Question:
Does Hoyt the younger enjoy the events (And all that goes with…training, etc) or does he get his enjoyment from his Dad’s sense of satisfaction?
<<<<<<<<<<<Isn’t it enjoyment either way? Dick Hoyt states in the program that he does tri’s because Ricky wants to keep doing them. When bike broke down he asked Ricky "do you want to keep going?" He shook his head yes and they hit the road. Ricky obviously has the mental ability to make decisions for himself. Let the man do what he wants. BTW I’m looking for a volunteer to drag ME around IMH next year!
Response:
After reading all the posts, and flames, and reflames, and reflections and philosphizing, I am left still with one question that I don’t think can be answered… Does Hoyt the younger enjoy the events (And all that goes with…training, etc) or does he get his enjoyment from his Dad’s sense of satisfaction?
Or maybe he enjoys both. The two aren’t mutually exclusive Einstein. Or maybe he just enjoys watching the hot chicks go by in their swim suits. In other words, your question is about as pointless as your existence but you know that already.
Response:
Can we allow for the possibility that he really, genuinely enjoys the sensations of triathlon? We do. Is it such a stretch to think he may, too? Can we also allow for the possibility that he is just saying so to gain the father’s approval, and this is some new twist on the parent who pushes their kid into their own interests agaionst the kid’s natural talent?
But again, you’re trying to create information from lack of information, a violation of a logical rule called information entropy. We KNOW that he’s stated that he enjoys participation in the sport (to the degree he participates). Without some sort of proof to the contrary, we have no reason to believe otherwise. However, you’re creating a position out of nothing. There is NO evidence that he does NOT enjoy participation. In fact, the only evidence in play suggests the opposite position. Is it possible the father, athlete and marine, is the one who’d really find it boring, and the son has felt bad about not being able to share his father’s activities, and so jumps at any opportunity to feel more a part of his dad’s life? Is it possible that the father would have gladly given up triathlon for chess if he only knew? Is it possible that each is laboring under illusions about what the other feels? An openness to other possibilities that aren’t as emotionally appealing is all I’ve really advocated here.
Actually, you’re stretching the definition of "possible". It’s "possible" that invisible unicorns exist on Mars because we cannot disprove all possible scenarios in which they might. You’re arguing from an inferior logical position. Is it possible, for instance, that every reader of this newsgroup is a serial killer? An unenlightened mind would say "yes, it’s possible because we can’t completely disprove all scenarios where it may be true.". However, an enlightened mind would dismiss the idea as being without merit until some proof to the affirmative were offered. That’s the way a logical argument is constructed. One party advances an idea and evidence. If you disprove the evidence, you disprove the idea. Your idea has no evidence, whatsoever, to support it. You are attacking the opposing idea without explaining why the evidence (in this case, first hand testimony) is to be dismissed. The point I’m getting at is that the differences between he and I are rather stark and obvious. However, beyond the obvious differences, I see no reason to presume he’s any different from me than you are different from me. Nor do I see any reason to presume the other way, except that it supports the warm feelings the TV coverage apparently engendered. For me, that’s not enough to justify dismissing all other alternatives. Brian "always pointing out the alternatives" Wagner
Brian, it’s not enough to "point out" alternatives. You must provide some reason for why these alternatives are likely to be true. Again, are we a collection of mass murderers? Is that idea equally valid to the concept that we are not all mass murderers? You’re stating an alternative that has no supporting evidence, whatsoever. That’s the difference between critical thinking and pure cynicism.
Response:
Just wanted to say that this was admirably well expressed, Rick. This whole debate has been very interesting and worthwhile. I appreciate the thought that’s gone into all the discussion. Kudos to all (oh, except for the trolls). 
In article – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Isn’t that true for anyone? Why would you doubt his motives because he speaks through a computer? Aren’t we all doing that right now? Turn it around. A skeptic always doubts. Does the need for and use of the computer to communicate relieve the need to doubt? If I doubted Rick Hoyt less than anyone else just because of his infirmities, I’m really insulting him. I’m saying that he’s too crippled to lie to me (or to himself). It’s patronizing, and it’s the kind of attitude on the part of non-handicapped people that upsets many handicapped people the most. I giving him credit for being a whole human being by questioning his motives just as I would anyone else’s, if his actions bother me. If I thought he was mentally incapacitated, I would only question his father’s motives. Rick "I said question, not condemn" Denney
– Tri-Baby _ – o ’ – __o – </_ ` ‘ – < – __/ /o_ – (()) (()) - / "Real triathletes don’t draft." http://www.stanford.edu/~brooksie *New to triathlon? Check out Hulaman’s Simple TriTips: http://www.hulaman.com/triathlon/tritips.html
Response:
But again, you’re trying to create information from lack of information, a violation of a logical rule called information entropy. Not at all – I’m simply saying there are other possibilities, and people should not be flogged for suggesting them.
Well, I certainly don’t consider myself to be flogging anybody, and I’ve tried to come to your defense when folks got out the flogging whip (or whatever you flog with.) We KNOW that he’s stated that he enjoys participation in the sport (to the degree he participates). Without some sort of proof to the contrary, we have no reason to believe otherwise. So we must automatically take him at his word?
In a word, unless we have compelling reason not to, "yes". It’s called common courtesy. Some of us naysayers have been accused of assuming Rick’s mind is as crippled as his body, but it seems that is more the case when one assumes lack of guile in a disabled person.
But again, if you imply guile, you should provide some positive evidence of the assertion. The "possibility" of guile does not mean that every person who ever says anything must provide proof of "no guile" By the same token, would you automatically presume that an able bodied person was telling falsehoods? Of course not, unless you had some compelling reason to believe the person was being dishonest. Rick is perfectly capable of perceiving his father’s enjoyment, and misrepresenting his feelings to protect that. I also think that if he is doing so, it’s pretty darn noble of him to do so.
I think this is a stretch. Personally, although I allow that this is the most likely of the conspiracy theories, it still fails Occam’s razor. It isn’t the simplest logical explanation of observed phenomenon. There are simpler explanations that do as good (or better) a job of explaining the behavior. No, we have plenty of speculative reasons, and I have no problem with the conclusion that he DOES enjoy it, provided it is reached after examining the possibility that he doesn’t, and based on the evidence. However, I believe that far too much of the harsh response to Mr. Denney’s reaction is based on people’s deciding that Rick Hoyt does enjoy it, merely because that is the conclusion that engenders the strongest warm fuzzy feelings for them.
Actually, if you will recall, I stood in Rick’s shoes last year and got roundly toasted for stating that I simply didn’t think Judy Molnar was very inspirational. I think this topic deserves reasoned discussion. I don’t deny you your right to state your case. I simply wish to provide a rebuttal. I also agree entirely that any personal attacks against a poster are virtually always unwarranted and degrade our newsgroup. How about the millions of kids whose parents selfishly push them into things they are not suited for?
True, there are SOME. I find it dubious that there are millions. Believe it or not, a lot of us wish we were STILL playing little league and gearing up for football. The overbearing parents are, in my experience, the exception, not the rule. I see this as an "innocent until proven guilty" situation. I remember a friend of mine who’s Mom had a doctorate and said that Little League was an unhealthy activity because it served only to aggrandize the parents. Well, if she’d ever seen my play, she’d have changed her mind because my skills on the diamond didn’t aggrandize anyone or anything. However, I thought it was mighty presumptuous of her to think that unhealthy competitive urges and projection of parental ambitions were the rule and not the exception. If I may, the same line or reasoning seems to resonate in your posts as well. How about that for a quadriplegic to prefer a contrived pseudo-participation in an activity the very basis of which is able-bodied striving over something in which he can particpate on an equal basis with his father or any other able-bodied person is, at the very least, counter-intuitive?
Actually, the way I look at it, he’s participating the best way he can. I would hardly call it pseudo-participation. Cripes, some days, I consider what I’M doing psuedo-participation, but it boils down to a personal experience for each participant. Isn’t that the theme we touch time and time again on the newsgroup? That triathlon is an intensely personal and sometimes borderline-spiritual activity that each person can only define for him/herself? Granted, as an able-bodied person, I can’t really see things through Rick Hoyt’s eyes, and there may be some projection involved, but then that makes your side the one that assumes his disability makes his emotions somehow wired differently from the rest of us.
Nah, actually, if anything I’m guilty of presuming that his emotions are wired the SAME as… well… me, anyway. That he likes watching hockey. That he enjoys the sensation of the road, the run, the water. That if he could, he’d play a hell of a lot more sports than he currently does, but he’s limited by a condition he was born with. (I, on the other hand, am limited by having a job, a pretty bad inside game in basketball, and an all-around lack of talent in most things athletic.) I figure he loves sports. Some folks are just like that. Also, those who believe that he enjoys it simply because that scenario gives them comfort are projecting their idea of what inspires good feelings onto Rick.
But Brian, if he appeared miserable, we’d have reason to believe he didn’t enjoy it. However, the limited evidence we have observed suggests the opposite, with an exclamation point: he loves it. My issue is with those who don’t test and who lash out at htose who suggest that they test. Mr. Denney didn’t even suggest that anyone else test, merely that he was struck differently, and that prompted HIM to test, and people jumped down his throat. That’s unconscionable, and you have even posted as much to distance yourself from it.
Yes, I agree with this statement wholeheartedly. I think we’re here to discuss triathlon and its myriad tangents, not to make personal attacks on people who express an alternative point of view.
Response:
Rick is perfectly capable of perceiving his father’s enjoyment, and misrepresenting his feelings to protect that. I also think that if he is doing so, it’s pretty darn noble of him to do so.
whoa there! that’s the classical mechanism of codependence. I know you don’t have a lot of respect for the field of psychology (or at least as it is interpreted by the media and masses) but concealing one’s own needs to meet a loved one’s is unhealthy. There’s nothing wrong with sacrifice, but it should be with all parties knowing the true score. If Rick is truly doing this just for his dad, I don’t think there’s anything wrong w/ that as long as they both know it.
Response:
Isn’t that true for anyone?
Yes. Why would you doubt his motives because he speaks through a computer?
I don’t, but nor do I accept his statements merely because he is disabled. What I do doubt is my ability to judge how genuine his statements are, since his form of communication involves none of the verbal or non-verbal cues we are all used to using in judging whether to believe someone’s words. I do not say he is not honest, but I acknowledge that he would be better able to deceive me than most. Aren’t we all doing that right now?
I hope not.
Response:
Isn’t that true for anyone? Why would you doubt his motives because he speaks through a computer? Aren’t we all doing that right now?
Turn it around. A skeptic always doubts. Does the need for and use of the computer to communicate relieve the need to doubt? If I doubted Rick Hoyt less than anyone else just because of his infirmities, I’m really insulting him. I’m saying that he’s too crippled to lie to me (or to himself). It’s patronizing, and it’s the kind of attitude on the part of non-handicapped people that upsets many handicapped people the most. I giving him credit for being a whole human being by questioning his motives just as I would anyone else’s, if his actions bother me. If I thought he was mentally incapacitated, I would only question his father’s motives. Rick "I said question, not condemn" Denney
Response:
But again, you’re trying to create information from lack of information, a violation of a logical rule called information entropy.
Not at all – I’m simply saying there are other possibilities, and people should not be flogged for suggesting them. We KNOW that he’s stated that he enjoys participation in the sport (to the degree he participates). Without some sort of proof to the contrary, we have no reason to believe otherwise.
So we must automatically take him at his word? As for evidence tothe contrary, we have no less august authority than the president of the United States, his entire administration, staff, and most of the elected officials from his party telling us that "everybody lies." Well, isn’t Rick hoyt part of everybody? Some of us naysayers have been accused of assuming Rick’s mind is as crippled as his body, but it seems that is more the case when one assumes lack of guile in a disabled person. Rick is perfectly capable of perceiving his father’s enjoyment, and misrepresenting his feelings to protect that. I also think that if he is doing so, it’s pretty darn noble of him to do so. However, you’re creating a position out of nothing. There is NO evidence that he does NOT enjoy participation. In fact, the only evidence in play suggests the opposite position.
No, we have plenty of speculative reasons, and I have no problem with the conclusion that he DOES enjoy it, provided it is reached after examining the possibility that he doesn’t, and based on the evidence. However, I believe that far too much of the harsh response to Mr. Denney’s reaction is based on people’s deciding that Rick Hoyt does enjoy it, merely because that is the conclusion that engenders the strongest warm fuzzy feelings for them. I like warm fuzzy feelings as much as the next person, but I don’t want them to be based on conclusions drawn merely to reinforce the feelings. I’d much rather feel good about something knowing that it is what it is based on a logical foundation, so I won’t have those feelings later spoiled by the revelation that all was not as I made myself believe it was. Actually, you’re stretching the definition of "possible". It’s "possible" that invisible unicorns exist on Mars because we cannot disprove all possible scenarios in which they might. You’re arguing from an inferior logical position.
No, I’m arguing with people who hold it to be impossible. In all fairness, Jimmy, I think you left that camp shortly after this began. It’s not only possible, but the probability of it, in my opinion, at least, rises above the noise. I’m not saying it’s the MOST probable scenario, but that it is one of them, and I for one, am reserving my outpouring of sentiment until I have more evidence to eliminate it. Painful experience has taught me to do so. Is it possible, for instance, that every reader of this newsgroup is a serial killer?
Not EVERY reader, but there are a few of us who fit the profile. <g An unenlightened mind would say "yes, it’s possible because we can’t completely disprove all scenarios where it may be true.". However, an enlightened mind would dismiss the idea as being without merit until some proof to the affirmative were offered.
However, this one doesn’t rise to anywhere neaar that level of certainty That’s the way a logical argument is constructed. One party advances an idea and evidence. If you disprove the evidence, you disprove the idea. Your idea has no evidence, whatsoever, to support it. You are attacking the opposing idea without explaining why the evidence (in this case, first hand testimony) is to be dismissed.
How about the millions of kids whose parents selfishly push them into things they are not suited for? How about that for a quadriplegic to prefer a contrived pseudo-participation in an activity the very basis of which is able-bodied striving over something in which he can particpate on an equal basis with his father or any other able-bodied person is, at the very least, counter-intuitive? Granted, as an able-bodied person, I can’t really see things through Rick Hoyt’s eyes, and there may be some projection involved, but then that makes your side the one that assumes his disability makes his emotions somehow wired differently from the rest of us. Also, those who believe that he enjoys it simply because that scenario gives them comfort are projecting their idea of what inspires good feelings onto Rick. No one REALLY knows but him how he feels about it. Keep in mind that all I really said is that I would be more impressed by an athletic father who gave up some of his athletic pursuits to take up activities iin which his disabled sone could be his equal. I’m not necessarily condemning the whole thing, I’m just suggesting that the less than positive feelings some of us have about it might stem from the fact that we don’t see this as the best case scenario, and there are far different approaches we find better. For all I know they might spend a lot of time playing chess or at some other activity where they are peers, but the TV coverage apparently didn’t mention it. If so, I find that a defeiciency in their human interest reporting. Brian, it’s not enough to "point out" alternatives. You must provide some reason for why these alternatives are likely to be true.
I think I have, and again, I may not even support those alternatives. I may only be pointing out that other people haven’t even considered their existence, and are simply making a Pavlovian response to a welle wrought TV presentation designed to elicit that response. Again, are we a collection of mass murderers? Is that idea equally valid to the concept that we are not all mass murderers? You’re stating an alternative that has no supporting evidence, whatsoever.
Again, there’s a big difference in the probability there. That’s the difference between critical thinking and pure cynicism.
No, critical thinking ALWAYS checks for alternatives to the emotinal response. Pure cynicism insists on their truth and reflexively casts aside the emotional response. It moved you. You were ready to accept that without questioning it. Someone suggested another angle. You obviously thought about it and decided it still moved you. Fine. There are still some people who refused to think about it and just lashed out at those who suggested they should, in a "how dare you endanger my good feelings" way. You are not one of them, Jimmy, and I have no quarrel with your reaching a differing conclusion, because your words indicate you really have tested your view. My issue is with those who don’t test and who lash out at htose who suggest that they test. Mr. Denney didn’t even suggest that anyone else test, merely that he was struck differently, and that prompted HIM to test, and people jumped down his throat. That’s unconscionable, and you have even posted as much to distance yourself from it.
Response:
Dick Hoyt states in the program that he does tri’s because Ricky wants to keep doing them. When bike broke down he asked Ricky "do you want to keep going?" He shook his head yes and they hit the road. Ricky obviously has the mental ability to make decisions for himself. Let the man do what he wants.
I don’t think anyone’s denying them the right to do it, we’re just debating the validity of various responses to it as a TV spectacle, and whether we think it’s as noble as the coverage made it out to be. BTW I’m looking for a volunteer to drag ME around IMH next year!
Now THAT’S the most intelligent comment I’ve seen on the whole issue yet. The question is whether you will compensate them. Brian "will race for free Clif bars" Wagner
Response:
We don’t know what is in the mind of the younger Hoyt. To Dick’ Doesn’t the young hoyt communicate via the computer? if so then we know what he choses to share with us.
Exactly – and ONLY what he CHOOSES to share with us.
Response:
Doesn’t the young hoyt communicate via the computer? if so then we know what he choses to share with us. Exactly – and ONLY what he CHOOSES to share with us.
Isn’t that true for anyone? Why would you doubt his motives because he speaks through a computer? Aren’t we all doing that right now? Before you buy.
Response:
<Hoyt father-son psycho-analysis deleted Well whatever the reasons, I hope that I am as freakin’ strong and fit as Hoyt Sr. when I become 59. Hell, I wish I were that strong now -Rolf — This space for rent 
IMC’94-14:07 IMC’95-11:59 IMC’97-12:12 IMC’98-14:02 IMNZ99-11:52 IMLP99-11:59
Response:
We don’t know what is in the mind of the younger Hoyt. To Dick’
Doesn’t the young hoyt communicate via the computer? if so then we know what he choses to share with us. John Hansen Sarasota Fl.
Response:
Brian "is Mr. Denney really the only other person who ‘gets it’?" Wagner
Actually, my comments were motivated by the fact that I seemed to be the only person who *didn’t* get it. Rick "At least everyone is thinking about it" Denney
Response:
I’ve read the thoughts on the HOYTs It seems there is the view that the NG is being being tortured, perhaps I saw a different show but the one I saw showed a man {the son} whos handicap is MS. He attended public school, attended college, and though his body doesnt respond, his brain does. The show I saw showed a man who communicated via the computer. He is quite aware of what He and his father are enduring. I don’t understand the view that the father is exploiting/torturing his son…That is not what the show I watch portrayed…. Someone whom I dont recall their identity suggested that the father and son should sit inside playing chess…. YOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING, isn’t that the exact thing that the "authorities" suggested the father do with his son…. Ahh just hide him away, visit him once a month, don’t forget the chess board. that is nutz…. The people who suggested "chess" should be ashamed of themselves. John Hansen Sarasota Fl.
Response:
I’ve read the thoughts on the HOYTs It seems there is the view that the NG is being being tortured, perhaps I saw a different show but the one I saw showed a man {the son} whos handicap is MS. He attended public school, attended college, and though his body doesnt respond, his brain does. The show I saw showed a man who communicated via the computer. He is quite aware of what He and his father are enduring. I don’t understand the view that the father is exploiting/torturing his son…That is not what the show I watch portrayed…. Someone whom I dont recall their identity suggested that the father and son should sit inside playing chess…. YOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING, isn’t that the exact thing that the "authorities" suggested the father do with his son…. Ahh just hide him away, visit him once a month, don’t forget the chess board. that is nutz…. The people who suggested "chess" should be ashamed of themselves.
John, you didn’t read the post in question very carefully. It was Ruth who posted that, and you missed the context of what she was saying. She explained that the "mother" instinct in her produced this gut reaction—- the desire to protect a child from harm. In no way was she disparaging the Hoyts’ efforts and accomplishments; she was just expressing one facet of her personal response to their saga. We all have "gut reactions" to things that might not necessarily be rational or "correct" in some way. Ruth was just copping to her own natural protective, motherly instinct, the desire to protect folks she cares about from harm. She explained that the "mother" in her is just one of her many "heads", and her other "heads" had other reactions (i.e., her athlete head understands, admires and encourages the Hoyts). Ruth, correct me if I messed any of that up! — Tri-Baby _ – o ’ – __o – </_ ` ‘ – < – __/ /o_ – (()) (()) - / "Real triathletes don’t draft." http://www.stanford.edu/~brooksie *New to triathlon? Check out Hulaman’s Simple TriTips: http://www.hulaman.com/triathlon/tritips.html
Response:
Someone whom I dont recall their identity suggested that the father and son should sit inside playing chess…. YOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING, isn’t that the exact thing that the "authorities" suggested the father do with his son…. Ahh just hide him away, visit him once a month, don’t forget the chess board. that is nutz…. The people who suggested "chess" should be ashamed of themselves.
It was me who suggested that they try something like chess where they both could be equal participants and I never said anything about indoors. Nor did I say anything about monthly visits, institutions, or hiding anyone away. I have a coworker who, with her husband, puts in as much time and effort as Dick Hoyt does supporting, coaching, etc., for her son’s pursuit of chess as a VERY PUBLIC TOURNAMENT PURSUIT. His father plays with him daily, coaching him, competing with him; his mother drives all over the state to tournaments, raises funds for his high school chess team, hosts parties for all his teammates (no one mentioned whether triathlon has netted a quadriplegic many peer friends that he can share activities with as an equal.) If Rick’s disability was sufficient to preclude any possibility of triathlon or other such pursuits (say he also lacked an immune system and had to live in a ‘bubble’) and chess was all that was feasible, would you then excuse the father for not spending time with him, since he apparently views a game of chess as tantamount to abandonment. Heaven forbid that anyone suggest we emphasize developing the minds of those whose bodies don’t operate up to spec. Steven Hawking must REALLY feel bad that no one’s dragging him around a triathlon course and he has to waste his time answering some of mankind’s toughest questions. Maybe you just think chess and other pursuits of the mind are just for sissies. I’ve tried playing basketball against two brothers who were on a high school chess team that won the national championship, and let me tell you, I couldn’t keep up (that was in my pre-triathlon days, though.) Brian "is Mr. Denney really the only other person who ‘gets it’?" Wagner
Response:
Brian "is Mr. Denney really the only other person who ‘gets it’?" Wagner
Ok, I have tried to avoid entering into the Hoyt melee….but this last statement ‘got me’. I watched the IMH, and I too was initially in awe of the Hoyts (And I am still damn impressed). The things I thought, however were much the same. I wondered if the son got joy out of the race, spending time with his dad, or if there was some kind of guilt thing going on. The other questions I had were along the lines of "what does the younger Hoyt do during training?" "Are there other things they do besides physical events?" and others along those lines. After reading all the posts, and flames, and reflames, and reflections and philosphizing, I am left still with one question that I don’t think can be answered… Does Hoyt the younger enjoy the events (And all that goes with…training, etc) or does he get his enjoyment from his Dad’s sense of satisfaction? John "No, Mr. Denney is not the only one…" "Ad astra per aspera" "A rough road leads to the stars"
Response:
Actually, I found nothing offensive about your suggestion about playing chess. The only thing I’ll say is that they both, father and son, seem to enjoy participation in triathlon. For all we know, one or the other of them does not necessarily like chess. Plus, this sort of touches on something that bothers me (way OT), and might be a pet peeve of yours, too. People presume knowledge from lack of knowledge. This, quite frankly, for reasons too involved to go into here, is a fundamental violation of the rules of logic. As an engineer, I’m sure you’ve run into it. People know you have technical skills, and therefore conclude that you must have no interpersonal skills. (Assuming that the presence of A implies a lack of B.) Likewise, you find folks with no interpersonal skills and folks think, "he should go into math or science." Where this falls down is that the presence of an antisocial nature has nothing to do with an aptitude in math and science (although it may make them more likely to want to relate to a computer than to people. This assumes that the lack of B implies the presence of A.) While in my MBA program, the soft-skill folks (marketing and org. behavior) would presume that anybody with technical aptitudes lacked creativity. (News to me… I guess I was wasting a lot of time with all those classes in the college of music while getting my information systems degree.) Likewise, they presumed that a lack of technical abilities implied some sort of increased creativity, which is crap as well. (Lack of a skill set does not predispose a person to the presence of a completely disrelated skill set.) The only flaw I see in the chess suggestion is that lack of physical skills does not necessarily mean that they younger Hoyt would find joy in a purely intellectual pursuit like chess. I know that, although I can play, I don’t find it that fun, and a lot of folks feel the same way. At the very least, the younger Hoyt enjoys watching Hockey, so he enjoys sports as a spectator. Who’s to say that he doesn’t enjoy the wind in his face, the motion of the water, the roll of the road, just as much as we do? Okay, we’ve got a form of exertion that he doesn’t have to face, but that’s outside his frame of reference. He literally doesn’t know what it means to go into exertion as part of the sport (likewise, we don’t know the difficulty of the physical obstacles he has to overcome). Can we allow for the possibility that he really, genuinely enjoys the sensations of triathlon? We do. Is it such a stretch to think he may, too? Is it possible that maybe he’d find chess boring? I know I do. The point I’m getting at is that the differences between he and I are rather stark and obvious. However, beyond the obvious differences, I see no reason to presume he’s any different from me than you are different from me. Again, I didn’t think the chess suggestion was offensive. Maybe that’s just not thrilling to him. Sometimes the obvious answer is the best one. (Occam’s razor and all.)
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Someone whom I dont recall their identity suggested that the father and son should sit inside playing chess…. YOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING, isn’t that the exact thing that the "authorities" suggested the father do with his son…. Ahh just hide him away, visit him once a month, don’t forget the chess board. that is nutz…. The people who suggested "chess" should be ashamed of themselves. It was me who suggested that they try something like chess where they both could be equal participants and I never said anything about indoors. Nor did I say anything about monthly visits, institutions, or hiding anyone away. I have a coworker who, with her husband, puts in as much time and effort as Dick Hoyt does supporting, coaching, etc., for her son’s pursuit of chess as a VERY PUBLIC TOURNAMENT PURSUIT. His father plays with him daily, coaching him, competing with him; his mother drives all over the state to tournaments, raises funds for his high school chess team, hosts parties for all his teammates (no one mentioned whether triathlon has netted a quadriplegic many peer friends that he can share activities with as an equal.) If Rick’s disability was sufficient to preclude any possibility of triathlon or other such pursuits (say he also lacked an immune system and had to live in a ‘bubble’) and chess was all that was feasible, would you then excuse the father for not spending time with him, since he apparently views a game of chess as tantamount to abandonment. Heaven forbid that anyone suggest we emphasize developing the minds of those whose bodies don’t operate up to spec. Steven Hawking must REALLY feel bad that no one’s dragging him around a triathlon course and he has to waste his time answering some of mankind’s toughest questions. Maybe you just think chess and other pursuits of the mind are just for sissies. I’ve tried playing basketball against two brothers who were on a high school chess team that won the national championship, and let me tell you, I couldn’t keep up (that was in my pre-triathlon days, though.) Brian "is Mr. Denney really the only other person who ‘gets it’?" Wagner
Response:
Steven Hawking must REALLY feel bad that no one’s dragging him around a triathlon course and he has to waste his time answering some of mankind’s toughest questions
Hawking is the reason we spent four months in Cambridge. My husband was working with him. So we and our children who came with us were priviledged to know him up close and personal. His physical achievements were remarkable for someone in his condition. He managed to drive a car with special equipment and partially feed himself. He was very kind to us, showed us around the campus, made sure we felt welcome, introduced us to his friends, one of whom has since won a Nobel prize. He took charge of his life in every way he could and he still does. Even when his speech had become totally intelligible he insisted on travelling and getting up to face his audience while what he was saying was projected. Remarkable man. We don’t know what is in the mind of the younger Hoyt. To Dick’s credit, he was given an education although that must have entailed a great deal of time and devotion for his parents. He may very well be capable of a fine game of chess. It’s not a game limited to the inmates of institutions for the unwanted. Ruth Kazez
Response:
Actually, I found nothing offensive about your suggestion about playing chess. The only thing I’ll say is that they both, father and son, seem to enjoy participation in triathlon.
Again, SEEM For all we know, one or the other of them does not necessarily like chess.
Definitely – it was but one suggestion among many possibilities for activitiees they BOTH could participate in as equals. Plus, this sort of touches on something that bothers me (way OT), and might be a pet peeve of yours, too. The only flaw I see in the chess suggestion is that lack of physical skills does not necessarily mean that they younger Hoyt would find joy in a purely intellectual pursuit like chess.
There is no assumption of the sort. Merely the point that such pursuits are the only venues where he can join his father as an equal. He is physically disabled, but intellectually, there is not such a gulf separating his abilities from his father’s. I am suggesting the possibility that they migh enjoy a more meaningful interaction in a realm where they are on equal footing. Say you spoke reasonable English and outstanding French, and I spoke English as well as you did, and outstanding German. I could lead you around by the hand through Germany, making your experience of the people and culture completely dependent on me, or you could lead me around through France, but we might be able to share the experience of touring England more thoroughly than we ever would either of the former alternatives. I would be far more impressed by a father who sacrificed an area of interest his son could never fully participate in to spend time with the son in a way that they could share truly equally. I know that, although I can play, I don’t find it that fun, and a lot of folks feel the same way. At the very least, the younger Hoyt enjoys watching Hockey, so he enjoys sports as a spectator.
Which is all he really is in Triathlon. Who’s to say that he doesn’t enjoy the wind in his face, the motion of the water, the roll of the road, just as much as we do? Okay, we’ve got a form of exertion that he doesn’t have to face, but that’s outside his frame of reference. He literally doesn’t know what it means to go into exertion as part of the sport (likewise, we don’t know the difficulty of the physical obstacles he has to overcome).
Exactly, it’s a sport where a large part of it is Greek to him. Neither on of them can truly know, or even grasp, the experience of the other. Can we allow for the possibility that he really, genuinely enjoys the sensations of triathlon? We do. Is it such a stretch to think he may, too?
Can we also allow for the possibility that he is just saying so to gain the father’s approval, and this is some new twist on the parent who pushes their kid into their own interests agaionst the kid’s natural talent? Is it possible that maybe he’d find chess boring? I know I do.
Is it possible the father, athlete and marine, is the one who’d really find it boring, and the son has felt bad about not being able to share his father’s activities, and so jumps at any opportunity to feel more a part of his dad’s life? Is it possible that the father would have gladly given up triathlon for chess if he only knew? Is it possible that each is laboring under illusions about what the other feels? An openness to other possibilities that aren’t as emotionally appealing is all I’ve really advocated here. The point I’m getting at is that the differences between he and I are rather stark and obvious. However, beyond the obvious differences, I see no reason to presume he’s any different from me than you are different from me.
Nor do I see any reason to presume the other way, except that it supports the warm feelings the TV coverage apparently engendered. For me, that’s not enough to justify dismissing all other alternatives. Brian "always pointing out the alternatives" Wagner
Response:
Question:
Excerpts from netnews.rec.running: 7-Jul-96 Re: Running Performance & Say that a runner can race a 5K at 7:00/mile pace with 10 pounds of extra bod y fat. What kind of pace could that runner have done if they were 5 or 10 pounds lighter? Let’s assume that the runner weighed 170 and their "normal" running weight is 160. Anyone have some info on this? I’m looking for something like XX seconds per mile for every YY pounds?
From pp. 564-565 "The New Competitive Runner’s Handbook" (Glover & Schuder, 1988) comes the following guidelines: For men, an additional 10 lbs. adds 2:30 to 10K times and 10:00 to marathon times. For women, a 10 lb. weight gain adds 4:00 to 10K times and 20:00 to marathon times. FWIW, I still remember that in peak condition, Margaret Groos looked more like a weightlifter than a runner. Bill Luby
Response:
Alan Culpepper of Colorado won the NCAA 5,000 Championship in 13:47. Alan is 6" 1" and weighs 138 pounds. He appears to have "no" body fat. Haile Gebrselassie was ranked number one in the world for 1995 at both 5000 and 10000. He is 5′3" and weights 119 pounds. Moses Kiptanui ranks first at 3000 meters and the steeplechase is 5′8.75" and weighs 132. America’s currently fastest miler, Steve Holman is 6′1" and weighs 145. My rule of thumb is that my time is proportional to my weight. Keeping other factors equal, if I lose X% weight I will run X% faster. For instance, if I could run a 40-minute 10K at 160 pounds, I could run a 36-minute 10K at 144 pounds. This idea was developed by my colleague Dick Durand (I know: who he?) back in the 1970s. He said the physics of the idea are sound. ——-Al Hromjak
Response:
For instance, if I could run a 40-minute 10K at 160 pounds, I could run a 36-minute 10K at 144 pounds. This idea was developed by my colleague Dick Durand (I know: who he?) back in the 1970s. He said the physics of the idea are sound.
So if I can run a 38:45 10K at 190 pounds all I have to do is go on a starvation diet to get into the Olympic Trials? (1 minute every four pounds by your example puts me at a 27:15 at 144 pounds.) Break out the Jenny Criag, I’m gonna kick some butt. — |\ ///| Crewstone Consulting ltd. | http://www.crewstone.com/ |/// \| 1001 S Marshall Suite 118 | "STOP THE NET! I Think I’m
Response:
:[...thin guys who run fast...] :My rule of thumb is that my time is proportional to my weight. :Keeping other factors equal, if I lose X% weight I will run X% faster. :For instance, if I could run a 40-minute 10K at 160 pounds, I could run :a 36-minute 10K at 144 pounds. This idea was developed by my colleague 
ick Durand (I know: who he?) back in the 1970s. He said the physics 
f the idea are sound. The old rule of thumb I used to hear was that one pound of body weight lost improved your pace by one second per mile, all else equal. Of course, there will be an optimum point below which you start becoming injury-prone or weak, but whilst above that point, the rule seems to hold true. — Chris BeHanna DoD# 114 KotSTA Ed Green 1975 CB360T – Baby Bike kore wa NEC no iken de gozaimasen. FOLMA #17 1973 RD350A – seized Why is Lon Horiuchi still breathing? 1987 EX500 - Wife’s Bike
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I have a question regarding how extra body fat affects running performance. Say that a runner can race a 5K at 7:00/mile pace with 10 pounds of extra body fat. What kind of pace could that runner have done if they were 5 or 10 pounds lighter? Let’s assume that the runner weighed 170 and their "normal" running weight is 160. Anyone have some info on this? I’m looking for something like XX seconds per mile for every YY pounds? I know that many runners (myself included) are overweight when they start training. I’m curious to see how much improvement is due to increased training & how much is due to weight loss. TIA, Eric Welch Opinions expressed herein are my own and may not represent those of my employer.
Eric, Take a look at page 564 of The New Compettive Runners Handbook by Bob Glover. There is a chart on just this subject for 10k times and marathon times. In general, they say to add 2.5 minutes per 10 pounds of extra weight for the 10K and 10 minutes per 10 pounds for the marathon. "Extra" in this sense is over the ideal weight which for a 6 footer should be 154-170 pounds.
Response:
I have a question regarding how extra body fat affects running performance. Say that a runner can race a 5K at 7:00/mile pace with 10 pounds of extra body fat. What kind of pace could that runner have done if they were 5 or 10 pounds lighter? Let’s assume that the runner weighed 170 and their "normal" running weight is 160. Anyone have some info on this? I’m looking for something like XX seconds per mile for every YY pounds? I know that many runners (myself included) are overweight when they start training. I’m curious to see how much improvement is due to increased training & how much is due to weight loss.
You might try the Clydesdale Virtual Racing Team at: http://www.mtn.org/ymca/cvrt.html They have data on time vs weight, and a link to an interesting Weight Handicapper at: http://www.dirigo.com/trmh.cgi RJ
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I have a question regarding how extra body fat affects running performance. Say that a runner can race a 5K at 7:00/mile pace with 10 pounds of extra body fat. What kind of pace could that runner have done if they were 5 or 10 pounds lighter? Let’s assume that the runner weighed 170 and their "normal" running weight is 160. Anyone have some info on this? I’m looking for something like XX seconds per mile for every YY pounds? I know that many runners (myself included) are overweight when they start training. I’m curious to see how much improvement is due to increased training & how much is due to weight loss. TIA, Eric Welch
A recent post on the track and field newserver is quoted here: Matt Mitchell writes: 4. One last note == Do the US athletes in the 800-1500M seem bigger (more muscular) than the athletes from overseas? (McMullen, Rock and Ned come to mind) Kipketer, El Guerroj (sp), Niongabo (sp), are all very gaunt (read really skinny) wouldn’t it behoove McMullen, Ned, and Rock to get out of the weight room and break out the Slim Fast? (It’s all about Power to Weight ratio isn’t it?)
I don’t know how others feel, but I have always thought that since triathlons and the "triathlete look" (more muscular, not so gaunt) became popular in the U.S. in the 1980s, it looked to me like average runners’ weights starting to go up here, even among some athletes at the elite level, apparently because it was not "cool" to be so skinny anymore. Also, it seems that increased weight training by runners in the U.S. has become more in vogue and in combination with not being careful about caloric intake that will unavoidably lead to extra weight gain. In bodybuilding it is an axiom that even if you do heavy weight training, you still require extra calories to gain the weight–otherwise you simply become more fit/toned and of course stronger, but your muscle mass/weight gain stalls out. But everybody knows how much distance runners like to eat–the energy expended doing weights is not necessarily going to sop up all those extra calories beyond a point, and so it’s not surprising to see runners carrying around additional pounds these days. There have been a couple of attempts in the past that I’m aware of to estimate the effect of excess running weight on performances. One was by distance runner Tom Osler in his book "Serious Runner’s Handbook" (1978). Tom, a mathematician by trade, was also known as something of a "fatty" whose weight fluctuated periodically, and he would have to go on a strict diet sometimes to get his weight back down, even in spite of sometimes running 100-mile weeks. Based on his own empirical experience racing at different weights, Osler estimated he lost 2 seconds per mile per pound of excess body weight. Interestingly, exercise physiologist Owen Anderson did a calculation based on VO2max in Running Research News a few years ago that arrived at about exactly the same conclusion: roughly 2 seconds per pound per mile slower above your optimum running weight. My own experience has been that in recent months, when I decided to add some weight training to pursue more balanced physical development and not worry about racing, I got similar results. In the process I have gained about 8 lbs. so far, and found that the pace of my lactate threshold runs have now slowed by about 15 seconds per mile on average at the same effort level, so this seems to agree closely. When I was in h.s. after I had grown to my now-adult height, I went through an experimental period where I purposely tried to lower my weight as much as possible, and always found I began to lose strength and feel weak and/or come down sick whenever I went below a certain level. I repeated the experiment several times to make sure I knew just where the fall-off point was, and once I knew that for sure, I then usually tried to maintain my weight just 2-3-4 pounds above that for a certain safety margin. However, my 2-mile PR from that period was set when I was right on the razor’s edge of my lowest possible weight with no safety margin. In college I got kidded by my fellow distance-running teammates about my low weight, but as a walk-on beat out these scholarship athletes who had more talent than I, but who didn’t watch their weight (and tended to overtrain as well). I always loved racing against people who kidded me about my weight, because I had experimented enough to know just how low I could go and I knew they simply weighed too much. It was a real pleasure seeing them mystified by not being able to beat me when they should have been able to, especially when one of the reasons was (to me) so obvious. I think similarly today, a lot of distance runners really don’t take the issue as seriously as they should. They seem to think that simply by running lots of miles or just training hard that the weight will come off. It certainly will to a point, but when you start to hone in on your competitive optimum, my experience was it didn’t necessarily work that way. In fact, I found that when I was rounding into peak shape, I tended to GAIN weight because I had been upping the training intensity and had a more uncontrollable appetite. It was easier to lose weight before the peak season, when I was training less intensely and my appetite stayed under control. Frankly, without a daily feedback check on the bathroom scale, I don’t believe I would have been able to stay at the targeted weight I found through experience worked best for me. out with weights much if at all (though I seem to remember they do do a regimen of calisthenics). They don’t worry about their upper bodies or how they look, and they have very low body weights. It could be some of their success is in part due to their better power-to-weight ratios. No recent studies I know of myself have been done comparing weights of athletes vs. performances, but it sure does appear that some of our American athletes weigh too much (Johnny Gray certainly excepted of course!) and could perhaps take some lessons from the Africans as Matt Mitchell pointed out. end quote — Alan Kirk Gray
Response:
I have a question regarding how extra body fat affects running performance. Say that a runner can race a 5K at 7:00/mile pace with 10 pounds of extra body fat. What kind of pace could that runner have done if they were 5 or 10 pounds lighter? Let’s assume that the runner weighed 170 and their "normal" running weight is 160. Anyone have some info on this? I’m looking for something like XX seconds per mile for every YY pounds? I know that many runners (myself included) are overweight when they start training. I’m curious to see how much improvement is due to increased training & how much is due to weight loss. TIA, Eric Welch Opinions expressed herein are my own and may not represent those of my employer.
Response:
Question:
I agree with Myles a/k/a Tri-ferret on this one: if you are not interested in the thread, don’t read it. There’s enough room here for everyone. I respectfully disagree with Paul. Sex is always popping-up in the threads. Maybe one’s sexual preference does matter at times. My feeling is, if it bothers you that much, see above. Cory "let’s play nice" H.
I must agree with Cory and Myles. Check out the rec.sport swimming for some pretty raunchy posts. My favorite was a bit of advice on winning the attention of some babe in lane 2. The poster suggested wearing two suits, one tucked inside the other. Nobody responded with a tut-tut, we can’t have any of that x-rated internet stuff. As long as heteros think sexual preference matters to themselves enough not to want to be reminded of different preferences, then we must accept that it matters to everyone, inclusively. At the same time, I thought Paul’s sentiment was entirely without malice and therefore perfectly acceptable to me. Ruth Kazez
Response:
I’m a gay guy and I prefer longer races. I’ve done the Ironman six times and and look forward to checking out some of the other Ironman races next year.
Yeah, but I still want to know what kind of a car do you drive? | Ray Plotecia | | Image Control |
Response:
Don’t sweat it, Bob. Who among us has not had the occasional bad day? Cory H.
Response:
I posted this. I don’t like it. I agree that it was inappropriate and irrelevant (and most importantly rude). I also agree that there is more than enough room for posts of this kind and that if I really thought it was boring I could have simply skipped the thread. It was a bad day – not that that is an excuse. My apologies to anyone I’ve alienated. Bob
On ya Bob. Good guys have bad days too. Shouldn’t worry about it too much – everyone is entitled to their own opinion (or at least, that’s my opinion!) TriFerret/TriGIT (Tri-haven’t-decided-yet).
Response:
I agree with Myles a/k/a Tri-ferret on this one: if you are not interested in the thread, don’t read it. There’s enough room here for everyone. I respectfully disagree with Paul. Sex is always popping-up in the threads. Maybe one’s sexual preference does matter at times. My feeling is, if it bothers you that much, see above. Cory "let’s play nice" H.
Response:
Can’t swim; Has 4Runner.
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Can’t swim; Has 4Runner. Mrs. T’s tri in Chicago on the 27th of Aug.. There are something like 4000 triathletes in total(or is it more ???, it’s lots in any case) More importantly, for a gay triathlete, is the SMELTS triathlon weekend that is part of it. The SMELTS is the Chicago gay sports group who organize in conjunction with the large Mrs. T’s race a weekend for gay triathletes in Chicago They bill it as the largest gathering of gay triathletes in North America. I will be there having a grand time. Steve, are you out there in cyberspace with all the info ???? Mrs. T’s info line: 312-404-2372 Smelts Info: 312-281-4692/312-478-1054 P.S. Out of curiosity, which pocket are you carrying your toothbrush in ??? :-) — Brendan Leitch __ My views only, not Magellan Passport OS / those of my employer Bell Northern Research "You can have a great job, great place to live Ottawa, CANADA and a great lover, but not all three at once" Micheal Tolliver – Character in Armistead Maupin’s "Tales of the City" series
This really is *so* boring! Does anyone else agree? I don’t care who you want to have a relationship with – but does it have anything at all to do with triathlon. I don’t get it. Bob
Response:
This really is *so* boring! Does anyone else agree? I don’t care who you want to have a relationship with – but does it have anything at all to do with triathlon. I don’t get it. Bob
I posted this. I don’t like it. I agree that it was inappropriate and irrelevant (and most importantly rude). I also agree that there is more than enough room for posts of this kind and that if I really thought it was boring I could have simply skipped the thread. It was a bad day – not that that is an excuse. My apologies to anyone I’ve alienated. Bob
Response:
Can’t swim; Has 4Runner.
Mrs. T’s tri in Chicago on the 27th of Aug.. There are something like 4000 triathletes in total(or is it more ???, it’s lots in any case) More importantly, for a gay triathlete, is the SMELTS triathlon weekend that is part of it. The SMELTS is the Chicago gay sports group who organize in conjunction with the large Mrs. T’s race a weekend for gay triathletes in Chicago They bill it as the largest gathering of gay triathletes in North America. I will be there having a grand time. Steve, are you out there in cyberspace with all the info ???? Mrs. T’s info line: 312-404-2372 Smelts Info: 312-281-4692/312-478-1054 P.S. Out of curiosity, which pocket are you carrying your toothbrush in ??? :-) — Brendan Leitch __ My views only, not Magellan Passport OS / those of my employer Bell Northern Research "You can have a great job, great place to live Ottawa, CANADA and a great lover, but not all three at once" Micheal Tolliver – Character in Armistead Maupin’s "Tales of the City" series
Response:
(inresponse to some conversation re the above subject) This really is *so* boring! Does anyone else agree? I don’t care who you want to have a relationship with – but does it have anything at all to do with triathlon. I don’t get it. Bob
There seem to be a lot of things on this newsgroup that are not directly related to triathlons – why pick on this one? More to the point, if it bores you so much, don’t read it (it has a clear subject heading after all) – just like I don’t read the stuff on races in Canada and the US, which are usually places and people I don’t know, so I miss all the witty innuendo that is often in accompaniment. Lighten up. Tri-ferret (still toying with Tri-nerd)
Response:
This really is *so* boring! Does anyone else agree? I don’t care who you want to have a relationship with – but does it have anything at all to do with triathlon. I don’t get it. Bob
It has everything to do with triathlons and almost nothing to do with relationships. If you find it boring, skip over it. Somebody asked a question related to triathlons and I answered it, in the most appropriate forum and in the most direct way. I find many things here boring and many interesting. I skip over the boring things and go to the interesting ones. — Brendan Leitch __ My views only, not Magellan Passport OS / those of my employer Bell Northern Research "You can have a great job, great place to live Ottawa, CANADA and a great lover, but not all three at once" Micheal Tolliver – Character in Armistead Maupin’s "Tales of the City" series
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Can’t swim; Has 4Runner. Mrs. T’s tri in Chicago on the 27th of Aug.. There are something like 4000 triathletes in total(or is it more ???, it’s lots in any case) More importantly, for a gay triathlete, is the SMELTS triathlon weekend that is part of it. The SMELTS is the Chicago gay sports group who organize in conjunction with the large Mrs. T’s race a weekend for gay triathletes in Chicago They bill it as the largest gathering of gay triathletes in North America. I will be there having a grand time. Steve, are you out there in cyberspace with all the info ???? Mrs. T’s info line: 312-404-2372 Smelts Info: 312-281-4692/312-478-1054 P.S. Out of curiosity, which pocket are you carrying your toothbrush in ??? :-) — Brendan Leitch __ My views only, not Magellan Passport OS / those of my employer Bell Northern Research "You can have a great job, great place to live Ottawa, CANADA and a great lover, but not all three at once" Micheal Tolliver – Character in Armistead Maupin’s "Tales of the City" series This really is *so* boring! Does anyone else agree? I don’t care who you want to have a relationship with – but does it have anything at all to do with triathlon. I don’t get it. Bob
Triathlon doesn’t care whether your gay or not . So including your sexual preference isn’t important when you post. — Paul Yeung , Ottawa, Canada SplisH SpLAsh !
Response:
