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:
I gave blood regularly for several years up to last year – like once every fourth or fifth month. After the Great Floridian last year, I went for a check up and found out I was anemic – low iron. The Doc, who was the chairman of Red Cross, told me to stop, or give maybe once a year.
Response:
Vanessa, from experience and from other inputs which have confirmed my thoughts, your "sensibility" to blood donation will depend on whether this is one of the first times you give blood or not. The first 2 or 3 times I gave blood, I was a little dizzy after. After a dozen times, I go play 90 minutes of squash a few hours after with no problem at all. The 4th time or so, that was a few days before I left for a 2-day orienteering marathon where I competed in the Elite class and finished on the podium. Maybe people are different from one another, my opinion is that the recovery after blood donation is VERY fast. The extremely important thing you have to remember is to drink a lot after the donation and eat calories. Most of all, drink. You’ll certainly have access to orange juice at the donation site. Do not hesitate to drink a lot. At the very least, you do not have to worry about August… – Francois Share what you know. Learn what you don’t.
Response:
Give Blood! I gave blood about two months ago and continued training normally the next day with no complications. I did take tons of good food and fluids right after i donated though. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – My company is having a blood drive July 15th. I want to do the socially responsible thing and give, especially since I have that rare and valuable type O- (universal donor!) and there is a blood shortage right now. However, I’m afraid it will mess up my training. Right now I do sprints, but I’m ramping up the distance in anticipation of doing an Olympic distance race August 8. I’m visiting my family July 16-18, so I probably wouldn’t get much training done then anyway. I’ve given blood before, but I wasn’t very active at the time, so that’s why I don’t have much of a clue what it will do to my training (although I have memories of being out of breath a lot). And I am a small person, about 110 pounds. So… will it have a big effect on my training? (I really wanna do an Oly). Is it safe to give? Or should I wait until after the race and seek out the Red Cross on my own (and can I even do that, or do I need to wait for a blood drive?) Thanks! Vanessa "why can’t they just take half a pint?" Smith
Response:
Vanessa "why can’t they just take half a pint?" Smith
You know, that crossed my mind also when a peer at work who also runs told me she couldn’t give blood because she was too petite. With all these shortages they’re claiming, something as simple as offering to take only 1/2 pint of blood will bring more people into the fold and cut down on these shortages. Or is there something that I don’t know which prevents this?… |26 | IMC’96: 10:36:37 | Fe | IMNZ, IMC ‘99 IMC’97: 10:42:53 | | "THE BEST ELEMENT OF RACING"
Response:
vanessa, as a physician, triathlete and devoted blood donor, I can tell you from personal and recent (4 days ago) experience that donating blood will "knock you down" for a day or so. You can rehydrate and replenish your plasma (non red blood cell volume) but it will take you a few days to get back to feeling normal, especially given your weight. I would wait until after your big race and use it as part of your recovery. keith
Response:
Hi Pete, You bring up something which I never understood. From what I understand there is a minimum weight requirement of 110 pounds but I have never read anything about a minimum height/weight requirement. Does this mean a very tall very thin person who weighs 110 pounds and is underweight would be accepted as a blood donor while a very short person who weighs under 110 pounds, yet is the correct weight for their height or is even heavy for their height not be accepted as a blood donor? Anyone know? You know, that crossed my mind also when a peer at work who also runs told me
she couldn’t give blood because she was too petite. With all these shortages they’re claiming, something as simple as offering to take only 1/2 pint of blood will bring more people into the fold and cut down on these shortages. Or is there something that I don’t know which prevents this?. ____ Deborah Oney Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Blood Recall/Withdrawal-Creutzfeldt Jakob Disease http://members.aol.com/debbieoney/blood.htm CJD Watch-the international CJD tracker http://members.aol.com/stacy91434/watch/watch.htm
Response:
I too am ultralight, and giving blood always throws my body all out of equilibrium. If I were you, I’d conveniently schedule a rest week around the blood donation. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – My company is having a blood drive July 15th. I want to do the socially responsible thing and give, especially since I have that rare and valuable type O- (universal donor!) and there is a blood shortage right now. However, I’m afraid it will mess up my training. Right now I do sprints, but I’m ramping up the distance in anticipation of doing an Olympic distance race August 8. I’m visiting my family July 16-18, so I probably wouldn’t get much training done then anyway. I’ve given blood before, but I wasn’t very active at the time, so that’s why I don’t have much of a clue what it will do to my training (although I have memories of being out of breath a lot). And I am a small person, about 110 pounds. So… will it have a big effect on my training? (I really wanna do an Oly). Is it safe to give? Or should I wait until after the race and seek out the Red Cross on my own (and can I even do that, or do I need to wait for a blood drive?) Thanks! Vanessa "why can’t they just take half a pint?" Smith
Response:
My company is having a blood drive July 15th. I want to do the socially responsible thing and give, especially since I have that rare and valuable type O- (universal donor!) and there is a blood shortage right now. However, I’m afraid it will mess up my training. Right now I do sprints, but I’m ramping up the distance in anticipation of doing an Olympic distance race August 8. I’m visiting my family July 16-18, so I probably wouldn’t get much training done then anyway. I’ve given blood before, but I wasn’t very active at the time, so that’s why I don’t have much of a clue what it will do to my training (although I have memories of being out of breath a lot). And I am a small person, about 110 pounds. So… will it have a big effect on my training? (I really wanna do an Oly). Is it safe to give? Or should I wait until after the race and seek out the Red Cross on my own (and can I even do that, or do I need to wait for a blood drive?) Thanks! Vanessa "why can’t they just take half a pint?" Smith
Response:
Vanessa, Don’t do any training immediately after donating. Dizziness, dehydration, etc, etc. The fluid you loose from donating gets replaced pretty quickly. Rehydrate with your favorite fluid replacement drink. Replacing blood cells and platelets take a bit longer, but I couldn’t say how long. Depends on alot of variables. It would be good to take some time off and/or reduce your training time for a couple of days. Extra iron, B12, folic acid, anti-oxidants supplements would help. Avoid vampires. You will certainly be in good shape for your August race. Donating blood is a noble sacrifice. Hats off to you. Best wishes, Frank Wallace Share what you know. Learn what you don’t.
Response:
| My company is having a blood drive July 15th. I want to do the socially | responsible thing and give… Good for you! | So… will it have a big effect on my training? (I really wanna do an | Oly). Is it safe to give? It will be interesting to see what the physiologists say, but I say give blood! It probably varies from person to person, but I’ve never had a problem with fairly strenuous exercise the next day. On the one occasion I almost let running prevent me from giving blood, I gave blood one morning and had a VERY HARD workout the following evening. This workout was designed to measure the VO2max, doing 3 mins on/3 mins off, and upping the speed of the "on"s until failure. It was one of the hardest workouts I’ve ever done, and I did quite well compared to friends of similar running ability, so I’m convinced that donating blood didn’t impair my performance to any perceptible degree. Good luck, rich
Response:
Question:
How about rollers? Here you are using some upper body muscles. Assuming you reach the same heart rate as on a "wind" trainer, which gives you a better work out? The weather finally improved enough to get out on the road in the DC area this week end, and I noticed a destinct imporvement in my peddling after spending some time on rollers exclusively. Any comment? Neal Elliott Silver Spring, MD – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -(Ryun G. Pavlicek) writes: I am pretty sure it depends on the style riding you do. Some people are inconsistent on the road and spend a lot of time coasting. However on a trainer where you can peg your heartrate at a certain number and hold it for two hours is very different than a two hour ride where you accelerate, stop, coast, and recover. Also another contributing factor is that on a trainer you arent using as many muscles as on the road esp upper body and so it is almost exclusively up to your legs to get the heart going. — Ryun Pavlicek Dept of Sociology University of Virginia
Response:
As a graduate student over the last couple yrs i have consistently done no less than 80% of my cycling on an indoor-trainer!! I find that i get an incredible workout, and it sure saves a hell of a lot of time. No preparation, just pop a tape in the VCR, crank up the tension, and hammer for an hour. I would agree w/ the 1:2 ratio, sounds about right. Just try to get a long ride a week(when training for something particular) and you should be fine. This is all i ever did and i can’t remember the last time a went over 1 hr for a 40k in a race. I start med school in the fall, and the trainer will most likely be *it* as far as cycling goes!! -Bryan
Response:
I missed the original post: is the implication that indoor miles are worth more than outdoor miles ? (I hope so) tim
In my humble opinion, it seems that indoor "mileage" might be worth a little more than outdoor miles, but not too much. Indoors, the effort is sustained with no coasting, hills, or wind to push. Conversely, outdoors, the effort includes uphills, headwinds and cornering. Really cannot say for sure. I am sure the cycling experts can provide more insight. -Rolf — Rolf "Ironman" Arands, Ph.D. (Chemical Engineering) Dept. of Chem. and Biochem. Eng’g, Rutgers University –These are my highly opinionated views, not Rutgers’–
Response:
marin rodriguez hayward, CA I am a teacher and a coach that insists on getting in my tri workouts too. Talk about time consuming!If it weren’t for my windtrainer i would have no time at all to get in a quality cycling workout except on weekends. With the trainer though, I can go home form school , strap on the bike and get a high quality workout in 45-60 minutes. Tracking HR is a must, but it beats the dwindling light and the rain in the winter. Has anyone tried the Cyclerobix (sp?) video? I was able to rent and preview it and it seems good! Also what’s your favorite show to watch while riding (hard effort during the show and rest during commercials)? Star Trek the Next Generation is great for an hour wkout!
Response:
I missed the original post: is the implication that indoor miles are worth more than outdoor miles ? (I hope so) tim
Response:
Riding indors is more intense for you legs no lights or stopsigns or traffic. But you still need the bike handeling skills to be able to maintain that smooth cadence while moving from side to side. I have witnessed many accedents in triathlons and all but one of them were from a lack of basic skills. Louis Pelissier
Response:
"Worth" is a relative term. It may be more of a work out to do one hour on the trainer than on the road at least for your legs and heart since it is constant. However, trainers do have negatives. it is easy to develop problems with your pedal stroke since you dont have to worry about going in a straight line (obviously not a concern for rollers). Also other adaptations to cycling on the road may get a bit rusty. For example, your back may not be accustomed to dealing with road shock or compensating during certain parts of the ride such as climbing. A number of people dont remain in the exact position they would use on the rod which can also be corrected but is something to be aware of. Ryun Pavlicek
Agreed! Excellent points. Having logged about a zillion (maybe two zillion) miles indoors this year, being on the road and managing the bike is almost a new experience! -Rolf — Rolf "Ironman" Arands, Ph.D. (Chemical Engineering) Dept. of Chem. and Biochem. Eng’g, Rutgers University –These are my highly opinionated views, not Rutgers’–
Response:
I’d say it totally depends on the type of trainer. In the "olden days" when rollers were the only thing available that might have been true. Now with multi-fan, fluid, and bake based mechanics I think you can get 1:1. I know I have a 4-fan vetta, and it gives slightly MORE resistance than a flat road because I’m 1 or 2 gears lower than I am outside. The only bad thing about it is that it is very loud. Has anyone else found trainers that give MORE resistance than flat road? I haven’t tried any of the new fluid or brake jobs…
I think the conversion now is just the opposite than what John Howard was referring to (i.e., 45 minutes on the trainer is comparable to an hour on the road). When you’re on the road you rarely ride for 45 minutes without letting up. As for more resistance on the trainer, if I crank the CompuTrainer up to the steepest grade, I have to stand to move the pedals! — Marty Miller (aka The Noodle) Proprietor of "The Triathlete’s Web" http://w3.one.net/~triweb/triweb.html
Response:
Humor – someone (I will keep identity confidential) actually sent me this: I own a fluid trainer. Recently, I put a stack of books under my front wheel to raise it above the rear to simulate a hill, but curiously, found that the resistance was the same, while the ride wasn’t very comfortable. Har har Rob
Response:
John Howard, noted Olympic cyclist and one time Ironman, winneronce stated that there is a 3 to 1 ratio (outdoors to indoors) fortrainer riding.
— I’d say it totally depends on the type of trainer. In the "olden days" when rollers were the only thing available that might have been true. Now with multi-fan, fluid, and bake based mechanics I think you can get 1:1. I know I have a 4-fan vetta, and it gives slightly MORE resistance than a flat road because I’m 1 or 2 gears lower than I am outside. The only bad thing about it is that it is very loud. Has anyone else found trainers that give MORE resistance than flat road? I haven’t tried any of the new fluid or brake jobs… D
Response:
Let me try to get it right this time. If you ride 1 mile indoors on a wind trainer, it is equivalent to 3 outdoors. My first reply had it backwards.
Response:
Let me try to get it right this time. If you ride 1 mile indoors on a wind trainer, it is equivalent to 3 outdoors. My first reply had it backwards.
That seems a bit much to me. I’ve always heard that you should double the distance. Personally, I think that’s even a bit too much. Maybe multiply by 1.5. — Marty Miller (aka The Noodle) Proprietor of "The Triathlete’s Web" http://w3.one.net/~triweb/triweb.html
Response:
I am pretty sure it depends on the style riding you do. Some people are inconsistent on the road and spend a lot of time coasting. However on a trainer where you can peg your heartrate at a certain number and hold it for two hours is very different than a two hour ride where you accelerate, stop, coast, and recover. Also another contributing factor is that on a trainer you arent using as many muscles as on the road esp upper body and so it is almost exclusively up to your legs to get the heart going. — Ryun Pavlicek Dept of Sociology University of Virginia
Response:
Does anyone have any good rule-of-thumbs for time on an indoor trainer as it compares to road mileage? I live in a very hilly area so my road training is inconsistent even though I use a HR monitor. Indoors I feel much more fatigued than on the road, even though the time and the heartrate was the same. Any thoughts? Bill Newman
Response:
John Howard, noted Olympic cyclist and one time Ironman, winner once stated that there is a 3 to 1 ratio (outdoors to indoors) for trainer riding.
Response:
