Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Embarrassed by your Olympic javelin: did cavemen do it better? (2012)

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 96 posts

Re: Embarrassed by your Olympic javelin: did cavemen do it better? (2012)

#41

Post by thaumasiotes »

coopsmoss wrote: post #7
thaumasiotes wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes, the permanent world record is a little unfortunate. Why? The longer you keep records, the less likely it is that you can exceed the previous record. Why would we expect javelin throws to get longer over time?

Attainable goals are more motivating and meaningful than unattainable ones. It's in many ways a different event because the equipment is different, so why should a record for a different event stand.

> It's in many ways a different event because the equipment is different, so why should a record for a different event stand.

That's a completely separate concern. Once records are established for the current event, you still expect them to be more or less permanent. Turning in the best performance in all of history is not an attainable goal. You can't expect it to be one.

Re: Embarrassed by your Olympic javelin: did cavemen do it better? (2012)

#42

Post by eecc »

happymellon wrote: post #40
bryanrasmussen wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Sports are about fun and competition and sometimes exercise. part of the competition part would be breaking records.

Competition is about beating other people, not necessarily records.

A record is a person that did very well in the past.

Re: Embarrassed by your Olympic javelin: did cavemen do it better? (2012)

#43

Post by SilverRed »

prof-dr-ir wrote: post #33
londgine wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

swimming technique and bicycle technically have improved a lot and all of the grading sports (gymnastics, diving) are constantly being changed since they were introduced into the Olympics. That is why so many of those records could be beaten. However it looks like Olympic archery does not allow a compound bow. I guess every sport decides if they want innovation or not.

Cycling is actually another notorious example of a sport where the rules are holding back significant innovation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recumbent_bicycle

The rules are in place not to hold back speed, but to protect the image of cycling. A recumbent may be faster but it does not look like a bicycle to the average person and changes the image of the sport.

Things like better shifters, lighter frames (within reason) more aero parts (within reason) are still allowed.

Re: Embarrassed by your Olympic javelin: did cavemen do it better? (2012)

#44

Post by nl »

sandworm101 wrote: post #17
londgine wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

swimming technique and bicycle technically have improved a lot and all of the grading sports (gymnastics, diving) are constantly being changed since they were introduced into the Olympics. That is why so many of those records could be beaten. However it looks like Olympic archery does not allow a compound bow. I guess every sport decides if they want innovation or not.

Swimming rules have also been progressively eased to help keep the records falling. Flip turns in backstroke. Relay dives. More aggressive dive blocks. The new breaststroke kick. Lots of little thing mean constant trend, constant records dropping.

But restrictions on swimsuit material have gone the other way. There were a bunch of records set using non-permeable suits in 2008-2009 that will take year to break again after FINA introduced the "textile material" rule.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LZR_Racer#Marketing_and_result...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arena_X-Glide#Controversy

Re: Embarrassed by your Olympic javelin: did cavemen do it better? (2012)

#45

Post by thaumasiotes »

nvader wrote: post #27
thaumasiotes wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes, the permanent world record is a little unfortunate. Why? The longer you keep records, the less likely it is that you can exceed the previous record. Why would we expect javelin throws to get longer over time?

Improved nutrition, sports science and innovations in the biomechanics of throwing.

If you really believe that, the obvious implication is that the current world record isn't permanent after all. Good news!

Re: Embarrassed by your Olympic javelin: did cavemen do it better? (2012)

#46

Post by random314 »

vikiomega9 wrote: post #39
p1key wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it has been close? Johannes Vetter got a result of 97.76m under a year ago, that is only 0.72m shy of the world record. Also the reason he was underperforming in the olympics was that the surface of the run-up track was not able to take his weight on the final step and he would slip, making it impossible to perform on his normal high level.

Source for the reason Johannes Vetter failed? Does not look like this was covered well in the press.

I think the throwing surface had poorer grip than standard for various reasons. So Vetter couldn't use his typical speed without slipping.

Re: Embarrassed by your Olympic javelin: did cavemen do it better? (2012)

#47

Post by nl »

Clewza313 wrote: post #3

Javelin is a bit of an outlier in the Olympics in that throws today are nowhere near the records, even after the changes discussed in the article. The winning throw this year was 87.58m, with only one other competitor managing even 86m. The world record, dating from 1996, is 98.48m , a full 10 meters and then some longer. Germany's Vetter, the one modern javelin thrower who has come within striking distance of that (…

> Javelin is a bit of an outlier in the Olympics in that throws today are nowhere near the records, even after the changes discussed in the article.

This isn't true.

There are 10 different athletes who have thrown within 7m of the world record[1] and Johannes Vetter has thrown over 94m 4 times[2].

> So why are we so much worse than 25 years ago?

We aren't

> The obvious explanation would doping.

Zelezy was a freak - as can be seen by his progression[3].

That kind of long-lived high performance (82m in 1986, 86m in 2006) is rarely because of doping - there are too many chances to get caught, and it's too hard to transition between doping types (eg steroids to HGH), and historical testing catches out too many people.

The Men's discuss OTOH... This is what a suspicious progression looks like[4].

[1] https://www.worldathletics.org/records/all-time-toplists/thr...

[2] https://www.worldathletics.org/records/all-time-toplists/thr...

[3] https://www.worldathletics.org/athletes/czech-republic/jan-z...

[4] https://www.worldathletics.org/athletes/germany/jurgen-schul...

Re: Embarrassed by your Olympic javelin: did cavemen do it better? (2012)

#48

Post by bryanrasmussen »

happymellon wrote: post #40
bryanrasmussen wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Sports are about fun and competition and sometimes exercise. part of the competition part would be breaking records.

Competition is about beating other people, not necessarily records.

that's why I said part of - part of it is beating the people you are competing with right now but another part is beating the people who were there before you.

Re: Embarrassed by your Olympic javelin: did cavemen do it better? (2012)

#49

Post by nAwYz »

vikiomega9 wrote: post #39
p1key wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it has been close? Johannes Vetter got a result of 97.76m under a year ago, that is only 0.72m shy of the world record. Also the reason he was underperforming in the olympics was that the surface of the run-up track was not able to take his weight on the final step and he would slip, making it impossible to perform on his normal high level.

Source for the reason Johannes Vetter failed? Does not look like this was covered well in the press.

In german news it was quite widely reported that he had problems with the surface of the runway

Re: Embarrassed by your Olympic javelin: did cavemen do it better? (2012)

#50

Post by hervature »

prof-dr-ir wrote: post #33
londgine wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

swimming technique and bicycle technically have improved a lot and all of the grading sports (gymnastics, diving) are constantly being changed since they were introduced into the Olympics. That is why so many of those records could be beaten. However it looks like Olympic archery does not allow a compound bow. I guess every sport decides if they want innovation or not.

Cycling is actually another notorious example of a sport where the rules are holding back significant innovation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recumbent_bicycle

Could also put an engine in there. Sports are defined by arbitrary rules.
Post reply on HN