Lance - more upper-body?

"Larry Chapman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Has anyone else noticed that Lance seems to have re-gained some
of his upper-body muscle mass that he lost during his bout with
cancer? I'm only judging this off some brief TV looks. This might
not bode well for his climbing ability. I remember when Greg Lemond
started skate-skiing in the off season and put on some upper body, and
it negatively affected his climbing.

-- LSC

I noticed it and commented on it last year. You gotta figure that, so many
years out from his cancer, his body would have to be moving toward some sort
of equilibrium. Regardless, that large upper body houses some of the most
massive lungs on the planet.

Tomorrow we'll begin to find out if it'll affect his climbing.

Bob C.

"psycholist" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Larry Chapman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Has anyone else noticed that Lance seems to have re-gained some
of his upper-body muscle mass that he lost during his bout with
cancer? I'm only judging this off some brief TV looks. This might
not bode well for his climbing ability. I remember when Greg Lemond
started skate-skiing in the off season and put on some upper body, and
it negatively affected his climbing.

-- LSC

I noticed it and commented on it last year. You gotta figure that, so

many

Quoted message said:

years out from his cancer, his body would have to be moving toward some

sort

Quoted message said:

of equilibrium. Regardless, that large upper body houses some of the most
massive lungs on the planet.

Training (except perhaps for swimming) does not increase vital capacity, and
having a large vital capacity does not confer any advantage in aerobic
sports. From this we can conclude that Armstrong's lungs are probably no
larger than those of any other 32 year old of comparable build.

Andy Coggan

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 19:13:54 GMT, Andy Coggan <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

"psycholist" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Larry Chapman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Has anyone else noticed that Lance seems to have re-gained some
of his upper-body muscle mass that he lost during his bout with
cancer? I'm only judging this off some brief TV looks. This might
not bode well for his climbing ability. I remember when Greg Lemond
started skate-skiing in the off season and put on some upper body, and
it negatively affected his climbing.

-- LSC

I noticed it and commented on it last year. You gotta figure that, so

many

Quoted message said:

years out from his cancer, his body would have to be moving toward some

sort

Quoted message said:

of equilibrium. Regardless, that large upper body houses some of the
most
massive lungs on the planet.

Training (except perhaps for swimming) does not increase vital capacity,
and
having a large vital capacity does not confer any advantage in aerobic
sports. From this we can conclude that Armstrong's lungs are probably no
larger than those of any other 32 year old of comparable build.

Andy Coggan

And how many 32 year olds of comparable build are there? He looks almost
freakish to me. Didn't Indurain supposedly have a lung volume much larger
than average? Lance seems to be the same to me -- genetically gifted with
large lung volume.

--
Bob in CT
Remove ".x" to reply

"Bob in CT" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 19:13:54 GMT, Andy Coggan <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

"psycholist" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Larry Chapman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> Has anyone else noticed that Lance seems to have re-gained some
> of his upper-body muscle mass that he lost during his bout with
> cancer? I'm only judging this off some brief TV looks. This might
> not bode well for his climbing ability. I remember when Greg Lemond
> started skate-skiing in the off season and put on some upper body,

and

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> it negatively affected his climbing.
>
> -- LSC
>
>

I noticed it and commented on it last year. You gotta figure that, so

many

Quoted message said:

years out from his cancer, his body would have to be moving toward some

sort

Quoted message said:

of equilibrium. Regardless, that large upper body houses some of the
most
massive lungs on the planet.

Training (except perhaps for swimming) does not increase vital capacity,
and
having a large vital capacity does not confer any advantage in aerobic
sports. From this we can conclude that Armstrong's lungs are probably no
larger than those of any other 32 year old of comparable build.

Andy Coggan

And how many 32 year olds of comparable build are there? He looks almost
freakish to me.

Tons - especially when you consider that Armstrong looks "freakish" only
when he tries to bend over some handlebars.

Quoted message said:

Didn't Indurain supposedly have a lung volume much larger
than average?

I don't know, but Indurain was a big guy, so you'd expect him to have a lung
volume of 7 L or more.

Quoted message said:

Lance seems to be the same to me -- genetically gifted with
large lung volume.

It's a "gift" only if you play a woodwind instrument - but for a cyclist,
it's practically meaningless.

Andy Coggan

Bob in CT said:

And how many 32 year olds of comparable build are there? He looks
almost freakish to me. Didn't Indurain supposedly have a lung volume
much larger than average? Lance seems to be the same to me --
genetically gifted with large lung volume.

Mikel Astarloza - 7.98 litres (highest measured at pre race checks...2004)

Marco Milesi - 7.74 litres (2003)

Giuseppe Guerini - 8.69litres (2002 maybe he took up smoking since?)

Average respiratory capacity 2004,2003,2002 : 5.74,5.67,6.62
respectively (maybe everyone took up smoking since?)

Lance's documented "genetic advantage" is a super-high
lactic-acid threshold.

-- LSC

"psycholist" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Larry Chapman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Has anyone else noticed that Lance seems to have re-gained some
of his upper-body muscle mass that he lost during his bout with
cancer? I'm only judging this off some brief TV looks. This might
not bode well for his climbing ability. I remember when Greg Lemond
started skate-skiing in the off season and put on some upper body, and
it negatively affected his climbing.

-- LSC

I noticed it and commented on it last year. You gotta figure that, so

many

Quoted message said:

years out from his cancer, his body would have to be moving toward some

sort

Quoted message said:

of equilibrium. Regardless, that large upper body houses some of the most
massive lungs on the planet.

Tomorrow we'll begin to find out if it'll affect his climbing.

Bob C.

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 15:58:51 -0400, gym gravity <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Bob in CT said:

And how many 32 year olds of comparable build are there? He looks
almost freakish to me. Didn't Indurain supposedly have a lung volume
much larger than average? Lance seems to be the same to me --
genetically gifted with large lung volume.

Mikel Astarloza - 7.98 litres (highest measured at pre race
checks...2004)

Marco Milesi - 7.74 litres (2003)

Giuseppe Guerini - 8.69litres (2002 maybe he took up smoking since?)

Average respiratory capacity 2004,2003,2002 : 5.74,5.67,6.62
respectively (maybe everyone took up smoking since?)

A one liter (or litre) is a pretty good advantage. Of course, you still
need a high tolerance for pain, great VO2 max, good power-to-weight ratio,
great recuperation, etc.

--
Bob in CT
Remove ".x" to reply

"Bob in CT" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 15:58:51 -0400, gym gravity <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Bob in CT said:

And how many 32 year olds of comparable build are there? He looks
almost freakish to me. Didn't Indurain supposedly have a lung volume
much larger than average? Lance seems to be the same to me --
genetically gifted with large lung volume.

Mikel Astarloza - 7.98 litres (highest measured at pre race
checks...2004)

Marco Milesi - 7.74 litres (2003)

Giuseppe Guerini - 8.69litres (2002 maybe he took up smoking since?)

Average respiratory capacity 2004,2003,2002 : 5.74,5.67,6.62
respectively (maybe everyone took up smoking since?)

A one liter (or litre) is a pretty good advantage.

Like I said, it might be an advantage if you play a woodwind instrument for
a living. Otherwise, it doesn't mean much.

Andy ("my VC is 5.7 L/min, but you don't see me riding the TdF"😉 Coggan

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 21:16:22 GMT, Andy Coggan <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

"Bob in CT" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 15:58:51 -0400, gym gravity
<[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Bob in CT wrote:

>
> And how many 32 year olds of comparable build are there? He looks
> almost freakish to me. Didn't Indurain supposedly have a lung volume
> much larger than average? Lance seems to be the same to me --
> genetically gifted with large lung volume.
>

Mikel Astarloza - 7.98 litres (highest measured at pre race
checks...2004)

Marco Milesi - 7.74 litres (2003)

Giuseppe Guerini - 8.69litres (2002 maybe he took up smoking since?)

Average respiratory capacity 2004,2003,2002 : 5.74,5.67,6.62
respectively (maybe everyone took up smoking since?)

A one liter (or litre) is a pretty good advantage.

Like I said, it might be an advantage if you play a woodwind instrument
for
a living. Otherwise, it doesn't mean much.

Andy ("my VC is 5.7 L/min, but you don't see me riding the TdF"😉 Coggan

With all due respect, I disagree. A larger lung capacity means that you
can bring in more oxygen. If you can bring in more O2, then you can also
process it (hopefully). One liter is a large amount.

--
Bob in CT
Remove ".x" to reply

Bob in CT said:

With all due respect, I disagree. A larger lung capacity means that you
can bring in more oxygen. If you can bring in more O2, then you can
also process it (hopefully). One liter is a large amount.

In cycling, unlike woodwinds, you can breath more rapidly to get more O2.

Dan

"Bob in CT" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 21:16:22 GMT, Andy Coggan <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

"Bob in CT" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 15:58:51 -0400, gym gravity
<[email hidden]>
wrote:

> Bob in CT wrote:
>
>>
>> And how many 32 year olds of comparable build are there? He looks
>> almost freakish to me. Didn't Indurain supposedly have a lung

volume

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>> much larger than average? Lance seems to be the same to me --
>> genetically gifted with large lung volume.
>>
>
> Mikel Astarloza - 7.98 litres (highest measured at pre race
> checks...2004)
>
> Marco Milesi - 7.74 litres (2003)
>
> Giuseppe Guerini - 8.69litres (2002 maybe he took up smoking since?)
>
>
> Average respiratory capacity 2004,2003,2002 : 5.74,5.67,6.62
> respectively (maybe everyone took up smoking since?)

A one liter (or litre) is a pretty good advantage.

Like I said, it might be an advantage if you play a woodwind instrument
for
a living. Otherwise, it doesn't mean much.

Andy ("my VC is 5.7 L/min, but you don't see me riding the TdF"😉 Coggan

With all due respect, I disagree. A larger lung capacity means that you
can bring in more oxygen.

Not necessarily - total ventilation is the product of both inspired volume
and breathing frequency, so having a larger lung capacity doesn't
automatically translate into a higher MVV (maximal voluntary ventilation).
Furthermore, very few individuals ever approach their MVV during exercise
anyway.

Quoted message said:

If you can bring in more O2, then you can also
process it (hopefully).

Hoping doesn't make it so. Elite athletes with very high VO2max values
sometimes do have problems maintaining 100% saturation of arterial blood
with O2 during intense exercise, but even in those who do not, it isn't due
to having lungs that are too small.

Andy Coggan

"Larry Chapman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Has anyone else noticed that Lance seems to have re-gained some
of his upper-body muscle mass that he lost during his bout with
cancer? I'm only judging this off some brief TV looks. This might
not bode well for his climbing ability. I remember when Greg Lemond
started skate-skiing in the off season and put on some upper body, and
it negatively affected his climbing.

I noted that several months ago and it illicited not a single response if
memory serves.

"psycholist" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I noticed it and commented on it last year. You gotta figure that, so

many

Quoted message said:

years out from his cancer, his body would have to be moving toward some

sort

Quoted message said:

of equilibrium. Regardless, that large upper body houses some of the most
massive lungs on the planet.

I'm not all that sure of that. When I went in to have the chest x-ray for my
gas poisoning there was a hullabaloo about them having to use two photos for
me and they'd never had to do that before. Since it was at the Cal Medical
Center in San Francisco I'm sure that they had a pretty large pool of
previous customers.

Mind you, having very large lungs is not the same thing as having a large
VO2max and I suspect mine is rather average to say the least.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> And how many 32 year olds of comparable build are there? He looks
> almost freakish to me. Didn't Indurain supposedly have a lung volume
> much larger than average? Lance seems to be the same to me --
> genetically gifted with large lung volume.

According to Michael Specter's profile of LA in the New Yorker (July 15,
2002, "The Long Ride," see http://www.michaelspecter.com/ny/index.html,
fourth pdf down), Lance's heart is "almost a third larger than that of an
average man." This would probably enhance the transport of oxygen to the
muscles, the better to produce power at the wheels. LA's resting heart
rate was given as 32 bpm. Any slower, and he would be a corpse. (Can you
be eliminated from the tour for that reason?)

Other than that, the article is a nice read, IMHO.

AMG

"AMG" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >

Quoted message said:

LA's resting heart
rate was given as 32 bpm. Any slower, and he would be a corpse.

Sez who?

Mine was 30 at one point. I remember Jimmy Carter's was claimed to be 29
when he was president and running for exercise.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Carl Sundquist said:

"AMG" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >

Quoted message said:

LA's resting heart
rate was given as 32 bpm. Any slower, and he would be a corpse.

Sez who?

Mine was 30 at one point. I remember Jimmy Carter's was claimed to be 29
when he was president and running for exercise.

I recall seeing Indurain's listed as being between 26 and 28. Does RHR
really have anything to do with performance on the bike?

--
tanx,
Howard

So far, so good, so what?

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

Ah...the respiratory system is complicated....

You can breathe as much oxygen as you want, but if the pump (the heart) is
not working efficiently, or there are not enough "box cars" (hemoglobin in
RBCs) to deliver the oxygen all is for naught. Furthermore, there are
mitochondrial abnomalities (maternally inherited) that lower the anaerobic
threshold...I am not aware of any mitochondrial abnormalities that "raise"
the threshold...but just becasue they are not known does not mean they do
not exist.

To say that LA succeeds because he has big lungs is like saying pam
anderson succeeds because she has...well...big lungs. It's the entire
package.

dem

Quoted message said:

"psycholist" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I noticed it and commented on it last year. You gotta figure that, so

many

Quoted message said:

years out from his cancer, his body would have to be moving toward some

sort

Quoted message said:

of equilibrium. Regardless, that large upper body houses some of the
most
massive lungs on the planet.

I'm not all that sure of that. When I went in to have the chest x-ray
for my
gas poisoning there was a hullabaloo about them having to use two photos
for
me and they'd never had to do that before. Since it was at the Cal
Medical
Center in San Francisco I'm sure that they had a pretty large pool of
previous customers.

Mind you, having very large lungs is not the same thing as having a large
VO2max and I suspect mine is rather average to say the least.

--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/

"Tom Kunich" wrote...

Quoted message said:

Mind you, having very large lungs is not the same thing as having a large
VO2max

.... nor is it the same as having very large breasts.

Quoted message said:

and I suspect mine is rather average to say the least.

Your, um, what now...?

"Howard Kveck" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Carl Sundquist said:

"AMG" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >

Quoted message said:

LA's resting heart
rate was given as 32 bpm. Any slower, and he would be a corpse.

Sez who?

Mine was 30 at one point. I remember Jimmy Carter's was claimed to be 29
when he was president and running for exercise.

I recall seeing Indurain's listed as being between 26 and 28. Does RHR
really have anything to do with performance on the bike?

Nope. Mine is 45 and I suck.