Dear Martin
I don't suppose you're a fan of Voltaire? No? It was he who wrote "I
disapprove of what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say
it". This may have been a more appropriate response to Mel's posting. As you
have chosen a more down-to-earth option there are likely to be those on this
list who will suggest that the list itself is better off without you. We
shall see.
Robert
----- Original Message -----
From: "Martin Jones" <[log in to unmask]>
> I hear what u say - load of crap really - u r the weakest link, goodby
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <[log in to unmask]>
> > On 27/03/2001, Martin Jones<[log in to unmask]> writes:
> >
> > << The British Amateur weightlifting Association do not allow Children
> under
> > the age of 15 to compete in their competions - it may be worth
contacting
> > them >>
> >
> > ***However, one of the greatest lifters of all time, Naim Suleimanov of
> > Bulgaria (who later became Naim Suleymanoglu of Turkey) at a bodymass of
> 52kg
> > was outlifting all adults at the age of 15 in world championships. He
> > recently retired after the Sydney Olympics and was invited to become one
> of
> > the honorary Vice Presidents of the International Olympic Weightlifting
> > Federation for his great contributions to the sport. Always a very
small
> > man, he was not well suited to most other sports, but, from an early age
> > excelled at lifting heavy weights and all these years later he is not
> > suffering from all those dreaded problems which young lifters are
supposed
> to
> > experience.
> >
> > Maybe British adults simply do not like children to be superior at sport
> to
> > adults :) Their whole ban is rather ludicrous, since the British
Olympic
> > movement allows much younger children to compete in the even more
> physically
> > demanding and stressful sport of gymnastics. Were they to be consistent
> and
> > base their bans on biomechanical and clinical findings, they should ban
> > youngsters from playing several sports before the age of 15, not only in
> the
> > Olympics, but also at school, and that definitely includes rugby,
> wrestling,
> > judo, soccer (high incidence of knee and ankle injury), track and field
> and
> > gymnastics. Cricket fast bowling and tennis might also be candidates
for
> > banning because of the very large stresses placed upon the spine and
> > shoulders. Not that I am promoting this idea, but I am simply trying
to
> > emphasize the illogicality and inconsistency of the whole sorry saga.
> >
> > When are people going to appreciate that one does NOT have to lift heavy
> > weights to impose large stresses on the human body and that basic
physics
> > shows that large forces (involving small loads but large accelerations)
> and
> > large torques (involving small loads, but long lever arms) can be
produced
> > without adding any load whatsoever to the body? Are Newton's Second Law
> and
> > the Law of Levers really so little understood by the sporting, teaching
> and
> > medical professions? If so, there is something very amiss with our
> > edunational system in general.
> >
> > Once upon a time a well-known scientist said that no person could
presume
> to
> > call himself educated if he did not understand the implications of the
> Second
> > Law of Thermodynamics - well, I am going to take that even further and
> state
> > that no modern person can afford to call himself/herself educated if
> he/she
> > does not understand the implications of Newton's even simpler three laws
> of
> > mechanics. Thus did not Zarathustra spake!
> >
> > Dr Mel C Siff
> > Denver, USA
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Supertraining/
> >
>
|