Genetic testing available for sprint versus endurance talent
Former Member
There was a piece on the radio this afternoon about a genetic test for sprint versus endurance aptitude depending, I think, on something to do with fast and slow twitch muscles. Just send a check and a cheek swab to a lab in Australia and find out where your genetic predisposition lies!
www.genetictechnologies.com.au/index_athletic.asp
The radio piece centered on the potential of using this technology to screen children and was against it.
I'm not endorsing the technology, just thought it was interesting food for thought.
I'd like to point out something that this question brings up.
The vertical leap test tends to predict whether someone will be a better sprinter or long distance swimmer.
Now, would anyone say that if we want to be a better 50 meter swimmer we should do plyometrics to work on our vertical leap? I sincerely doubt it.
That leads to a generic study that comes out, let's say that it finds great 200 meter *** strokers have very large bicep muscles. Would we then see articles suggesting that we should work on our bicep muscles? Maybe
Now that brings us to the finding that the best endurance athletes had high lactate threshold swim speeds and high lactate threshold heart rates. Would we then see artciles suggesting we throw out the big yardage and work mostly on trying to raise lactate threshold? We already have seen thousands of them.
The first instance seems ludicrous, the second less so, and the third is accepted dogma. What we haven't demonstrated in any case is that the better athletes actually trained those aspects. A sprint swimmer doesn't train his vertical leap to make it better. A supposed breastroker may or may not work on his biceps. But most importantly, while we can show an association between high lactate threshold swim speed and performance, what is often glossed over is that the people with the highest lactate threshold swim speed may not have done very much "lactate threshold" swimming.
Everyone takes that logical leap and we don't seem to question it much. I'm not saying I have better ideas, just that we should be a little cautious.
I'd like to point out something that this question brings up.
The vertical leap test tends to predict whether someone will be a better sprinter or long distance swimmer.
Now, would anyone say that if we want to be a better 50 meter swimmer we should do plyometrics to work on our vertical leap? I sincerely doubt it.
That leads to a generic study that comes out, let's say that it finds great 200 meter *** strokers have very large bicep muscles. Would we then see articles suggesting that we should work on our bicep muscles? Maybe
Now that brings us to the finding that the best endurance athletes had high lactate threshold swim speeds and high lactate threshold heart rates. Would we then see artciles suggesting we throw out the big yardage and work mostly on trying to raise lactate threshold? We already have seen thousands of them.
The first instance seems ludicrous, the second less so, and the third is accepted dogma. What we haven't demonstrated in any case is that the better athletes actually trained those aspects. A sprint swimmer doesn't train his vertical leap to make it better. A supposed breastroker may or may not work on his biceps. But most importantly, while we can show an association between high lactate threshold swim speed and performance, what is often glossed over is that the people with the highest lactate threshold swim speed may not have done very much "lactate threshold" swimming.
Everyone takes that logical leap and we don't seem to question it much. I'm not saying I have better ideas, just that we should be a little cautious.
