3 ms·

I think what it comes down to is that sport is of course primarily a vehicle to sell people things when they try to emulate professionals. You can't sell a swi

I think what it comes down to is that sport is of course primarily a vehicle to sell people things when they try to emulate professionals. You can't sell a swim suit that breaks down after a few uses. You can't sell people on autologous blood transfusions. If it was about technology bike racers would all be using recumbent bikes, but that is not very popular with consumers. It's a very finely tuned balance; enough advancement so you can keep selling new stuff, not enough to make it predominantly an absurd R&D game and obscure the human talent.

scribu 10y ago
I agree with the ideea that a sport loses its meaning if the athlete is overshadowed by technological advances. However, I'm not convinced by the argument that sports need to keep equipment palatable to amateurs. Consider Formula 1 racing: it's a popular spectator sport, despite the fact that an F1 car costs millions of dollars, which surely no regular Joe can afford.
autokad 10y ago
they often show videos of olympic gymnasts of the 1950s and say look at what they can do now! there is a lot more talent and training for sure, but they were also doing flips in dirt and today they bounce around on trampolines. so many people think 4'+ Biles can jump 10 feet in the air. even the arena's have huge changes in tech
FullMtlAlcoholc 10y ago
> You can't sell people on autologous blood transfusions. I'm pretty sure that you will be able to sell people on gene therapy that provides enhancement pretty soon.
decker 10y ago
The UCI banned recumbents because the upright bike manufacturers didn't want a faster bike to compete. People these days don't buy recumbents because they are very expensive due to being a low-volume niche item.
- WillPostForFood 10y ago
  There is a good history of the recumbent ban by UCI in 1934 here: http://www.helsinki.fi/~tlinden/winforb.html http://www.helsinki.fi/~tlinden/winforb.html There is no mention of bike manufacturers involved at all. Do you have a citation for your claim?

scribu 10y ago

I agree with the ideea that a sport loses its meaning if the athlete is overshadowed by technological advances. However, I'm not convinced by the argument that sports need to keep equipment palatable to amateurs. Consider Formula 1 racing: it's a popular spectator sport, despite the fact that an F1 car costs millions of dollars, which surely no regular Joe can afford.

autokad 10y ago

they often show videos of olympic gymnasts of the 1950s and say look at what they can do now! there is a lot more talent and training for sure, but they were also doing flips in dirt and today they bounce around on trampolines. so many people think 4'+ Biles can jump 10 feet in the air. even the arena's have huge changes in tech

FullMtlAlcoholc 10y ago

> You can't sell people on autologous blood transfusions. I'm pretty sure that you will be able to sell people on gene therapy that provides enhancement pretty soon.

decker 10y ago

The UCI banned recumbents because the upright bike manufacturers didn't want a faster bike to compete. People these days don't buy recumbents because they are very expensive due to being a low-volume niche item.

WillPostForFood 10y ago
There is a good history of the recumbent ban by UCI in 1934 here: http://www.helsinki.fi/~tlinden/winforb.html http://www.helsinki.fi/~tlinden/winforb.html There is no mention of bike manufacturers involved at all. Do you have a citation for your claim?