[HN Gopher] Limits to running speed in dogs, horses and human
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Limits to running speed in dogs, horses and human
        
       Author : fforflo
       Score  : 56 points
       Date   : 2024-08-07 14:57 UTC (4 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (journals.biologists.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (journals.biologists.com)
        
       | stonethrowaway wrote:
       | I don't think the title is accurate. And this isn't about
       | biology. The biology is there and the author dismisses it in
       | Introduction and proceeds to go down the statistics rabbit hole.
       | A golden opportunity to discuss how we can obtain limits of
       | locomotion while adhering to thermodynamics was lost. There's no
       | physiology in here. Instead, we have plots of past competitions
       | and silly predictions to go along with it.
       | 
       | I suppose I'm asking too much of the author to write the "Tire &
       | Vehicle Dynamics" book applied to the human body but, one can
       | dream I suppose.
        
         | Mathnerd314 wrote:
         | Yeah, I was hoping for something building on this kind of work:
         | https://simtk.org/projects/runningsim There is definitely a
         | speed at which your muscles would have to exert more force than
         | bones/tendons can handle, for example. And then there is
         | probably a muscle/weight tradeoff.
        
           | BobaFloutist wrote:
           | > And then there is probably a muscle/weight tradeoff
           | 
           | For sprinting I don't know that there is, given that muscles
           | are capable of exerting more force than their weight.
        
           | AlbertCory wrote:
           | if you're a data guy, then that's what you do.
           | 
           | If there are absolute limits, they are probably in the
           | ligaments. See my answer above about baseball pitchers.
        
             | Someone wrote:
             | > If there are absolute limits, they are probably in the
             | ligaments.
             | 
             | Maybe. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulnar_collateral_ligam
             | ent_reco...:
             | 
             |  _"Some baseball pitchers believe that they can throw
             | harder after ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction than
             | they did beforehand. As a result, orthopedic surgeons have
             | reported that parents of young pitchers have asked them to
             | perform the procedure on their uninjured sons in the hope
             | that it will increase performance. However, many people,
             | including Frank Jobe, believe that any postsurgical
             | increases in performance are most likely the result of the
             | increased stability of the elbow joint and pitchers '
             | increased attention to their fitness and conditioning. Jobe
             | believed that rather than allowing pitchers to gain speed,
             | the surgery and rehab protocols merely allow pitchers to
             | return to their pre-injury levels of performance."_
             | 
             | (I don't see that header "misconceptions" follow from that
             | paragraph, which says _"some people believe A, others
             | believe not-A"_ )
             | 
             | Also, even if ligaments can't be trained to be stronger and
             | can't be replaced by something stronger, longer arms should
             | lead to faster throws for the same forces on those
             | ligaments, wouldn't it?
        
               | AlbertCory wrote:
               | well, there's always surgery, isn't there? Bionic
               | pitchers.
               | 
               | Longer arms: maybe. The tallest pitchers aren't the
               | fastest, though. And there will probably never be a human
               | with a 10 foot wingspan.
               | 
               | There have always been pitchers with unhittable
               | fastballs, but often they can't control them and they
               | walk too many batters.
        
       | wongarsu wrote:
       | Looking at <100 years of data, fitting a logistic equation to it
       | and concluding that the limit is close to the current plateau is
       | ... unsatisfying.
       | 
       | Maybe that's an unfair summary, there is more statistic rigor
       | than that in the paper. But nonetheless the observed time period
       | seems way too small to support any conclusion
        
         | Aachen wrote:
         | I was similarly wondering whether the author has tried taking a
         | subset of the data and seeing if the result still comes out the
         | same. It seems mildly suspect that, in each case, it just so
         | happens that we've just about reached the limit. By excluding
         | recent data, there can't be a bias to recent values
        
         | hansvm wrote:
         | It depends a bit on your model of the observed performance
         | improvements. Do we have better training and nutrition (a
         | logistic model seems simplistic if so)? Do we simply perform
         | better when we have other high-performing peers to compete
         | against (in which case the logistic model isn't perfect, but
         | it's not terrible -- you'd expect an exponential increase in
         | population to have enough additional brackets to get every
         | constant, additive gain, and assuming logistic growth for the
         | population a logistic curve-fitting roughly inverts that
         | function)?
         | 
         | At best though, it's a model of what _will_ be achieved, as
         | opposed to the hypothetical bounds on those achievements if we
         | were going to invest resources into hitting them.
        
         | PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
         | What it incredibly frustrating to me that is on the one hand,
         | we might somewhat glibly say that we know we can ignore the
         | data for the preceding 5000 years because we know that all the
         | fastest performances have been in the last century.
         | 
         | But merely saying that then leads to the question: do we
         | actually know that?
         | 
         | And what's frustrating is that I don't there is any way to be
         | confident about any answer to that question.
        
           | scott_w wrote:
           | I think we can. We have archeological records showing us what
           | even the fittest people looked like and what clothes they
           | wore. Modern equipment is so much better than what ancient
           | people had access to, it's just not even close.
           | 
           | Better nutrition means people can get bigger/stronger more
           | easily. Easier access to training equipment amplifies this.
           | 
           | The access to information we have means even more people can
           | train more optimally than people in the past possibly could.
           | 
           | The sheer volume of people gives us statistical probability
           | that genetic freaks will appear more frequently.
           | 
           | All of these gives us more confidence that current records
           | are "true" records.
        
         | AlbertCory wrote:
         | Right. A data-based approach is unsatisfying. Here is a related
         | question:
         | 
         | How fast can a baseball pitcher throw a ball? Will we ever see
         | a 125 mph fastball? There's no equipment involved (running
         | shoes, etc.)
         | 
         | I saw an physics-based analysis of this once, based on the
         | tendons in the arm and shoulder. Your muscles might get
         | stronger and your mechanics might be optimized, but the tendons
         | do not improve. At what speed will they just snap?
         | 
         | This video is only a little bit about that, when the
         | physiologist mentions the ligaments. It's hugely entertaining,
         | though:
         | 
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8udNOTFiqUs
        
       | Aachen wrote:
       | The to-me coolest bit is at the very bottom, captioned "context":
       | 
       | > [...] a women running the estimated absolute fastest speed for
       | 100 m would have beaten the world's fastest male in 1955, a feat
       | that would have astounded contemporary spectators. The predicted
       | maximum speed (5.83 m s-1) for a man running a marathon (42.2 km)
       | would have been fast enough to beat the great Emil Zatopek in his
       | world's best 10 km race in 1954. Those in the stands watching
       | that race could not have imagined someone besting Zatopek by 16
       | s, and then simply continuing at that winning pace for another
       | 32.2 km.
       | 
       | The actual result for humans is split out by distance and gender
       | in figure 11 near the bottom, peaking at ~150m distance just shy
       | of 11 for men and 10 m/s for women
        
         | polishdude20 wrote:
         | I wonder if we have better/faster athletes now because poverty
         | is going down? Like, back in the 1950's there were people on
         | this earth who were genetically the best at running but
         | potentially did not have the economic means to actually train
         | themselves and develop. As we bring more people above the
         | poverty line, there's more of a chance of finding those
         | genetically gifted people and developing them.
        
           | hacb wrote:
           | The technology related to running also improved a lot in the
           | last years (running shoes with carbon inserts, better
           | nutrition, ...)
        
           | K0balt wrote:
           | I'd conjecture that what we see with both humans and animals
           | is a result of two primary factors: nutrition and global
           | mobility. Better food and medicine combined with mobility so
           | that the best of the best can be brought to the competition.
        
           | wiether wrote:
           | There are dozens factors that explains the performance
           | improvements, like tech that can help detect future talents,
           | globalization that can help finding talents in the middle of
           | nowhere, studies on physiology... The biggest one being
           | probably : experience. Thousands of athletes and coaches have
           | learn for other's success and failures regarding training,
           | pacing, resting, nutrition and removal of psychological
           | limitations. Roger Bannister history is relevant : before he
           | broke the 4mn mile, people thought it was impossible for
           | decades. Once he did, many other achieved the same feat in
           | the following years.
           | 
           | Regarding your question about poverty, I'd say it's a tough
           | one.
           | 
           | Because in third World countries, only the athletes that pass
           | the selection process actually come out of poverty. The
           | others stay there.
           | 
           | In rich countries on the other hand, I see two things :
           | 
           | - having the means to train with the best coaches, the best
           | gear... can help you make it to the top ; some rich parents
           | are even pushing hard this way (see the article on tennis a
           | few weeks back here en HN)
           | 
           | - but also, if you have the means to go to college, aiming
           | for a regular career is a way much safer bet than pursuing a
           | professional athlete career. Teenagers that are very good at
           | a sport and are given the choice between the two, most are
           | going to pick the regular career and enjoy sport outside of
           | work. A poor kid who's choice is between a life changing
           | career in sports and stay in the misery they known since
           | their birth, are definitely going to pick the only one
           | offering the hope of a positive outcome.
        
           | BobaFloutist wrote:
           | I would imagine that as global population increases, we just
           | get to buy more and more lottery tickets with the hope of
           | producing someone with the genes, the temperament, and the
           | upbringing to excel in any given niche in increasingly absurd
           | ways.
        
           | flowincarnate wrote:
           | There are a lot of factors, however for better or worse PEDs
           | are likely a huge portion of this. I don't think folks
           | realize just how pervasive their use is in almost every
           | sport.
        
             | Someone wrote:
             | "PED" isn't a precise term. I think most sports, at top
             | level, are kind of clean in that athletes adhere to doping
             | regulations.
             | 
             | They also sail extremely close to the limits, though. For
             | example, exercise induced asthma is extremely common for
             | athletes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exercise-
             | induced_bronchoconstr...:
             | 
             |  _"Research by sports scientist John Dickinson found that
             | 70 percent of UK-based members of the British swimming team
             | had some form of asthma, as did a third of Team Sky
             | cyclists, compared to a national asthma rate of eight to
             | ten percent, whilst a study by the United States Olympic
             | Committee in 2000 found that half of cross-country skiers
             | had EIB."_
             | 
             | Many of those athletes will use medicine to correct for
             | this that enhances their performance. That isn't _that_
             | different from taking corticosteroids to cure an
             | inflammation that thus allow athletes to train at higher
             | intensity, but the former is medicine and the latter is
             | forbidden medicine aka doping.
        
           | tofflos wrote:
           | I believe that the popular working theory is that poor people
           | have less options, i.e. distractions, which leads to more
           | time spent training and better athletes. If the theory is
           | correct then bringing people out of poverty would also
           | decrease the number of candidates.
        
             | diggan wrote:
             | > I believe that the popular working theory is that poor
             | people have less options, i.e. distractions, which leads to
             | more time spent training and better athletes
             | 
             | That sounds backwards. Poor people have more distractions,
             | they need to think about how to survive the current
             | week/month with the little they have, and do everything
             | they can do make sure to afford housing and food, leading
             | to less time spent training.
             | 
             | At least that's my personal experience of being poor and
             | not being able to focus because I didn't know if I'd afford
             | the rent the next month.
        
             | wiseowise wrote:
             | > I believe that the popular working theory is that poor
             | people have less options, i.e. distractions, which leads to
             | more time spent training and better athletes.
             | 
             | As someone who grew up poor - this doesn't make any sense.
             | When you're poor you can't afford training, you can't
             | afford food and time to stay competitive.
        
         | paganel wrote:
         | On the other hand the women 100 m world record has been the
         | same for almost 40 years now ( 36, to be more precise), I don't
         | see how anyone could improve on that by a wide margin in the
         | next 40 years.
        
           | User23 wrote:
           | Improvements in womens' sprint times ceased the same time
           | drug testing got good enough to catch all the androgens then
           | in use.
           | 
           | Today's women doubtless could beat those records with modern
           | gear and pharmaceutical enhancements.
        
           | trte9343r4 wrote:
           | Include transgender athletes and record improves a lot. There
           | is no reason why women should be slower than males.
        
             | wiseowise wrote:
             | Your solution to improving women records is to bring
             | biological males?
        
               | trte9343r4 wrote:
               | Not to "bring", they are already there! Just stop
               | discrimination!
        
         | beretguy wrote:
         | > a women running the estimated absolute fastest speed for 100
         | m would have beaten the world's fastest male in 1955
         | 
         | Maybe it's because they had less body weight to "move".
        
       | joaomacp wrote:
       | Obligatory related paper:
       | 
       | "in the future, the fastest humans on the planet might be a
       | quadrupedal runner at the 2048 Olympics, which may be achieved by
       | shifting up to the rotary gallop and taking longer strides with
       | wide sagittal trunk motion."
       | 
       | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4928019/
        
         | ptsneves wrote:
         | Today I learned there is such a thing as human quadrupedal
         | rubbing. https://youtu.be/RZlvWpeC208?si=xsii66h2cPtjH6ba
        
           | jacobolus wrote:
           | 15.7 seconds to run 100 meters on all fours is pretty
           | impressive, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3h0AkNNP70
           | 
           | Seems like it would be hard on the wrists.
        
       | jijojohnxx wrote:
       | Interesting perspective!
        
       | mark-r wrote:
       | Interesting fact: humans are well built for shedding excess heat,
       | which is a limiting factor in long races. It is possible under
       | the right weather conditions for a man to outrun a horse.
        
         | spacecadet wrote:
         | I am not a researcher here, but I have read that some believe
         | this contributed to early human success, as it allowed humans
         | to essentially run down their prey over long distances. For
         | instance, as a bow hunter, I have observed how short distance a
         | deer can actually flat out run before what appears to be lack
         | of "something", not lack of fear. That something being energy
         | or physical constraints of some kind.
         | 
         | I am also a long distance runner with ultra marathons under my
         | belt and I believe that humans are great at sustained long
         | distance. Anything can sprint fast for a short distance, but it
         | requires a unique combination of human qualities to sustain
         | medium speed over great distances.
        
           | paganel wrote:
           | Since I've started owning dogs I've realized how much of an
           | advantage we, humans, have as a species because we can sweat
           | and hence regulate our temperature through almost all of our
           | body, while on the other hand dogs can only do that through
           | their tongues (afaik).
        
             | dredmorbius wrote:
             | Dogs have a higher surface-area-to-volume ratio, which
             | helps, though the fur of course hinders.
             | 
             | On a related note, I've speculated for years that tongues
             | play a major cooling role for whales. These are highly
             | vascularised structures which can be exposed to tremendous
             | water flows (for effective thermal transfer). The animals
             | otherwise have an immense metabolism, and are largely quite
             | well insulated by blubber. And of course cannot effectively
             | sweat. Even if the _usual_ problem is heat retention,
             | highly-energetic activities (long-distance migration,
             | escape from or combat with predators, feeding activities)
             | might result in _excess_ heat which needs to be shed
             | quickly. As a long-time swimmer myself I 've experienced
             | overheating even in relatively cool waters (for humans) and
             | the challenges in _reducing_ core temps. There have been
             | multiple cases of open-water swimmers overheating and even
             | dying swimming in warm temperatures (several in the middle-
             | east over the past decade or so).
             | 
             | I'd just written that I'd found no scientific literature
             | discussing this when I attempted another search (using
             | FastGPT from Kagi, which I'm finding quite useful for this
             | sort of thing). And lo! Two hits:
             | 
             | "Thermoregulation in the mouths of feeding gray whales"
             | (1997) <https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9353198/> doi:
             | 10.1126/science.278.5340.1138.
             | 
             | "The blood vessel network in the tongues of gray whales
             | precools blood to avoid heat loss via counter-current heat
             | exchange." <https://asknature.org/strategy/lingual-rete-
             | precools-blood/>
             | 
             | This actually discusses structures of the tongue which
             | _reduce_ thermal transfer, but also specifically addresses
             | the characteristics of the tongue which make it effective
             | _at_ thermal transfer:
             | 
             |  _Baleen whales such as the gray whale move huge quantities
             | of cold ocean water through their very large mouths and
             | across the filtering surface of the baleen. The tongue of a
             | whale can represent as much as 5% of its total body surface
             | area. The whale's body is well insulated with blubber but
             | not the tongue. Thus, to avoid losing too much of its body
             | heat to the cold water passing through its mouth, the gray
             | whale's tongue has the largest counter-current heat
             | exchanger yet described._
             | 
             | I feel vindicated!
        
         | polymatter wrote:
         | There is a race based on that.
         | 
         | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_versus_Horse_Marathon
         | 
         | It's often fairly close between human and horse
        
           | dredmorbius wrote:
           | Posted recently though little discussion:
           | <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41213618>
        
         | WalterBright wrote:
         | A huge advantage a human has is a will. A man will keep going
         | far beyond where a horse will just quit.
        
           | mark-r wrote:
           | The horse may quit not because of lack of will, but simply
           | because it is physically unable to go on. The body just stops
           | working properly after a certain point.
        
             | WalterBright wrote:
             | A man will drive himself to much more exhaustion than a
             | horse.
        
               | dredmorbius wrote:
               | There is in fact ample history of horses worked to
               | exhaustion:
               | 
               | "When Horses Posed a Public Health Hazard" (2008):
               | 
               |  _The horses posed another sanitation problem when they
               | dropped dead -- sometimes from overwork, sometimes from
               | disease..._
               | 
               | <https://archive.nytimes.com/cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2
               | 008/...>
               | 
               | Similar concerns were key in the formation of the SPCA in
               | Britain and the United States:
               | 
               | <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSPCA>
               | 
               | <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Society_for_the_P
               | reve...>
               | 
               | The legend that concerns over animal welfare inspired
               | creation of San Francisco's cable cars ... seems
               | unfounded:
               | 
               |  _Many people have heard the story of Andrew Hallidie
               | inventing the cable car after seeing horses slip and fall
               | to their death on the hilly cobblestones of San
               | Francisco. The story feels right--as an animal lover,
               | Hallidie went on to found the Society for the Prevention
               | of Cruelty to Animals--and has achieved mythical status
               | in San Francisco._
               | 
               |  _But it's not true._
               | 
               |  _Hallidie was motivated by a much more prosaic demand:
               | making money._
               | 
               | <https://sfstandard.com/2023/11/18/san-francisco-cable-
               | cars-d...>
               | 
               | (Hallidie also didn't invent the cable car, though his
               | father invented, and he advanced, steel wire rope
               | technology and its applications, including in cable
               | cars.)
               | 
               | Hallidie _did_ help found the SPCA, so he clearly had
               | _some_ concern for animal welfare.
        
               | WalterBright wrote:
               | I presume there is a difference between driving a horse
               | with a whip and the horse driving himself.
        
       | lupire wrote:
       | The host website is as interesting as the article:
       | 
       | http://biologists.com
        
       | Glyptodon wrote:
       | I was hoping this would be a more mechanical/physics defined
       | limit. Along the lines of "given bone shapes and mass, muscle
       | mass, maximum twitch speed, and energy expenditure, we determined
       | the maximum performance combinations and their physical limits."
        
         | 082349872349872 wrote:
         | Let's say we have a 100 kg sprinter capable of anaerobically
         | producing 20 watt/kg for up to 10s.
         | 
         | How fast could they reach 100 m from a standing start, in a
         | vacuum, with perfect traction?
         | 
         | Having forgotten how to set up simple integrals, I've consulted
         | the interwebs, which claim d = (8*P/9*m)^1/2 * t^3/2
         | 
         | Assuming I can still do algebra, that's t = (d /
         | (8P/9m)^1/2)^2/3 ~= a little over 8 sec ?
         | 
         | Lagniappe: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Zd-70dCstI&t=55s
        
       | interludead wrote:
       | Have you ever had the chance to see a Greyhound in real life?
       | They are so beautiful.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-08-11 23:01 UTC)