-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
X10 at boxing matches
- Thread starter Mohoyoho
- Start date
-
- Tags
- fujifilm x10
Can't answer that. I know that the gloves are pretty padded. I know that the boy is a top student in his class.
The X10 wasn't too bad for shooting this event. It blew away my friend's Canon DSLR T31i with a slow zoom. I am certain if he had a fast lens, the results would be different, but his exposures were mighty dingy. The X10 was fairly responsive once the focus was set. I used the continuous setting; I am aware that there is a thread stating that the continuous setting is dodgy. I got several other nice action shots as well.
The X10 wasn't too bad for shooting this event. It blew away my friend's Canon DSLR T31i with a slow zoom. I am certain if he had a fast lens, the results would be different, but his exposures were mighty dingy. The X10 was fairly responsive once the focus was set. I used the continuous setting; I am aware that there is a thread stating that the continuous setting is dodgy. I got several other nice action shots as well.
John Carson
Senior Member
Brain damage is usually a long term effect that results from having the brain bouncing against the skull. Padded gloves don't stop it. See here for a more general discussion.
http://www.bma.org.uk/health_promotion_ethics/sports_exercise/boxing.jsp#.T1RE7YfoLTo
One extract:
"Boxing shares with a few other sports the potential for chronic brain injury. An unpublished survey of British neurologists in 1974 about their encounters with chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) and its association with sport yielded 12 jockeys, five soccer players, two rugby players, two professional wrestlers, one parachutist and 294 boxers."
--
john carson
Kenjebek Tokochev
Member
Thank you for sharing photos. Did you try to use external flash? I also planning to try shots at boxing.
--
kenito
--
kenito
Pipe down and worry about yourself. Jeez. Eliminate everything for kids, but say nothing about football?
Get a grip.
Get a grip.
John Carson
Senior Member
Get a little bit informed. Boxing is in a different league to football.
http://www.bma.org.uk/...otion_ethics/sports_exercise/boxing.jsp#.T1RE7YfoLTo
--
john carson
I won't pipe down and I refuse to worry about myself only, or even mainly. It's a question of ethics.
I certainly don't mind my grand children playing risk sports; but I don't view boxing as a matter of risk; it seems to me to be a certainty that some brain damage will occur if that sport is practiced at all intensively. Children's brains, being in development, are particularly vulnerable.
Sorry, but if I saw a child punched like the little girl in pic #2, I'd be very tempted to bring her to see a doctor, and I would cerainly tell anyone within earshot.
But I'm not asking you to pipe down; I also believe in freedom of speech.
I certainly don't mind my grand children playing risk sports; but I don't view boxing as a matter of risk; it seems to me to be a certainty that some brain damage will occur if that sport is practiced at all intensively. Children's brains, being in development, are particularly vulnerable.
Sorry, but if I saw a child punched like the little girl in pic #2, I'd be very tempted to bring her to see a doctor, and I would cerainly tell anyone within earshot.
But I'm not asking you to pipe down; I also believe in freedom of speech.
This is a private forum. Not the entire world. Freedom of speech doesn't exist here.
Football injuries are ok, apparently, as it's accepted by society.
There's nothing wrong with the above situation and they are not your kids, so don't question someone else's ethics, sister. Take it to a mom-jeans forum on parenting.
Football injuries are ok, apparently, as it's accepted by society.
There's nothing wrong with the above situation and they are not your kids, so don't question someone else's ethics, sister. Take it to a mom-jeans forum on parenting.
"Page not found"
John Carson
Senior Member
Sorry, my mistake. Here it is:
http://www.bma.org.uk/health_promotion_ethics/sports_exercise/boxing.jsp#.T1Wy9ofoLTp
--
john carson
You've never read through that disputed page before, have you? Like in detail and implications of what things mean?
I have and I've seen it before and I've seen it destroyed on many grounds, not to mention on the grounds of hypocrisy and statistics, including the fact that it's culturally biased and ignorant to the outside world, which includes such things as football (and rugby) and gives them essentially free passes, despite proven statistics of not only bodily injury, permanent/chronic injury, but also of direct and indirect brain trauma from impacts in those other sports.
I point out the hypocrisy in that people call out boxing, but will defend football and rugby endlessly as "safe".
I have and I've seen it before and I've seen it destroyed on many grounds, not to mention on the grounds of hypocrisy and statistics, including the fact that it's culturally biased and ignorant to the outside world, which includes such things as football (and rugby) and gives them essentially free passes, despite proven statistics of not only bodily injury, permanent/chronic injury, but also of direct and indirect brain trauma from impacts in those other sports.
I point out the hypocrisy in that people call out boxing, but will defend football and rugby endlessly as "safe".
John Carson
Senior Member
I have read it.
The evidence of long-term brain damage from boxing is clear. The evidence from soccer and rugby is less clear and newer.
As evidence accumulates, we may see a greater push for at least rule changes in other sports. Your hypocrisy chargers notwithstanding, there are concerns expressed by medical people about other sports, e.g.,
http://www.scotsman.com/news/ban_scrums_in_school_rugby_to_stop_brain_injuries_professor_1_816060
--
john carson
That new link is only a recommendation and still not peer-reviewed internationally recognized documentation of studies. Once again, you're using UK-oriented linking, which is culturally biased and ignores the greater world out there and larger contexts, which is a severe shortcoming and criticism of the first link you posted. Not to mention that the UK's medical system is in so much trouble (and I'm an NHS cardholder if you want to call that out), that it's simply in no position at this point to try to create respectable recommendations until it works itself out of its hole, first thing, stops murdering patients, and brings itself back to international standards of research and respectability.
You can not defend the massive holes in that first, disputed link you posted by posting an unrelated link from someone else.
You can not defend the massive holes in that first, disputed link you posted by posting an unrelated link from someone else.
John Carson
Senior Member
So what? We were talking about hypocrisy. The link was merely to give an example of medical people showing a concern over injuries in other sports. You specifically mentioned rugby, so I found a rugby-related article. There is a lot of research going on looking at all sorts of sports. I could have linked to a study on soccer (which found some cognitive impairment among professional soccer players, especially forwards and backs) or to research into long term brain injuries in United States NFL (gridiron) players.
You seem to have a chip on your shoulder about cultural matters which makes you unable to recognise a fact. You complain that people aren't talking about the dangers of rugby and I give a link to someone pointing out the dangers of rugby and you are still complaining.
I can see now that you are a crank. There is no point in reasoning with you.
You merely asserted the existence of holes and never identified any. I posted a link for a specific purpose, which I clearly identified in the post, which was to address your hypocrisy charge. It had nothing to do with "defending holes".
I won't bother replying to any further posts by you on this subject.
--
john carson
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum