Dellavedova of the Cavaliers, drank tons of coffee before games during the finals series against the Warriors when Kyrie was out. He played above his perceived ability, though the Cavaliers ultimately lost.
He also collapsed after one of the games from dehydration, had to be taken to the hospital, and was not effective in any games afterwards. Maybe he had a little too much energy?
One of the trainers mentioned in this article, Ben Kenyon, is actually a neighbor of mine. He lives in the same apartment complex. I haven't seen him since the season started but when I do he always seems like he's running at 150%. I have no idea how these guys do it.
But I can attest to the benefits of straight black coffee with grass fed butter, it takes a while to get used too and you can't overdo it (you'll get the runs) but it provides a noticeable energy boost while also being a bit satiating from the fat.
Earlier in the article it mentions an electric kettle and a french press. My guess is the reliability of a thermometer on an electric kettle (especially one that travels that much) is suspect to begin with, and might read 8F high.
Well it's odd because a sentence later it is being emphasized that the water must be 190 not 189 or 191. Maybe the kettle was set to 220 as some strange setting not relating to the actual temperature of the water? Or maybe being NBA players they have a moon kettle.
> Office workers, sleepy truckers, hospital nurses on 10-hour shifts, cabbies, students, cops? They're not the only ones who benefit from a cup, or a few, Harkless pointed out.
Don't get me wrong, I love coffee. However, it may be more accurate to say that all of these people (including the athletes) are using caffeine to medicate their chronic sleep deprivation, which may be at least partly caused in the first place by caffeine consumption.
NBA basketball players are in a tough position because they often need to peak between approx. 7-10pm (local time), and they frequently travel between 4 time zones. Most individuals would be naturally winding down alertness during those hours, even with good sleep patterns.
You make a good point. Sure, caffeine provides a quick, easy and relatively safe (and legal) boost. But ultimately, you have to balance that short term solution with a slightly longer term view of sleep quality and other recovery efforts. For example, what do they eat / drink as soon as the game is over to optimize recovery (so caffeine is less necessary the following night).
Put another way, you can alert the body and the mind but that doesn't necessarily lead to a high quality performance. Feel better is not the same as scoring more points.
I've done a little research on caffeine, and as far as wakefulness goes (not touching the other effects here), it works by binding to the same protein receptors the body uses to decide if it is tired. Body unable to get signals that should trigger a feeling of tiredness == Body not conscious of being tired.
BUT the body responds by producing more of those receptors, making it more likely that it will start getting signals of fatigue even when the signaling proteins are at a low concentration. Thus, regular caffeine takers will find they need caffeine to feel a "normal" level of tired. It takes roughly 2 weeks without caffeine for a regular caffeine taker to achieve a no-caffeine level of such receptors.
Now, how much of the above is pseudo-science? Great question. FWIW, when I did the research the sources seemed credible enough (naming actual proteins, referring to actual studies, not just giving me animated drawings and hand-waving details) and it at least correlates with my anecdotal data - I don't use caffeinated drinks or supplements as a normal rule but do use them for special events (unusually late night/early morning) and have found the wakefulness effects to be effective unless I slip up and get too lax in my definition of "unusual". I also never thought caffeine was a big deal ( I never knew withdrawal symptoms, for example ) until I stopped using it as a general rule and my sleep improved notably. That said, my sleep quality is generally terrible so it doesn't take much to improve it.
Did you notice any other side effects from dropping caffeine? For example, weight loss (or at least less likely to gain)? That is, I've read that stress increases cortisol. I could think (too much) caffeine can have similar effect.
I ask because I tend to feel that less caffeine makes me feel "lighter" (so to speak). But I haven't tracked it closely. It's more a general pattern that I think I'm seeing, but perhaps it's wishful thinking plus some bias?
Not that I recall, but I was surprised at the notable effects overall. Caffeine is so prevalent and people so knee-jerk defensive of it that we don't notice the powerful effects (be they good or bad). Unfortunately, it's been several years and I don't recall any specific reactions other than the sleep and that overall impression.
From the article, "'The half-life of caffeine is five to seven hours,' says Brian St. Pierre, director of performance nutrition at Precision Nutrition."
So if they drink some 30 minutes before a ~2.5 hr game, they've got 3 hours post-game. Which seems reasonable: an hour for interviews / meetings, some travel, settling in, then normal sleep.
At the NBA level, they're definitely not deficient on post-game recovery and nutrients either.
I don't think this is the case. I played on a B/C-tier Overwatch team as the main DPS (mostly Tracer) for several months and I can tell you there is a stark difference in snap-reflex between non-caffeinated and caffeinated states, regardless of sleep amount. There were many other things I did to improve my reflexes and rote mechanical skill in general, but none made as much an obvious difference as caffeine.
Caffeine is obviously s performance enhancing drug. The ncaa has limits to how much caffeine you can have in you while performing, I’m sure other entities do as well.
You need to drink a lot of caffeine (or pills I suppose) to go over the limits (unless they're a lot lower now?). We're talking like on the order of a gallon of coffee or something.
I'm impressed that the MLB, with ~2X the number of games, manages to travel less than the NBA. I wonder if it's a venue availability issue or a better traveling salesman algorithm.
And when they do have to travel in a way that would impact their performance, it's major news (in the baseball world) for days. I remember when the Detroit Tigers had 4 games within 48 hours in different timezones [1] and the MLB got some serious criticism for it. The Tigers had to pull some of their best (and highest paid) players due to lack of sleep.
Twice last season, the Giants had to play in Denver (5200 feet altitude) traveling from other cities with no off day. One of these was a day game immediately following a night game in Chicago.
Well off the top of my head, most of the time baseball teams play 3-4 games in a series in the same place.
In basketball, lets say you're an east coast team, they'll usually schedule a tour of all 4 LA teams, but you have to play every Western team once, but not all at once.
Baseball is a very local sport, you play the teams nearby you considerably more than you play any other teams. Also, as others mention, they’ll play multiple games in one location.
> "WHEN IT COMES to the toll of travel, the NBA is in a league all its own. NBA teams, according to ESPN Stats & Information's Vincent Johnson, average 43,534 miles per season, nearly 7 percent more than..."
Not to get too far off topic but couldn't it be possible for the NBA (or any league) to optimize for this?
Along the same lines, I have to wonder if there's a way to incorporate such signals into a betting algorithm. That is, once you get past home team advantage, perhaps stops / miles in the previous week is worth +/- X points.
I would guess player travel is a bit low in the schedule makers priorities. They have a lot to account for with arena availability as they often share with concerts/events and even a handful share with professional NHL teams and their own 40+ home game schedules.
I'd also guess that east/west miles traveled are more of a disadvantage than north/south miles. Flying sucks, but messing with your circadian sucks even more.
The league also semi-optimizes for this with divisions/conferences.
The NBA optimizes for this somewhat. Many east coast teams will play all three Texas based teams in a single trip. There are a lot of factors that can get in the way of this, such as concerts, trade shows, or other large events that are booked in large arenas.
For instance, the Spurs are forced to go on 22 day road trip because their home arena is busy hosting the annual San Antonio Stock and Rodeo Show.
There is also a lot of data on team win/loss percentages that I'm sure vegas keeps up on. On average - teams on the 2nd game of a back to back road trip win just 32% of their contests. Also, teams that play one game at home and another on the road the following night only win 37.3% of their contests.
"teams on the 2nd game of a back to back road trip win just 32% of their contests"
Well, ok, but since there is presumably an overall home court advantage, 32% (or 37%) isn't in comparison to a baseline of 50%, but something less. I found a page that suggests the median NBA team wins a little under 40% of its road games. There are teams that do fairly good at home that average around 33% on the road.
If you need extreme data points you should look into the Russian Premier League for Football. While sports in the USA use Eastern/Western Conferences to lower travel requirements, the Football leagues enforces 2 matches per teams regardless of location. In the 2017-2018 season the farthest two teams were 5,000+ miles apart! [1]
As others have mentioned, the league optimizes for this somewhat. For instance: East Coast teams often go on a West Coast road trip where they will play in Denver, LA, Portland, Utah, etc. for a stretch. Also, often times West Coast teams play in Brooklyn (Nets) and Manhattan (Knicks) in a short period of time.
While teams in the NFL only play one game per week, there are a few games played in England each year. That can be an 8 hour time difference for west coast teams.
The process of making the NFL schedule has been discussed here before (see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14192378, for example), and IIRC they do try to give teams some time off after extra-US games (so they can adjust, time-wise), either on their own or because teams ask for it.
Caffeine does wonders when taken in a calculated manner. For some time now I restrict myself to at most 3 cups of coffee a week so I do not build tolerance.
I try to plan those cups ahead of time and always receive a very noticeable boost in energy level and concentration from them.
As I get older, my tolerance has lowered. I used to be able to handle a Starbucks 'tall' cup, but now I can only drink two espressos at most, if spaced out by two hours or so. If I go over my limit, it's 7-9 hours of lying still in a dark room with a migraine-like headache.
Starbucks drip coffee contains a lot more caffeine per serving than espresso... I have seen figures that a venti size medium roast can be 280mg total, while single espresso shots might be as little as 70mg.
In general all lighter roasts have more caffeine than the same beans roasted to a darker state. Espresso uses a particularly dark roast and is relatively lower in caffeine content. Of course you don’t drink normal coffee in single shots, and you know the old saying, “Quantity has a quality of its own.” Sipping a beer will get you as much alcohol as shot of whisky, but you can work several shots into a single cocktail.
Wow, a venti is up to 340mg caffeine. Anecdotal sample size of one, anything more than 300mg in one serving crosses the threshold from 'super alert and productive' to 'jittery, nervous and feeling uncomfortable'.
While it's true that a 20 ounce Venti drip coffee has much more caffeine than a 2 ounce espresso shot, it seems unfair to call them both "a serving". It seems unlikely that the person that's going to drink an entire Venti coffee would just drink a single espresso shot.
A 12 ounce tall Starbucks coffee has 193mg and a double espresso shot has 150mg. (a tall Americano has 2 espresso shots, so it too has 150mg of caffeine)
Portland travels further than any other team because "Portland is the only team in the Pacific Northwest."
(Geez I'm not a sports fan but who moved the Sonics to Oklahoma without telling me?)
Anyway yeah look at this map and you can see it: Portland is both near the geographic extent (like Boston, Miami & LA), and relatively far away from its adjacent cities (unlike those 3).
I wonder if any of them have experimented with cold brew yet. Personally, my preference is Funranium Labs' (http://www.funraniumlabs.com) Black Blood of The Earth (BBoTE). The upside is that you don't need to carry around alot of apparatus: You can get a good Americano equivalent with 3:1 or 4:1 BBoTE to hot water. Or you can have it straight.
One downside is that it's supposed to be stored cold; but it can handle 2 days of room-temperature (considering how it is shipped), so maybe it's not too big of an issue. Another downside is most of the BBoTE offerings are single-origin, so things go out of stock from time to time, but there are some blends available: Death Wish is one, and the proprietor has been known to do custom batches of Dunkin Donuts and other blends.
When I was a road warrior at Hewlett Packard, one of my coworkers bought me an aeropress. Kinda changed my life to be honest. Being able to make legitimately great coffee no matter where I am is fantastic.
Up until that point, I had a lot of weeks where I'd be traveling 20-30 hours a week, and drinking garbage coffee. Great coffee makes working so much easier, and an aeropress isn't much larger than a soda can. I basically pack the aeropress, a few filters, and a canister of freshly ground coffee beans. I'm able to make coffee that rivals any good coffee shop, and it takes up nearly no space in my luggage.
If you are optimizing for pure caffeine delivery I'm a little surprised that they go through so many lengths to grind and brew boutique coffee when there are caffeine pills available. Much easier to deliver a proper dose as well.
Much better than this coffee routine is an afternoon nap.
My sport has similar playing times as NBA players, our games are 2-3/week from 7pm-11pm, and coffee at 6pm is by far not that good as a nap from 3:30 to 5, and drinking a lot of water (1-2 liter) with sugar and electrolytes during the games. Coffee is actually problematic, it causes dehydration. Slightly better than coffee would be beer for pure endurance sports (running, swimming, cycling) which don't need much attention.
69 comments
[ 3.4 ms ] story [ 135 ms ] threadHe also collapsed after one of the games from dehydration, had to be taken to the hospital, and was not effective in any games afterwards. Maybe he had a little too much energy?
But I can attest to the benefits of straight black coffee with grass fed butter, it takes a while to get used too and you can't overdo it (you'll get the runs) but it provides a noticeable energy boost while also being a bit satiating from the fat.
I'm mostly amused that anyone thought "people who live and work in Portland frequently drink coffee" was some sort of revelation.
Don't get me wrong, I love coffee. However, it may be more accurate to say that all of these people (including the athletes) are using caffeine to medicate their chronic sleep deprivation, which may be at least partly caused in the first place by caffeine consumption.
NBA basketball players are in a tough position because they often need to peak between approx. 7-10pm (local time), and they frequently travel between 4 time zones. Most individuals would be naturally winding down alertness during those hours, even with good sleep patterns.
Put another way, you can alert the body and the mind but that doesn't necessarily lead to a high quality performance. Feel better is not the same as scoring more points.
I've done a little research on caffeine, and as far as wakefulness goes (not touching the other effects here), it works by binding to the same protein receptors the body uses to decide if it is tired. Body unable to get signals that should trigger a feeling of tiredness == Body not conscious of being tired.
BUT the body responds by producing more of those receptors, making it more likely that it will start getting signals of fatigue even when the signaling proteins are at a low concentration. Thus, regular caffeine takers will find they need caffeine to feel a "normal" level of tired. It takes roughly 2 weeks without caffeine for a regular caffeine taker to achieve a no-caffeine level of such receptors.
Now, how much of the above is pseudo-science? Great question. FWIW, when I did the research the sources seemed credible enough (naming actual proteins, referring to actual studies, not just giving me animated drawings and hand-waving details) and it at least correlates with my anecdotal data - I don't use caffeinated drinks or supplements as a normal rule but do use them for special events (unusually late night/early morning) and have found the wakefulness effects to be effective unless I slip up and get too lax in my definition of "unusual". I also never thought caffeine was a big deal ( I never knew withdrawal symptoms, for example ) until I stopped using it as a general rule and my sleep improved notably. That said, my sleep quality is generally terrible so it doesn't take much to improve it.
I ask because I tend to feel that less caffeine makes me feel "lighter" (so to speak). But I haven't tracked it closely. It's more a general pattern that I think I'm seeing, but perhaps it's wishful thinking plus some bias?
So if they drink some 30 minutes before a ~2.5 hr game, they've got 3 hours post-game. Which seems reasonable: an hour for interviews / meetings, some travel, settling in, then normal sleep.
At the NBA level, they're definitely not deficient on post-game recovery and nutrients either.
Because that latter effect you can build a huge tolerance for, you had to stay off of caffeine for everything but tournaments.
The U.S. has 6 time zones, but Hawaii/Alaska don't have NBA teams: Relevant time zones are Pacific, Mountain, Central, and Eastern.
[1] https://www.freep.com/story/sports/mlb/tigers/2017/05/26/det...
In basketball, lets say you're an east coast team, they'll usually schedule a tour of all 4 LA teams, but you have to play every Western team once, but not all at once.
Not to get too far off topic but couldn't it be possible for the NBA (or any league) to optimize for this?
Along the same lines, I have to wonder if there's a way to incorporate such signals into a betting algorithm. That is, once you get past home team advantage, perhaps stops / miles in the previous week is worth +/- X points.
The league also semi-optimizes for this with divisions/conferences.
That is already done. Vegas accounts for every conceivable variable under the sun.
For instance, the Spurs are forced to go on 22 day road trip because their home arena is busy hosting the annual San Antonio Stock and Rodeo Show.
There is also a lot of data on team win/loss percentages that I'm sure vegas keeps up on. On average - teams on the 2nd game of a back to back road trip win just 32% of their contests. Also, teams that play one game at home and another on the road the following night only win 37.3% of their contests.
Well, ok, but since there is presumably an overall home court advantage, 32% (or 37%) isn't in comparison to a baseline of 50%, but something less. I found a page that suggests the median NBA team wins a little under 40% of its road games. There are teams that do fairly good at home that average around 33% on the road.
[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017%E2%80%9318_Russian_Premie...
But that’s slightly different because it could be seen to change the dynamic form performance over a season to fewer best out of N events.
I try to plan those cups ahead of time and always receive a very noticeable boost in energy level and concentration from them.
As I get older, my tolerance has lowered. I used to be able to handle a Starbucks 'tall' cup, but now I can only drink two espressos at most, if spaced out by two hours or so. If I go over my limit, it's 7-9 hours of lying still in a dark room with a migraine-like headache.
For more on cortisol and caffeine: https://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonykosner/2014/01/05/why-th...
Chronopharmocology and caffeine: http://neurosciencedc.blogspot.com/2013/10/the-best-time-for...
https://www.kickinghorsecoffee.com/en/blog/caffeine-myths-es...
https://globalassets.starbucks.com/assets/94fbcc2ab1e2435985...
Recommended daily caffeine limit is usually quoted at around 400mg for an adult, although there's not a lot to back that number up.
A 12 ounce tall Starbucks coffee has 193mg and a double espresso shot has 150mg. (a tall Americano has 2 espresso shots, so it too has 150mg of caffeine)
https://globalassets.starbucks.com/assets/94fbcc2ab1e2435985...
(just in case that link doesn't work, it came from this page: https://www.starbucks.ca/menu/nutrition-info)
(Geez I'm not a sports fan but who moved the Sonics to Oklahoma without telling me?)
Anyway yeah look at this map and you can see it: Portland is both near the geographic extent (like Boston, Miami & LA), and relatively far away from its adjacent cities (unlike those 3).
https://sportemind.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/nba-map.jpeg
One downside is that it's supposed to be stored cold; but it can handle 2 days of room-temperature (considering how it is shipped), so maybe it's not too big of an issue. Another downside is most of the BBoTE offerings are single-origin, so things go out of stock from time to time, but there are some blends available: Death Wish is one, and the proprietor has been known to do custom batches of Dunkin Donuts and other blends.
Up until that point, I had a lot of weeks where I'd be traveling 20-30 hours a week, and drinking garbage coffee. Great coffee makes working so much easier, and an aeropress isn't much larger than a soda can. I basically pack the aeropress, a few filters, and a canister of freshly ground coffee beans. I'm able to make coffee that rivals any good coffee shop, and it takes up nearly no space in my luggage.
My sport has similar playing times as NBA players, our games are 2-3/week from 7pm-11pm, and coffee at 6pm is by far not that good as a nap from 3:30 to 5, and drinking a lot of water (1-2 liter) with sugar and electrolytes during the games. Coffee is actually problematic, it causes dehydration. Slightly better than coffee would be beer for pure endurance sports (running, swimming, cycling) which don't need much attention.