1. Explain the difference between work and power using a real-life example
2. What is the purpose of obtaining HR and BP measures at rest, during training and during recovery? What would you likely expect to see in these values throughout the rest, exercise, recovery cycle?
3. Discuss typical maximal oxygen consumption values for individuals in different age groups, sexes, and athletes from different types of sports (endurance vs. anaerobic). In other words what trends would you expect to see in these groups. Explain why you these trends would occur.
4. Discuss factors that affect performance of anaerobic power and speed tests?
5. Explain the tests you would select for a senior that has some difficulty with balance and is at increased risk for CVD? What would you be sure to monitor during these tests? Why would you choose these tests and how can they inform your programming for that person?
6. Explain what tests you would select for a collegiate outside midfielder? What would you be considering during these tests? Why would you choose these tests and how can they inform your programming for that
Sample Solution
Sample Solution
Firstly, Vittola argues after a war, it is the responsibility of the leader to judge what to do with the enemy (Begby et al (2006b), Page 332).. Again, proportionality is emphasised. For example, the Versailles treaty imposed after the First World War is questionably too harsh, as it was not all Germany’s fault for the war. This is supported by Frowe, who expresses two views in jus post bellum: Minimalism and Maximalism, which are very differing views. Minimalists suggest a more lenient approach while maximalist, supporting the above example, provides a harsher approach, punishing the enemy both economically and politically (Frowe (2010), Page 208). At the last instance, however, the aim of war is to establish peace security, so whatever needs to be done can be morally justified, if it follows the rules of jus ad bellum.
In conclusion, just war theory is very contestable and can argue in different ways. However, the establishment of a just peace is crucial, making all war type situation to have different ways of approaching (Frowe (2010), Page 227). Nevertheless, the just war theory comprises of jus ad bellum, jus in bello and jus post bellum, and it can be either morally controversial or justifiable depending on the proportionality of the circumstance. Therefore, there cannot be one definitive theory of the just war but only a theoretical guide to show how wars should be fought, showing normativity in its account, which answers the question to what a just war theory is.
