I've seen a lot of articles claiming that alcohol has a very bad impact on athletic performance. Examples include, but are by far not limited to:
- http://oade.nd.edu/educate-yourself-alcohol/alcohol-and-athletes/
- http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/the-running-blog/2014/apr/23/how-does-alcohol-affect-athletic-performance
- https://www.acsm.org/docs/current-comments/alcoholandathleticperformance.pdf
- http://www.athletestore.co.uk/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/The_Effect_of_Alcohol_on_Athletic_Performance.7.pdf
I'm of course not in position to doubt those articles, as I'm a no expert in biology.
However. There is one thing I find odd.
Namely. These articles themselves claim that alcohol is widely consumed even by the highest ranking athletes. I mean, if alcohol has that bad effects... then it couldn't have been consumed by highest-ranking athletes, as alcohol-consuming athletes could never rich the heights of the tops of proffessional sports?
Also. AFAIK mediaval knights were not abstinents by any means, they were drinking beer and wine and mead to excess; yet they were able to bring their strength, stamina, etc, to an extreme.
This is not something I wish to argue about; rather, this is something I fail to understand.
BTW. This question is not personal; I don't do sports and I very rarely drink. And I regret the former, not the latter.