A closer look at Kenyan/GB performance in middle-distance between 90's and recent

I want also to explain the evolution of Marathon in African Countries. There was a great difference in the behavior and the tradition of Kenyan and Ethiopian runners, coming from the organization of their normal life.

In Ethiopia, always there was the tradition of long and continuos run. This was part of the Ethiopian mentality, and is not a case that the first Olympic medals for Ethiopia came in the Marathon (Abebe Bikila in 1960 and 1964, Mamo Wolde in 1968, Fatuma Roba in 1996) when the event, practically, was unknown in Kenya.

The most natural event for Kenyans was the steeples. Children living in the villages in the mountain had the school maybe 5-8 km far : a child started to walk for going school, after 300m met another child, and they started to challenge each other for short distances (who can win till that tree, 400m far ?) recovering walking. So, without knowing, they prepared themselves with a "Kenyan Fartlek" on hilly ground, very useful for the ability to change quickly speed and to attack the hills.

On the other side, Ethiopian were not interested in short distances. We can say that Kenyans started with short distance (don't forget in Olympic 1972 Kenya won the 4x400m relay) for, step by step, extending the duration of the effort, Ethiopians started with the volume of km, only training speed from the beginning of the 70' years, producing athletes like Miruts Yifter and Mohamed Kedir owner of a good speed.

The only Kenyan marathon runners before Olympics 1996 were Ibrahim Hussein (winning Boston, and training in US), Douglas Wakhiiuri (WCh 1987 and Olympic Silver 1988) and Erick Wainaina (Olympic Medal), both training in Japan.

The Kenyan Marathon was born thanks to the Italian dr. Gabriele Rosa. He started to follow Moses Tanui, was able to find a Sponsor investing a lot of money, and created several training camps where athletes started to follow a basic program for Marathon, putting more long run in their preparation. Because the average talent Kenyan runners had, was easy to have a lot of athletes (of normal level) under 2:10, while at the same time European athletes decided (British particularly) to drastically reduce the mileage, in this case no more prepared for running at high level 42 km.

With the increase of the interest around marathon, all the big Cities wanted to have a marathon of high level, and step by step the money (coming not only from external sponsors, but mainly from the money paid by the runners for entering the race)and the number of races in calendar grew a lot : now the number of existing marathons is 20 times bigger than 20 years ago.

There is a history behind the results in athletics, not depending on doping as main reason. We have to look to the culture of the Country, the interest, the economical support, for explaining african results that are by far better than in the other part of the World, speaking about the average of high level.

The fact Great Britain had about 15 years of blackout is for the mistakes British Coaches did, and for them (in athletics there is very little historical knowledge, as Coevett every time shows) what was normal 40 years ago seems, today, an unbelievable performance.

Yes, they did. No doubt they lost a lot of talent to soccer and other sports that were suddenly awash with money due to satellite television deals.

But this thread wasn't so much about GB, it was about the decline in Kenyan performances. I picked GB because GB is one of the top non-African countries in middle-distance, and one of the few that has more than 1 or 2 breaking 1:44/3:33 in a season, so it's possible to compare with Kenya. There are many other non-African nations who have similarly gone up as Kenya has declined. You could do the same comparison between the whole of Europe and Kenya, and it would look just as stark.

Still, there is no other country in the world whose performances (at least in middle-distance) have declined so much in relation to the LACK of worldwide testing, and gone up so much in relation to the IMPROVEMENT in worldwide testing. This is in complete contrast to Kenya. Any idiot would draw the obvious conclusion from that that doping is far greater a problem in Kenya and always has been, and that Britain is not a 'dirty' country.

If they lost interest when still were the best in the World is their problems, due to the change in the British society. At the end of 2000, we had 15 athletes running under 1'43", and the first 6 belonged to different Countries : Wilson Kipketer (Denmark), Sebastian Coe (GBR), Joaquim Cruz (Brasil), Sammy Koskei (Kenya), Vebjor Rodal (Norway) and Johnny Gray (USA). In 1500m, 12 athletes ran under 3'30" : 4 Kenyans, 2 British and 2 Maroccans, and one from Algeria, Spain, Burundi and USA.

While African running involved a greater part of young population, European and American running lost the will of physical sacrifice for hard training, changing the interest from training for performances to training (jogging) for health.

These are the reasons, not doping (that in any case started in US and Europe, of sure not in Africa).

Coevett, I never said UK is a dirty Country. And I know very well that, at the moment, the problem of doping in Kenya became worse, because that culture is growing due to the ignorance of the most part of coaches and athletes.

What I say is that there are too many reasons at the base of a performance, and you (like many others in LR) refuse (or don't know) to analyze.

1) Speaking about track : new shoes. We can consider advantage of about half second per lap due to the improvement of reactivity. This means that the current 3'30" are the 3'32" of 10-20 years ago, and we had athletes running 3'30" with old shoes without being top talents and in absolutely clean way. In my group, for example, I had Timothy Kiptanui running 3'30"04 (2004), Collins Cheboi (3'30"34 in 2015), Robert Rono (3'30"99 in 2002), without speaking of Ronald Kwemoi (3'28"81 in 2014) and Caleb Ndiku (3'29"50 in 2013), who were really big talents. David Nyaga won the mile in Oslo 2005 in 3'47"97, like a 3'46" today, and was a good athlete, not a champion.

In 5000m the difference is about 5"-6" : without speaking about Stephen Cherono (12'48" in 2003 like 12'42" today), I had Thomas Longosiwa (12'49"04 in 2012), Edwin Soi (12'51"34 in 2013), Imane Merga (12'53"58 in 2010), Moses Mosop (12'54"46 in 2006), James Kwalia (12'54"58 still junior in 2003), Mark Bett (12'55" in 2001). Today, everybody could run under 12'50".

2) Speaking about road races : new mentality (and, of course, shoes). Today nobody fears to run the first half under 62", because everybody knows that, if you are not with the leading group after 25-30 km, you can't reach any prize. For many years nobody tried to run the first half under 63' : when Steve Jones, without pacer, started in Chicago 1985 at the pace of 2'55" for running the first half in 61'53", every coach (myself included) thought he was crazy and also not very cleaver (at the end failed the WR for 1" running 2:07'13"). What could run Steve today, running the first half in 61'53" very comfortable in a group, still big after 30 km ? I think under 2:04 can be the answer.

3) The pace. The last competitions in 1500 and 5000m in DL showed again something we saw at the beginning of 2000, when the most part of competitions were organized for attacking some WR (El Guerrouj in 1500m, Bekele in 5000 / 10000m, Gebresilase in 10000m) : with the leaders running fast, the most part of the following athletes can achieve big times, also if their position is not near the podium. If you run under 3'30" or under 12'50" finishing number 9, you are a good athlete but not a champion, so we must quit to think that everybody running fast times because WAGONS of a top TRAIN can do this because of doping.

He’s incapable of refraining from lying. His word is mud.

Well, that may be part of the answer. But I think any complete reckoning on this topic has to also examine the shift of Kenyan talent to the marathon. Could be that many of the best Kenyan runners are not even bothering with track anymore.

Maybe kenyans are getting more modern lifestyles.

Maybe more are going into the marathon, instead of track

The glorious career of Sir Mo Farah was only possible because one Kenyan (quite sensibly) decided he'd had enough of the track.

Considering times alone, Farah's best event was the 1500. Quicker than Coe, Cram and Ovett, still quicker than Weightman, quicker than Centro and within a whisker of Makhloufi. But if you're one of a handful who can run around 3:30 on a given day, nothing is guaranteed. 5/10k championship medals now go to 1500m runners who can stay in touch until the final lap. All the really good long distance runners are on the roads.

uk is a filthy dirty country when it comes to sport(not as bad as usa),but they hide it extremely well,and top athletes are well protected.just because they dont test positive,doesnt mean theyre not on.when 3 women robotically ran into the olympic 800 meter final in 2021,my first thought was 'russia part 2'.now are their doped runners as numerous as the kenyans? no.

No, according to the World Athletics list, there are 9 Kenyans in the top 30 800m times, and 2 in the top 30 1500. That makes 11, not 19. Learn basic maths, and stop falsely accusing me of lying to deflect from the rampant Kenyan doping problem.

worldathletics.org

1500 Metres - men - senior - outdoor - 2023

Link:worldathletics.org/records/toplists/mi...

worldathletics.org

800 Metres - men - senior - outdoor - 2023

Link:worldathletics.org/records/toplists/mi...

Sometimes you manage to amaze:
Here are the 4 Kenyans in the top 30 of the 1500: Tim Cheruiyot, Reynold Cheruiyot, Abel Kipsang and Vincent Keter. You might mention in the next 6 (31-36), there are 4 more who won Bronze or Silver Level 1500s to achieve their times (Komen, Etiang, Munguti and Kemboi). So even with your obviously intentional cutoff, you are undercounting by 2.
Now the funny thing is you are wrong the other way in the 800. I count 7 in the top 30 with one at 32.
So the combined number of 11 is correct, though flawed because of the cluster of Kenyans in the 1500 just missing the arbitrary cutoff. Put it at 40 and you get 9 Kenyans in the 800 and 8 in the 1500.

And now it reads :

800m 12 Kenyans 9 Brits

1500m 9 Kenyans 5 Brits

In 2003 for the whole season :

800m 9 Kenyans 1 Brit

1500 11 Kenyans 0 Brits

Again, in the past 20 years the population of Kenya has virtually doubled, whereas Britain's has grown marginally (and mostly due to immigration).

This is hilarious.