Rekrunner says he has observed that East Africans have slim calves and big mouths. He draws the conclusion from this, based upon his cool and rational scientific racism, that PEDs do not work, and that East African dominance is due entirely therefore to special adaptations that the likes of Jakob, Coe, Ovett, Cram, Ryun, Snell, Herb Elliott, Bannister all lacked.
Have you counted the other "doping" of social comfort (nutrition, material support, mediatization) that were using Jakob, Coe, Ovett, Cram, Ryun, Snell, Herb Elliott, Bannister?
If it isn't doping that explains it then it is their genetics.
The conclusion of a genetically underprivileged.
If it isn't doping that makes Kenyans better, what is it then? Do they train differently? Do they wear shoes others don't have? Do they have better coaches? Better diets? But you are saying they aren't genetically superior, right?
Rekrunner says he has observed that East Africans have slim calves and big mouths. He draws the conclusion from this, based upon his cool and rational scientific racism, that PEDs do not work, and that East African dominance is due entirely therefore to special adaptations that the likes of Jakob, Coe, Ovett, Cram, Ryun, Snell, Herb Elliott, Bannister all lacked.
I'm not a big fan of someone speaking on my behalf. While I'm aware of studies finding a few physical differences, like small calves higher up the leg, this is not the basis of any of my conclusions.
As a side note, if a substance is a true PED, it can only be because it works. I never say otherwise.
Over time, I have observed that, for non-Africans, all of the drugs combined from 1990-2018 (which includes the EPO era) don't seem to have helped many non-Africans run much faster than their 1980s non-African predecessors, and put that side by side with another often repeated claim that EPO works as well for East Africans as it does for non-Africans, and drew a logical conclusion about EPO for distance events from 800m to the marathon.
If you were to ask me, I think two reasons for East African success is long term altitude and low bodyweight. If more non-Africans followed the path of the Robertson twins, we might see significantly faster non-Africans.
I didn't say that. But junior xc of it's own isn't a conclusive measure of athletic success. It is a minority pursuit. It wasn't matched by the same kind of success at a senior level on the track at that time.
It's a measure of XC success. What's the reason for the astonishing East African domination of the World XC champs- year after year, beginning with their participation? The rest didn't care?
It's "a measure of XC success". So what? I didn't suggest otherwise. It isn't a measure of overall distance running success - on the track or the road. In the 70's and early to mid-80's other nations were dominant in the middle and long distances.
Your scientific racist friend Rekrunner thinks it can be explained by the size of Kenyan nostrils, or a hypothesised relationship between melanin and calf to armpit ratio. There is a simpler explanation.
1987 world cross country championships was the year Kenya really started to dominate. Here are the top 3 kenyans from that year (finished 1,2,5) 1 : John Ngugi - banned for refusing to take out of competition test. 2 : Paul Kipkoech - younger brother banned for EPO positive. 3 : Some Muge - father of Mathew Kisorio, banned for testing positive for steroids at the 2012 world championships (also claimed that there was state sponsored doping in Kenya).
It seems desparate that you have to lie about what "rekrunner thinks" in three separate posts. I have a simple explanation.
What't the theory here? That doping helps a runner if his brother took it years later, or his father years earlier? That is a difficult challenge for anti-doping if they have to start testing the whole family.
I wonder if my PRs all coincide with one of my brothers drug use? I'll have to inquire about that. I don't think my dad did any drugs, except for enjoying his beer in the evenings.
No, that it's obvious that doping is a near universal problem in East Africa and that it's both absurd and offensive for you to insist that the domination of their runners can be explained by scientific racism and the crazy unsupported belief that peds do not work.
Imagine if the sons or brothers of Coe, Ovett, and Cram all were busted for drugs. Imagine if I was saying, despite that, that it doesn't matter because peds don't work, and that the British domination of middle-distance running in the 80's remains untarnished and proof that the British have a special genetic adaptation for middle-distance running?
Your scientific racist friend Rekrunner thinks it can be explained by the size of Kenyan nostrils, or a hypothesised relationship between melanin and calf to armpit ratio. There is a simpler explanation.
1987 world cross country championships was the year Kenya really started to dominate. Here are the top 3 kenyans from that year (finished 1,2,5) 1 : John Ngugi - banned for refusing to take out of competition test. 2 : Paul Kipkoech - younger brother banned for EPO positive. 3 : Some Muge - father of Mathew Kisorio, banned for testing positive for steroids at the 2012 world championships (also claimed that there was state sponsored doping in Kenya).
Top 8 juniors in 85 were from Kenya/Ethiopia - similar for the other years since Kenyas 1st appearence. What's the reason for this astonishing dominance?
Juniors in xc? As far as open championship distance running is concerned that's about as relevant as being good at orienteering or some such minority pursuit.
Rekrunner says he has observed that East Africans have slim calves and big mouths. He draws the conclusion from this, based upon his cool and rational scientific racism, that PEDs do not work, and that East African dominance is due entirely therefore to special adaptations that the likes of Jakob, Coe, Ovett, Cram, Ryun, Snell, Herb Elliott, Bannister all lacked.
Have you counted the other "doping" of social comfort (nutrition, material support, mediatization) that were using Jakob, Coe, Ovett, Cram, Ryun, Snell, Herb Elliott, Bannister?
So what does that say about El G and the most advanced set up he benefitted from outside of NOP and the GDR (and I'm talking about 'social comfort')? Or Aouita and his multiple doctors and ability to train in Mexico, Italy, the USA etc.
Why do you assume 'social comfort' is harmful to a runner? You think it's better for young runners growing up to have a McDonalds in every high street, PlayStation consoles, and parents telling them never to play outside? You think there aren't doctors or physiotherapists in Iten?
Howman has said the numbers doping will be considerably higher than those caught. Clearly, that means the numbers doping in Kenya will be far greater than those busted. But you argue against that. So how many Kenyans are actually doping? Only those who have been caught?
However, as you keep insisting that convicted dopers like Houlihan are innocent victims of an unjust system, consistency requires that you say the same of the Kenyans convicted of doping. They must be "victims", not dopers.
I don't really know what Howman said -- only what you said he has said, and you are not the most accurate source of unfiltered information.
I do not argue the number of Kenyan dopers are not greater than 1-2%. I argue that Howman would not know if it were 5% or 50%, because his knowledge is limited to 1-2%, and that any WADA-funded estimate greater than 1-2% relies on several assumptions.
I have often said that Kenyans are likely frequent victims of an unjust system, considering the number of busts in Kenya for Nandrolone, and the fact that farmers do not routinely castrate their pigs.
We also saw in a WADA-funded 2017 study, that many Kenyans tested positive after going to the doctor when they were sick -- victims of lack of education with respect to athletes' obligations and typical medicines for routine treatments.
Howman's knowledge is not limited to the 1-2% of athletes caught. Unlike you, he is an expert on doping and antidoping and knows that many many more athletes dope than are caught. But, unlike him, you are an "expert" in that which you have absolutely no experience of.
But - as expected from you - the Kenyan dopers are "victims" of their circumstances and an unjust system. Like poor Shelby.
After yet another East African 'European' X country champ busted, are you demanding we also answer why East Africans (until Jakob) dominated the European X country in recent years?
Rekrunner believes that Kenyans dominate because of calf to butt ratios for efficient running and larger orifices for oxygen utilization. The rest of can see that - 'they are doping' - is a simpler and more reasonable explanation than his (pseudo) scientific racism.
Dominating European cross country, where times are slower, is more easily explained, and not quite the same question as dominating in World Cross country, before EPO was widely used.
I don't "believe that Kenyans dominate because of calf to butt ratios for efficient running and larger orifices for oxygen utilization".
I believe the most significant factors are long term altitude and low bodyweight, and that non-Africans would perform better by training long term at altitude, like the Robertson twins.
I don't believe doping would help, because it didn't/doesn't seem to help non-Africans.
As clear as day - the doping denier says doping doesn't enhance performance, because "it doesn't seem to help non-Africans". Your denial - and your ignorance - is of Olympian proportions.
Rekrunner is like a virus you can't avoid getting infected by. You know he's cranky and hasn't got any valid viewpoint, nothing worth even reading let alone responding too, but you keep finding yourself falling for the bait. His only cleverness consists in a schoolboy like habit of responding every time with another inane question instead of defending his position (which he can't). As he just did, when it is pointed out that his 'proof' of Kenyans dominating 80's xcountry supposedly without drugs is suspect in the light of doping scandals connected to them or their immediate family, he turns around and asks if they benefited from the doping of their relatives, when any rational person would see that it casts doubt upon whether they were clean.
I have no idea why I keep responding to this fruitcake. If I passed somebody in the street who was ranting about the Earth being flat, I would just chuckle to myself and not give him the time of day.
No one argues that doping was invented in Africa. Your usual strawman. But the Africans have embraced the practice - the Kenyans have proved that.
But in your usual slithery way you are now also appearing to say that it isn't doping that gives Africans "significant benefit" but altitude. The doping-denier never misses his chance. Yet African athletes (and especially the Kenyans) don't appear to agree with you about that, as they continue to dope in their masses.
Altitude is one reason why the dichotomy of doping and genetics is false.
Doping busts do not necessarily establish "significant benefit".
I'm sure many athletes don't agree with me, as they have not done the performance analysis I have, and sometimes athletes prefer to listen to bad advice based on rumors.
No one argues doping busts of themselves prove benefit - another of your usual straw men. It is what doping is perceived to do, allied to its known effects on human physiology by those who use it, that establishes benefit.
So you have done the "performance analyses" - when you don't know which athletes are doping and which aren't - and that makes you more knowledgeable about the effects of these drugs than the athletes who use them? You could not be a more arrogant windbag than you show there.
Imagine if the sons or brothers of Coe, Ovett, and Cram all were busted for drugs. Imagine if I was saying, despite that, that it doesn't matter because peds don't work, and that the British domination of middle-distance running in the 80's remains untarnished and proof that the British have a special genetic adaptation for middle-distance running?
If that were so and you said that you would have to be rekrunner and his various stooges.
No, that it's obvious that doping is a near universal problem in East Africa and that it's both absurd and offensive for you to insist that the domination of their runners can be explained by scientific racism and the crazy unsupported belief that peds do not work.
Despite all the headlines, when you remove all the hype and emotion, it's still not all that obvious that Kenyan doping is worse than the global average. I haven't seen any bust rates as a percentage of the athletic population. The Kenyan doping busts just makes more headlines. Some unofficial figures for blood doping that I have seen are admittedly getting old, so it's possible that doping has ramped up in recent years, slowing the Kenyans down so stars like Jacob and Jake can finally compete on the world stage.
Doping is a universal problem, not confined to a few regional tribes in East Africa. In fact, many people blame foreign coaches and managers for corrupting the East African athletes, by importing their foreign doping culture into Africa. Kenya was a British colony until 1963 -- it probably will take a few generations to wash out the stains of corruption that left behind.
What is it that I insist? Contrary to your repeated lies, I think East Africans exceed because of living and training long term altitude and an average low bodyweight. This has nothing to do with race. Athletes like the Robertson twins seem to confirm this, along with Ryan Hall (grew up at Big Bear) and Sondre Moens, after 8 months training at altitude.
And I thought I put this other old myth to bed. Of course I believe PEDs work. It couldn't be called a PED if it didn't work. The open questions are whether a banned substance is a PED, and whether a PED is a banned substance.
Howman's knowledge is not limited to the 1-2% of athletes caught. Unlike you, he is an expert on doping and antidoping and knows that many many more athletes dope than are caught. But, unlike him, you are an "expert" in that which you have absolutely no experience of.
But - as expected from you - the Kenyan dopers are "victims" of their circumstances and an unjust system. Like poor Shelby.
It's also unlike you. Howman is an "expert" that knows the real limit of his knowledge is 1-2%. How much does Howman actually say "many many" is? The double?
You are too gullible and too easily persuaded by what you believe experts must know, and that that matches what you want to believe, without demanding any supporting facts and evidence and controlled observations. This could be excused if you were still a young impressionable newbie, but with age is supposed to come wisdom.
I am not so gullible to fall for your wishful arguments that "appeal to authority". This is a common logical fallacy. "Experts" are especially bound to back up their opinions with data, to separate them from the quacks.
Imagine if the sons or brothers of Coe, Ovett, and Cram all were busted for drugs. Imagine if I was saying, despite that, that it doesn't matter because peds don't work, and that the British domination of middle-distance running in the 80's remains untarnished and proof that the British have a special genetic adaptation for middle-distance running?
You are doing a lot of imagining. I don't frame so many of my deep-rooted core beliefs on pure imagination.
Were the sons or brothers faster than Coe, Ovett, and Cram? If not, I would imagine that argues against doping "working".
I never ever say PEDs don't work. Obviously, if they didn't, we couldn't call them PEDs.
I don't ever argue for genetic adaptations. I argue for environment combined with low bodyweight, and think that sea-level athletes also possess the genetics to respond to altitude. Imagine if Coe, Ovett, and Cram lived all their lives at altitude and they all weighed 50 kilos (110 pounds or 7 stone 2 pounds).
I have no idea why I keep responding to this fruitcake. If I passed somebody in the street who was ranting about the Earth being flat, I would just chuckle to myself and not give him the time of day.
But you are not responding to me, not really. You keep repeating the same lies about what I think and say -- I do not believe what you say I believe, and I do not say what you say I say.
You have not really explained how Kenya nor Ethiopia allegedly out-doped Russia and Spain and Europe and America in the '80s, long before your EPO timeline of 1992. You just imagine that three Kenyans did dope and ask me to imagine with you, because their brother or future son will dope later.
It's a measure of XC success. What's the reason for the astonishing East African domination of the World XC champs- year after year, beginning with their participation? The rest didn't care?
It's "a measure of XC success". So what? I didn't suggest otherwise. It isn't a measure of overall distance running success - on the track or the road. In the 70's and early to mid-80's other nations were dominant in the middle and long distances.
"East Africans" are extremely successful in track distance running since decades. They are even more successful in cross country and on the road.
The world Cross Country Championships is one of the biggest single sports events on the globe with around 50 nations competing in the 1980s and up to 70+ nations in the 1990s (1986 World Aquatics Championships have had 34 nations competing despite much more events in different sports and despite contested just every four years).
And pressed to give an answer for the astonishing success especially from Kenya and Ethiopia right from their first appearance your only response is that nobody cares about it.
Almost any big nation regularly send a team to those championships - they obviously do care.
Running on a natural course is one of the most natural forms of human fitness. And East Africans have proved since decades to be the best in this- What's the reason for this?
And no, there are not just two points (doping and genetics) which have an influence on performance. Hard to believe this has to be clarified.
Doping also wasn't the only reason for the enormous sporting success from the GDR.
Top 8 juniors in 85 were from Kenya/Ethiopia - similar for the other years since Kenyas 1st appearence. What's the reason for this astonishing dominance?
Juniors in xc? As far as open championship distance running is concerned that's about as relevant as being good at orienteering or some such minority pursuit.
You've lost long long before any credibility - but this is a new all-time low for you.