There is no “genetic superiority” when it comes to distance running. Literally everyone sub 2:09 is just doping.

Armstronglivs wrote:

slowwer wrote:

This was your statement: "So if it isn't doping that has made Kenyans successful then doping does not enhance performance"

"Kenyans have some aptitude for running" - some aptitude! - Kenyans are the most successful distance runners (some break after two Olympic boykotts in the early 80s) in the world since almost six decades.

Many Kenyans now dope (since when?) and I have no doubt it has a "positive" effect for them. So it's very likely that without doping some of the top runners from Kenya wouldn't be there (at the top). But it's absolutely obvious, that even without a single Kenyan doper (and the rest unchanged) Kenya still would be a major (the major?) force in distance running. See the astonishing domination in Marathon and road running (alongside Ethiopia).

So, it isn't doping which has made Kenyans successful (today it contributes to their success, how much? hard to say, the rest of the world also dopes) and for sure doping does enhance performance (which doping, under which conditions, by how much - very difficult questions). Your statement was nonsense. You are unable to discuss - in a normal discussion something like this should be clarified after the 2nd post).

You keep belabouring a single point, that Kenya would be "successful" (how successful?) even without doping. But you don't know that, since they have shown they are amongst the worst dopers in the sport. It is nonsense to suggest that doping would scarcely have made a difference when so many do it. That is, unless, you have to maintain it hasn't helped them. You don't realise it but you are arguing contradictory - as well as factually inaccurate - positions. But this is round and round the mulberry bush. I'll leave you to your confusion.

slowwer wrote:

Coevett wrote:

We know that the rest of the world doesn't dope like Kenya does, any assertion by you to the contrary is just speculation with no evidence. In fact, it goes against the evidence, as you have to explain how one country (Kenya) has 250+ doping busts with relatively rudimentary testing (almost non-existant until around 3 or 4 years ago), which is more than any continent (other than Africa obviously).

Before EPO came on the scene, Kenya was less dominant than the GDR at distance running. No Kenyan ran under 2:09 until EPO came on the scene. There's your answer.

Kenya was not less dominant than the GDR (we are just talking for the men).

On the track, from 1964 up to their last one in 1988,

GDR (1 boykott) has won 0 - 1 - 3 at the Olympics,

Kenya 9 - 6 - 5

If you want to add the Marathon (Kenyans almost have not competed in the event before around 1980) you have to add 2 golds for GDR and 1 silver for Kenya.

Kenyans have set 12 world records up to end of 1990, GDR athletes 1 (standard events including Mile and 3000m).

Kenyans reached the following positions in the all-time lists:

2 - 2 - 2 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1

GDR athletes:

5 - 2 - 2 - 1 - 2 - 4 - 3

Kenya has had much more top athletes in every event.

Your statement is complete nonsense.

rekrunner wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

You might try that in English.

Already did. It's not always easy to dumb it down enough for a 7-year old -- no offense meant to 7-year olds.

Let me try it again. I agree with the study's findings and the authors' "requirement" to "replicate" the experiment, but with an "improved experimental design" to "confirm these findings":

"In the present study, an average improvement of 27 s (corresponding to a ~5% improvement) during the 3000 m run at ~2150 m above sea level after rHuEpo administration was found."

"The current study was not double-blind, and therefore, the extent of the placebo-effect cannot be quantified."

"Factors unrelated to rHuEpo such as altered motivation (e.g., placebo, order effect) may partly explain the reported performance effects and reflected in the small but significant rise in RPE after rHuEpo in KEN."

"The present study was (not) blinded (nor) include a control group. Therefore, the novel data generated within the study limitations, although useful for comparison with the literature, require further replication."

"further research with larger sample size, complete data set, measurement of tHbmass, arterial blood gases, SaO2 and improved experimental design (e.g., randomized, placebo-controlled crossover study design) is required to confirm these findings."

slowwer wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

You keep belabouring a single point, that Kenya would be "successful" (how successful?) even without doping. But you don't know that, since they have shown they are amongst the worst dopers in the sport. It is nonsense to suggest that doping would scarcely have made a difference when so many do it. That is, unless, you have to maintain it hasn't helped them. You don't realise it but you are arguing contradictory - as well as factually inaccurate - positions. But this is round and round the mulberry bush. I'll leave you to your confusion.

Kenya became the world no. 1 distance running nation on Earth a few years after they started to compete. Don't try to argue all of their success is only because of doping.

I have not contradicted anything. You were completely wrong on some issues here. You will never accept this because you are a dishonest self-absorbed narcissist who has absolutely no interest in serious discussions. Or you just can't.

For years you claimed that anybody who can put two feet ahead is doping since childhood.
But Kenyans success is just because they dope - you never will see the illogical in your thinking. And if you would, you would not admit.

Europeans can't clear the water jump in the way many Kenyans do since decades. Why?

slowwer wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

You keep belabouring a single point, that Kenya would be "successful" (how successful?) even without doping. But you don't know that, since they have shown they are amongst the worst dopers in the sport. It is nonsense to suggest that doping would scarcely have made a difference when so many do it. That is, unless, you have to maintain it hasn't helped them. You don't realise it but you are arguing contradictory - as well as factually inaccurate - positions. But this is round and round the mulberry bush. I'll leave you to your confusion.

Kenya became the world no. 1 distance running nation on Earth a few years after they started to compete. Don't try to argue all of their success is only because of doping.

I have not contradicted anything. You were completely wrong on some issues here. You will never accept this because you are a dishonest self-absorbed narcissist who has absolutely no interest in serious discussions. Or you just can't.

For years you claimed that anybody who can put two feet ahead is doping since childhood.
But Kenyans success is just because they dope - you never will see the illogical in your thinking. And if you would, you would not admit.

Europeans can't clear the water jump in the way many Kenyans do since decades. Why?

rekrunner wrote:

Coevett wrote:

We know that the rest of the world doesn't dope like Kenya does, any assertion by you to the contrary is just speculation with no evidence. In fact, it goes against the evidence, as you have to explain how one country (Kenya) has 250+ doping busts with relatively rudimentary testing (almost non-existant until around 3 or 4 years ago), which is more than any continent (other than Africa obviously).

Before EPO came on the scene, Kenya was less dominant than the GDR at distance running. No Kenyan ran under 2:09 until EPO came on the scene. There's your answer.

"More than any continent"? Where are you getting the figures by country and by continent?

Once again, for about the 10th time, where are you getting 250+?

If we assume 250+ is accurate, this is a figure dating back to 2004, spanning 18 years, including both men and women.

What are the comparable figures for Asia, then, which includes Russia, China, and India?

What are the figures for Europe, with Spain, France, Italy, and the rest?

What are the figures for North America, which includes Canada, USA and Mexico? South America?

250+ seems like a very small number for "continents", spanning 18 years.

Aragon wrote:

Kenyan mountaineous areas are in some ways reminiscent of Basque country (and perhaps Colombian mountaineous areas), very overrepresented at the highest echelons in their sports also in relation to the rest of the country. Here is an interesting quotation from Daniel Coyle's book Lance Armstrong's war:

Basques and bike racing. It is an overstatement to say that cycling is the primal act of national identity, but not all that much of an overstatement. Large races are treated as national holidays. Basque highways are under restricted speed limits to enable training and racing on weekends; Basque radio crackles with live play-by-play of junior-high races. The de facto national team, the neon orange–clad EuskaltelEuskadi, is supported partly by the sponsoring phone company and partly by its fans, whose subscriptions cover nearly half of the team’s measly $4.5 million budget (Postal, by comparison, would spend nearly three times that amount in 2004). The Basque cooperative, Orbea, manufactures bicycles in numbers similar to the pistols they once forged. Seventy Basques ride in the four-hundred-strong pro peloton, which made Basque Country, per capita, the most fertile cycling ground on earth. “An emanation of our people,” is how Euskaltel rider Haimar Zubeldia described it, and no rider emanates more essential Basque spirit than [Iban] Mayo.

But doping, doping, doping!!!

Yeah, but practically everyone in the pro peloton was blood doping in all of its forms the two decades after ~1992, which shouldn't explain why a population of some 3 million people, less than 0.5 % of European + North & South American population, produced some fifteen percent of pro cyclists in the early 2000s, very likely also a majority of the Spanish cyclists.

slowwer wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

You keep belabouring a single point, that Kenya would be "successful" (how successful?) even without doping. But you don't know that, since they have shown they are amongst the worst dopers in the sport. It is nonsense to suggest that doping would scarcely have made a difference when so many do it. That is, unless, you have to maintain it hasn't helped them. You don't realise it but you are arguing contradictory - as well as factually inaccurate - positions. But this is round and round the mulberry bush. I'll leave you to your confusion.

Kenya became the world no. 1 distance running nation on Earth a few years after they started to compete. Don't try to argue all of their success is only because of doping.

I have not contradicted anything. You were completely wrong on some issues here. You will never accept this because you are a dishonest self-absorbed narcissist who has absolutely no interest in serious discussions. Or you just can't.

For years you claimed that anybody who can put two feet ahead is doping since childhood.
But Kenyans success is just because they dope - you never will see the illogical in your thinking. And if you would, you would not admit.

Europeans can't clear the water jump in the way many Kenyans do since decades. Why?

Armstronglivs wrote:

slowwer wrote:

Kenya became the world no. 1 distance running nation on Earth a few years after they started to compete. Don't try to argue all of their success is only because of doping.

I have not contradicted anything. You were completely wrong on some issues here. You will never accept this because you are a dishonest self-absorbed narcissist who has absolutely no interest in serious discussions. Or you just can't.

For years you claimed that anybody who can put two feet ahead is doping since childhood.
But Kenyans success is just because they dope - you never will see the illogical in your thinking. And if you would, you would not admit.

Europeans can't clear the water jump in the way many Kenyans do since decades. Why?

To claim that someone who doesn't accept the nonsense you peddle as fact is a "self-absorbed narcissist" is uncannily like ... a self-absorbed narcissist.

Coevett wrote:

slowwer wrote:

Kenya became the world no. 1 distance running nation on Earth a few years after they started to compete. Don't try to argue all of their success is only because of doping.

I have not contradicted anything. You were completely wrong on some issues here. You will never accept this because you are a dishonest self-absorbed narcissist who has absolutely no interest in serious discussions. Or you just can't.

For years you claimed that anybody who can put two feet ahead is doping since childhood.
But Kenyans success is just because they dope - you never will see the illogical in your thinking. And if you would, you would not admit.

Europeans can't clear the water jump in the way many Kenyans do since decades. Why?

Kenya won its first medals in the 1960s. They were no more dominant in the 80's than they were in the 60's. They became the world no 1 distance running nation on Earth a year or two after EPO came on the scene. They started to lose it to Ethiopia when EPO testing and then the ABP was introduced, and since proper testing was introduced to Kenya 2 or 3 years ago, even Uganda is starting to rival them (not to mention in middle-distance, GB and Australia are ahead of them again).

Aragon wrote:

Kenyan mountaineous areas are in some ways reminiscent of Basque country (and perhaps Colombian mountaineous areas), very overrepresented at the highest echelons in their sports also in relation to the rest of the country. Here is an interesting quotation from Daniel Coyle's book Lance Armstrong's war:

Basques and bike racing. It is an overstatement to say that cycling is the primal act of national identity, but not all that much of an overstatement. Large races are treated as national holidays. Basque highways are under restricted speed limits to enable training and racing on weekends; Basque radio crackles with live play-by-play of junior-high races. The de facto national team, the neon orange–clad EuskaltelEuskadi, is supported partly by the sponsoring phone company and partly by its fans, whose subscriptions cover nearly half of the team’s measly $4.5 million budget (Postal, by comparison, would spend nearly three times that amount in 2004). The Basque cooperative, Orbea, manufactures bicycles in numbers similar to the pistols they once forged. Seventy Basques ride in the four-hundred-strong pro peloton, which made Basque Country, per capita, the most fertile cycling ground on earth. “An emanation of our people,” is how Euskaltel rider Haimar Zubeldia described it, and no rider emanates more essential Basque spirit than [Iban] Mayo.

But doping, doping, doping!!!

Yeah, but practically everyone in the pro peloton was blood doping in all of its forms the two decades after ~1992, which shouldn't explain why a population of some 3 million people, less than 0.5 % of European + North & South American population, produced some fifteen percent of pro cyclists in the early 2000s, very likely also a majority of the Spanish cyclists.