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

mooonshot wrote:

I yawn back at your post. You have no clue what you are talking about.

And the moon landings were faked, right?

Body type and genetics is not the main advantage they have otherwise why would all the European and American athletes go to altitude to train.

The advantage they have is being born at altitude and having hundreds of athletes training at altitude against a few score foreign athletes their mainly part time.

Millions of Kenyans and Ethiopians have the same genetics but virtually all the best athletes see born at altitude in Rift valley.

But you've got the double whammy of that advantage with doping on top. Actually triple because its s numbers game and economics mean it's worth hundreds if not thousands are training full time in the hope for most of just earning a few thousand dollars.

Without doping all the world records would be considerably slower though.

Only read the first page of thread.

Sometimes I think it’s more accurate to use the word HEREDITY than Genetics in this conversation.

Borderline wrote:

Just pointing this out. EPO hit the scene and the world record went from 2:09 to 2:01 in a matter of 20 years. Yet we are supposed to think these athletes are just getting better by magic.

The world record was 2:09 back in the 60s...

Ever heard of mechanical advantage?

ukathleticscoach wrote:

Body type and genetics is not the main advantage they have otherwise why would all the European and American athletes go to altitude to train.

The advantage they have is being born at altitude and having hundreds of athletes training at altitude against a few score foreign athletes their mainly part time.

Millions of Kenyans and Ethiopians have the same genetics but virtually all the best athletes see born at altitude in Rift valley.

But you've got the double whammy of that advantage with doping on top. Actually triple because its s numbers game and economics mean it's worth hundreds if not thousands are training full time in the hope for most of just earning a few thousand dollars.

Without doping all the world records would be considerably slower though.

Curious: How much slower do you think?

Inquiring minds want to know wrote:

ukathleticscoach wrote:

Body type and genetics is not the main advantage they have otherwise why would all the European and American athletes go to altitude to train.

The advantage they have is being born at altitude and having hundreds of athletes training at altitude against a few score foreign athletes their mainly part time.

Millions of Kenyans and Ethiopians have the same genetics but virtually all the best athletes see born at altitude in Rift valley.

But you've got the double whammy of that advantage with doping on top. Actually triple because its s numbers game and economics mean it's worth hundreds if not thousands are training full time in the hope for most of just earning a few thousand dollars.

Without doping all the world records would be considerably slower though.

Curious: How much slower do you think?

They won't be slower, they will get faster. He's just another one of the millions of naive people who believe all the drug bs.

Good points on the world xc results in 1980's. However, what was Ngugi's pr track times all run in late 80's

13:11 and 27:11

than 10 years later in 1997 what is Paul Tergat running:

12:49 and 26:27

Note sudden improvement in mid twenties:

NERunner053 wrote:

Smaller bones lol? wrote:

I don’t think there is any evidence that East Africans way smaller bones ....????

ya'll should read the Sports Gene. let science instead of feeling help form your opinion. maybe not bone size but I remember from the book a lot on having smaller legs, overall. so they carry less mass & benefit which equals in having better running economy. in some ways, they're just more efficient runners.

I think it's true that doping can put athletes into the same tier and others over the top but east Africans have been dominating the 800 on up going back a pretty long time. it helps to have a culture where running is the top sport and to be at altitude with good genes.

East Africans generally have smaller calves which is an advantage. But the biggest(besides doping), in my opinion, is being raised at Altitude. It is scientifically shown that if you grow up at altitude at a certain age your lungs do get bigger and handle Oxygen better than someone who grew up at sea level. The effect is sustained even if later in life you do not continue to live at altitude. This is benefit some Americans like Ryan Hall and Shalene have had.

But doping is the biggest advantage right now but East Africans are far from the only ones doing it. Honestly, now that their testing is a little better they're probably getting caught at a higher rate than more developed countries because they're less systematic and organized in their methods to beat the testing.

You can definitely run faster than 2:09 clean. But are a high percentage of sub 2:09 guys doping? Probably more than we would want to admit.

If doping works without a genetic superiority, where are all the white 2:02-2:03 Marathoners or all the sub-59:00 Half Marathoners or all the sub-26:40 10,000m runners or all the sub-12:50 5000m runners?

Oh, right, doping only works on Africans because they are genetically superior.

Logic, people, and reality of data.

I don't know. As far as I know, no one has yet reliably characterized how blood doping "works" on elite runners. There is a lot of wild speculation and a broad range of theories and hypotheses about blood doping's role in distance running history.

letstalkbollocks.com wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

Lance Armstrong was not an elite runner.

Oh so it only works for runners?

You are welcome. Thanks for the rare positive feedback.

Ctrl+Alt+Del wrote:

Thank you rekrunner for replying to all those points with facts and common sense.

At least 2 million Somalis in the UK... SMH

yawn wrote:

Inquiring minds want to know wrote:

Curious: How much slower do you think?

They won't be slower, they will get faster. He's just another one of the millions of naive people who believe all the drug bs.

Jon Orange still post on here!

Anyone who thinks that people like Bernard Lagat don't have some inherent physiological advantages over the majority of the population have never been 44. How much those advantages play a role in his success I don't know, because Lagat has trained for many many years at a high level. For some, the drop-off from optimal performances happens like cliff, and for others it's a very slow, gradual decline.

But I definitely believe that people like Rupp and Kipchoge have significant physical capabilities that only a small percentage of the population will have at any given time. On top of that, add years of disciplined training, and you get results.

DC Wonk wrote:

Anyone who thinks that people like Bernard Lagat don't have some inherent physiological advantages over the majority of the population have never been 44. How much those advantages play a role in his success I don't know, because Lagat has trained for many many years at a high level. For some, the drop-off from optimal performances happens like cliff, and for others it's a very slow, gradual decline.

But I definitely believe that people like Rupp and Kipchoge have significant physical capabilities that only a small percentage of the population will have at any given time. On top of that, add years of disciplined training, and you get results.

While this is all true, it doesn't mean drugs aren't involved. You average Joe will never be even close to an elite no matter what they do or even competitive at a high school level. Take someone who is national class clean and you can make them international class or a world beater with doping.

rekrunner wrote:

I don't know. As far as I know, no one has yet reliably characterized how blood doping "works" on elite runners.

There is a lot of wild speculation and a broad range of theories and hypotheses about blood doping's role in distance running history.

Lame post rekrunner...even by your standards.

If there is so much "wild speculation" and a broad range of just "theories" & "hypotheses," then why is the method of blood doping prohibited?

Why was the ABP created that specifically looks for hematological anomalies to the degree where an athlete can be banned minus an AAF drug positive, and all titles, medals, times & earnings can be annulled over the time period of the anomalies?

Borderline wrote:

Just pointing this out. EPO hit the scene and the world record went from 2:09 to 2:01 in a matter of 20 years. Yet we are supposed to think these athletes are just getting better by magic.

First of all, no, the world record 20 years ago was 2:06:05. So the world record has actually gone from 2:06 to 2:01 in 20 years which isnt an unrealistic progression at all. Secondly, using your logic, there must have been some really strong PEDs from 1910 to 1925 considering the world dropped from 2:42 to 2:29 in a matter of 15 years.

mooonshot wrote:

If doping works without a genetic superiority, where are all the white 2:02-2:03 Marathoners or all the sub-59:00 Half Marathoners or all the sub-26:40 10,000m runners or all the sub-12:50 5000m runners?

Oh, right, doping only works on Africans because they are genetically superior.

Logic, people, and reality of data.

There's more profit doping Africans

and less testing

That's why rosa and hermens have been doing it for years

Some of it certainly genetics. Consider the Nilotic ethnic groups:

"Physically, Nilotes are noted for their typically very dark skin color and slender, tall bodies. They often possess exceptionally long limbs, particularly vis-a-vis the distal segments (forearms, calves). This characteristic is thought to be a climatic adaptation to allow their bodies to shed heat more efficiently.

Sudanese Nilotes are regarded as one of the tallest peoples in the world. Roberts and Bainbridge (1963) reported average values of 182.6 cm (71.9") for height and 58.8 kg (129.6 lbs) for weight in a sample of Sudanese Shilluk.[33] Another sample of Sudanese Dinka had a stature/weight ratio of 181.9 cm/58.0 kg (71.6"/127.9 lbs), with an extremely ectomorphic somatotype of 1.6–3.5–6.2.

In terms of facial features, Hiernaux (1975) observed that the nasal profile most common amongst Nilotic populations is broad, with characteristically high index values ranging from 86.9 to 92.0. He also reported that lower nasal indices are often found amongst Nilotes who inhabit the more southerly Great Lakes region, such as the Maasai, a fact which he attributed to genetic differences.[34]

Additionally, it has been remarked that the Nilotic groups presently inhabiting the African Great Lakes region are sometimes smaller in stature than those residing in the Sudan region. Campbell et al. (2006) recorded measurements of 172.0 cm/53.6 kg (67.7"/118.2 lbs) in a sample of agricultural Turkana in northern Kenya, and of 174.9 cm/53.0 kg (68.8"/116.8 lbs) in pastoral Turkana.[35] Hiernaux similarly listed a height of 172.7 cm (68") for Maasai in southern Kenya, with an extreme trunk/leg length ratio of 47.7.[34]

Many Nilotic groups excel in long and middle distance running. Some researchers have suggested that this sporting prowess is related to their exceptional running economy, a function of slim body morphology and slender legs.[36] A study by Pitsiladis et al. (2006) surveyed 404 elite Kenyan distance runners; it found that 76% of the international-class respondents identified as part of the Kalenjin ethnic group and that 79% spoke a Nilotic language.[37]"