Dennis Kimetto - what are we Westerners still missing about Kenyan Marathoners?

"lungs-on-sticklegs "africans"

______________________________________________________________________________

Ha!!!!!!

[quote]true brit wrote:

I think a lot of it is a culture of immediate gratification in the modern world, and a general avoidance of sustained hard work over months and years. [quote]

That kind of describes Kimetto.

I don't understand why there is such hostility on LetsRun to the premise that superior distance running genetics plays a major role in the marathoning success of East Africans. Yes, there are many other factors and they all play a role... culture, diet, altitude, and so on... but the raw talent (i.e., genetics) has to be there first to reach world-class level.

Here's an article that points out one of those genetic factors... stick legs.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/parallels/2013/11/01/241895965/how-one-kenyan-tribe-produces-the-worlds-best-runners

And here is why it isn't discussed, according to the author.

"Asking that question [are the Kalenjin genetically superior] almost convinced Epstein to back out of his book contract. He realized he'd have to address sensitive questions of ethnic and racial differences. Academics told him they had evidence of genetic advantage but wouldn't share their research with him for fear they'd lose their jobs."

fisky wrote:

Here's an article that points out one of those genetic factors... stick legs.

Then why are the Japanese, with their clonking calf muscles, the next best bunch of marathoners behind the east Africans. You would expect the Europeans to at least be ahead of the Japanese who should be severely handicapped for distance running if you follow the "stick leg" theory.

Genetics do play a role no doubt, but chalking everything up to genetics is just too simplistic.

I sometimes wonder who the people are that dispute the genetic component.

Are they young up and coming white athletes who believe they have a shot if they work really hard?

Parents of children who have high hopes?

Racists?

I kind of hope they are at least talented athletes in their own right who are close to World Class but I wouldn't be surprised if they are 22 minute 5kers who think they can take 9 minutes off with the right type of hard work.

So those of you who dispute, tell us your story.

Joe Binks wrote:

High Bred Artist wrote:

OP, and quite a few others here, I'll assume you've never stood next to someone like Kimetto. If you were to stand next to him, both of you in just your running shorts, you wouldn't be asking this question.

Dude is a totally different animal. I question how "westerners" can be as close to these lungs-on-sticklegs "africans" as they are. It's really amazing the different morphology.

African males must be physically different to their female counterparts, because we have the anomaly that a white girl, born in Cheshire England, has still run the marathon far faster than any African female.

Wrong. You cannot generalize based on an anomalous observation.

A1 Genetics wrote:

Hall doesn't even race anymore and he's not living in a trailer and eating ramen noodles.

Hall will never become "rich", by US standards, by winning major marathons. In fact his life will not even change that much materially. He is not going to have the same material motivation as a Kenyan athlete who will be able to use his prize money to do things such as build several hotels in Kenya and literally become a millionaire.

objectivity wrote:

Then why are the Japanese, with their clonking calf muscles, the next best bunch of marathoners behind the east Africans.

Are they?

Last time I checked South America had a faster regional Marathon record than Asia.

I'm not sure that anyone said it is completely due to genetics. But it certainly is MOSTLY due to genetics, and people trying to argue otherwise are lying to themselves.

So he's basing his assertions on "secret" scientific research, when he could have filled an entire book making the counter argument based on dozens of research papers that have established that genetics don't play a factor.

It's funny how Kenyan genes suddenly changed after Bernard Lagat drove his brand new Mercedes through the Rift Valley.

Now a Coach wrote:

So he's basing his assertions on "secret" scientific research, when he could have filled an entire book making the counter argument based on dozens of research papers that have established that genetics don't play a factor.

It's funny how Kenyan genes suddenly changed after Bernard Lagat drove his brand new Mercedes through the Rift Valley.

Are you really publicly admitting that you are dense enough to believe that genetics aren't the main reason?

Here is the thing..

I could go to a certain area of Kenya and grab 50 men, aged 16-24. I could pick them out just by body type and age. I could put those men in a 10km race and a bunch would break 30 minutes...

I could never do that in the USA...

Their base level of running ability is so much better. If it's 30 min 10k there, it's 35 min 10k here. So we work to get to the level that they start out at..

It's just genetics. No need to feel bad about it.

Now a Coach wrote:

So he's basing his assertions on "secret" scientific research, when he could have filled an entire book making the counter argument based on dozens of research papers that have established that genetics don't play a factor.

Source? Any link to these "established" facts.

All the non-secret scientific research I can remember seeing does indicate that there is some genetic component.

Of course there are other factors than just the genetic.

It's funny, because I don't think anybody arguing for a genetic factor is saying that this is the only factor.

Meanwhile all the "genetics don't exist" people seem to know for 100% sure that there is NO genetic component.

Also, I don't think everybody understands what genetic means.

It's not a question of having some specific "super-runner" gene not present in other populations.

It's the % of raw talent in a population.

Maybe you should try reading the Sports Gene?

To challenge your "established" beliefs a bit.

Always good to get a wider perspective, no?

Try these reasons for African dominance in the marathon.

1) Many (but by no means all) children lead a more natural, healthy life. Lots of traveling on their own two feet.

2) Running is away out of what in many cases would be a life in semi poverty; it's a way to earn money and buy land/provide for their families. It's a hard life- but no harder than working long hours at a physically demanding, low paid job.

3) They believe they can do it. So and so who lives just down the road has made a few dollars by running; why not them? They try- if they don't succeed the give up. "Running for fun" isn't really an African trait.

4) They don't confuse completing with competing. They see little value in finishing a marathon with a few thousand in front of them. It's make money or find something else to do.

5) All these things mean there are lots of potential fast runners training together. We only ever hear of the reasonably successful ones; not the ones that give up/are broken by the training load/simply discover they don't have the talent.

6) In the 1960s,70s,80s in the UK there were scores of clubs that had dozens of members training 80-120 miles a week just to make their club 6, 9 or 12 for a national championship race on road or country. hence the great depth we had at that time. Then the mass participation events came along and changed the nature of distance running. In some ways for the better but in terms of elite standards very much for the worse!

Nutella1 wrote:

objectivity wrote:

Then why are the Japanese, with their clonking calf muscles, the next best bunch of marathoners behind the east Africans.

Are they?

Last time I checked South America had a faster regional Marathon record than Asia.

LOL at comparing an entire continent against a small country. I think depth is more important when talking about a marathon culture and success, than a few outliers. Just like West Africa and East Africa are much different, you can't classify an entire continent as the same.

You could apply most of these reasons to countless of other relativity poor populations, living a simple life around the globe.

Yet they don't seem to produce any runners. Only a handful of people from a small geographic area in East Africa do.

Of course there has been a snowball effect where, some East-Africans started winning competitions, and others thought "hey, maybe I could do that as well".

But this snowball wouldn't have started rolling in the first place if they didn't have the raw talent.

Same thing with sprinting and people of West-African ancestry.

I think too often Americans try to mimic the training of Kenyans with mixed results. You are not going to find a slew of 6'0" 137lb 'mericans roaming the quad. It is a genetic advantage in distance running to be small. Instead of embracing our more muscular genetics we seem to fight it.

Distance running is one of the few sports in which coaches have been slow to embrace modern strength training for improved performance. You can stay skinny run long yet still improve strength and running economy. The next big thing in distance running could be that 5'9 130lb elf who runs 100-140 miles a week but also power cleans more than his bodyweight.

Alan

Too much Nutella wrote:

LOL at comparing an entire continent against a small country.

You got a point, but Japan isn't by any means a small country population wise.