Correct me if I'ms wrong, but I believe that Arturo Barrios and Bob Kampeinen have faster PRs than Meb at 10000m and the marathon, respectively, right?
Furthermore, non-African runners have run 2:06 marathons before; it's not like he's running any kind of special times, noe times which haven't been produced by people who were "born and raised in North America" and all that crap.
Tom N. Baggs wrote:
Old Runner Guy wrote:So why do we accuse tje kenyans of doping and never the badgers? Answer, racism.
Plus the minor detail that several Kenyans have been caught doping while no Wisconsin runners have.
Oh yeah, there's that. But the r word is such a crutch these days that you can get lots of special treatment if you whine it loud enough and often enough. So whine away!
Uhh... There are also 30 million Kenyans and about 50 Badgers. Really, more Americans (even on a per capita basis) have tested positive than Kenyans, so his assertion does hold true.
That's bullshit. There are no "American names". There are names of European descent, but as we know that America is a big mixture of people from all over, there are no "American names".
Look how popular Andrew Howe is in Italy -- his name doesn't sound to Italian, does it? And he was born in LA. But you think the Italians (who are much more homogenous in their background than the USA) are saying, "How do you pronounce this silly foreign name?"
mobile9 wrote:
Peaople on this board bitch a lot more about Lagat as anew US citizen, than they do Colleen DeReuk (sp?).
No sh*t, Sherlock. Colleen DeReuk is past the prime of her career and is not about to smash any American records. It's simply a matter of visibility - she is not half the force in T&F that Lagat is.
She won a medal for the USA at World Cross; without her, it's unlikely we would have the team bronze in Lausanne. I'd call that pretty significant.
mobile9 wrote:
Tom N. Baggs wrote:Plus the minor detail that several Kenyans have been caught doping while no Wisconsin runners have.
Oh yeah, there's that. But the r word is such a crutch these days that you can get lots of special treatment if you whine it loud enough and often enough. So whine away!
Uhh... There are also 30 million Kenyans and about 50 Badgers. Really, more Americans (even on a per capita basis) have tested positive than Kenyans, so his assertion does hold true.
So, if between now and the end of time any wisconsin distance runner, present team or alumni, is busted doping, then we can dismiss the entire program as a bunch of drugged up cheats.
Isn't that the standard we hold 30 million kenyans to right now?
In fact, find one kenyan cheat and we can write off all east african nations. By this standard, we can dismiss wisconsin as a bunch of cheats if any big ten runner, past or present, is busted doping.
Again why do we dismiss east africans as dopers but not badgers, because we are actively looking for reasons to put down their superiority. Because they are black.
Old Runner Guy wrote:
Because they are black.
You are a racist, and to make yourself feel better you accuse everyone of being one. There is a lot more doping in professional sports than college, every knows that.
YOU ARE A F***ING IDIOT, THIS ISN'T ABOUT RACE, HOLY SHIT LOOK AT THE EASTERN EUROPEAN DOPERS!
As Tonto said, "What do you mean we, white man?"
When Cathal Lombard tested positive, there weren't high numbers of posters who accused Carroll or Sullivan of doping.
Why?
Because a) the Irish, as most Europeans, are treated as individuals and b) they're not kicking everyone's ass.
Old Runner Guy wrote:
Because they are black.
You are so right. Nobody ever accused the East German women of doping during the 70s and 80s. Everybody believes they were clean because of their white skin.
Hitler would be proud of you.
There are two different concepts going on and you need to grasp that before you call everyone a racist. First of all, people are going to relate to people they feel some sort of connection with. They are going to do this on different levell. But most people are going to feel more of a connection to people who are more like them. Sometimes race may factor into this. I don't think this makes them racist.Let's go by your points one by one:
Regarding the skin color angle, their seems to be a lot more enthusiasm for guys like Teg and Webb on this board then their was for Steve Holman and Johnny Gray (even when the later two were having great seasons a few years ago).
I think this website started in 2000. Steve Holman wasn't any good then. Neither was Johnny Gray. When Krummenacker was doing great, people were talking about him. People rip Webb on here all the time. He's white.
A few years ago when Marius Bakken was under 13:10, he got a lot of attention and his own threads on theis board. How many threads you see about Issac Songok or Augustine Choge?
Yes people are going to relate Bakken because of his race. That doesn't make them bad people. But they relate way more to Webb, Ritz, and Tegenkamp.
Last thought, If later today Craig Mottram announced he wants to be a U.S. citizen in time to compete in the olympic 5k in China, would this board would treat him the same way as Legat?
Well it is not the exact same thing as Lagat for me since I am white. No way in hell would I feel like Mottram was a product of the American system or the future example for "American" distance running. i wouldn't feel a lot of pride for him at all. However, I would pretty much look at him the exact same way I do now. Being a white man I would still have the racial connection with Mottram that I don't have with Lagat. In case you looked there aren't a lot of white distance runners doing any good. So personally I would feel slightly more of a connection to Mottram than Lagat but not much more at all.
When Lombard suddenly began turning in those spectacular times after years of running much slower I immediately thought that he was dirty. Again, performances that are beyond what we think of as attainable are less likely to arouse suspicion than those we think unattainable.
When those women from China were smashing all the WRs it aroused suspicion. Similarly, when you have a group running 30-60 seconds or more faster over 5-10 km than seems attainable, it will generate some suspicion. Derek Clayton improved his marathon best from 2:18 to 2:09 in one race. IF he did that today, I expect it would generate accusations of drug use. If one runner from Wisconsin ran 13:05 for 5km and the rest were turning in "normal" collegiate times for those distances I imagine we'd have all sorts of people here wetting themselves about how great the Wisconsin kid is. If he failed a drug test he'd be bashed but I doubt anything would be said about the rest of the team. However, if the rest of the team was also turning in unbelieveable performances and one of them failed a drug test, you'd see the whole program bashed for being drug users.
Again, performances that are beyond what we think of as attainable are less likely to arouse suspicion than those we think unattainable
I screwed that up. It should read "preformances beyond what we think of as attainable are MORE likely to arouse suspicion."
HRE wrote:
Derek Clayton improved his marathon best from 2:18 to 2:09 in one race. IF he did that today, I expect it would generate accusations of drug use.
See Trent Briney.
phidipidippides wrote:
HRE wrote:Derek Clayton improved his marathon best from 2:18 to 2:09 in one race. IF he did that today, I expect it would generate accusations of drug use.
See Trent Briney.
Ok. Why?
A White Male vs Black(or minority) in "America" is easy to figure out!
- the basic truth in American(reality) is pretty plain and simple to figure out!
- just a simple test: if you put "minority" on any type of form you are not "A White Male"
So......In America minority status does include "Moroccans"(or anyone else you consider lite skinned)....so dont even think they are consider white in America!...no way!
....repeat after me.......In "America" everyone declares themself a Minority unless they are "A White Male"!...just the way it is and the most people "see it" that way!
It's nice to see everyone agrees that genetics and the anthropological tie-in thats related to it is all just one big fraud, and its all just 'fake science' masquerading as racism.
Hence, this whole issue is about racism, and politics.
(Sarcasm).... Ho hum. The issue is so blatently obvious. People just don't want to "get it", on purpose.
This issue is about science. Not the politics of who is, or who isnt, a so-called "real american". This isnt about racism. I swear, human beings just have an amazing ability to drag up every 'red herring' issue imaginable.... all for the sake of being argumentative.
All this stuff about how all americans are really just immigrants anyway, and this country is just a big "melting pot" really borders on excessive political correctness.
Theres a line here, between it being the truth, to some extent, versus it being P.C. crap which avoids the real issues of anthropology and genetics.
People are taking this "We are all Gods children" thing just a little too far. Fine, okay. We're all human beings... we shouldnt have prejudices based on race or gender or religion. But that attitude, while great from a human philisophical perspective, is 100 percent useless to scientists who want to actually do real work studying the genetic dofferences between various groups of people to determine why some seem to have abilities that others dont.
Its the difference between philosophy which may state that "we're all human beings who are equal" versus science which does not really care about that philosophy one bit... Science only cares about real world facts regarding genetics and anthropological heritage. We all know what this issue is really about, so lets stop dragging up every unrelated issue (politics and religion) into the mix in an attempt to avoid the real issue.
HRE wrote:
phidipidippides wrote:See Trent Briney.
Ok. Why?
Because when he made that remarkable improvement to finish 4th at the trials, the accusations went flying. I was affirming what you stated.
There is no black and white just shades of gray
I am a white male. Their is nothing racist with me perferring to root for other white males because we share similarities I identifuy with.
What is racist is to disparge all east africans as drug cheats when the common similarity is skin color. And it obvious why we do it . . . Because we hate the idea that east africans are superior runners. So, instead of accepting the fact the a NATURALLY better, we disparge based on race.
This is no different than the racism of Jesse Jackson and Rev. Al claiming anything bad the befalls the black community (even a hurricane in the "chocolate city" of new orleans) is the fault of uncaring whites. It can never be that some blacks have a disadvantage they need to overcome. No, it's the white man putting down the black man.
Likewise, white distance runners have a disadvatage they need to overcome to achieve true world class status. We don't see it that way. We see systematic cheating by east african nations to deny victories to white runners, even though no one can prove it (mostly the proof is white runners cannot run that fast so black runners must be cheating.
This is racism. This is why the statement "east africans are dopers" is racist.
Caucasians include those of Middle Eastern and North African descent.