Angel Memo Hernandez wrote:
Would love to know which N.A. athletes spend time there training.
Reid Coolsaet and Eric Gillis are there for the winter, as is Brit Scott Overall.
Angel Memo Hernandez wrote:
Would love to know which N.A. athletes spend time there training.
Reid Coolsaet and Eric Gillis are there for the winter, as is Brit Scott Overall.
deanouk wrote:
Then we get this sudden breakthrough in events from 800 upwards at a time when a non testable endurance drug emerges (the 90's) , where Africans are knocking dozens of seconds of existing world records at a rate exponentially greater than predicted rates of world record progression.
Deano, are you seriously suggesting that the East Africans have some clever super-advanced drugs which far better-funded athletes in the West didn't know about?
eurodonkey wrote:
Deano, are you seriously suggesting that the East Africans have some clever super-advanced drugs which far better-funded athletes in the West didn't know about?
No, I believe he is saying that East Africans took the same drugs westerners took, but they could be far more aggressive due to the complete lack of off-season testing of East Africans.
The supposed biological explanation of East African dominance in distance running is specious, unproven and perhaps even offensive. What is proven by this article is that some countries have relatively rigorous doping testing and related non-testing controls while other countries do not. These more rigorous programs are certainly far from perfect but at least they exist. The fact that major stars in countries with rigorous controls have been brought down indicates that the controls are at least partially successful. No major African star has ever tested positive? I'm sorry, I don't buy it. There's a huge double standard at work here.
Why on earth not? You're entire argument is, bluntly, absurd.
It wasn't anything new when East African runners were winning races and setting records in the 90s.
Given the size of the population, the level of industrialization and access to health, training, facilities, coaching and so on, it was highly, highly improbable that ANY world record holder might ever come from one particular tiny area in Kenya. And yet, the history of track through the mid-latter part of the last century is rife with fantastic athletes from this area; fantastic in one particular type of event. It would be highly, highly improbable, given how much such things as access to training and coaches, sponsorship money, facilities, and so on have changed, that the likes of Keino, Bekila, Rono, et al, would not begin to become more prominent and, if we can use the word, "commonplace".
So I'll ask again .. how on earth do you think that Africa would NOT provide the world with the greatest distance runners, given the absolute and undeniable dominance Africa provides in the shorter distance races?
I remember attending the NCAA Championships in Eugene, OR, in 1984. In the men's 200m, there were 6 heats. That's 48 athletes. And every single one of them was a black guy. The top c.50 sprinters in the country were African American. Yet the population of African Americans -> the US population is less than 10%. Given your "rationale" here, the only reasonable excuse for that is PEDs.
Or, if we accept that Africans are faster sprinters, why on earth do you think some of them might not also be, consistently, better distance runners?
Are you seriously that hooked into Coe that you really think there's no way Africans might really be consistently faster than he was - even more so given advances in technology, training and so on since the 70's & 80's?
If you can find it, you might want to watch some replays of the video from the Berlin OG in 36. You'll be aghast at what you see.
The 90's saw El G, Geb, Komen as absolute champions and world record holders (and we might include Bekele .. though his reign obviously extends way beyond 2000). Yet just last year we saw a 5000m that was faster than any 5000m race in the 90's, with the exception of a few very exceptional athletes (3) and performances. Gebremeskel ran almost as fast in Paris as Komen and Geb ran; and he had to sprint to outkick a 19 year old.
Solinsky ran 12:56 and change .. do you really think there's no way he could be 15-20 seconds slower than the world record holder? Hell, an 18 year old kid ran roughly 10 seconds slower last year than Bekele's THIRD fastest ever run.
How about the marathon? Given your argument, you'd have to be saying that every guy running sub 2:06 today is on drugs. Times in the marathon are considerably faster now than they were in 1997.
The dominance of East Africans is so far removed from the Chinese women its almost comical that you'd even TRY to make that argument. To say "it's no different" is either blatantly dishonest or ridiculously ignorant.
Consider Kenya again .. if the dominance is drugs, as you seem to believe, how do you explain the Rift Valley? The dominance in middle and long distance running isn't from "East Africa" .. it's from a small group of people in a very particular location. The Masai aren't breaking 2:05 marathons and running sub 27:00 10 000m. Neither are the Dinka. Or the Watusi. Or the Bantu.
Lastly - anyone, and I mean ANYONE, who has had anything to do with sport, understands how much our performances are shaped by those we compete with; It's not surprising, at all, that in an era of El G (say) other athletes performed spectacularly; hell, look at the 2012 800m in London. Were all those runners on drugs? This notion that it could only be PED's would imply that, given Landy broke the 4min mile so soon after Bannister did that they all must've been on drugs, too.
This crap you guys go on with is ridiculous.
wtfunny wrote:
So I'll ask again .. how on earth do you think that Africa would NOT provide the world with the greatest distance runners, given the absolute and undeniable dominance Africa provides in the shorter distance races?
I think it is a very plausible theory. I used to along with the "West African sprinters and East African distance runners" theory too. But now it appears that the superior distance running is more likely a result of a lack of testing.
If it's administered by the same WADA insiders that the IOC and IAAF uses then nearly everyone will pass since they train coaches and technicians in advance on how to easily pass the PED screens. Hope this helps.
Kip Litton
Look over the 2 links posted above
Example - 10 000m
156 of the top 300 times posted by Kenyans
89 of the top 300 times posted by Ethiopians
9 by Maroccans
9 from Eritrea
7 from Quatar
7 from Uganda
4 from Mexico
3 from Great Britain (2 of which are Farrah - i.e., East African)
5 from the USA (2 of which are East African (Meb and Abdi))
So, let's just look at Ethiopians and Kenyans .. 245 of the top 10 000m times ever from those 2 countries, and the majority those from a tiny select portion of the region country. And you think it's simply "lack of testing"?
Why would so many Kenyans continue to dominate when they come and run track in the US collegiate system? I'm here in Alaska - you ever seen APU's XC track team?
wtfunny wrote:
Look over the 2 links posted above
Example - 10 000m
156 of the top 300 times posted by Kenyans
89 of the top 300 times posted by Ethiopians
9 by Maroccans
9 from Eritrea
7 from Quatar
7 from Uganda
4 from Mexico
3 from Great Britain (2 of which are Farrah - i.e., East African)
5 from the USA (2 of which are East African (Meb and Abdi))
So, let's just look at Ethiopians and Kenyans .. 245 of the top 10 000m times ever from those 2 countries, and the majority those from a tiny select portion of the region country. And you think it's simply "lack of testing"?
Can a clean cyclists hope to compete with one who dopes? Of course not.
Why would so many Kenyans continue to dominate when they come and run track in the US collegiate system? I'm here in Alaska - you ever seen APU's XC track team?
Forged birth certificates. It's common in many many sports.
Let me ask you a question: does the complete lack of off-season testing even make you a little suspicious of PEDs?
I do want to clarify one thing. I'm not a blank-slater and I think genes are unevenly distributed throughout populations. Clearly there are some advantages for Kenya and Ethiopia. Poverty, which channels their athletic interests into running, altitude, leading a more physically active lifestyle. I also suspect that Africans in general and Kalenjin's in particular have body types that favor running - long legs and short torsos. But I think the genetic advantages for distance running are relatively minor. The offseason PEDs are doing the heavy lifting.
Anyone invoking west African origin sprinters has their head up their proverbial hindquarters with regards to PEDS. What is the doping rate among top sprinters of this backround? Ludicrous.
The First Wave of PED use was steroids in the late 60's/70's. Look at the ethnic representation of sprinters at the Olympic/world level before and after 1968. You will see a MAJOR change in composition, and it isn't just because black sprinters suddenly discovered they were genetically gifted. They were FAR more inclined to take the risk of drugs, as *may* be the case with our impoverished friends in east Africa. Maybe it IS just the Ugali. Hopefully, time will tell....
Justin91 wrote:
Can a clean cyclists hope to compete with one who dopes? Of course not.
[quote]
a) .. that assumes an awful lot of variables as constants
b) you're saying that about 250 of the top 300 all time performances are by dopers?
[quote]Justin91 wrote:
Forged birth certificates. It's common in many many sports.
Sure, there COULD be some 20 year old kids running here. "some".
Justin91 wrote:
Let me ask you a question: does the complete lack of off-season testing even make you a little suspicious of PEDs?
In and of itself, no. Given human nature, I'd say sure, there are quite probably a number of athletes at this level doping. Let's say half of them. Let's say 75% of them, just for kicks.
75% of 245 athletes = 184. Which means the remaining top 61 times, ever, were recorded by Ethiopians and Kenyans .. and still we only have less than 10 top non African performances.
And that's assuming none of the non Kenyan and non Ethiopians were doping. And that's assuming 75% of those times were doped.
And that's assuming NONE of the non African times were doped.
That still yields a virtually undeniable dominance in the sport. As would be reasonably expected, given West African dominance in the sprints.
Let's assume, though, that all those great performances of the late 90's were set by dopers; Komen, El G, Geb, Tergat, et al .. all of them .. so where were the non Africans? We know for a fact, looking at cycling, that Europeans/American distance athletes were heavily into EPO ... so why were all these European-American runners, doped to the gills, having their a** handed to them by the Africans? The Africans had better drugs?
That's what's so crazy about all this; folks claim everyone was on the juice in the 90s because of some exceptional athletes; then I'd expect the best juicers to win, hands down. Somehow the best juice ended up in Kenya and Ethiopia track teams, while the cyclists of the US and Europe were somehow getting the same stuff; yet the track guys from those countries couldn't swing it?
High Wire wrote:
Anyone invoking west African origin sprinters has their head up their proverbial hindquarters with regards to PEDS. What is the doping rate among top sprinters of this backround? Ludicrous.
The First Wave of PED use was steroids in the late 60's/70's. Look at the ethnic representation of sprinters at the Olympic/world level before and after 1968. You will see a MAJOR change in composition, and it isn't just because black sprinters suddenly discovered they were genetically gifted. They were FAR more inclined to take the risk of drugs, as *may* be the case with our impoverished friends in east Africa. Maybe it IS just the Ugali. Hopefully, time will tell....
^This^ post is nonsense.
It would be ridiculous to think the depth of East Africa in the distance events is PED related. There is a "Perfect Storm" for the development of distance runners in Kenya and Ethiopia.
There is not sufficient money or access to fund drug programs for all these athletes.
What can be reasonably questioned is when some of the many 2.07/08 marathoners (and comparable track runners) make improvements to 2.04/05. These athletes usually have a big time manager/coach behind them by this stage and the resources to fund a drug program.
troof be told wrote:
Angel Memo Hernandez wrote:Would love to know which N.A. athletes spend time there training.
Reid Coolsaet and Eric Gillis are there for the winter, as is Brit Scott Overall.
Hmm. Suspicious.
wtfunny wrote:
Why on earth not? You're entire argument is, bluntly, absurd.
It wasn't anything new when East African runners were winning races and setting records in the 90s.
Given the size of the population, the level of industrialization and access to health, training, facilities, coaching and so on, it was highly, highly improbable that ANY world record holder might ever come from one particular tiny area in Kenya. And yet, the history of track through the mid-latter part of the last century is rife with fantastic athletes from this area; fantastic in one particular type of event. It would be highly, highly improbable, given how much such things as access to training and coaches, sponsorship money, facilities, and so on have changed, that the likes of Keino, Bekila, Rono, et al, would not begin to become more prominent and, if we can use the word, "commonplace".
So I'll ask again .. how on earth do you think that Africa would NOT provide the world with the greatest distance runners, given the absolute and undeniable dominance Africa provides in the shorter distance races?
I remember attending the NCAA Championships in Eugene, OR, in 1984. In the men's 200m, there were 6 heats. That's 48 athletes. And every single one of them was a black guy. The top c.50 sprinters in the country were African American. Yet the population of African Americans -> the US population is less than 10%. Given your "rationale" here, the only reasonable excuse for that is PEDs.
Or, if we accept that Africans are faster sprinters, why on earth do you think some of them might not also be, consistently, better distance runners?
Are you seriously that hooked into Coe that you really think there's no way Africans might really be consistently faster than he was - even more so given advances in technology, training and so on since the 70's & 80's?
If you can find it, you might want to watch some replays of the video from the Berlin OG in 36. You'll be aghast at what you see.
The 90's saw El G, Geb, Komen as absolute champions and world record holders (and we might include Bekele .. though his reign obviously extends way beyond 2000). Yet just last year we saw a 5000m that was faster than any 5000m race in the 90's, with the exception of a few very exceptional athletes (3) and performances. Gebremeskel ran almost as fast in Paris as Komen and Geb ran; and he had to sprint to outkick a 19 year old.
Solinsky ran 12:56 and change .. do you really think there's no way he could be 15-20 seconds slower than the world record holder? Hell, an 18 year old kid ran roughly 10 seconds slower last year than Bekele's THIRD fastest ever run.
How about the marathon? Given your argument, you'd have to be saying that every guy running sub 2:06 today is on drugs. Times in the marathon are considerably faster now than they were in 1997.
The dominance of East Africans is so far removed from the Chinese women its almost comical that you'd even TRY to make that argument. To say "it's no different" is either blatantly dishonest or ridiculously ignorant.
Consider Kenya again .. if the dominance is drugs, as you seem to believe, how do you explain the Rift Valley? The dominance in middle and long distance running isn't from "East Africa" .. it's from a small group of people in a very particular location. The Masai aren't breaking 2:05 marathons and running sub 27:00 10 000m. Neither are the Dinka. Or the Watusi. Or the Bantu.
Lastly - anyone, and I mean ANYONE, who has had anything to do with sport, understands how much our performances are shaped by those we compete with; It's not surprising, at all, that in an era of El G (say) other athletes performed spectacularly; hell, look at the 2012 800m in London. Were all those runners on drugs? This notion that it could only be PED's would imply that, given Landy broke the 4min mile so soon after Bannister did that they all must've been on drugs, too.
This crap you guys go on with is ridiculous.
I totally agree with you.
The crap the idiots and bad actors on this board come up with is literally ridiculous.
The trouble is, for every one of you, there are ten dimwits, two of which are willing to post under different names and flood a thread to make it look like others agree with their specious lies.
smh
Justin91 wrote:
The offseason PEDs are doing the heavy lifting.
We're not going to know if this is the case until it is proven to be the case.
You can't just say this and "presto" it is true.
I know this is the internet, and you are used to being able to post / publish anything instantly and think you are an expert.
Kenyan track performances are physically impossible without PEDs. If they tried to do the training that leads to these amazing performances without drugs, they'd die.