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

Or you ask the Kenyan govt that just admitted that there is a large complex of coaches, agents and doctors helping Kenyan runners dope. Once you start getting doping doctors on a widespread basis it goes way beyond desultory doping practices and you have entered Balco and pro cycling territory.

The simple fact is the sport is a laughingstock. No one cares. 99.9% of sports fans have no clue who won any major marathon, and the athletes are interchangeable, rising in the night and fading just as fast. No one thinks it is legitimate. These arguments about genetics or running culture are ridiculous. Even sad. But they are also a clear form of enabling. Despite overwhelming and admitted evidence of systematic doping, the results of endemic doping are used as an attempt to obfuscate the issue.

Talent cannot beat chemistry. China made that point easily enough.

Go take all the drugs you can tolerate. You still won't race sub-59 1/2 Marathon and you won't race sub-2:04 Marathon. The sub-59 & sub-2:04 athletes are from different countries and have different coaches. Nothing like the situation of the great Chinese female runners, 1500m to 10000m a couple decades ago.

Oh look. Another strawman.

What do I rely on? I recommended against the popular mistake of "blind acceptance". I actually said "maybe": "Maybe more like one fifth, according to another estimate from the same event". That can also mean "maybe not".

I do rely on the newly published result to show that "1 in 2" cannot be relied on.

I know it's a lot of words and numbers and math, but once again, to correctly interpret 43.6%, or 31.4%, or 21.2% requires developing a deeper understanding of the methods and their limitations and their margins of error, to understand what they show, and what they do not show.

Very few seem to have the will to develop that, preferring to think unvalidated results from indirect methods in need of refinement can be conclusive. Refinement is not just my recommendation -- both papers producing 43.6%, or 31.4%, or 21.2% explicitly recommended refinement of the methodology.

I have never doubted the advantages of doping for women in shorter distance events, where superior muscular strength can play a role.

You would already know that if you were inclined to be bothered to inform yourself.

Kenyan women (and Ethiopian women) weren't really competing yet in 1993.

Not true.Ethiopian and kenyan women are better than the ma family army,these days.

It seems you are the one with alzheimer's, assuming you remembered these points in the first place. I have consistenly asked, in various forms, why the Russians did not succeed in distance running with their men. The same question can be posed for the Chinese and Indian men.

If you bothered to inform yourself of the content of annual WADA reports, and various other official studies and unofficial "expert" analysis, you would see that many nations dope, and have done so for decades, but not all of them perform.

No straw man. You stated drugs trump talent. Prove it. Take drugs and either race sub-59 1/2 or take drugs and race sub-2:04 Marathon. You can't.

It is a straw man, because you asked him to run those times. Clearly drugs don't make everyone run those times! It's always a combination of massive talent and drugs that anyone is the best in the world. The question is, how much do drugs help?

So you accept that turtle juice works on Chinese women, but not men?

I assume the OP meant primarily the argument that East Africans have some kind of genetic superiority, as most runners under 2:07 are East African.

Not a strawman. You have no answer for the obvious.

False. I can tell you have never run or raced at a high level, let alone with Kenyans. East German and Chinese aren’t even a discussion.

Ummm.....

2:06:50 in the late 80s by Densimo.

Derek Clayton had the world record at 2:09:36 in 1967.

I don't know anything about turtle juice.

I do accept that male hormones work well for both women and men, but men already produce larger amounts than women naturally, which is WADA legal.

Hard to say which 20 years were meant, or if we should ignore the seconds.

Gerard Nijboer ran 2:09:01 in 1980 and Kipchoge ran 2:01:09 in 2022. That's 42 years.

If we say EPO "hit the scene" in 1993, the record was 2:06:50 (from 1988) and in 2013, it was 2:03:23.

Of course it is. Obviously if you give peds to a hobby jogger at the local turkey trot they will not break a wr or get anywhere close. But he will outperform other hobbyjoggers. Now give them to a higher level athlete, a national caliber athlete, then it becomes a different story. You know that. Sure Lance Armstrong was talented. But take the peds away and he was not getting close to winning the TDF.

We have some people on here who think their comments mean anything. They don't. The problem is being openly admitted at the source.

Some runners from specific regions are faster than others from other regions.

5 millions Kelenjin produce way more top Marathon runners than 4 billions of USA, China, India and Europe combined.

For you, doping is the only explanation for this astonishing fact.

More Kalenjins dope? Or they dope better?

Doping doesn't explain this dominance.