Kipyegon is simply too good.

bladerunner wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

The dominance of the E African women is simply too extreme and too conspicuous. It is like an entirely separate sport with them. We see much the same with Jamaican sprinters.

If they came from a pool of natural athleticism of that kind of superiority to all others we should expect to see them excelling in every kind of sport. But we don't. Their best athletes are all found in only one sport of a narrow range of events. They are sports in which doping will make an automatic and demonstrable difference, because they aren't sports of technique and skill like so many others.

Sure, doping will be present everywhere, but what we are seeing in this sport from these countries is beyond obvious. It is in plain sight.

By that reasoning, then the fact that the vast majority of NFL and NBA players are black must also be conspicuous. What are they doing that white players are not?

Lumping Hassan in with E. Africans doesn't work. She has lived and trained in the U.S. for years. And what about Helen Obirii? She moves to Boulder and wins Boston. These runners are getting tested out of competition just like the Americans so it's a stupid argument.

griles17 wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

The dominance of the E African women is simply too extreme and too conspicuous. It is like an entirely separate sport with them. We see much the same with Jamaican sprinters.

If they came from a pool of natural athleticism of that kind of superiority to all others we should expect to see them excelling in every kind of sport. But we don't. Their best athletes are all found in only one sport of a narrow range of events. They are sports in which doping will make an automatic and demonstrable difference, because they aren't sports of technique and skill like so many others.

Sure, doping will be present everywhere, but what we are seeing in this sport from these countries is beyond obvious. It is in plain sight.

Yeah no, it isn't a coincidence that the best distance runner (by far) that Europe ever produced is actually Ethiopian

Armstronglivs wrote:

bladerunner wrote:

By that reasoning, then the fact that the vast majority of NFL and NBA players are black must also be conspicuous. What are they doing that white players are not?

Lumping Hassan in with E. Africans doesn't work. She has lived and trained in the U.S. for years. And what about Helen Obirii? She moves to Boulder and wins Boston. These runners are getting tested out of competition just like the Americans so it's a stupid argument.

Black athletes in the US are successful in every kind of sport - and that was long before the practice of doping became a commonplace. Track, football, basketball, boxing, tennis and so on - even golf. But we also see other racial and ethnic groups succeeding in US sports. We don't see that in E Africa, where it is only distance running - a doper's sport if there ever was one.

Athletes like Hassan and Obiri come from countries that have a doping culture in sports. That there is more testing in the US doesn't mean they will be prevented from doping - as we have seen from those few US athletes that have been caught. But wherever there is doping most aren't caught - with the recent glaring exception of Kenya, where doping clearly lacks a sophisticated basis amongst many athletes.

However, much of this distracts from my fundamental point which is not that athletes from Africa (and Jamaica) are successful - any country can produce top athletes - but their degree of success is so disproportionate it suggest they are almost a different species from everyone else. They aren't. But doping can make it look like that.

For those who think my views are somehow "racially" based, they aren't - I am also sceptical at the increased success of Norwegian athletes today.

Armstronglivs wrote:

bladerunner wrote:

By that reasoning, then the fact that the vast majority of NFL and NBA players are black must also be conspicuous. What are they doing that white players are not?

Lumping Hassan in with E. Africans doesn't work. She has lived and trained in the U.S. for years. And what about Helen Obirii? She moves to Boulder and wins Boston. These runners are getting tested out of competition just like the Americans so it's a stupid argument.

Black athletes in the US are successful in every kind of sport - and that was long before the practice of doping became a commonplace. Track, football, basketball, boxing, tennis and so on - even golf. But we also see other racial and ethnic groups succeeding in US sports. We don't see that in E Africa, where it is only distance running - a doper's sport if there ever was one.

Athletes like Hassan and Obiri come from countries that have a doping culture in sports. That there is more testing in the US doesn't mean they will be prevented from doping - as we have seen from those few US athletes that have been caught. But wherever there is doping most aren't caught - with the recent glaring exception of Kenya, where doping clearly lacks a sophisticated basis amongst many athletes.

However, much of this distracts from my fundamental point which is not that athletes from Africa (and Jamaica) are successful - any country can produce top athletes - but their degree of success is so disproportionate it suggest they are almost a different species from everyone else. They aren't. But doping can make it look like that.

For those who think my views are somehow "racially" based, they aren't - I am also sceptical at the increased success of Norwegian athletes today.

letsdrum wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

Black athletes in the US are successful in every kind of sport - and that was long before the practice of doping became a commonplace. Track, football, basketball, boxing, tennis and so on - even golf. But we also see other racial and ethnic groups succeeding in US sports. We don't see that in E Africa, where it is only distance running - a doper's sport if there ever was one.

Athletes like Hassan and Obiri come from countries that have a doping culture in sports. That there is more testing in the US doesn't mean they will be prevented from doping - as we have seen from those few US athletes that have been caught. But wherever there is doping most aren't caught - with the recent glaring exception of Kenya, where doping clearly lacks a sophisticated basis amongst many athletes.

However, much of this distracts from my fundamental point which is not that athletes from Africa (and Jamaica) are successful - any country can produce top athletes - but their degree of success is so disproportionate it suggest they are almost a different species from everyone else. They aren't. But doping can make it look like that.

For those who think my views are somehow "racially" based, they aren't - I am also sceptical at the increased success of Norwegian athletes today.

So, the rest also dopes.

How do you explain, that from the 75 fastest women's 5000m times, 70 are from East Africans (in origin)? The 5 remaining times are from USA (3), Germany and Russia.

How can "doping" explain this?

astro wrote:

This is the only sport in history dumb enough to try to come up with a racial excuse for why runners from certain nations dominate. But like you said, it is like watching a different sport. And increasing the difference is much more dramatic on the women's side, where PEDs have a larger impact. Nor would something like a somatological explanation, which is weak to begin with, come close to explaining the disparity. If you have a culture of doping, even in a relatively small population (eg, Jamaica) it can produce tremendous results.

I guess in a way we owe the Chinese a debt of gratitude. Their early 90s dominance destroys the pseudo scientific myths that have been employed to cloud over the doping issue. For example, seven Chinese runners ran sub 3:55 in the 1500m in the course of two years. A 20 year old ran 3:50 in 1993. Occam's razor. Doping is the obvious explanation, unless you want to believe that a runner such as Kipyegon can naturally smash ultradoping times. Add to that an avalanch of AIU doping busts and the bitter myth clingers appear increasingly deluded.

Ezrun wrote:

Hassan should have went for the win. She played it safe and understandably so after a tough 10K. But it would have been interesting if she took the lead with 500 m to go. Obviously Faith probably would have passed her and won it and maybe Hassan would have fell to third

But yeah faith is definitely on another level at the 1500 and 5K but it would have been interesting if she tried the triple if she could have won all three or if it would have been too much for her and she might have only won one...

Hassan started our kick too soon in the 10K I think she could have won it if she really timed it right and she could have got two silvers along with that with ideal racing...

Could faith have won all three? Is she really too good or fortunate that Hassan is tripling? Will she ever win marathons like Hassan?