Purdy pictures 1500m to marathon (1960-2009)

bingo!

Passlevard wrote:

I'd be really interested to see the hematocrits of top runners. Even without a good drug test, that would pretty much immediately tell us who's doping.

Although certainly not scientific and certain, it sure would be interesting to know! Changes over time correlated with training logs would even prove more interesting. Having had a loved one use EPO legitimately for chemotherapy, the results were rather dramatic.

Sir Lance a lot wrote:

I will not deny what you are saying on the issue of the majority of top distance runners in the world coming from the Kalenjin tribe, and yes, Kenya being by far being the dominant nation on the all time lists. However, I do think you definitely overstate that case at least as relates to Ethiopia. With the inclusion of ETH, the big burst of great times since the late '80's should absolutely not only be considered a "Kalenjin thing", but also be considered an East African "thing" too.

yadda, yadda, yadda

Sir Lance a lot, you could have ended your rant after the first sentence, which was my point.

The numbers of Kalengin runners in the yearly lists have increased dramatically since 1990, and in the case of the marathon, exponentially. Out of the top 100 times in the marathon, the Ethiopians have had a fairly steady share: 7.6% since 1990. Only recently, in the last two years (13.3% and 19.3%) has that trend changed.

This might come as a shock to you, but the Kenyans have improved their share of top 100(1) marathoners from a measly 1.2% in 1990, to 9.6% in 1994, to 32.1% in 1998, to 43.7% in 2000, all the way to a peak of 66.3% in 2008.

Yes there are a smattering of other East African countries in the mix, but this is a predominately Kalenjin influx into the performance pool. This is all from one isolated corner of a small country in East Africa.

(1) actually the top 100 yearly performances minus secondary performances, leaving 83-89 performers each year in the analysis.

Passlevard wrote:

I'd be really interested to see the hematocrits of top runners. Even without a good drug test, that would pretty much immediately tell us who's doping.

My hematocrit is 48.3, measured when I had taken a break in training. I was the slowest runner on my college team. I can tell you that I wasn't doping. I don't think this is the solution.

That is normal. If it is like 60 then that means DRUGS.

BS - Cycling has a limit 50 there are a handful of people who have a crit higher ... but ~99.9% of the population of the world falls below this level and there is a genetic condition which causes this. If you are dehydrated, it will read high. Cyclists ride with 60, then get rushed into the trailer for IV fluids to get it down to the magic 50.

ewrafasd wrote:

Passlevard wrote:

I'd be really interested to see the hematocrits of top runners. Even without a good drug test, that would pretty much immediately tell us who's doping.

My hematocrit is 48.3, measured when I had taken a break in training. I was the slowest runner on my college team. I can tell you that I wasn't doping. I don't think this is the solution.

ewrafasd wrote:

Passlevard wrote:

I'd be really interested to see the hematocrits of top runners. Even without a good drug test, that would pretty much immediately tell us who's doping.

My hematocrit is 48.3, measured when I had taken a break in training. I was the slowest runner on my college team. I can tell you that I wasn't doping. I don't think this is the solution.

I think training actually reduces hematocrit, but regardless you'd be legal. Almost no one has an unaided hematocrit above 50, though. However, I didn't realize that bikers had found a way to lower hematocrit so quickly? I suppose that would sort of ruin the testing idea.

i see y'all posting bout polynomial regression but lets talk bout my regression 4:17 1600 to 4:05 1500

Just wanted to jump in here about one thing: the en masse adoption of the internet by good and crappy runners alike.

I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing having all these blogs and crap out there (and I realize as one of those mediocre blaggers, I am biased). It takes a lot of the mystery out of being a good runner.

I mean, personally, I can remember being a 15 year old sophomore in high school reading about Jim Ryun's inhuman workouts and hardly-believable achievements and thinking "what planet is this guy from?"

Then I stumble on letsrun, and what's one of the first things I stumble on? Discussions of Frank Shorter's training and the Summer of Malmo. Seeing the way to train- the right way to train- changed my whole approach to the sport. I'm from NH, and when I was a sophomore, 1:57 and 4:20 were considered legendary performances. Hell, 4:30 was considered ridiculous.

The internet encouraged me and my friends to start doing real training and set our sights higher. The blogs out there are extensions of that. It was comforting to know "Hey, so-and-so had absolute shit workouts for two weeks, and he didn't let it affect his confidence- I better shut the heck up and get on with it."

I don't view the whole internet thing as a means for attention-seekers to try to hype themselves up, though I can understand why some people would think that. Instead, I think that the internet allows for a spread of information that helps ignorant high schoolers think beyond their next dual meet. The blogs and websites of the fast and semi-fast, to me, say to kids "look at this clown running 80 miles a week, struggling through his workouts, and running Regional marks. He's not even that good- you can do that in a couple years."

Sorry to go off on a tangent, I just wanted to put my two cents in.

-one of the mediocre bloggers clogging the internet

(who is nonetheless grateful for malmo's suggestions over the years)

thinks he is never wrong, but often is wrote:

Sir Lance a lot, you could have ended your rant after the first sentence, which was my point.

The numbers of Kalengin runners in the yearly lists have increased dramatically since 1990..... yada yada yada yada right back at ya

malmo,

The point we were discussing was the "dramatic drop in performances" that occurred in distance running during the mid 90's and somewhat continued into the early/mid 00's. Different theories of EPO use or influx of new african talent were ideas we all mentioned.

This concept was focusing on the dramatic drop in times that make up the WORLD RECORDS, or the ALL TIME top 10, or even top 25. Not the top 100 or something to that effect. No one doubts Kenya has the most depth, and most of that depth comes from their Kalenjin tribe. You've told us nothing we all didn't already know on that front. But was depth REALLY the point that was being analyzed?? No, it was the times at the very TOP of the all time lists that really plunged and were being called into question.

And so to deny Ethiopia's major contribution to that "dramatic drop in performances" at the TOP of the all time lists during the mid 90's to early 00's is beyond silly, and you know it. Nearly 20 performers under 13:00 and 27:15, and 10 under 2:07 is a "smattering" ??? 3 of the top 5 all time in 5k and 10k ?? The 2 greatest distance runners in history, who have routinely beaten ALL the kenyans??? I know you like to stick to your guns come hell or high water, but that was simply a silly word to describe Ethiopia's contribution to the major improvements that occurred in distance WR's, or the times that now make up the top 10 or even top 25 all time lists.

So Kenya and the Kalenjin have the most depth. A) duh? B) So what?? How on earth does that fact preclude one from coming to the conclusion that the dramatic drop in distance performances we've been analyzing is due to an influx of great talent from Kenya AND Ethiopia (and thus from "east africa" as a region) ??? It doesn't.

I have no idea what your agenda is in denying something so clear. So it is no doubt interesting to point out that the majority of the best talent has come from such a small part of the world, ie, one small part of Kenya. Yes, very interesting. But to deny the fact that runners that have come from a neighboring country(ETH) have often crushed the best from that small tribe, is very strange.

Lance a lot, you've created a bone of contention and you're jealousy chewing on it as if your life is depending on it. Here is what I said:

"Another note. You keep saying the improvements are an "east African" thing. Not really. There are a smattering of Ethiopians, Ugandan and Tanzanians in the mix. The great majority of them, by a huge margin, it is a Kalenjin thing -- only ten percent of the population, located geographically in the western highlands of Kenya."

My point was clear. I'm not denying anything to the Ethiopians. The Ethiopians have always factored into the equation and their numbers have been fairly consistent over the decades. Their influence on records and medal counts are obvious. However, it's been the Kalenjins, only ten percent of Kenyas 40 million citizens, that have provided the depth of the talent pool. The Ethopians, a country more than double the size of Kenya (85MM to 40MM) has not contributed to that pool anywhere near what the Kalenjins have.

Take a deep breath and quit chewing.

I think the issue here is cause and effect. the puzzle that we were trying to solve is what created the great drop in times at the top of the lists...and given that those places at the top are occupied by Ethiopans to a great extent, the influx of talent from the Kalenjins doesn't explain the phenomena, nor include or exclude EPO as a factor. An increase in participation/talent pool from Ethiopa would help explain the phenomena.

E_Smith, there might very well be an increase in the depth of the ETH talent pool, only it hasn't shown up in the yearly lists until that last 2 years. One of the reasons could be political. Ethiopia, historically has been one of the most oppressive countries in the world, with no one, even national Olympic heroes, exempt from its cruelty. Coupled with limited financial resources, perhaps many of the worlds top runners were never allowed outside of the country. Perhaps restrictions have been loosened recently and athletes that would not normally travel far away to competitions are now getting that opportunity?

Some support for that conjecture is that in the past you'd rarely see Ethiopians in competitions in America. Now its a frequent sight, especially on the roads. Ethiopians not good enough for National team consideration can earn far more in American road races than they could ever dream of at home, making those competitions a proving grounds, a farm team.

Then, of course, Ockhams Razor could come to play here, and it could be that the depth of talent in Ethiopia was never there and the increase is a recent development.

Who knows, maybe in a couple of years a bunch of Yemeni Yahoos might be dominating the world distance scene, and we'll be trying to figure that one out?