American Record vs. American CITIZENS record

Michael Faraday wrote:

If a Kenyan changes passports it doesn't change his DNA.

And of course the metric by which we determine citizenship is DNA

There was a very efficient government in Europe 70yrs ago that had the same idea...

Most of you guys just dont get it. Growing up in America is one thing. Competing for another country and moving here once you can make your Olympic team is another.

Lagat is not a true American. Solinsky is. Just because his great grandparents were not born here does not make him European. Lagat is a drug cheat and a cowhard.

If you want to play that game, nobody holds the US record because we're all Africans.

Actually, there is a higher chance of genetic variation within groups (as individuals) than between groups (as an average). This is particularly true in the case of East Africans, who hail from what is genetically the cradle of human life as we know it. The average East African has more in common with you, genetically, than he does with a randomly selected other East African. What he does NOT have in common with you, and DOES have in common with the other East African, is culture. Genetic differences exist, but they are always greater within groups than between groups. The standard deviation within a group is larger than the difference of the averages between groups. This is basic, introductory research methods stuff for any competent statistician.

Michael Faraday wrote:

I'm not saying anyone has to leave. I'm just not willing to pretend that a Kenyan who has changed singlets holds an "American" record. If a Kenyan changes passports it doesn't change his DNA.

If you think that DNA is the issue, than your whole "American born" bullshit goes right out the window. What is "American DNA?" The US is a damn melting pot, most people have DNA from all kinds of other countries, get over it.

Sanders Sauls wrote:

Why is it that war and suffering perpetrated by Indian tribes from South America to North America don't count?

Human sacrifice, slavery and the obliteration of entire communities went on among the Indian nations long before Columbus and continued after he arrived?

You did not know that?

Columbus was white.

my opinion wrote:

I will root for lagat because he is an excellent runner and a great person...

.

As great as you can be with a positive A sample.

central nyer wrote:

I have always been a fan of the

YOU COMPETE FOR ONE COUNTRY DURING A CAREER

idea

Lopez, meb, manzano...american

lagat, maree....not

+1

That's what it's like in soccer. Lots of people have dual cititzenship but whenever you play for one country, you can never play for another one, ever.

I'm sick of seeing gold medals by so-called Bahrain or Dubai runners.

I don't see how people could disagree with this. A. its not racist B it prevents a bunch of kenyans from coming over to another country and dominating.

Nutella1 wrote:

central nyer wrote:

I have always been a fan of the

YOU COMPETE FOR ONE COUNTRY DURING A CAREER

idea

Lopez, meb, manzano...american

lagat, maree....not

+1

That's what it's like in soccer. Lots of people have dual cititzenship but whenever you play for one country, you can never play for another one, ever.

I'm sick of seeing gold medals by so-called Bahrain or Dubai runners.

This is kind of close to what I've always thought -- that it's not exactly about race. I play chess, and as everyone knows, Russians and other Eastern Europeans are most of the best chess players (though the world champion is an Indian, and the world #1 is Norwegian.) Anyway, a lot of Eastern Europeans immigrated to the US toward the end of the Cold War, and now make up a lot of the best players there too. I (and many other chess players) have always thought of Gata Kamsky (current US champion and subject of my name), Boris Gulko, Alexander Shabalov, etc. -- all multiple US champions -- as imports and not "real" Americans. This isn't racism (and the fact that Eastern Europeans happen to be white helps this to be seen), but a recognition that Eastern Europeans are currently better at chess than Americans, and that a few of them who already developed their skill to a high level moving to the US doesn't actually represent an improvement in American chess.

It's really the same thing in distance running, except that it's East Africans, not East Europeans, who dominate the competition, and since East Africans are black, some people think it must be racism.

themanontherun wrote:

Actually, there is a higher chance of genetic variation within groups (as individuals) than between groups (as an average). This is particularly true in the case of East Africans, who hail from what is genetically the cradle of human life as we know it. The average East African has more in common with you, genetically, than he does with a randomly selected other East African. What he does NOT have in common with you, and DOES have in common with the other East African, is culture. Genetic differences exist, but they are always greater within groups than between groups. The standard deviation within a group is larger than the difference of the averages between groups. This is basic, introductory research methods stuff for any competent statistician.

And it is so introductory that you apparently misunderstanding it. This should become easily apparent to you when you look at the easily visible genetic differences between africans and europeans. And at the risk of making this discussion even more controversial, just pick the gene that controls skin color. Clearly your statement, "The standard deviation within a group is larger than the difference of the averages between groups," completely fails when looking at that particular genetic difference.

Do not try to apply a conclusion about the differences in the entire human genetic code amongst groups and individuals, to differences in particular genes. (and it is particular genes, those that boost running performance, that we are discussing here).

Michael Faraday = Greg Bell (check out his email address), a huge racist. "DNA difference" is code for black. Notice how he hints at his real beliefs when he mentions accepting that some races are better at certain things than others?

rsbones wrote:

And it is so introductory that you apparently misunderstanding it. This should become easily apparent to you when you look at the easily visible genetic differences between africans and europeans. And at the risk of making this discussion even more controversial, just pick the gene that controls skin color. Clearly your statement, "The standard deviation within a group is larger than the difference of the averages between groups," completely fails when looking at that particular genetic difference.

Do not try to apply a conclusion about the differences in the entire human genetic code amongst groups and individuals, to differences in particular genes. (and it is particular genes, those that boost running performance, that we are discussing here).

You know that not every East African is amazing at running? It's one specific tribe for the most part, the Kalenjin

That may be the case. Does that somehow contradict what I posted? It is still more likely that this is not only a cultural difference but that genetic variations are also an influence on the success of certain people over other people and that those gene variations can be more common in some groups than others.

billy madison wrote:

Most of you guys just dont get it. Growing up in America is one thing. Competing for another country and moving here once you can make your Olympic team is another.

Lagat is not a true American. Solinsky is. Just because his great grandparents were not born here does not make him European. Lagat is a drug cheat and a cowhard.

Sorry but when Lagat moved here he couldnt make an Olympic team. He was running 23:45 for 8K and 13:36 for 5K. The fact is Kip has lived in the U.S. since he moved here in 1996, even while training and running for Kenya 2000-2004. (He does now live in Germany in the summer when he is doing the European circuit) And since he had no problem making the Kenyan Olympic teams, he certainly didnt become an American so that he could make our team because its easier. And he certainly didnt do it to take advantage of living and training over here, because he was doing that just fine for 4 years (although he had begun the process of becoming a citizen somewhere around 2001). He became a U.S. Citizen because he wants to be an American. No other reason.

I admit that Lagat breaking the 5k record is not as

exciting to me as guys like Ritz, Teg, or Sol doing it.

However, its not because he is black but because he grew

up and competed for a foreign country. When Michael

Johnson broke the 200m record at the 96' olympics it was

one of the most exciting sporting spectacles I have ever

seen and made me proud to be an American. However, I saw

MJ as an American and not a guy who grew up in a foreign

country and decided to come and get citizenship and

compete for America. So it has nothing to do with the

color of his skin but his identification with a foreign

country. However, whether or not Americandistance fans

feel excited about it doesn't reallymatter. Lagat is the

American record holder in the 5k, period!

Become a citizen, compete in the Olympics, etc. That's all fine, but...

If you aren't eligible to be the President of the United States, you should not be allowed to hold an American Record in track & field, either!

Nutella1 wrote:

central nyer wrote:

I have always been a fan of the

YOU COMPETE FOR ONE COUNTRY DURING A CAREER

idea

Lopez, meb, manzano...american

lagat, maree....not

+1

That's what it's like in soccer. Lots of people have dual cititzenship but whenever you play for one country, you can never play for another one, ever.

I'm sick of seeing gold medals by so-called Bahrain or Dubai runners.

+2

those are the same thing.

So if you move here when you're one, you shouldn't be allowed to hold a record? Why not change it to "eligible to hold public office"?