Sobering stats on depth of US distance running / Kenya vs. the World

duece wrote:

GOML wrote:

2. Japan had 41 on the list, yet largely has been unable to translate this depth to any kind of success at the very top tier (Worlds/Olympics, Marathon Majors, etc.) It seems almost the opposite of the USA with it's top athletes but lack of depth.

So all of a sudden Lagat, Meb, and Plaatjas are American.

Yes they are, douche

no they die in a car crash or get shot with a flaming poison arrow by someone from another tribe. Kenya has hazards that we don't.

asdfsadf wrote:

shoe guy wrote:

A better question to ask is why is Japan better than the US in terms of overall depth?

Exactly. Genetics doesn't explain this. But I can, in one word:

MILEAGE!

Japanese run mega-miles, and though we are stronger on top (in the 10k at least) we get pounded depth-wise by a country half as big as us because they get their asses out the door and RUN!

Why couldn't the Japanese be genetically superior for longer distances? Why is this out of the realm of possibility for explanation? I don't get this.

lance-a-lot - Tis Fair - I meant to say "year", not month.

Also my point was not why people are good at their sport, or why they continue to play their sport. If it were, we could make the argument why would a nba player retire after 1 year once they are set?

The point was why does a player go into said sport.

Why does a 14 year old american boy choose to play football vs XC?

Why does a 14 yr old Kenyan Boy choose to run xc vs football?

We had 200+ sub 2:20 marathoners in 1983, how many were sub 2:18? 70? 100? Certainly a lot more than today.

Back then there was more of a let's do this spirit. Good or decent runners were more willing to take the time to train, even if it meant a lesser job and a few years off the career track. 2:14 marathoners weren't exactly dime a dozen, but there were a lot of them.

Economic times weren't great then, but better than now (worse than 10-15 years ago). The younger generation is more concerned about the future and making a living--and other things--than running fast after college. Now, it seems that the only ones who continue running are the very elite, NCAA champions and runners up, who get big contracts. The depth at the high school and college level over the past 8 or 10 years has been better than ever--even the 1970s and 1980s. They're just chosing not to compete and continue striving as they did a generation ago.

Running 63:00 for 13.1 miles and pocketing $12k a year in sponsorship/prize money sounds great if you're from rural Kenya. Not so good if you're an American with a college degree.

Opportunity cost.

deleuze wrote:

asdfsadf wrote:

Exactly. Genetics doesn't explain this. But I can, in one word:

MILEAGE!

Japanese run mega-miles, and though we are stronger on top (in the 10k at least) we get pounded depth-wise by a country half as big as us because they get their asses out the door and RUN!

Why couldn't the Japanese be genetically superior for longer distances? Why is this out of the realm of possibility for explanation? I don't get this.

agree. i don't believe this "mileage" b.s.

huh? wrote:

agree. i don't believe this "mileage" b.s.

Because the US USED TO have lots of runners in that range. Cf 1870 and 80s. But we don't anymore. Our genes haven't changed since then.

hell yea bruh wrote:

scottdye wrote:

3. Kenya with 184 !?! Are you serious? That's almost half the list!

Any insights from the LRC faithful?

Yeah, 184 of 337 is more than half, not almost half.

It's still "almost" half. You must not know what "almost" means.[/quote]

Although I get your point, the term "almost half" is generally interpreted to mean "somewhat under","approaching" etc. When it exceeds half, the better phrase is "over half", which is more accruate and give the reader a better understanding of the Kenyan dominance.

Although it has been quite adequately explained "it is a matter of choices". If the only sport every child in the U.S had an opportunity to compete in was running, we would see elevated competition levels and athletes now in other sports excelling in track, cross country and road races.

huh? wrote:agree. i don't believe this "mileage" b.s.

I was not ruling out the idea that their training methods or mileage approach is the reason why they produce more depth.

I just find it curious that genetics is easily accepted as an explanation in the case of the East Africans, but not accepted as an explanation in the case of the Japanese.

Is it because of a weird cultural myth about Asians having weak bodies and a tremendous work ethic?

If the HM was a NCAA scoring event (imagine it was run 2 weeks before the NCAAs) you would see a lot more fast times. All those 29 min 10 runners would be close to 63. Or if your company had a team of 10 guys paid to run fast half marathons.

My economics professor said there were three kinds of lies: "Lies, damn lies, and statistics."

I don't want to hear about how many fast Japanese marathoners or any other distance until one of them beats an American in a major event, Worlds, Olympics, or anything.

2007 Worlds: Lagat, Teg, Rupp, Kara Goucher.

2008 Olympics: Flanagan, Rupp, Ritz and Hall.

2009 Worlds: Ritz, Rupp, Lagat, Manzano.

Japan: 0

If you would have done this analysis on the 400 meters back in the late 90's the US would dominate in a very similar fashion.

If you ranked the world's best basketball players, we would also dominate the top 500. But in tennis, soccer and other global ball sports we wouldn't.

I wonder what track and field event is the most representative of relative population size?

Bill Huntington wrote:

My economics professor said there were three kinds of lies: "Lies, damn lies, and statistics."

I don't want to hear about how many fast Japanese marathoners or any other distance until one of them beats an American in a major event, Worlds, Olympics, or anything.

2007 Worlds: Lagat, Teg, Rupp, Kara Goucher.

2008 Olympics: Flanagan, Rupp, Ritz and Hall.

2009 Worlds: Ritz, Rupp, Lagat, Manzano.

Japan: 0

we are talking population not individuals

Bill Huntington wrote:

My economics professor said there were three kinds of lies: "Lies, damn lies, and statistics."

I don't want to hear about how many fast Japanese marathoners or any other distance until one of them beats an American in a major event, Worlds, Olympics, or anything.

2007 Worlds: Lagat, Teg, Rupp, Kara Goucher.

2008 Olympics: Flanagan, Rupp, Ritz and Hall.

2009 Worlds: Ritz, Rupp, Lagat, Manzano.

Japan: 0

We're talking about the marathon here so let's look at the stats shall we?

In 2007, Japan put FOUR men ahead of our first in the marathon and FIVE women ahead of our first with one of them grabbing a medal.

In 2008, we did well on the mens side with 2 of ours beating Japans first (Ogata was 53 seconds behind Hall). On the womens side, both countries only had one finisher and Japans top women beat our top woman.

In 2009, Japan put THREE ahead of our first man. They put TWO ahead of our first woman (Miss Kara Goucher, who you have listed above although not for the marathon) and one of them won the silver medal.

So what were you saying?

asdfsadf wrote:

huh? wrote:

agree. i don't believe this "mileage" b.s.

Because the US USED TO have lots of runners in that range. Cf 1870 and 80s. But we don't anymore. Our genes haven't changed since then.

our genes have not changed but you can not deny as a population we have been getting bigger and fatter

So I google "sobering stats" and this what I got:

Suicide stats for gay and lesbians

American drinking of alcohol hits 25 year high

Numbers in the dangers of texting while driving

Stats on domestic violence

The serious decline of the New Mexico budget

27% of Ontario drivers drove after drinking

College alcohol consumption increase

Business combinations fail 60-75% of the time

A high speed rail system that could cost up to $200B

And then...sobering stats on the depth of US distance running

I had click about 5 pages to find anything on cancer.

And if they're choosing those sports because they think they're gonna get money then they are sadly misguided and very stupid.

You have to be EXCELLENT to get a scholarship in any sport and the vast majority of kids do not.

Timmy Jenkins wrote:

Americans ~never run road races overseas. There are basically no fast half marathons in the U.S. There are fast marathons in the U.S. and the top U.S. track runners do go overseas to run. The relative strength of the U.S. in the half marathon is exacerbated by the above.

"No fast half marathons"??

There are plenty of fast half marathon courses in the US. Just no fast runners in them.

The half really doesn't require pacing into the late stages, and several WRs and other <60:00 HMs in recent memory have been near-solo efforts for the last several miles.

You can keep making excuses, but "no fast half marathons in the US" is no excuse at all.