RUNNERS FROM THE 70'S and 80's WERE CAPABLE OF SUB 13 and SUB 27

I dont believe that you ever spoke to Dave Bedford when he was running.

Where did this meeting of minds take place ?

Bedford was racing against the best in the world here in the UK, at the time UK was arguably the strongest nation in terms of depth of competition, he was running the equivalent of a grand prix meet every time he stepped on a track in the UK

nah, walker was on epo too.

so was zatopek.

Jim Ryun on a good mondo track being paced could have ran 3:45 for the mile... Wow he was good

Since African runners have been running sub 13:00 and sub 27:00 with regularity, only two non-African Runners have done so: Bob Kennedy and Dieter Bauman. Why would non-African runners from the 70's and 80's be any different?

If any non-African runner could do it, I would say Fernando Mamede and Dave Moorcroft. Perhaps also Eamon Coughlin, Thomas Wessinghage and Karl Fleschen.

Regarding African runners from the past who could do it: Ben Jipcho, Kip Keino, Myruts Yifter, Henry Rono and Suleiman Nyambui.

When we have coaches telling our runners that they are genetically inferior, we have a much bigger problem than a lack of opportunity.

The question then should be "why did non-African runners stop improving?"

yes we have the problem that we are genetically inferior....

why

name one European/American on the planet with the potential to run 12.40 for 5k, 26.30 for 10k and 2.05 for marathon, nobody....

by the time we egt down to these times the Africans will have moved on, again, the reason the Europeans stopped improving might well be that we were coming to the limits of our capabilities, after all derek Clayton ran 2.08 nearly 40 years ago now, not many Caucasians have run quicker, how many, 10?

yes, I do think ryun could have run 3.45 if paced on a mondo under the lights on a cool scandinavian evening.

Strange that we reached our limit so soon after we started training seriously. What's it been, 50 years? That's not very long at all. Perhaps the Africans are about to reach their peak?

waz the whole point of this thread was to discuss the idea that there were lot of white boys who could have run 12.50-12.55 and 26.40-26.50

not to mention Steve Jones, Alberto Salazar, Derek Clayton etc who were as good as any 2.05 marathon runner.

Sooner or later one of your allegedly gentically inferior white boys is going to run as well as Paula Radcliffe but with a good sprint finish beat the world and the world records.

Are you seriously trying to tell me that it is completely impossibe?

The concept that white people are genetically inferior to whatever black master race you seem to believe is going to totally dominate the planet for ever in distance running, is so totally ridiculous and defeatist it seems to me like a form of mental illness.

I presume you are using the race subject to confuse people. It is not about skin colour it is about athletes from regions of the world where there has been a static population for hundreds of generations living at altitude. Even among those groups there are small pockets of runners who are obviously more talented at distance running than the people who live around them. A significant number of all the medals won by kenyan athletes are from just one tribe.

All of the people from that area eat the same diet, live at the same altitude etc but one tribe is much better than its neighbours so please explain why there is no genetic influence at work here.

Nobody is using the term inferior, they are saying that some small groups of people have a genetic advantage. From these groups come most of the better runners in the distance world. The top of the rankings include some special people who are not as genetically advantaged, and then we have a few cheats before we get to the best of the rest from sea level.

You are referring to that bollox about the so called Kalenjin tribe being superior. Lofty even Kenyans will tell you that is a load of bull.

why not the Geordie tribe man?

utter crap - in fact, if you look at the evidence, the two runners from that period who have suffered serious illness are Steve Scott and John Walker - Coe, Cram and Ovett (although now a fat f***er - but hey, why not when you used to knock out 120 a week) are perfectly healthy.

not wanting to suggest anything but if people were using stuff they might be the ones now suffering the health consequences.

bollox wrote:

utter crap - in fact, if you look at the evidence, the two runners from that period who have suffered serious illness are Steve Scott and John Walker - Coe, Cram and Ovett (although now a fat f***er - but hey, why not when you used to knock out 120 a week) are perfectly healthy.

not wanting to suggest anything but if people were using stuff they might be the ones now suffering the health consequences.

bollox, didnt Steve Scott and John Walker run a ridiculous number of sub four miles, competing to be the first to run 100 sub 4's. what a silly competition, I'm not surprised their health has suffered.