It was just to hot to run a fast time, that is it!
And who says that woman should not be running faster then men.
Hell maby back in the days when men where men, males beat females. But now that science has figuredout all of the things that the body can and cannot do. And that anything over 70 miles, is a wast of time. It is things have changed.
And what has happened to that "isolated" population in the past couple of thousand years? It's been bred with all sorts of other lines.
This is getting as dumb as all the morons bantering that Marion Jones' kid will be a world class sprinter. IT DOESN'T WORK THAT WAY!!!!!! Most world-class runners are genetic freaks, and there are plenty of them in any population.
Who held the 200 m record for over a decade before Michael Johnson came along? A little white Italian dude! Sure he was juiced, but I'm betting the MJ and most of the world class sprinters are as well. Russia typically has several 27'+ long jumpers every year.
I hear british women have the best genetics - after all, no one is close to Paula.
DUMMMMMBBBBBBBB!!!!!!
I read a report somewhere a while back, I'm not sure where, but I'll try to remember. It promoted a theory about the success of the Kenyan distance running had something to do with genetics. The theory stated that the one tribe that dominates the running scene (I forget the name of it) has historically been famous for stealing livestock from other tribes nearby. The stealing would often take place at night and on foot, often running very long distances at a very quick pace to get the job done. Naturally, the individuals who could run the longest, fastest would gain more livestock, and thus be looked upon as more successful. So, in turn the ability to be a great distance runner has become a desireable trait for mating in this certain tribe. I would like to know if anyone else has ever seen anything on this or not.
Personally, I believe genetics does have something to do with it, but it would be completely stupid to think that only one factor is at play. The question that should be asked should not be, how are the africans getting so good, but why are the Americans getting worse.
Running fast would be an advantage in ANY culture, not just west african. Bogus study. But you're correct, "why aren't Americans competitive?" If you follow the twisted logic here, you'd say our genetics are worse! Clearly even letsrun posters aren't that dumb, but they are willing to latch on to that excuse to explain why the Kenyans are beating us. Makes no sense.
Why then is distance running so prevalent in one particular tribe? I agree running fast would be an advantage in most cultures, but here it seems like it is accelerated, but by what? Probably a mix of environment/cultural forces. So what I think is that it is stupid to fight the genetics vs environment fight because most likely it is both.
I think your confusing two different things here. You are talking about genetics of group of people (one african tribe) - it is true that the certain groups possess certain traits, and those traits are genetic (light skin light hair, dark skin dark hair, etc.) It is possible that, ON THE WHOLE, a population might be genetically superior at certain things than others.
With respect to world class athletes, we are now talking about something completely different. The question isn't "are the genetics of a certain african tribe superior with respect to running than some caucasion population" - that may in fact be true (although there are no studies to confirm this, and don't hold your breath). The question is "Are the genetically-superior freaks in one population better than the genetically-superior freaks from another?" 99.9% of Kenyans cannot compete with Alan Culpepper in the marathon (even if trained) - but their genetically gifted can. There is nothing to suggest that their freaks have any genetic advantage over our freaks. That leaves environment
plain and simple
SWB
Soft White Boys its an affliction gained through easy living
Very good point, but the concentration of "genetically-superior freaks" in Kenya is a lot higher than that of Americans. Per your example, 99.9% of Kenyans cannot compete with Culpepper, but 99.999999999999999......% of Americans can't.
All in all though this whole argument between genetics vs environment is stupid. One side will refute the other because of lack of "proof" all the while they lack "proof" for thier own points. The data does not exist, therefore it is all opinions based on very little data. My point is shown in the way you disregarded the study I talked about earlier when all you had to go on was what I recollected from memory about it, without reading it yourself. That's a very uneducated way to practice scientific reasoning, and shows your opinion is tainted by bias.
If the study was published in a scientific journal, than I assure you that I would have read it. There isn't a single scientific journal article that backs what you are saying. The certainly is no data whatsoever that says Kenya has more genetic freaks. And really, that's not the point either, is it? The fact remains is that the US doesn't have a SINGLE individual who can compete with the top 10 or 15 Kenyans right now in the marathon (although I pray that Meb or Culpepper or maybe Briney has a breakthrough and starts believing that they are on equal terms talent-wise). We clearly have lots of INDIVIDUALS in the US with the genetics to compete. The questions, as I think you pointed out earlier, is why not? Involved in other sports? Too fat? Running but not training smart/hard enough? Believes that Kenyans are genetically superior and therefore won't race any marathon at sub 2:06 pace? All of those questions go back to culture.
OK, how's this to change it up. Let's suppose I by into your wrong but eloquently proposed assumption that the Kenyan superfreaks are a bit better than American superfreaks? Are you then saying that the Kenyans are performing at 100% of their capacity? Certainly your not. That then leaves the possibility that Americans could tap a higher percentage of their potential and beat them. But we don't have anyone within 5 minutes of the top Kenyans right now - that's not because of genetics. I contend it's 99% mental.
Zipp wrote:
Simplest explanation = culture
So people of west African decent in Nigeria, the Caribean, and the United States all share the same culture?
And what has happened to that "isolated" population in the past couple of thousand years? It's been bred with all sorts of other lines.
And yet we still don't all look the same. Two thousand years is nothing in human evolutionary terms.
Bum wrote:The question isn't "are the genetics of a certain african tribe superior with respect to running than some caucasion population" - that may in fact be true (although there are no studies to confirm this, and don't hold your breath). The question is "Are the genetically-superior freaks in one population better than the genetically-superior freaks from another?"
So you're suggesting that the means of two populations may be different, but values 6 standard deviations away from those population means are identical. I'm not aware of any other populations in nature that exhibit such an odd property.
Hmmmmm. If I have to explain this, you probably won't understand anyway, but I'll try.
Take a classroom exam given to 2 large classes - one class is 10000 Americans, one class is 10000 Kenyans. The mean for the Americans is 55%, the mean for the Kenyans is 57.8% - small but meaningful difference. If you look at the scores are for those in each population that are 6 standard devations away, guess what??? They are both right around 99.5% - a few freaky smart ones in each but just because the overall mean was slightly higher in the Kenyan class, the superfreaks are for all practical purposes equal. Lies, damn lies, and statistics!!
Class dismissed.
OK, I'm listening. Please explain how you calculated your 99.5%.
You really are a dumb f***. Same thing was said about black basketball players 5 years ago, until white eastern euros showed up and started kicking ass. Tell me which gene(s) makes them superior runners? You don't know which genes are superior, and neither does anyone else. And don't give me any bullshit about Kenyans "as a population" have "better" running genetics - there has never been a genetic study of the "kenyan population". All pure bullshit, but you and most of the scientifically illiterature dopes on this page buy into it. No genetic advantage. Period. Different culture, different upbringing, yes.