Because genetics are real. Science has shown (as has experience) that certain traits are adapted for certain activities. For example, it is easier for taller people to dunk a basketball. There are exceptions, but being tall is a genetic advantage when you are trying to touch things that are high up off the ground. Is this clear to everyone?
As phenotypes are reflected in certain populations around the globe, certain sub-groups of humanity have adapted to certain activities (such as heat retention or heat dispersal). These traits are not equally shared by all phenotypic groups. Groups with more of a certain trait (as a % of population) are said to be at an advantage.
Why is this even a debate on this website? Does anyone have a hard time understanding this? This is like the third thread this month about "is talent real" or "does body-type matter" and so on. It sort of seems like a "duh" level question for people to be asking (unless the OP is a kid).
Well thanks for the "duh" level science brofessor. Now explain why Jakob Ingebrigtsen doesn't fit your model?
I would say that Ingebrigtsen is an outlier, a once in a generation talent, or that he's doping.
One or the other.
I kind of suspect both, but I enjoy watching him run either way.
As for East Africans having a genetic advantage: yes, and that's just from a simple, totally un-scientific eye test.
I watch them run and it's obvious that they do it different, and I can see why they win all of the time.
Well thanks for the "duh" level science brofessor. Now explain why Jakob Ingebrigtsen doesn't fit your model?
I would say that Ingebrigtsen is an outlier, a once in a generation talent, or that he's doping.
One or the other.
I kind of suspect both, but I enjoy watching him run either way.
As for East Africans having a genetic advantage: yes, and that's just from a simple, totally un-scientific eye test.
I watch them run and it's obvious that they do it different, and I can see why they win all of the time.
He's the fastest Caucasian over 1500, and second fastest over 5000 (Grant Fisher is actually the fastest). In each event, there are 6 and 2 non-Africans (all Caucasians) in the all-time lists, respectively. So yeah, Ingebrigtsen is an outlier as a fast non-African distance guy.
African dominance is a thing. Genetics are a thing.
How is talking about drug use by East Africans misinformation? As of last October there were 51 Kenyans serving suspensions for PED use. I believe that number is now close to 60.
Didn't take tie to read all, but I'd like to point out some facts :
Arguments about genetics are never supported by evidence, and the precise meaning of any hypothetical result isn't assessed. Say you find that some favorable traits are more present among the kenyan population than european one. That only means that kenya has a greater pole of potential competitors. If they don't have the right infrastructures to train them, it's wasted on them (so to speak). So the question is, are the "genetic advantages" about frequency or genes only possessed by specific ethnicities?
Also, I've read something about the east-african lean body-frame being an advantage : please, that's typically an issue of frequency. You'll maybe find far less lean framed people in Europe, but still. And it's simplistic : some people point the length of the Achilles tendon as an important factor, and is enhanced by the traditionnal jumping dance of the Masais. If it's an "improvable asset", then nothing about genetics. If it's a trait that has been selected through generations, then it's still likely a question... of frequency!
East African genetic dominance is 100% a myth. The biggest quantity of drug busts in the 21st century in track and field had been from Kenya. Track and field doesn’t require many resources like football or hockey , in fact this is why third world countries win medals in track and field , especially distance running. Distance running requires talent and EPO to be at the top. Take away sports like futbol and you get the talented athletes focusing their attention on track and field.
Not genetics, but a combination of environmental and social factors.
And factcheck: Russia has the biggest quantity of drug busts by far in the 21st century in track and field. They have been using both steroids and blood doping since the '70s. As Russia has demonstrated, this didn't translate into distance running performance for their men. They could onlyl succeed with women in shorter distance events, and in race-walking.
It isn't "East Africans" it is certain groups of people from Kenya and Ethiopia. Usually they grew up in rural areas. Worked hard as part of daily life. Good nutrition. Skinny. Then when they start running, they are at altitude and have dirt roads everywhere. And they have the example of champions who came before them . . . . Kids from big cities in those countries don't become champions. . . . When groups in other countries start focusing on running and gain confidence and run at altitude on dirt roads, they run fast as well!
It isn't "East Africans" it is certain groups of people from Kenya and Ethiopia. Usually they grew up in rural areas. Worked hard as part of daily life. Good nutrition. Skinny. Then when they start running, they are at altitude and have dirt roads everywhere. And they have the example of champions who came before them . . . . Kids from big cities in those countries don't become champions. . . . When groups in other countries start focusing on running and gain confidence and run at altitude on dirt roads, they run fast as well!
This seems right. I was listening to an Aussie podcast about World XC and they were saying what you don't get on the livestream is seeing all these U20 girls collapsing all over the place. They couldn't take the course. All but the East Africans who looked completely at ease on the hills and looked stronger. Even on the first loop of the course you could see the difference.
It's genetics + culture + environment. The next generation of Dibabas and Bekeles aren't going to be as good. Too coddled. Tirunesh Dibaba as a child was living in a rural area without electricity in her home.
Well thanks for the "duh" level science brofessor. Now explain why Jakob Ingebrigtsen doesn't fit your model?
I would say that Ingebrigtsen is an outlier, a once in a generation talent, or that he's doping.
One or the other.
I kind of suspect both, but I enjoy watching him run either way.
As for East Africans having a genetic advantage: yes, and that's just from a simple, totally un-scientific eye test.
I watch them run and it's obvious that they do it different, and I can see why they win all of the time.
There is no magic sauce. There is no metabolic nirvana attainable through doping. None of you know this because you don't even know what metabolism is.
The level of ignorance about badic Biology is staggering.
They threw up the occaisional star like Bikile and Kieno in the 60's when they had the advantage of being full-time athletes when the rest of the world were amateur part-timers and forced to retire by age 25 (22 in the case of Herb Elliott), but they were far from dominant, despite distance running being the only sport that any young sportsman could make money from, and the greatest stars from that period were non-African. Jim Ryun was better than Keino. Steve Ovett was better than Henry Rono even at Rono's distance of two miles.
Before 1988 or so, no Kenyan sniffed the top 300 marathon all time list, and there were more Japanese than Ethiopians in it. Only with the advent of EPO did Kenyans start to dominate.
So why bring genetics into it?
In medical school, we learned that Black Africans and their descendants around the world have an average of 15% more testosterone in both males and females than others. This is why we see them mature faster and have more aggression. Eighty percent of fights in my local high school are among the black enrollment despite being 20% of the student body. In the community they commit 70% of the crimes prosecuted despite also being 20% of the population. More testosterone gives more physical advantage. And then there is a lot more to say but it will take too long. Maybe you can find it in medical journals, etc. if you are unable to see that with your eyes.
That myth has been well dispelled lately. There appears to be no genetic racial advantage in anything except sprint events like 100/200. Other than that there has even been white/ Hispanic 400m Olympic gold medalists. But East African dominance in distance running is due to EPO abuse.
Post like this are just ridiculous.
If genetics aren't a factor, then why in the hell is like 80% of the US distance team born in East Africa? And don't tell me it's EPO as we test for EPO over here.
Do people not understand how bell curves work? If people from Texas have an IQ that is 10 points less on average than someone from Canada that doesn't mean that there won't be genius from both Canada and Texas.
Coaching, opportunity, etc are key as well. It's not 100% genetics.
We shouldn't be defined by stererotypes. White guys - some of them at least - can sprint and crush the NBA. I'm just not sure if any of them can run 2:03 in the marathon.
They threw up the occaisional star like Bikile and Kieno in the 60's when they had the advantage of being full-time athletes when the rest of the world were amateur part-timers and forced to retire by age 25 (22 in the case of Herb Elliott), but they were far from dominant, despite distance running being the only sport that any young sportsman could make money from, and the greatest stars from that period were non-African. Jim Ryun was better than Keino. Steve Ovett was better than Henry Rono even at Rono's distance of two miles.
Before 1988 or so, no Kenyan sniffed the top 300 marathon all time list, and there were more Japanese than Ethiopians in it. Only with the advent of EPO did Kenyans start to dominate.
So why bring genetics into it?
In medical school, we learned that Black Africans and their descendants around the world have an average of 15% more testosterone in both males and females than others. This is why we see them mature faster and have more aggression. Eighty percent of fights in my local high school are among the black enrollment despite being 20% of the student body. In the community they commit 70% of the crimes prosecuted despite also being 20% of the population. More testosterone gives more physical advantage. And then there is a lot more to say but it will take too long. Maybe you can find it in medical journals, etc. if you are unable to see that with your eyes.
Not true....Those studies have been debunked. When comparing testosterone levels between Men of comparable body types such as muscular athlete to muscular athlete the Test levels are the same. One hormonal difference found is that Black Men have a higher estrogen level. The male group with highest test level is actually Mexican Men, surprisingly so.
Abstract. Context: Higher testosterone in black compared with white men has been postulated to explain their higher prostate cancer incidence. Previous studies
Lets keep Peds out of the topic otherwise we cant go anywhere . And of course I m not saying that doping doesnt exist in East African runners as facts shows the contrary.
To me the genetic advantage (if really there is one ) is very very little , and more than a genetic advantage I will talk of a mix of factors that all togheter makes East African runners dominate everywhere in distance running.
Why I m saying that is not a genetical factor, simply because if we look back at white distance runners of 70's 80's and 90's , almost 40 years ago or more , white runners they had great times in all distance running disciplines so How it is possible than after 40 years those times are still strong for a white runner ??? Now if we see a white runner goes sub 2:10 in the marathon we look at him like something important but we know that that time was already made 40 years ago and now is nothing compared to East African.
So white runners may have had a genetic regression???
Also this is a big no no.
In 1967 Derek Clayton made 2:09 in Fukuoka 55 years ago !!!! De Castella 2:08 in 1981 more than 40 years ago . Carlos Lopes 2:07:12 in 1985!!!!
So how is possible than from 2:07 2:08 in 40 years there's been no progress from white runners??? Because if they were able 40 or 50 years ago to run 2:07 2:09, now with the logical progression of human limit they should be able to run 2:03 2:04 2:05. And that exactly what East African runners are doing now.
The main factor is out of 1000 young white boys or girls how many has the love for distance running ???? Probably 5% In East Africa rift valley out 1000 boys or girl that wants to try sport how many will try distance running??? Probably 90 %. I m not even saying that they dont want to suffer cos distance running can be hard , with great fatigue etc etc. But every sport needs discipline and dedication.. I see my son play football , and he plays and train with every condition rain , snow , cold , often contact injuries . But he has Nigerian blood , wife is African and he s very very fast at school the coach said to me , to make him continue with track and leave soccer cos he made a test and was the fastest he ever recorded in that school in many years. But he loves soccer and quit athletic . Probably he would have had a better chance at athletics than football to made it maybe at regional or national level . And the same happens with guys that have a talent for distance running but have interest for other sports.
Genes combine with environmental factors to produce behaviors. If there is a gene for distance running, and no one has found one yet, it alone will not make someone a great distance runner. It needs an environment conducive to developing such an ability.
If you talk to anyone about Kenyan runners you know that the people you see winning and placing highly at major races are the tip of the iceberg. The training camps those people go to are filled with other, slower Kenyans who are desperately hoping to get fast enough that an agent will bankroll them to overseas races where they also can make some money too. This is the environment that like;y develops that running gene if it does exist. At any rate, the environment develops something that creates the performances we see.
There's really nothing like that going on in other countries. The closest thing in the US is maybe our college system where loads of runners would like to get a shoe deal after graduation. But they aren't desperate and if they don't, just as most of those Kenyans won't get bankrolled overseas, they just move on. If we had several camps here with dozens of people in each one training really hard, not worrying about burnout or overtraining but willing to risk such things in hopes of making it big, we'd almost surely see a handful of people .with really impressive performances too. But that's not going to happen.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.
