Le Tour wrote:Fair enough, but in danger of sounding arrogant, for a real running nerd, how hard is it to use the right numbers? This is after all a comparable sport, everyone can access the numbers and information about them are prett widely discussed here and in other track and field forums.
Well, ventolin came up with the formula that is used in the calculator and that is definitely something not everyone can do.
se16 wrote:
Mo Farah is Somalian, he was born in Somalia.
His parents are Somalian.
Just because someone decides to leave their country and live in the UK does not make them British.
In this case, it does, as the United Kingdom is one of many nations that defines its people on the basis of their desire to be a part of the United Kingdom.
If Coe's endurance was so poor because he only ran 3;29 high, then Peter Snell's 100 miles a week only got him 3:37!
Of course, an athletes times need to be set into a historical context.
'his record was hugely hammered & probably mo shouda gone + 3/4s quicker if it was set-up his race'
Just when you got a bit of credibilty you go and shoot yourself in the foot
So now Mo can run 3:24.... off a 50 400m time.
What are other people on here going on about race for Genetically and pretty recently you are mostly pure European on here. Can we claim Rupp's medal as well?
How long do you need?
Mark Strong was born in London, but his parents are from Austria and Italy. Is he not really British?[/quote]
That seems pretty easy...that would most likely make him a German-Italian no? or did he magically receive English genetics upon simply being born in England? Now how he got the non-German or Italian last name Strong I don't know...
ukathleticscoach wrote:
'his record was hugely hammered & probably mo shouda gone + 3/4s quicker if it was set-up his race'
Just when you got a bit of credibilty you go and shoot yourself in the foot
So now Mo can run 3:24.... off a 50 400m time.
What are other people on here going on about race for Genetically and pretty recently you are mostly pure European on here. Can we claim Rupp's medal as well?
learn to read
Le tour wrote:
800 dude wrote:If you think the UK is some kind of racially harmonious paradise compared to the US, I suggest you go to a few soccer games over there. The US may have more deep and systemic racial issues, due to the legacy of slavery, jim crow, redlining, etc., but I've never seen the kinds of overt displays of racism in the United States that I've seen in the UK. I've probably heard the N word more times in my few weeks in the UK than I have in my entire life in the US. And I've certainly never heard an American make monkey noises at a black person.
Only 9% of black women in USA marries outside of race. Better for men, but black women still suffers under a taboo.
What? Why should black women want to marry outside of race? Is there something wrong with marrying a black guy? Why would you assume marrying outside of race is a sign of social mobility?
u.s. vs britain wrote:
lpd wrote:White Americans get upset over any black success in anything,period. I have been to Britain,have relatives there,the British whites do not have the insecurities that seem to plague white Americans.Interracial dating or relationship for example,in Britain is no big deal.Whereas here in US,a white woman as much as smile at a black man and white men go bonkers.
The whites in britain are the royalty. Anyone who's not royalty is in the same boat, poor regardless of ethnicity, and the aristocracy takes what they have.
The u.s. is the same but more subtle, the media stirs up racial issues to divert attention from the irs and the fed, i.e. the aristocracy.
the aristocrats or really plutocrats are jewish. the WASPs lost power long ago. The royal family are in bed with them but don't have the real power.
notreally wrote:
How long do you need?
Mark Strong was born in London, but his parents are from Austria and Italy. Is he not really British?
That seems pretty easy...that would most likely make him a German-Italian no? or did he magically receive English genetics upon simply being born in England? Now how he got the non-German or Italian last name Strong I don't know...[/quote]
Only if you treat nationality as a genetic thing, ie you're a complete dunderhead.
notreally wrote:
How long do you need?
Mark Strong was born in London, but his parents are from Austria and Italy. Is he not really British?
That seems pretty easy...that would most likely make him a German-Italian no? or did he magically receive English genetics upon simply being born in England? Now how he got the non-German or Italian last name Strong I don't know...[/quote]
austria and germany are different countries by the way.
SempreSami wrote:
notreally wrote:How long do you need?
Mark Strong was born in London, but his parents are from Austria and Italy. Is he not really British?
That seems pretty easy...that would most likely make him a German-Italian no? or did he magically receive English genetics upon simply being born in England? Now how he got the non-German or Italian last name Strong I don't know...
Only if you treat nationality as a genetic thing, ie you're a complete dunderhead.[/quote]
European nationality has historically been based on ethnicity. If Africans took over Italy and drove out the Italians, would you consider them the new Italians?
nationality wrote:
SempreSami wrote:That seems pretty easy...that would most likely make him a German-Italian no? or did he magically receive English genetics upon simply being born in England? Now how he got the non-German or Italian last name Strong I don't know...
Only if you treat nationality as a genetic thing, ie you're a complete dunderhead.
European nationality has historically been based on ethnicity. If Africans took over Italy and drove out the Italians, would you consider them the new Italians?[/quote]
Are you suggesting that French people of African descent, despite being born in France and holding a French passport, aren't really French?
SempreSami wrote:
nationality wrote:Only if you treat nationality as a genetic thing, ie you're a complete dunderhead.
European nationality has historically been based on ethnicity. If Africans took over Italy and drove out the Italians, would you consider them the new Italians?
Are you suggesting that French people of African descent, despite being born in France and holding a French passport, aren't really French?[/quote]
I am suggesting they are citizens of France. Whether they are "French" or not is subject to interpretation of the word. They are French today if the definition is citizenship, but they are not of French background/heritage. Just like in the US, blacks are considered African American, they are not considered English American or WASPs, even if they happen to be from a former British colony and speak english.
someone had to do it wrote:
ukathleticscoach wrote:'his record was hugely hammered & probably mo shouda gone + 3/4s quicker if it was set-up his race'
Just when you got a bit of credibilty you go and shoot yourself in the foot
So now Mo can run 3:24.... off a 50 400m time.
What are other people on here going on about race for Genetically and pretty recently you are mostly pure European on here. Can we claim Rupp's medal as well?
learn to read
Learn to answer the question
You seem to have confused ethnicity for nationality.
really wrote:
Le tour wrote:Only 9% of black women in USA marries outside of race. Better for men, but black women still suffers under a taboo.
What? Why should black women want to marry outside of race? Is there something wrong with marrying a black guy? Why would you assume marrying outside of race is a sign of social mobility?
It's true that black women are the least likely to marry outside of their race, but it's not due to a racist taboo. As black women advance socially beyond black men, they choose to marry down, within their race, rather than marry people of other races at their own socioeconomic level. See:
http://www.amazon.com/Is-Marriage-White-People-American/dp/B007K4FRA2SempreSami wrote:
You seem to have confused ethnicity for nationality.
I said European nationality has traditionally been based on ethnicity.
ukathleticscoach wrote:Learn to answer the question
learn to read
3/4s = 0.75s
only a fool woud interpret 3/4s ( it's called a fraction ) as being meant to imply 3 or 4s faster
55-flat opener was too fast for mo, he ran wide in lane on bends & out in lane 2 for 1 stretch, lost drafting overall as out wide on occasions or too detached from guy ahead
meaning, that if he sat down, thought about if he couda re-run the race ideally, etc, he woud probably come out with a figure of
low-3'28
NOT 3'24