Dennis Kimetto - what are we Westerners still missing about Kenyan Marathoners?

old man vinter wrote:

Absolutely untrue. VO2 max is most certainly more tied to your genes than environmental impact.

wrong

look up how VO2 max is calculated... it's inversely proportional to weight which is almost entirely environmental

also look up the HERITAGE family study and you will see how much maximum VO2 uptake can change on even minimal training

get informed if you wanna be taken seriously on here

stop with the calc wrote:

old man vinter wrote:

Absolutely untrue. VO2 max is most certainly more tied to your genes than environmental impact.

wrong

look up how VO2 max is calculated... it's inversely proportional to weight which is almost entirely environmental

also look up the HERITAGE family study and you will see how much maximum VO2 uptake can change on even minimal training

get informed if you wanna be taken seriously on here

Seriously. Yes, weight plays a part. But apart from that it's mostly genetics. Only outliers can train their VO2 into the 80s-90s. Most people can't.

Genetics is 4 stupid wrote:

Seriously. Yes, weight plays a part. But apart from that it's mostly genetics. Only outliers can train their VO2 into the 80s-90s. Most people can't.

Did you not read anything he said? Or do you just choose to ignore it? It is not mostly genetics. There is no evidence of that. The evidence backs up his claim not yours.

stop with the calc wrote:

old man vinter wrote:

Absolutely untrue. VO2 max is most certainly more tied to your genes than environmental impact.

wrong

look up how VO2 max is calculated... it's inversely proportional to weight which is almost entirely environmental

also look up the HERITAGE family study and you will see how much maximum VO2 uptake can change on even minimal training

get informed if you wanna be taken seriously on here

I know how it is calculated, and see post above.

ppdk wrote:

Did you not read anything he said? Or do you just choose to ignore it? It is not mostly genetics. There is no evidence of that. The evidence backs up his claim not yours.

Ignore what part? He did not present any evidence.

Manchester wrote:

SMJO wrote:

Have you ever seen two short Asian people produce a child that looks like Manute Bol just by putting the baby food on a higher shelf in strong sunlight?

Stop it with the constant straw men, SMJO. It's childish, disrespectful, and contributes nothing to the conversation. And the fact that you keep changing your handle is basically admission that you're a coward.

It's a perfect example my mossy tusked adversary.

Your handle certainly tells us who you are.

Genetics is 4 stupid wrote:

ppdk wrote:

Did you not read anything he said? Or do you just choose to ignore it? It is not mostly genetics. There is no evidence of that. The evidence backs up his claim not yours.

Ignore what part? He did not present any evidence.

Ah you were too obvious in this post. You gave yourself away troll.

OK- So looked up his study: Here is the opening quote:

"It is widely recognized that individuals can respond quite differently to a given intervention, such as drugs, diet, or exercise. For instance, there are considerable individual differences in improvement in maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max; measure of aerobic endurance capacity) with aerobic training.

"Studies conducted with young or older adults have typically reported gains in VO2max ranging from almost 0% to 50%, even though all the subjects completed exactly the same training program under close supervision. Scientists had previously assumed that these variations result from differing degrees of compliance with the training program, i.e., good compliers have the highest percentage of improvement and poor compliers show little or no improvement. However, it is now clear that even when there is full compliance with the program, substantial variations occur in the percentage improvements in VO2max values of different people. The same principle is also thought to apply to other physical activity-related phenotypes, including differences in response of the various risk factors for cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes."

I can't see how that backs up his argument.

Genetics is 4 stupid wrote:

ppdk wrote:

Did you not read anything he said? Or do you just choose to ignore it? It is not mostly genetics. There is no evidence of that. The evidence backs up his claim not yours.

Ignore what part? He did not present any evidence.

He did, actually. Or at least he told you where to find it.

ppdk wrote:

Ah you were too obvious in this post. You gave yourself away troll.

Whatever. To present evidence you have to actually present it. You can't just yell I'M RIGHT! Well you can, but it's not evidence.

What was his family background like? Bol had freakishly tall relatives farther back.

How tall was the mailman of the family you are talking about? I kid.

Genetics is 4 stupid wrote:

I can't see how that backs up his argument.

Sometimes you gotta read more than the opening quote. Maybe start with the results?

Maybe it's too politically sensitive, but me thinks that on average Europeans have the disadvantage of a more developed prefontal cortex. That makes for a culture that is all about thinking, not feeling. That part of the brain does not want to turn off, ever.

The best athletes are like artists, and supposedly they are mostly just reacting via the cerebellum. This is the key in sport: reacting. The arms balance the legs as a reaction. The legs swing forward as a reaction to them being stretched. The muscles react automatically when going into an eccentric contraction. Only a very small window of time are athletes needing to consciously be the driving force, such as during a concentric contraction (approximately 15% of the gait cycle per leg, or 30% total)

A more reactive cerebellum and less active prefontal cortex combined with the correct morphology and motivation = johnMFdoe-sporting-hero.

They are simply better at pulsing "on" with great precision and power and then pulsing "off" very quickly and completely.

avinely wrote:

Genetics is 4 stupid wrote:

I can't see how that backs up his argument.

Sometimes you gotta read more than the opening quote. Maybe start with the results?

I read it. What part of it backs up his argument that VO2 max has almost no genetic component?

Genetics is 4 stupid wrote:

avinely wrote:

Sometimes you gotta read more than the opening quote. Maybe start with the results?

I read it. What part of it backs up his argument that VO2 max has almost no genetic component?

Did anyone say it had "almost no" genetic component? No, invented that straw man now.

One study calculated a statistical MAXIMUM heritibility of 47%. That runs counter to you saying it is "mostly genetic," given that it is, at most, 47%, and likely lower due to environmental similarities between parents and children.

QED

OK, how many parents on here are going to activate their kids running genes now that we know how to do that?

Can I get a show of hands?

Touché! I did read his argument as the relationship between VO2max and genetics being very weak.

Not a troll attempt, just sloppy reading on my part.

Determining talent component of marathon performance is more complicated because whatever it is its internal and its not clear. I consider any opinions using outward appearance naive at best. I used to think that way too but seeing so many examples of where it don't correlate I just gave it up.

Most recent example is the 4th placer at berlin looked like a big fella compared to kebede. Probably could have run faster too had he not blown himself up following 2:02 pace. Kebede himself though small doesn't really have the skin and bones look. Not to mention thunder thighs bekele who will have his work cut out for him to answer the challenge.

Its hard to put one's finger on what causes east african dominance because you know it isn't muscular power and it isn't endurance either as both ends of those are dominated by non east africans. They got this niche here that is the perfect balance of power and endurance. One has to appreciate also that they are definitely better at taking chances that are part of why they can achieve these times. Other cultures like ourselves concerning running we tend to make fun of people if they shoot for the moon and fail miserably when there's too many fanboyism around certain runners. I'm not saying one side is worse than the other but it creates a dumb partisan dynamic that retards development independent of the africans. At least they know what they are doing in that respect.

How many western runner weigh 110 pounds?