There is no “genetic superiority” when it comes to distance running. Literally everyone sub 2:09 is just doping.

Slowwer and Rekrunner - can you please say whether you agree with the following statement, or at least that you can see it contains a large amount of truth?

Ethiopia and Kenya are the only two countries in the world in which the only realistic way a young, fit, and healthy person can become a professional sportsperson is through distance running.

BTW, in that same race that Omanyala ran 6:55, white British youngster Charlie Dobson ran a fine 6:61. Seems nobody told him about only West Africans having 'special adaptations' for sprinting either.

Coevett wrote:
BTW, what are you talking about? He ran 6:55. What time do I have wrong?

2000? 3000? steeple?

Btw, nothing racist to realise that since decades the best sprinters are from West Africa and the best distance runners are from East Africa.

I have no doubt there are extremely small dutch people.

One word for you: genes - genele - gènes - gene - Gene -jeni - gének - genler - geny - 유전자

Completely irrelevant, completely nonsensical, completely wrong, completely stupid statement. So, a true Coevett.

That is part of the corruption. Friends in high places.

One country incurred 40% of violations. The 60% is everybody else - the rest of the world. You do see there is a difference in proportions there?

Kenyans have been shown to dope in distance running more than anyone else in the modern era. Although the doping options in the '60's and '70's were fewer testing was also very limited. So what are the chances that Kenyan sporting culture only suddenly changed in the last 5 years or so, when winning would have been just as important fifty years ago as it is today?

As for making the facile comparison with Lydiard's athletes in the '60's, the revolution in training methods together with a few rare talents is enough to explain their success. Over the decades we see that New Zealand has not revealed a tradition of doping, none of its best runners has incurred a doping violation and by official assessment it is seen as one of the countries least at risk of doping. It is interesting to note that New Zealand's prominence in running receded as doping became more prevalent in the sport. By comparison, we see Kenya, with its 40% of the world's doping violations in athletics. I can always count on your ignorance.

What a load of waffle. These are all the same tired arguments of a doping denier, which you are.

We all know what "revolution in training methods" really means, wink, wink. Don't be so naive. Man has been running for millenia, and training hasn't really changed since the days of Arthur Newton.

Of course New Zealand didn't get caught doping in the '60s because there was no testing! Not until IOC introduced doping controls in 1967. What else can possibly explain why their performances receded? This also coincided with Lydiard's taking his "training" to Finland and Mexico. Blood transfusions became popular in Finland, and I don't have to explain that Mexico is a mecca for drugs -- Christian Hesch anyone?

What New Zealand pioneered in the '60s became the blueprint for GDR and Ma's Army and Morocco. Their performances similarly came out of nowhere, and then receded, once doping controls were ramped up.

Sure, no problem.

I do not agree with that statement.

Sure I can see this partial statistic from just one anti-doping organization. We know that the AIU ramped up their focus on Kenya over the last few years.

What I haven't seen yet:

- What proportion of overall testing was on Kenyans?

- You told me performance was a given. Who of the remaining 60% performed like the Kenyans?

So you think in Kenya and Ethiopia there are other sports that it is realistic for a healthy and fit young person to become professional and earn a living from? If so, which are these sports? The only professional sportsmen I know of in Kenya other than athletics (99% distance runners) is soccer, and the last I checked there was a grand total of 3 professional Kenyan soccer players.

Or do you think there are other countries in the same situation as Kenya and Ethiopia where the only realistic path to earning a full-time living from sport is distance running? If so, which are these countries? Uganda? No - Uganda actually is quite successful in a number of other professional sports. Perhaps Somalia and Eritrea? Maybe.

A small Dutch person doesn't disprove the notion that the Dutch have genes for tallness. The fastest African sprinter in history being Kenyan does rather disprove the notion that Kenyans lack the genetics for sprinting.

The claim that Dutch people have genes predisoposing them to tall heights and the Japanese don't, isn't disproven in the slightest by pointing to a small Dutch person. If the tallest Japanese man was taller than the tallest Dutchman who ever lived, it ought to make you question the claim.

It seems like a very complex topic to attempt to reduce to a statement with a couple of "onlys".

The best Kenyan and Ethiopian runners mainly come from a few regions at altitude -- most healthy fit young Kenyans and Ethiopians not from the regions cannot realistically earn a professional living in distance running.

Besides soccer, a number of Kenyans seem to play cricket and field hockey and boxing and basketball. Chris Froome became a cyclist.

Ethiopia has a few soccer players too.

Here, knock yourself out:

Are you talking about Coe now?

Deflection. How the other 60% performed is completely irrelevant to the fact that Kenyans lead the world now in cheating.

You should acquaint yourself with the facts. You wouldn't sound so stupid. Coe wasn't facing criminal charges in his country's criminal courts.

Facetiousness requires wit, which you sadly lack.

Hardly.

We can't make much sense of "40%" without knowing how many tests the AIU conducted on Kenyans in the first place.

I've been asking for years to establish a conclusive connection to better elite performance, and you always bounce back to superficial "doping is present in sport" sermons and "it is given" presumptions. The only conclusive connection seems to be assuming it in the first place.