Andrew Letherby - first `caucasian` at World Cross in 44th

thanks for the info I was wondering if anyone notice!

thanks

I am not sure I buy the reasoning that any course is taylor made for any group (african european). I agree certain courses might favour someone, but if you look at history, Stavanger, Dublin ie mud baths but still won by africans when we can argue that those were courses for europeans. So anyone who says the course and heat favored africans is not totally correct in MY Book.

white people cant jump or sweat.

who was the first "caucasian" in the women and juniors races?

thanks

North Africans are generally classified as Caucasians, so the first Caucasian was Anis Selmouni in 13th.

llcs do you think he(generally speaking) would be considered a caucasian in America or would he be considered a minority(with affirmed action rights)?

I judge Causasian in America (no matter who you are) by if you receive special rights or privages that (generally speaking) caucasians dont receive(special rights set up by the government help the unfairness).

Last I checked, most of North Africa was bloody hot. "European descent" might be a better qualifier, though.

Check back in the previous years' results, and you will see that in the colder weather the "Euros", get in the top 15 and occasionally in the top 8.

Ohhenry wrote:

llcs do you think he(generally speaking) would be considered a caucasian in America or would he be considered a minority(with affirmed action rights)?

I judge Causasian in America (no matter who you are) by if you receive special rights or privages that (generally speaking) caucasians dont receive(special rights set up by the government help the unfairness).

Woah, and here I though caucasian meant white people.

i always thought caulk or chalk. both normally very white things.

Looks like:Senior women: 12. Jessica Augusto (POR)Junior women: 15. Charlotte Purdue (GBR)Junior men: 46. Jake Robertson (NZ)Looks like white chicks do better than white dudes.

Ohhenry wrote:

who was the first "caucasian" in the women and juniors races?

thanks

Ohhenry wrote:

llcs do you think he(generally speaking) would be considered a caucasian in America or would he be considered a minority(with affirmed action rights)?

I judge Causasian in America (no matter who you are) by if you receive special rights or privages that (generally speaking) caucasians dont receive(special rights set up by the government help the unfairness).

White people in America have special rights and privledges.

WTF is "affirmed action"?????

Ohhenry wrote:

llcs do you think he(generally speaking) would be considered a caucasian in America or would he be considered a minority(with affirmed action rights)?

considered a minority by whom? and on what basis?

Do you mean what the hypothetical man-on-the-street might think, or how he would in fact be categorized by various legislative acts?

Note that the scientific basis for racial categorization is problematic. In this case, however, i believe that the rationale is that the north african gene pool derives to a large extent from those that emigrated out of africa some time ago (40,000 years or so), and then imigrated back to africa recently (within the last 5000 yrs or so)

horses for courses wrote:

Last I checked, most of North Africa was bloody hot. "European descent" might be a better qualifier, though.

Check back in the previous years' results, and you will see that in the colder weather the "Euros", get in the top 15 and occasionally in the top 8.

Either way, what's it really mean? Plenty of Moroccans and Algerians have immigrated to France and then had kids who are running for France or then had kids who had kids who are running for France. North Africans have been immigrating to France for generations, since the mid-1800's. Just because you see an Arabic-named person on a French roster doesn't necessarily mean that he and his parents and his parents' parents and his parents' parents' parents couldn't have been born there. Also, does being of (pale skinned is apparently the implication) European descent automatically imply an athletic disadvantage to Africans or Asians?

Genetically, North Africans are much closer to Europeans (particularly southern Europeans) than they are to sub-Saharan Africans.

llcs wrote:

Ohhenry wrote:

llcs do you think he(generally speaking) would be considered a caucasian in America or would he be considered a minority(with affirmed action rights)?

considered a minority by whom? and on what basis?

Do you mean what the hypothetical man-on-the-street might think, or how he would in fact be categorized by various legislative acts?

Note that the scientific basis for racial categorization is problematic. In this case, however, i believe that the rationale is that the north african gene pool derives to a large extent from those that emigrated out of africa some time ago (40,000 years or so), and then imigrated back to africa recently (within the last 5000 yrs or so)

Here's how the US Supreme court has ruled:

"The question of a difference between the white race and the Caucasian classification in the United States led to at least one set of major legal contradictions in the United States Supreme Court in the pre-Civil Rights era. In the case of Ozawa v. United States (1922), the court ruled that a law which extended U.S. citizenship only to "whites" did not apply to fair-skinned people from Japan, because:

The term "white person", as used in [the law], and in all the earlier naturalization laws, beginning in 1790, applies to such persons as were known in this country as "white," in the racial sense, when it was first adopted, and is confined to persons of the Caucasian Race... A Japanese, born in Japan, being clearly not a Caucasian, cannot be made a citizen of the United States.

However a year later, the same court was faced with the trial of United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind (1923). The court ruled that a person from the Indian subcontinent could not become a naturalized United States citizen, because they were not "white". The Supreme Court conceded that anthropologists had classified Indians as Caucasians, and thus the same race as whites, as defined in Ozawa. However, it concluded that "the average man knows perfectly well that there are unmistakable and profound differences," and denied citizenship.

Sutherland found that while Indians were indeed anthropologically Caucasian, the framers of the Constitution could never have intended letting Bhagat Singh Thind enter the country and be naturalized. Sutherland commented "the average man knows perfectly well that there are unmistakable and profound differences", leveraging the common man's understanding of Caucasian, meaning white, and hence Thind could not be eligible for citizenship since he looked distinctively different from this common man's notion. Rather than create a new classification, Sutherland found Indians to be Asian, subjecting them to preexisting anti-Asian laws passed nationally and in California under the heavy lobbying of the Asiatic Exclusion League."

I'm so damn proud of this country right now.

Wow, this topic is incredibly interesting and relevant.

Let's also have a thread about the highest-placed Asian at the Tour de France.

And here's another question I've always - and I mean my ENTIRE life - wondered about: Who has the most natural ability for checkers, Kalenjin or Inuit?

This does, of course, beg the question of why Letherby can go to Mombassa and race better when that load of CU exes in the town where he lives apparently can't. His career as a pro has been solid, whether it be marathons or Peachtree. Why would none of those dumb Buffs train with or at least consult with this guy? He's clearly figured out something that basically the rest of them haven't.