SO WHAT: Christophe Lemaitre became the first white man to break 10.00

Pretty sure everyone in the world except for maybe men tops is light years from 9.58.

Why not make a big deal out of a white guy running sub 10, we made a big deal out of Obama being elected president. Every president before Obama was a man and when he became elected it was just another man in office regardless of race. Lemaitre is just another man that ran sub 10.

I for one think Lemaitre's accomplishment is equal to Obama's in its historical nature. Little white boys and girls all over the world will look at the video of this young white male breaking down the speed barrier and think the color of my skin no longer determines the speediness of my feet and if Lemaitre can do it then yes we too can one day run fast. Every time I watch the video of young Christophe I get all dewey eyed like Jesse Jackson in Grant Park the night Obama accepted the vote of the people that he would become the 44th President of the United States. What a great day for track and field and all of human kind.

Wow, what a week. First Solinsky runs the greatest three races in American history and now this.

dirty on what? that dude is skinnier than wariner.

I agree with this statement. As an african american runner, I think it's great that there is going to be some diversity in the super exclusive sub 10sec club. This guy definitely deserves recognition. What I have a problem with is statements like "only .4 behind the blacks" and the like. This makes it seem as if the "whites" should be superior in everything bringing back the idea of white supremacy. An for americans to say things like this is crazy because they're basically wanting another country to take a possible medal from us at the olympics or worlds. Anywho, congrats to this guy for an amazing accomplishment.

Besides, the guy is French. When is the last time the French have been good at anything? (Quote)

I’ve a strong suspicion that France will still be surviving as a viably functioning state, retaining her unique character, culture and history, long after the ‘United’ States becomes just a memory. I suppose folks living in a country that’s visibly coming apart at the seams are the last to comprehend it. I’d love to have been able read the verdict of some future Edward Gibbon.

douglas burke wrote:

...but a whole road race circuit created to exclude kenyans (exclusion of people based on skin color is wrong and racist)

What is the race series that specifically excludes Kenyans?

What is the race series that only allows white people?

Why are you so stupid?

yeah we should have american only races to pick our teams for international competition, but do we really need a 15k AND a 10 mile? AND a 20k AND a half marathon AND a 25k? an 8k, a 10k, AND a 12k USA CHAMPIONSHIP.

Oh, wait, so you're talking about the american champs series in your pitiful rant above? Maybe you missed a few key point. They're minor, but let me point them out anyway.

1) The American only race series doesn't specifically forbid Kenyans. It forbids EVERYONE who is not American. That includes a whole hell of a lot of "white" countries like many of those in Europe, as well as all kinds of other ethnicities such as asians, etc.

2) The american race series has ZERO limitation based on race. Maybe you missed the memo, but "american" doesn't mean any particular race. It means where you hold citizenship, and in fact, America has one of the most diverse populations, so it could be a fairly diverse series if such people chose to participate.

3) While the wide array of championship races may be odd (I too have long questioned why we have distances that essentially repeat themselves, like 20k and 1/2 mar), that is absolutely nothing to do with race. You're just another guy who is so keen to focus on racism that you make it out to be places it isn't. How the hell is having too many races that any American can run a sign of racism?

Finally, I wonder if you also think that we should eliminate gender categories. Having a race that only men or only women can run is sexist, right?

SayItAgainSam wrote:

The reason I like VIPAM and douglas burke because most of the time their posts are interesting and thought provoking but they always tell it like it T.I.S!

The other thing about VIPAM and douglas burke is that they always criticize or diminish the accomplishments of white runners and always support black runners. Now, the performance results support that view (though you have to also take into account drug likelihood with particular types of performance, like the sub 9.8 100m and sub 12:50 5000m runners), but they should pay more attention to the question of improvement and parity. The evidence that white runners too can break 10 seconds in the 100m and 13 in the 5000m, given the right training and mindset is very important, because it defeats the racist and self defeating attitudes that say that only black runners have the genetic ability to do such things and by implication in many racists's minds, that black people, being better physically, must be lacking in mental attributes. Now we know that neither of those is true, and therefore the sub 10 race is huge: it defeats (okay, maybe the wind gauge was wrong, as other races had over 3 m/s, but still he was knocking on the door and would have done it soon anyway) a very large body of literature built on the fact that no white man had ever broken 10s.

The fact that Lemaitre is just 20 is also significant.

not true. vipam thinks bolt is a druggie.

There's been dozens of people who've become President of the US. What's the big deal about Obama being the first non-white (completely)? Over 40 people have done it before.

Precisely Watson wrote:

White people have wanted to prove for a long time that they can overcome the genetic, cultural, and socioeconomic gap that seems to have left people not of African origin with the short end of the stick, athletically.

What socioeconomic gap are you talking about that has left white people on the short end of the stick?

Because it's a gigantic milestone for an entire race, you moron. Think of this as "affirmative action in athletics"- ha

I think you're taking the Letsrun "media attention" much too seriously. It's not like it's REALLY thought of as an absolutely PHENOMINAL performance (regardless of all other variables) by the Letsrun staff; it's a nice, light-hearted way to bring some attention to the fact that a barrier has been broken for a specific race now.

CheckYourself-

Are you really so stupid as to think that white track fans don't recognize how far off 9.98 is from 9.58?? F'n relax dude, no one said this guy is beating Bolt. In fact, no one said that the performance was even "phenominal". All they said was "first white man to break 10.00 in a 100m race. That is a fact. It is noteworthy.

Quit being so insecure.....the guy'll probably fail a drug test next month and then we'll have to wait another 10 years.

Celebrating first black man to become president: GOOD!

Celebrating first white man to run sub-10.00: BAD!

I hate to point out but they are different. Black people have historically been mistreated, held down and kept from seeking higher office or even voting in the US. So when Obama became president it showed how far we had come.There was no systemic effort to keep white sprinters from being fast.

Hipocracy is Fun! wrote:

Celebrating first black man to become president: GOOD!

Celebrating first white man to run sub-10.00: BAD!

Wariner isn't consistent enough to be doping.

and not only is he the first white man to break 10, he is also the third fastest man at age 19/20.

WhitePony wrote:

Precisely Watson wrote:

White people have wanted to prove for a long time that they can overcome the genetic, cultural, and socioeconomic gap that seems to have left people not of African origin with the short end of the stick, athletically.

What socioeconomic gap are you talking about that has left white people on the short end of the stick?

I didn't mean the short end of the stick, as in a poor socioeconomic standing. I meant that the poverty and drive to succeed in other countries has long rendered our efforts to keep up, athletically, quite insignificant. We are showing that, despite our pampered nation of fatties, we have people who are willing to sacrifice what it takes to perform at the highest level. This also applies to most European countries, since there seems to be quite a noticeable gap between people living in poverty in Africa, and those who grew up in other parts of the world showing that their socioeconomic advantage does not make them unable to perform at the level that used to exclusively belong to people of African origin. In this case, I am not talking exclusively about sprinting, but distance running as well, in which other "white" barriers have been broken, like 13:00 for 5k and 27:00 for 10k. Funny, it seems people didn't complain nearly as much when those were broken.

Dubious wrote:

I hate to point out but they are different.

Black people have historically been mistreated, held down and kept from seeking higher office or even voting in the US. So when Obama became president it showed how far we had come.

There was no systemic effort to keep white sprinters from being fast.

Hipocracy is Fun! wrote:

Celebrating first black man to become president: GOOD!

Celebrating first white man to run sub-10.00: BAD!

There was no systemic effort to keep blacks down for about 50 years. Yet, people still recognized the accomplishments of the race. It's not like they overturned a conspiracy against blacks. We always knew blacks were capable of holding office, just like we knew it was possible for a white man to run under 10 in the 100m. It just had to happen. Both are significant, and slavery doesn't have shit to do with it!