BS wrote:
IF Peter Snell were born 24 years ago he would have a hard time matching the accomplishments of Nick Willis. When Snell ran the population of serious runners was 1/10th of what it is now and african runners were but a speck on the horizon.
You just became the author of one of the funniest nonsenses I have ever read. (But frankly, I read them quite frequently.) To the contrary, the current world competition in the 400-1500 m (but even the 3000 m) is an utter joke. Africans on these distances are global B-athletes, who became dominant primarily due to the fact that white runners left track almost completely in mid 80's, and the advance of EPO around 1995 is another story.
Still, white Americans must be reasonable. With the current average height of US white males 179 cm, you can't expect that your country would become the source of a long distance talent. You simply grew too tall. Tall runners can be successful, but they are generally a rarity (e.g. Tergat 182/62), because they must be much leaner than small-frame guys to compensate their unfavourable VO2 max./VO2 ratio. Your only big advantage is thus advanced sports science and nutrition.
If you want some advice, here it is: Concentrate on the talent development in the 400-3000 m, where you have the biggest chances in the global competition. It is true that the body build of a white US male is a bit unfortunate, because despite a fitting height and somatotype, he is rather short-legged, which is a drawback in middle distances. But still, you have a huge 200-million population and most likely a persisting high variability in body types, due to the diverse origin of European immigrants. Or import young people from the Netherlands and northern Germany. That's the safest guarantee for the increase of your athletic potential.
Small Hispanics from Mexico can be a substitute (though rather second-rate) in long distances and the marathon, but they certainly won't contribute anything else to your society.