While you readily admit that Africans are faster, you are rather unique in admitting that (among my regular opponents), and these admissions and concessions seem to go unnoticed by anyone else. The answer to your question "why?" are not always addressed to you, but can be found in the posts of the likes of "Coevett" and "m!ndweak".
Look just now, Coevett thinks that the non-Africans just are not doping because they don't have the culture. This is a far more severe statement about doping prevalence than me saying "greater than 29%".
And "m!ndweak" is convinced that anyone who shows a 3-5% improvement in their career (which includes just about everyone who has gone from junior to professional) can only have done that by doping, because that number just keeps coming up.
While you chose the word "downplay", we are in a thread that advertises 5% performance improvement from low volume blood infusions. This is not the only thread that advertises 5%. You yourself brought up the Scottish and Kenyan study, despite your stated reservations about the Kenyan study.
The "facts" you presented in a decade by decade analysis show that non-Africans only improved on the order of 3% since the 1960s -- an improvement which includes many factors, like synthetic tracks, shoes, training, nutrition, professionalism, etc. in addition to your unlimited steroid, unlimited blood doping, unlimited EPO timeline, and steroid ABP timelines.
So I try to downplay any notion of 5% for distance runners "at the top", because this puts potential performance improvements for elite runners in a more realistic perspective.
casual obsever wrote:
Then this would raise some awkward questions:
- Are non-Africans just bad at doping? (they seem to have got it right in cycling...)
- or are non-Africans just bad at performing, for non-doping reasons?
Not sure what's so awkward about that. It's quite obvious that the runners (and sprinters) of African heritage are faster than the Asians and Caucasians.
I recall that you think that the reasons for that are not related to doping, but a combination of motivation/culture/genes. So... why do you so often bring up the fact that Africans outperform the rest of the world, to try downplay the advantages runners can get from PEDs?