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

Take a look at the Commonwealth Games medal table from 2018.

Australia won a total of 198 medals.

Kenya won 17 medals - and every single one of them in athletics (and I think 16 of those in distance running, and one in the men's javelin).

The population of Kenya is almost exactly twice that of Australia, although given the younger demographic, the 18-30 athletic pool age group is likely perhaps 3 times that of Australia.

So you probably have 90% of talented, motivated young sportsmen and women in Kenya going into distance running. Perhaps the equivalent figure is 5% in Australia, and I'd say that is probably generous.

Athletics is one of the worst paid sports, and as a recent thread put it has - 'the highest risk for the lowest reward'. Josh Kerr, the new GB u23 1500m record holder has a brother who chose Rugby over athletics, and is already a Scotland international.

But let's suppose it's only 80% of running talent in Kenya that focuses on running, and in the West, it's 20%.

So with their respective 'young' populations, you would expect Kenya to have twelve times as many top 1500m runners as Australia if their natural talents were equal.

But that's not what we find.

Since the start of the 2018 season going by the 30 top fastest 1500m runners in the world, we see that there are 9 Kenyans in the there and 2 Australians.

13 Kenyans have gone under 3:36 since the start of 2018, 3 Australians (and 4 if you include Luke Matthews who ran 3:36.03).

So the 'domination' is way less than you would expect even if the only factors you take into account are likely '1500m' talent pool.

Even if we pretended that 1500m running was as popular in Australia as Kenya, then the number of world class 1500m runners in each nation would be about what you would expect from their relative population sizes (at least of the 18-30 range).

But if we took into account the reality - that likely far fewer young Australian gifted sportsmen actually choose 1500m running than Kenyans - you would have to conclude that it's Australians who have the better 'genetic' talent.

In then when you consider the doping in Kenya....really, the 'domination' of Kenya at 1500m is quite pathetic.

Of course they 'dominate' the Marathon far more, but then applying the same considerations above and you're probably reach the same conclusion that Kenyans have no greater genetic talent.

How many more posters will you try to impersonate today, Coevett? I have counted 3 so far.

I ran plenty of sub 2:09 800's with nothing better than caffeine as fuel.

Will the line be drawn? wrote:

Is anyone else sick of hearing how these East Africans are just genetically superior? They are in area where getting drugs is way easier than other parts of the world and in areas where drug testing isn’t even a thing. It’s awfully funny people think these guys are just better athletes. The only thing they are doing that Americans aren’t is getting away with doping. These guys debuting at times faster than the world record times ten years ago makes zero sense, humans didn’t all of a sudden evolve to be faster in the last 10-20 years. The entire area needs banned from participating in the Olympics until they get good testing.

please provide the evidence.

round and round wrote:

Will the line be drawn? wrote:

Is anyone else sick of hearing how these East Africans are just genetically superior? They are in area where getting drugs is way easier than other parts of the world and in areas where drug testing isn’t even a thing. It’s awfully funny people think these guys are just better athletes. The only thing they are doing that Americans aren’t is getting away with doping. These guys debuting at times faster than the world record times ten years ago makes zero sense, humans didn’t all of a sudden evolve to be faster in the last 10-20 years. The entire area needs banned from participating in the Olympics until they get good testing.

please provide the evidence.

Litteraly just Google 'kenyan doping', and 'Ethiopia doping'. And educate yourself.

Debunking this myth wrote:

round and round wrote:

please provide the evidence.

Litteraly just Google 'kenyan doping', and 'Ethiopia doping'. And educate yourself.

+1

round and round wrote:

Will the line be drawn? wrote:

Is anyone else sick of hearing how these East Africans are just genetically superior? They are in area where getting drugs is way easier than other parts of the world and in areas where drug testing isn’t even a thing. It’s awfully funny people think these guys are just better athletes. The only thing they are doing that Americans aren’t is getting away with doping. These guys debuting at times faster than the world record times ten years ago makes zero sense, humans didn’t all of a sudden evolve to be faster in the last 10-20 years. The entire area needs banned from participating in the Olympics until they get good testing.

please provide the evidence.

I think it’s pretty obvious as both first and second place in the 2016 women’s Olympics marathon have been disqualified for doping that the rest of the top athletes are doping too. I doubt doping is just confined to the winners, they are all doing it.

These guys debuting at times faster than the world record times ten years ago makes zero sense, humans didn’t all of a sudden evolve to be faster in the last 10-20 years. The entire area needs banned from participating in the Olympics until they get good testing.

And what about american and jamaican sprinters. I can say that they are all doping and USA, Jamaica should be banned for olympics

Is there genetic superiority in America when they can field a basketball team of more 6'9" players than all the world combined?

Is there genetic differences in humans that can absorb melotonin and get a tan vs. those that cannot tan and burn and stay white?

Is there genetic superiority when 62% of all high school participation in Football is White Caucasian, yet the professional Football league (NFL) is 82% African American?

Is there genetic superiority that all AAU track records from U8, 9-10, 11-12, 13-14, 15-16, 17-U from 400m down to 100m is held by African American kids?

Every sub 20min 5k is doping

Tower Porklets wrote:

Jonesey ran 2:07 low off a positive split and no pacemakers back in 1985.

Given that, you gotta say 2:06 was possible clean back then. And given today's shoes (VF) and nutrition, you're looking at 2:05 at least being a reasonable cut off for clean athletes.

Then I'm sure there are people more talented than jonesey , so suddenly 2:04 doesnt look so far off

This argument is based on the assumption that Jones was clean, although blood transfusions and steroids were common in the 80s, and no tests for blood doping and only very rudimentary roid tests around.

Not saying the assumption is wrong, but it could very well be.

spyro the dragon wrote:

I agree that most East Africans are doping, but I also believe they have the physical advantage of simply having smaller bodies, which is incredibly advantageous in the marathon. Also, all sub 2:09s are dirty? I don't think so. There is no evidence to suggest that Japanese marathoners are dirty.

Agreed, lighter bodies and high altitude are better for very long distances. There will be doping going on. I must say, it is the Sudanese that have the most ideal body type for running.

casual obsever wrote:

Tower Porklets wrote:

Jonesey ran 2:07 low off a positive split and no pacemakers back in 1985.

Given that, you gotta say 2:06 was possible clean back then. And given today's shoes (VF) and nutrition, you're looking at 2:05 at least being a reasonable cut off for clean athletes.

Then I'm sure there are people more talented than jonesey , so suddenly 2:04 doesnt look so far off

This argument is based on the assumption that Jones was clean, although blood transfusions and steroids were common in the 80s, and no tests for blood doping and only very rudimentary roid tests around.

Not saying the assumption is wrong, but it could very well be.

You are joking if you think Steve Jones was doping. He was working shifts as a fitter in the Royal Air Force at RAF Lyneham when he emerged as a world-class runner. He was initially coached by another RAF guy, Bill Tonner, and then self-coached, not part of any well-know program, with a shady coach.

He started running at about 18 in the RAF, and if you were around at the time, there was a quite steady progress from very good, to international, to world-record breaker, improving every time he went up in distance.

I'd say it would be hard to think of a less likely doper.

I can accept that all sub 2:05s are doped, but no way all sub 2:09s are.

Dear Lord ! Another thread about East African doping! How many we've got? Hundreds?

doctorj wrote:

Dear Lord ! Another thread about East African doping! How many we've got? Hundreds?

And if they keep getting busted it could be hundreds more! ?

2:01 was run in 2018. EPO has been around since, what, the early 1990s? I tend to think the WR falls a little quicker if EPO is the only contributing factor.

HowToEPO wrote:

2:01 was run in 2018. EPO has been around since, what, the early 1990s? I tend to think the WR falls a little quicker if EPO is the only contributing factor.

Not if the talent was hitting the tracks in the 90s & 00s. That is where all the action & dough was at in those days. Now the action & dough is on the roads. Look at the big time marathons these days - televised and loaded with prime time talent.

Top talent follows where the dough is.

Just like how everyone is school that seemed smarter than you was cheating, right? Some people are gifted. Either you will accept it or accept that you're not gifted (and I'm not actually writing to you).