The Ingebrigtsen's prove that the East African 'natural born runner' superiority is a myth. Here's why.

The circle is everyone running away from the topic, and me circling back:

Two problems with this post:

- The Ingebrigtsens have only shown so far that it is possible for Norwegians to run almost as fast as Europeans were running in the early to mid-1980s.

- Replacing one "myth" with the alternative "myth" that the fastest East Africans would be running the same times as the Europeans of the 1980s, but for drugs.

Armstronglivs wrote:

Your argument that the Ingebrigtsens are unlikely to be doping only stacks up if testing is effective at catching dopers. It isn't. Tests catch 1-2% of professional and elite sportsmen whereas official WADA estimates of the incidence of doping range from 15-40%. It may even be higher. The Ingebrigtsens could easily be doping and not get caught. If they are as fast or faster than those whom you believe are doping I can't see how they themselves could be clean.

That WADA estimate says nothing about Norwegian distance runners.

Most of us here know that the majority of that 15-40% (of global athletes) will come from places like East Africa.

The Ingebrigtsens are running as fast as most doped up East Africans because they are more talented runners.

Just like Herb Elliott and Peter Snell were running equivalent times of the best Europeans and Africans of today, and yet blood doping hadn't even become a thing yet in their day.

It's inconsistent for you to claim that the culture between today and the 1960's is so wildly different that we can assume nobody cheated back then whereas everybody cheats today, while ignoring the possibility that doping rates today can vary immensely between different cultures (i.e. Norway and Kenya).

You've also admitted yourself that the likes of Nick Willis and the Ingebrigtsens wouldn't be doping to the extent that East Africans are, simply because they can't.

2% of 40% doping athletes caught is to some extent due to most of the dopers being in places with little or no testing.

rekrunner wrote:

The circle is everyone running away from the topic, and me circling back:

Two problems with this post:

- The Ingebrigtsens have only shown so far that it is possible for Norwegians to run almost as fast as Europeans were running in the early to mid-1980s.

- Replacing one "myth" with the alternative "myth" that the fastest East Africans would be running the same times as the Europeans of the 1980s, but for drugs.

There is some truth in your first statement. It's more a case of the Ingebrigtsens reminding us that the 'superiority' of East Africans is a modern myth, and that Europeans have always been able to run as fast.

The second statement is nonsense, relies on your absurd belief that EPO doesn't work, and has nothing to do with your first statement anyway.

The Ingebrigtsens haven't yet run as fast as the best Europeans of the 80's, this is true (although Jakob is on course to), and yet they are competing with the very best East Africans of today (although would be trailing the EPO juiced to the max likes of El G, Lagat, Bekele etc).

Your assumption that most doping occurs in E Africa because that is where more are presently being caught presumes that testing is effective. We have known for nearly twenty years that much doping can be masked. This is borne out by expert estimates that the actual incidence of doping far exceeds the numbers caught - and that still includes E Africa, where doping likely lacks the kind of sophistication that currently occurs elsewhere. The Jamaican whistleblower, Ann Shirley, reported that doping is endemic in all sports and across all countries. Norway will not be an exception. The critical culture is of sport, not nationality. Doping has greatly increased since the era of Snell and Elliot, when the technology had yet to seriously emerge in middle and long distance running. It is has now become an enormous industry worldwide. The view we might take is that doping is no longer regarded as unethical by top athletes but as necessary to compete. This has been confirmed by athlete surveys, including those that indicate athletes would even shorten their lives if it meant attaining a gold medal. But they don't have to take that risk; with expert medical advice they can reduce the likelihood of damaging their health as well as being caught. There is every incentive to dope. This is especially so if you are likely to lose to someone who is. I doubt the Ingebrigtsens are less committed or less ambitious than any other top athletes.

Natural Talents wrote:

elite genetics

No such thing. How fast is Ingebrigt? How about their grandparents? Which genes do elites have that non-elites don't?

The people insisting on this presumption need to put up or shut up. The tech has been around for years to do dna studies and find some actual evidence. As of now, there is none.

If all Norwegians were as ate-up skinny as Frederik, way more of them would be elite. There is plenty of empirical evidence supporting the view that skinny people are better at mid and long distance. East Africans are mostly skinny due to low-calorie diets.

Bad Wigins wrote:

Natural Talents wrote:

elite genetics

No such thing. How fast is Ingebrigt? How about their grandparents? Which genes do elites have that non-elites don't?

The people insisting on this presumption need to put up or shut up. The tech has been around for years to do dna studies and find some actual evidence. As of now, there is none.

If all Norwegians were as ate-up skinny as Frederik, way more of them would be elite. There is plenty of empirical evidence supporting the view that skinny people are better at mid and long distance. East Africans are mostly skinny due to low-calorie diets.

I asked a Nigerian graduate student two years ago who was studying at a major Midwest university his thoughts regarding athletic differences between Nigerians and Kenyans. The gentleman was 6'4" 260 lbs. He did not say a darn thing about muscle twitch ratio. He said, "Diet." I do not recall the diet specifics. He told me what he knew of the Kenyan diet. Nigeria is a wealthier nation. Nigerians are larger and more well fed.

I don't believe that "EPO doesn't work" -- these are your words, not mine.

That my two statements have little do with each other is a reflection of the original post, trying to make a connection between two things which have nothing to do with each other, both of which are problematic.

The superior performances of East Africans are historical fact.

Ingebrigtsen's matching European times from the 1980s shed very little information on the reasons for the superior performances of East Africans.

The Ingebrigtsens are not simply running nearly as fast as "Europeans in the 80's", they are close to matching the best performances of runners of that era who were multiple world record holders and world and Olympic champions, as well as being amongst the greatest athletes of the 20th century. Not quite the same thing. And Jakob is still only 18. With the combined achievements of the brothers, it's a bit much like Coe, Ovett and Cram all came from the same family. Really?

They are also running nearly as fast as the very best E Africans today, and easily matching the continent's best "teenagers", from

a countries where we have seen doping (or the lack of controls) acquiring farcical proportions.

The thread doesn't quite get it right: there is really nothing to choose now between the best European and E African distance runners - for likely the same reasons.

If the E Africans are no longer superior to Europeans that suggests either the Europeans are doping to level the playing field or the E Africans are no longer doping. (Well, yes.) But either way, the logical inference, once the Europeans have caught up to the Africans, is that the previous African superiority was built on the basis of doping.

This assumes 1) that East African performances are no longer superior to Europeans, and 2) that the superior European performances are doped, and 3) that the superior African performances were doped, and 4) that Europeans have caught up to the Africans, and 5) that African superiority was built on the basis of doping.

rekrunner wrote:

This assumes 1) that East African performances are no longer superior to Europeans, and 2) that the superior European performances are doped, and 3) that the superior African performances were doped, and 4) that Europeans have caught up to the Africans, and 5) that African superiority was built on the basis of doping.

It takes as fact that doping exists, that it is particularly rife in E Africa, that E African dominance has coincided with one of the least controlled eras in sports doping, and that Europeans like Jakob are now closing the gap on the best Africans. But, yes - life itself is an "assumption". If you want to argue about fake moon landings I'm sure you will find a thread.

rekrunner wrote:

This assumes 1) that East African performances are no longer superior to Europeans, and 2) that the superior European performances are doped, and 3) that the superior African performances were doped, and 4) that Europeans have caught up to the Africans, and 5) that African superiority was built on the basis of doping.

What exactly are trying to say or imply? You bloviate so much that I can't make heads or tails of most of your posts anymore.

1) - That appears to be the case with better and more OOC testing lately.

2) - Difficult to determine without more information (50/50).

3) - A strong possibility that PEDs played a role.

4) - Appears to be in some disciplines.

5) - As in #3...a strong possibility that PEDs played a role.

These are 5 assumptions I do not make because simply because they are not supported by facts without liberal doses of imagination. Yes it is a fact that doping exists. However: - I don't know what you mean by"particularly" rife; I think even you don't believe that, as you often tell us that doping is everywhere in all countries in all sports, citing experts like Rene Anne Shirley, whistleblower from Jamaica, suggesting nothing particular about East Africa. Doping was extremely rife in Russia, with only limited success for women and race walkers, with no men in events like 1500m or 5000m "closing the gap". - East African dominance started as early as 1981, in World Cross Country, and continues to today; which period was more controlled? 1960s? 1970s? - Despite repeated assertions, Europeans like Jakob, running 1980s era times, are not now closing the gap on the best Africans; right now it is only one European, and he's closing the gap on the best non-Africans. Jakob is not yet as fast as Nick Willis or Chris Solinsky. Interesting you equate the effects of doping with fake moon landings.

Armstronglivs wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

This assumes 1) that East African performances are no longer superior to Europeans, and 2) that the superior European performances are doped, and 3) that the superior African performances were doped, and 4) that Europeans have caught up to the Africans, and 5) that African superiority was built on the basis of doping.

It takes as fact that doping exists, that it is particularly rife in E Africa, that E African dominance has coincided with one of the least controlled eras in sports doping, and that Europeans like Jakob are now closing the gap on the best Africans. But, yes - life itself is an "assumption". If you want to argue about fake moon landings I'm sure you will find a thread.

1) Wrong 2) Faith 3) Faith 4) Wrong 5) Faith

Let's Get To The Bottom Of This wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

This assumes 1) that East African performances are no longer superior to Europeans, and 2) that the superior European performances are doped, and 3) that the superior African performances were doped, and 4) that Europeans have caught up to the Africans, and 5) that African superiority was built on the basis of doping.

What exactly are trying to say or imply? You bloviate so much that I can't make heads or tails of most of your posts anymore.

1) - That appears to be the case with better and more OOC testing lately.

2) - Difficult to determine without more information (50/50).

3) - A strong possibility that PEDs played a role.

4) - Appears to be in some disciplines.

5) - As in #3...a strong possibility that PEDs played a role.

I've explained this to you before - the Russian men pursued RW with the strategy of having a better chance of world domination in an endurance sport that the East Africans don't compete in. The primary objective was Olympic & WC medals and International domination. Yuriy Borzakovskiy (1:42.47) was their lone runner with some impressive results winning an Olympic gold (2004) & several WC medals.

-Are you really denying that doping is 'particularly rife' in East Africa???? That's even more insane than your belief that EPO doesn't work!!

-I've explained to you before about East African crosscountry domination in the 80's. John Ngugi was the first African to win the world cross country more than once, and then of course won Gold in Soul, so the best example of the 'take over' of East Africans. I'm sure you are aware that he was later suspended for evading doping controls. Other names from the 80's later were busted. Paul Kipkoech, another 80's star, died mysteriously at only 32. Those who say Ethiopians and Kenyans could not have been blood doping int he 80's are extremely naieve.

-NonAfricans are closing the gap. Times are getting faster in traditional countries such as GB and Aus/NZ, depth is getting bigger. Something like eight British guys have ran under 1:46 already this year. Ten years ago I don't think a single Brit did. Not even in the Golden Days did we have that depth. Then there are junior talents like Max Burgin, Kane Elliott, Ethan Hussey in GB, and similarly exciting talents in places like Australia. Ethan Hussey is only 16 and has ran 1:49/3:46 and 14:29 (the last on the road when he was 15). Jakob certainly is closing the gap on the best Africans, you can see that with every race. At 1500 he's only behind potatoe Tim now and getting nearer each time. Unless you mean the EPO peak era times and Kiprop, which kind of negates your point to any sane and intelligent person. In a well paced race Jakob would have ran 3:28 at Monaco.

Why don't Kenyans dominate racewalking btw? Why is the richest and most famous vo2 max endurance athlete Kenya has ever produced a pasty faced white kid with Scottish parents?

I filed your explanation under "Imagination of anonymous posters". There is no shortage of personal pet theories, often conflicting with other personal pet theories, about what may or may not have happened, and the reasons behind.

I like Vodka wrote:

I've explained this to you before - the Russian men pursued RW with the strategy of having a better chance of world domination in an endurance sport that the East Africans don't compete in. The primary objective was Olympic & WC medals and International domination. Yuriy Borzakovskiy (1:42.47) was their lone runner with some impressive results winning an Olympic gold (2004) & several WC medals.

rekrunner wrote:

I don't believe that "EPO doesn't work" -- these are your words, not mine.

That is somewhat disingenuous Reky. Your are the sole proponent of the "placebo" hypothesis to explain the massive sudden gains from epo.