Richard:
I've read most of what you site and what I wrote in no way "contradicts
virtually all published assessments of Kenyan training practices. I have
also discussed this with many Kenyan runners, from Kip Keino to Ibrahim
Hussein to Wilson Kipketer. They all laugh at the gross generalization that
Kenyans are great runners because they ran to school as children, run longer
mileage in training, and train at higher intensity.
³I lived right next door to school,² laughs Wilson Kipketer, world 800-meter
record holder, dismissing such cookie-cutter explanations. ³I walked, nice
and slow.² Some kids ran to school, some didnıt, he says, but itıs not why
we succeed.
And for every Kenyan monster-miler, there are others, like Kipketer, who
gets along on less than thirty. ³Training regimens are as varied in Kenya as
any where in the world,² notes Colm OıConnell, coach at St. Patrickıs Iten,
the famous private school and running factory in the Great Rift Valley that
turned out Kipketer and other Kenyan greats. OıConnell eschews the
mega-training so common among runners in Europe and North America who have
failed so miserably in bottling the Kenyan running miracle.
As for empirical evidence, much has been collected by Bengt Saltin and Tim
Noakes who consider such myth making (Kenyans train harder as the total
explanation for their success) as pretty silly.
Could Kenyan training methods be a factor in the success of some of their
great athletes? Of course. Is there one clear pattern of training that
almost all Kenyans ascribe to? Of course not? Even if there was, would that
explain the magnitude of Kenyan success, considering that many of their
training principles have been adopted, and even magnified, by athletes from
other countries? Of course not!!
So...I believe we'll have to just end this with the reality -- the modest
claim-- the facile explanations that training is the key to Kenyan success
is far too simplistic (and erroneous in key ways) to explain the phenemenon.
It's obviously bio-cultural, an assertion which no reasonable observer, let
alone a scientist, would dispute.
On 4/29/01 12:59 PM, "t-and-f-digest"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 14:18:03 -0700
> From: Richard McCann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: RE: t-and-f: Empirical evidence
>
>> Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 08:38:37 -0700
>> From: Jon Entine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Subject: t-and-f: Empirical evidence
>>
>> With all due respect, what you have supplied is anecdotes, not evidence.
>> Sure, you can find examples all over the map. If I find one example of a low
>> intensity, low mileage champion runner, I can't generalize that that applies
>> to "all Kenyans," any more than I could take the results of one race and say
>> that indicates a trend. The empirical evidence would result from a much
>> larger database of examples. I don't say for certain that Kenyans train less
>> than Americans. What I do say without any doubt is that glib statements that
>> Kenyan success can be explained by the "fact" that they train more is not
>> only pure speculation, it is not supported by the evidence. My argument is
>> against "environmental determinism", not for genetic determinism. Of course
>> training plays a role--more in some cases, less in others.
>
>
> Jon
> Are you saying that you're observation, which contradicts virtually all
> published assessments of Kenyan training practices (e.g., Train Hard Run
> Easy, Running Research News, magazine articles, interviews with Americans
> and Europeans who train with the Kenyans, etc.), is the only valid
> viewpoint? You have failed your own standard because you have not offered
> substantial evidence either. I think you before you can make such a broad
> contradictory statement that you need to do an indepth empirical study that
> takes the training regimens for the top athletes from selected nations and
> statistically compare the training levels. I know that you'll have some
> difficulty in getting accurate training records from the Kenyans because
> many do not keep training logs, and even then, the recorded distances and
> times may be inaccurate for technological reasons. Given the apparent
> lack of "evidence" we have to go with the majority opinion of those who
> have independently observed these patterns--Kenyans tend to train harder
> than other athletes around the world, and this likely explains much of
> their current advantage.
>
> As for the Falmouth times, Buck's analysis is insightful. In addition, you
> only mentioned 1982. The other years shown also had 5-7 finishers under
> 32:50, indicating the fields in each year were of relatively consistent
> quality.
>
> I agree that group training can have a significant effect. My own running
> career would go up when I could train with others, and down when I was on
> my own. I had 4 years of training on my own out of a 12 year truly
> competitive career, and those years were always worse than the previous
> year in terms of competitive results, and I had better succeeding years
> after 3 of those years on my own when I was again training in a
> group. (And the last year was before injuries and work forced me into
> becoming a trudger.)
>
> Richard McCann
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 00:38:18 +0200
> From: "Andy=?ISO-8859-1?Q?_M=B8hlbach?=" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re(2): t-and-f: rotterdam ?
--
Jon Entine
RuffRun
6178 Grey Rock Rd.
Agoura Hills, CA 91301
(818) 991-9803 [FAX] 991-9804
http://www.jonentine.com
