Dubstepforum.com

Every kid in Jamaica right now is going to want to be a sprinter, expect them to dominate for a long time

ehbrums1 wrote:That's not after example, Jamaica is extremely shady in their doping regulations

What? That has nothing to do with what we are talking about (plus it is controversial for many reasons). Can't help but feel you are clutching at straws there.

No your trying to give an example for why they were dominant in sprinting and not other events, and all I'm saying is that they've been known to be pretty relaxed on the regulations

ehbrums1 wrote:No your trying to give an example for why they were dominant in sprinting and not other events, and all I'm saying is that they've been known to be pretty relaxed on the regulations

And I'm saying that's awful rationalisation. And you don't think practically every sprinter in the world at some point takes some form of performance enhancer?
Anyway, like I say, that is poor reasoning. They are dominant because every kid wants to grow up as a sprinter in the same way every kid wants to grow up to be a footballer in the UK.

ehbrums1 wrote:US 104 medals....

Yeah but the point people are making is that population and funding are the main factors rather than some inherent athletic superiority or sexual equality in the USA that doesn't exist elsewhere (only just over half the USA medals were from women- and about half of the olympic medals go to women so it isn't anything that surprising what they did).

USA population 311 million: 104 medals....if there was some weird NW Europe combined team of UK, France and Germany it'd have population 210 million and 142 medals.....I'm sure people could go on with those sort of stats all over the place, USA women did very well, but to say that they are leaps and bounds ahead of the rest of the world because of some equality law seems a bit far fetched.

Hedley King wrote:

ehbrums1 wrote:US 104 medals....

Yeah but the point people are making is that population and funding are the main factors rather than some inherent athletic superiority or sexual equality in the USA that doesn't exist elsewhere (only just over half the USA medals were from women- and about half of the olympic medals go to women so it isn't anything that surprising what they did).

USA population 311 million: 104 medals....if there was some weird NW Europe combined team of UK, France and Germany it'd have population 210 million and 142 medals.....I'm sure people could go on with those sort of stats all over the place, USA women did very well, but to say that they are leaps and bounds ahead of the rest of the world because of some equality law seems a bit far fetched.

pkay is talking about a difference in culture more than anything else. He certainly isn't talking about inherent athletic superiority.
*edit, misread post

hugh wrote:

Hedley King wrote:

ehbrums1 wrote:US 104 medals....

Yeah but the point people are making is that population and funding are the main factors rather than some inherent athletic superiority or sexual equality in the USA that doesn't exist elsewhere (only just over half the USA medals were from women- and about half of the olympic medals go to women so it isn't anything that surprising what they did).

USA population 311 million: 104 medals....if there was some weird NW Europe combined team of UK, France and Germany it'd have population 210 million and 142 medals.....I'm sure people could go on with those sort of stats all over the place, USA women did very well, but to say that they are leaps and bounds ahead of the rest of the world because of some equality law seems a bit far fetched.

pkay is talking about a difference in culture more than anything else. He certainly isn't talking about inherent athletic superiority. I think you misunderstand him.

No, I get that- mostly I was taking it that he says some US equality law is the reason USA women do so well, I'm saying that they don't do so especially well and that there are loads of other factors, and most of the western world has similar equality laws

hugh wrote:How do you explain Jamaica winning so many track and field events? Answer > They invest a lot in track in field compared to other sports because sprinting is their national sport.

I highly doubt Jamaica has the same sort of funding as the US do for their runners. you guys are seriously deluded.

Molzie wrote:

hugh wrote:How do you explain Jamaica winning so many track and field events? Answer > They invest a lot in track in field compared to other sports because sprinting is their national sport.

I highly doubt Jamaica has the same sort of funding as the US do for their runners. you guys are seriously deluded.

there is a serious amount of money put into running in Jamaica... but its ONLY for the people at the very top eg Bolt.

Molzie wrote:

hugh wrote:How do you explain Jamaica winning so many track and field events? Answer > They invest a lot in track in field compared to other sports because sprinting is their national sport.

I highly doubt Jamaica has the same sort of funding as the US do for their runners. you guys are seriously deluded.

I am saying it is a combination of culture and funding. If a sport is highly popular and highly funded in any given country in relativity to any other country then they will certainly achieve more in that sport than the other country. There's no delusion here, gtfo with that bull.

And let's not forget a lot of funding comes from sponsorships. I don't think you realise just how much funding Bolt, Blake and co get.

hugh wrote:And let's not forget a lot of funding comes from sponsorships. I don't think you realise just how much funding Bolt, Blake and co get.

true that.

Furthermore, it's not like cos Jamaica is such a poor nation that literally everything they do is from the bottom of the barrel. I can't help but feel there's a tad of ignorance/racism wrapped up in those negative assumptions but its too awkward to unravel.

And potentially steroids

ehbrums1 wrote:And potentially steroids

What about IOC independently testing all olympic medal winners?

hugh wrote:I can't help but feel there's a tad of ignorance/racism wrapped up in those negative assumptions but its too awkward to unravel.

wut?

They would have to do that through each country's system

I assume you were disgusted when Gatlin won a medal?

ehbrums1 wrote:They would have to do that through each country's system

that isnt how it works

Then explain how athletes are losing their medals only after the Olympics, instead of not being allowed in at all

ehbrums1 wrote:US 104 medals....

Cos of the size of your country and nature of the education system you lot have.... no other reasons.