article on racial dominance!

mickoo

why black will beat white at the olympics

Next Saturday afternoon, in less time than it has taken me to type this sentence, the fastest man at the Olympics will take the 100m gold medal. That man may be the pre-Olympic favourite, the American Maurice Greene. It may be Trinidad's Ato Boldon. It may even be Britain's Dwaine Chambers, who has run into impressive form in the last few weeks. But whoever it is, of one thing we can be certain: he will be black. Indeed, you've probably got more chance of winning the lottery next Saturday than a white man has of even making it to the final. The last time that a white athlete participated in an Olympic 100m final, Jimmy Carter was still in the White House. And the last time a white athlete held the 100m world record, Khrushchev was ensconced in the Kremlin. Over the past decade, the 10 second mark in the 100m has been broken 200 times - but not once by a white athlete. Nor is it just at the 100m that whites are so noticeably absent. Every men's world record at every commonly-run track distance from 100m to the marathon now belongs to a runner of African descent.

Nor is there any respite for white sportsmen away from the Olympics. In 1950, the American Basketball Association was almost entirely white. Today it is 80 per cent black; among the stars the figure rises to 95 per cent. Sixty per cent of American footballers are black. France won the football World Cup and Euro 2000 with a team in which more than a third of the players were black. In boxing, the two world heavyweight champions - Lennox Lewis and Evander Holyfield - are black; there is not a single serious white contender for their crowns.

What lies behind such black domination of sport? The traditional liberal answer points the finger at social factors. Blacks, so the argument runs, have been driven into sport because racism has excluded them from most areas of employment. Racism also makes blacks hungrier than whites for success, and so they more often end up on the winners' rostrum. In the postwar world, largely as a consequence of the experience of the Holocaust, there has been a great reluctance to see human differences, indeed to view any aspect of human behaviour, in biological terms. Humans, we have come to believe, can be explained purely in terms of culture.

Increasingly, this antipathy to biology is wearing away. More and more, biologists, anthropologists and athletes themselves are looking to nature not nurture for an explanation of black domination. 'Blacks are made better', argues Carl Lewis, the African American athlete who won four golds at the 1984 Olympics. The American journalist Jon Entine dismisses the environmentalist theory of black athletic prowess as 'political correctness'. Entine's book, Taboo: Why Black Athletes Dominate Sports and Why We're Afraid to Talk About It was published in America earlier this year to great controversy. The liberal consensus, Entine argues, has served only to disguise the truth about the black domination of sport - which is that blacks are built to run and jump. It's an argument that's winning a hearing on this side of the Atlantic too. Last week, the BBC transmitted The Faster Race, produced by its Black Britain team, which argued the case for a natural black athleticism. Channel 4 begins shortly a three-part series, The Difference, which explores genetic differences between races, including in sport. It's time we put away our fears of talking about racial differences, the series argues, and faced up to the facts of genetic diversity.

The view that black sportsmen and women have a natural superiority rests on the evidence of physiological research, largely into two groups of athletes: East African long distance runners and West African sprinters. East Africa, and in particular Kenya, is the powerhouse of middle and long distance running. The top 60 times in the 3000m steeple chase are all held by Kenyan athletes, who also hold more than half the top times at 5000 and 10,000 metres. Kenyan men have won the world cross-country championship every year since 1986. At the Boston marathon, often considered the world's premier event, Kenyan men have not lost since 1990. Most remarkably, the vast majority of top Kenyan runners come from one area in the country - the Kalenjin region along the western rim of the Great Rift Valley, adjacent to Lake Victoria. Kalenjin runners have won more than seventy per cent of Kenya's Olympic medals in world running and all but one Kenyan-held world records.

A number of lines of research suggest that the secret of such spectacular success lies in superior biology. All muscle contains two kinds of fibres - fast-twitch and slow-twitch. The former is good at producing explosive bursts of energy, the latter at sustaining muscle effort over long periods. Physiologists have shown that the muscles of Kenyan athletes have a higher proportion of slow-twitch fibres than those of white or West African athletes. Kenyans also enjoy a slighter body profile, have relatively longer legs and larger lung capacities, and possess more energy-producing enzymes in their muscles which are better able to utilise oxygen.

Athletes of West African descent - which include most African American, Caribbean and black British athletes - have, on the other hand, a physique which is suited to explosive events, requiring sprinting and jumping. Such athletes possess what biologists call a mesomorphic physique with bigger, more visible muscles including a larger chest. Their muscles contain a higher proportion of fast-twitch fibres than do whites or East Africans. Athletes of West African descent also possess less body fat, a higher centre of gravity, narrower hips, and higher levels of testosterone in their blood.

For Entine such physiological and biomechanical differences demonstrate the natural superiority of black athletes. For Entine's critics, on the other hand, the very search for such differences demonstrates a racist outlook. 'I don't think it matters what the biological conclusions are', argues former footballer Garth Crooks. 'It forges a distinction between black and white athletes which is unhealthy, unhelpful and untrue.' According to the prestigious science journal Nature, 'The danger that interracial comparisons will be inhibited by considerations of political correctness is less serious than that interracial studies will be wrongly used.' 'There are some things better left unsaid', concluded the New York Times.

Such critics are responding to a long history of racism in which black athletic superiority has often been seen as evidence of intellectual backwardness. 'The Negro excels in the events he does because he is closer to the primitive than the white man', claimed Dean Cromwell, the head coach to the US team at the 1936 Berlin Olympics. 'It was not long ago that his ability to sprint and jump was a life-and-death matter to him in the jungle.' Today, too, scientific racists, such as the controversial Canadian psychologist Philippe J. Rushton, argue that there is a trade-off between brain and brawn, and that black athletic superiority has been purchased at the price of lower intelligence. In The Faster Race Rushton explained (with a perfectly straight face) that Asian and white infants are born with bigger heads than black infants. Hence Asian and white women have a bigger pelvic girdle than do black women. A smaller pelvis, Rushton claimed, is better suited to running. Asians and whites are brainier, blacks more athletic.

Such claims may seem to us deeply offensive. But this is no reason to close our eyes to scientific arguments about racial differences in sporting ability. The cause of antiracism is not strengthened by ignoring science or censoring data. Racial science is a pseudo-science, which ignores the truth about human differences; antiracists should not try to ape it. Moreover, the debate about differences in sporting abilities is part of a wider debate about the meaning of new knowledge about genetic diversity. Channel 4's The Difference links racial variation in physical attributes to racial variation in intelligence. The final programme in the series is largely given over to Charles Murray, co-author of The Bell Curve, to argue that black populations are naturally less intelligent that whites and Asians. Liberals who refuse to engage in the debate about natural difference are simply leaving the terrain open to the likes of Rushton and Murray.

The real problem with the 'blacks are born to run' thesis is not that it is politically incorrect and hence should be ignored but that it is factually incorrect and should be challenged. The most basic difficulty is the confusion of racial and population differences. Different population groups are clearly physically distinct. The Masai in Kenya tend to be taller and longer limbed than the stocky, short-limbed Inuit in the Arctic, because the body-forms of both have been shaped by natural selection to suit their particular environments. But the fact that there are physical differences between human groups does not mean that such differences can be reduced to racial distinctions, nor that such differences need have a meaningful consequence in human endeavour, whether that be sport or IQ tests.

It is certainly possible to divide humanity into a number of races, as we conventionally do, according to skin colour and body form. But it is also possible to do it many other ways - using, for instance, blood group, lactose-tolerance, sickle cell, or any other genetic trait, as the basis for our new 'races'. Genetically, each would be as valid a criterion as skin colour. The distribution of one physical or genetic characteristic - say skin colour - is not necessarily the same as that of another - such as blood group. The current division of the world into black, white, Asian and Oriental races is, in other words, as rooted in social convention as in genetics.

Entine rejects such criticisms as mere 'semantics'. But his own argument shows why it is not so. According to Entine, East Africans are naturally superior at endurance sports, West Africans at sprinting and jumping, and 'whites fall somewhere in the middle'. But if East and West Africans are at either end of a genetic spectrum of athletic abilities why consider them to be part of a single race, and one that is distinct from whites? Only because conventionally we use skin colour as the criterion of racial difference.

To understand why genetic notions of population difference are at odds with social ideas of race, consider the Australian athlete Cathy Freeman. Freeman, an Aborigine, is the hottest Australian athlete, and a good tip for the 400m Olympic gold. Because of their skin colour, Aborigines are often bracketed with sub-Saharan Africans as a 'black' race. Racial scientists have often argued that Australian Aborigines and black African are the two most primitive races in the world. Since Freeman's rise to prominence, there has been much speculation that Aborigines, like black Africans, are natural athletes. Genetically, however, there is no population in the world more distinct from those of sub-Saharan Africa than Australian Aborigines. Freeman is genetically closer to white athletes such as Britain's Katherine Merry than to black athletes such as America's Marion Jones. Here, as in much else, appearances can be deceptive.

Not only are genetic notions of population differences distinct from political concepts of race, but the physiology of human differences is not easy to interpret in sporting terms. Entine suggests that West Africans have relatively slender calves compared to whites, and that this helps their sprinting ability. It is difficult to see how, because muscle-power increases with cross-sectional area; smaller calves should make it harder, not easier, to excel in explosive sprinting events. Indeed 'slender calves' is the main biological reason given for the lack of African-Americans in ice hockey. Yet the same attribute is seen as enhancing their performance on the track.

It is true that athletes of West African descent living in North America, Western Europe and the Caribbean dominate many sports. But contemporary West Africans don't. This is the opposite of what one should expect if athletic ability was predominantly genetic. In America, considerable intermixing between black and white populations has meant that the African American population embodies, on average, some 30 per cent of genes from populations of European descent. Hence African Americans should be poorer athletes than West Africans. The reverse is true.

What all this suggests is that the relationship between sports, culture and genetics is much more complex than either liberal antiracists or 'race realists' like Entine and Murray will allow. Athletic talent is at least in part inherited, and there are undoubted genetic differences between populations. Nor should we dismiss the possibility that West Africans and Kenyans have a genetic advantage when it comes to sprinting or long distance running. It has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt, and there is clearly much more to sport than natural ability, but in principle there is no reason to assume that certain populations have physical characteristics more suited to particular athletic activities. But are blacks naturally better athletes than whites? Not necessarily. We should be highly suspicious of any and all attempts to confuse the genetics of populations and the politics of race.

iregk

Not a bad article but basically what its doign is concentrating on sports that have a large black presence. Lets look at other sports and check for black dominance. Snooker, race driving at any level, tennis, Ice Hockey, Cycling, Swimming to name but some. Its very easy to pick certain sports and claim that black people dominate the sporting world when you are completely ignoring others.

Also as the article is now a few years old certain sports in it have also moved on. Recheck the boxing statement as someone noted in another thread on the subject and that now becomes null and void. The sub 10 second times for the 100m sprint are not purely down to genetics and the colour of your skin. I think we all know at this stage each one of the starting linup in the olympics 100m final are on some form of epo. You can start to see a lot of sprinters come out as being doped now but in reality if the IOC went at it with real gusto it would make a mockery of thier blue ribbon event and they know it!

Dragan

Plus any article that makes the argument that the current boxing scene is dominated by black boxers and only looks at two fighters is silly. Too many boxing orgs and titles to do just that.

IT Loser

iregk wrote:

Not a bad article but basically what its doign is concentrating on sports that have a large black presence. Lets look at other sports and check for black dominance. Snooker, race driving at any level, tennis, Ice Hockey, Cycling, Swimming to name but some. Its very easy to pick certain sports and claim that black people dominate the sporting world when you are completely ignoring others.

Also as the article is now a few years old certain sports in it have also moved on. Recheck the boxing statement as someone noted in another thread on the subject and that now becomes null and void. The sub 10 second times for the 100m sprint are not purely down to genetics and the colour of your skin. I think we all know at this stage each one of the starting linup in the olympics 100m final are on some form of epo. You can start to see a lot of sprinters come out as being doped now but in reality if the IOC went at it with real gusto it would make a mockery of thier blue ribbon event and they know it!

Ancient article, Lewis has been forced into retirement by dominant white contenders, who now control the biggest divisions in the Sport. If you go back to the time of Rocky Marciano: SAME THING.

The truth of the matter is that the GAA has some of the best athletes in Ireland amongst its ranks. Pretty soon some black kid will win a race that 500 kids playing GAA could have won if the mood took them....

IT Loser

iregk wrote:

Not a bad article but basically what its doign is concentrating on sports that have a large black presence. Lets look at other sports and check for black dominance. Snooker, race driving at any level, tennis, Ice Hockey, Cycling, Swimming to name but some. Its very easy to pick certain sports and claim that black people dominate the sporting world when you are completely ignoring others.

Also as the article is now a few years old certain sports in it have also moved on. Recheck the boxing statement as someone noted in another thread on the subject and that now becomes null and void. The sub 10 second times for the 100m sprint are not purely down to genetics and the colour of your skin. I think we all know at this stage each one of the starting linup in the olympics 100m final are on some form of epo. You can start to see a lot of sprinters come out as being doped now but in reality if the IOC went at it with real gusto it would make a mockery of thier blue ribbon event and they know it!

And besides, if you look at the Sprinting you have the Belarussin girl Yuliya Nesterenko, and the Greek pair too. People laugh...but don't forget that Ben Johnson doped. Carl Lewis doped. Linford doped. Flo Jo doped and died from it.

Bottom line is that if you go right across the board, the Black Man isn't really anywhere near as dominant as is at first thought. In fact, good Ole Whitey pretty wel kicks his ass, so to speak. And: None of this makes any mention of the so called "Extreme Sports"....wasn't it Edmund Hilary who climbed Mt Everest? Look at Ranulph Fiennes!! Any black "superior" people doing that sort of stuff? Swimming the channel?

Theres a lot more to dominance than strutting about in a leotard in the 100m dash, let me tell you.

SpAcEd OuT

IT Loser wrote:

The truth of the matter is that the GAA has some of the best athletes in Ireland amongst its ranks. Pretty soon some black kid will win a race that 500 kids playing GAA could have won if the mood took them....

Sorry I'm confused are you saying that the Irish are faster than the West Africans but that all of our best sprinters are too busy playing GAA?

Because that is the most ridiculous statement I have ever heard

SpAcEd OuT

IT Loser wrote:

Bottom line is that if you go right across the board, the Black Man isn't really anywhere near as dominant as is at first thought. In fact, good Ole Whitey pretty wel kicks his ass, so to speak. And: None of this makes any mention of the so called "Extreme Sports"....wasn't it Edmund Hilary who climbed Mt Everest? Look at Ranulph Fiennes!! Any black "superior" people doing that sort of stuff? Swimming the channel?

Apart from swimming and cycling blacks dominate pretty much all other sports, I wouldnt really call extreme sports such as skateboarding a sport nor would a white person being the first to climb mt.everest be considered as racial dominance, look at the list of people having climbed mt.everest in the last 15 years high percentage of blacks

IT Loser

SpAcEd OuT wrote:

Sorry I'm confused are you saying that the Irish are faster than the West Africans but that all of our best sprinters are too busy playing GAA?

Because that is the most ridiculous statement I have ever heard

Did I mention sprinting in particular??


I said a huge chunk of our best athletes were playing field sports, thus depriving the athletics scene of their presence.

IT Loser

SpAcEd OuT wrote:

Apart from swimming and cycling blacks dominate pretty much all other sports, I wouldnt really call extreme sports such as skateboarding a sport nor would a white person being the first to climb mt.everest be considered as racial dominance, look at the list of people having climbed mt.everest in the last 15 years high percentage of blacks

Blacks are slowly being pushed out of boxing, track and field by WHITES

Sorry if you can't accept this. All you have to do is look at the ratings...no Black Champions at

Heavyweight
Light Heavyweight
Super-Middlweight

Those are the three strongest divisons of the top 4.

Even basketball and American Football have seen white percentages move up closer to 50%...the Black American team can't beat white teams like Argentina, Lithuania, Greece..in fact American coaches are bringing in Europeans to study the international game, which is regarded as SUPERIOR to the domestic American game.
Brett Favre was winning consecutive MVP's right thru the 1990's:D

SpAcEd OuT

IT Loser wrote:

Blacks are slowly being pushed out of boxing, track and field by WHITES

Sorry if you can't accept this. All you have to do is look at the ratings...no Black Champions at

Heavyweight
Light Heavyweight
Super-Middlweight

Those are the three strongest divisons of the top 4.

Even basketball and American Football have seen white percentages move up closer to 50%...the Black American team can't beat white teams like Argentina, Lithuania, Greece..in fact American coaches are bringing in Europeans to study the international game, which is regarded as SUPERIOR to the domestic American game.
Brett Favre was winning consecutive MVP's right thru the 1990's:D

In the boxing heavy weight division 7 of the top 10 boxers are black

could you give me a link to your claims that Argentinian, Lithuanian and Greek national American Football teams are beating America

isnt the current per centage of blacks to whites in NBA 85per cent black compared to 25per cent white, dont know where you got the closer to 50 per cent from

oh and could you tell me why, despite being a minority in the US, they dominate all of the US national sports?
even if your figures of 50per cent white 50 per cent black in NBA were true [which I dont think are] that still shows a massive degree of dominance seeing as there is a lot more whites in America than Black

and to be honest I dont see how blacks are being pushed out of track

Clive

SpAcEd OuT wrote:

Apart from swimming and cycling blacks dominate pretty much all other sports,

Well here's a list of all the events in the 2008 olympics, with the number of events in brackets - could you please explain how "blacks" (LMAO @ that BTW) dominate all of these "apart from swimming and cycling"?

* Aquatics (46 total)
o Diving (8)
o Swimming (34)
o Synchronized swimming (2)
o Water polo (2)
* Archery (4)
* Athletics (track and field) (47)
* Badminton (5)
* Baseball (1)
* Basketball (2)
* Boxing (11)
* Canoeing (16)
* Cycling (18)
* Equestrian (6)
* Fencing (10)
* Football (soccer) (2)
* Gymnastics (18)
* Handball (2)
* Hockey (field) (2)
* Judo (14)
* Modern pentathlon (2)
* Rowing (14)
* Sailing (11)
* Shooting (15)
* Softball (1)
* Table tennis (4)
* Taekwondo (8)
* Tennis (4)
* Triathlon (2)
* Volleyball (4)
* Weightlifting (15)
* Wrestling (18)

Shock horror, different genetic makeups lend themselves to natural aptitudes for some sports! :eek:

Leon11

Here's a thought, anyone care to explain why Cycling is not dominated by Blacks. I'd have thought their fast twitch fibers would have been advantageous.

SpAcEd OuT

Clive wrote:

Well here's a list of all the events in the 2008 olympics, with the number of events in brackets - could you please explain how "blacks" (LMAO @ that BTW) dominate all of these "apart from swimming and cycling"?

* Aquatics (46 total)
o Diving (8)
o Swimming (34)
o Synchronized swimming (2)
o Water polo (2)
* Archery (4)
* Athletics (track and field) (47)
* Badminton (5)
* Baseball (1)
* Basketball (2)
* Boxing (11)
* Canoeing (16)
* Cycling (18)
* Equestrian (6)
* Fencing (10)
* Football (soccer) (2)
* Gymnastics (18)
* Handball (2)
* Hockey (field) (2)
* Judo (14)
* Modern pentathlon (2)
* Rowing (14)
* Sailing (11)
* Shooting (15)
* Softball (1)
* Table tennis (4)
* Taekwondo (8)
* Tennis (4)
* Triathlon (2)
* Volleyball (4)
* Weightlifting (15)
* Wrestling (18)

Shock horror, different genetic makeups lend themselves to natural aptitudes for some sports! :eek:

im sorry where did I say blacks dominated all of them

IT Loser

SpAcEd OuT wrote:

In the boxing heavy weight division 7 of the top 10 boxers are black

could you give me a link to your claims that Argentinian, Lithuanian and Greek national American Football teams are beating America

isnt the current per centage of blacks to whites in NBA 85per cent black compared to 25per cent white, dont know where you got the closer to 50 per cent from

oh and could you tell me why, despite being a minority in the US, they dominate all of the US national sports?
even if your figures of 50per cent white 50 per cent black in NBA were true [which I dont think are] that still shows a massive degree of dominance seeing as there is a lot more whites in America than Black

and to be honest I dont see how blacks are being pushed out of track

7 of top 10???

This is the TOP 10

Klitschko- IBF
Maskaev-WBC
Lyakhovich-WBO
Valuev-WBA
Toney
Ruiz
Byrd
Brock
Samuel Peter
Hasim Rahman
As you can see the 4 Heavyweight Champions are....WHITE:eek: And within 2 weeks those 4 guys will between them hold wins over 4 of the black guys. Dems the facts.

5 Black, 4 White and 1 Hispanic but the important thing is that by next week the best of them {Klitschko} will have beaten 3 of the other 5 Black contenders. Rahman barely beat Barrett but Valuev KO'd Barrett in 11, and Maskaev has beaten Rahman, not once, but twice...both times by KO.

After that its a matter of opinion as to what order you put the remaining fighters in. The 4 best are white. You could probably make an argument to include up-and-comer Alex Povetkin in that group {he won the GOLD in 2004 Olympics at SUPER HEAVYWEIGHT}

This weekend Lyakhovich will fight Shannon Briggs and will beat him. Next weekend Wlad Klitschko will fight Calvin Brock and beat him. When he does that Wlad will have 3 wins over 3 of the heavy weight to 10. FACT:eek:

50-50 is a draw. The number of whites going into Sports is simply lower. And you have to look at the MVP's too. Brett Favre won it like 3 years in a row. And dude....85:25 doesn't even make sense. That would be 110%. You're tripping man!! The highest disparity i have EVER heard is 67:33. And that is more like 60:40 and closing in recent years.



BASKETBALL>
http://www.insidehoops.com/olympics.shtml

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basketball_at_the_2004_Summer_Olympics

Americas NBA Superstars came THIRD behind Italy and Argentina

IT Loser

Leon11 wrote:

Here's a thought, anyone care to explain why Cycling is not dominated by Blacks. I'd have thought their fast twitch fibers would have been advantageous.

It also involves a gruelling murderous high-altitude trek thru the Pyrenees in the TDF. It would appear that good old whitey is best at that..see Mt Everest,, South Pole, North Pole etc.

SpAcEd OuT

IT Loser wrote:

7 of top 10???

This is the TOP 10

Klitschko- IBF
Maskaev-WBC
Lyakhovich-WBO
Valuev-WBA
Toney
Ruiz
Byrd
Brock
Samuel Peter
Hasim Rahman
As you can see the 4 Heavyweight Champions are....WHITE:eek: And within 2 weeks those 4 guys will between them hold wins over 4 of the black guys. Dems the facts.

5 Black, 4 White and 1 Hispanic but the important thing is that by next week the best of them {Klitschko} will have beaten 3 of the other 5 Black contenders. Rahman barely beat Barrett but Valuev KO'd Barrett in 11, and Maskaev has beaten Rahman, not once, but twice...both times by KO.

Yeah white fighters are on top at the moment but if the last century is anything to go by black people tend to dominate

IT Loser wrote:

50-50 is a draw. The number of whites going into Sports is simply lower. And you have to look at the MVP's too. Brett Favre won it like 3 years in a row. And dude....85:25 doesn't even make sense. That would be 110%. You're tripping man!! The highest disparity i have EVER heard is 67:33. And that is more like 60:40 and closing in recent years.

Ha sorry meant 15 per cent wasnt thinking, I read somewhere that they are 350 players in the league and 300 of them are black i'll find the link if you want

even it was 60 to 40 that still doesnt explain how there are more blacks playing basketball in a country dominated by white people



Oh and in the last 68 years America have won the basketball olympics 12 times out of 16 with their black dominated team, white dominated teams have won a mere 4 times

Clive

SpAcEd OuT wrote:

im sorry where did I say blacks dominated all of them

It was right here:

SpAcEd OuT wrote:

Apart from swimming and cycling blacks dominate pretty much all other sports,

SpAcEd OuT

I said blacks dominate pretty much all other sports i.e majority of sports not all sports

ed6hellsfresh

i think the point the article is trying to stress is regarding activities that require only raw athletic ability.
in terms of running, although technique is important, it is basically of raw ability and then some training on top of that. sprinting jumpin etc are simple activities and sports that incorporate them tend to be black dominated.

i dont think the argument is that blacks are better at archery naturally, there are usually no argumments that black people have an inate superiority in coordination, and things that invlove complex training.
and also there is no point making reference to sports that are played by certain cultural groups more than others

it is hard to argue that in sports that require basically no equipment, and rely on running or jumping, that blacks do not possess some naural superiority.
i believe that black people tend to on average be superior at running and jumping, but when it become a game of complex skill etc it evens out.

Clive

SpAcEd OuT wrote:

I said blacks dominate pretty much all other sports i.e majority of sports not all sports

Well "pretty much all other sports" doesn't mean "majority of sports" but fair enough.

Of the 32 odd Olympic sports I listed, could you please point out which 17 or more that "blacks dominate".

IT Loser

SpAcEd OuT wrote:

Yeah white fighters are on top at the moment but if the last century is anything to go by black people tend to dominate



Ha sorry meant 15 per cent wasnt thinking, I read somewhere that they are 350 players in the league and 300 of them are black i'll find the link if you want

even it was 60 to 40 that still doesnt explain how there are more blacks playing basketball in a country dominated by white people



Oh and in the last 68 years America have won the basketball olympics 12 times out of 16 with their black dominated team, white dominated teams have won a mere 4 times

I don't know what you mean by "dominated".....it doesn't have the slightest relevance UNLESS as many white people are as activley participant in the sport. Example: 200 million whites vs 35 million blacks. If 50% of the Black popln follow BasketBall, and try to make a career of it, and only 10% of the White population tries the same, then we have 20million whites and 17 million blacks....and that narrows your stats right down.


When you look at how the media portrays the white athlete as slow, uncoordinated, dumb etc its not really surprising that very few white kids get involved in sprinting, basket ball, boxing.


However, the best white heavyweights of recent have been

Klitschkos
Maskaev
Lyakhovich
Valuev
Botha
Sanders
Coetzee

Thats 8 fighters that have won the World Championship over the last 20 years...and where do they come from?

South Africa, and the Former Soviet Union. Not exactly places known for bashing whitey, now are they?? I didn't think so either. They didn't grow up with stories of how "you'll be no good, the black man will beat you everytime":)

One of the best centers ever to play basketball came from Lithania: SABONIS was his name. Google that ass man!!:eek:

Corrie Sanders was the fastest punching southpaw heavyweight of all time and probably the fastest punching heavyweight, along with Mike Tyson, since Mohammed Ali.


So you see.....if more white people were involved in boxing, I am sure we would see more white contenders and white champions. Just look back to the so called "great white hopes" of the early 1900's. These men came together to avail of the lucative search for a white man to dethrone the first black Champion, Jack Johnson. Eventually, one of them did just that. Why? Because of all the great numbers that came forward to fight, some of them must have been good, right? Of course.



Another example: name the 5 biggest things to hit British Football in the last 15 years:

David Beckham
Michael Owen
Roy Keane
Wayne Rooney
Theo Walcott

And only one of them is "black" and even he has white blood. White kids are among the very very best in the world at football...because they PARTICIPATE in large numbers and because they BELIEVE that they can whip ass. So they do. Hell, Thierrry Henrys paternal Grandfather is WHITE!!! Would he be Henry without those genes, of course not!! Unlike Basketball, Boxing, where the sterotype has discouraged participation in these sports...despite some very high success rates, and despite the fact that 9 of Ring Magazines TOP 20 of the 20th Century Fighters were WHITE.


Just my opinions dude.

IT Loser

Clive wrote:

Well "pretty much all other sports" doesn't mean "majority of sports" but fair enough.

Of the 32 odd Olympic sports I listed, could you please point out which 17 or more that "blacks dominate".

Clive....England was considered the home of middle-distance running until the Kenyans arrived in the 1990's.

In time, English guys will come to dominate middle-distance again. The point I am trying to make to people is that once a people/race show an aptitude for a particular sport then that aptitude will remain there and will surface as soon as participation re-commences.


It is generally accepted that white {heavyweight} fighters of the early 1900' such as JJ Jeffries, Corbett, Fitzimmons, Dempsey, Loughran were some of the very very best to have ever fought for or won the title.

Just because whites turned away from heavyweight boxing from 1960-1990 doesn't mean that we've forgotten how to fight.

Jewish peoples used also have a high number of serious contenders in the sport in the early 1900's, but turned away in time from what they ultimately regarded as a vicious corrupt sport in favour of academic self-promotion.

Doesn't mean that Jewish kid can't fight anymore!!

SpAcEd OuT

IT Loser wrote:

I don't know what you mean by "dominated".....it doesn't have the slightest relevance UNLESS as many white people are as activley participant in the sport. Example: 200 million whites vs 35 million blacks. If 50% of the Black popln follow BasketBall, and try to make a career of it, and only 10% of the White population tries the same, then we have 20million whites and 17 million blacks....and that narrows your stats right down.

yes but they don't, to say 50 per cent of blacks play basketball is absoloutely ridiculous your basically saying that 1 in every 2 black people play basketball the percentage of black people that play basketball is likely to be the same or only a little higher than the percentage of white people that play basketball, yet they still completely dominate the sport even if your ridiculous statistics of one in every 2 black people playing basketball were true there would still be 2.5million more whites playing basketball yet less than 50 of them playing professionally compared to 300 blacks playing

IT Loser wrote:

When you look at how the media portrays the white athlete as slow, uncoordinated, dumb etc its not really surprising that very few white kids get involved in sprinting, basket ball, boxing.

How does the media potray white athletes as slow, uncoordinated and dumb because I have never once seen that, many white kids get involved in sports such as sprinting and basketball at a highschool level but most don't progress because of the simple fact that they aren't good enough, nothing to do with the media.

Boxing defiently seems to have a higher per centage of black fighters to white but there is still more white boxers to black and yet in the last century blacks have always seemed to come out on top [im going on the last 100 years unlike the last 1-2 years like you are]

IT Loser wrote:

However, the best white heavyweights of recent have been

Klitschkos
Maskaev
Lyakhovich
Valuev
Botha
Sanders
Coetzee

Thats 8 fighters that have won the World Championship over the last 20 years...and where do they come from?

yeah compared to around 28 black fighters who have won the championship in the last 20 years

IT Loser wrote:

So you see.....if more white people were involved in boxing, I am sure we would see more white contenders and white champions. Just look back to the so called "great white hopes" of the early 1900's. These men came together to avail of the lucative search for a white man to dethrone the first black Champion, Jack Johnson. Eventually, one of them did just that. Why? Because of all the great numbers that came forward to fight, some of them must have been good, right? Of course.

thing is there is more white people boxing than blacks

IT Loser wrote:

Another example: name the 5 biggest things to hit British Football in the last 15 years:

David Beckham
Michael Owen
Roy Keane
Wayne Rooney
Theo Walcott

the french team that won the world cup had 9 black players yet there is more white french playing soccer than there was black people in thier colonies.
Brazil considered the greatest team in the world is black dominated. The greatest player to ever hit the game Pele was black. The current best player in the game Ronaldinio is black

IT Loser wrote:

And only one of them is "black" and even he has white blood.

considering there is more than 30 times more whites in Britain than blacks and a black player made it in the top 5 that certainly shows something look at the odds, that is some achievment

IT Loser wrote:

Hell, Thierrry Henrys paternal Grandfather is WHITE!!! Would he be Henry without those genes, of course not!!

Henrys grandparents were of Antillean heritage actually why did you make that up

IT Loser wrote:

Unlike Basketball, Boxing, where the sterotype has discouraged participation in these sports...despite some very high success rates, and despite the fact that 9 of Ring Magazines TOP 20 of the 20th Century Fighters were WHITE.

yeah and the other 12 are black despite there being a higher number of white boxers

ed6hellsfresh

using specific cases is stupid in this argument. its like arguing that the chinese race arent on average maller than whites. . .because the is THIS ONE 7'6' guy in the nba. the argument shouldnt really be case specific

cowzerp

Most of the sports that are dominated by white athlethes are not popular in black areas-apart from boxing-boxing is going through a lull at the moment!
i'd bet any money that in 1-2 years it will go back to the way it historically has been-blacks dominating boxing-we'll see. i'm white by the way.

Myksyk

Michael Shermer (Skeptic magazine and Scientific American contributor) has written on this. Here's an essay from him on the subject.

LundiMardi

any chance of some better adjectives than ''the blacks'' or ''the whites''?:rolleyes:

cowzerp

LundiMardi wrote:

any chance of some better adjectives than ''the blacks'' or ''the whites''?:rolleyes:

Why do you not understand what we're saying? grow up

Pherekydes

cowzerp wrote:

Why do you not understand what we're saying?

No. Tell us.

Explain the terms 'black' and 'white'.

iregk

Jesus lads we are talking about sporting division and dominance. There is no need to start having a go at a term of phrase. Lets not start getting all pc now.

t-ha

iregk wrote:

Lets not start getting all pc now.

I'm with Lundi on this, & it's not because of being PC. Like I mentioned in the other recent & similar thread, there is a massive variation in the physical traits of all the groups of people who make up 'the blacks' or 'the whites' that keep coming up in the thread. Would you lump me in with Svend Karlsson and co. as 'the whites' (& please do! )?

I think IT Loser has raised some interesting points also about the parentage of those we consider to be 'black' or 'white' - particularly those from Europe or N. America.

I also think that there are so many factors involved in determining sporting success (social/cultural/economic/political) that it makes it very difficult to extract any undeniable proof that people with one skin colour are better at sports than people of another colour.

Don't be too surprised if China start kicking ass in many sports events pretty soon.

cowzerp

IT Loser wrote:

However, the best white heavyweights of recent have been

Klitschkos
Maskaev
Lyakhovich
Valuev
Botha
Sanders
Coetzee

Thats 8 fighters that have won the World Championship over the last 20 years...and where do they come from?

South Africa, and the Former Soviet Union. Not exactly places known for bashing whitey, now are they?? I didn't think so either. They didn't grow up with stories of how "you'll be no good, the black man will beat you everytime":)


All joking aside-the klitchko's are o'k! but the other boxers are crap-they are winning when the standard of heavy weight boxing is terrible-BOXING is a sport that genetics wont hold you back as there is so many different styles to suit your height and build-tyson short and stocky-fighter---lewis tall-boxer