Olympic Athlete Claims Blacks are superior to Whites

Originally posted by getreadyalready
And here is a typical Youtube video of a track meet, where a Sophomore in High School runs a 10.3, and you might notice all the competitors are black.

high school is a no brainer really. Blacks physically mature quicker than whites.

reply to post by Debunkology

high school is a no brainer really. Blacks physically mature quicker than whites.

I don't know if that is true or not, but if it is true, then it could be combined with my buddy's thesis about birthdates, and it gives even more weight and reasons to why black people are better athletes. If they mature quicker, and are better players at younger ages, then they will also get more playing time, more experience, and more coaching at younger ages due to being better players earlier. All of that experience will follow them throughout their career.

So, now it looks like we have a 3rd theory as to why they are better athletes.

Could be:
1. More fast-twitch muscle fiber
2. Extra, or bigger muscle in the achille's tendon, hamstring area
3. Earlier physical maturation.

Could be all 3!!!

Regardless, it seems obvious to me that they are more athletic in general.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by Debunkology

 

high school is a no brainer really. Blacks physically mature quicker than whites.

I don't know if that is true or not, but if it is true, then it could be combined with my buddy's thesis about birthdates, and it gives even more weight and reasons to why black people are better athletes. If they mature quicker, and are better players at younger ages, then they will also get more playing time, more experience, and more coaching at younger ages due to being better players earlier. All of that experience will follow them throughout their career.

So, now it looks like we have a 3rd theory as to why they are better athletes.

Could be:
1. More fast-twitch muscle fiber
2. Extra, or bigger muscle in the achille's tendon, hamstring area
3. Earlier physical maturation.

Could be all 3!!!

Regardless, it seems obvious to me that they are more athletic in general.

edit on 5-7-2012 by getreadyalready because: (no reason given)

I don't see how physical maturation at an earlier stage could benefit a player other than his/her peers being overlooked. Plus again, it also depends on exactly what sport we are talking about.

Also the term athletic has many factors. One being speed, and an other being endurance. A person with fast twitch muscle fibres will be fast off the mark. But the person with slow twitch muscle fibres will have better endurance. So which one is the more athletic?? The guy who can run 100 meters fast? Or the guy who can run a marathon faster?

reply to post by Debunkology

I don't see how physical maturation at an earlier stage could benefit a player other than his/her peers being overlooked. Plus again, it also depends on exactly what sport we are talking about.

I stated exactly how, and I stated in a way earlier post that a friend of mine did his Thesis study on this very principle. He studied the likelihood of a hockey player making it into the NHL, and he discovered birthdate was the #1 determining factor of success. The reason was precisely "early physical maturation."

The kids that are physically mature at an earlier age, are going to be the best kids on the young teams, and as such, they are going to get more playing time, more responsibility, more coaching, and more experience. So, they were already physically better, just do to being a little older, but now they improve upon that physical advantage by also having a mental advantage by way of coaching and experience. This situation stays apparent all through high school and into college sports until all the players have eventually completed puberty. We're talking 10-20 years of extra coaching, extra experience, extra responsibility on the playing field, mentoring less athletic peers, etc., etc.

So, what starts off as a physical advantage just because someone has a birthdate that makes them several months older than their counterparts, eventually gets them knowledge, experience, confidence, etc.

reply to post by Debunkology


I am just going off science here nothing else.

reply to post by getreadyalready
What proof do you have to back up any of your claims?

Originally posted by Jaellma
reply to post by getreadyalready

 

What proof do you have to back up any of your claims?

"Any of my claims?"

I posted videos, I posted stats from record books, I gave a billion examples. Perhaps you should go back and read my posts again.

reply to post by getreadyalready
I really don't want to turn this wonderful thread into mush. All your claims are just theories, no scientific study to back it up. As a matter of fact, even though a segment of blacks excel in sprints, you also have whites who do so, as posted on the previous page.

There are also white high school sprinters who run sub 10.5 seconds 100m sprints. Nothing new. Again, all you have are claims, stories and results from races, etc but no scientific study to prove one race is superior to the other in athletics.

I am all for disclosure and proof but for anyone to make a claim that one race is better than the other in sports or athletics need to provide empirical and fully tested studies to back up their claims.

reply to post by Jaellma


The top 10 finishers in the Boston Marathon were Kenyan and Ethiopian. Every major track record is held by a black person, the powerlifting records are falling to black people, the NFL and NBA are dominated by black players. Someone already tried the "not scientific" argument earlier, and I showed where this hypothesis precisely follows the scientific method. We observe something repeatedly, and we form an hypothesis, and then we test that hypothesis and either strengthen or weaken it, or tweak it to make it more appropriate.

My hypothesis is already well-stated, and backed up with a ton of observation, it is your turn to disprove it. And, naming a few exceptions to the overwhelming rule does not disprove it, it just proves there are exceptions.

this argument is like objectively viewing animals and their speeds,,,,,, but people get emotional because either they are slightly racist/insecure and do not want to admit that a black person may be superior then them at something.... or idk what else it can be..,,..,.,.,.,,.,.

noone would argue a gazelle to be just as fast as a cheetah when we have scientific proof of cheetahs being able to run faster.....

with the running thing I have heard it has something to do with the structure of the hips and muscles I guess in that region,..,.,.,. ( maybe related to why black women have sterotypically larger ) and this is why blacks excel at running ,,,,,, and why whites are better at swimming.,,.,.,... blacks from africa ,, like the cheetah needed to adapt to run fast,.,.,.,.

reply to post by getreadyalready

The top 10 finishers in the Boston Marathon were Kenyan and Ethiopian. Every major track record is held by a black person, the powerlifting records are falling to black people, the NFL and NBA are dominated by black players. Someone already tried the "not scientific" argument earlier, and I showed where this hypothesis precisely follows the scientific method. We observe something repeatedly, and we form an hypothesis, and then we test that hypothesis and either strengthen or weaken it, or tweak it to make it more appropriate.

My hypothesis is already well-stated, and backed up with a ton of observation, it is your turn to disprove it. And, naming a few exceptions to the overwhelming rule does not disprove it, it just proves there are exceptions.

Ha! What a load of crock! Your hypothesis is not based on any sound foundation. What you have observed is a group or groups of people gravitating to a sports or activities and sticking to it over time. Of course they will get good at it and the results will show it.

I am sure if you put any other group of people and have them focus on it and work extremely hard at it without outside influences taking their attention away, you will get similar results.

Again, you don't have proof of anything just pure observation BUT your observation does not take into account cultural affinity for a particular activity. If you factor that in, you would not come up with your educated guess.

reply to post by Jaellma


what are you talking about? are you white?

you dont think blacks are better at basketball then white people?

you dont think blacks can run faster then white people?

what is your argument?

that the only reason blacks are better at these things is that they practice more? that takes individual value away from everything everyone has ever done,,,,,, leonardo da vinci just practiced painting more..,, mozart just spent more time then me making music,, of course hes better..


ahh, I can see the argument now,,,, you are upset in thinking that because this person is black he will have an advantage of winning a running race,,.,.. its not about that,,,,, there are plenty of black people who couldnt run down the block!! its about the cream of the crop,,,,, the best of the best,.,.,.,. the elite,,.,,. the best black runners can beat the best white runners,,.,.,. the best black basketball players can beat the best white basketball players.,,.., its not every black person is better then every white person,,,,,,

reply to post by ImaFungi

that the only reason blacks are better at these things is that they practice more?

That is exactly my point. You are saying the same thing I am saying, up until that point. Everything else you are saying is irrelevant. In any case, as you also pointed out, blacks, or anyone else for that matter, if given an opportunity to practice and practice and do something over and over will excel at it.

It is as simple as that.

Hopefully you get it now.

reply to post by Jaellma



im saying thats untrue........


white people can practice for 30 years at playing basketball,,,,,, white people probably invented the game of basket ball,,,,,, the best white basketball players probably would not beat the best black basketball player,..,,.,. even if they practice the same amount of time.,.,.,.,

and switch that with the running example as well,,, my excuse is the adaptive structure of the body,,, the ability,,,, is there a professional running sprint on youtube where a white man comes in first place?

Originally posted by ImaFungi
reply to post by Jaellma

 

is there a professional running sprint on youtube where a white man comes in first place?

I'm not going to bother researching, but straight off the top of my head. Jonathan Edwards won gold at the Olympics for triple jump. And he still holds the world record, and has done since 1995. With a jump of 18.29m




He also holds the second biggest record, and third biggest record.

Fourth place world record is Willie Banks with 17.97m, he is black.

lol, I thought that said running jump. (I'm tired)

I posted a youtube video before of a white guy winning gold at the Euros 100m (he also won gold at the 200m). His fastest at the 100m is 9.90 I think.

reply to post by Debunkology


okok ,,,.,
i yahoo answered fastest 100 m


Through the 2008 Olympic Games in Beijing, the fastest men's 100 meter times:
1) 9.69 - Usain Bolt, 2008 Olympics
2) 9.72 - Usain Bolt, 2008
3) 9.74 - Asafa Powell, 2007
4) 9.77 - Asafa Powell, 2007
5) 9.77 - Asafa Powell, 2006
6) 9.77 - Justin Gatlin, 2006
7) 9.77 - Asafa Powell, 2005
8) 9.79 - Maurice Greene, 1999

Usain Bolt has since run 9.58s at the IAAF World Championships in Berlin 16/8/09.

The top times are now

9.58 - Usain Bolt (JAM), Berlin 2009
9.69 - Bolt, Beijing 2008 / Tyson Gay (USA), Shanghai 2009
9.71 - Gay, Berlin 2009
9.72 - Bolt, New York 2008

Originally posted by ImaFungi
9.58 - Usain Bolt (JAM), Berlin 2009
9.69 - Bolt, Beijing 2008 / Tyson Gay (USA), Shanghai 2009
9.71 - Gay, Berlin 2009
9.72 - Bolt, New York 2008

So the difference between the fastest black guy (who seems to be destroying everyone else), and the fastest white guy recorded today. Is a difference of 0.32 seconds over 100 meters.

The fastest white guy at 200m held the world record from 1979-1996, with a record of 19.72. With wind against. Michael Johnson broke that, then finally the amazing Usain Bolt with 19.19. So the difference again is 0.53 seconds over 200 meters.

400m, Jeremy Wariner (white guy) is 3rd in world record with 43.45 seconds. Michael Johnson (black guy) holds the world record in 400m with 43.18. So the difference there is 0.27

800m record is set by David Rudisha (kenyan) (1.41.01), the 3rd place world record was set by Sebastian Coe (white guy), who actually held the world record from 1981-1997.

So that's a difference of......
0.32 seconds over 100meters
0.53 seconds over 200meters
0.27 seconds over 400meters
0.72 seconds over 800meters