Mmm, not sure what your telling, but can anyone confirm that the last man who said such things on national TV got fired, I think it was back in the 1980s.
It is just at such a striking variance with what you have been hearing from ESPN for so many decades... "Large thighs", "big, strong black guys bred during slavery", "superior natural athletes" blah blah blah...
And now we see that it's just a big empty bubble... Your brain is incapable to process it.
"You should have just left it at that. you are wasting a lot of precious brain power trying to figure out a way how, maybe, JUST maybe, white runners could match the success of black runners at sprints or distance running. it ain't happening."
It will never happen. Similarly like black boxers will never cease to dominate professional boxing, even after they face real international competition from former USSR. It's just unimaginable. They will dominate forever. And even if they weren't, we will just make some pathetic excuses, like that they started to be bored by this sport and moved to NFL. lol
Black men are just bigger all over.Even white women recognize this
fact.Ask Sarah Palin,she knows.
All international sports Americans are just another nation now. Tennis, Americans are fading, boxing and now track and field. The only sport that the still have a strangle hold on is swimming. Every other sport is a domestic sport that other nations barely play.
[quote]MmmmKay wrote:
Mmm, not sure what your telling, but can anyone confirm that the last man who said such things on national TV got fired, I think it was back in the 1980s.
[quote]
Yes. I know. Greeks are sharp observers. LOL
The voice of sanity wrote:
It will never happen. Similarly like black boxers will never cease to dominate professional boxing, even after they face real international competition from former USSR. It's just unimaginable. They will dominate forever. And even if they weren't, we will just make some pathetic excuses, like that they started to be bored by this sport and moved to NFL. lol
I think I have heard this kind of excuse from some posters in this thread about people not being interested in certain sports as soon as some groups begin to enter a sport in big numbers. Which one is more pathetic ?
Drugs,Drugs,Drugs wrote:
All international sports Americans are just another nation now. Tennis, Americans are fading, boxing and now track and field. The only sport that the still have a strangle hold on is swimming. Every other sport is a domestic sport that other nations barely play.
A lifestyle that is too comfortable naturally discourages from too demanding physical activities. Sometimes I wonder, if this is not the reason, why some European nations relatively underachieve in sports, despite their exceptional sports potential. It is a paradox that with the increasing comfort (and increasing body size), people cease to see sports as a way to make living.
Lpd, you initially made some interesting points, but unfortunately reverted to spewing BS about pedophilia/homosexuality, meanwhile also just picking and chosing whatever facts serve you best and not responding to anyone trying to have a normal discussion. Instead you just keep repeating that blacks are athletically superior.
First of all, does running ability define athletic superiority? You ignore the technical numbers like pole vault, hammer throw, discus, shot put, javelin throw etc., where whites are superior. Not to mention the plethora of sports where whites are dominant and blacks almost non-existent. In fact, blacks are well-represented in only a limited number of sports: basketball, T&F, baseball, NFL, soccer, what else?
Secondly, you chose to simply ignore the relative percentages of blacks and whites going for a career in sports, which sport they choose and any socio-economic reasons behind it. In the US, for example, The sports I just mentioned are pretty much the only ones where you can make big bucks and become famous (+ tennis/golf/hockey, where you find few successful blacks). Considering the relatively poor average socio-economic status of blacks, it is no surprise that they relatively often choose those sports over other sports. Combine this with the popularity of particular sports among certain races and you have most of the reasons.
E.g. in Kenya/Ethiopia/Jamaica, sports almost exclusively revolves around running. When everybody tries the same sport, obviously big talents will surface.
Same is true the other way around: I'm Dutch and we are the tallest nation in the world, yet we suck at basketball. Why? Don't even believe it's because we lack the athleticism. The sport is simply unpopular and we have no good system/coaches etc, so hardly anyone plays the sport. Likewise, few people choose T&F, since many other sports are far more popular.
One of the funniest things in the world is that if you average typical physiques in 20 main athletic events, you will get a physique that is virtually 100% identical to that of a physically active Dutch man (183.6 cm, BMI 23.63 kg/m2). Yet the Dutch ignore athletics almost completely...
Something similar applies for former Yugoslavians, who ineffectively waste their extraordinary sports talent in team sports. And some people still believe that athletics objectively reflects the global athletic potential... What a joke!
Even the fact that you can see so many runners from little populous nations of the Carribean flooding track is not enough to wake people up. (But to be honest, it took almost 10 years, until I myself realized this.)
Same is true the other way around: I'm Dutch and we are the tallest nation in the world, yet we suck at basketball. Why? Don't even believe it's because we lack the athleticism. The sport is simply unpopular and we have no good system/coaches etc, so hardly anyone plays the sport. Likewise, few people choose T&F, since many other sports are far more popular.
And I should add that basketball (and vollyeball) are played by one of the smallest nations of European descent (Spaniards, Turks, Italians, Argentinians). The tallest nations in Europe play handball or ice hockey.
This paradox is quite understandable, however, because the height requirements in those two sports are so extreme that they eliminate 90+% of the male population from any serious participation. You need a very specific (and quite perverse) sports culture to make these sports naturally popular.
Athletics track is the purest form of any sports.Just you and the elements.
Whites say they are good at rowing,archery,ice hockey.These are club
recreational sports that outside of a few countries,the rest of the world
couldn't care about.As for swimming,the Asians are beginning to make
inroads and will eventually surpass whites as they have done in diving.
And heaven helps whites if blacks ever take swimming seriously.A
Chinese sports official when asked why the Chinese invest so heavily
in aquatic sports,said they avoid sports that interest blacks because
they know they have no chance but are confident they can compete
against and beat whites.The Chinese have no illusions.
The voice of INsanity wrote:
One of the funniest things in the world is that if you average typical physiques in 20 main athletic events, you will get a physique that is virtually 100% identical to that of a physically active Dutch man (183.6 cm, BMI 23.63 kg/m2). Yet the Dutch ignore athletics almost completely...
One of the funniest things in the world is watching people like you ramble on and on and on and on practically incoherently while thinking they are making some amazingly astute and profound points.
WTF is your obsession with the Dutch men? I mean, if you have a crush, that's cool, I will not judge. So you think that tall people are almost always good at sports??? What on earth are you smoking? The sport we are mostly talking about here is running, and height has very little to do with success at this sport. You seem absolutely convinced that if the Dutch put their collective minds to it, and dedicated everything they had to success in running they'd be taking down the best black sprinters and best east african distance runners. Isn't that your beyond ridiculous point?
The voice of INsanity wrote:Even the fact that you can see so many runners from little populous nations of the Carribean flooding track is not enough to wake people up. (But to be honest, it took almost 10 years, until I myself realized this.)
What on earth point are you trying to make here? The runners from those little Caribbean nations have, for the most part, the same genetic heritage as do the formerly dominant US black sprinters. This fact is entirely consistent with the notion that best black sprinters are more talented than the best white sprinters. You are blabbing on so much you've confused yourself entirely. (not that that would take much)
lpd wrote:
Athletics track is the purest form of any sports.Just you and the elements.
Whites say they are good at rowing,archery,ice hockey.These are club
recreational sports that outside of a few countries,the rest of the world
couldn't care about.As for swimming,the Asians are beginning to make
inroads and will eventually surpass whites as they have done in diving.
And heaven helps whites if blacks ever take swimming seriously.A
Chinese sports official when asked why the Chinese invest so heavily
in aquatic sports,said they avoid sports that interest blacks because
they know they have no chance but are confident they can compete
against and beat whites.The Chinese have no illusions.
It is O.K. that this list of anecdotes can boost your confidence.
BTW, I checked this year's performance lists in the long jump. Can you tell me, please, where is any US white long jumper among the 126 ones, who achieved at least 785 cm?
http://www.iaaf.org/records/toplists/jumps/long-jump/outdoor/men/senior/2013Since we know so well that blacks are such superior athletes, it is quite understandable that no US white guy can jump farther. Indeed, the names like Aleksandr Menkov, Jinzhe Li, Christian Reif, Loúis Tsátoumas etc. sound suspiciously African. No wonder that US whites even don't dare to compete in such an event dominated by invincible blacks.
Blacks should try Olympic/Greco-Roman wrestling. That is one of the other pure sports and is as old as running is, as a sport. Mano-a-mano.
I don't know if I would call diving a sport. Should be in the same category as billiards, requires calm, collective, relaxed and disciplined behavior, like darts and golf as well.
What is often believed as "the way it is" is often changed eventually...
If all healthy people focused on sports for a decade around their prime, I am pretty darn sure all sorts of new finding would happen and new results.
A very tiny percentage of the population actually take any sport serious at any time. So I don't think we have enough of a segment of the world's population to draw concrete conclusion at this time....
We can already draw conclusions.The IAAF study shows that Europe
has the most participation in athletics.Most people in Africa,Asia,
South America are busy just surviving day to day.Even with this
overwhelmingly predominant participation by whites,blacks still
dominate them.So,we already know who is winning and who isn't.
Tyrannosaurus Rexing wrote:
The voice of INsanity wrote:One of the funniest things in the world is that if you average typical physiques in 20 main athletic events, you will get a physique that is virtually 100% identical to that of a physically active Dutch man (183.6 cm, BMI 23.63 kg/m2). Yet the Dutch ignore athletics almost completely...
One of the funniest things in the world is watching people like you ramble on and on and on and on practically incoherently while thinking they are making some amazingly astute and profound points.
WTF is your obsession with the Dutch men? I mean, if you have a crush, that's cool, I will not judge. So you think that tall people are almost always good at sports??? What on earth are you smoking? The sport we are mostly talking about here is running, and height has very little to do with success at this sport. You seem absolutely convinced that if the Dutch put their collective minds to it, and dedicated everything they had to success in running they'd be taking down the best black sprinters and best east african distance runners. Isn't that your beyond ridiculous point?
The voice of INsanity wrote:Even the fact that you can see so many runners from little populous nations of the Carribean flooding track is not enough to wake people up. (But to be honest, it took almost 10 years, until I myself realized this.)
What on earth point are you trying to make here? The runners from those little Caribbean nations have, for the most part, the same genetic heritage as do the formerly dominant US black sprinters. This fact is entirely consistent with the notion that best black sprinters are more talented than the best white sprinters. You are blabbing on so much you've confused yourself entirely. (not that that would take much)
It seems to me that Tyrannosaurus rex was not the brightest species. This is probably why it died out.
Tall people are actually good in a very significant majority of sports. Body height is the major determinant of sports success overall. If it were not true, Olympic athletes wouldn't be markedly taller than their native population. (They are, by ca. 5-6 cm on average.)
Among the major Olympic sports, only long distance running, gymnastics, diving, trampoline, badminton, table tennis, mountain biking and partly road cycling (depending on terrain) require body height below 180 cm. You can add weight categories in martial and strength sports, but these are largely bogus and artifical activities for small-sized people.
At Winter Olympics, you could find more sports with lower height requirements (mainly figure skating, short-distance speed skating, ski jumping and various acrobatic events), but understandably, the international competition is inevitably lower as well.
Olympic sports that are most demanding in terms of body height (190+ cm) are basketball, volleyball, handball, waterpolo, short-distance swimming (crawl), rowing, heavyweight divisions of combat sports (taekwondo, boxing, judo), bobsledding, high jump, discus throw, shot put.
BTW, height in running is a damn important factor! Short-distance sprinters are not too tall on average (about 181-182 cm), because excessive height would hamper acceleration. The longer the distance, the taller the runners are: In the 400 m, they are the tallest (at least 185 cm on average), because this distance relies on anaerobic capacity that increases with body size.
After aerobic metabolism gets the upper hand (which happens after ca. 55-72 seconds, according to mathematical estimations), runners again become smaller: About 180-181 cm in the 800 m, about 176-178 cm in the 1500 m. (And I should add that around 1990, the average height of a 800 m runner was about 183 cm, and that of a 1500 m runners was ca. 180 cm. The African participation pulled the means down, but as we know, clean times are not faster than in mid-80's.) In the 10 000 m and the marathon, average height falls below 170 cm, because small body dimensions are closely tied with running economy.
And we shouldn't forget that height is very important in the hurdles: The average 110 m hurdler is about 186 cm tall (i.e. the tallest among all runners), the average 400 m hurdler is not much different from runners in the flat race (ca. 185 cm).
In summary, the current ethnic composition of athletic champions in the 400-1500 m doesn't fit the anthropometric data. In the 400-800 m it is really hilarious. Simply absurd. People often think that when the 400 m is a "sprint", it means that the dominant runners must come from the same nations that dominate the 100-200 m. This is wrong. The 400 m distance has markedly different requirements, both in terms of physiology and body type.
The most grotesque thing is that the available data on the muscle fiber composition don't indicate that there would be any marked physiological differences between Europeans and West Africans in this distance. Certainly not in women, because the muscle fiber composition in Europeans in vastus lateralis muscle (ca. 55% fast-twitch fibers) would just ideally fit in a race that is slightly anaerobic (i.e. lasting 50-55 seconds or so). In contrast, the muscle fiber composition in West African blacks would be closest to the 200-300 m.
For a long time, I was thinking over the roots of the current situation in the 400-1500 m. I couldn't grasp it. It was simply mindboggling. Moroccans and Kenyans, 171 cm tall, dominating the 800-1500 m?! Eventually, I had to resort to the simplest explanation: People in the industrialized world don't give a damn about track. Yes, it's so simple. And since that time, I don't take track results seriously anymore.
lpd wrote:
We can already draw conclusions.The IAAF study shows that Europe
has the most participation in athletics.Most people in Africa,Asia,
South America are busy just surviving day to day.Even with this
overwhelmingly predominant participation by whites,blacks still
dominate them.So,we already know who is winning and who isn't.
An IAAF article that I read several years ago stated that the majority of runners in UK are "fun runners", and the average age of a distance race winner is about 40 years.
Yes skinny Kenyans who are Ectomorphs and West Africans who zero stamina are going to dominate swimming. All of the Blacks who have medaled less Colin Jones have been biracial or in the case of Anthony Irvin virtually non West African. There is reason why anything above 800 meters West African representation is abysmal and it's not because of aversion to the events.
Listen, mate, there was a time when the world thought Finns were genetically superior and at one time Brits, New Zealanders...which are mostly the same anyway. Then there was the time that Native North Americans were thought to be superior because the tiny pedestrianism game had some natives.
What is certain one day, changes later, it seems.
Wait 10 or 20 years...who is next? People of India, right? Possibly!!
Yes North American Indians were deemed genetically superior to Caucasians in endurance running and even had star players in the NFL at positions that required speed. Now you scarcely find a North American Indian in any long distance running event and no full blooded Native Americans are in the NFL.