Community >> View Thread
1 2  >> All
Author
Bk Ray

Moderator

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 6,863



White, Caucasian men tend to dominate strongman competitions.

Blacks tend to dominate boxing (I can only think of Tyson Fury and Klitschko) and sprint events.

Gymnastics is starting to have equal representation at the highest level.

MMA does tend to be predominately white.

A strange mix here.







Moderator: Spiderman Board, Moderator: Star Trek Board
Posted with Google Chrome 64.0.3282.186 on Windows 10
The Black Guardian

Moderator

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 24,168


I don't think it's about any sort of advantage. It's a cultural thing. For instance, the breeding grounds for MMA (the gyms) tend to be almost entirely White culture. From what I hear, this is even true in Asia. Boxing gyms tend toward Blacks and Latinos.


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 58.0 on Windows 10
zvelf


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 9,612



    Quote:
    MMA does tend to be predominately white.


I'm not sure about the percentage of mixed martial artists who are white, but whites certainly don't dominate at the top echelons. Of the 8 UFC men's champions, only 3 (Stipe Miocic, Conor McGregor, T.J. Dillashaw) are white. Daniel Cormier, Tyron Woodley, and Demetrius Johnson are black. Robert Whitaker and Max Holloway have Polynesian heritages (Maori and Samoan, respectively).

The UFC women's champions are a little harder to categorize. Cris Cyborg and Amanda Nunes are white latinos from Brazil. Nicco Montano is Native American (Navajo). Rose Namajunas is white (via parents from Lithuania).



Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 7
Dragon Red


Member Since: Fri Jul 05, 2013
Posts: 1,069


Swimming tends to be dominated with whites

Basketball seems to be dominated with blacks.

Bot of these I get. Because on average Blacks far as I am aware do tend to be naturally taller than Whites. Also swimming, i think that may be down to whites having a bit less bone density




Posted with Google Chrome 64.0.3282.186 on Windows 7
Bk Ray

Moderator

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 6,863



I'll give you MMA, seems quite even on the board.





Moderator: Spiderman Board, Moderator: Star Trek Board
Posted with Google Chrome 64.0.3282.186 on Windows 10
The Black Guardian

Moderator

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 24,168



    Quote:
    Swimming tends to be dominated with whites



    Quote:
    Basketball seems to be dominated with blacks.



    Quote:
    Bot of these I get. Because on average Blacks far as I am aware do tend to be naturally taller than Whites. Also swimming, i think that may be down to whites having a bit less bone density

No. There's practically no difference in heights, on average.


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 58.0 on Windows 10
Dragon Red


Member Since: Fri Jul 05, 2013
Posts: 1,069


When I lived in Birmingham and worked there for a number of years, close to a decade in fact. As a rule of thumb my black colleagues looked bigger than my white colleagues did, broadly speaking of course.

So it must be a perception thing on my part then. For me its difficult to judge what short and tall really are, because from my perspective most people look small to me. But anyway, I stand corrected. \:\-\)


Posted with Google Chrome 64.0.3282.186 on Windows 7
Bk Ray

Moderator

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 6,863



I remember being taller than most of the Fijin's I met, well built but not excessively tall (I am 6'2).





Moderator: Spiderman Board, Moderator: Star Trek Board
Posted with Google Chrome 64.0.3282.186 on Windows 10
Thurisaz


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 5,665


I don't believe it is a race advantage. Anymore than finding a great scientist, philosopher, or artist has roots in race. There is no mecca of talent from one particular race that will determine success. That said, you can certainly find trends and there are reasons your question is valid.

Exposure to a sport, and the ability to pay for the resources to develop a young athlete are very influential factors. Soccer is the most popular sport in the world. Because all you need is a patch of grass and a ball. Raising a successful athlete in sports like hockey, swimming or tennis require a dedicated space and equipment. Which means money. Which races hold wealth and which race of people dominate those sports? White people, mostly. Williams sisters kicking arse buck the trend but are not an exception because...money.

But money isn't the entire answer. There is the Jimmy the Greek argument. Which is a USA thing. And he got fired. And I'll probably get sh&t for bringing it up. But you asked.

Unpopular to talk about but obviously real. Goes like this. Slave owners bred the Africans slaves they imported to be strong. Treated them like cattle. Their descendants are the product of that selective breeding and so excel in areas of strength and speed. Thus, the NBA and NFL show upwards of 65% representation of black athletes even though the overall population is about 13%.

That ugly episode in history aside, I really don't believe there is any inherent difference that would lead to anyone failing or succeeding in a sport.

Though if there were a previous example in history where natural selection or selective breeding came into play (are Canadian arms just made for Curling?) I'd be open to hearing about it.

Oh, I forgot about climate. But the bobsledders from the Caribbean put that to rest. But still, ski jumpers probably come from the Northern hemisphere. Mostly.






[URL=http://s1362.photobucket.com/user/wulabo/media/Doom_zps60271c02.jpg.html][IMG]http://i1362.photobucket.com/albums/r693/wulabo/Doom_zps60271c02.jpg[/IMG][/URL]
Posted with Google Chrome 63.0.3239.132 on Windows 10
MysteryMan


Member Since: Fri Apr 28, 2017
Posts: 1,922





    Quote:
    Unpopular to talk about but obviously real. Goes like this. Slave owners bred the Africans slaves they imported to be strong. Treated them like cattle. Their descendants are the product of that selective breeding and so excel in areas of strength and speed. Thus, the NBA and NFL show upwards of 65% representation of black athletes even though the overall population is about 13%.



The reason this is unpopular is because it then also implies they were bred to be docile and less intelligent as beasts of burden.

These horrific slavers may have tried to do this...but it would have taken many many generations.


Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 10
Trent Trueheart


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 684



    Quote:

      Quote:
      Unpopular to talk about but obviously real. Goes like this. Slave owners bred the Africans slaves they imported to be strong. Treated them like cattle. Their descendants are the product of that selective breeding and so excel in areas of strength and speed. Thus, the NBA and NFL show upwards of 65% representation of black athletes even though the overall population is about 13%.



    Quote:

    The reason this is unpopular is because it then also implies they were bred to be docile and less intelligent as beasts of burden.



    Quote:
    These horrific slavers may have tried to do this...but it would have taken many many generations.


It's also unpopular because there is no real evidence. Like you said, some may have tried, but I doubt it lasted long enough or was widespread enough to lead to any changes we would see today. Let's not forget, it took a lot longer to reach puberty back then, and you would need at least 5 generations before you started seeing results. If a generation is about 20 years, we're looking at 100 years before we start seeing changes. That means if a slave owner started selective breeding, his son and grandson would have to continue it before seeing results. I don't know if that's likely since it eventually becomes better to play a numbers game.



Posted with Mozilla Firefox 58.0 on Windows 10
MysteryMan


Member Since: Fri Apr 28, 2017
Posts: 1,922



    Quote:

      Quote:

        Quote:
        Unpopular to talk about but obviously real. Goes like this. Slave owners bred the Africans slaves they imported to be strong. Treated them like cattle. Their descendants are the product of that selective breeding and so excel in areas of strength and speed. Thus, the NBA and NFL show upwards of 65% representation of black athletes even though the overall population is about 13%.

      Quote:

        Quote:

        The reason this is unpopular is because it then also implies they were bred to be docile and less intelligent as beasts of burden.

        Quote:

          Quote:
          These horrific slavers may have tried to do this...but it would have taken many many generations.



    Quote:
    It's also unpopular because there is no real evidence. Like you said, some may have tried, but I doubt it lasted long enough or was widespread enough to lead to any changes we would see today. Let's not forget, it took a lot longer to reach puberty back then, and you would need at least 5 generations before you started seeing results. If a generation is about 20 years, we're looking at 100 years before we start seeing changes. That means if a slave owner started selective breeding, his son and grandson would have to continue it before seeing results. I don't know if that's likely since it eventually becomes better to play a numbers game.


Yep...pretty much in agreement on both these points.


Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 10
Dragon Red


Member Since: Fri Jul 05, 2013
Posts: 1,069


What are you guys on about? If a slave owner wanted big strong slaves for the next generation, all they have to do is take a big strong slave and use him like a stud horse, and hey presto, chances are most of his off spring will grow up to be big and strong like himself. In one generation.




Posted with Google Chrome 64.0.3282.186 on Windows 10
bd2999


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 15,596


I mean there may be something to that but one also has to think that culture and expectations play into it. We know that athletes come in all colors, races and ethnic groups (also sexes, genders etc).

However, if one considers African American's in the US than many are going to be geared towards basketball or football. Not so much hockey. Does not mean it is a zero sum game but that does slant things.




Look Raist bunnies...
Posted with Mozilla Firefox 58.0 on Windows 7
zvelf


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 9,612



    Quote:
    Bot of these I get. Because on average Blacks far as I am aware do tend to be naturally taller than Whites. Also swimming, i think that may be down to whites having a bit less bone density


I think these are relatively easy to explain. In the United States, blacks tend to be far more economically disadvantaged than whites and access to many swimming pools costs money. Basketball is not a costly sport and public courts are readily available in most cities and school yards making basketball the most easily accessible of the major sports. Football and baseball tend to require large fields, and when played appropriately, football gear and helmets, baseball mits, etc. are pricier than needing just one basketball.




Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 7
Thurisaz


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 5,665



    Quote:
    What are you guys on about? If a slave owner wanted big strong slaves for the next generation, all they have to do is take a big strong slave and use him like a stud horse, and hey presto, chances are most of his off spring will grow up to be big and strong like himself. In one generation.


The lack of evidence I believe they are referring to deals with the racist notion that this selective breeding was intended and/or had the effect of lowering the intelligence of the offspring. Which, certainly there is no evidence that I am aware of. However, to your common sense take on the physical impact...the evidence is obvious. In terms of speed and strength the African American athlete is unbelievable. How else do you account for 13% of the population having north of 65% representation in sports where physical speed and strength are critical, namely American football and basketball.

If it were not a function of selective breeding for enhanced physical attributes and rather a function of something specific in the DNA inherited then Africa would be a pro sports recruiter's dream. Yet we find that is not the case.

I don't argue that slave owners may have had the intent of breeding them for lower intelligence but clearly if they did that failed. 21st century understanding of intelligence is still a mystery. The 17th and 18th century versions of what makes someone smart were even more remedial. Heck, in the 20th century they were still measuring skulls to gauge intelligence.

So, while the discussion over the impact selective breeding by slave owners had is taboo, because it supposedly lowered intelligence, if you rightfully remove that from the equation you are left with observable evidence that it had a physical impact.




[URL=http://s1362.photobucket.com/user/wulabo/media/Doom_zps60271c02.jpg.html][IMG]http://i1362.photobucket.com/albums/r693/wulabo/Doom_zps60271c02.jpg[/IMG][/URL]
Posted with Google Chrome 63.0.3239.132 on Windows 10
Dragon Red


Member Since: Fri Jul 05, 2013
Posts: 1,069



    Quote:
    The lack of evidence I believe they are referring to deals with the racist notion that this selective breeding was intended and/or had the effect of lowering the intelligence of the offspring. Which, certainly there is no evidence that I am aware of. However, to your common sense take on the physical impact...the evidence is obvious. In terms of speed and strength the African American athlete is unbelievable. How else do you account for 13% of the population having north of 65% representation in sports where physical speed and strength are critical, namely American football and basketball.


Thanks for that. I was legitimately having difficulty following the conversation. But yes, how indeed do you account for those percentages? It is really telling if you look at it. Basketball is a very tiring and physical game despite being non-contact sport and I did play it at university in my youth and I can say I did find it absolutely exhausting. American Football is just something else entirely. Brutal!


    Quote:
    I don't argue that slave owners may have had the intent of breeding them for lower intelligence but clearly if they did that failed. 21st century understanding of intelligence is still a mystery. The 17th and 18th century versions of what makes someone smart were even more remedial. Heck, in the 20th century they were still measuring skulls to gauge intelligence.


I have read a lot of history admittedly, not much about slavery as a whole. Truth is, most races on earth at one time or another have had a turn at being slaves so its a much bigger and older topic than in the context of just the slave trade, however, what little I did read about the slave trade... I would assume from the books and accounts contained therein that, most, slave owners basically regarded the slaves as just beasts of burden who were capable of speaking. So since the slave owners regarded them as lower intelligence anyway, they would not bother wasting their time and effort trying to make them even more stupid (I am not saying slaves were stupid to be clear, but from a slave owners perspective probably they did see them as stupid), what a slave owner would want is more beasts of burden for the future. And that as we know is easily and readily achievable.






Posted with Google Chrome 65.0.3325.146 on Windows 10
MysteryMan


Member Since: Fri Apr 28, 2017
Posts: 1,922



    Quote:

      Quote:
      The lack of evidence I believe they are referring to deals with the racist notion that this selective breeding was intended and/or had the effect of lowering the intelligence of the offspring. Which, certainly there is no evidence that I am aware of. However, to your common sense take on the physical impact...the evidence is obvious. In terms of speed and strength the African American athlete is unbelievable. How else do you account for 13% of the population having north of 65% representation in sports where physical speed and strength are critical, namely American football and basketball.



    Quote:
    Thanks for that. I was legitimately having difficulty following the conversation. But yes, how indeed do you account for those percentages? It is really telling if you look at it. Basketball is a very tiring and physical game despite being non-contact sport and I did play it at university in my youth and I can say I did find it absolutely exhausting. American Football is just something else entirely. Brutal!


And Hockey isn't? And rugby isn't? And tennis matches in a blazing sun isn't an endurance feat?

There are all sorts of statistics supporting all sorts of false assumptions about one race being mentally or physically superior.

As the old saying goes there are lies....there are damn lies...and then there are statistics.

The belief or thought that one race is smarter or stronger or faster or whatever...is part of why things like racism exist. One group feels superior than another, and with very little true evidence.


Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 10
Thurisaz


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 5,665





    Quote:
    The belief or thought that one race is smarter or stronger or faster or whatever...is part of why things like racism exist. One group feels superior than another, and with very little true evidence.


The example being discussed isn't proposing that one race is stronger or smarter than another. That's the point. If people with African DNA were inherently stronger then we would see enormous representation by them in competitive sports around the world. But we do not.

However, there is a specific segment of that population who underwent circumstances designed to enhance strength and the statistical evidence is hardly anecdotal or misconstruing data.

I'd be curious to know how you explain the massively disproportional numbers in Basketball and Football. Yes, we see other sports skew towards other races (hockey, tennis, etc.) but I think there are reasonable economic factors contributing in those situations.






[URL=http://s1362.photobucket.com/user/wulabo/media/Doom_zps60271c02.jpg.html][IMG]http://i1362.photobucket.com/albums/r693/wulabo/Doom_zps60271c02.jpg[/IMG][/URL]
Posted with Google Chrome 64.0.3282.167 on MacOS X
MysteryMan


Member Since: Fri Apr 28, 2017
Posts: 1,922



    Quote:

      Quote:
      The belief or thought that one race is smarter or stronger or faster or whatever...is part of why things like racism exist. One group feels superior than another, and with very little true evidence.



    Quote:
    The example being discussed isn't proposing that one race is stronger or smarter than another. That's the point. If people with African DNA were inherently stronger then we would see enormous representation by them in competitive sports around the world. But we do not.



    Quote:
    However, there is a specific segment of that population who underwent circumstances designed to enhance strength and the statistical evidence is hardly anecdotal or misconstruing data.



    Quote:
    I'd be curious to know how you explain the massively disproportional numbers in Basketball and Football. Yes, we see other sports skew towards other races (hockey, tennis, etc.) but I think there are reasonable economic factors contributing in those situations.


You say economic...I say cultural and environmental which is not only limited to economic.

I don't believe the following for a moment but to use the same argument one could argue the White Quarterbacks in football are far more successful than their Black counterparts. The QB position is considered the brains of the offense of unit...does that mean White football players ARE smarter by that specific use of statistics?


Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 10
Thurisaz


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 5,665


]


    Quote:
    You say economic...I say cultural and environmental which is not only limited to economic.


It is perfectly plausible for cultural and environmental issues to contribute as well.


    Quote:
    I don't believe this for a moment but to use the same argument one could argue the White Quarterbacks in football are far more successful than their Black counterparts. The QB position is considered the brains of the offense of unit...does that mean White football players ARE smarter by that specific use of statistics?


What don't you believe for a minute? That African Americans make up more than 65% of players in those sports. That's a fact. Rather than changing the subject could you please provide your theory on that fact? What cultural and environmental factors contribute to their faster 40 times?

As for the white QB statistics I certainly think there is an inherent bias that many in the sport possess. A prejudice we are certainly seeing change with the HS and College ranks filled with Black QBs and a big uptick in the number of Black NFL QBs. Yet, are we seeing a similar change with more diverse representation in positions like WR or RB? No, not at all. Why? Because of the speed and strength advantage.






[URL=http://s1362.photobucket.com/user/wulabo/media/Doom_zps60271c02.jpg.html][IMG]http://i1362.photobucket.com/albums/r693/wulabo/Doom_zps60271c02.jpg[/IMG][/URL]
Posted with Google Chrome 64.0.3282.167 on MacOS X
Bk Ray

Moderator

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 6,863



This is pretty genes based. Not a lot of blacks compared to whites.

I hear the argument about cricket, tennis etc as rich, white men sports.





Moderator: Spiderman Board, Moderator: Star Trek Board
Posted with Google Chrome 64.0.3282.186 on Windows 10
Nose Norton


Location: Plainville
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 5,719


Deion Sanders recently got some criticism for his comments on the time of Penn State's Troy Apke in the 40 yd dash at the NFL combine.
He basically implied(strongly) that he was surprised that a white guy could run so fast. While I think that a white commentator would get criticized much more harshly if he made a comparative comment about a black athlete, I have to admit that I agree with him. It surprised me too.


Posted with Google Chrome 64.0.3282.186 on Windows 10
Dragon Red


Member Since: Fri Jul 05, 2013
Posts: 1,069


I'm not saying that hockey rugby and tennis are not tiring and need a lot of endurance but I am agreeing with the percentages 13% of a population accounting for 65% of its makeup is quite a significant finding. So I agree with Thuriszaz about it.


    Quote:
    There are all sorts of statistics supporting all sorts of false assumptions about one race being mentally or physically superior.

    *snip*

    The belief or thought that one race is smarter or stronger or faster or whatever...is part of why things like racism exist. One group feels superior than another, and with very little true evidence.


I think this may be a point of misunderstanding in terms of context here. Is a Labrador a superior dog to a great dane? No, they are just different in terms of what function they perform. Great Danes were bred to hunt and kill, Labradors were bred to bring a kill back to their owner. Its not that one dog is better. Its purely functional. So one dog will do one job better than the other can. Why is a human any different? We are all basically the same thing, we all bleed red, but, some races of human must clearly be more inclined to one sporting function over another. Naturally gifted perhaps. Or a product of their ancestors?



Posted with Google Chrome 65.0.3325.146 on Windows 10
MysteryMan


Member Since: Fri Apr 28, 2017
Posts: 1,922



    Quote:
    ]



    Quote:

      Quote:
      You say economic...I say cultural and environmental which is not only limited to economic.



    Quote:
    It is perfectly plausible for cultural and environmental issues to contribute as well.



    Quote:

      Quote:
      I don't believe this for a moment but to use the same argument one could argue the White Quarterbacks in football are far more successful than their Black counterparts. The QB position is considered the brains of the offense of unit...does that mean White football players ARE smarter by that specific use of statistics?



    Quote:
    What don't you believe for a minute? That African Americans make up more than 65% of players in those sports. That's a fact. Rather than changing the subject could you please provide your theory on that fact? What cultural and environmental factors contribute to their faster 40 times?



    Quote:
    As for the white QB statistics I certainly think there is an inherent bias that many in the sport possess. A prejudice we are certainly seeing change with the HS and College ranks filled with Black QBs and a big uptick in the number of Black NFL QBs. Yet, are we seeing a similar change with more diverse representation in positions like WR or RB? No, not at all. Why? Because of the speed and strength advantage.


Your cherry picking your sports. Grabbing 1 or 2 sports and pronouncing your statistics of proof of one groups physically superiority over another's is a typical missuse of statistical data.

And what percentage of HS and College black QB's are moved into different positions when they go to (if they go to) the pros compared to other insert skin color of your choice players?


Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 10
MysteryMan


Member Since: Fri Apr 28, 2017
Posts: 1,922



    Quote:
    I'm not saying that hockey rugby and tennis are not tiring and need a lot of endurance but I am agreeing with the percentages 13% of a population accounting for 65% of its makeup is quite a significant finding. So I agree with Thuriszaz about it.



    Quote:

      Quote:
      There are all sorts of statistics supporting all sorts of false assumptions about one race being mentally or physically superior.



      Quote:
      *snip*



      Quote:
      The belief or thought that one race is smarter or stronger or faster or whatever...is part of why things like racism exist. One group feels superior than another, and with very little true evidence.



    Quote:
    I think this may be a point of misunderstanding in terms of context here. Is a Labrador a superior dog to a great dane? No, they are just different in terms of what function they perform. Great Danes were bred to hunt and kill, Labradors were bred to bring a kill back to their owner. Its not that one dog is better. Its purely functional. So one dog will do one job better than the other can. Why is a human any different? We are all basically the same thing, we all bleed red, but, some races of human must clearly be more inclined to one sporting function over another. Naturally gifted perhaps. Or a product of their ancestors?


Then you have to account for a breeds intelligence too as one of these traits. It is a physical trait afterall the make up of ones brains, the interconnectivity tissue the grey matter etc etc...

If its ok to say one race is just faster...its ok to say one race is just smarter.

That's the danger of doing this.


Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 10
Dragon Red


Member Since: Fri Jul 05, 2013
Posts: 1,069


This is why I purposefully included the phrase "We are all basically the same thing" when referencing humans, my point was to emphasise that some humans may be more inclined to one activity vs another. You don't specifically NEED a labrador to bring back the duck you shot, any dog could do that with proper training, but, the labrador is specifically bred to do it. So will do that particular task well.

Dogs can vary quite wildly so maybe not the best example but hopefully I made my point, but since we're on the subject of intelligence, it isn't just race difference, what about male female differences. Are girls smarter than boys nowadays because they seem to be performing better in school? There is no "danger" in talking about things like this as long as you realise that there is no "superior" race, just one race may be more inclined to one activity than another.


Posted with Google Chrome 65.0.3325.146 on Windows 10
MysteryMan


Member Since: Fri Apr 28, 2017
Posts: 1,922



    Quote:
    This is why I purposefully included the phrase "We are all basically the same thing" when referencing humans, my point was to emphasise that some humans may be more inclined to one activity vs another. You don't specifically NEED a labrador to bring back the duck you shot, any dog could do that with proper training, but, the labrador is specifically bred to do it. So will do that particular task well.



    Quote:
    Dogs can vary quite wildly so maybe not the best example but hopefully I made my point, but since we're on the subject of intelligence, it isn't just race difference, what about male female differences. Are girls smarter than boys nowadays because they seem to be performing better in school? There is no "danger" in talking about things like this as long as you realise that there is no "superior" race, just one race may be more inclined to one activity than another.


Inclination is fine, and is part of cultural, locational, environmental factors etc...

If girls are doing better it could be for many reasons...but since we haven't changed genetically in the last 50years or so with big pushes in public schools...this definitely seems and environmental change. What was done to help young girls...how do we continue to do this and also find a similar change for boys? That's a very productive discussion I would agree.


Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 10
Trent Trueheart


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 684



    Quote:
    This is why I purposefully included the phrase "We are all basically the same thing" when referencing humans, my point was to emphasise that some humans may be more inclined to one activity vs another. You don't specifically NEED a labrador to bring back the duck you shot, any dog could do that with proper training, but, the labrador is specifically bred to do it. So will do that particular task well.



    Quote:
    Dogs can vary quite wildly so maybe not the best example but hopefully I made my point, but since we're on the subject of intelligence, it isn't just race difference, what about male female differences. Are girls smarter than boys nowadays because they seem to be performing better in school? There is no "danger" in talking about things like this as long as you realise that there is no "superior" race, just one race may be more inclined to one activity than another.


In the first half of the 20th century, some people were convinced that Jewish people were genetically gifted to play basketball. College and professional teams were filled with them, so obviously it must people because of their genetics. The truth was less complex. Basketball is popular in the inner cities and at the time, a large portion of the inner city poor were Jewish people. Nowadays, a large portion of the inner city poor is African American. So maybe it's not genetic, but economic.

Of course, the percentage of African American athletes in the NFL and NBA does seem too large to be explained by economics. However, maybe it's a case of a self-perpetuating myth. If we all believe that African Americans are genetically better suited for football and basketball, we might be funneling to kids towards those sports rather than others. And if we all believe that African Americans are better at sports than academics, we could be encouraging them to play sports more than we are to pursue academic interests. I would also say that these days, African American boys are going to be more interested in the NFL or NBA because so many of the players look like them.

But how did we get here? I'm just going to throw this out there because I don't have the data to confirm it. Maybe it is an economic issue. Let's not forget that sports haven't always been very lucrative for athletes. It's possible in the 1960s & 1970s, fledgling sports leagues like the AFL and the ABA had to fill their rosters with cheaper African American athletes in order to compete with the more established NFL and NBA. Then the mergers of these leagues might have created a situation where African Americans were overly represented. After that, it could have continued as owners tried to maximize their profits. But like I said, I don't know if this is true, it's just a theory. It could be completely baseless, but I would be curious to know if anyone had tried to look into it.


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 58.0 on Windows 10
Thurisaz


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 5,665




    Quote:
    Your cherry picking your sports. Grabbing 1 or 2 sports and pronouncing your statistics of proof of one groups physically superiority over another's is a typical missuse of statistical data.


No. I discussed other sports and see reasonable explanations for the observable representations. These 2 examples are not cherry picked, they stand out as anomalies. But if you are that uncomfortable answering the question, I understand and won't press you any further.


    Quote:
    And what percentage of HS and College black QB's are moved into different positions when they go to (if they go to) the pros compared to other insert skin color of your choice players?


Don't have numbers on that, but my perception is a much higher number. Superior speed and strength often offers paths to success that their counterparts of a different color don't have. How many white QBs who can't cut it in the NFL have any other option to make it as a pro?






[URL=http://s1362.photobucket.com/user/wulabo/media/Doom_zps60271c02.jpg.html][IMG]http://i1362.photobucket.com/albums/r693/wulabo/Doom_zps60271c02.jpg[/IMG][/URL]
Posted with Google Chrome 64.0.3282.167 on MacOS X
Thurisaz


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 5,665





    Quote:
    Of course, the percentage of African American athletes in the NFL and NBA does seem too large to be explained by economics. However, maybe it's a case of a self-perpetuating myth. If we all believe that African Americans are genetically better suited for football and basketball, we might be funneling to kids towards those sports rather than others. And if we all believe that African Americans are better at sports than academics, we could be encouraging them to play sports more than we are to pursue academic interests. I would also say that these days, African American boys are going to be more interested in the NFL or NBA because so many of the players look like them.



    Quote:
    But how did we get here? I'm just going to throw this out there because I don't have the data to confirm it. Maybe it is an economic issue. Let's not forget that sports haven't always been very lucrative for athletes. It's possible in the 1960s & 1970s, fledgling sports leagues like the AFL and the ABA had to fill their rosters with cheaper African American athletes in order to compete with the more established NFL and NBA. Then the mergers of these leagues might have created a situation where African Americans were overly represented. After that, it could have continued as owners tried to maximize their profits. But like I said, I don't know if this is true, it's just a theory. It could be completely baseless, but I would be curious to know if anyone had tried to look into it.


That's a very interesting observation. Thanks for sharing your perspective and I think the notion of a perpetuated myth fueling at least a portion of the observable discrepancies could have merit.

Even those this issue can be sticky and a lot of people want to walk on eggshells, bringing it up really does help build some understanding and offer new ideas.





[URL=http://s1362.photobucket.com/user/wulabo/media/Doom_zps60271c02.jpg.html][IMG]http://i1362.photobucket.com/albums/r693/wulabo/Doom_zps60271c02.jpg[/IMG][/URL]
Posted with Google Chrome 64.0.3282.167 on MacOS X
1 2  >> All

Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2018 Powermad Software