MLF

First topic message reminder :

What is happening to this kid? He looked totally overweight and is now slower than when he was 17. Where has his talent gone? Up in smoke?

So explain the 100m rankings to me again?

djlovesyou wrote:So explain the 100m rankings to me again?

Not until you explain why it is that over the years when black football players were making it at the top level many commentators (including Ron Noades) that black players were good strikers because they were instinctive. WHy many NFL owners and so called experts said that blacks would never be good quater-backs, why baseball owners said that blacks would never be good pitchers and batters (is that what they're called)? Why so called experts said that blacks are not built to be swimmers or lift weights. Why blacks now dominate b-ball, NFL and other sports which do not require much money to participate in?

Why aren't there many white sprinters? Simple. They are at a disadvantage before they even start thinking of sprinting. The disadvantage is they they believe their are genetically disadvantaged from the start. As soon as Christophe Lemaitre makes big waves, more will follow because they have belief. For that I am thankful.

This is a great thread

azania- you were good then for a little while until the nfl thing. I am afraid that makes almost no sense

you don't think sprinting is a nature thing at all - fair enough that's your opinion. But as DJ says how do you explain the utter dominance of west-african origin sprinters in that case?

you were good enough to answer the first question. What about this one? Try not to answer a question with another question just tell us your theory.

Also, although it seems a long time ago it was me who answered your original MLF question. Where do you think his talent has gone?

english_osprey wrote:This is a great thread

azania- you were good then for a little while until the nfl thing. I am afraid that makes almost no sense

you don't think sprinting is a nature thing at all - fair enough that's your opinion. But as DJ says how do you explain the utter dominance of west-african origin sprinters in that case?

you were good enough to answer the first question. What about this one? Try not to answer a question with another question just tell us your theory.

Also, although it seems a long time ago it was me who answered your original MLF question. Where do you think his talent has gone?

You don't want to understand it that's why it makes no sense.

As for the domination of west african origin sprinters, I explain it the same way that swimming is caucasian dominated (withthe exception of anthony Nesty who has half european).

MLF's talent has gone up in smoke. He is way too big. Look at Powell at age 18 and look at him now. Not that great a difference. It seems this version of MLF has eaten up the original MLF.

djlovesyou wrote:I think I can say that.

It was a government sponsored programme.

lol.. perhaps you can say that for the majority of them during that era. But there will certainly be a few that weren't. They may have been fazed out of the teams.

But the other countries you mention you certainly can not accuse every Greek/Russian/Moroccan/American/Spanish person of being a drugs cheat. Surely not?


English your answer to the original MLF question was not entirely correct.

1. MLF was an unusual black man that developed early (or rather stopped developing too early). Whichever way you look at it. It is most common for both black and white people to continue developing physically until they're 21.
2. Agree.
3. Agree.
4. Agree. Didn't have the right coaching.
5. He got mislead. Has the wrong training. Doesn't progress.
6. Agree.

Why MLF doesn't train like Jamaicans?
1. You now accuse all Jamaicans of being on drugs. I disagree.
2. I don't think MLF was just satisfied with where he was, he desperately tried to do the right things. He jsut didn't have the right people around him.

english_osprey wrote:racist played card in line 6
anything that you can't or won't understand is racist is it?
are you hoping that playing that card will quell any discussion regarding cheating?
as i said in the gatlin thread when you try and insinuate the same to DJ it's just cowardly, stupid and obviously lazy.
Without having to educate you yet again, and if you had read anything about athletics history you would already know that
1. Black and white uk athletes cheated heavily in the late 70's and eighties
2. White East German athletes were on a state sponsored ped regime in the same period (documented by themselves)
3. White and black US athletes were heavily into ped abuse throughout this period and much later, right up to Balco (almost all black in the latter case)
4. Chinese female long/middle distance runners were obviously drugged in the late 80's 90's
5. Jamaicans are doing it now

There you go, just a taste of the wide spread of ped corruption that takes in Europeans both black and white, Americans both black and white and the Chinese. I won't even go into the state-sponsored drugging by the kenyans and ethiopians if that upsets you

So, before you accuse me or anybody else of racism why not get your facts right you silly little boy?

You can't just accuse everyone in these nations of being on drugs. I'm certain there were athletes from all of these nations that were competing cleanly. It is a bit naive to say differently.

And please stop calling me stupid names like 'silly little boy'. It is very odd. Try not to be what they call a cyber bully or a forum troll.

ryan
without knowing the details of his trining regime or indeed his attitude to training it's hard to say if that was the reason. It certainly could be!

I still stick by the 'needing drugs to go any further' theory though.


Your second post.
I still don't know if you are misunderstanding my point or I'm not explaining it well enough.
To be fair nowhere do I say all athletes from certain countries are doing drugs. Obviously that would not be feasible. The point i was making is that each of these well known drug taking situations europe/us/china etc involved people from a wide spread of the human race. Banish from your head that I am accusing only black people of cheating. Nowhere in any of my posts have i ever said that.
However each of these group (and many many others) were definately guilty of cheating. All I am saying and all that i have ever maintained is that several (not all) jamaicans are cheating but in their defence THEY ARE MERELY THE LATEST IN A LONG LINE OF CHEATS, cheats of many colours you might say.

Sadly my friend I don't want it to be true either but the unfortunate truth is that
1. athletics is not clean, never has been, and never will be
2. many jamaicans cheat

"As for the domination of west african origin sprinters, I explain it the same way that swimming is caucasian dominated "

so you are suggesting that caucasians have particular natural advantages re swimming and therefore you agree that west africans have similar natural advantages re sprinting?

Good point

Swimming seems more of a cultural thing though. A report showed that 70% of 11-12 year old black American kids are essentially non swimmers (compared to about 30% of white kids). It seems swimming is just something that black kids don't tend to get involved in.

I know a lot as been said about physiology in swimming, and there is some credence to the 'dense bone structure' theory, but I don't think that's the defining factor.

Sprinting, on the other hand, is a sport that is contested all over the world, and by all ethnicities. There is nothing cultural that is stopping white sprinters from competing. In Europe, I would imagine, that the number of white sprinters outnumber the black sprinters by about 50 to 1. (probably conservative there). So the problem is certainly not getting white sprinters to compete.

Germany has a very good athletics set-up, and obivously, the vast majority of their sprinters are white, but they've only ever had one guy go under 10.10 in their history, let alone 10.00. There really shouldn't be anything holding them back, surely?

english_osprey wrote:"As for the domination of west african origin sprinters, I explain it the same way that swimming is caucasian dominated "

so you are suggesting that caucasians have particular natural advantages re swimming and therefore you agree that west africans have similar natural advantages re sprinting?

Good point

Is it possible to have a rational debate with someone who either doesn't understand the written word or deliberately misrepresents what is written? Either way its thoroughly dishonest and I prefer not to engage a dishonest person in any capacity. Good day.

djlovesyou wrote:Swimming seems more of a cultural thing though. A report showed that 70% of 11-12 year old black American kids are essentially non swimmers (compared to about 30% of white kids). It seems swimming is just something that black kids don't tend to get involved in.

I know a lot as been said about physiology in swimming, and there is some credence to the 'dense bone structure' theory, but I don't think that's the defining factor.

Sprinting, on the other hand, is a sport that is contested all over the world, and by all ethnicities. There is nothing cultural that is stopping white sprinters from competing. In Europe, I would imagine, that the number of white sprinters outnumber the black sprinters by about 50 to 1. (probably conservative there). So the problem is certainly not getting white sprinters to compete.

Germany has a very good athletics set-up, and obivously, the vast majority of their sprinters are white, but they've only ever had one guy go under 10.10 in their history, let alone 10.00. There really shouldn't be anything holding them back, surely?

If you've grown up thinking you are not good enough, you will finish not being good enough. You will not put the energy into the training that is required and ultimately never fulfil whatever potential you have. MLF is a prime example. He has the talent to run 9.9 or below, but not the physical application of the mental application. It wouldn't surprise if a similar thing affects the psyche of white sprinters. I can almost guarantee that within 3 years more white sprinters will follow Christophe and break the 10 sec with regularity. All it takes is one.

I have no idea why only 1 german has run faster that 10.10.

Are you suggesting MLF was applying himself when he was running his best though?

As far as I remember, he was training twice a week.

Sprinting is nearly all natural talent. Training only accounts for a small fraction of performance.

Don't you think it's a bit odd that despite there being so many more white sprinters in Europe than black sprinter, it seems only one doesn't have this 'inferiority complex' that you seem to think is holding every white person back. Surely there would be a couple with a bit of self belief, particularly in nations where they don't have any competition from black sprinters.

tanzania

"It wouldn't surprise if a similar thing affects the psyche of white sprinters"

Are you in all seriousness suggesting that sprinting is merely positve mental thinking?
And that the west african origin sprinters have it ?
But that all but 1 caucasian and 4 BILLION asians don't?
Isn't THAT rather racist?

If you don't know why west african sprinters are super-dominant why not just admit the fact?
your 'theories' are just becoming more and more ludicrous.

djlovesyou wrote:Are you suggesting MLF was applying himself when he was running his best though?

As far as I remember, he was training twice a week.

Sprinting is nearly all natural talent. Training only accounts for a small fraction of performance.

Don't you think it's a bit odd that despite there being so many more white sprinters in Europe than black sprinter, it seems only one doesn't have this 'inferiority complex' that you seem to think is holding every white person back. Surely there would be a couple with a bit of self belief, particularly in nations where they don't have any competition from black sprinters.

Lemaitre has a complex, he actually believes he's black. It is the only answer.

Good one Ryan. Could be a classic.

english_osprey wrote:tanzania

"It wouldn't surprise if a similar thing affects the psyche of white sprinters"

Are you in all seriousness suggesting that sprinting is merely positve mental thinking?
And that the west african origin sprinters have it ?
But that all but 1 caucasian and 4 BILLION asians don't?
Isn't THAT rather racist?

If you don't know why west african sprinters are super-dominant why not just admit the fact?
your 'theories' are just becoming more and more ludicrous.

Osprey, read this carefully. I have zero intention in engaging with you in debate as you are totally dishonest. So ask as many questions as you want, you will not get a response from me. It will be like urinating in the wind.

If I asked the same question, would you try to answer it? Or was that last post a get-out for a question you simply don't have the answer to?

Or indeed a realisation that your standpoint is rather ridiculous?

djlovesyou wrote:Are you suggesting MLF was applying himself when he was running his best though?

As far as I remember, he was training twice a week.

Sprinting is nearly all natural talent. Training only accounts for a small fraction of performance.

Don't you think it's a bit odd that despite there being so many more white sprinters in Europe than black sprinter, it seems only one doesn't have this 'inferiority complex' that you seem to think is holding every white person back. Surely there would be a couple with a bit of self belief, particularly in nations where they don't have any competition from black sprinters.

I don't know the details of his training regime, but from what I have heard, he spent too much time in the gym doing strength training and therefore bulked up. Goodness knows what Linford is doing with him.

Of course its odd. There has been much research done about this and many have reached the 'fast muscle twitch' theory. Just like there was much research decades earlier which also proved the inferiority of black runners and athletes for certain reasons.

To me its all a nonsense. Now that Lemaitre has made the breakthrough, I can almost guarantee that more white sprinters will follow and once again scientists will be scrambling the DNA of individuals to make up more theories.

djlovesyou wrote:If I asked the same question, would you try to answer it? Or was that last post a get-out for a question you simply don't have the answer to?

Or indeed a realisation that your standpoint is rather ridiculous?

dj I will debate with you all nigh long. You do not manipulate words in the manner osprey does and you do not look to score points.

DJ, I have adressed all ospreys points in the course of this thread. What I will not tolerate is his insinuations and cack handed way of throwing the racist jibe at me.

So what you're saying is ALL WHITE PEOPLE have an inferiority complex that is stopping them from running under 10 seconds, besides Lemaitre?

But now you think that all it needed for ALL WHITE PEOPLE to stop having this inferiority complex is for one white person to break 10 seconds?

I just want to get this clear before I start telling people about this as an amusing story in the pub.

djlovesyou wrote:So what you're saying is ALL WHITE PEOPLE have an inferiority complex that is stopping them from running under 10 seconds, besides Lemaitre?

But now you think that all it needed for ALL WHITE PEOPLE to stop having this inferiority complex is for one white person to break 10 seconds?

I just want to get this clear before I start telling people about this as an amusing story in the pub.

Why the capitalising?

It is not as simple and straight forward as that. To be blank IT IS NOT WHAT I AM SAYING.

Enjoy your drink. I see why this section of the board is dead. Have a good evening.

But it is an inferiority complex that white people have?

This doesn't really fit well with other sports that you've mentioned though. The other sports the 'inferiority complex' happened before the recruitment phase, in that black/white people simply didn't take up the sport because they felt they weren't good enough.

Sprinting is nothing like that. More white kids take up sprinting than black kids in this country, yet generally the black kids end up faster.

So therefore it can only mean one of a few things.

1) Black kids simply work harder - but surely this would be true in all aspects of life if this were the case. Also it doesn't really apply to sprinting as really hard work isn't always necessary to have at least some degree of success.

2) White kids feel inferior so they simply can't manage the simple task of running from A to B as fast as they could if they would only think positively.

3) Kids from a West African background are simply more likely to have the genetic predisposition for running fast.

For anyone with any knowledge of the sport, or indeed anyone with the ability to analyse simple facts and statistics, it's a no-brainer.

Enjoy your drinks. And enjoy debating athletics on a dead board. You guys killed it.

How could I have made your visit better?

Agreed with everything you said despite it being incredibly naive and misinformed?

Let's be honest, you post a lot on the boxing board. How are people treated there when they jump in and spout a lot of nonsense?

People debate there with honesty and give opinions. Words said are not deliberately twisted in order to 'win' a debate. Perhaps that is something your good self and osprey can learn from.

tanzania
did you used to post on this board under another name?

you haven't addressed ANY of my or Dj's questions in any manner whatsoever

The simple truth is that you have arrived on this board with an agenda which is,
'sprinters of west african origin do not have a natural advantage in that event'
and now you can't justify it in any sense. We are suggesting the opposite is true and provided our theories as to why that might be so

Now that you have run out of ideas and have taken to more and more ludicrous suggestions while simultaneously sidestepping reality. Dj's last post couldn't have been more polite yet you can't answer him but just resort to your bully-boy tactics.
The board is open to discussion and of course you are perfectly entitled to your opinions. But surely you have to have reasonable back-up to support your ideas should somebody challenge them?



And talking of evidence. When you post things like this,

"Just like there was much research decades earlier which also proved the inferiority of black runners and athletes for certain reasons"

could you please point us in the direction of this 'research' which you quote at regular intervals. When it was done and by whom for example? Because if you are relying on this as some sort of evidence you would need to pove it actually exists. Surely that's not an unreasonable request?

"Lemaitre has a complex, he actually believes he's black. It is the only answer."

Now that's a clever answer. Perhaps you have a point there?

I wouldn't really call it an agenda, more an opinion e_o which it seems is all azania is presenting here

For me personally, I do think that there is an advantage in sprinting depending on your origin.

In a way it's also a lot like with rugby. Depending on your physique and natural ability as it stands, you have to be a fairly big player to be successful. You get occasional exceptions such as with Shane Williams, who is about 5'8 in a world of 6'+ rugby players (or for a sprinting example, Lemaitre) but by and large certain sports/event sdoes appear to be dominated by a certain type of person/physique

Just my view though!

I think rugby's a good example
Takr japanese rugby. Popular, fairly well-developed rugby infrastructue, plenty of enthusiasm, plenty of moey.But competetive? No, beacause rugby is primarily a power game and they just don't have enough of it to subdue pacific islander teams for instace.
That's despite, in my opinion, having superior passing ability and advanced technical skills to Islander teams. Every so often they will run bigger teams close and score the occaisionally brilliant try but unfortunately that's not enough. Simply their lack of physical development compared to most other rugby playing nations is a major handicap to them.

english_osprey wrote:"Lemaitre has a complex, he actually believes he's black. It is the only answer."

Now that's a clever answer. Perhaps you have a point there?

Thanks. I thought it was clever too if not funny.

english_osprey wrote:tanzania
did you used to post on this board under another name?

you haven't addressed ANY of my or Dj's questions in any manner whatsoever

The simple truth is that you have arrived on this board with an agenda which is,
'sprinters of west african origin do not have a natural advantage in that event'
and now you can't justify it in any sense. We are suggesting the opposite is true and provided our theories as to why that might be so

Now that you have run out of ideas and have taken to more and more ludicrous suggestions while simultaneously sidestepping reality. Dj's last post couldn't have been more polite yet you can't answer him but just resort to your bully-boy tactics.
The board is open to discussion and of course you are perfectly entitled to your opinions. But surely you have to have reasonable back-up to support your ideas should somebody challenge them?



And talking of evidence. When you post things like this,

"Just like there was much research decades earlier which also proved the inferiority of black runners and athletes for certain reasons"

could you please point us in the direction of this 'research' which you quote at regular intervals. When it was done and by whom for example? Because if you are relying on this as some sort of evidence you would need to pove it actually exists. Surely that's not an unreasonable request?

At least have the decency to use my username. Christ, you guys lack common etiquette. If you haven't heard about research to show the 'inferiority' of blacks in endurance events, in speed events in athletic prowess in general dating from the early 1900s then I suggest you look it up. I am not your google b!tch.

azania
unfortunately my friend I believe that the 'research'you speak of is non-existant.

I am not quoting the 'evidence' nor relying on it to make a point. You are and therefore YOU should produce it.

english_osprey wrote:azania
unfortunately my friend I believe that the 'research'you speak of,Edit: insult removed, RD, is non-existant.

I am not quoting the 'evidence' nor relying on it to make a point. You are and therefore YOU should produce it.

A quick google search and I found this little snippet:

"If a “racial” group had faster reflex
time than other groups, they would
have a substantial athletic advantage
–Assumes that this fundamental
neurological difference is genetically
programmed
–There is no evidence of such a
difference between elite athletes
–There is no known genetic
polymorphism, racial or otherwise, that
would account for such a pattern"

Do your research and stop being so slack. And no I will not show you the link as I want you to make up the excuse that I am making things up as you surely will.

Another point here. Very few athletes directly from West Africa have broken the 10 sec barrier (doing it clean). The black athletes who have are from USA and the Caribbean who are not 100% African origin. Are the sprinters from the Americas a super breed of human doe to inter-breeding from slavery? What other racialized theories can you come up with. I will repeat, there is zero credible evidence of this so called fast twitch muscle.

Is there any link between race, genes and athletics?

I'm going to start with the idea that many people hold, that there is some special athletic prowess held by people of African descent in America. Most people sort of believe that African Americans are genetically predisposed to being faster runners or better basketball players or for being better cornerbacks in the National Football League. And there's also now some scientific studies which are attempting to look at population-based differences in genes that have to do with various aspects of physiological performance related to athletic ability.

Now, at some level, when we look at human physical variation, there are some differences between human populations that could possibly relate to athletic performance. For example, if we were to look at people from northern climates, who were indigenous residents of northern climates, they tend to be short and stout instead of long or tall and lean. And there are good physical reasons for that. If you evolved in northern climates, like the Aleut or the Eskimo populations did, heat retention is facilitated by being short and stout. If you evolved in the tropics, where the environment is very hot, then heat loss is facilitated by being long and lean. So you're going to see differences in body proportions on that kind of scale.

Now, if you were to ask yourself, "Is it likely that an Alaskan Eskimo is going to become a center in the NBA?", well, probably not, because height has something to do with your performance at that position in the NBA. So, we can see that in the gross scale it's likely that physical differences may have something to do with various forms of athletic performance.

But when we talk about subtle things like, for example, whether a given population is going to be fastest in sprinting, then it's not so simple. The fact is that most of the world record holders in the 100-meter dash are of Western African descent, but they also tend to be African-Americans who have mixed with Europeans and American Indians. So it's not easy for us to determine whether it's being African that might have something to do with them being so fast, or whether it's the fact that they have European and American Indian ancestry that might have helped them be so fast.

And all of those genetic factors have to be tempered in terms of the environment in which individuals train. For example, if you look at those sprinters of Western African ancestry, they all got their records because they trained in the United States, Canada, Great Britain, or even in the Caribbean. If you look at the Western African countries where those sprinters' ancestors supposedly came from, none of those countries have ever produced any world record holders in the sprint events.

So if it was something uniquely about being African that makes you a fast sprinter, then you'd expect that Western African countries would be holding all these records too, but in fact they don't. It has something to do with genetic predisposition, it has something to do with environment, it has something to do with training regimes, and particularly at the level of world-class athletic performance.

One of the factors that shows how the situation of populations in different geographical regions influences predisposition for sport is altitude. The Kenyan success in long-distance running may have something to do with the fact that the Kalenjin Kenyans come from a high-altitude region in Kenya. But, Kenyans from low altitudes don't do well in long-distance running, so it's not something special about being a Kenyan, it's something special about living at those high altitudes.

Now, in the last Boston Marathon, which (laughter) someone predicted would be won by a Kalenjin Kenyan, it was in fact won by a South Korean. Now, Korea is also a mountainous country, and so it's entirely possible that this individual at least trained at high altitude. Second place was won by an Ecuadorian, which also is a mountainous country, and they also probably trained at a high altitude.

So we have both short-term physiological adaptation that occurs from training in high altitude, and also long-term genetic adaptations for living at high altitude that might come from populations who live in those regions. And again, none of these things are consistent with our 19th century notions of race, because within the same country low-altitude Kenyans don't do well at long-distance running whereas high-altitude Kenyans do.

So we can't come to any fast, hard rule about how genetic ancestry is going to influence the ability of an individual to perform an athletic event. I think that the simplest thing is to look at the individual's history, how hard they trained, where they got their training, what kinds of resources were put into getting them to be able to participate in world-class athletics, that it's a combination of all these things and that we'll never have a simple genetic answer that says, "Because you came from this region of the world, you're going to dominate in swimming or long-distance running." I don't think we're ever going to have that.


Go find the link as I have zero intention of producing. You are not the only one who can be difficult in what was an open and decent exchange of opinions.

So we have established that it is people of mixed heritage who run fastest. Which gene belonging to which ethnic group makes the runner go fast? Oh and white men can also jump as high as black men. Look at the Olympic champions in the past. For so-called athletics fans, you guys are deeply unthinking and very naive.

Edit by RD: if an article/information is taken from another site, all links need to be provided, please insert a link, or state where you obtained the information. Thanks.

english_osprey wrote:azania
unfortunately my friend I believe that the 'research'you speak of, Edit: insult removed by RD, is non-existant.

I am not quoting the 'evidence' nor relying on it to make a point. You are and therefore YOU should produce it.

english, a tip for you. There really is no need to take these digs at people. Its destroying the forum. You could finish your comment; "unfortunately my friend I believe that the 'research'you speak of. I am not quoting the 'evidence' nor relying on it to make a point. You are and therefore YOU should produce it."

No need for the credibility dig. You seem to always start by trying to get the other person back up. Its not nice reading.

Please also remember, this isn't a court of law.

That's not really research though azania, that's some chumps opinion.

Well kindly explain how very few west africans (I believe only Nigerians, Ghanians) have broken the 10 sec barrier and those with mixed heritage from the Americas dominate the sport? Bare in mind that hardly any African Americans or Caribbeans have 100% west African genes.

There are actually some good points being made on here by some, although you do have to read through a fair amount of childish rubbish to get there.

I offer my two-pennies worth, with the caveat that I know very little about athletics training, but a fair bit about performing at high level in other sports (I coach cricket at a decent standard).

I feel DJ underestimates the effect coaching and dedication has on even sprinting. There is quite a lot of technique to sprinting (I once went to a sprint-coaching work-shop to see if there was anything one could take from it and apply to cricket) - from hitting the ground in the right way with your feet, to coordinating arms and legs perfectly, to keeping the upper body relaxed, so coaching and training clearly makes a major difference, and IMO more than DJ thinks. Indeed it was Matthew Syed who wrote the book about the 10,000 hours concept, which suggests that anybody can reach the highest standard given they train well enough for long enough (I simplify enormously).

Now I can't agree with Matthew: all my experience shows that there is such a thing as "talent", I refuse to believe that I could play golf as well as Tiger Woods simply by practising well/hard/long say. Tiger Woods was born with something which I simply don't have: the ability to hit a golf ball 300 meters.

However I think talent is probably only 10% of the equation, and by talent I include "mental talents" (so mental toughness, the ability to bounce back from defeat more determined, the ability to switch on in major events) and tactical awareness (not so much in sprinting I would think) as well as physical attributes. The rest you must do through hard work, which means practising enough and especially in the right way.

BUT I don't think you can get to the top without that natural ability to start with.

Whatever percentage you assign it, if you agree with my premise that you need a certain amount of natural ability to succeed (and some people - e.g. the aforementioned Syed - don't, although how Syed would deal with DJ's extreme case of a 5'2 basketball player, or at the other end of the scale a 6 foot female gymnast - is unclear) then we all accept that some individuals enjoy natural advantages over others. I suppose the great argument is then whether these advantages translate accross ethnic groups.

Personally I think the evidence heavily suggests that they do. Or let me explain more clearly: a far greater proportion of the African-American population (say 1 in 100) have the innate ability to run sub-10 seconds than exists in the white european population (say 1 in 10,000) - numbers purely plucked out of thin air for illustrative purposes.

I don't think you can explain the dominance of the African-Americans in the sprints purely by other factors. Similarly I don't believe that you can explain the fact that (say) no black mathematician has won the fields medal by institutional racism and lack of opportunities (although both of these certainly played a part): the fact is a greater proportion of the white population have an innate ability to do mathematics of that standard than blacks. This does not mean no blacks can do maths (or no whites can run fast): it simply means different people have different abilities. Everyone should be given the same opportunities, but given the same opportunities not everyone will perform the same.

But I DO think that somewhere there are athletes from other ethnic groups with the ability to run as fast as Bolt (given the same quality of training - in the same way I DO believe that there have been blacks in the past who had the ability to become fields medalists). Lemaitre has shown this to some extent (although he doesn't run as fast as Bolt obviously). The question is then why don't they?

- They don't train as hard: IMO this is nonsense and the same kind of nonsense as the one which suggests that black people don't do as well at school as white people because they don't work as hard. Both of these statements are IMO racist: you are making a behavioural judgement on an entire ethnic group based on their ethnicity.

- Equal opportunities: I think this plays a part. Is there evidence that because we believe african-americans run quicker we should and do concentrate more ressources on them? I ask because I simply don't know. But certainly there is the reverse card: I believe whites until very recently in a lot of countries (including the UK, although "very recently" is perhaps overkill) had MORE opportunities in other areas, and so were more likely to go into something else but athletics. Maybe we have missed out on the white Usain Bolt because he happened to also be very good at physics and prefered that to athletics?

- Belief: I think Azania has a point, but not necessarily in the way he/she thinks. I agree that you need to believe you can be successful in order to be so. Perhaps then there is a case that some talented white athletes didn't believe they could be the very best, so didn't feel inclined to put in the hard work (the other 90%), and (partly because they had other opportunities not available to everyone) went and did something else. In this respect I do think people will look at Lemaitre and things may change, but it will take a lot longer than the 3 years mentioned. It is the young 11 year-olds of today who will be inspired by Lemaitre, and BELIEVE that with the sufficient hard work they can make it to the top. If there is an 11 year-old "white Bolt" out there he may look at Lemaitre and decide there is a path to glory in sprinting after all.

- Culture: not sure this plays much (if any) role at all. As DJ says, sprinting is something everyone does. I sprint. I run 12 seconds. I won't ever run sub-10, and honestly I don't believe I ever had the ability to. I didn't have the 10%.

- PEDs: well yes, you see, I do have to mention the elephant in the room. There are after all African-American athletes from outside Jamaica you know... Anyway I let you make your own minds up as to whether Jamaican athletes are systematically using PEDs...

Now once again I admit to not knowing that much about athletics, so don't shoot me too hard. Any corrections on facts and athletic based comments are very welcome.

I don't think you can explain the dominance of the African-Americans in the sprints purely by other factors. Similarly I don't believe that you can explain the fact that (say) no black mathematician has won the fields medal by institutional racism and lack of opportunities (although both of these certainly played a part): the fact is a greater proportion of the white population have an innate ability to do mathematics of that standard than blacks. This does not mean no blacks can do maths (or no whites can run fast): it simply means different people have different abilities. Everyone should be given the same opportunities, but given the same opportunities not everyone will perform the same.

Oh dear God. The Bell Curve has been discredited for your information.

I am not talking about "intelligence" I am talking about the 1 in a million person who has the ability to do something truly extraordinary (like become a fields medallist or be Usain Bolt). That is not something you can measure by an IQ test, or as far as I know by any other way.

I'm sorry but I don't believe we're all born the same.

Anyway thank you for your considered response.

Mike Selig wrote:I am not talking about "intelligence" I am talking about the 1 in a million person who has the ability to do something truly extraordinary (like become a fields medallist or be Usain Bolt). That is not something you can measure by an IQ test, or as far as I know by any other way.

I'm sorry but I don't believe we're all born the same.

Anyway thank you for your considered response.

Maths and sports are two different things. Now everyone can be a world class sprinter and not everyone can be an Einstein type genius. But ethnicity plays no part on either mathematic ability or sporting ability.

I don't agree there sorry anzania. Not everyone can be a world class sprinter. Paula Radcliffe couldn't be, for instance. Her physique, genes, whatever you want to call it, just isn't built for it.

Everyone is different and unique, we can't all be good at everything, that's why so many athletes vary in size etc across all of the events. Certain types of people are more suited to certain events.

rugbydreamer wrote:I don't agree there sorry anzania. Not everyone can be a world class sprinter. Paula Radcliffe couldn't be, for instance. Her physique, genes, whatever you want to call it, just isn't built for it.

Everyone is different and unique, we can't all be good at everything, that's why so many athletes vary in size etc across all of the events. Certain types of people are more suited to certain events.

I haven't said everyone can be a world class sprinter. What I have been saying all along is that race plays no part in ones ability to be a world class sprinter and now a world class mathematician.

But you've already happily admitted that there are certain differences between different populations of people (tall South Sudanese people for example).

So surely this implies that certain populations could me more predisposed to certain sporting events.

azania wrote:

Mike Selig wrote:I am not talking about "intelligence" I am talking about the 1 in a million person who has the ability to do something truly extraordinary (like become a fields medallist or be Usain Bolt). That is not something you can measure by an IQ test, or as far as I know by any other way.

I'm sorry but I don't believe we're all born the same.

Anyway thank you for your considered response.

Maths and sports are two different things. Now everyone can be a world class sprinter and not everyone can be an Einstein type genius. But ethnicity plays no part on either mathematic ability or sporting ability.

Yes you did. Apologies if that was just a typo

azania wrote:But ethnicity plays no part on either mathematic ability or sporting ability.

I'm glad you can be quite so categorical about it. I'm not sure I agree, as I say I don't think the differences in success between various ethnic groups can be explained purely by cultural/opportunical (which isn't a word but you know what I mean) differences.

Being tall doesn't mean you will automatically be a good basket ball player. I'm still waiting to hear why West Africans do not dominate sprinting whilst people who are of mixed heritage do. Because Bolt, Lewis, Gay, Powell are black doesn't mean that down their ancestral line they don't have white and amer-indian heritage. They almost certainly do. I haven't seen or heard of any sub 10 Amer-Indian sprinters, but have read about a very good distance runner.