So you wanna get controversial? lets do it intelligently.

[Lestat]

Kenyans win marathons, what no African American can win (too heavy)

Exactly.

Kenyans with their low body weight and minimal amount of lean muscle would likely have not made it to the US in great numbers during the slave trade.

 

[spongebob]

As to socioeconomic pressure, I never could sit comfortably with that argument. Why? Because there are a whole hell of a lot of poor people of OTHER cultures and races. And these races are not over represented in profressional sports. I'd say there are more poor caucasion people then anyone to be quite honest. Why are their parents not driving them to athletics as a way out? I certainly don't see many trailer park raised ivy league students, so are they bypassing academia AND sports? Why?


.

its a combination of the two lestat with genetics playing the larger role. socio-economics setting the stage for the environment. nature and nurture.

 

[Lestat]

its a combination of the two lestat with genetics playing the larger role. socio-economics setting the stage for the environment. nature and nurture.

ok so we are getting somewhere.

Genetics DOES play a role, can people agree on that?

my point is that genetics were modified due to specific events in history.

 

[GoldenDelicious]

Thank you for responding to the original post.

First off, about domination. When I look at a roster, and there is 50% or more of its players of an African American decent, I consider that domination. Even if it was 35%, I'd say it was domination, considering as a percentage of the total population, African Americans make up a much smaller percentage.

thats quite subjective though, lestat. what roster are you looking at, precisely? i cant disprove you without merely throwing my (equally) uninformed opinion at you, but neither do i think your statement is convincing (to me). im not sure they exist, but youd need some statistics on the proportion of athletes of various races in elite levels as compared to their contribution to the overall population, and then perhaps adjust for differences in socioeconomics, access to facilities etc etc

As to socioeconomic pressure, I never could sit comfortably with that argument. Why? Because there are a whole hell of a lot of poor people of OTHER cultures and races. And these races are not over represented in profressional sports. I'd say there are more poor caucasion people then anyone to be quite honest. Why are their parents not driving them to athletics as a way out? I certainly don't see many trailer park raised ivy league students, so are they bypassing academia AND sports? Why?

first, i would point out that may be greater numbers of poor white people as compared to african americans, it says nothing of their proportion in the population demographic you see. there are many, many white people in america, and so id expect that there would be more poor white people than the entire number of black people, rich and poor, in the same location.

and again, id say that the answer to your question is complex (and would involve generalisations built on generalisations). the logical way to answer the question (and im no statistician) is to start at the bottom and work your way up. look at the number of athletes at different levels in the sport (amateur through professional), then assess the ethnicicity of the fanbase (because the fanbase would likely reflect interest in the sport at an amateur level, and is therefore meaningful), adjust socioeconomically, factor in the marketability of the athlete to the target market, think about the likely desireable traits in an athlete and see which race (or racial subgroup) would best fit your proposed model, and try to connect some dots, starting with the obvious ones (most black people are likely bigger than koreans, and would likely make better quarterbacks) and working backwards, comparing the prospects of the elite athletes from each racial group with their likely prospects had they not played that sport, socio-cultural pressures etc etc. then do it over and over again, based on your new conclusions, and start peeling away layers.

i didnt say that socioeconomic pressure was the only important factor, i just said that it was a main one. maybe its easier to come up with a simple model:

the 3 main things you need to achieve something are: 1) ability (since if you absolutely cannot do something, then its just not possible), 2) opportunity (since ability is irrelevent unless it may be employed) and 3) motivation (since you will not combine 1 and 2 without some sort of desire, motivation or compulsion)

now you focused mainly on number 1, as per "black" genetics, but neglected the latter 2. socioeconomic factors would mostly manifest in category 2 (access to facilities, ability to support oneself while the athlete is not yet at a level that is self sustaining), and less in category 3 (where the athlete is motivated by economic factors themselves, or by some sort of racial idolisation ie black role models for potential black athletes, which would therefore result in interest from an entire racial group towards a certain sport. cultural influences/predispositions towards various sports would fit in category 3 also...positive and negative)

im not going to sit here typing all day like some wannabe, but hopefully just looking at what i typed above, you can extrapolate a bit and see how mere genetics are only part of the story, and also (before i forget) - consider that the trends we see in professional sport today reflect what was happening in society a generation or more ago. just because there are lots and lots of mexicans in america today, for example, doesnt mean that they ahve had time to consolidate, and become a population that is capable of spawning elite sportspeople...since chances are theyre still a bit focused on just surviving.

bloody hell lestat, this topic is huge. i cant type nearly as fast as im thinking, and im doing a shitty job of putting the little i can frame into these posts

As to the unnatural selection and why it hasn't happened to other races? The North American slave trade is a very recent and salient event in history. Nearly all African Americans living in the US are direct decented of people who were brough here originally as slaves. So they ALL would have been subject to the harsh conditions of the ship ride over. With other cultures you didn't see an entire nation's worth of slaves that went on to become their own unique culture, except for maybe the Jews when they were freed from Egyptian slavery. It was my understanding that their entire population was enslaved.

lestat i think your putting waaaaaaaaay too much into this shipride over. as taxing as it likely was, populations the world over have been subject to equally lethal selective pressures, in the form of pestilences, plagues, wars...and yet you dont see 'super races' evolving.

sorry bor but i think youre trying too hard to simplify something thats really pretty complicated

 

[Lestat]

Golden,

thanks again for the response.

I am not trying to say that there is only ONE factor, and I am not trying to say that slavery i the single biggest factor affecting the makeup of professional sports teams today. I'm suggesting that it is a factor, and not a trivial one.

 

[Phaded]

im in..

 

[GoldenDelicious]

ok good, because ive been up for 20 hours, and im in a coma, in case you couldnt work it out from my previous shit post

nite

 

[Lestat]

ok good, because ive been up for 20 hours, and im in a coma, in case you couldnt work it out from my previous shit post

nite

nah man, it was still one of the more cohesive and comprehendable posts on this thread.. or the entire board for that matter.

 

[needtogetaas]

omg stfu allready.