Why do black people run faster than white?
- Thread starter Pithikos
- Start date
spidergoat
Valued Senior Member
Perhaps so, it could have something to do with diet.
http://mintinfo.hubpages.com/hub/Why-Do-Jamaicans-Run-So-Fast
Yes. Everyone has several types of mussel, many tall black have considerable greater fraction of those called "fast twitch", I think is the name. They respond faster but fatigue more rapidly - why blacks don´t do so well in long endurance races, with the possible exception of Ethiopians who have run long distances for years and start at an early age. Running long distances is the "national sport" of Ethiopia! (The body, of the youth especially, can adapt to the needs.)
I am (technically) white and I can certainly outrun this black guy:
Pretty sure I can out walk him even, as I don't need a fork lift to get around! So the premise of your question is flawed, please return with evidence that on average black people are faster then white people, and then we will talk.
PS Billy are you sure we got different kinds of mussels, I don't own any claims or even mollusks!
Pretty sure I can out walk him even, as I don't need a fork lift to get around! So the premise of your question is flawed, please return with evidence that on average black people are faster then white people, and then we will talk.
PS Billy are you sure we got different kinds of mussels, I don't own any claims or even mollusks!
This thread screams "Racist Joke".
I am not a racist and my kids are 1/2 Asian, however somebody must be thinking.
If this thread was about "Why Slobovians (no such culture/ insert race of choice) run so fast?"
"....because the slow ones are in jail".
would be the answer.
There are many much worse on sciforums already.
I am not a racist and my kids are 1/2 Asian, however somebody must be thinking.
If this thread was about "Why Slobovians (no such culture/ insert race of choice) run so fast?"
"....because the slow ones are in jail".
would be the answer.
There are many much worse on sciforums already.
Last edited:
Only for those who are so inclined and/or ignorant of some basic facts about muscles:
My memory in prior post 3 was quite accurate (even if my spelling was not). I´ll now note that back when East Germany was trying (and getting) many athletic prizes, part of the reason was they checked children for the relative amount of the various muscle types they naturally had and then forced intensive training on those who had a natural advantage in some sport due to their distribution of muscle types.http://www.ideafit.com/fitness-library/a-primer-on-muscles said:
Last edited by a moderator:
Probably. All sprinters, black or white, tend to have more fast-twitch muscle fibres, and the fastest sprinters have the most.
Certainly races do differ, but environment plays a large part as well, both in the race factor as well as adding to it. Jamaica is another example of a country that does well in athletics such as running, and because of its economics and tradition of running as a main way of getting places, it's no wonder that the best of the best from there are going to be exceptional.
Oh certainly ethnicity has something to play with it, but not ALL black people are good runners, only of a select ethnic groups of "black" people could you expect to find on average superior runners. Sort of like how not all Caucasians are smart, just Ashkenazi Jews, and even of them with an average IQ of 115 there are idiots. Why are Ashkenazi Jews so smart, probably because the dumber ones kept getting killed off and could not do the only jobs they were allowed to have (banking) in Europe for dozens of generations.
Likewise why do Ethiopians and American Africans tend to dominate some sports and not others, maybe because of some selective pressures?
Another possibility is trained population: Lets say your Brazil where everyone eats, sleeps and shit football, the national team can be created from a much large pool of candidates then other countries and thus their chances of having awesome players are higher, hence why Brazil does so well at football. Likewise countries like Ethiopia might have very large training programs for running, hence why they do so well in running.
Neither of these are mutually exclusive and it could be both reasons.
Likewise why do Ethiopians and American Africans tend to dominate some sports and not others, maybe because of some selective pressures?
Another possibility is trained population: Lets say your Brazil where everyone eats, sleeps and shit football, the national team can be created from a much large pool of candidates then other countries and thus their chances of having awesome players are higher, hence why Brazil does so well at football. Likewise countries like Ethiopia might have very large training programs for running, hence why they do so well in running.
Neither of these are mutually exclusive and it could be both reasons.
Last edited:
Why not black African excel mainly blacks in the American continent excluding the Haitian Apparently there is a selection perhaps even not natural selection,. Did the slave holders mist breed for stronger worker ?
it's an evolutionary trait.
everyone was after the black mans butt for so long that he developed this trait.
raiding watermelon patches and chasing chickens probably helped.
-sourced from watsamata university.
It's not true, in general.
Black people genetically from the highlands of northeastern Africa, the Andaman Islands, Australia, Papua New Buinea, and many other regions, are no faster and in some case slower than white people over short distances.
Black people genetically from Central and West Africa, excluding the San and a couple of other groups, do run faster than white people over short distances.
The sociological race is not the discriminating factor. The actual genetic heritage is.
Over long distances, people genetically from the northeastern highlands of Africa seem to have a serious advantage - over black people and white people and yellow people alike. They are black, in sociological race. There is some evidence that red people from a couple of regions of NA can challenge there.
Over middle distances the sociological races get muddled, but overall white people outcompete all varieties of the other sociological races in a vague middle range starting around 1500 meters and ending somewhere around 10,000 meters. There is considerable evidence red people from certain parts of NA could take this one genetically, but their gene pool has been blasted and their social support is inadequate to provide clear comparison. (The first recorded sub four minute mile was run by a Pawnee red in the 1800s, a recognized runner from a Great Plains tribe known for its running ability).
Forget race. Go with biology.
Hehe not sure if this is actually racist. Nothing wrong with racial differences, only racial superiority. Seeing marked differences between races is sort of the point of "races". I think iceaura answered it quite nicely, but past white and black, I don't see how races can properly classify "yellow" and "red" people lol
Also there's some environmental factor at play. A lot of countries send their athletes to other places to train because of higher altitudes, which can improve their training. Well, some of the African countries listed are at elevated grounds (e.g. Kenya I think), so their athletes have lived all their lives at higher altitudes. Also a lot of African countries support and invest more resources in their track athletes. Not that you really need much, all you need is a long pathway to run lol
If you were to ask: why are so many US inner city basketball players black, you would quickly realize that most inner city residents are black, so there was already a racial bias in the question. Secondly, you'll discover that public recreation facilities in the inner city will provide basketball as a minimum, since it requires the least equipment, can be played indoor or outside, and can be played on little more than a concrete slab with a hoop. Translated: this is the cheapest way to give low income residents of that demographic area some semblance of recreation when parks have been paved over and no one really cares about their recreation in the first place. Contrast this with the lush green parks in suburban yuppie neighborhoods, and the soccer moms and dads with their late model SUVs and the kids loaded down with expensive suits and equipment which they will outgrow in one season.
Why do black people run fast? Because it's the cheapest sport (next to swimming, which only requires a waterhole or beach) and blacks are chronically economically disadvantaged. This is why it's so spectacular to see people living under every kind of oppression bringing energy and enthusiasm to the Olympics. Brazil will be the next test case, it's got a great diversity in ethnicity, and yet blacks remain at worst poverty levels imaginable. Then again, these destitute people are famous for their high spirit in sports and recreation as well as song and dance.
Liberalism and PC teaches the lie that all human are the same. If one sees obvious differences, using the objective skills of a scientist, one is supposed to second guess themselves or risk the PC police calling you insensitive or worse, until you to reinforce their lies. If humans were all the same why would PC need a dual standard and laws on the books which discriminate; quotas?
Black males, in general, are good at running and most sports. This is not based on wishful thinking, or racism, but observational facts. In this particular case, PC does not yet use the dual standard and emotional manipulation, to hide the real data. The result is natural ability and hard work; natural selection, the only things that determines the winner.
As an explanation, I would guess blacks are closer to natural instinct, since much of Africa is retro and tribal. Civilization allows props which can compensate for lack of natural ability. Tribal has fewer props and therefore requires you maintain natural muscular vigor, by default. If you have to dig with a shovel, compared with a back hoe, the shovel will keep you more fit. Western blacks only left Africa hundreds of years ago, not thousands.
Picture if the liberals and their PC police decided to extend their lie into sports, using the dual standard, because the blacks win too much compared to their percent of the demographics. We can legally enforce quotas that will reflect the national demographics. We can also make the blacks feel guilty for winning too much and say this is due to discrimination conspiracy. The change may also require the men's 100 meters become the unisex 100M. We will also need to make room for the handicapped and any group that starts to whine.
Next, we would then need to rewrite the sports history books to better reflects the wishful demographics. We may also need to discount or even purge the old records as cheating and discriminatory, so when the new sprint times comes in, we can all pretend to marvel when the new modern age world record in the 100M is broken in under 15 seconds. After a few generations of public school propaganda, the children will think the lie is actually real, since the laws and peer pressure will make all the data appear to reinforce the lie. Sport is a loose end for liberalism, since it says that some races can do better and maybe the we are all the same is a con job!
Black males, in general, are good at running and most sports. This is not based on wishful thinking, or racism, but observational facts. In this particular case, PC does not yet use the dual standard and emotional manipulation, to hide the real data. The result is natural ability and hard work; natural selection, the only things that determines the winner.
As an explanation, I would guess blacks are closer to natural instinct, since much of Africa is retro and tribal. Civilization allows props which can compensate for lack of natural ability. Tribal has fewer props and therefore requires you maintain natural muscular vigor, by default. If you have to dig with a shovel, compared with a back hoe, the shovel will keep you more fit. Western blacks only left Africa hundreds of years ago, not thousands.
Picture if the liberals and their PC police decided to extend their lie into sports, using the dual standard, because the blacks win too much compared to their percent of the demographics. We can legally enforce quotas that will reflect the national demographics. We can also make the blacks feel guilty for winning too much and say this is due to discrimination conspiracy. The change may also require the men's 100 meters become the unisex 100M. We will also need to make room for the handicapped and any group that starts to whine.
Next, we would then need to rewrite the sports history books to better reflects the wishful demographics. We may also need to discount or even purge the old records as cheating and discriminatory, so when the new sprint times comes in, we can all pretend to marvel when the new modern age world record in the 100M is broken in under 15 seconds. After a few generations of public school propaganda, the children will think the lie is actually real, since the laws and peer pressure will make all the data appear to reinforce the lie. Sport is a loose end for liberalism, since it says that some races can do better and maybe the we are all the same is a con job!
Well I didn't say that this wasn't racially-related, I said it wasn't racist. One is where differences are incidental, the other where differences lead to inferior and superior castes. And this wasn't a topic that undermined their ability, it was about people's ability to earn gold medals in the Olympics. I don't really see running as the definite value who is the more superior race overall, I just see that as some people are better at some things, and others better at other things. I think this had more to do with the genetic background of races, more than the social. But i could be wrong.
And what do you expect in inner city regions. Don't you think it'd be a mockery to invest more money/space for large soccer fields or some indoor hockey arena, instead of investing in more cheaper housing or social programs. Yes, basketball is cheap for the city AND for the players, they have to buy 1 basketball, as opposed to buying soccer shoes/soccer/shin guards/equipment. So its cheap to build. I think that is the point. I think there are a lot more recreational public courts in lower-income areas than higher end residential areas, and building more, cheaper courts makes sense in city planning.
You mean physiology. That would assume the worst kind of racist attitude imaginable, namely, that physical attributes of strength and endurance are racially disparate. The only biological factor I can think of is one that amounts to speciation. Looks like a brick wall to me. From the standpoint of physiology, there is only one race, the human race, which is one species, one physiology.
If that was the real intent of your question, you would do better to ask why Eritreans and Nordic people tend to be tall, or why pygmies are geographically isolated.
Notice, you could just as well ask, why are so few medal winners from Jakarta or Sicily or Ankara? Who knows. But I seriously doubt that correlating winners to skin color is a valid at all. Have you wondered why so many weight lifters or boxers are Iranian? Some things are cultural. Dressage is probably not as common in Soweto as in the posh regions of England or the ranches of Virginia. But neither would it be that common among the Inuit or Parana people, for reasons that are both cultural and practical.
If you happen to be white yourself, then you may not be aware that during much or most of the time that the Olympics has been open to blacks, some of the major population centers in sub-Saharan Africa have chronically been plagued by war, genocide, dictatorship, drought/famine and apartheid. Is it possible more athletes from those regions have only recently been free enough to enjoy the privileges of recreation. It's hard to go running with snipers on the roof, or while your baby is dying of dehydration. Increased Olympic participation by people of all ethnicities will signal the dawn of freedom, and perhaps a modicum of stability in those regions, but probably nothing more. I have no idea if sub-Saharan participation and performance has anything to do with this question. If you meant to ask about Jamaica, then that's another question entirely. The answer to that is, their relocation from Africa to the Caribbean was a consequence of the slave trade.
But you could just as well ask: why are so many hockey players white. Not only that, but why are so many blonde.
The only question to ask here is, why are so may people looking for racial stereotypes? It's not a question of biology, but one of sociology.