Couple of very random questions :)

B

Big_Idiot

2
Am i correct in saying that black people have more fast twitch fibers than white people?

I say this because:

1. They are known to be able to jump higher.
2. Most of the top olympic sprinters are black.
There's also other things.

Also what is it about that we never see black people in the swimming events? Iv heard something before that they have a disadvantage of swimming, but im not sure at all.

:D all non-racist questions, very random :):):)
 
I have heard that they have more fast-twitch muscle fibers, I don't know if it's true or not. I'm sure there's some physical reason why black people dominate almost every sport once that sport becomes culturally popular in the black community.

I think the swimming thing may just be cultural. There is a stereotype that a lot of black people can't swim.
 
Also not trying to be racist, however this statement will be. Black people dedicate more time to playing their sport because they see it as their only way "out" or "up" in the world than white people. Whereas white people value their education more as their way "out" or "up"

And many black people are afraid of swimming because of lack of swimming education at a young age.
 
I think black people in general have very good muscle building genetics. They seem to be responding very well to weight training,thus many of the black population are fairly muscular and well built.
 
Dry = i disagree with ya there man. White people are just as focused and dedicated :)

vojdancov = I see what your saying. But its only because of their darker skin that you can see their muscle tone better. Just like at a BB Comp, you put the darker tan on to bring out the physique ;)
 
Yes generally the have a higher percentage of fast oxidative muscle fibres. They also carry a different blood hematocrit to white people and therefore are often suited to power based sports.

Then again the best marathon runners in the world are black.

It also comes down to diet. Black men, and women of course have long been hunter gatherers of high protein meats like fish whereas the white ethnicity have long relied on crops of carb based foods. Over a period of time we have evolved differently from eachother.
 
You could also argue they have a slight advantage from periods when they were used as gladiators, hence only the genetically stronger survived.
 
there was a discussion similar to this once on lyles board,basicly most black sprinters etc come from america or the west indies,you dont really get good sprinters from kenya,somalia etc.

in america/west indies most black people came from the west coast(think its correct) of africa as slaves,so when they were bought only the best were picked (sounds horrible) and the same went for the women so over the years the best males and females were bred,and that produced the best genes.

its not colour its genetics.
 
Dry said:
Also not trying to be racist, however this statement will be. Black people dedicate more time to playing their sport because they see it as their only way "out" or "up" in the world than white people. Whereas white people value their education more as their way "out" or "up"

And many black people are afraid of swimming because of lack of swimming education at a young age.
Click to expand...


thats a pretty crazy blanket statement to make. there are plenty of white atheletes and plenty of very successful educated black businessmen and women.
 
NBS 4life said:
Yes generally the have a higher percentage of fast oxidative muscle fibres. They also carry a different blood hematocrit to white people and therefore are often suited to power based sports.

Then again the best marathon runners in the world are black.

It also comes down to diet. Black men, and women of course have long been hunter gatherers of high protein meats like fish whereas the white ethnicity have long relied on crops of carb based foods. Over a period of time we have evolved differently from eachother.
Click to expand...

when did crops come? The evolution argument doesn't really hold up unless we are talking about A LOT of years.
 
There is an even more controversial idea that African-Americans in particular excel in sports because of selective breeding during slavery.

It's true that selective breeding can bring on drastic, quick results but they should have begun to disappear nearly as quickly once that time period ended and people could produce offspring with whomever they wanted.
 
maybe they continued in secrecy to keep their place at the top of the athletic throne? only to one day take over the world?
 
Karky said:
when did crops come? The evolution argument doesn't really hold up unless we are talking about A LOT of years.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Europe was very different from Africa, even centuries ago. Because of animals like oxen to plow fields, it became possible for Europeans to develop as an agricultrual society while in Africa people were still hunter-gatherers. Africa did not have animals suitable for domestication, at least not to the extent that was present in Europe.
 
To make drastic changes yes, but smaller differences could occur over a shorter amount of time. However, I am still talking about 2-4 thousand years. Also, in Europe people had horses which they used for transportation. In Africa, people walked/ran.

There is a book by Jared Diamond "Guns, Germs, & Steel" which explains how Europe became more advanced than everywhere else on the globe. Diamond's reasoning was that by taking advantage of horses, cattle, and oxen, it took less people to provide food for an entire villiage, which allowed some people to develop thinks like metal working and firearms.
 
If a gene is already present in the genotype but not the phenotype then yes, changes can happen quickly, something totally new to emerge a very long time will have to pass.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top