Article with interview of Roger Black

[white lightning]

Here is a good article about one of the best 400 meter runners of all time.He was a total stud and would have won a gold if it weren't for the juiced M.Johnson.They ask him what the difference is between black and white sprinters.He says it is a mental thing that is engrained into us so much that most believe it.He doesn't believe in the physical or color being the reason.I totally agree with him although some of you guys don't.There are alot of Wariners and Pickerings out there that never even get to compete or are discouraged from doing so!Enjoy the article guys.

http://sport.independent.co.uk/general/article325241.ece

 

[White_Savage]

Lighting, no one here believes the complete black dominance of sprinting is ENTIRELY natural. There are exceptions to all predictions of a bellcurve of attributes amongst different populational groups, and the fact that there are virtually no Whites in Olympic sprinting is very fishy.

 

[GreatLakeState]

Why are high school state sprint champions black? Are the
white sprinters who dominate their white conferences, white
regionals, suddenly psyched out and slow down when they run
into black sprinters?Edited by: GreatLakeState

 

[Guest]

personally i don't believe johnson used drugs. he also seems like a class guy. he complained when no media in america covered wariner and rock going 1-2 in the 400 at the world championship.

 

[JD074]

Of course he is representing Wariner, so he has a personal stake in him garnering attention, signing endorsement deals, etc. He should be upset if Wariner is ignored. But I definitely appreciate the article he wrote. That was very cool.

 

[white lightning]

I agree with the fact that M.Johnson has helped our cause in speaking out.We could use more athletes like him to do so.Here is the problem.If you are a white athlete,coach,owner,scout,etc. and speak out,you will be black balled forever.It is not P.C. That is why most whites won't speak.They don't want to lose their jobs/careers.I can understand that but if enough did,they couldn't fire all of us.As far as the roids,he was on them with 99% accuracy.Just because he possibly took them doesn't make him a horrible person.One thing that I have noticed is that in England,they don't go head hunting as much as the US when these subjects are discussed.They talk about white sprinters alot over there.

 

[JD074]

Lighting, no one here believes the complete black dominance of sprinting is ENTIRELY natural. There are exceptions to all predictions of a bellcurve of attributes amongst different populational groups, and the fact that there are virtually no Whites in Olympic sprinting is very fishy.

I am of the same opinion. I do think there are general, average differences between races when it comes to things like running, intelligence, violence/ aggression, etc. It just seems so obvious to me. And even Jon Entine (whose book is apparently the Bible of Black Athletic Supremacy, although I haven't read it,) says that there are fast white athletes who can be sprinters, running backs, etc.

I think the bell curve that Savage mentions is important to remember. Just because black athletes are, on average, a little faster (not a lot faster, just a little bit, but enough to make a difference at the elite levels of professional sports,) doesn't mean that there aren't exceptionally gifted white athletes who are fast, explosive, agile, great leapers, etc. We can write a very nice, long list of white athletes who are those things.

My personal opinion is that the average difference is small enough, and our population large enough, that it shouldn't make that great of a difference in areas like running back, wide receiver, cornerback, and 400 meter sprinting. But extremely small differences in speed mean a lot in sprinting.

So I'll argue that the black predominance in 100m sprinting is more justified by differences in biology than other areas (like the running back position,) but there should be at least a few whites at the extreme end of the bell curve who should be competitive in the 100m. Of the few hundred million white men on this planet, there must be a few who could be 100m champions. If Nesterenko did it on the women's side, a white man can do it on the men's side. It isn't happening right now, and may not happen for decades, and may not happen ever. But it is a possibility.

But I think we can all agree that this extreme level of speed is not necessary to be a talented running back or wide receiver. Those are more egregious examples of Caste at work than 100m sprinting, in my opinion. Edited by: JD074

 

[White_Savage]

Why are high school state sprint champions black? Are the
white sprinters who dominate their white conferences, white
regionals, suddenly psyched out and slow down when they run
into black sprinters?

I dunno. Are Standardized Tests "culturally biased" in favor of Whites and against Blacks, but not against Asians who just stepped off the boat into our "culture" to beat Whites and blacks on test scores?

Get thee behind me, Satan...

 

[White_Savage]

JD074:
Actually, I have to give Entine some honesty credit. He does mention that that Whites are as dominant in activities involving muscular strength and endurance as blacks are in sprinting, and that Asians have their abilities as well. He does make a few mistakes, like saying Whites have slower reflexes (based on how fast your knee twitches when tapped with a hammer. Tests based on things like hitting a button as soon as a light flashes show whites to have FASTER reflexs and that average reflexive speed tracks well with average intelligence.)

This is a good deal better than Sailer's continual portrayal of the black as Uber-macho and the White as a race of Poindexter, while completely ignoring who's stronger or who tends to win all-in fighting matches.

However, he plainly states that his study of racial athletic differences was to take the debate out of the hands of "racists" and has several times in his writings put in an idea of "Just because you're a good athlete doesn't mean you're not intelligent", IOW, it seems to me he's trying to steer the debate completely AWAY from looking cognitive or crime differences.

Anyway, there are black people who make good in science, as quiz show contestants, etc, despite the very signifigant average difference in I.Q. It would be evidence of systamatic exclusion of blacks if this were not case. Anyone who cannot see how this logic can be applied to sprinting and other sports must be one of those self-hating Whites.

 

[Guest]

simple voluntary reflexes are directly related to IQ. this is a fact with plenty of evidence. it's pretty easy to test this idea in a lab so there's no debate. it's not a perfect correlation but it is a direct correlation.

this stands in direct contradiction with basketball where the need to think at blinding speed is higher than in any other activity. specifically when on offense, as defense is reactive. we all know west africans are the best basketball players by a lot, yet they have the lowest avearge IQ. so how are they making those decisions so fast?

another source of observational evidence is race car drivers who must operate at the fastest mental speed possible for hours.. there is less decision making here and more reaction though i suspect. i will say that race car drivers are VERY GOOD. take a ride in one of their cars if you ever get the chance. you'll be scared almost immediately at the high speeds.

 

[White_Savage]

"this stands in direct contradiction with basketball where the need to think at blinding speed is higher than in any other activity. specifically when on offense, as defense is reactive. we all know west africans are the best basketball players by a lot, yet they have the lowest avearge IQ. so how are they making those decisions so fast?"


I have no idea why anybody thinks this is so. Why is "the need to think at blinding speed" supposedly more important in basketball, but less important than in say hockey, or soccer, or football (esp when you're a QB), baseball (esp on defense), boxing, fencing, or the most complicated physical chess game known to man, MMA fighting? Speaking of which, where are the black demons who dominate speed chess?

To say West Africans are the best at basketball because of some supposed thinking superiority is assinine because it completely shuns Occam's razor. (Which is simply the well-known observation that the simplest explanation and one based on readily observable information is usually the correct one)

Um, you may have perhaps noticed that a particularly tall, lanky, and long-armed body type is most common among Africans? And you have perhaps noticed those hoops are just high up enough to make being a tall guy extremely advantageous? When's the last time you saw a short and stocky Afro-American become a millionaire basketball star, for all his "athleticism" and "superior improvisational" abilities?

And on the cultural side perhaps you've also noticed that basketball is a black religious institution and your black kids are playing basketball constantly when White children are-well, going to school, studing for school, working, hunting, fishing, actually reading books or securing their future instead of spending most of their waking hours dribbling a ball. And yet, given all this, your West Africans have been notably unable to "outhink" their opposition in Olympic play, when the ability to deal with unfamiliar opponents and situations and improvise a solution would be the MOST valuable, not the least.

Finally, I have yet to see how the problems of controlling a car around a track at nearly 200 mph while surrounded by other cars, trying to overtake them while they try to overtake you, involves less "thinking" than trying to decide which direction to go or pass the ball on the way to the basket.

 

[Bart]

.

this stands in direct contradiction with basketball where the need to think at blinding speed is higher than in any other activity. we all know west africans are the best basketball players by a lot, yet they have the lowest avearge IQ. so how are they making those decisions so fast?

Not to nit pick, but how does one think at blinding speed? Isn't that term normally usedin relation to physical movements? There are basketball, football and tennis players who makequickdecisions, having honed their skills since childhood.Off the field or court some of these athletes are dumber than dirt. I'm not diminishing the intelligence needed to play at a high level in some situations but you don't have to be a rocket scientist to play a childs game.


How would a Nigerian basketball player who makes on-court decisions supposedly at blinding speed, match up with someone like Bobby Fischer in agame of chess? I would bet Fischer in his prime could play the entire NBA simultaneously and beat them all.But I wonder if he could even dribble a basketball? Even a border colliecan maneuver and make quick decisions, but it has no clue about basic math. In other words, passing or shooting a ball, no matter how deftly, is a poor measure of mental acumen.How about speed chess for blinding mental speed?


http://www.bobby-fischer.net/bobby_fischer_speed_chess.htm
The Herceg Novi blitz event was the speed tournament of the 20th century. It had four world champions competing, and Bobby not only finished 4 ½ points ahead of Tal in second place, he also obliterated the Soviet contingent, 8 ½ - 1 ½, whitewashing Tal, Tigran Petrosian and Vasily Smyslov, six-zip; breaking even with Viktor Korchnoi; and defeating David Bronstein with a win and draw. According to one report, Fischer spent no more than 2 ½ minutes on any game, thereby also giving, in effect, heavy speed odds to powerful opponents. So, while Tal - or a Soviet editor rewriting Tal - is technically correct that the greats could beat Fischer, it is more apt to say that he could beat them far, far more often.

 

[white tornado]

The Nigerian basketball team sucks. Edited by: white tornado

 

[white lightning]

Why is it that so many people think that whites cannot compete in sprinting.Coach Clyde Hart of Baylor has said that color has nothing to do with it.He has coached for over 40 years.Even Michael Johnson believes that kids are told not to even try.They are discouraged from even trying to make the team alot of times or are told to go up to the longer distances.This happened to many kids including Tim Benjamin of England.

I don't think that color has that much to do with it.I may be one of the few that believes that.I think that your body type does factor most of the time though.Michael Johnson proved a guy with short legs and a long torso can break world records but he is the exception to the rule.On the average,sprinters have the short torso,long legs and are very mesomorphic/musculsar.
To make a true comparisson,we would need to seen many more white sprinters with the ideal body types.You rarely see white sprinters period because they go into other sports.It's just like basketball,whites just are not interested in general with taking the time to excell.

It takes alot of hard work to be a olympic level sprinter.I have the utmost respect for the long hours that these guys put in on the track practicing.All I'm saying is that whites were competetive when they used to have the large numbers competing up into the 1960's. White sprinters won gold medals in all of the events.I do not believe that it is no longer possible.People used to say just three years ago that a white would never win a gold medal in the 400 meters.Well,whites went 1-2 in the Olympic Final.People are very gullible and tend to just believe that all blacks are superior athletically which is a lie.Many are outstanding athletes but there are many whites who too could be possibly just as good!

 

[JD074]

When's the last time you saw a short and stocky Afro-American become a millionaire basketball star, for all his "athleticism" and "superior improvisational" abilities?

Charles Barkley? Short for a power forward anyway. And definitely stocky.

 

[JD074]

Why is it that so many people think that whites cannot compete in sprinting.Coach Clyde Hart of Baylor has said that color has nothing to do with it.

Interestingly, I disagree with both opinions. I do think that whites can compete in sprinting (Nesterenko, Wariner, and Rock have proven that, ) but color does have something to do with it. Race has something to do with everything! Race matters. Race differences matter. Whether it's athleticism, intelligence, crime and violence, whatever. Race is one of the most important things in the world. Apparently we disagree on this, and that's okay.

He has coached for over 40 years.

How long has Bobby Bowden been coaching? Deberry? I'm grateful for Clyde Hart for doing such a great job with Wariner, but still.

Even Michael Johnson believes that kids are told not to even try.They are discouraged from even trying to make the team alot of times or are told to go up to the longer distances.

Of course! That's what the Caste System is all about!!! But that doesn't mean that there aren't average, small differences between races.

I don't think that color has that much to do with it.I may be one of the few that believes that.

You and Franz Boaz.

To make a true comparisson,we would need to seen many more white sprinters with the ideal body types.

Maybe someday we'll see male 100m sprinters come out of countries that are practically all-white, like Lithuania, Serbia-Montenegro, and Russia, where they won't be slotted out of sprinting because the coaches only want blacks. Then again, they may still prefer their top speedsters to play other sports, like soccer. Countries like the US, Canada, Britain, France, and Germany are becoming less and less white by the day. Look at France's National basketball team. Mostly black. There'll be fewer and fewer places where white athletes will be able to develop without being pushed out of the way by blacks and the coaches who worship them.

You rarely see white sprinters period because they go into other sports.

Of course they go into other sports. It's a combination of personal decision (for example, many European kids and teens prefer soccer to track,) parent's influence (when their kids are very young, encouraging them to play certain sports and not others,) and slotting. Track isn't very popular anymore, and that could be another part of it. This is true for both blacks and whites. How many black athletes that would've been baseball players, boxers, or track athletes a few decades ago are football and basketball players today? And, unlike blacks, whites play so many- seriously- so many sports. I really can't blame the white kids and teens for pursuing other sports, can you? Who wants to get the Brock Forsey treatment? Why not avoid that and play another sport and be great at it? These white kids, man... they're too smart for their own good!

But, WL, we do see white male 100m sprinters. (And that's what we're talking about, right? Because Nesterenko, Kenteris, and Wariner have won the other races.) But unfortunately they usually finish 6th or 7th. We see glimmers of hope (like Dusty Stamer finishing third, Macro's excellent races in the past,) but none of them have gotten over the hump and became an elite 100m sprinter. That's just the way it is for now.

All I'm saying is that whites were competetive when they used to have the large numbers competing up into the 1960's.

And how will people respond to this? "That was a long freakin' time ago!" Nobody cares about great white sprinters of the 60's.

Of course greater participation will help. Nothing we can do about that. Hopefully the success of Wariner and Nesterenko will encourage talented young white sprinters to pursue this sport, see how far they can go in it. It's really up to them. Most of them will be talented in other sports as well. They'll have to decide what's best for them.

I do not believe that it is no longer possible.

I don't either, but it's not happening for the men's 100m sprinters, for whatever reason(s). It's probably a combination of many factors. Nesterenko did it on the women's side. Now we need a man to step up. Right now nobody is even close. I don't say that to be insulting, mean, or rude. It's simply a fact that cannot be denied.

People are very gullible and tend to just believe that all blacks are superior athletically which is a lie.

They're wrong. But there are differences between races. Can we at least agree on that? Or are we going to agree with the anti-white liberals? That the only reason that blacks commit a highly disproportionate amount of crime, do worse in school, and whatever else, is because of institutionalized racism, the legacy of slavery, poor environment, and a lack of resources? I'm not going to do that. No way.

Many are outstanding athletes but there are many whites who too could be possibly just as good!

We can agree on that. Even though... ahem... the percentages might be different. And we can disagree on that.

Edited by: JD074

 

[Guest]

white_savage:

blacks dominate every major sport you listed except hockey, which they aren't interested in dominating.

also, please do not post about basketball again until you know something about it.

bart:

i have no idea what point you're trying to make. you're trying to compare one of the fastest games to one of the slowest.

backcourt NBA players make decisions much faster than any chess player. it's really that simple.

 

[White Shogun]

blacks dominate every major sport you listed except hockey, which they aren't interested in dominating.

Blacks dominate baseball, soccer, fencing, and MMA? Where did you get this information?

You've done well at playing the game thus far, but now you're beginning to show your true, uh, color. The basis of your arguments on this thread and others is that blacks are superior athletes and thats just the way it is. 'jody says so. According to you, any sport that has a non-black majority is that way only because blacks do not want to participate, or perhaps, are kept out of it by the 'man. Is that right?

If no man can beat a black man off the dribble (your quote), why can't American, all-black NBA dream teams beat the best European and South American teams of white players? I know that you said on another thread that these white foreign players work well together as a team, but if one is so dominate of another physically, so fast that his opponent cannot keep up, and is just genetically superior, shouldn't those dream teams beat their weaker opponents even MORE handily, when you have five of these uber-athletes on the court?

You know, the thought just occured to me that engaging in a discussion with you about this is going to be a waste of time. You aren't here to actually debate racial issues in sports nor are you here to support white athletes, which is the purpose of Caste Football. You're here simply to amuse yourself by posting messages slanderous of whites and promoting stereotypes, most likely giggling like a school-girl while you type, composing your messages one key at a time.

 

[white lightning]

I totally agree with you White Shogun.Jody didn't seem too bad early on,but as of late she has turned into a poster like Pugnus,Godking and others.The question I have is why are you here Jody is you don't think that white athletes can compete on a level playing field with black guys?You are not going to change any of our minds with your black is best mentality.That is as racist as a KKK Member saying whites are best at everything.If anything,whites are the best all around athletes in the world.We dominate more sports than any other race.Show me any other race that can come close?Blacks,no.Hispanics,no.Asians,No. Whites are criticized when they should be looked up to.We have a combonation of size,speed and strength that is very hard to beat.The Caste System is our biggest enemy.All that we need is equal opportunity.Trust me on that!!

 

[White_Savage]

Shogun: Yep, appears to be another ******* nut-hugger. Apparently does not watch MMA, if he thinks ******** dominate it. Apparently does not know what a QB is, the position that requires the fastest THINKING (as opposed to the fastest running) on a football team. Apparently does not know what SPEED chess is. Ever see anyone play to mate in 5 minutes? Here complex deciscions are being made in seconds at most, involving alot more possibilities and complexities than run left, run right, or pass the ball. Blacks are good at basketball, they have the body-type for it and its in their culture, but this laughable "thinking superiority" goes against everything that is actually scientifically known about the cognitive abilities of the races and is simply another manifestation of ******* Supremacism.

JD: Barkely, right. You just named ONE. And he was around 6 feet tall anyway, right?

"If no man can beat a black man off the dribble (your quote), why can't American, all-black NBA dream teams beat the best European and South American teams of white players?"

As I said, this is a great question. Playing with unfamiliar team-mates against unfamiliar styles of play would be the absolute BEST time for those who can supposedly make instant deciscions and pull great plays out of there arses to shine.

 

[White_Savage]

on the court?

You know, the thought just occured to me that engaging in a discussion with you about this is going to be a waste of time. You aren't here to actually debate racial issues in sports nor are you here to support white athletes, which is the purpose of Caste Football. You're here simply to amuse yourself by posting messages slanderous of whites and promoting stereotypes, most likely giggling like a school-girl while you type, composing your messages one key at a time.

Yes. It just occured to me that "jody" probably thinks Occam's razor is what Occam de pimp down the street threatens de ho's with if theys trys an' gyps him.

 

[SteveB]

I am in agreement with WL on this one. You guys keep saying there are big physical differences between the races. What are they? There is no prototypical black male just as there is no prototypical white male. Look at the body difference between Shaquille O'Neal and Allen Iverson. The same as the difference between Mark Eaton and Steve Nash. You all point out the differences on average, but there is a big variance on both sides of that average for all races.

The reason why most of the top 100m sprinters are black is because there are a lot of them in the sport at a young age. If you go to any AAU track meet, you will see black kids of all ages running the sprints and very few white kids. In fact, there will be almost no whites either running or in the stands. The same applies to youth baseball (at least in Texas). If you go to any youth baseball all-star game, it is almost 100% white. No surprise that there are fewer MLB black players.

Does this same reasoning apply to geographical differences. In other words, most American 100m sprinters come from Texas, California, or Florida. Are they physically more gifted than their black brothers in the rest of the U.S.? Logic would tell us no, it probably because more kids from those states are involved in track at a young age. The same can be said for baseball. There are more MLB pitchers from Southeast Texas than anywhere else in the country. Are they physically superior to white pitchers from other parts of the country? I can tell you from experience living and growing up in SE TX that it is not genetic, it is because almost every white kid plays Little League baseball.

There are white guys out there with the physical tools to be competitive in the 100m. I see white guys all of the time with a prototypical sprinter build (average height, small bone structure, narrow hips, long slender calfs/shins, large upper thighs/gluts), but I doubt few of them run track. I think that with 100% dedication to the sport, guys like Jeremy Bloom, Kevin Curtis, Don Beebe, among others could/would have been great sprinters. Unfortunately we will never know since they didn't choose track as a sport.

 

[Bart]

bart:

i have no idea what point you're trying to make. you're trying to compare one of the fastest games to one of the slowest.

backcourt NBA players make decisions much faster than any chess player. it's really that simple.

This is truly one of the most ignorant statements ever written on this board. You are probably mistaking chess for the black equivalent...checkers.

 

[JD074]

I am in agreement with WL on this one.

Are you also in agreement with the race hustlers about IQ, poverty, crime, and education? Is it all Whitey's fault?

You guys keep saying there are big physical differences between the races.

I assume you're referring to me and/or White Savage. I've stated repeatedly that I believe in small, average differences.

What are they?

I'm not enough of an expert to say definitively what the specific differences are, but it's apparent that there's something beyond the Caste System at work here. Just as mental differences exist, I believe physical differences exist. But I'll admit to ignorance about the scientific details involved.

There is no prototypical black male just as there is no prototypical white male.

But there are bell curves. Man this is frustrating!

Look at the body difference between Shaquille O'Neal and Allen Iverson.

Or the similarity between Vince Carter and Kobe Bryant. Or two white Strongmen or shotputters.

You all point out the differences on average, but there is a big variance on both sides of that average for all races.

Yeah. Bell curve. (I'm not talking about the book, by the way. I'm talking about the actual concept of the bell curve.) What do you think we've been saying all this time?!

The reason why most of the top 100m sprinters are black is because there are a lot of them in the sport at a young age.

I understand about cultural differences, the Caste System's slotting process, white kids' preferences for other sports, parental influence, etc. But perhaps, to a certain extent, kids and teens gravitate toward the sports that their bodies are suited for. Is that possible? I agree with White Savage's comment about basketball. There's a certain percentage of tall, long-limbed blacks who are physically suited for basketball, and it's ingrained in their culture. I think it's a combination of the physical and the cultural, nature + nurture. They feed off eachother. They reinforce each other. Think about the illiterate, drug-addicted, promiscuous, crime-prone blacks in the inner cities. Their genetics and their awful environment reinforce each other. Nature + nurture. Genetics + environment. To say that it's only environment/ nurture/ upbringing/ how they're treated, is just as dogmatic and stubborn as saying that it's only genetics.

There is a certain percentage of whites who can sprint, but my layman's opinion is that it's a lower percentage than among blacks. Most sports are complex enough, and our US population so much larger than the black US population, that the differences in percentages shouldn't matter that much. I personally feel that this is the case with football, where only Americans participate (so we have a huge population advantage,) and so many running backs and wide receivers are good despite not being freakishly fast, and so many talents and skills- other than simply running a straight line very fast- are needed, that we should be able to compete for every position. But I think the bell curve does make a significant difference in the simplistic sport of sprinting.

Does this same reasoning apply to geographical differences.

There are elements other than genetic, absolutely. Geography is probably very important. Aren't some sports played year around in southern areas? I think someone else posted about this in reference to baseball. I forget exactly what was said. Football and baseball are outdoor sports, the warm weather must be advantageous. Maybe the Latin baseball players benefit from their warm weather. And then you have basketball, an indoor sport, with many of the black players coming from New York and Chicago.

I can tell you from experience living and growing up in SE TX that it is not genetic, it is because almost every white kid plays Little League baseball.

And why don't more American blacks play baseball? Is it that they're better suited for other sports? How much does long arms and light calves help one hit a curveball?

There are white guys out there with the physical tools to be competitive in the 100m.

I agree. But for a lot of reasons they are not competitive at the elite level. Whether it's due to slotting, personal preference, parental influence, fewer at the extreme end of the bell curve, or all the above. And isn't track a lot more objective than football? We all know white kids don't get the Div. I scholarships. Of course, Rock didn't need one. But if you win a race, you win a race. It's objective. How many blacks have run a sub-10, and how many non-blacks have done so (whites, Asians, mestizos?) That's objective.

Are there white men on the planet who have the genetic potential to run sub-10? I believe so. With the right training, and the passion and determination, I think it's possible. But that does not mean that there aren't differences.

I see white guys all of the time with a prototypical sprinter build (average height, small bone structure, narrow hips, long slender calfs/shins, large upper thighs/gluts), but I doubt few of them run track.

Maybe that'll change someday.

I think that with 100% dedication to the sport, guys like Jeremy Bloom, Kevin Curtis, Don Beebe, among others could/would have been great sprinters.

Or maybe good sprinters, like Macro or Stamer.

Unfortunately we will never know since they didn't choose track as a sport.

Good point.

Edited by: JD074

 

[White_Savage]

Steve: No one is here to DISCOURAGE White athletes in any sport. Except jody. But she/he/it doesn't count.

Like I said, no one think's it's entirely natural. But you know, scientists can tell the race of a skeleton's owner not just using the skull, but the femur and several other bones. There are provably some racial differences. We ARE the best at so many sports, probably the best all-around athletes when you consider all athletic attributes (strength, speed,endurance, coordination) in aggregate, but it's probably physically impossible for one race to be the best at every sport.

But here's a tidbit you might like. I just found out that Jim Jeffries could run 100 yards in 11 seconds. And this was no track specialist at all we're talking about, but a 217 lbs muscled-like-a-bull heavyweight boxer and wrestler, living in the year 1898. Think about that one.