athletics shows caste american sports

waterbed said:
Total points for whites 24: 9 for strength, technical , explosive , speed,8 points for jumping and 7 for running.

Total points blacks 19: 9 for running, 8 for jumping and 2 for combination strength , technical explosive, speed.

Total points arabs 9: 5 for running, 2 for strength, technical explosive speed and 2 for jumping

Total points mongoloids 7 points: 3 for running, 3 for jumping and 1 for strength, technical explosive , speed.
Click to expand...

The stats are pointless anyway, because what we today in Europe see on track is 3rd athletic league. The interest in athletics has been very small during the last 2-3 decades and field events stay in the hands of whites only because other people are too terrible in it.
 
http://www.halls.md/bmi/singapore.htm

OBJECTIVE: To study the relationship between body fat percentage and body mass index (BMI) in three different ethnic groups in Singapore (Chinese, Malays and Indians) in order to evaluate the validity of the BMI cut-off points for obesity. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SUBJECTS: Two-hundred and ninety-one subjects, purposively selected to ensure adequate representation of range of age and BMI of the general adult population, with almost equal numbers from each ethnic and gender group. MEASUREMENTS: Body weight, body height, sitting height, wrist and femoral widths, skinfold thicknesses, total body water by deuterium oxide dilution, densitometry with Bodpod(R) and bone mineral content with Hologic(R) QDR-4500. Body fat percentage was calculated using a four-compartment model. RESULTS: Compared with body fat percentage (BF%) obtained using the reference method, BF% for the Singaporean Chinese, Malays and Indians were under-predicted by BMI, sex and age when an equation developed in a Caucasian population was used. The mean prediction error ranged from 2.7% to 5.6% body fat. The BMI/BF% relationship was also different among the three Singaporean groups, with Indians having the highest BF% and Chinese the lowest for the same BMI. These differences could be ascribed to differences in body build. It was also found that for the same amount of body fat as Caucasians who have a body mass index (BMI) of 30 kg/m2 (cut-off for obesity as defined by WHO), the BMI cut-off points for obesity would have to be about 27 kg/m2 for Chinese and Malays and 26 kg/m2 for Indians. CONCLUSIONS: The results show that the relationship between BF% and BMI is different between Singaporeans and Caucasians and also among the three ethnic groups in Singapore. If obesity is regarded as an excess of body fat and not as an excess of weight (increased BMI), the cut-off points for obesity in Singapore based on the BMI would need to be lowered. This would have immense public health implications in terms of policy related to obesity prevention and management.

here an example that gave me the conlusion of 10% heavier build at the same height for whites comparedto east asians. and 12.5 % heavier at the same height compared to south asians.


And compared to west african blacks and pacific islanders it depends from to the study.As far as the studys that west african blacks and pacific Islanders had more muscles were when they looked at blacks whites and pacific islanders with a high % bodyfat.Probably black and pacific islanders gain a higher ratio muscle to fat when taking in to much calories then whites do.In the studys i have seen with healthy bodyfat % whites had more muscles compared to black and pacific islanders.
 
The studies are very good and give a good idea about the muscular development. However, Chinese are not the heaviest Mongoloids. And it also depends on, if they come from the north or the south. Koreans, Japanese, Mongols or North Chinese are comparable to Central Europeans, while Thais, Philippinos, Malyasians or Indonesians are almost as skinny as East Africans.
 
War Lord said:
The meagre Dutch participation in athletics is one of the most mind-boggling things in sports, because they may have the best world's physique for athletics overall.
Click to expand...
Yes, height and proportion.
 
The Dutch have a perfect height (184 cm), quite long legs (trunk/height ratio 51.5%) and their body build is reasonably slender. At least 20% young Dutch possess a height of 190 cm or more. In contrast, in Germany it is ca. 8%, which means that 15 milion Dutch can match 37.5 million Germans in this regard, and with increasing height, this disproportionate ratio further increases.

The Dutch measurements ideally fit the 400 m and all jumping events, but generally offer a very universal potential for the widest range of athletic disciplines, from the 1500 m (as the ectomorphic extreme) to the discus throw (as the endo-mesomorphic extreme). Actually only long distances and extreme field events (shot put, hammer throw) would be too distant from this body type.

It is obvious that in the Netherlands nobody cares about athletics, because if they did, they would bring medals on wagons. Football, cycling, swimming and rowing are the biggest thieves of athletic talents there.
 
the 184 cm could be including some non whites.The average dutch student weight on average around 180 lbs lean and 184.8 cm. http://dined.io.tudelft.nl/nl,dined2004,301 ( in dutch).right their is calculater 1 SD( standard derrivation) and said 26.6% above 190 cm which is close to your 20%.

less then 160 lbs or 200 lbs plus( lean no gym) are often seen too. Dutch record shot put is 21.62 still further then arab or east asian.
But we are I think to small country for a lot of WR and a lot of events not populair, but enough for better result then best result of then evry east asian( decathlon, shot put, discuss, 1500 meter ,1600 meter, 800 meter and more) but it would be better if we could do sports like in america with school like i already said.
but we are at least always top 10 or close to top top 10( like top15 or so) in the oympic games.
all the old WR's in swimming of dutch Innge de bruin, pieter van den hoogenband and team-swimming are broken in the time with the new swimming suits (were aloud for a year or so).of the dutch young generation is 25% non white, they are around 35% in the amateur leagues and a little less then the pro leagues( 25%).the minoritys nearly all play soccer or do a fight sport.the fight sport accomodations are mostly in the big citys and are over 90% participated by non whites.But some whites dutch world champion mostly when it is not only punching wirh arms but also with legs muay thai, Sem schilt 4 times k-1, Peter Aerts 3 times k-1, Bas Rutten american fight sport or so. were mostly what would be considered nordic, with some alpine and meditteranic elements, espacially under the rhine river- which can also be called the Roman river lol.within the nordics you had differnt tribes too, the strongest bodied being the borreby germanic 20% elementt here mostly north east isolated , i remember that i saw jaap stam teamfoto from before hew went to pro he was with 200 lbs the the skinniest of the soccer team and they are often natural and not juiced, fat like american football players.Around Kampen and north of that are a lot of white beasts.
 
I know the page, but I have no idea, if the data are reliable. The last info on Dutch height I have gives 184 cm for young males and 181 cm for young females.
 
yea 184 or 185 cm depending on study.And i think 171 cm for women not 181
smiley1.gif
 
study only included white dutch with several dutch generations as their forfathers. waterbeds stats are accurate. all of the white south africans trace boer [dutch ] heritage, and we have seen how good some of these guys]gals] have been.
smiley20.gif
 
thankfully the dutch in regard to technical medical studies are not interested in political correctness, but FACT. like most european based studies
smiley32.gif
 
but any,BMI based study is unreliable , as there are too many "what if "factors. in medicine the BMI is technically only used for anaesthetics
smiley20.gif
 
Waterbed, thanks for this writeup. I've often said my theory is that whites are the best all round athletes. I think this shows evidence of that. It seems whites have a quadriceps and possibly first couple step advantage. Blacks get more leg lift and have a more graceful (not more powerful) stride because of hamstring strength etc. carrying them "slightly" faster over 100 meters. West Africans aren't faster than whites from 0-15 meters or from just above 400 meters to 1500 meters. BTW, burst is very important in American football.

Whites have better X-Y agility in American football which is very underrated. This is shown by our great short shuttle times and agility differentials (40 time-short shuttle) with a low rate of participation amongst smaller skill players at the combine and we have good blend agility marks too in the 3-cone between X-Y and X-Z agility, blacks have a slight edge in the broad jump. whites have the squat and bench records, whites seem to be good at resisting loosing their balance when hit on the field (ie. tackle breaking). I notice all the tackle breaking from Gerhart, Alstott and Riggins and how we squat more weight amongst elites and think of how powerful white football players can be. I wrote up a whole list about the advantages of whites vs. black athletes myself a couple years back, but the research wasn't quite as good as yours waterbed.
smiley9.gif
Edited by: ToughJ.Riggins
 
BTW, google "lateral agility trumps speed on the football field" to see how many of the top agility marks were from white WRs, LBs etc. competing against blacks at the same position not only this year, but last year too at the NFL combine.
smiley16.gif
 
ToughJ.Riggins said:
Waterbed, thanks for this writeup. I've often said my theory is that whites are the best all round athletes. I think this shows evidence of that. It seems whites have a quadriceps and possibly first couple step advantage. Blacks get more leg lift and have a more graceful (not more powerful) stride because of hamstring strength etc. carrying them "slightly" faster over 100 meters. West Africans aren't faster than whites from 0-15 meters or from just above 400 meters to 1500 meters. BTW, burst is very important in American football.

Whites have better X-Y agility in American football which is very underrated. This is shown by our great short shuttle times and agility differentials (40 time-short shuttle) with a low rate of participation amongst smaller skill players at the combine and we have good blend agility marks too in the 3-cone between X-Y and X-Z agility, blacks have a slight edge in the broad jump. whites have the squat and bench records, whites seem to be good at resisting loosing their balance when hit on the field (ie. tackle breaking). I notice all the tackle breaking from Gerhart, Alstott and Riggins and how we squat more weight amongst elites and think of how powerful white football players can be. I wrote up a whole list about the advantages of whites vs. black athletes myself a couple years back, but the research wasn't quite as good as yours waterbed.
smiley9.gif
Click to expand...


Thanks bro.

The good balance of white players I noticed too.Whites have often shorter legs then blacks at the same height which give you balance and whites have often big calves which is great I think for changing direction and keeping your balance.

At the decathlon toplist you see 85% of the best are white, and most of the non whites peing mixed race, with most having lot white in them( except 1 american).In teamsports like american football,soccer it is great if you combinate speed with endurance and great jumping abilty etc.
 
As per usual you leave out info, you sound like Michael Moore lying by omission. Brian Hartline ran a 40 in the 4.5 range (4.52 if I recall) and his short shuttle was about 4.1 (4.12?), (Collie also did very well and Edelman and Peterman tore it up at their Pro Days in agility differential). This means Hartline has solid speed for a starting WR and simply loses VERY LITTLE speed when making one quick cut- and has good burst- which is very important for a WR. You don't have a 0.42 agility differential if you lose much speed when you make a cut or have bad burst troll. This whole crap about multiple moves in an instant X-Z agility is overrated, even RBs can't hesitate for more than a quick cut one way and than back the other and the priority is to fight north-south. You aren't only a troll, you are also a liar! I believe Nate Swift is faster than Anquan Bolden and a few other starting black WRs. Swift is significantly slower than average for a starting WR- there's no doubt- running a 4.67, but his 4.25 shuttle and great 3 cone time show his game is short area quickness! Bottom line, you left out the white shuttle times which average better than the black times to lie by omission because all you care about is 40 times. Buzz off, you're not wanted here!Edited by: ToughJ.Riggins
 
waterbed said:
ToughJ.Riggins said:
Waterbed, thanks for this writeup. I've often said my theory is that whites are the best all round athletes. I think this shows evidence of that. It seems whites have a quadriceps and possibly first couple step advantage. Blacks get more leg lift and have a more graceful (not more powerful) stride because of hamstring strength etc. carrying them "slightly" faster over 100 meters. West Africans aren't faster than whites from 0-15 meters or from just above 400 meters to 1500 meters. BTW, burst is very important in American football.

Whites have better X-Y agility in American football which is very underrated. This is shown by our great short shuttle times and agility differentials (40 time-short shuttle) with a low rate of participation amongst smaller skill players at the combine and we have good blend agility marks too in the 3-cone between X-Y and X-Z agility, blacks have a slight edge in the broad jump. whites have the squat and bench records, whites seem to be good at resisting loosing their balance when hit on the field (ie. tackle breaking). I notice all the tackle breaking from Gerhart, Alstott and Riggins and how we squat more weight amongst elites and think of how powerful white football players can be. I wrote up a whole list about the advantages of whites vs. black athletes myself a couple years back, but the research wasn't quite as good as yours waterbed.
smiley9.gif
Click to expand...


Thanks bro.

The good balance of white players I noticed too.Whites have often shorter legs then blacks at the same height which give you balance and whites have often big calves which is great I think for changing direction and keeping your balance.

At the decathlon toplist you see 85% of the best are white, and most of the non whites peing mixed race, with most having lot white in them( except 1 american).In teamsports like american football,soccer it is great if you combinate speed with endurance and great jumping abilty etc.
Click to expand...

Your Welcome Waterbed. I see it the same way, blacks have many gifts as athletes as do whites, but I believe us whites have quite the all round athleticism. I see a small advantage for whites over blacks in European football and at more positions than blacks in the NFL. Basketball, I'd give a slight edge to blacks.

The basically race neutral positions in football are Power tailback, Flanker (usually the #2 WR) and Strong Safety. Blacks have a SLIGHT edge as scatbacks, CBs and Free safeties IMO with their most noticeable edge being at CB no doubt. Most other positions slant towards whites having a slight edge (including slot WR). A race neutral position should be about 70% white. FS would be about 55% or 60% white IMO. Scatback if just between black and white would be close to 50/50 IMO and CB would be the only black majority position IMO being maybe 60% black and 40% white.
 
"Lateral agility trumps 40-yard speed on football field"













Hmm, okay..let's put that to the test:

2s9c6rr.png



Oops.
 
Gemini said:
"Lateral agility trumps 40-yard speed on football field"
Hmm, okay.. let's put that to the test:</font></div>
Click to expand...
Gemini, do you have similar data for previous years? i.e., for guys who have now been in the league for a few years?

My guess is that the "lateral agility guys" would do increasingly better compared to the "speed guys" after the novelty of trying to use the speed guys for big plays begins to wear-off.
 
waterbed said:
i don't know if the study also include dutch people( passport) of non dutch heritage( 20% in holland) which would make the average 2 cm or so smaller.
Click to expand...


it includes non etnic dutch so white dutch is 186.3 cm on average or so 6 feet 1.5.they said in the study that with higher education where taller then low educated ones becuase the % white dutch is higher for the high educated.
 
Re. Dutch and athletics.

I'm of Dutch ethnicity, as are many in West Michigan. Dutch are the dominant athletes here in all high school sports, and West Michigan is now the equal to the East side of the state in football, doing it with (the exception of Muskegon) white teams heavy on Dutch last names.

What I've noticed between West Michigan Dutch and current Netherlands Dutch, is our superiority in clean leaving, conservatism, Christianity, Calvinism, etc. which leads to wholesome athletic participation.
 
joe fisher better make sure he gets looked after ,with talent like his he should not be going off the radar ay time soon. anybody any info on where he is next academic year?
 
Gemini said:
"Lateral agility trumps 40-yard speed on football field"
<div></div>
<div></div>
<div></div>
<div></div>
<div></div>
<div></div> 
<div></div>
<div></div>
<div></div>
<div></div>
<div></div>
<div></div>
<div></font> </div>
<div>Hmm, okay.. let's put that to the test:</font></div>
<div></font> </div>
<div>
2s9c6rr.png
</font></div>
<div></font> </div>
<div></font> </div>
<div>Oops.</font></div></font>
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. I simply think it's amazing that the last two years- white players have averaged significantly better in a short, burst, two change of direction drill over 20 yards. It's harder to make up ground- where you have to hit your second gear quickly and then have to quickly change directions without slowing down much- over a short 20 yard race.

Your list is incomplete so you may have selected the players you wanted to- to tally their yards. So, what- blacks outdo whites a bit at 40 yards- we know this. Most plays for RBs, Flanker and slot WRs are made in the first 25 yards of the line of scrimmage. 30 yard runs or more are quite rare. And heck, even Le'Ron Mclain with his 4.88 speed had around an 80 yard run against the Cowboys a couple years ago. RB is more about burst and cutting angles- than straight lined speed. Yes at some point speed becomes an issue, but there are still many successful backs in the NFL who run 4.6s. I'd say the average speed for an NFL RB on the 2 deep is about 4.5, but remember there are different types of backs for different situations and offensive systems in the NFL.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top