blacks in boxing

[dannyk]

Hi all. I'm new to this site and I am glad to finally see a website that doesn't degrade whites. It never ceases to amaze me how, unlike blacks, white people stick each other in the back and spend more time fighting with each other. Blacks always seem to stick together, which is the one thing I do respect them for.


Just a few things I've noticed concerning blacks inboxing based on my experience in playing with them as well as my research and observations,which you may or may not disagree with:


*Blacks are at an advantage in boxing, due to the fact that they tend to have longer a longer reach. Take a black and white boxer, both 6' tall, and almost always, the blackguy will have longer arms.This, combined with the fact that blacks have denser bones than the other races. Ever notice that in women, only caucasian and oriental women are at high risk for osteoporosis?This of course, would mean that blackscan take a punch better than a whites, since the skull is nothing but bone.I don't believe blacks hit any harder or have better skills, but I believe these 2 facts, denser bones and longer arms,do give them an enormous advantage in boxing.Combine this with the fact that whites have been brainwashed since childhood to believe that blacks are better than us at almost anything athletic and then they have a mental advantage, which is perhaps the biggest advantage of all.

 

[white is right]

Hi all. I'm new to this site and I am glad to finally see a website that doesn't degrade whites. It never ceases to amaze me how, unlike blacks, white people stick each other in the back and spend more time fighting with each other.Blacks always seem to stick together, which is the one thing I do respect them for.


Just a few things I've noticed concerning blacks in boxing based on my experience in playing with them as well as my research and observations, which you may or may not disagree with:


*Blacks are at an advantage in boxing, due to the fact that they tend to have longer a longer reach. Take a black and white boxer, both 6' tall, and almost always, the black guy will have longer arms. This, combined with the fact that blacks have denser bones than the other races. Ever notice that in women, only caucasian and oriental women are at high risk for osteoporosis? This of course, would mean that blacks can take a punch better than a whites, since the skull is nothing but bone. I don't believe blacks hit any harder or have better skills, but I believe these 2 facts, denser bones and longer arms, do give them an enormous advantage in boxing. Combine this with the fact that whites have been brainwashed since childhood to believe that blacks are better than us at almost anything athletic and then they have a mental advantage, which is perhaps the biggest advantage of all.

On average they also tend to have worse endurance than white boxers. Many times the give one to take one white style is because of the shorter reach. Notice that tall white boxers tend to be stick and move type boxers that are similar to many black boxers and many shorter black boxers tend to fight white styles too.

 

[jaxvid]

I don't think a couple of inches gives a boxer much of an advantage. Are punches that just connect at the very tip of a glove that effective? Reach is over rated, it would be interesting to analyze some fights and see it the fighter (black or white) with the greater reach usually wins.

What is the advantage of thicker bones? Less breakage? How many fights feature broken bones? Not many I would guess. A thicker skull does not seem significant either as the damage of a punch to the head is that the brain is sloshed around inside the skull and bangs against the side of the skull causing shock. What difference is the thickness of the bone of the skull when its the soft tissue of the brain that you want to cause trauma to?

If jaws, fingers, or skulls were being broken by white men causing them to lose fights then I would say there is an advantage but since that is not the case then what is the "thicker bone" advantage????

 

[dannyk]

I agree that whites tend to have more endurance. The longer the fight goes, the more it tends to benefit the white guy.


As far as the current white heavyweights go, Maskaev impresses me the most. He took alot from Rahman and still whipped him in the 12th round, bad back and all. Klitchko could be better if he worked on developing a constant jab to keep his opponents off him. He moves pretty good for a heavyweight and has good power, but doesn't seem to take a punchvery well. Even though he won, he was knocked down 3 times in one fight,but I can't remember the name of the guy he was fighting. Liakhovich was beaten by Shannon Briggs in a very boring fight. And if he would have thrown more punches in the later rounds, I think he might could have taken Briggs, at least on points, since Briggs has very poor endurance. Even though Briggs won the fight, he almost looked defeated sitting in his corner totally exhaustedwhen it was over.

 

[dannyk]

I don't think a couple of inches gives a boxer much of an advantage. Are punches that just connect at the very tip of a glove that effective? Reach is over rated, it would be interesting to analyze some fights and see it the fighter (black or white) with the greater reach usually wins.

What is the advantage of thicker bones? Less breakage? How many fights feature broken bones? Not many I would guess. A thicker skull does not seem significant either as the damage of a punch to the head is that the brain is sloshed around inside the skull and bangs against the side of the skull causing shock. What difference is the thickness of the bone of the skull when its the soft tissue of the brain that you want to cause trauma to?

If jaws, fingers, or skulls were being broken by white men causing them to lose fights then I would say there is an advantage but since that is not the case then what is the "thicker bone" advantage????

 

[dannyk]

Reach is a definite advantage in boxing, even if it's only a couple of inches. I'm not saying it guarantees a victory every single time, only that it is an advantage. The same is true of skull thickness. It may not guarantee a victory, but it's an advantage. It seems to me that someone with a thicker skull can absorb more punishment. And being able to take a punch is almost, if not more important as being able to give one, especially at the professional level.

 

[PitBull]

I don't think "skull thickness" beyond a certain point means anything.
People get knocked out when the brain bouces around against the skull.
The cushioning around the skull and its thickness is probably more
important.Neck strength is probably a lot more important too, as well
as the muscles which move and stabilize the jaw.

Also, short arms are an advantage inside. Whites have better upper body
strength than blacks.

It seems all those so-called advantages don't mean much lately, eh?
Watch Ricky Hatton beat on those supposedly denser ribs for a while.

And also, at the elite level, averages are meaningless. You're talking
about the very best of the best, who are far from average.

 

[freedom1]

I'm no fan of blacks, but I try to be realistic.

Yeah, blacks are better suited for boxing, no doubt about it. On average (not in every case) they have quicker reflexes and longer limbs. They have a flatter nose with wider nostrils that is harder to break than the European nose. They cut, but not to the degree whites do due to tougher skin. Their greater bone density makes the blows they throw harder and makes their craniums more able to withstand blows. Of course these are averages. Also, it would be against the law to scientifically test who can better take a punch.

The recent success of whites in boxing doesn't negate black dominance of the sport since the 60s. Many examples of blacks putting beat downs on whites could be cited.

Whites tend to have more static strength and endurance.

A big part of boxing has to with desire. By sheer will, a fighter with less ability can overcome one with more. I would posit that the current crop of Eastern Europeans are more hungry than American blacks who've become softer from American living.

A border collie is different than a pit bull who is different than a poodle. So what? I say thank God for the variety.

Also, the current Mixed Martial Arts tournaments come closer to simulating real fights than boxing does, and whites are kicking ass in those tournaments.

 

[Kaptain]

Wait a minute. This is caste football and yet I see a lot of people making huge assumptions of white athletic inferiority. Please post sources. Post a source that shows research that confirms that: 1) Whites have slower reflexes, less dense bones, and shorter "wing span". In particular compare Russian breeds to West African. I know their are racial differences but many of these claims fall in the category of the mythical hip swivelness and fast-twitch muscle fiber.

Whites are dominating boxing (especially hwt) in the only ERA in which the world has finally been allowed to compete. The advantages are ours.

 

[dannyk]

Wait a minute. This is caste football and yet I see a lot of people making huge assumptions of white athletic inferiority. Please post sources. Post a source that shows research that confirms that: 1) Whites have slower reflexes, less dense bones, and shorter "wing span". In particular compare Russian breeds to West African. I know their are racial differences but many of these claims fall in the category of the mythical hip swivelness and fast-twitch muscle fiber.

Whites are dominating boxing (especially hwt) in the only ERA in which the world has finally been allowed to compete. The advantages are ours.

 

[dannyk]

I never said that blacks were superiror to whites. Only that they had certain advantages in boxing due to thicker skulls and longer arms. As for scientific evidence, it is common knowledge that white women and oriental women have a higher incidence of osteoporosis than do black women. Does that make blacks "better" than us? Absolutely NOT. It simply means they are different.


I think whites are physically stronger, on average, than blacks due partly to the average black having longer arms, which are a big disadvantage when it comes to moving alot of weight. I also have read studies that show the average white person has a heavier brain, which accounts for our higher intelligence. I also have to admit that blacks are better at running sprints, and have an advantage in sports that require quick bursts of speed and/or sports like boxing where they can use their dense skulls and long arms to advantage. Oh yea, and they are hands down better at committing violent crimes. Whites are better at everything else. I think I'd rather be in the everything else category and I'm sure everyone else here can agree with me on that one!

 

[white is right]

Wait a minute. This is caste football and yet I see a lot of people making huge assumptions of white athletic inferiority. Please post sources. Post a source that shows research that confirms that: 1) Whites have slower reflexes, less dense bones, and shorter "wing span". In particular compare Russian breeds to West African. I know their are racial differences but many of these claims fall in the category of the mythical hip swivelness and fast-twitch muscle fiber.

Whites are dominating boxing (especially hwt) in the only ERA in which the world has finally been allowed to compete. The advantages are ours.

I know reach disadvantages for caucasians exists. Watch the reach of most black fighters vs whites in all catergories and their is an obvious disadvantage. This disadvantage is with all caucasians ie Italian/Southern European types. North Eastern/Western Asians, Germanics. Note there are exceptions Golota had a long reach for his height. Even Latinos that are predominately white but wouldn't be classified as white by most posters on this board ie Julio Cesar Chavez had huge reach disparities with his black opponents like Terrance Ali, Roger Mayweather(he was taller),Pernell Whitaker. This disadvantage is an advantage in wrestling and weightlifting hence whites and caucasian Arabs/ West Asians(Iranians) tend to dominate these sports for this reason.

 

[PitBull]

Problem is that overall racial averages mean nothing in one-on-one contests
between two unique individuals. The whole point of Caste
Football is that talented white athletes who are every bit as fast (or faster),
strong (or stronger), smart (or smarter), and agile as blacks are getting
shafted because of their skin color.

Now, if you are talking about overall national educational policy, for
example, the low average black IQ means something, because you are
talking abaout many millions of people. But not one-on-one in a ring.

 

[freedom1]

Here's some data and quotes from researchers:

Bone density and fat percentage:

http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/71/6/1392

http://www.aafp.org/afp/20041001/1293.html

Trunk to length ratio (this article quotes numerous researchers who have found differences)

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,947918-5,00 .html

Testosterone differences, see J. Phillippe Rushton's, Race Evolution and Behavior

Here's a section from an article called, Peering under the Hood of African Runners by Constance Holden from that was printed in Science Magazine:

The differences don't stop with body shape; there is also evidence
of a difference in the types of muscle fibers that predominate.
Scientists have divided skeletal muscles into two basic groups
depending on their contractile speed: type I, or slow-twitch
muscles, and type II, fast-twitch muscles. There are two kinds of
the latter: type IIa, intermediate between fast and slow; and type
IIb, which are superfast-twitch. Endurance runners tend to have
mostly type I fibers, which have denser capillary networks and are
packed with more mitochondria. Sprinters, on the other hand, have
mostly type II fibers, which hold lots of sugar as well as enzymes
that burn fuel in the absence of oxygen. In the 1980s, Claude
Bouchard's team at Quebec's Laval University took needle biopsies
from the thigh muscles of white French Canadian and black West
African students. They found that the Africans averaged
significantly more fast-twitch muscle fibers--67.5%--than the French
Canadians, who averaged 59%. Endurance runners have up to 90% or
more slow-twitch fibers, Saltin reports.

Bouchard, now at Louisiana State University in Baton Rouge, says his
team looked at two enzymes that are markers for oxidative metabolism
and found higher activity of both in the West Africans, meaning they
could generate more ATP, the energy currency of the cell, in the
absence of oxygen. The study suggests that in West Africa there may
be a larger pool of people "with elevated levels of what it takes to
perform anaerobically at very high power output," says Bouchard.

Although training can transform superfast-twitch type IIb fibers
into the hybrid type IIa, it is unlikely to cause slow- and
fast-twitch fibers to exchange identities. Myburgh says there is
evidence that, with extremely intensive long-distance training, fast
IIa fibers can change to slow type I fibers. So far, however, there
is no evidence that slow-twitch fibers can be turned into
fast-twitch ones. As an athlete puts on muscle mass through
training, new fibers are not created, but existing fibers become
bigger.

 

[Alpha Male]

And I've read study after study that disproves the validity of these studies. In fact, a book on this topic was on the shelf in Barnes and Noble and it went on to disprove this myth along with other ones concerning differences in races. I'll look for the title.

Tell the great white powerlifters and World's Strongest Men that they don't have enough fast twicth muscle fibers to lift abusrd amonts of weight. Regardless, making these kinds of sweeping generalizations are the reason why there is a castesystem in football and an even greater psychological system of athletic inferiority that permeates most whites.

 

[white is right]

And I've read study after study that disproves the validity of these studies. In fact, a book on this topic was on the shelf in Barnes and Noble and it went on to disprove this myth along with other ones concerning differences in races. I'll look for the title.

Tell the great white powerlifters and World's Strongest Men that they don't have enough fast twicth muscle fibers to lift abusrd amonts of weight. Regardless, making these kinds of sweeping generalizations are the reason why there is a castesystem in football and an even greater psychological system of athletic inferiority that permeates most whites.

Boxing has too many intangibles to certain physical traits as tell all sign on who will be the better boxer. Skill can blunt brute physicality. Does anybody think Toney can beat Peter if the fought in a phonebooth with one guy emerging? Rocky Marciano was at huge disadvantage speed and reach wise and early on in his career coordination wise. Yet is the gold standard for heavies........

 

[ironfist]

I agree that whites tend to have more endurance.  The longer the fight goes, the more it tends to benefit the white guy. 


As far as the current white heavyweights go, Maskaev impresses me the most.  He took alot from Rahman and still whipped him in the 12th round, bad back and all.  Klitchko could be better if he worked on developing a constant jab to keep his opponents off him.  He moves pretty good for a heavyweight and has good power, but doesn't seem to take a punch very well.  Even though he won, he was knocked down 3 times in one fight, but I can't remember the name of the guy he was fighting.  Liakhovich was beaten by Shannon Briggs in a very boring fight.  And if he would have thrown more punches in the later rounds, I think he might could have taken Briggs, at least on points, since Briggs has very poor endurance.  Even though Briggs won the fight, he almost looked defeated sitting in his corner totally exhausted when it was over.


 

If you think Maskaev could beat Klitschko, you know nothing about boxing. Edited by: ironfist

 

[devans]

I agree that black people GENERALLY have longer limbs. That's legs, arms, fingers, toes,
Humans ahave adapted slightly to colder climates by having shorter thicker limbs (less heat loss)
This is most pronounced in Innuit populations and some east asians.

But where did this slower reflexes business come from?
I find that hard to believe.
Fast games and activities that need quick reflexes such as some Martial Arts, Fencing, Badminton, Lightweight Boxing, Table Tennis, Racing driving etc - hardly dominated by Black people!

 

[freedom1]

I'm not disputing the premise of this whole website, i.e., that white athletes are discriminated against. I know for a fact that's true. I'm just saying that racial differences go deeper than just the outer paint jobs. The proclivities that would allow one group to thrive in colder European areas would be a disadvantage in Africa and vice versa.

The whole idea of statistics (created by whites to test for intelligence) is that the smaller the group, the less accurate your predictions will be, the larger the group, the more accurate. You can put one black man in front of me, and I can't tell you anything about him. He might be smart and law abiding. However, because he's a nice guy, doesn't mean I'm going to start taking strolls through black neighborhoods. The larger groups do allow me to make predictions. I can look at any place where blacks are crowded together, Haiti, Africa, the central neighborhoods of large American cities and see the results. These places are not the same as Iceland or Japan (places with few to no blacks).

There are many variables that predict boxing success, these include, skill, will, strength, endurance and strategy, areas where whites often have the advantage. However, bone density, quickness, and reach also need to be included, and these are areas where blacks tend to have the advantage.

In sports where less variables are involved, predictions are easier, such as running fast in a straight line. Yes, there are white wide receivers who can run the 40 in 4.3, but there are more blacks who can do it. Should receviers like Curtis (Rams) be discriminated against because blacks on average are faster? Absolutely not. Has he been? Yes! That he and other players have been treated unfairly does NOT negate the fact that blacks are a little faster. Don't throw the baby out with the bath water. Are there more talents required to be a wide receiver than just speed? Yes, but does that mean speed isn't important? No.

The talent or aptitude required to move heavy objects such as in the shot put or bench press or farmer's walk are different than those required to pop someone with an explosive left jab.

The French Canadian researcher who took actual samples did find blacks tend to have a greater percentage of fast twitch fibers as compared to whites. Does this mean every black will have more fast twitch fibers? No.

This data is proven by real world results. Just watch the 100 meters at the olympics. Personally I'm rooting for the white guy. I had high hopes for Shirvington and continue to have high hopes for Yepishin and the others, but I know they're at a genetic disadvantage in that narrow talent.

 

[White Shogun]

What attributes have given whites the advantage in MMA?

 

[freedom1]

Definitely, skill, will, strength, endurance and strategy. Strategy is related to cognition. MMA requires a much more comprehensive set of skills than boxing. It's just so much more complicated in a relative sense.

Many of the ground positions reward static strength, endurance and well honed technique.

Whites have not been shut out of early development. Boxing gyms are typically only available in black or Hispanic parts of town whereas martial arts and wrestling are available everywhere.

 

[dannyk]

I'm not disputing the premise of this whole website, i.e., that white athletes are discriminated against. I know for a fact that's true. I'm just saying that racial differences go deeper than just the outer paint jobs. The proclivities that would allow one group to thrive in colder European areas would be a disadvantage in Africa and vice versa.

The whole idea of statistics (created by whites to test for intelligence) is that the smaller the group, the less accurate your predictions will be, the larger the group, the more accurate. You can put one black man in front of me, and I can't tell you anything about him. He might be smart and law abiding. However, because he's a nice guy, doesn't mean I'm going to start taking strolls through black neighborhoods. The larger groups do allow me to make predictions. I can look at any place where blacks are crowded together, Haiti, Africa, the central neighborhoods of large American cities and see the results. These places are not the same as Iceland or Japan (places with few to no blacks).

There are many variables that predict boxing success, these include, skill, will, strength, endurance and strategy, areas where whites often have the advantage. However, bone density, quickness, and reach also need to be included, and these are areas where blacks tend to have the advantage.

In sports where less variables are involved, predictions are easier, such as running fast in a straight line. Yes, there are white wide receivers who can run the 40 in 4.3, but there are more blacks who can do it. Should receviers like Curtis (Rams) be discriminated against because blacks on average are faster? Absolutely not. Has he been? Yes! That he and other players have been treated unfairly does NOT negate the fact that blacks are a little faster. Don't throw the baby out with the bath water. Are there more talents required to be a wide receiver than just speed? Yes, but does that mean speed isn't important? No.

The talent or aptitude required to move heavy objects such as in the shot put or bench press or farmer's walk are different than those required to pop someone with an explosive left jab.

The French Canadian researcher who took actual samples did find blacks tend to have a greater percentage of fast twitch fibers as compared to whites. Does this mean every black will have more fast twitch fibers? No.

This data is proven by real world results. Just watch the 100 meters at the olympics. Personally I'm rooting for the white guy. I had high hopes for Shirvington and continue to have high hopes for Yepishin and the others, but I know they're at a genetic disadvantage in that narrow talent.

 

[dannyk]

Freedom, your last post was right on the mark. I agree 110%. I ALWAYS cheer for the white guy in any sport. Always have, ever since I was a kid. And I agree that we should be honest with ourselves. Both races have advantages and disadvantages in all sports, whether we want to admit it or not. Someone else also made the comment that whites tend to cut easier, which I agree with. Maybe blacks have thicker skin? Again, I want to emphasize that I don't think this makes them better, but only gives them advantages unique to boxing. When you think about it, with all of these advantages they have (longer reach, denser bones/skin)blacks should win at boxing alot more than they actually do. Thisonly proves the greater toughness of the white man, who wins despite the fact that he's at a natural disadvantage.


Someone also said that if I thought Maskaev could beat Klitchko, I knew nothing about boxing. Well, I never said that. I only said that I was more impressed with Maskaev in his fights than Klitchko. But the more I think about it, the more I think Maskaev could beat him. I just wasn't impressed with Klitchko in his fight with Sam Peter, who dropped him 3 times before Klitchko finally won on points. Maskaev is one tough customer, from what I've seen. So I guess I know nothing about boxing..lol

 

[jaxvid]

Peter dropping Klitschko was years ago. His recent fights have been dominant whereas Maskaev's have not. You have to put things in perspective, fighters mature and age and learn, the Vlad of today is not the same as he was 5 years ago, he is clearly the most dominant fighter TODAY.

 

[JD074]

Peter dropping Klitschko was years ago.

And, as I've pointed out several times, two of those punches were to the back of the head. Those two knock downs shouldn't have counted.