Alvin Ailey was leader of a black dance troop. Modern/ballet/jazz. You know, the kind of stuff that is excruciating to have to sit through. The Nicholas Brothers were a great dancing duo. If you can ever catch clips of them tapping away it is incredible.
My take on this site
- Thread starter Black Guy
- Start date
Colonel_Reb said:
I posted the Riggins info because I believe someone mentioned that he was as talented and fast as any black RB. His numbers show that he was a good RB but wasnt on the same level as OJ Simpson or Marcus Allen etc etc. He was good no doubt but he was more of a inside runner who could punish you when he got the ball. He was not a slashing type of Runner.
Highwayman
Newbie
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2005
- Messages
- 48
Black Guy said:
No, it wasn't slavery. A mere 400 years could not possibly produce that sort of result. Basic genetics would tell you that, look it up if you don't believe me. It also wouldn't address why sprinters of West African ancestory win almost all Olympic events--even those not born in West Africa.
I do believe evidence suggests certain racial discrepancies exist, but not to this extent. Football is a game of skill, not just speed. I can accept the liklihood that the top tier of black athletes might be able to run faster on average---but we're talking about just the exceptional ones, aren't we? The ones with both speed AND football skill.
Coaches on EVERY level like to pretend they can coach "everything but speed." so the more numerous (due to population disparity) guys with similar speed and perhaps greater football skills get shunted to the less speedier positions because it's an inherent stereotype that those of African ancestory have greater speed.
I wonder...what would be your guess. If the top 5000 runners in the United States were to run, how many of them would be of African ancestory? Gimme an idea of your assumptions here.
Highwayman said:
You make good points. If top 5000 runners ran it would all depend on what TYPE of running were talking about. If your talking long distance running then it would be European people. If your talking spirints then more than likely people of African descent. Which not to say that someone white cant win the sprint or have a good long distance runner be of African origin.
Highwayman
Newbie
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2005
- Messages
- 48
My question is on percentage though. Even with sprinters only, Americans of African descent make up about what, 12% or so of the average?
What do you think the odds are they'd make up even 2500 of the top 5000 sprinters? They might make up 8 of 10--that's the top ten--that's statistically possible. But a one in eight or one in ten or so polulation making up 90% of the speed positions in football is very unlikely. Especially as it's a game that isn't dominated by sprinters and whom a guy like Jerry Rice is the best despite not being drafted very high because he was too slow? He ran like a 4.6, didn't he? It was his fopotball skills that made him the best, not his speed.
Now, Jerry Rice was discriminated against because of his speed,. How many guys from a population that outnumbers his like eight or ten to one that might on average be slower but includes oodles more people with the same football skills with the same speed might have been able to succeed were they not shunted to positions they couldn't play as well because of their skin color?
What do you think the odds are they'd make up even 2500 of the top 5000 sprinters? They might make up 8 of 10--that's the top ten--that's statistically possible. But a one in eight or one in ten or so polulation making up 90% of the speed positions in football is very unlikely. Especially as it's a game that isn't dominated by sprinters and whom a guy like Jerry Rice is the best despite not being drafted very high because he was too slow? He ran like a 4.6, didn't he? It was his fopotball skills that made him the best, not his speed.
Now, Jerry Rice was discriminated against because of his speed,. How many guys from a population that outnumbers his like eight or ten to one that might on average be slower but includes oodles more people with the same football skills with the same speed might have been able to succeed were they not shunted to positions they couldn't play as well because of their skin color?
white lightning
Hall of Famer
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2004
- Messages
- 21,499
Another good example is the nfl's all time leading
rusher,Emmitt Smith.He only ran in the high 4.5 - 4.6
range.They said he was too slow going all the way back
to college.All he did was prove everyone wrong.The
thing is that if he was white,he would have probably
never got the opportunity.This has to change.There are
too many Staley's & Farmers out there that get screwed
year in & out.Even Kretshcmer wasn't drafted after
leading the nation in rushing.Lumsden might not ever
play much.Why wasn't he drafted & he is fast?Staley was
fast too but the Caste System continues!Let's keep
getting the word out guys!
rusher,Emmitt Smith.He only ran in the high 4.5 - 4.6
range.They said he was too slow going all the way back
to college.All he did was prove everyone wrong.The
thing is that if he was white,he would have probably
never got the opportunity.This has to change.There are
too many Staley's & Farmers out there that get screwed
year in & out.Even Kretshcmer wasn't drafted after
leading the nation in rushing.Lumsden might not ever
play much.Why wasn't he drafted & he is fast?Staley was
fast too but the Caste System continues!Let's keep
getting the word out guys!
Highwayman said:
I will answer the question this way. Ok black people make up 12% of the population here in the US but they win all the sprinting metals. The hypothesis of the site is that white kids are being slotted out of sprinting due to stereotypes.
Look at it like this. No white man has ever ran a sub 10.0 100 yd dash from america. But out of the 12% black population plenty of people have ran a sub 10.0 100 yd dash. There has to be a answer for that. What ever the answer is exaplains why black people dominate all the speed positions in the NFL and why slower black player still get chances and still do well. That also explains why white atheletes that might be similar to jerry rice get passed over. Its all about what people percieve to be true. They probaly think a white kid couldnt make it which is not always true. You make some good points. If a white player is slower but has the skills he should get a chance to play. I see your meaning.
Here is the "caste system" take on sub 10 sec 100 meters. It is entirely likely that a sub 10 sec has never been run by someone not on performance enhancing drugs (steroids, HGH etc.) Certainly almost all of the African sprinters of the last 15 years can plausibly be connected to coaches that doped their runners. There may have been a few, very few, non doped sub 10 sec runs. But it is doubtful.
Note this this is not presented just to insult the black sprinters that are without question very talented, it just indicates that at the upper echelons of track you have to dope to be succesful. there is really no other choice. if one guy is getting away with it he will beat you every time.
This "doped" success has occurred in the current caste sytem era so all likely candidates for doping would have been the many black american sprinters that were already at the top. No whites would have been eligible since whites are weeded out for the top spots early on before a runner can get famous enough to get "coached" by a doping coach.
Also do not confuse the current american skill at performance enhancing drugs with the crude efforts of the former communist countries. The stuff they used was nothing compared to the juice people like BALCO are turning out. The white runners of Europe are not getting the same good stuff as our guys, so there results would be less regardless of genetic make-up
Blacks run sub 10 sec 100's because they are all doped, every single friggin' one of them. No exceptions. Sorry, black sprinting dominance is not due to having to outrun hungry tigers in Africa.
Note this this is not presented just to insult the black sprinters that are without question very talented, it just indicates that at the upper echelons of track you have to dope to be succesful. there is really no other choice. if one guy is getting away with it he will beat you every time.
This "doped" success has occurred in the current caste sytem era so all likely candidates for doping would have been the many black american sprinters that were already at the top. No whites would have been eligible since whites are weeded out for the top spots early on before a runner can get famous enough to get "coached" by a doping coach.
Also do not confuse the current american skill at performance enhancing drugs with the crude efforts of the former communist countries. The stuff they used was nothing compared to the juice people like BALCO are turning out. The white runners of Europe are not getting the same good stuff as our guys, so there results would be less regardless of genetic make-up
Blacks run sub 10 sec 100's because they are all doped, every single friggin' one of them. No exceptions. Sorry, black sprinting dominance is not due to having to outrun hungry tigers in Africa.
Well said Jaxvid.
I believe that there are some genetic differences in athletic abilities between the races. Black people may be percieved as being faster because of world class sprinting results. White people have always dominated the power sports in track and field (shot-put, hammerthrow, discus etc.) as well as other measures of power (e.g. power lifting, world's strongest man contest etc.). Yet I don't see discrimination against blacks in the power postions in the NFL. Isn't power important in the so called "speed positions" too? Black Guy, I agreed with most of what you said in your last post, but why do you suppose there isn't discrimination against black players because of there supposed "lack of power"? Just another angle to think about.
I believe that there are some genetic differences in athletic abilities between the races. Black people may be percieved as being faster because of world class sprinting results. White people have always dominated the power sports in track and field (shot-put, hammerthrow, discus etc.) as well as other measures of power (e.g. power lifting, world's strongest man contest etc.). Yet I don't see discrimination against blacks in the power postions in the NFL. Isn't power important in the so called "speed positions" too? Black Guy, I agreed with most of what you said in your last post, but why do you suppose there isn't discrimination against black players because of there supposed "lack of power"? Just another angle to think about.
White Shogun
Hall of Famer
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2005
- Messages
- 6,285
Personally, I'd like to see a new argument made than the same
tired "no white guy has run a sub 10 in the 100 argument" as a
way of explaining why there aren't any white running backs in the NFL.
How many black NFL running backs can run a sub-10 100?
Do you think the NFL's all time leading rusher, Emmit Smith, could run q sub-10? With wind at his back and buck naked even?
How about Earl Campbell? Eddie George? What about the vaunted JIM BROWN?
I don't think so. There's more to the running back position than
straight speed, and the lack of sub-10 100's by white sprinters has
nothing to do with why there aren't any whites playing running back in
the NFL.
tired "no white guy has run a sub 10 in the 100 argument" as a
way of explaining why there aren't any white running backs in the NFL.
How many black NFL running backs can run a sub-10 100?
Do you think the NFL's all time leading rusher, Emmit Smith, could run q sub-10? With wind at his back and buck naked even?
How about Earl Campbell? Eddie George? What about the vaunted JIM BROWN?
I don't think so. There's more to the running back position than
straight speed, and the lack of sub-10 100's by white sprinters has
nothing to do with why there aren't any whites playing running back in
the NFL.
white lightning
Hall of Famer
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2004
- Messages
- 21,499
I couldn't agree more white shogun.There have been too
many excellent running backs who lacked that game
breaker speed.It's more about vision and how you make
your cuts.Some backs actually out run their blockers
and they get no where.While a fast running back may be
exciting,it is not necessary to run a 4.4 to be a
effective r.b. The problem is that even when a white
r.b. runs 4.4, they still ignore him because they think
he isn't tough enough,etc.It's a complet joke!
many excellent running backs who lacked that game
breaker speed.It's more about vision and how you make
your cuts.Some backs actually out run their blockers
and they get no where.While a fast running back may be
exciting,it is not necessary to run a 4.4 to be a
effective r.b. The problem is that even when a white
r.b. runs 4.4, they still ignore him because they think
he isn't tough enough,etc.It's a complet joke!
Highwayman
Newbie
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2005
- Messages
- 48
jaxvid said:
I thought 'doping' was something entirely different than drug use? The way I heard it, what is commonly called 'doping' amounts to taking some pints of blood out of your system months before an event, and in the meantime your body will naturally replenish the lost blood. Then right before the competition, the blood is added back to your system giving you extra blood to increase speed and stamina.
Sure, it's still cheating, but it's not quite drug use in my book. It's also very difficult to catch I've heard, and some suspect it's used by just about every one of the top competitiors in major events, even those like the Tour de France which isn't exactly dominated by Africans last I checked.
Highwayman
Newbie
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2005
- Messages
- 48
Black Guy, I don't think we disagree a whole lot here. I brought up that 2500 of 5000 bit in hopes you might have access to information that would refute my point, as I've never seen that sort of data. My suspicion is while the very top, say 50 or so, might be dominated by those Americans of predominatedly African descent, once you got of that tier the population discrepancies would start to tell.
White_Savage
Mentor
An interesting thread. Though for most of my life I've been uninterested in ball games,(In sports, I'minterested in MMA, kick-boxing,boxing, wrestling/grappling, fencing and shooting, pretty much in that order) I feel the socio-politico implications ofpopular sports areprobably important for "our fight" as it were.
The first thing I find unbelievable: The assertion that there can not be some sort of conspiracy to over-emphasize the physical abilities of blacks, or more to the point, to downplay the physical abilities of whites. HistoryIS a long series of conspiracies. Thosewhounderstand society and it's manipulation must surely realize that your average American knowsthe players on hisfavorite football team better than he knows his congressmen, that more people watch the Superbowl than the State of the Union address. Sport combined with television is an INCREDIBLY powerful thing, and only a fool thinks no one would use itto their own socialends-such as convincing the people that took over the world through warriorship that really folks, you're too physically incompetent to defend your person, honor, family, or community, don't even try.
The second thing that stick in my craw is how BG dismisses all sports (especially Mixed-Martial arts, wrestling, and the various strength sports) not dominated by blacks as games blacks simply cannot be bothered to play. I will freely admit that legitamate science has concluded there is some truth to the idea that blacks are faster sprinters, but the same science has also concluded that whites, on average, are stronger (at least those whites who actually bother to lift weights), and have reflexes at least on a parity with blacks.(This was the conclusion of the only scientific racial comparison of reflexes I've seen). The sports that require and where I have personally seen the most freakishly fast reflexes are fencing and shooting sports.A black man celebrating black talents is certainly anatural and normal thing, but why is it nessecary to try and rationalize away white talents? When did our society decide that being able to run fast wasathletic but being able to pick upatremendous weight was merely a sideshow, or that a man who could put a ball in a hoopneeds to be glorified but a guy who can hit a1" moving target on his opponent's wrist with an epee over and overagain should be ignored? Do the peopleentirely choose which sports andathletic skill sets getglorified, or do those who manipulate the mass of the peopledecide the emphasis, for their own ends? I wonder.
To say nothing of the fact that polite society has absurd double standards...I root for that Russian Klitscko to keephaving successes in the boxing ring, or I say I like UFC because the white dominance of said sport lays to rest the myth of white males as wimps and weaklings, and I'm a racist monster, something my black counterparts never suffer for their ethnic pride.
The final thing I find absurd is how when the disparity between blacks and whites on standardized tests, IQ scores, crime rates, career success, etc, is mentioned,we get the same sort of rationalizations and attempts to explain away the numbers that BG criticized the folks here for using in regards to the dearth of white running backs. Towrite"I bet my IQ is higher than the posters here" or some such is not a logical response. I could just as easily claim "I can outsprint anyone here" but that would just be a defensive cop-out (To say nothing of the fact it wouldn't be true, even if I was just racing against the white guys
)
If implications about black intelligence are uncomfortable, I can understand why, but man is a creature of both mind and body, why shouldn't whites be equally bothered by the implication that they are physically inferior?
The first thing I find unbelievable: The assertion that there can not be some sort of conspiracy to over-emphasize the physical abilities of blacks, or more to the point, to downplay the physical abilities of whites. HistoryIS a long series of conspiracies. Thosewhounderstand society and it's manipulation must surely realize that your average American knowsthe players on hisfavorite football team better than he knows his congressmen, that more people watch the Superbowl than the State of the Union address. Sport combined with television is an INCREDIBLY powerful thing, and only a fool thinks no one would use itto their own socialends-such as convincing the people that took over the world through warriorship that really folks, you're too physically incompetent to defend your person, honor, family, or community, don't even try.
The second thing that stick in my craw is how BG dismisses all sports (especially Mixed-Martial arts, wrestling, and the various strength sports) not dominated by blacks as games blacks simply cannot be bothered to play. I will freely admit that legitamate science has concluded there is some truth to the idea that blacks are faster sprinters, but the same science has also concluded that whites, on average, are stronger (at least those whites who actually bother to lift weights), and have reflexes at least on a parity with blacks.(This was the conclusion of the only scientific racial comparison of reflexes I've seen). The sports that require and where I have personally seen the most freakishly fast reflexes are fencing and shooting sports.A black man celebrating black talents is certainly anatural and normal thing, but why is it nessecary to try and rationalize away white talents? When did our society decide that being able to run fast wasathletic but being able to pick upatremendous weight was merely a sideshow, or that a man who could put a ball in a hoopneeds to be glorified but a guy who can hit a1" moving target on his opponent's wrist with an epee over and overagain should be ignored? Do the peopleentirely choose which sports andathletic skill sets getglorified, or do those who manipulate the mass of the peopledecide the emphasis, for their own ends? I wonder.
To say nothing of the fact that polite society has absurd double standards...I root for that Russian Klitscko to keephaving successes in the boxing ring, or I say I like UFC because the white dominance of said sport lays to rest the myth of white males as wimps and weaklings, and I'm a racist monster, something my black counterparts never suffer for their ethnic pride.
The final thing I find absurd is how when the disparity between blacks and whites on standardized tests, IQ scores, crime rates, career success, etc, is mentioned,we get the same sort of rationalizations and attempts to explain away the numbers that BG criticized the folks here for using in regards to the dearth of white running backs. Towrite"I bet my IQ is higher than the posters here" or some such is not a logical response. I could just as easily claim "I can outsprint anyone here" but that would just be a defensive cop-out (To say nothing of the fact it wouldn't be true, even if I was just racing against the white guys
If implications about black intelligence are uncomfortable, I can understand why, but man is a creature of both mind and body, why shouldn't whites be equally bothered by the implication that they are physically inferior?
Colonel_Reb
Hall of Famer
Good post White_Savage and welcome to Caste Football. You are right in your questioning of this explaining away of white abilities. No doubt there is a conspiracy, one that has been around for far too long now and unfortunately shows no signs of slowing up. Hopefully through honest discussion on this and other boards we will change this.
Alpha Male
Mentor
First of all, Black Guy stated that white men dont have the speed,
elusiveness, or stregth. While the first two can be deabted, the
third cannot. It has been scietifically documented that the
average white outperforms the average black in all forms of
weightlifting (i.e. the bench press and squat). But you dont need
this info for that to be true. The top ten becnh pressers are all
white and not many blacks have placed that well in strength
events. Look at the World's Strongest Man competition or the
Olympic Weightlifters. The reason for this is inherently
genetic. Whites have larger chest and shorter appengages and the
right combination of muscle fiver cross section on average.
However, when I did happen to see a black man from the NFL no less on
the World's Strongest Man he performed poorly and came in last
place. However, none of the announers said he was a feeble black
man or anything of the like that white athletes here from
basketball announcers (i.e Bill "idiot" Walton). The point is if
blacks want to try and compete in powerlifitng and feild events
(throwing) no one is going to place psychological warfare on
them. If these sports were the most popular the myth of white
athletic inferioirty wouldnt exisit.
Edited by: Alpha Male
elusiveness, or stregth. While the first two can be deabted, the
third cannot. It has been scietifically documented that the
average white outperforms the average black in all forms of
weightlifting (i.e. the bench press and squat). But you dont need
this info for that to be true. The top ten becnh pressers are all
white and not many blacks have placed that well in strength
events. Look at the World's Strongest Man competition or the
Olympic Weightlifters. The reason for this is inherently
genetic. Whites have larger chest and shorter appengages and the
right combination of muscle fiver cross section on average.
However, when I did happen to see a black man from the NFL no less on
the World's Strongest Man he performed poorly and came in last
place. However, none of the announers said he was a feeble black
man or anything of the like that white athletes here from
basketball announcers (i.e Bill "idiot" Walton). The point is if
blacks want to try and compete in powerlifitng and feild events
(throwing) no one is going to place psychological warfare on
them. If these sports were the most popular the myth of white
athletic inferioirty wouldnt exisit.
Edited by: Alpha Male
Colonel_Reb
Hall of Famer
Good points Alpha Male. We have to work with the cards we have been dealt know, which means we are in for a long struggle, but I'm up for it.
Bill Walton is a freakin idiot. It's funny that Steve Jones, the black guy, came to Nash's defense. Nash is an ironman, I never see him slow down or get tired. I can't stand to listen to Walton. During the game, he will contradict himself over and over. According to Walton, one minute Nash is an unathletic scrub, the next he says that he is among the all time greats like Oscar Robinson and Jerry West. I finally had to turn down the volume on the TV to keep my head from exploding.