Athletes and race...a theory

Great Debates
1

While some people, people who are exceedingly sensitive to the point of deny reality, might find the following offensive, it is certainly not meant to be.

I have observed that blacks seem to be athletically gifted to a degree disproportionate to their numbers in the population. Others have also noticed this. The only theory I’ve heard so far to explain it is that blacks simply “go out for sports” more as a way to “escape their circumstances”, which I think is horseshit.

I think it’s really simple. Slavery was horrific. Surviving the trip over took a sturdy, strong person of excellent constitution. Surviving the rigors of slavery itself took strong people of strong constitution and will. Those were, to a far greater degree than in the general population, the sorts of people who lived long enough to have children and pass their genes to the next generation. Slaves and thier offspring didn’t get any coddling.

And I think that is why such an unusually high number of black people seem to be born to be exceptionally fit, making them better athletes.

Agreement? Flames?

stoid

2

You bet. Now if you could extend your theory to explain how black Americans have been genetically selected to be virtuoso improvising musicians.

If you want an alternate theory, try Jon Entine’s *“Taboo: Why Black Athletes Dominate Sports and Why We Are Afraid to Talk About It”.

3

If Cecil hasn’t addressed this I’ll eat my record collection. However, in the mean time here’s a guess.

The trouble I see with that argument is that it excludes all Blacks not descendant from slaves i.e. non ‘African-Americans’. As the disproportionate percentage is also manifest throughout European countries, I’d discount slavery to a large extent.

Having said that, a huge percentage of slaves were lost on the journey across the Atlantic as well as once they arrived in the Caribbean and North America so one has to think there is some (potential) validity in the notion.

Also, it is so difficult to compare the US with other non first world nations because modern athletic performance is the product of many other factors: Training facilities, access to the sport itself, to trainers, to dietary input, sponsorship and professionalism, competitive national hierarchy, a competent administrative structure………I’d feel a lot happier comparing like with relative like (i.e. black minorities in predominately white first world societies)

Personally and without any formal knowledge, I’d guess there is a genetic difference of which the origins lie in the historic survival rate of children born to African mothers in Africa. Africans tended to have many children of which fewer survived (presumably because of the harsher conditions: famine, disease, general diet…lots), those who did survive being stronger or favoured. The ratio of survival for those born in more temperate climates and less dangerous environments would be greater.

I see it as akin to Darwinism: An evolution based of survival with an indirect benefit being greater potential for muscle density and therefore faster reaction times.

It seems to me that those two characteristics - muscle density and reaction time - combined with access to first world commitment to sporting excellence, are the key features of better black performance in predominately white societies.

Hey, it’s a guess. Anyone got cites ?

4

jcgmoi beat me to it, but here’s a link to Scientific American’s review of the Entine book.

http://www.sciam.com/2000/0500issue/0500reviews1.html

5

Stoidela There have been a few articles about this, where the traits came from seems to be the crux of the argument vs the truth of the statement. Here’s a link to a book review on the subject Eveyone Ive read pretty much says it goes back further than that. Not to mention, I don’t think evolution works quite that fast.

Total anecdotal evidence: While Blacks tend to hold most of the records for track events, you also notice that plenty of those are held by blacks of African origin, Nigerians spring to mind.

6

Hey sorry about the double post, Geesh has eveyone heard of that book?

7

I fail to see the controversy. Even stipulating Entine’s conclusions, so what? There are a thousand million people (probably more) who can run faster than me. Why should I care if a disproportionate number of them are black?

8

stuffinb wrote:

Forgive me, but I believe I have been living in a cave for the last 20 years.

Other than people of African descent, or people descended from Africans that were originally brought to other countries as slaves, what other kinds of “blacks” are there?

9

I think I do as well. Actually, I’m not sure there is a “controversy”. There is an interest in sport though, and if race is an aspect of performance, I find it as interesting as, for example, why less than tall teenagers are better gymnasts, why the French and Australian sports programmes are more advanced and what distinguishes a great swimmer from a great track athlete (amoungst others).

It’s also interesting to me that the clear differential in performance isn’t cited in any of the endless evolution threads (to my knowledge) as something at least worthy of discussion.

But maybe I’m just an insensitive oaf.

10

I agree with the OP wholeheartedly. The disproportionate amount of the best athletes in most events are people of African ancestry. Ironically, people of a liberal bent don’t like to talk about any race of people having an advantage over any other in sports, music, or scholastic achievement. Instead, we should view all people, and therefore races, as equal in potential. If this is not ignoring the obvious, I do not know what is.

The PC view is that excellence in any particular area is the result of environment and individual triumph. This is absolute crap! I attended a rural high school in the american south that was approximately half white - half black. Who do you think our best athletes in every sport were? You all know the answer because you have probably seen a sporting event at least once in your life.

Yes environment matters. It matters because blacks have historically been alienated from typical white suburban sports including golf, tennis, swimming, soccer, and lacrosse.

Now that the barriers have come down a little, we allow Tiger Woods show us how golf can be played, Sabrina and Venus move up on the tennis ladder. It is only a matter of time before blacks dominate practically all sports. I don’t think this is bad but it should shake some core beliefs in other areas.

When I was working on my Ph.D. at Dartmouth, one of the hot topics at the time was the book “The Bell Curve”. I had the privilege to take a class under one of the greatest intelligence experts in the world. While there are problems with the methodology in the book, I learned that it would be quite unlikely for different groups, developing under quite different circumstances, to possess exactly the same set of skills.

11

Good PC answer. But how can you not care? At least as far as why it’s disproportionate. Just to learn something, even if it’s as boring as “more training”. That would be intriguing, at least to me.

And pertaining to the OP, I had a teacher once who said one of his professors told him (I’m sure this sounds bad already) that it’s a result of discrimination. He used examples like the Irish and their success as boxers in the early 20th century, and Jewish people and their success as basketball players in the 40’s. It’s only two examples, so I’m not sure he’s on to something.

12

I’ll add this: blacks, especially black men, seem to much more often than white men have stunningly fabulous physiques that they don’t seem to have to work very hard to get or keep. I think this is related.

13

Actually, the most convincing argument I’ve ever heard for why a certain race excels at sports was in a sociology class.

As much as the OP considers the idea ‘that blacks simply “go out for sports” more as a way to “escape their circumstances”’ is ‘horseshit’, in fact, it’s a very good explanation. Sports, much more than any other field, is very performance dominated. Can you tell me which of two batters is better? Sure, you look at their ERA and slugging average and contact average. Can you tell me which of two accountants is better? Much more subjective, especially in areas of fine delimination.

Therefore, minorities see sports as a much easier way of gaining distinction. Add to this how cheap it is to get involved in sports when compared to the college education you’d need for other fields (hey, $1000 for equipment, good shoes, and a gym pass pales in comparison to $5000 a year just for a state college) and how people in sports are obvious achievers (name how much a top accountant can make over 5 years. Now tell me how much Ken Griffey Jr. made in his deal with the Reds. Note the difference in numbers? Note how much easier it is for most people to know how much Griffey made than how much a good accountant makes?).

The results were best proven to me, though, by the example they used of Heavyweight Boxing title contenders. If you go back through the list of champs, it’s amazing the gentrification and strati. Late in the 19th century, nearly every name is Irish- John L. Sullivan, a few O’Malleys, etc. Then, in the early 20th Century, you have- hold on to your hats- Jewish domination of the sport, such as Max Baer. Do we think of Jews as being ‘bred for sport’? But there they are, dominating the title bouts for a good fifteen to twenty years. Next came the Poles, and then Italians, and eventually blacks. Now it’s starting to turn heavily Hispanic.

Maybe there’s some genetic differences; but all in all, it’s sociological and economic. After each minority rose in sports (and crime, also an endeavor which doesn’t discriminate much and doesn’t require a lot of money to start out in), they also began to make headway into ‘regular’ society- the Irish hegemony of boxing comes just before the Irish began getting included (and in many cases taking over) big city political machines, likewise for Jews, Italians, etc.

It’s a standard cycle. While I expect that Asians may have avoided it to some extent due to American bias tending to be in their favor (all those guys are smart geeks, after all), it wouldn’t surprise me if in forty years we see this same thread asking, “Are the Vietnamese genetically different enough to explain their domination in sports?”

14

Id say blacks will be better at sports in warmer weather. Because blacks generally seem to be more loose which makes them better at hot sports but worse at cold sports.

15

No, its a pedestrain misunderstanding of natural selection.

Perhaps you should start by questioning your dismissal of the sociological analysis. Why is it not valid? Do you have data?

Start first by asking yourself if “blacks” is a valid biological unit of analysis (implied in your prefered scenario). The answer is clearly no, but let’s go on. Then you might ask if well-to-do “blacks” show markedly higher fitness levels (physical) than whites in similar socio-economic circumstances. (You might want to control for social mobility also, as newly well-to-do may retain other social habits). You might want to examine whether there is regional variation.

You make a number of unsupported presuppositions here: (1) that the period of selection was long enough to induce change (300 years is not that long in evolutionary terms, especially for a non-isolated breeding population: black folks were not isolated, they have European and Native American ancestry.) (2) As implied, you assume that the selection pressure was consistent and coherent. Clearly it was not. (3) You assume it was markedly different, in the long run, than home region. This is doubtful.

All in all, the parsimonious explanation is that certain portions of black american society, in large part poor, perceive that their best road to success is through sports. Their perception is tthat this is a field where they can overcome what they perceive to be endemic prejudice against them as a ‘race.’ Efforts are invested in excellence in this field. The payoff occurs at a higher rate than in other groups who do not feel similarly bounded in their efforts.

Bzzzt
Try again.

16

Your example proves what? I see the same sociological process noted by another poster.

I rather hope that those who still believe in race will instead take to judging individuals, and take
a moment to inform themselves on genetics.

Which says nothing at all about the genetics of the issue, which is the root of any non-sociological explanation. The Bell Curve was pseudo-science dressed up in faulty statistics and based on discredited (which is to say, disproved) ‘racial’ science. There are ample works which have delved into this and the faulty underpinnings of this terrible work. One need only delve into their cites.

In re the Entine book: the first issue here is the author’s acceptance of racial categories without looking into the underlying science. There are plenty of dubious articles on the “characteristics” of racial groups – none of which I have ever read deal with the underlying genetic diversity. I.e. the non-homogeniety of the supposed homogenous and coherent macro-population – blacks. Instead, this is abstracted away. Cultural practices and change over time are also abstracted away (e.g. it is all very well and good to note Asians are largely absent in major sports, now. But the same was true for Blacks. For socio-cultural reasons. One does not abstract away from this or ‘assume’ that it is impossible to derive from socio-cultural factors. Those are emprical questions to be addressed first.)

To quote from the SA article (which goes to easy IMHO)
"Entine does not examine the data on these findings closely, however. And he leaves a number of questions unanswered. Precisely how did these differences originate? The matter of temporal sequencing proves critical—that is, whether rigorous training precedes physiological adaptation (such as changes in oxidative capacity and fatigue resistance) or whether the capacity for tough training reflects a predisposing genetic endowment. Moreover, whether or not such differences are “racial” also remains unclear. "

Obviously temporal sequence is key! Indeed rigorous training and cultural practices (Kenyan runners, for example, come largely from areas where as children running is a developed sport and where long distances are expected to be covered on foot, rapidly) need to be examined first. Then of coure, finding differences in allelic distribution which map unto the supposed populations (are they even coherent) is absolutely necessary! Of course, there is a lack of data, but in my mind, you start with valid data and go forward.

I am deeply disappointed to see critical thinking called “PC” while easy popular superstitions is what?

17

I have to agree slightly on both sides.

I have old pictures of myself when I was kid. Surprisingly, I had a six-pack and pecs at the age of 10! During a child, I was a bit of an outcast, so I’ve always been a nerd not really excelling in sports. I don’t get basketball and I used to play football with my neighborhood friends – that’s when I came to a startling revelation in my life.

I could run fast as hell.
I haven’t ran in quite a long time. But I’m certain that if I were to run across a track, it could be done with careless ease.
On a slightly different subject.

Speaking of the Bell Curve, that (The pointing out of the fallacy in the study) relieved me somewhat in sociology class. For a long, long time I always felt that I was inferior intellectually because of my race. One thing that fed into that was my inability to perform in mathematics. Mathematics makes me furious since I cannot grasp the precepts to understand it.

Don’t get me wrong. I can add, subtract, divide, and multiply. But when you mix those together while throwing in the letters of the alphabet in the brew of terror. It completely throws me off. Frankly, given its lack of application in real life circumstances, I’m surprised that is even taught in school beyond basic arithmetic and introduction to algebra.

That is the first thing to go when I become president. Yes, I will become president. :slight_smile:

But on the other hand, my father, who comes from an African country called Liberia. Is a genius when it comes to math.
Regards,

B. Williams

18

I tried to find a site but couldn’t, maybe someone else heard this and can help me find a site.

I heard on the news recently that some geneticist said that the vast majority of human genes are the same regardless of race. The small minority of genes that are different are insignificant and superficial. This is why all races can breed with each other, we are all one human race.

19

I dealt with this in (hope this works) a thread during the summer: http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=26233 There are no fixed genetic differences between the “races” (i.e. there is no such thing as “black genes”) and intra-group variability in alleles is higher than inter-group variability.

20

As far as I know Tiger Woods once asked why he, who is half Thai and the other half a mixture of African, Indian, Swedish and German (and possibly some other components as well), should be looked upon as some kind of spokesman or guiding star for the black part of the US population.