# Fisher DeBerry and the Elephant in the Locker Room (sports and race related) **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 26, 2005, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fisher-deberry-and-the-elephant-in-the-locker-room-sports-and-race-related/328023 "2005-10-26T17:35:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 10
**Author:** ![Shalmanese](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/45deac/32.png) [@Shalmanese](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shalmanese)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fisher-deberry-and-the-elephant-in-the-locker-room-sports-and-race-related/328023/181 "2005-10-31T17:16:35Z")
> [@holmes](#): > > [Genes](http://www.pponline.co.uk/encyc/0056b.htm) > > > [@](#): > > > > If genes aren’t responsible, what accounts for the difference between African and non-African running? The African approach to training differs from the American-European method in a number of ways, including intensity (Africans usually train more intensely but with less mileage), the amount of hill training (there’s no comparison here; the Africans are almost always working on hills), periodisation (Africans vary their training more - favouring big upswings and then gentle troughs; in fact, many Africans take a month or two away from running while their American and European peers continue to plug away without a break), and diet (Africans eat more carbohydrate, less protein, and less fat). Africans also benefit from a decade-long ‘base’ period - just running back and forth to junior school at moderate speeds - before they take up serious running, while Americans and Europeans tend to simply plunge into competition in more senior school without a prolonged, strength-boosting build-up… > > > > Many of these factors have already been studied in scientific settings. We know that intensity is the most potent producer of fitness, yet American and European runners still preach the merits of high mileage. We know that hill training is better than flat-ground running, yet American and European runners often limit hill work to once a week. We know that the African diet is more conducive to elite performances, yet American and European runners continue to edge toward more protein and fat… Sorry, but this smacks too much of “ancient chinese secret” to me, “western science” is too “arrogant” to comprehend the secret rituals of an “ancient culture”. It would be reasonable to assume that Kalenjins are one of the most intensely studied groups in sports science because they are such an interesting case. It would stretch the imagination to imagine that scientists took no notice of the very real differences in training regimes or were too “arrogant” to take any note of it. In practise, what likely happened was that trials were conducted comparing the two different styles of training and it was found it lead to no effect or a detrimental effect. Even if they didn’t do that, surely the amateur running community must have latched onto this if it works. If you’ve ever hung around fitness nuts, you know they’re willing to try any nutty idea if it might make one iota of difference. Hell, even if it didn’t work, you could package it into some snappy movement and make a quick buck off it (and I swear I thought all this before I clicked the link). So then I click on the link to read the full article and what are the words immediately after the snip? “In addition, our book on periodisation - how to structure training over rather prolonged periods of time in order to produce the best-possible performances…” In sort, this sounds like a slick sales pitch rather than rigourous science. However, while browsing their site, I did come across [this](http://www.pponline.co.uk/encyc/east-african-running.html) which actually **does** look worthwhile. > [@](#): > > Hamilton (6) examined empirical evidence for a range of influences that may contribute to East African running dominance, including environmental, social, psychological, and physiological variables. After examining research from various disciplines, he concluded that there was no clear explanation for the East African supremacy. However, **Hamilton argued that psychological factors may perpetuate this dominance by attributing differences between African and white running performances** to stable external factors, thereby disempowering white runners and empowering East African runners. Regardless of the possible existence of physiological advantages in East African runners, belief that such differences exist creates a psychological atmosphere that can have significant consequences on performance. > > snip > > Stone et al(7) gave black and white students a laboratory golf task that ostensibly measured ‘natural athletic ability’, ‘sport intelligence’, or ‘sport psychology’, depending on how the test was presented. Nothing changed in the test itself, just the perception of what the test measured. **Both black and white students scored equally well on the sport psychology control condition. However, black participants outperformed white ones when the task was framed as a test of natural athletic ability, whereas white participants outperformed black ones when the task was framed as a test of sport intelligence.** This phenomenon is referred to as stereotype threat and may be of help in explaining the dominance of certain sports by specific groups. Although scientific inquiry intogenetic differences between races remains unresolved, previous research suggests that belief in such differences has a large impact on performance. > > snip > > Oddly enough, **a person does not even have to believe the stereotype to be affected by it**. Awareness, even at a subconscious level, appears to be sufficient. For example, Levy (10) primed [senior citizens] using subliminal messages and then gave them a memory test. Those who had been primed with negative words associated with old age, such as senile or forgetful, performed worse than seniors primed with positive words like wise and sage. > > snip > > **Research examining the role of stereotype threat in elite levels of performance is virtually non-existent.** As a result, the suggestions presented in this paper, although based on strong research with non-elite samples, remain speculative. Future research should consider the role of stereotype threat as a reason for performance differences in racially dominated sports such as middle and long distance running. Without indisputable evidence indicating the genetic advantages associated with a specific racial group, researchers should continue to examine alternative explanations for the apparent dominance of one group over another in sport. Now, this is finally a viable hypothesis that does not posit a genetic basis. It seems perfectly plausible to me that sterotype threat could be the reason to explain all the known facts. However, as the article stated, more work needs to be done in this area. It’s not clear that sterotype threat works at the elite level in the same way as it does the amateur level. Furthermore, it would also have to explain how blacks rose into dominance and why they have stayed there for an unnaturally long time. Finally, it would need to explain the east/west bias for running. Especially if many African-Americans probably don’t know whether they are east or west africans yet still follow the same patterns of dominance. In short, I’m willing to at least concede that both the evidence for a genetic basis for athletic performance and that such genetics are unevenly distributed is not as strong as I originally thought. That still doesn’t change the fact that a) A genetic basis is still a viable hypothesis and b) It was only until I found these cites that a credible case could be made for the opposing side. ---
**Author:** ![Shalmanese](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/45deac/32.png) [@Shalmanese](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shalmanese)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fisher-deberry-and-the-elephant-in-the-locker-room-sports-and-race-related/328023/182 "2005-10-31T17:21:57Z")
> [@archmichael](#): > > Three points: > > First, it’s funny how you twist it around to make it seem like people are being prevented from debating this issue. I don’t recall this thread being locked to prevent a race debate. In essence this isn’t a fight against racism, but more a fight against the phenomenon of confirmation bias. In GD, you will be expected to back up outrageous claims, whether it’s “I see a lot of blacks in professional sports, hence blacks must be better athletes” or “I see a lot of black coworkers come in late for work, hence there must be such a thing as ‘colored time’” or “My Christian friend survived a plane crash, guardian angels must exist”. The thing is, weve posted extraordinary evidence. 44 black runners can do under 10 second 100m while no white people can. 91% of steeplechase winners are from a single country. About half the world champions in marathons are from a single **tribe**. NFL is 77% black even though it has not been traditionally considered a sport for the disenfranchised. Theres more than enough extraordinary evidence to support the extraordinary claim. Now the onus falls on the other side to come up with an equally viable hypothesis. ---
**Author:** ![holmes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e95f7d/32.png) [@holmes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/holmes)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fisher-deberry-and-the-elephant-in-the-locker-room-sports-and-race-related/328023/183 "2005-10-31T17:43:06Z")
You’re seriously downplaying the role of culture and the whole article. I don’t understand why you would dismiss this out of hand because they may be selling a book. > [@](#): > > Of course, believers in black ‘super-genes’ haven’t been able to explain exactly how Africans have managed to corner the market on superior genetic material. When the Finns dominated the running world in the 1920s and again in the 1970s, no loud voices proclaimed that Finnish runners were genetically superior. Instead we pondered the merits of reindeer milk and called Lasse Viren a potential blood doper. When the Brits dominated middle-distance running in the 1950s and 1980s, there was no talk about brilliant British genetic material. Rather, we heard about British pluck and hard work. And when the Chinese women ran wild in 1993, it was because they were drugged, not because red-hot genetic material had fired up their performances. But now that Africans are running wild, the genetics lessons begin. Somehow, Providence has chosen to bless only African runners with top-quality DNA… Viable…WTF? You’re telling me you would rather believe that there’s some sort of mental mojo going on, that white athletes are choking because they’re competing against black athletes and losing, 'cause they believe they will? You believe that, rather than environmental, social, and physiological and economic variables? Please note from the bottom of your link: \*\* “Although this research has yet to be replicated in an athletic domain…”\*\* I respect your ability to modify your position, something often lacking around here…but, c’mon. ---
**Author:** ![Shalmanese](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/45deac/32.png) [@Shalmanese](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shalmanese)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fisher-deberry-and-the-elephant-in-the-locker-room-sports-and-race-related/328023/184 "2005-10-31T18:04:19Z")
> [@holmes](#): > > You’re seriously downplaying the role of culture and the whole article. I don’t understand why you would dismiss this out of hand because they may be selling a book. > > Viable…WTF? You’re telling me you would rather believe that there’s some sort of mental mojo going on, that white athletes are choking because they’re competing against black athletes and losing, 'cause they believe they will? You believe that, rather than environmental, social, and physiological and economic variables? > > Please note from the bottom of your link: \*\* “Although this research has yet to be replicated in an athletic domain…”\*\* > > I respect your ability to modify your position, something often lacking around here…but, c’mon. Stones work is very well known in Psychology and caused a minor furor when it came out. But it’s been replicated and found solid. It’s precisely because it’s such a counter-intuitive idea that it seems viable. ---
**Author:** ![holmes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e95f7d/32.png) [@holmes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/holmes)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fisher-deberry-and-the-elephant-in-the-locker-room-sports-and-race-related/328023/185 "2005-10-31T18:09:59Z")
If I missed the link where’s this has been replicated in an athletic domain please re-post it. I love it that you’re rethinking your position, but it bothers me that it’s for the wrong reason; at least IMO. Still one shoudn’t look a gift horse and all that… ---
**Author:** ![holmes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e95f7d/32.png) [@holmes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/holmes)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fisher-deberry-and-the-elephant-in-the-locker-room-sports-and-race-related/328023/186 "2005-10-31T18:27:14Z")
Forget it, found the bookmark. ---
**Author:** ![archmichael](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/bb73d2/32.png) [@archmichael](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/archmichael)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fisher-deberry-and-the-elephant-in-the-locker-room-sports-and-race-related/328023/187 "2005-10-31T18:34:02Z")
> [@Shalmanese](#): > > Because, by your standards, pretty much all statements are considered sweeping generalisations. Sunsets are pretty, roses are red, rapists are evil, Europeans are less religious than Americans, Conservatives favour less gun control, ordering well done steak is unsophisticated. (;)) If you can’t see the differences in the list you supplied, I don’t know how to make it any clearer for you. In fact well-done/steak thread supports my contention that generalizations will be called out in a debate. Didn’t it go for like four pages, with people chiming in on why you would mess up a perfectly good piece of meat vs why do you care how I eat my steak? The sweeping generalization that well-done steak orderers are unsophisticated had to be defended. I don’t recall anyone falling back on the “What? Can’t we even make generalizations?!?” schtick. If someone were to start a thread stating they thought sunsets are pretty it would be moved to MPSIMS. If someone were to claim that sunsets are the prettiest time of the day or that they were prettier than sunrises, some people would want to know how they came to that conclusion. > [@Shalmanese](#): > > So you would advocate replacing a mediocre classification with…? No classification? How does that help matters? No matter what a classification is, as long as it is at least marginally useful, it’s still better than no classification. > > You’ve deliberately twisted my analogy into something completely different. A more similar comparison would be if I made the claim that “chairs are more comfortable to sit on than beds” and you come in and say “But what about sofabeds? huh? huh? Is that a chair or a bed? you can’t tell! nobody can tell! your assertion is groundless! chairs are a social construct! chairs have no ergonomic basis!” I’ll group these together because it speaks to the chasm between us. I do not believe we as humans are racially different. Which is why I see us as all the same chair, but painted in different colors. I am getting the sense that you do believe there are racial differences, where one group is better at one thing than another group. A sort of different but equal philosophy. Which is why your world view is “We might all be different types of chairs, but we’re all chairs”. But the genetics is on my side. Genetics has no answer for what ‘race’ my children will be, even if they know that the father is Korean and the mother is black. Because race has always been an arbitrary categorization. Italian immigrants to the US use to be viewed as “not quite white”. The Japanese during WWII viewed themselves as completely different race from the other Asians, even the Koreans. So why not have no race classification in sports. It’s not like a bone marrow donor list, where a black recipient will have a better chance of finding a compatible donor from a black donor. Other than very race conscious people or people trying to prove something about a race, why even compile racial sports statistics. And seeing as we’re intermarrying more and more, what point is there is doing so? If someone were to come up with a list of great left handed runners. I would ask why they even bothered researching such a list. If someone researched that all the runner who have run the 100m in under 10s had a birthmark on their left asscheek, it would mean as much to me as finding out they were all black. A conclusion that this means that left asscheek birthmarks are correllated to speed would be met with just as much skepticism as someone claiming there is a correllation between “West African Descent” and speed. ---
**Author:** ![Shalmanese](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/45deac/32.png) [@Shalmanese](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shalmanese)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 6:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fisher-deberry-and-the-elephant-in-the-locker-room-sports-and-race-related/328023/188 "2005-10-31T18:43:35Z")
> [@holmes](#): > > If I missed the link where’s this has been replicated in an athletic domain please re-post it. I love it that you’re rethinking your position, but it bothers me that it’s for the wrong reason; at least IMO. > > Still one shoudn’t look a gift horse and all that… to fully appreciate it, you have to have some understanding of Stone’s findings on the field of psychology. Black people would do (relatively) better at golf if you called it an “ability test” but white people would do better if you called it a “intelligence test”. Women would do better in a “math calibration test” than a “math ability test”. Old people would do worse in a test for senility than a test for wisdom. Even though the contents of the tests are exactly the same. It’s been verified literally dozens of times in a huge number of different situations and it absolutely blew people’s minds when it came out. It’s very easy to underestimate the importance of this effect and it has been used to successfully explain a wide range of phenomena. _Thats_ why I think it’s a viable hypothesis. That being said, I still think the genetic argument holds merit. It simply seems too counterintuitive to me that there is no genetic basis for athleticism. Maybe both factors come into play. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fisher-deberry-and-the-elephant-in-the-locker-room-sports-and-race-related/328023/189 "2005-10-31T19:05:03Z")
> [@Shalmanese](#): > > That being said, I still think the genetic argument holds merit. It simply seems too counterintuitive to me that there is no genetic basis for athleticism. Maybe both factors come into play. I certainly wouldn’t say that genetics aren’t involved in athletic ability. Some people are born faster runners than others, just as some people are born with better eyesight. But the unanswered question is: Are there measurable differences between large population groups of people in terms of athletic ability? ---
**Author:** ![The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc348/32.png) [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Flying_Dutchman)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fisher-deberry-and-the-elephant-in-the-locker-room-sports-and-race-related/328023/190 "2005-10-31T19:53:38Z")
> [@archmichael](#): > > So why not have no race classification in sports. It’s not like a bone marrow donor list, where a black recipient will have a better chance of finding a compatible donor from a black donor. Other than very race conscious people or people trying to prove something about a race, why even compile racial sports statistics. From the OP’s link > [@](#): > > DeBerry kept his staff huddled late Sunday night to discuss Saturday’s 48-10 Mountain West Conference loss to Texas Christian. The coaches talked about recruiting and the need to enroll faster players. Lets get into the discussion shall we? Coach 1. Where are we gonna get the faster players? Coach 3. We need more sprint drills Coach 2. We need to enroll more blacks. Coach 3. Hey, that is a racist comment, we can’t go there. Coach 4. Okay, lets push for the Academy to enroll more athletes of West African descent. Coach 1. Why, wouldn’t that mean they have a genetic advantage? Coach 3. There are no scientific studies that prove that. Coach 2. Then why do my records of my athletes indicate that the best times are held by black players. Coach 4. Correction. West African descent Coach 3. Its cultural. DeBerry: Fuck this noise. Our fuckin careers are at stake here. I’m gonna tell them in no uncertain terms that we need to enrol more fuckin blacks here. Everyone else is doin it. ---
**Author:** ![holmes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e95f7d/32.png) [@holmes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/holmes)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fisher-deberry-and-the-elephant-in-the-locker-room-sports-and-race-related/328023/191 "2005-10-31T20:22:13Z")
or it could have gone like this. Coach 1: We need more fast players. Coach 2: You know most of them are black. Coach 3: Does it matter? Recruit the fasterst players…I fucking care if they’re green, we need speed! DeBerry to reporters: “We got outplayed and are looking to see what we can do to improve the team.” ---
**Author:** ![holmes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e95f7d/32.png) [@holmes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/holmes)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fisher-deberry-and-the-elephant-in-the-locker-room-sports-and-race-related/328023/192 "2005-10-31T20:23:39Z")
I **don’t** fucking care…this rough talk always gets me. ---
**Author:** ![Shalmanese](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/45deac/32.png) [@Shalmanese](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shalmanese)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fisher-deberry-and-the-elephant-in-the-locker-room-sports-and-race-related/328023/193 "2005-10-31T20:29:24Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > I certainly wouldn’t say that genetics aren’t involved in athletic ability. Some people are born faster runners than others, just as some people are born with better eyesight. But the unanswered question is: Are there measurable differences between large population groups of people in terms of athletic ability? Well, Ericsson disagrees with both of us. I’m not in a position to judge the validity of his claims but it seemed like a reasonbly supported paper and I didn’t not any obvious logical flaws. Who knows, maybe I’m reading it wrong. If you have access to academic journals, I highly reccomend the Ericsson piece. ---
**Author:** ![archmichael](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/bb73d2/32.png) [@archmichael](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/archmichael)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fisher-deberry-and-the-elephant-in-the-locker-room-sports-and-race-related/328023/194 "2005-10-31T20:44:11Z")
> [@Shalmanese](#): > > The thing is, weve posted extraordinary evidence. 44 black runners can do under 10 second 100m while no white people can. 91% of steeplechase winners are from a single country. About half the world champions in marathons are from a single **tribe**. NFL is 77% black even though it has not been traditionally considered a sport for the disenfranchised. Theres more than enough extraordinary evidence to support the extraordinary claim. Now the onus falls on the other side to come up with an equally viable hypothesis. Damn this thread is moving fast. Over the weekend, I thought this thread died. I guess we’re all “doing work on the computer”. 😃 So we go back to the evidence of what? Which is why it is a great example of confirmation bias. You start with a the premise of ‘blacks are better athletes’ then cherry pick stats that prove your premise. You ignore stats that show their decline in other sports, or you explain it away. We end up arguing with people who claim that all success is purely genetics and all failures are for any other reason but genetics. Straight out racism, socioeconomics, disinterest. > [@Shalmanese](#): > > NFL is 77% black even though it has not been traditionally considered a sport for the disenfranchised. It’s not? > [@Shalmanese](#): > > 44 black runners can do under 10 second 100m while no white people can. Isn’t it at all possible that the best white runners are being diverted to other more popular and lucrative sports? Maybe the worlds fastest white runners are going into their respective national past-times. Maybe white athletes are a victim of their own multitude of options. Maybe the choice is either make millions and gaining fame playing for the Premier League/NFL/NBA/NHL/MLB or make tens of thousands of dollars and some fame about every four years during the Olympics running the 100m. ---
**Author:** ![archmichael](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/bb73d2/32.png) [@archmichael](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/archmichael)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 9:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fisher-deberry-and-the-elephant-in-the-locker-room-sports-and-race-related/328023/195 "2005-10-31T21:08:55Z")
> [@The Flying Dutchman](#): > > Lets get into the discussion shall we? > > Coach 1. Where are we gonna get the faster players? > Coach 3. We need more sprint drills > Coach 2. We need to enroll more blacks. > Coach 3. Hey, that is a racist comment, we can’t go there. > Coach 4. Okay, lets push for the Academy to enroll more athletes of West African > descent. > Coach 1. Why, wouldn’t that mean they have a genetic advantage? > Coach 3. There are no scientific studies that prove that. > Coach 2. Then why do my records of my athletes indicate that the best times > are held by black players. > Coach 4. Correction. West African descent > Coach 3. Its cultural. > > DeBerry: Fuck this noise. Our fuckin careers are at stake here. I’m gonna tell them in no uncertain terms that we need to enrol more fuckin blacks here. Everyone else is doin it. If the belief is that blacks are faster, why not just go the next step. DeBerry: Next try outs will be Blacks only. Reporter: Why would you do such a racist thing? DeBerry: It’s not racist, sadly everyone knows the fact that Blacks are faster than Whites. We need a faster team, and we wont discriminate against a fast white player. If we had infinite resources, I would try everyone out, but we don’t. The stats show that we need the largest pool of black athletes increases the possiblity of finding the fastest players. and I don’t want to seem harsh but allowing white players to try out will give us a smaller pool. It’s a pure numbers game people. DeBerry:Now those white players are invited to try out for QB, because I think we all know who makes the best QBs ::wink, wink:: ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 10:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fisher-deberry-and-the-elephant-in-the-locker-room-sports-and-race-related/328023/196 "2005-10-31T22:01:17Z")
> [@holmes](#): > > **magellan01** I realized you took your ball and went home, in regards to me anyway. Your metaphor is as clumsy as it is inaccurate. If you can read you’ll be able to see that I’ve been active throughtout. But clumsiness and misrepresentation from you is not surprising. ---
**Author:** ![holmes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e95f7d/32.png) [@holmes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/holmes)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 10:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fisher-deberry-and-the-elephant-in-the-locker-room-sports-and-race-related/328023/197 "2005-10-31T22:26:24Z")
You go girl! You served me! Whoo! ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 10:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fisher-deberry-and-the-elephant-in-the-locker-room-sports-and-race-related/328023/198 "2005-10-31T22:36:12Z")
> [@holmes](#): > > You go girl! You served me! Whoo! Perfect. Glad to have helped you find your stride. Now either you’ll go away or I will ignore you in full. Oh, the suspense… ---
**Author:** ![The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc348/32.png) [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Flying_Dutchman)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fisher-deberry-and-the-elephant-in-the-locker-room-sports-and-race-related/328023/199 "2005-10-31T22:38:45Z")
> [@archmichael](#): > > If the belief is that blacks are faster, why not just go the next step. > > DeBerry: Next try outs will be Blacks only. Since no football coach has ever done that, are you suggesting that American football coaches don’t really believe blacks are faster. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Carter\_of\_Mars](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/2bfe46/32.png) [@John\_Carter\_of\_Mars](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Carter_of_Mars)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 10:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fisher-deberry-and-the-elephant-in-the-locker-room-sports-and-race-related/328023/200 "2005-10-31T22:46:25Z")
> [@holmes](#): > > I do not doubt the figures. I don’t doubt that on average African-Americans sportsmen tend to be faster than their white counterparts. I don’t doubt that West Africans and East Africans are winning. What I doubt is that reason they are is because of some genetics, that only they have. I especially doubt that in the case of African-Americans, who are as white as snow and dark as night. Good. We are in agreement then. After four pages of this thread, you have finally admitted that: a)Black people exist, and b) Black athletes tend to be faster than white athletes. Unlike some others in this thread, I have proposed no hypothesis as to why black athletes tend to be faster than white ones. I don’t think the cause is relevant to the OP’s question, which was, “Is it racist to state that black athletes tend to be faster than white athletes?”. I say that it is not racist, because there is plentiful evidence that black athletes do, indeed, tend to be faster than white ones. Why this is so is not something I’ve addressed here. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fisher-deberry-and-the-elephant-in-the-locker-room-sports-and-race-related/328023.md?page=9) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fisher-deberry-and-the-elephant-in-the-locker-room-sports-and-race-related/328023.md?page=11)