From: gary@ccs.northeastern.edu (Gary Duhaney)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
Subject: Re: Race and Speed (was Re: Debunking the standard myth)
Date: 16 Aug 92 21:52:55 GMT
Organization: Comp. Sci. @ NU

In article <168grlINNi6k@seven-up.East.Sun.COM> bih@bagheera.East.Sun.COM writes:
>Interesting you should bring this up. The latest issue of Runner's World has an interesting
>article called "White Men Can't Run". It attempted to explain why West African blacks 
>dominate the speed events and North(?) African blacks (Kenya, Ethiopia) dominate the
>longer distances.
>
>I know the point of this thread is basketball, but as we all know, speed and jumping ability
>are *VERY* important in today's basketball game. 
>
>> The clock is not biased, and all track coaches care about is winning; not what color you are.  
>
>The article describes track and field as the "ideal" lab. For both the above reasons and 
>because track requires less hand/eye co-ordination and expensive equipment than other
>sports. Success in track is almost (but not totally) determined by raw physical ability.
>
>So why do West African blacks do so well in speed oriented sports? Well, the article referred
>to a study of muscle twitch percentages (fast vs slow) of West African blacks and French
>Canadian Whites. This study generated the standard bell curves; the West African curve though
>was slightly skewed toward the fast twitch end. This means that the "average" black has

No, all this says is that the "average" West African Black might have more
fast twitch muscles than the "average" French Canadian White.  It did not
test everyone black and everyone white, therefore it cannot make that claim.

>more fast twitch than the "average" white. However, an above "average" white would have
>more fast twitch than the aforementioned "average" black. On the extreme high end of the
>curve (above 90% fast twitch) where one would expect to find world class sprinters, 
>there are just more blacks that meet this criteria than whites. 
>
>This seems to be a pretty valid study. So why all the hubub that all races are equal and

Whether it is a valid study or not, I don't know, since I didn't see it.
But it is obvious that quite a few ignorant asses have taken that study and
applied it to everyone else.

>environmental forces influence athletic performance? Perhaps it's the other notion that
>blacks are less intelligent that other races. I personally do not believe that, but it is

You sure?  Are you just saying that, to make your point more palatable.

>the flip side of the "blacks are better athletes" perception. And if I were black I would
>certainly not want to support the first theory for fear it may also somehow strengthen
>the second theory.
>
>But the facts are that real differences do exist between races. Why do you think we look 
>different? Also, it is a known medical fact that people of African ancestory have a higher
>incidence of sickel cell anemia. Why? Because it was discovered that the sickel blood cells
>that cause the anemia have an advantage in certain parts of africa in resisting certain
>mosquito borne diseases (malaria, I think). Each race's genetics have evolved seperately 
>depending on the environmental stesses placed upon it. The world is very different from
>one area to another which is why it is not so unlikely that there could be real physical
>differences from race to race.

Let me guess.  Blacks jump higher because we had to jump over trees?
Whatever happened to the old racist view that we were swinging on the
branches instead.  Lets see, we are faster, because unlike our white
counterparts (who killed), we chose to run from lions and tigers and
bear Oh my.

None of what you said proves your point.
>
>Anyway, I've rambled on long enough. 
>
>-Bennet