Quote:
Originally Posted by flojons
I see your point. It is of course a lot to do with culture which is why certain groups dominate certain sports. In west africa football is the main sport which is why nigeria does not dominate sprinting like the US and Caribbean runners. It is said that high altitude in Ethiopia and Kenya is one reason why they dominate running. Mexico and Bolivia and other parts of south america are high altitude, but they best known for football and boxing, which is part of the culture in mexico and south america, whereas running and not boxing or football is the main sport in Ethiopia and kenya
But this so called 'black gene' theory always comes up in the said sports like running and boxing etc where blacks dominate. Then the said argument about slave breeding comes into it. Were the athletes who do well in rowing, weightlifting cycling, swimming better bred from others which is they they dominate the event? Even before the doping scandals come to light, i never heard of selective breeding of swimmers, weightlifters etc to ensure the the fittest did well.
Does this argument just comes down to plain stereotyping once again?
|
I think all of it is more cultural, a kind of specialization based on climate and environment, plus opportunity.
Jamaicans didn't always win sprint medals at the Olympics, its only after they started getting the right training and organization that they became world renowned.
Keep in mind it is blacks in America and Jamaica that do well at the sprinting events, with other isolated nations here and there like Trinidad, Canada or the United Kingdom.
Blacks from other nations don't do as well in the sprints because some of those nations aren't as organized in their training facilities and such. The other Caribbean nations still lag.
I think if blacks had grown up in cold weather climates and their culture emphasized skiing, ski jumping, etc, some would be just as good in those events if they grew up with it at a young age.