Racial Genetics in boxing

Explain your reasoning please. Im not gonna bullshit you with stats or facts i can find on wikipedia, cause it seems everything can be contradicted but my reasoning is based on personal experience, i shouldnt have said all the physical advantages that is my mistake but they certainly have most.. most of all they are fast which is the greatest athletic trait to have imo, all of the evidence is right in front of you to say blacks are the best at boxing, take the top 25 boxers of all time most likely almost all of them are black. Its not a fact but in my eyes it seems pretty obvious. The blacks i have trained with, been friends with played football with etc. are some the most athletic people i have ever seen. It doesnt bother me though i mean, ill just keep working harder and getting better some people are just born with the advantage

BTW to those who think physical/athletic ability is close to 100% genetic are greatly mistaken. There has been studies that showed that a person can train, if done properlty, in a way that converst more slow twitch fibers to fast twitch. I have one example from my own life. My brother, although not the best athlete, was decent at most sports that he liked to do. He was okay at basketball around the 9th grade, but when he completely stopped playing sports and stuck to his computer, he lost all his athletic ability. And this was in a matter of 5 years or so. I know this is the opposite, but it works both ways. If you take a much younger kid with at least some athletic ability (some people just don't have it), you can turn that kid into a completley different athlete (in this case, fast, agile, strong, explosive) byt the time he is an adult.

Your such tool. and have no comprehension of what you want to say and what you are actually saying. lol Your just a loser in general. that really mean's a lot coming from you. :tragedy: or is it just a lame reply because you have nothing to say back? you can understand the human genome yet you can't read what I wrote above?

Every race got humans with all sort of different genetic structures. So you will get all kind of differnt body compositions from every race. No race is superior to the other. As far as I know a myth that simply explains an evident difference is... white men can't jump and black men can't swim. Then again, you see great athletes from different races making the myth look bad...

Canada Joe, What do you mean? LMAO!!! I am still waiting for him to answer that question

BTW, I'm not saying one race is superior to another. I'm just saying that there is a greater chance of a black athlete being really fast, for example, than that of a white athlete because there is greater genetic diversity. This isn't too say that a white athlete couldn't some day be the fastest man alive. Because of the greater diversity I would also expect some of the worst athletes in the world to be black. Whites on the other hand would likely be clustered more toward the center of the spectrum and not produce as many outliers simply because of less genetic variation. Also, since a Yale geneticist is apparently a crockpot (based on???) here's a couple other articles from credible science research institutes that support what he's saying: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/21/AR2008022102739.html All three studies support the idea that modern human beings left East Africa, walked into Central Asia and then fanned out east and west to people the entire planet. The studies also confirm earlier research showing that as a group, Africans have more diverse genes than people of other continents. But the new research further shows that genetic diversity declines steadily the farther one's ancestors traveled from Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, which is roughly the site of the exit turnstile for the "out-of-Africa" migration. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/02/080220161704.htm Human genetic diversity decreases as distance from Africa—the cradle of humanity—increases. People of African descent are more genetically diverse than Middle Easterners, who are more diverse than Asians and Europeans. Native Americans possess the least-diverse genomes. As a result, searching for disease-causing genes should require the fewest number of genetic markers among Native Americans and the greatest number of markers among Africans. Finally, just so your aware, this does not conflict at all with what Suzuki mentioned and he's right as far as I know.

Now you've clearly revealed what I've said all along, that you belive blacks are a superior race. You quote some crackpot to back up your racist beliefs. :nonono: You remind me of Hitler. He used to quote crackpot "scientists" to back up his irrational beliefs on racial superiority. This is why you fit the definition of a racist, and I do not. Although I support white fighters and you support black ones, I do not believe any race is superior to any other. I believe, as the great Canadian geneticist David Suzuki says, there is TEN TIMES as much variation between individuals within races, as there is between races. This proves racism, the belief that one race is superior to another, is not supported by science. Give up your racism, mt102879! People need to get along with one another, and your claims of blacks being "athletically superior" just creates animosity. Crackpot scientist? OMG, this is too funny. Ladies and gentlemen, the Yale crackpot himself: http://www.med.yale.edu/genetics/fac/KennethKidd.php I'm still waiting for evidence about the arm and leg length of black people. When do you think you'll have that for me?

Is there any benifit or hinderince from being Black, White, Samoan, Mexican, Asian ect? ie - White guys cut bad, Samoans have bigger bone structures and take a punch better? Just curious what the general feel is here NO RACISIM Samoans are generally stocky and could have trouble making weight, if not at HW. Probably = big punchers Blacks have good genetics in terms of endurance, speed and power. Asians tend to get the speed, and sometimes have a lot of heart and durability Whites cut easy, but they can have different strengths it depends - whites don't have a global advantage that we see in all whites. some are fast, some are slow, some punch hard..some are weak. Peurto ricans got some pop Mexicans are tough with stamina and punching power. just a few traits i notice. If i had to pick who had the most genetically gifted fighters, I'd have to go with Blacks, although many blacks suck at boxing - so don't every kid who's black go thinking he's made for boxing. Boxing is mostly mental to, so genetics won't matter so much.

Blacks have big d*cks.

So once again, the very obsessive mt102879 answers my post. :lol1: Half of this guys post are replies to mine! :crazy: FYI: The arm length of Mayweather and Hatton were given just before the fight on the HBO broadcast - Hatton 20", Floyd 26". The 12" reach advantage Hearns had over Duran is on Boxrec: 78" to 66". Hearns was also at least 6" taller. http://www.boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_id=303&cat=boxer Mt102879, you never complain about Atlas and others going on about the height and (nonexistant) reach advantage the Klitschkos have, why is that? Double standards? You are truly, deeply racist mt102879 (I noticed your thinly veiled comment on superior "genetic diversity" of black people). Although you try to hide it, your hatred for white people comes across very clearly in your posts. Is this your proof that black people have proportionally longer arms and legs? I never said that height and reach advantage don't exist. Generally there's nothing wrong with pointing it out but it's just part of the equation. You however want to bring it to the top to downplay everything else when it comes to black athletes. My thinly veiled comment about "genetic diversity"? LOL It's a FACT. From the article I posted. "I would say, without a doubt, that in almost any single African population-a tribe or however you want to define it-there is more genetic variation than in all the rest of the world put together," -Kenneth Kidd, Yale Med.

No race is more athletic than any other. Black people do on average have PROPORTIONATELY LONGER ARMS AND LEGS and that gives them advantage in certain sports that involve running and reach (basketball). You're wrong about the Olympics, by far the greatest number of medals were won by white and Asian athletes - do some research. Whites, Hispanics and Asians are doing well in boxing right now, although having proportionately longer reach has always given blacks an advantage in this sport. Floyd Mayweather's arms were 6" longer than Ricky Hatton's, 26" to 20". Tommy Hearns had a 12" reach advantage over Roberto Duran. I'd like to see where your getting your facts from concerning arm and leg length. I have a feeling I'll be waiting a long time. I love that your newest attack against black athletes is "reach advantage" in an effort to downplay skill and athletic ability. Your racist garbage never ceases to amaze me. Anyway... In my opinion success of black athletes comes down to socio-economical factors as well as genetic diversity. Humans originated from Africa and since this is the oldest population in the world this also means it's the most genetically diverse. You'll likely find some of the shortest, tallest, etc. people of African descent. Which is turn means you would expect to find outliers in terms of athletic ability. There's an interesting article written by Malcolm Gladwell on this subject that I read years ago. Link below if anyone is interested: http://www.gladwell.com/1997/1997_05_19_a_sports.htm

Gotta love the scientists and philosophers in a boxing forum... No, I'm not saying ANYTHING about genetic superiority or inferiority. It's a fact that when you breed any type of living thing, if you keep breeding the ones with certain genes the group will eventually have more with that type of genes. In this case we are talking about physical ability for boxing (strength, speed, etc). And yes because the physically strongest ones able to do the most slave labor were bred, there are more, as a percentage of the group's population, physically stronger black people. Now if you want to argue that there are more stronger white people (just strength wise) then its because there are many more white people in this world than the number of slaves who were bred. In my opinion the physically strongest race is white people. If whites were bred like blacks, there would be even more strong white people in this world. But the fact is that whites aren't as athletic/agile and it will be a negative in boxing. Do I really have to mention this? On the other hand speed/explosiveness which has to do with fast twitch muslces fibers are a genetic trait of black people. If you want to argue this, then you're as dumb as Horus. Just look at the 100-400 m race field in track and field events. Proof that strength was due to breeding of slaves is the fact that 90% of strong black people are from countries where there were black slaves in the past several hundred years. You don't see that many strong black people from Africa. But you do see still see fast runners from Africa. I NEVER SAID blacks are superior in terms of physical ability. Having superior physical ability vs more people from a population having a certain ability are two different things. Look at your dumb ass now jumping to conclusion about physical ability and inferiority. You would like to (or you already do ) believe others are physically inferior, wouldn't you? No, it doesn't. And thanks for jumping to another conclusion with your pea brain. Your such tool. and have no comprehension of what you want to say and what you are actually saying. lol Your just a loser in general.

so you're saying they were bred to be genetically superior in terms of physical ability Gotta love the scientists and philosophers in a boxing forum... No, I'm not saying ANYTHING about genetic superiority or inferiority. It's a fact that when you breed any type of living thing, if you keep breeding the ones with certain genes the group will eventually have more with that type of genes. In this case we are talking about physical ability for boxing (strength, speed, etc). And yes because the physically strongest ones able to do the most slave labor were bred, there are more, as a percentage of the group's population, physically stronger black people. Now if you want to argue that there are more stronger white people (just strength wise) then its because there are many more white people in this world than the number of slaves who were bred. In my opinion the physically strongest race is white people. If whites were bred like blacks, there would be even more strong white people in this world. But the fact is that whites aren't as athletic/agile and it will be a negative in boxing. Do I really have to mention this? On the other hand speed/explosiveness which has to do with fast twitch muslces fibers are a genetic trait of black people. If you want to argue this, then you're as dumb as Horus. Just look at the 100-400 m race field in track and field events. Proof that strength was due to breeding of slaves is the fact that 90% of strong black people are from countries where there were black slaves in the past several hundred years. You don't see that many strong black people from Africa. But you do see still see fast runners from Africa. So if blacks are superior in terms of physical ability, what are other races in terms of physical ability? inferior ? :thinking: I NEVER SAID blacks are superior in terms of physical ability. Having superior physical ability vs more people from a population having a certain ability are two different things. Look at your dumb ass now jumping to conclusion about physical ability and inferiority. You would like to (or you already do ) believe others are physically inferior, wouldn't you? So does that mean this pac think blacks are Physically Superior to other races of the world? Isnt that racist? No, it doesn't. And thanks for jumping to another conclusion with your pea brain.

Pacmanjay by your own standards you are a racist.

I am telling you that we have Dominate and Recessive genes. Each parent gives only one of its pair(gene) to its kid. Example: you have two copies of each gene that you inherited from your mother and your father. Each copy of the gene could be different. For example one copy may give you blue eyes while another may give you brown. So, what color are your eyes if you have both the brown and blue eye version of the eye color gene? Brown. This is where the idea of dominant and recessive comes in. Dominant means that one of the versions trumps the other. I understand what dominant and recessive genes are I'm just struggling to understand what this has to do with this discussion. It's an irrelevence. also, are you suggesting that genes idiosyncratic to black people are dominant? if so this is a rediculously arbitrary view. Though brown eyes are more dominant I clearly don't see the significance of this, as you seem to be able to.

so wait a moment. are you trying to say that the genes peculiar to white people are recessive? genetic prominence is a gibberish phrase btw. (there are examples of black communites dying out purely through breeding, would this evidence change your mind?) I am telling you that we have Dominate and Recessive genes. Each parent gives only one of its pair(gene) to its kid. Example: you have two copies of each gene that you inherited from your mother and your father. Each copy of the gene could be different. For example one copy may give you blue eyes while another may give you brown. So, what color are your eyes if you have both the brown and blue eye version of the eye color gene? Brown. This is where the idea of dominant and recessive comes in. Dominant means that one of the versions trumps the other. So with that being said: the point I wanted to make was Blacks have more genetic prominence,distinction, visibility over non-blacks. Meaning that the physical features that are prominent among Black people show up more in mixed raced children that includes blacks and non-blacks

so you're saying they were bred to be genetically superior in terms of physical ability So if blacks are superior in terms of physical ability, what are other races in terms of physical ability? inferior ? So does that mean this pac think blacks are Physically Superior to other races of the world? Isnt that racist? :thinking:

I don’t know where you got that the idea that I believe a child gets more genes from 1 parent than the other...but I think you need to reexamine what I wrote and reexamine what you comprehended from what I wrote. Do you understand what genetic prominence is? so wait a moment. are you trying to say that the genes peculiar to white people are recessive? genetic prominence is a gibberish phrase btw. (there are examples of black communites dying out purely through breeding, would this evidence change your mind?)

Its not their genetic superiority, but the fact that the strongest bodies were bred so you're saying they were bred to be genetically superior in terms of physical ability

HOW IS IT TRUE? ARE YOU FUUUUUUUUUUUKKKING RETARDED? Just because YOU want it to be true, IT'S TRUE?? LMFAO, I'm done with your pea brained 10th percentile intelligence posts. You are 99% correct?? Now, how the fuk did you come to that conclusion? Right, the same way you come to all your conclusions, you want it to be. Like I said, you're a fuking joke and anyone who takes you seriously must be as dumb as you. if I am "FUUUUUUUUUUUKKKING RETARDED" like you say, What does that make you for trying to argue with a retarded person?:thinking: and asking a retarded person to "provide facts" think about that, and get back to me lol @ at the incredible stupidity and contradictions people put on themselves while trying to make other people look foolish.