Race topics will always strike a nerve, and we all have some personally sensitive perspective about this.
It seems that black men dominate practically every North American sport worth mentioning other than hockey and soccer. This observatiion is a fact, but to draw conclusions is pure speculation and can label you as a racist.
Only a few of us have the training and background to fully understand all the complexities in determining why people are what they are - and even this is not enough to fully undestand why.
For example, my interpretation as to why people of colour are not dominant in hockey is because of socioeconomics, or simply because it costs too much money.
I think that opportunity is the key. Most parents do not raise their kids to become professional athletes, but to become successful in a career.
Opportunity, and social integration are some of the factors as to why people are where they are. This is why so many kids from poor backgrounds become boxers - they saw an opportunity to succeed in something. Do you think these kids saw the same opportunity to become a doctor or a lawyer?
On the flipside, what if some white kid had all the physical attributes to be the greatest boxer ever, but were presented with all the opportunities to become a doctor or lawyer. I guess we will never know.
Bernard Hopkins is at it again. During a recent interview with Lem Satterfield of FanHouse/BoxingScene.com, the 45-year-old veteran made some interesting comments reagrding the issue of race, and how it relates to boxing and the big fight between Manny Pacquiao and Shane Mosley, which happens on May 7 at the MGM Grand in Las Vegas. Hopkins made huge headlines in November when he spoke to Satterfield about Pacquiao possibly avoiding African American fighters.
hopkins the supremacist. Way to keep bigotry alive, stink hole.
bunch of racist phucks in here... yes, blacks dominate in almost all the sports but other races are catching up.. why is it so hard for these black people to accept the fact that a man or women of a different race can be just as good as them? If pacman was black, all the blacks would respect him and say he's the greatest, even better than floyd but since manny is yellow the hate continue...
and i compared shaq to samprass because i was making a point...
the point is, it has nothing to do with race...
how come lance armstrongs lungs are 40% more efficient that a normal persons?
he is white.
my point was made , you wont see it, although u will see color
Your point was not made.
Your Shaq-Samprass comparison was a fail and I told you why.
Steve Kerr was a 3 point shooting PG. Nothing more. If he had handles better than Jordan then he would have been able to penetrate and get to the rim (ala allen iverson).
ur wrong. there are a number of football positions that require athleticism. in all of those positions, the best players of all time are overwhelmingly african american.
WR, defensive backs, and RB require the most athleticism.I can even agree with linebackers and SOME linemen.But half the OL and DL are overweight and slow but strong as hell, and require more technique and skill.
First and only black man in history to win ONE SINGLE CHAMPIONSHIP EVER in Formula 1, and you call that dominance?Sad isn't it how y'all are? You win 11% of medals in all sports in summer Olympics and almost nothing in winter Olympics, yet you claim dominance in the sporting world because you are being good in 3-4 sports and underachieve in rest 95% of them, sad man, but i understand , you are so desperate for having nothing in western world so you claim anything u can!
IF THAT'S THE CASE WHY NOT ME CLAIM LARRY BIRD AND EMINEM AND CLAIM DOMINANCE IN NBA AND HIP HOP, SLIM SHADY IS THE BIGGEST SEELING HIP HOP ARTIST IN HISTORY, SO UR OWN KIND OF MUSIC, ACCORDING TO UR LOGIC, IS WHITE DOMINATED
Race topics will always strike a nerve, and we all have some personally sensitive perspective about this.
It seems that black men dominate practically every North American sport worth mentioning other than hockey and soccer. This observatiion is a fact, but to draw conclusions is pure speculation and can label you as a racist.
Only a few of us have the training and background to fully understand all the complexities in determining why people are what they are - and even this is not enough to fully undestand why.
For example, my interpretation as to why people of colour are not dominant in hockey is because of socioeconomics, or simply because it costs too much money.
I think that opportunity is the key. Most parents do not raise their kids to become professional athletes, but to become successful in a career.
Opportunity, and social integration are some of the factors as to why people are where they are. This is why so many kids from poor backgrounds become boxers - they saw an opportunity to succeed in something. Do you think these kids saw the same opportunity to become a doctor or a lawyer?
On the flipside, what if some white kid had all the physical attributes to be the greatest boxer ever, but were presented with all the opportunities to become a doctor or lawyer. I guess we will never know.
ur wrong to some degree. scientists know why africans and those of african descent make good athletes. its all genetics and evolution. longer/stonger legs, wider noses etc. there are many anthropological articles on it and its a topic we have went over in anthropology many times. theres nothing racist about it, what it is is genetics. its not superiority. its how africans evolved to survive in their environment. simple.
Comment