Maybe there are some "specialties"  where some race excel... Those of African descendance for instance do seem more athletic

http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php?a=topic&t=39613&f=4&min=80&num=5

I have some thoughts on this, particularly focusing on team sports. I've seen it mentioned on the various race threads lately that blacks are athletically superior to whites. Perhaps they are.

Considering that American blacks were selectively bred for strength and endurance during slaves times it's somewhat surprising that they aren't monolithically dominant in all sports. They don't appear to have any great size advantage on whites, though they do on other nonblack groups: http://isteve.blogspot.com/2007/09/black-v-white-physical-differences-in.html

But it would be an interesting experiment to assemble NFL, NBA, and MLB teams of the best white and black players in those respective leagues, give each team the same budget, give each team a coach of their own race and a staff of their own race and have them compete 10 times. I suspect the white teams would win most of the time, especially if the black teams were made up of pure or nearly pure blacks, as opposed to mixed race types like Derek Jeter. The most dominant football teams of the last 15 years, the Indianapolis Colts and the New England Patriots, were two of the whitest teams in the league, if not the whitest. The white-heavy Celtics of the 1980s, led by Larry Bird, dominated most of the black-heavy teams they competed against. Even if it's true that blacks are athletically superior, athleticism is mind and body working together. I doubt all-black teams could out-strategize all-white teams if they didn't have a white coach and staff to direct them.

There was only a brief period in the late 60s in the US when all-white college basketball teams competed against all-black or integrated teams. Before this whites and blacks didn't compete against each other in team sports. You had integrated sports teams before the late-60s, but you didn't have all-white teams competing against all-black teams. When MLB was racially segregated you didn't see Babe Ruth's Yankees competing against Negro League teams. The late 60s was a very short window. It would be interesting to compile stats from that period to determine which teams came out on top most of the time. Adolph Rupp's all-white Kentucky team lost the 1966 college championship to an all-black Texas Western team (with a white coach and staff, mind you). Jєωιѕн sports writers love that game and talk about it being "historic" because they think it proves that blacks are superior athletes to white goys. I'd like to have seen those two teams play 10 times and see who won more. One game is not enough to get a good idea, and I wonder how well the Texas team would have fared even in that one game with a black coach and staff directing the action.

It's clear that in certain sports, such as running, blacks have a genetic advantage. Their success in running doesn't seem to have anything to do with social engineering or to be in any way rigged in their favor. Kenyans have dominated long-distance running for a long time, and American blacks are dominant in sprinting.

Though I think people jump the gun in assuming blacks are athletically superior all-around to whites. The Jєωιѕн establishment, blacks, and DWLs have a vested interest in promoting the idea of black physical superiority, to make blacks seem necessary, since, in a utilitarian sense, they don't contribute much of anything else to this country other than manual labor (which whites could easily do themselves).

I often hear people say that each race has its own strengths, which means that all races are deficient and need each other. Open borders types and multiculturalists always use this as a way of hoodwinking whites into thinking they'll be enriched by being overrun with nonwhites. The fact is whites, as a whole, are good at everything. The best at everything? Maybe not. But good at everything.* Unlike blacks, whites don't specialize in sports. It's just one of many things whites pursue, and yet whites still have a major presence. Can you imagine how dominant whites would be if they put all their eggs into the sports basket, as do blacks? If we had racially segregated teams I'm convinced black teams would rarely defeat white teams. And whites dominate most solo sports as it is, though this may be due to lack of access to these sports by blacks.

I'm extremely skeptical of this claim of black athletic superiority to whites, and even to other nonblack races. Especially when it comes to team sports. It wouldn't surprise me if all-asian and all-arab teams would consistently defeat all-black teams.

*Actually all races are self-contained units. The various races have been apart from other races for most of history and they've done well enough to survive on their own.

I think that culture is the highest factor here. Of course different races tend to be semi-isolated genepools,but this is only because our cultures tend to keep races from intermixing too much.

Another cultural example would be of course the selective breeding done on the slaves. We can see a consistency that they were bred for one thing only. Raw muscularity. This would be the most important factor in any hardwordking environment.

Blacks seem less prominent in finesse sports. Golfing, baseball, soccer.

Quote from: rum

Considering that American blacks were selectively bred for strength and endurance during slaves times it's somewhat surprising that they aren't monolithically dominant in all sports. They don't appear to have any great size advantage on whites, though they do on other nonblack groups:

If blacks were truly bred for those traits, then surely American blacks descended from slaves would be physically superior to plain old African blacks, right?

I'm assuming they were, but it's possible they weren't. Even if they were, though, the point of that comment is that they don't have a great size advantage on whites and I'm skeptical of the claims that they are all-around athletically superior to whites, most especially when it comes to team sports.

.

I have to be honest here;  I had NO IDEA what the audio was until I read the comments on the video page.  I played it over and watched the words, and then I made a few minor corrections.  But I missed one:  there should be "and" before "two biscuit biscuit..." instead of the comma after "cornbread."

.

Quote from: Neil Obstat

I have to be honest here;  I had NO IDEA what the audio was until I read the comments on the video page.  I played it over and watched the words, and then I made a few minor corrections.  But I missed one:  there should be "and" before "two biscuit biscuit..." instead of the comma after "cornbread."

You would be lying if you told me that you didn't absolutely die after he said "fatback meat."

Actually, when I first viewed the clip I did not understand the words "fat back meat" (or most of the other words except "mama" and "corn on the cob").  So it couldn't be funny when you don't know what he said.  Then when I read the comments and the one post where someone wrote out the words, by that time the punch of the joke was gone (jokes aren't funny if you have to work at the humor).

If Negroids are physically superior, and mentally equal (as I am told), then they are the Supreme race.

The literal ubermensch

Sickle cell would beg to differ, mate.