Is it coincidence that the top ten fastest sprint times over 100m are held by black men, or is there a known genetic advantage that can be proved?

I thought black people actually had a certain muscle that some other people didn’t have. Or maybe not a muscle, but something that would have to do with your legs/running. This could be totally false though. Probably, actually. But I have heard it. lol

@beautifulbobby193
I think your right, it probably ginetic, but I also think to segragate people into groups is a questionably seperatist attitude.

I think it would have been better to pose the question ‘why is it that people with certain genetic traits are more sucessful at sports?”

Though I also think you didn’t mean it the wrong way.

@Pazza I think it would have been better to pose the question ‘why is it that people with certain genetic traits are more sucessful at sports?”

That’s misleading. People are more successful at sports because they have certain genetic traits that make them so. And black people seem to have a higher occurrence of said traits. I don’t find that racist or anything; it’s just the truth.

This athletic prowess is definitely a genetic thing. I don’t think they have any extra muscles that we don’t. Natural selection is the most likely cause; perhaps for some reason living in Africa required more athleticism to survive than in Europe or other countries, thus more athletic people were able to pass down their genes while weaker ones did not. The fact that these people also happen to have dark skin has nothing to do with it.

I wish I could give you more proof of my answer, but I’m tired and shouldn’t really be fluthering in the first place. :P Hope that’s a start to answering your question, though.

@ParaParaYukiko
Oh course it ginetic, thats the whole point!
It just makes the origional question pointless.

(in my opinion…...)

Ps. I think anveryone should look up the difinition of the word PERSON.
try ‘black law dictionary’
It may change your life.

Complex question. There are many factors. Probably the most significant is socio-economic. As an example, Jamaicans have been dominant lately in the world of sprint largely for the simple reason that track is a HUGE deal in Jamaica. Track stars are national heroes and the sport is open to anyone regardless of financial resources. It’s analogous to Nordic skiers in Norway; no one argues that Scandinavians are racially better suited to skiing than blacks because they hold the major records.

But having said that, there are some physical characteristics among people of West African heritage that may tend to give a bio-mechanical advantage in sprinting and jumping. They tend to have proportionately longer legs and arms, and body fat tends to be distributed more in the trunk than in legs and arms. And that’s about all. Significantly, there appears to be more difference in this regard between West Africans and East Africans than between west Africans and Europeans, so it’s hard to make a purely racial distinction.

Ultimately, factors of representation (the sheer numbers of a particular race who participate in a given sport), economic and cultural (including prestige and motivation) factors are likely more important than any racially linked characteristics.

Once again, there is more genetic diversity among groups than between groups. Sorry, but them’s the facts. You will have to look elsewhere, because the genes responsible for melanin production have nothing to do with athletic prowess. Unless white guys are better hockey players—or is it that Candian winters are cold?

Well, one of the reasons may be because people who can trace their genetic origins to Africa or similar areas exhibit longer limbs and bodies for the same reason that jackrabbits have big long ears: it disperses the heat better.

Similarly, those humans whose ancestry can be traced further north, especially to areas around the Arctic Circle, are short and round, as this body shape retains heat better.

So, no, not a coincidence. If you are a black person, then you are on average, taller (and with longer legs) than a white person.

Nonsense. Every human being traces his or her ancestry to Africa.

@pdworkin, I was referring to those people who are more obviously and more recently from Africa.

And your statement discounts the multi-origin theory. :P

There is no empirical evidence that clinal variations in melanin production are associated with athletic prowess.

The OP: “Is it coincidence that the top ten fastest sprint times over 100m are held by black men, or is there a known genetic advantage that can be proved?”

Answer: Yes, it is a coincidence. No, there is no genetic advantage that can be proven.

I think that it is important to note that in all sports, people who have a genetic advantage are allowed to compete on the same playing field as everyone else. Take Michael Phelps, for example; he has large hands and feet, very long arms, and a long torso that allow him to move faster in the water. Should the Olympics have a special category for six foot four inch men with six foot seven inch arms, as well as hypermobile ankles, and size fourteen feet? Surely not. Once you start making smaller categories, then eventually, everyone will be in a category by themselves.
Maybe that is a good idea after all, that way, I could win a gold medal, even if it is in a category of just me.

It appears that countries known for having produced great runners don’t seem to have very good national football teams. Could it be that white folk tend to live in countries where they are pushed into sports other than track and field?

I have always thought that Allen Iverson could have been a world class soccer player if the US didn’t have a large focus on basketball and american football. Same could probably go for white athletes. If they lost interest in football, then we might see more of them winning track and field events.

@arpinum
ITS NOT SOCCER! ITS FOOTBALL!......
AN FOOTBALL IS RUGBY FOR GIRLS!.......;-P