Since 1968, all bar 1 of the men's 100m, 200m and 400m world record holders have been of West African descent....

Yes, sprinters from all over the world training in North America, because North America has the best facilities. But still, sprinters descending from a region of Africa dominate sprinting and have done for longer than I can remember, with little to no sign of that changing.

Perhaps the simple reason white sprinters can't match their counterparts of West African origin is because their bodies are marginally slightly less suited to that particular discipline. A bit like you don't see many Papuans tearing up the NBA.

Yes, we have already said that how fast you can run in a stright line is the most important part of playing rugby league

I'll see your assertion and raise you a Karl Pryce.

And so this clown eventually reveals his hate agenda.

It's interesting how easily the supposed salient factors affecting athletics are swapped and discarded to fit the outcome: when North Americans of West African descent win gold medals it's because of innate genetics, but when no West Africans themselves win anything it's because they can't afford the same training and facilities (unlike the Kenyans who are rolling in it, we must presume). It could never be cultural factors which affect the take-up, training and success of different events, could it? Why would the country with the best facilities in the world produce world dominating athletes who are predominantly black? The same reason a country where Blacks are disproportionately poor and are perceived to be better athletes utilise sports scholarships as a vehicle for social mobility.

This conversation would be so much easier if people recognised the difference between correlation and cause. Are we going to argue that the Chinese have a biological predisposition for ping-pong, or is it obvious that table tennis is culturally more important and popular in China (just like athletics is culturally more important and popular to Black Americans).

This was probably the case many many years ago when the little white guy had a natural sense of superiority born of empire and also was the only one with a secondary level education. That was a long time ago and has no place today, so I agree with you 100%.

Are you trying to say that white Americans aren't beating black counterparts because culture? That white people don't really want to sprint but black American culture wants them to?

I can understand team sports like basketball, or sports that require money for any kind of constant participation like tennis, swimming, etc. But not sprinting. You don't need money to sprint as a kid. Most sports require speed. A lot use sprint as a training method. They're all exposed to it regularly and pretty much have a great opportunity to go on to a scholarship for better training. I find it very hard to believe that sprinting (prevalent in many sports) is a cultural thing.

I hope the argument of "why haven't any Western African people been winning?" is dead as well. Top training facilities are hardly in abundance in Africa. Nature vs nurture and all that.

Indeed.

You are Tim Harford and I claim my £5.

So the Backs?............Broughton, Cudjoe, BJB, Watkins, Lawrence, George, Atkins, Walker, Pryce, Dixon, McGilvary, Sharp, Lyne, Williams, Blythe.... I think we have a fair share of Ethinicity in Super League, based on ability, dont see an issue!

Not forgetting another minority, the ginners, like Welham