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

I'm saying that there are structural and cultural factors which may lead to athletics or sports being dominated by Blacks:

a) sport offers a means of social mobility for members of poorer sections of society either directly, through a career in sports, or indirectly, through a college scholarship (which incidentally may be a persons last or only chance of such an education).
b) Blacks are disproportionately represented in poorer sections of society.
c) Blacks are perceived to have a better chance of success at sport.


You're kind of making my point. Sports which require little or no money to participate in return for a potentially lucrative career or education will have a higher take up by Blacks who are disproportionately represented in poorer sections of society. Sports which require a lot of personal financial investment will be more representative of the demographic at that socio-economic level (i.e. vast majority white). Of course this is simplified and there are many other factors at work as well, such as localised popularity, family traditions, etc, which will affect and even subvert the demographic of sport.


Why should it be dead. It demonstrates how people will pick up on a correlation which supports their preconceived idea and reject out of hand a correlation which doesn't.

I'm afraid that reference is lost on me.

Maybe young white sprinters are ignored or have less focus put upon them or encouraged to focus on other sports because of a preconception that there is a limit to their ability because of their race, maybe coaches consciously or subconsciously see more talent in black youngsters because of a preconception that white sprinters are inferior and so they are more likely to be picked up and developed and so to progress in the sport . The same as some would argue that the larger amount of black wide receivers and running backs and disproportionate amount of white quarterbacks in the NFL isnt necessarily because those races are naturally predisposed to those positions but because black wide receivers are thought to be naturally predisposed to those positions so at youth level they are encouraged toward them at the expense of other positions.

As for the why havent any Western African people been winning medals isnt dead, its a clearly pertinent point. It is impossible to realistically attribute natural predisposed genetic talent to the fact people are of West African descent when West African people themselves dont show this same attribute.

The Undercover Economist and presenter of More or Less on Radio 4; their mantra is 'correlation does not imply causation.'

I live on the edge.