The first discussion on ethnicity and sprinting we had was a bit childish and at the very least counter productive. After taking some time to compose myself and my thoughts, I just wanted to start this discussion in a less hostile manner, and with a more fertile foundation.
So what is the position of most people on ethnicity and sprinting? This subject really is a taboo, but not in the way John Entine implies. In fact, it is against political correctness to say that whites are close to or as fast as blacks. Here’s a classic double standard all-to-often employed: when the IQ difference is brought up with black people in comparison to whites, people tend to go back and think of the socio economic factors that caused the rift in scores and even crime for that matter. But when white athleticism is brought into the discussion, the party line is that blacks are just more naturally gifted, and that whites have all the opportunity in the world.
The world record in 1980 was 10.03 by Jim Hines (9.95A). Valery Borzov had run 10.07, .04 off this, Allen Wells had run 10.11, only .08 off the WR, and Petar Petrov had run 10.13, .1 off the WR. As you can see, the differnce was incredibly small, even in a completely integrated sport. Now the difference is .31 in the 100. But that is an outlier, the majority of medallists are still in the 9.8 to 9.9 range. That is why I feel that whites are competitive in the 100 when at full capacity and potential. Obviously, the 100 is pretty much the only event where a white athlete is not on the all-time top 10 list (discounting aerobic exercise), but that does not mean that the sport should be 100% black even in the finals. The fact that every other race that runs the 100 on earth has improved since 1984ish, except whites, is very disturbing. I would argue socio economic factors play a large part in this, as well as steroids. Steroids, although used by all races, has aided many of the black gold medallists like Linford Christie, Justin Gatlin, Ben Johnson, and more. It is my personal opinion that white athletes are very competitive with black athletes in the 100m. Even taking the results without an evaluation of socio economic factors, a white man made the finals of the 100 in 2007, won the silver in the world indoor 60m in 2006, and ran 10.04 with no wind the other day.
Here are some options to get you thinking:
1. whites and blacks are the same speed but the former is inhibited by socio economic factors
2. whites and blacks are the same speed until the black athlete focuses on training, because their bodies respond better to explosive training, and are less geared to enhance cardio and focus on the CNS, etc.
3. steroids are taken by the nations where black sprinters typically compete
4. blacks are faster than whites at top speed, but all else is equal
5. blacks are faster than whites in every way
6. the top 20 sprinters in the world are always black, and it should be that way
7. the top sprinters in the world can be any race, but blacks should always have the WR
8. it’s all mental
9. I’m just confused to why blacks have improved so much, and whites have not gotten much faster