Serious discussion on Monfils

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by unjugon, Jun 16, 2006.

  1. unjugon

    unjugon Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2006
    Messages:
    332
    This guy...keeps winning matches he shouldn´t be winning based on the analysis of him and his game made by fellow forumers in various topics. Some examples:

    This one is also telling:
    And:
    And also:
    So, to start things off: someone with an awkward forehand, a serve that needs work, who is most of the times off-balance, having mediocre volleys, and playing meters behind the baseline ala Roddick lately...is able to reach Monte Carlo semis, beat Blake -to the surprise of most people- after playing 3 five-setters, and beat Ljubicic -who is known for beating almost everyone who is behind him in the rankings routinely and losing just to the cream of the crop- on grass.

    A credit to him, or to the lack of quality in men´s tennis?
     
    #1
  2. exruda

    exruda Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    May 22, 2006
    Messages:
    660
    Location:
    Poland
    Maybe he's just an epitome of an anti-choker, winning all those matches that he shouldn't :)
    Seriously, I have the same problem with him, but I think it comes down to his game being ugly, and not really that ineffective.
     
    #2
  3. LowProfile

    LowProfile Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Messages:
    1,440
    Now what would you say if you were a young professional doing quite well while people who you could take a golden set off of with your eyes blindfolded and playing with a broom handle were to call your game awkward? Nothing.

    Monfils is better than us. Perhaps he has his reasons for being so. Who are we to say that his game looks like it should be ineffective?
     
    #3
  4. Ash Doyle

    Ash Doyle Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    968
    Does he really have these problems, or just appears to have these problems to some people on this message board who probably aren't exactly qualified to judge? An effective game isn't always pretty. He may not be consistent, but when it's all working together he as dangerous as most anyone out there.
     
    #4
  5. grizzly4life

    grizzly4life Professional

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2006
    Messages:
    1,057
    exactly.... the guy seems to hit hard, and is very athletic. not that many errors...

    i don't think he's close to maximizing talent yet, but if people can't see a bunch of things he does alot better than gasquet, they're blind.
     
    #5
  6. quest01

    quest01 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2006
    Messages:
    4,624
    Monfils gets lucky thats why. He is very ackward how he moves and reacts on the court. Also he showboats to much after winning a point. Hes a good player, but not as good as Blake.
     
    #6
  7. unjugon

    unjugon Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2006
    Messages:
    332
    I´d say Monfils is a tougher competitor than Gasquet.

    Plus IMO Monfils is a great talent though, in his own way.
     
    #7
  8. quest01

    quest01 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2006
    Messages:
    4,624
    Hes good, but Blake is the better african tennis player. If you were comparing african tennis players, you would have to say Blake right now is the best, do you agree?
     
    #8
  9. Ripper

    Ripper Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2005
    Messages:
    4,651
    Location:
    "Where Moth & Rust Destroy"
    What's wrong with saying someone is black? Neither Blake or Monfils are African. I know all about black people in the US wanting to be called African-Americans, but I have to say this, they can't impose that "African _____ (fill in the blank with whatever), on other black people around the world.

    Edit: I live in a country where, also, there's another "not offensive" word used to replace black. Is black a bad word? Neither black people are really black in color, the same as white people are not white in color. These are just names to refer to races. Where's the offense?! There, I said it...
     
    #9
  10. MLoutch

    MLoutch Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2005
    Messages:
    198
    Whoa - African???

    Blake is from Yonkers, New York! Monfils is as French as they come - His parents and family are from Guadalupe and Martinique (FYI both Islands are French departments - just like Hawaii is a US state).

    I bet you would have to go back a few hundred years for both to claim they are from Africa. I can only hope you are trying to be flip?

    Monfils is just very young and still growing into his frame - lots of the taller and lankier players can look awkward. Once he finishes growing and matures he will be a force -
     
    #10
  11. exruda

    exruda Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    May 22, 2006
    Messages:
    660
    Location:
    Poland
    I have an American friend who is black and who feels insulted when being called African American -- he considers himself a pure american, just of a different skin color.

    why do we have to compare black players to each other, anyway? I really do think other characteristics, such as height, have bigger influence on Monfils' movement on the court...
     
    #11
  12. Steven87

    Steven87 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    May 2, 2006
    Messages:
    522
    Monfils....bad form?

    You guys are way against this guy. I dont see a problem with his stroke, it works for him, so there is no problem. Maybe he can beat others because he was the better man at them time? Geez, get off him, he's a great player

    and funny
     
    #12
  13. Breaker

    Breaker Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2005
    Messages:
    7,753
    People like Gasquet's game better because it's prettier, everyone likes nice, smooth strokes even if they are wielded by a headcase, like Gasquet. People don't like games from someone who is kind of jerky in every part of their game, even if they're getting the results, like Monfils.
     
    #13
  14. JayxTheKoolest

    JayxTheKoolest Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    May 1, 2006
    Messages:
    445
    I think Monfils has a good chance to become a great clay court player. Beyond that, there's not much hope.
     
    #14
  15. D-Bomb

    D-Bomb Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2006
    Messages:
    157
    The main reason he's so good is that he's just so athletic. He's kind of deceiving with his game: You would think that a big tall guy like him with a big serve would be more offensive, but he's actually more of a defensive player. Plus not only is he athletic but he's also a competitor.

    It's amazing how big a part being a competitor is. Look at Gasquet vs. Monfils. Gasquet's got loads of talent, but he's streaky, and sometimes acts his age too much. Monfils doesn't have a wide repertoire of shots to pull out, but he makes what he has work by competing and staying tough. Actually, you could almost argue the same with Federer vs. Nadal, but I don't wanna get into that anymore.
     
    #15
  16. jhhachamp

    jhhachamp Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2004
    Messages:
    3,168
    He has not really done anything yet, so I'm not sure what your point is. Everyone in the top 50 has had some good wins. When he actually wins some big tournaments then maybe you have a point.
     
    #16
  17. rlbjr

    rlbjr Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2004
    Messages:
    103
    Not many of us can trace our heritage back more than a few generations in the countries within which we were born or raised. Blake is an american, Monfils a Frenchman. When peoples heritage includes a visible difference americans have a PC habit of labeling them as Japanese-American, African-American etc. I have
    Italian/Slovakian heritage, but because I look like any other white guy, I'm just american. Personally I think the whole PC thing is getting pretty silly.

    I've seen Monfils play several times on hardcourts and he can really thump the ball. His forehand is as hard as anyone out there, including Gonzo, when he wants it to be. When that happens though, it doesn't go in much. I suspect his coach is training him to tone it down a bit and pick his spots.

    He is a terrific talent physically, but I think it may be too late for the technical development required for him to reach the top and stay there.
     
    #17
  18. ubel

    ubel Professional

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2006
    Messages:
    871
    Location:
    Athens, Georgia
    Monfils is kinda like that guy who you watch play and you think their play is kinda ugly, their stance is a bit weird, and there's this off-feeling about the way they just do things (like the way he runs) but somehow they just keep winning matches. I guess he's kind of a like a professional sandwhich maker: it's not how he goes about doing it, the only thing that matters is the finished product (which has been a couple of W's over some other, ahem, professional sandwhich makers).
     
    #18
  19. monfils

    monfils Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2005
    Messages:
    259
    Whats wrong with his technique, explain. I don't see anything wrong with his technique or movement, infact i think he is very sound technically.
     
    #19
  20. Dilettante

    Dilettante Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 13, 2005
    Messages:
    2,198
    Location:
    Katy Perry's belly button
    I agree. Monfils is VERY young and he's playing at a high competitive level. He has beaten some of the best players on the tour.

    Many people here can't understand that you don't have to be aesthetically pleased by a player's game, to be able to recognise his talents and powers.

    I agree.

    But I think -obviously from my own country's and culture perspective, I don't expect to be universally right- the PCness is a trap: when you call someone for example "African-American" or whatever, I mean someone who is born and raised in the US, you seem to be meaning (in some way) that this guy is not merely "an American". Why aren't white people called "European-American"?

    I don't hear that Monfils is an "African-Frenchman", he's merely a Frenchman.

    I hope that no one would get offended by my comments (if that's the case, I apologize), I know that different countries involve different perspectives and different meanings.
     
    #20
  21. monfils

    monfils Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2005
    Messages:
    259
    He has proven that he can play well on all surfaces. His won a clay court title, he has been to 2 hard court finals, 1 indoor carpet final, QF on grass and his best grandslam result was on grass. He won the junior grandslams on all three surfaces which proves that he can play well on all surfaces.
     
    #21
  22. WillAlwaysLoveYouTennis

    WillAlwaysLoveYouTennis Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 11, 2006
    Messages:
    1,731
    Location:
    Deutschland
    Ripper, blanket statements are so very low-brow. Not all "black" people in American wish to be called African Americans, simply because considering that they only have some ancestors who came from Africa, and many are extremely mixed of different nationalities, that would be like calling English people German, because many of their ancestors came from Germanic tribes. This posting was about a tennis player named Monfils, devolving it into a discussion of race or only comparing him to other darker skinned players is part of the problem of what makes it so difficult for such ones to be accepted or passed over based on their game play. In your attempt to be "correct" it only shows how very much ones do not understand what such "labels" are based on. Agreeing with MLouch and exruda here. Dilettantee quite true. Yet US is not the other country with such discussions, to be sure, here in Germany, if you are mixed African or a darker skinned people and German , you are considered simply black, and less often black German, but if you are mixed say, Polish or Russian with German, or a lighter skinned people, you are simply called German. It is solely based on color of skin, even if the lighter ones don't speak German, didn't grow up here, or don't consider themselves German. German people, as a majority, accept them amongst "themselves". No angst about this, it just continues to be a fact here.

    But when talking solely about tennis and tennis players, does anyone remember how very awkward, lanky, and often out balance Goran Ivanisevic was at a young age? I remember watching replays on television of how he often struggled to keep his footwork effective. Eventually he grew out of it and became a champion, and was always a dangerous player in any event.
     
    #22
  23. emcee

    emcee Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2004
    Messages:
    740
    First of all, he can't.

    Second of all, that's what being a fan is. I can say Tayshaun Prince's jump shot looks weird but it goes in a lot and it's certainly better than mine. Do I not have the right to do that?

    If pros are just pros and so different from us and untouchable, let's just get rid of this entire forum. Monfils' technique is not as good as other pros. He seems to have a mental/athletic edge to make up for it. But if Gasquet grew some balls and was as tall as Monfils, he's beat Monfils every time because his technique is better.
     
    #23
  24. Eviscerator

    Eviscerator Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2006
    Messages:
    1,708
    Location:
    S. Florida
    I have rarely seen him play, but people might not be sold on him because they question his fundamentals/foundation.

    The same can be said in other sports like football where a quarterback has a strange throwing motion, or in baseball where the pitcher throws sidearm. Over the long haul players like that either break down physically, or are broken down due to a lack of consistency. However some players are just unorthodox, play well despite their atypical style, and go on to have great careers.

    In his case, only time will tell.
     
    #24
  25. matty p

    matty p New User

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    55
    Some people may not be drawn to him because of him by his unorthodox style, however there are so many young people who like him because he is exciting and fiery on court. I was at his 1st round match at the aus open this year and the majority of the crowd consisted of young people. Surely this is a good thing for tennis, isnt it? Even if the purists don't like his demeanour or his style, at least hes drawing more young people to the game of tennis.
     
    #25
  26. monfils

    monfils Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2005
    Messages:
    259
    People keep on saying there is something wrong with his technique. I don't see anything wrong. Can someone please explain.
     
    #26
  27. Kobble

    Kobble Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    2,366
    He puts up a good fight, and that makes him fun to watch.
     
    #27
  28. fantenam08

    fantenam08 New User

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2005
    Messages:
    84
    Agreed!! Sigh. I'm sure it has been pointed out but the fact that they are from two different countries is more of an influence, than their race.

    As far as the irrelevent African-American vs Black issue, either one is fine. African-American is an ethnicity, black is a race, thus Monfils can not be African-American because he is from France. If it makes folks feel better America also has Jewish-Americans, Italian-Americans, Carribean-Americans etc, because Americans just love hyphens. :rolleyes: I have some friends who prefer to refer to themselves as African-American because they feel as though it represents both sides of their heritage. I have other friends who don't like the idea of being hyphenated, because they feel they are as much American, as any of the whites in the country. The only true Americans, are the Native Americans, everyone else is either of European, or some other mixture of descent.

    End of rant.

    Off topic, but I would love to see Monfils play in the NBA. His personality seems much more suited for contact sports, though I think his showboating with create alot of discord among team members.
     
    #28
  29. WillAlwaysLoveYouTennis

    WillAlwaysLoveYouTennis Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 11, 2006
    Messages:
    1,731
    Location:
    Deutschland
    "Black" is not a race. Where from the racist subworld did that come from? LOL But interesting point you did put up..."Native Americans" are only the true Americans. I suppose that might be so considered from some standpoints. But as a Native American of Apache blood, who also enjoys tennis, played collegiate level and has followed it since very young age....always disappointing to see threads such as this focus on ethnicity instead of ability.
     
    #29
  30. WillAlwaysLoveYouTennis

    WillAlwaysLoveYouTennis Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 11, 2006
    Messages:
    1,731
    Location:
    Deutschland
    And fantenam, if you really wished to see Monfils in a contact sport, why not suggest hockey? Much more contact... but then certainly, less of the darker skinned players on the ice.
     
    #30
  31. monfils

    monfils Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2005
    Messages:
    259
    Whats your point?
     
    #31
  32. WillAlwaysLoveYouTennis

    WillAlwaysLoveYouTennis Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 11, 2006
    Messages:
    1,731
    Location:
    Deutschland
    The simply point that the person suggested a "contact sport". Basketball has contact, but it is not a "contact" sport, nor one where they are many "darker skinned" players. It was a honest suggestion and thought, but also an ironic one. Multi-sided, nicht wahr?
     
    #32
  33. fantenam08

    fantenam08 New User

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2005
    Messages:
    84
    So I stand corrected on the contact sport perspective. Monfils expressed an interest in playing in the NBA, not hockey. Being that he is so extraverted, I thought the sport would fit him as well, not that he isn't a great tennis player.

    If you can better distinguish the difference between black and african-african american (no real difference) to the question asker then be my guest. I've been checking black (non-hispanic) as my race for years, but each country does have different ideas as to what signifies race. Some folks believe there are only three real races, I could care less, it's just not that deep to me.
     
    #33
  34. Aykhan Mammadov

    Aykhan Mammadov Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2004
    Messages:
    1,672
    Location:
    Baku, Azerbaijan
    Black people in general are stronger than white. So to say naturally.

    If to be serious I don't see any promising future for Monfils. He is young, full of energy, as a black player he has got some strength from nature, but he doesn't get that amazing and magician feel of the ball what is necessary to become great player.
     
    #34
  35. fantenam08

    fantenam08 New User

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2005
    Messages:
    84
    Umm, not helping.

    Race- a social construct used to identify people who have similar phenotypic traits.

    Biologically there is no difference between blacks and whites in terms of intellect, athleticism, or other potential

    Ethnicity- a social construct used to identify a group of people who share a similar cultural heritage
     
    #35
  36. emcee

    emcee Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2004
    Messages:
    740
    First of all, Mr. Enlightened, there are lots of people who are neither black or white.

    Second of all, people might want to believe that race is just the color of your skin, but you know it's not true. Not every black person is a Larry Allen but they TEND to be stronger/more athletic.

    Racism sucks, but then some people take it too far the other way. There are differences between races. Saying that to yourself doesn't make it true.
     
    #36
  37. malakas

    malakas Banned

    Joined:
    May 27, 2006
    Messages:
    15,774
    Location:
    Greece
    I think Monfils has huge potential.I have faith in him,that he will much excell himself and become a great tennis player.
    Hem..yes..Well,in fact there is.People from different races and regions have different athletic abillities.White people from the Scadinavia region have greater ratio length hands-legs to body length.
    Different gonotype means different phenotype which means different characteristics which quite often mean different athleticism-abilities in sport.
     
    #37
  38. fantenam08

    fantenam08 New User

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2005
    Messages:
    84
    Race is a social construct, but if you want to believe that race equates athletic abilities Malakas, then that's your perogative.

    And thats Ms. Enlightened emcee, and thanks for pointing out the obvious, that their is more than one race. Since I was replying to Aykhan who was trying to point out that blacks are "by nature" stronger than whites, I refered only to those two races.

    The difference genetically between one human as another I believe is less than 1%. I put the idea that blacks are prone to be more athletic, right up their with the idea that by nature being of asian desent makes you prone to be smarter. Its a ridiculous stereotype.
     
    #38
  39. exruda

    exruda Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    May 22, 2006
    Messages:
    660
    Location:
    Poland
    There is something in this, IMO.
    Look at athletes in different running distances.
    100m and all sprints are owed by black athletes.
    martahons are won by white
    (and the longer the distance, the less dominant the blacks become).
    Scandinavians win in the high jump.
    and this can go on and on and on.

    But imo tennis is one of those all-round sports that does not favor any type of athlecism, so that everyone can have a go :)

    edit: i forgot chinese in gymnastics :)
     
    #39
  40. malakas

    malakas Banned

    Joined:
    May 27, 2006
    Messages:
    15,774
    Location:
    Greece
    No,I don't say that race equates athletic abilities.But there are some differences in one's characteristics apart from the colour of their skin that derive from the gonotype.These differences in characteristics can sometimes translate in athletic abilities depending on the sport.
    As for the 1% difference,keep in mind that the difference between the dog and the wolf is about 2% and they are different species!
     
    #40
  41. fantenam08

    fantenam08 New User

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2005
    Messages:
    84
    Yes, but we're not different species. I see where you are coming from, yes genotype affects phenotype, by the very definition that genes determine how we look physically. Phenotype- includes all observable physical traits, skin color, hair texture, etc, which is what most people use when they are trying to categorize a person as one race or another. But being of a certain race, does not automatically assure certain traits such as strength, agility, speed, intellectual capacity. That's my only argument. To be honest, even certain traits such as height don't guarantee athleticism, if so Justine Henin, wouldn't keep winning tournaments against these tall players who have much better range.
     
    #41
  42. malakas

    malakas Banned

    Joined:
    May 27, 2006
    Messages:
    15,774
    Location:
    Greece
    Yes.We are the same species.And yet,we are so diverse.If only 2% of the genes makes two species differ,it is quite logical that the 1% of our difference would change more than our colour.

    But of course!!And yet,this is big trap that the human species may fall into.And if we don't want an ominous future for our children we all must, aknowledge that genes is definitely not what determines our abilities!!Not what determines our success in sports,scienses all fields of our civilization!But I am very afraid and worried that it will affect our happiness,if we only let it to happen.:( Natural choise is very very important also for our survival as a species.And humans must realise that...
     
    #42
  43. fantenam08

    fantenam08 New User

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2005
    Messages:
    84
    Okay I see what you mean. I'm not a biologist, so I have no real way of knowing. But I mostly agree with what you are saying. :)
     
    #43
  44. jhhachamp

    jhhachamp Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2004
    Messages:
    3,168
    You are right here. With the vast combinations of genetic makeup of life forms, all humans are within 1% of every other human. But this means absolutely nothing.

    Why is the idea that blacks are prone to be more athletic a ridiculous stereotype?
     
    #44
  45. superman1

    superman1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    5,241
    It's not a ridiculous stereotype. I don't know if it's been scientifically proven (looking at fast twitch fibers vs slow twitch between races), but just from observation it's pretty easy to tell that in general Black people seem to be more athletic. There are plenty of statistics to prove other things (Blacks more prone to high blood pressure, lower life expectancy, higher rates of obesity, higher rates of arrest), so I'm sure you could prove this.
     
    #45
  46. Ztalin

    Ztalin Guest

    Yeah, there's evidence supporting the "stereotype" that blacks are more athletic at a number of things. But there is also evidence supporting that on average, they have lower IQ's. That isn't to say that there aren't many brilliant black people, though.
     
    #46
  47. WillAlwaysLoveYouTennis

    WillAlwaysLoveYouTennis Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 11, 2006
    Messages:
    1,731
    Location:
    Deutschland
    I have no need to list a definition of what is so different between being "black" American or African American, one would have to ask one of such person who calls themselves such to explain it to you. I made a comment as did you, a response to another reply, as did you. In the US, on the forms one has the option to check (though sometimes those receiving the forms with check it for you if you decline) I cannot in honesty check any of them, but just choose the closest, "Native American". It's no deep thing for me either, I am who I am, and people see me different ways, depends on their own background and/or nationality.

    As far as sports goes, and seeing that this thread has continued to devolve into something the original poster did not make an issue of (and yes, I've become involved with this also LOL), in running, many "blacks" have denser and larger muscles, therefore have more explosive power making them quite successful in short distance running needing greater speed. But consider in the latter years you see ones from other countries, for example, Russia, Spain, Greece, who have become faster in short distance running, but you see obviously their body structure is more similar to the traditional "black" runners: larger and more heavily muscled buttoks, thighs and calves. Yes, I go there. And I agree with the person who said, some people take the racism thing so far over the other way as to be equally annoying. There are some differences that are more based on racial background. That is not promoting separatism or racism, but just a fact. There was an American sports announcer, Howard Kosell, I believe who made a statement about "blacks" in sport, which raised a considerable protest in the 70s or perhaps 80s, I can't remember what year, but what he said was not incorrect. It was an observation and could be seen as possibly true, but people just didn't want it to be said. Yes, it was regarding how many "blacks" during slavery times had been specially bred to create more powerful bodies in order to help them "work", and this had been carried down through the years so that many modern "blacks" in America were physically stronger than their lighter-skinned neighbors. Rather off topic true, before I am (re)lectured, but just a consideration on racism and/or realities.

    Yes, there are racial diseases factors also to support some aspects of certain races deal more with this than that. Certainly for Native Americans, who are considered by many to be an Asian group, are mor prone to diabetes. And the age old stereotype that they have a problem handling alcohol consumption is based on fact: we lack an enyzme to negate the affects of alcohol.

    Some things one has to accept, and other things, one doesn't.
     
    #47
  48. fastdunn

    fastdunn Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    6,294
    That's fairly correct statement. However, "intelect", "atheleticism"
    and "potential" are somewhat fuzy concept.

    But if you compare more concrete metrics, there are certain differences.

    For example, composition of muscle fibers in different races.
    There are two different muscle fibre: fast twitch and slow twitch.
    Fast twitch is for quick abrupt motion and slow twitch is for long term
    repetitive motions.

    White people have more of slow twitches and black people have
    more of fast twitches. Asians are somewhere in the middle.
     
    #48
  49. superman1

    superman1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    5,241
    Intellect and potential all have to do with the brain, and since we don't know the first thing about how the brain works, it's better to stick with stuff you can prove like physical anatomy between races. There obviously are differences. Color and facial features are the obvious ones, but if you go deeper you will see small differences in the actual biology of the person. Black people seem to have a higher incidence of people with denser, fast twitch muscle which you need in most sports. So the stereotypes that Black people are good athletes and know how to dance (hehe) are based on truth. Don't be overly politically correct and pretend otherwise. Black people are also very obese (if we're talking general statistics) so it evens out.
     
    #49
  50. jhhachamp

    jhhachamp Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2004
    Messages:
    3,168
    I agree, it seems pretty hard to argue all races are exactly physically equal of one another. It seems like common sense that blacks are more athletic on average. When I was in basketball camp in like 8th grade, they tested the vertical leaps of players. I think I got like 18" and most of the others in my group got around the same, if not lower. The one black kid in my group got over 30". This is not to account for the huge percentages of black players in the NBA and NFL.

    True, but statistics of those types don't really prove anything conclusively because there are many factors at work. Blacks are much more likely to live in poverty and dangerous neighborhoods, so this obviously makes it more likely they will be more unhealthy and have lower life expectency. You can't really tell if it is something genetic or not until you control for those significant variables. Same goes for higher arrest rates. The vast majority of violent crimes are committed by the poor and blacks are more likely to be poor. There is also still inherent racism in our laws and criminal justice system that account for at least some of the discrepency of arrest rates.
     
    #50

Share This Page