Undefeated49-0 wrote:
Take for instance this guy (Tuan_Jim) the first name alone is a dead giveaway that he's a Pacquiao fan, so naturally he is not going to say anything that favors Floyd Mayweather,
SaadOffTheDeck wrote:I'm not a fan, but he clearly earned atg status. He's always in the gym and would be perfectly suited for same day weigh ins. Manny too. .
SNG wrote:I once read that on average North Koreans are 1-3 inches shorter than their neighbouring South Koreans. This is down to malnutrition.
Oliver Fennell gave me a book about a North Korean defector and their story. Obviously statistics are difficult to get, but I'm pretty sure it said something along those lines about North Korean defectors. Interesting as it could well be more than that. I imagine most North Korean defectors are of above average health and below average age.
I'd say the main thing about defectors is they would be above average wealth - as that's going to be the main thing which will allow you to escape.
The malnutrition of the people in North Korea is pretty well documented.
As I said earlier, in the last 50,000 years, average male human height has barely changed, going from 5'10 - down to 5' 3" and back up to just over 5'10 - clearly whilst genetics play a role in governing human physiology, there is only a very small upward trend, and it is very very slow. However, changing diets have a far quicker effect on people realising their genetic potentiality.
tiny_acres wrote:I am no scientist.But doesn't breeding have something to do with this.
I remember the unpopular comments made by Jimmy the Greek about slaves.
Where they took the biggest strongest fastest male and female and had them create better bloodlines
through breeding.
Isn't that a form of genetics?I am not trying to sound stupid it is a legitimate question.
If we take a female track star and a NFL all pro would their child have and advantage physically over
2 substandard nonathletic parents giving birth to a child?
Could this contribute to our athletes now being faster and stronger?Or am I thinking to simply?
I watched an interesting documentary a few years ago which basically said this (I think it involved Michael Johnson?). It argued that the US & Jamaica have produced so many good black athletes partly because the slaves who survived the terrible conditions on the boats over from Africa must have been genetically strong, which gave their descendents an advantage when it came to athletics/sports.
tiny_acres wrote:I am no scientist.But doesn't breeding have something to do with this.
I remember the unpopular comments made by Jimmy the Greek about slaves.
Where they took the biggest strongest fastest male and female and had them create better bloodlines
through breeding.
Isn't that a form of genetics?I am not trying to sound stupid it is a legitimate question.
If we take a female track star and a NFL all pro would their child have and advantage physically over
2 substandard nonathletic parents giving birth to a child?
Could this contribute to our athletes now being faster and stronger?Or am I thinking to simply?
I watched an interesting documentary a few years ago which basically said this (I think it involved Michael Johnson?). It argued that the US & Jamaica have produced so many good black athletes partly because the slaves who survived the terrible conditions on the boats over from Africa must have been genetically strong, which gave their descendents an advantage when it came to athletics/sports.
this is one reason and the other reason is, that genetics improv when human beings do physicly hard work.
meaning slaves for working physicly extremly hard, so the descendants were geneticly strong. thats why usa is so good in most every sport they play, because of black people. this one stupid dude james, always talking about nutrition and training is the only thing that matters and not genetics. than why arent there so many super athletic white athletes in the usa? they have the same nutrition and training methods like the black athetes in the us, yet black athletes are much better than most white athletes. look at the nba, nfl or boxing in the us, basicly only consists of black athletic athletes, because their ancestry were working physicly extremly ahrd.
tiny_acres wrote:I am no scientist.But doesn't breeding have something to do with this.
I remember the unpopular comments made by Jimmy the Greek about slaves.
Where they took the biggest strongest fastest male and female and had them create better bloodlines
through breeding.
Isn't that a form of genetics?I am not trying to sound stupid it is a legitimate question.
If we take a female track star and a NFL all pro would their child have and advantage physically over
2 substandard nonathletic parents giving birth to a child?
Could this contribute to our athletes now being faster and stronger?Or am I thinking to simply?
I watched an interesting documentary a few years ago which basically said this (I think it involved Michael Johnson?). It argued that the US & Jamaica have produced so many good black athletes partly because the slaves who survived the terrible conditions on the boats over from Africa must have been genetically strong, which gave their descendents an advantage when it came to athletics/sports.
this is one reason and the other reason is, that genetics improv when human beings do physicly hard work.
meaning slaves for working physicly extremly hard, so the descendants were geneticly strong. thats why usa is so good in most every sport they play, because of black people. this one stupid dude james, always talking about nutrition and training is the only thing that matters and not genetics. than why arent there so many super athletic white athletes in the usa? they have the same nutrition and training methods like the black athetes in the us, yet black athletes are much better than most white athletes. look at the nba, nfl or boxing in the us, basicly only consists of black athletic athletes, because their ancestry were working physicly extremly ahrd.
I heard that blacks have more fast-twitch muscle fibers than whites.
Boxerbeetle wrote:
I watched an interesting documentary a few years ago which basically said this (I think it involved Michael Johnson?). It argued that the US & Jamaica have produced so many good black athletes partly because the slaves who survived the terrible conditions on the boats over from Africa must have been genetically strong, which gave their descendents an advantage when it came to athletics/sports.
this is one reason and the other reason is, that genetics improv when human beings do physicly hard work.
meaning slaves for working physicly extremly hard, so the descendants were geneticly strong. thats why usa is so good in most every sport they play, because of black people. this one stupid dude james, always talking about nutrition and training is the only thing that matters and not genetics. than why arent there so many super athletic white athletes in the usa? they have the same nutrition and training methods like the black athetes in the us, yet black athletes are much better than most white athletes. look at the nba, nfl or boxing in the us, basicly only consists of black athletic athletes, because their ancestry were working physicly extremly ahrd.
I heard that blacks have more fast-twitch muscle fibers than whites.
correct. no wounder why they dominate sports involving running.
SaadOffTheDeck wrote:SW: Roman Gonzalez
108: Yoko Gushiken
112: Pancho Villa
115: Khaosai galaxy
118: Eder Jofre
122: Erik Morales
126: Willie Pep
130: Floyd mayweather
135: Roberto Duran
140: Duilio Loi
147: Ray robinson
154: thomas Hearns
160: harry Greb
168: Roy jones
175: Ezzard Charles
200: Evander Holyfield
H: joe louis
Oddly, I think Sam langford is top 3 ever but he encompassed so many divisions he doesn't fit at the top of any.
tiny_acres wrote:I am no scientist.But doesn't breeding have something to do with this.
I remember the unpopular comments made by Jimmy the Greek about slaves.
Where they took the biggest strongest fastest male and female and had them create better bloodlines
through breeding.
Isn't that a form of genetics?I am not trying to sound stupid it is a legitimate question.
If we take a female track star and a NFL all pro would their child have and advantage physically over
2 substandard nonathletic parents giving birth to a child?
Could this contribute to our athletes now being faster and stronger?Or am I thinking to simply?
I watched an interesting documentary a few years ago which basically said this (I think it involved Michael Johnson?). It argued that the US & Jamaica have produced so many good black athletes partly because the slaves who survived the terrible conditions on the boats over from Africa must have been genetically strong, which gave their descendents an advantage when it came to athletics/sports.
this is one reason and the other reason is, that genetics improv when human beings do physicly hard work.
meaning slaves for working physicly extremly hard, so the descendants were geneticly strong. thats why usa is so good in most every sport they play, because of black people. this one stupid dude james, always talking about nutrition and training is the only thing that matters and not genetics. than why arent there so many super athletic white athletes in the usa? they have the same nutrition and training methods like the black athetes in the us, yet black athletes are much better than most white athletes. look at the nba, nfl or boxing in the us, basicly only consists of black athletic athletes, because their ancestry were working physicly extremly ahrd.
When you learn to string a sentence together in a semblance of correct geammar you can call me stupid
. You are too ignorant to have the vaguest understanding of the complexity of the subject you think you are discussing.
this is one reason and the other reason is, that genetics improv when human beings do physicly hard work.
meaning slaves for working physicly extremly hard, so the descendants were geneticly strong. thats why usa is so good in most every sport they play, because of black people. this one stupid dude james, always talking about nutrition and training is the only thing that matters and not genetics. than why arent there so many super athletic white athletes in the usa? they have the same nutrition and training methods like the black athetes in the us, yet black athletes are much better than most white athletes. look at the nba, nfl or boxing in the us, basicly only consists of black athletic athletes, because their ancestry were working physicly extremly ahrd.
I heard that blacks have more fast-twitch muscle fibers than whites.
correct. no wounder why they dominate sports involving running.
Fast twitch fibres are only of use un certain sports.
Actually only the black people descended from west aftica have a very high proportion of fast twitch fibres. The 'slim boned' africans of most of the rest of africa have high proportions of slow twitch fibres. 'Black people' takes in close to 1 billion in africa alone never mind their descendants who have huge genetic diversity.
Your arguments are oversimplified in the extreme. Again, you are talking about things you barely understand.
Killer Kovalev wrote:How come this deluded, weird, racist, angry, unhappy, obese Black Supremacist CHEPPAAAA never gets banned
he clearly wants racial debates, has a massive anti white thing going on
he shuld be banned because he really brings the forum down.
We know he is black how exactly?
Whatever colour he is, he is as shite through a funnel.
Killer Kovalev wrote:I don't want to get too much into racial debate but..
Wthe whole continent of Africa is completely awful at boxing. The worst continent at Boxing, even worse thsn Asia.
In the pros, in the amateurs.. they are completely useless. Maybe it is because they are black??
Whites are only about a 4% minority in africa , yet the best african boxers are white.
You need to change your user id. Racist (plus stupid) posts like that should not be associated with Krusher. He makes his own mistakes.
Kovalev was joking, and you are serious. If anything, blacks may be more talented in sports than whites. Your statement about Africa is wrong. The problem U.S. is facing is that talented blacks are going into football and basketball, as you can earm money easier in those sports, and they are way more popular than boxing.
To be fair i think he's just trying to show how dumb it is to simplify athletic prowess into black or white.
Boxing unlike sprinting requires a lot more than just genetics to suceed. Even in something like sprinting however training and nutrition is extremely important. Thats why most if not all siccessful sprinters train in the U.S as youngsters certainly until very recently. I guess its hard for some people here to accept that it is a complex and nuanced argument.
ikorolev wrote:Kovalev was joking, and you are serious. If anything, blacks may be more talented in sports than whites. Your statement about Africa is wrong. The problem U.S. is facing is that talented blacks are going into football and basketball, as you can earm money easier in those sports, and they are way more popular than boxing.
Theres so many factors at play. Talented at what? Why do so many young black men in the U.S go into sport for instance? The lack of success in boxing fot african nations is mainly lack of facilities and opportunity though there have of course been some highly successful black african boxers.
ikorolev wrote:Kovalev was joking, and you are serious. If anything, blacks may be more talented in sports than whites. Your statement about Africa is wrong. The problem U.S. is facing is that talented blacks are going into football and basketball, as you can earm money easier in those sports, and they are way more popular than boxing.
To be fair i think he's just trying to show how dumb it is to simplify athletic prowess into black or white.
Boxing unlike sprinting requires a lot more than just genetics to suceed. Even in something like sprinting however training and nutrition is extremely important. Thats why most if not all siccessful sprinters train in the U.S as youngsters certainly until very recently. I guess its hard for some people here to accept that it is a complex and nuanced argument.
Theres so many factors at play. Talented at what? Why do so many young black men in the U.S go into sport for instance? The lack of success in boxing fot african nations is mainly lack of facilities and opportunity though there have of course been some highly successful black african boxers.
ikorolev wrote:Kovalev was joking, and you are serious. If anything, blacks may be more talented in sports than whites. Your statement about Africa is wrong. The problem U.S. is facing is that talented blacks are going into football and basketball, as you can earm money easier in those sports, and they are way more popular than boxing.
No way are blacks more talented. Whites dominate most sports, win about 80% of all olympic medals yet only make up about 17% of the world population
The football/basketbal lthing has proven to be 100% bullshiiit. It's a really laughable, pathetic excuse, flawed on every level. You are embarassing yourself even mentioning it unless you want to be mocked and ridiculed.
You only have to look at Boxrec ratings. see how many active current USA fighters there ( most of whom are Black).There is so many.... So there is no excuses
With black boxers it seems they have the quanity, but lack the quality.
The whole continent of Africa is realy awful at Boxing, All their boxers go out in the 1st or second round at the Olympics and World Championships.
What is laughable is you. One-two generations ago, when boxing was very popular, black boxers dominated it.
Africa is not good at boxing or other sports because of poverty and lack of good coaches.
Killer Kovalev wrote:I don;t know any sports that Blacks are better than whites at there hardly any.
Sprinting.. that't it.. but that comes under the umbrella of Athletics
Basketball ... maybe.
Whereas name the sports that Whites are better than Blacks at and we'd be here all day.
American football, basketball and track are the most popular sports in the U.S. not requiring expensive equipment at early stages, and they are all dominated by blacks.
Killer Kovalev wrote:why are quite small nations such as Ukraine and Tiny little nations like Ireland. Doing so much better than the whole continet of billions of Africa put together at boxing. Vast majority of Black boxers are very poor it seems that's why. There's nothing racist about it. it's just the truth.
I will repeat for dummies: Africa is not good at boxing or other sports because of poverty and lack of good coaches.
Killer Kovalev wrote:why are quite small nations such as Ukraine and Tiny little nations like Ireland. Doing so much better than the whole continet of billions of Africa put together at boxing. Vast majority of Black boxers are very poor it seems that's why. There's nothing racist about it. it's just the truth.
I will repeat for dummies: Africa is not good at boxing or other sports because of poverty and lack of good coaches.
Black africans are mostly unathletic, lack hard work ethic, are technically very poor.
Some countries in Africa are richer than the likes of Ukraine. Poverty is no excuse
They are just simply really really awful at Boxing, With a continent of Billions there is no excuses. fact.
Laughable.....
Very few counties in africa are richer in terms of living conditions than ukraine.
Youve heard of azumah nelson, dick tiger?
If they are so lazy and unathletic why have african natiobs dominated.middle and long distance running for 5 decades?
You do realise that every single 100 meter record holder from the last 40 odd years traces their genes directly to west africa right?
Killer Kovalev wrote:LOl you are really talking about ''Popular''... are you completely stupid and deluded.
Boxing is not the most popular sport anywhere - FACT
every country has more poular sports than boxing
it's really really pathetic and laughable when you make that excuse get it through to your dumb head.
Football/Soccer for example is the most popular sport in the world in the vast majority of countries, and white have always been much much better than blacks at it.
Interesting then how many black players are now coming through at the highest level from african nations isnt it?
Killer Kovalev wrote:I don;t know any sports that Blacks are better than whites at there hardly any.
Sprinting.. that't it.. but that comes under the umbrella of Athletics
Basketball ... maybe.
Whereas name the sports that Whites are better than Blacks at and we'd be here all day.
American football, basketball and track are the most popular sports in the U.S. not requiring expensive equipment at early stages, and they are all dominated by blacks.
This guy is a racist moron. Dont waste your breath ikorolev. Im putting him on ignore.
This whole discussion about genetics (which I guess inevitably led to a "race" debate (and probably Godwin's Law soon enough)) is pretty much irrelevant anyway: questions like "who was better, Ali or Louis?" or "Monzon or Hagler?" don't have a real definitive answer. That's part of the fun of talking about them, taking individual cases and putting them up against other individual cases. The likes of Benny Leonard, SRR and Roy Jones jr. are all products of their age but all also stand apart and above from the majority of their contemporaries because of how much better they are than them.
Misunderstood and misapplied hard science isn't going to get you any closer to figuring out who "the best ever" is. You just have to look at the available evidence and take the best guess you can.
