why do non black fighters almost never get called athletic?

jamamb
Lightweight
Posts: 14329
Joined: 17 Sep 2017, 05:37

why do non black fighters almost never get called athletic?

Post by jamamb »

just wondering, is it some type of psychological bias? seems almost exclusively used for black fighters.

a guy like lomachenko has excellent speed, agility, timing, etc. yet i hear athletic far more to describe a guy like wilder, who tbf id say fits that bill

manny pac in his prime was ultra quick and explosive and could put together ridiculous rapid fire combos. could bounce around swiftly too.

and then guys like george groves and saunders are fast and snappy, with there punches and movements, and seem to have sharp reflexes. yet a guy like eubank was considered the athletic one.

linares too.....fast and agile


yet 'very althetic' 'natural athlete' 'athleticism' seem like qualities that are almost exclusively assigned to black fighters, as if only they have them
KiwiRider
Super Lightweight
Posts: 26650
Joined: 11 Feb 2017, 22:25

Re: why do non black fighters almost never get called athletic?

Post by KiwiRider »

Come on Jammy, you know these type of topics degrade by about the 4th or 5th post :maybe:
TheGingerBomber
Lightweight
Posts: 1233
Joined: 31 Jan 2017, 13:18

Re: why do non black fighters almost never get called athletic?

Post by TheGingerBomber »

I know what you mean, for instance Josh Kelly I would say is very athletic (maybe I'm the only one)....but I bet he's quick across the track and he's extremely agile and flexible.

Just one of those things, beast is another word used to describe a black boxer or a big black centre forward, it's sort of a racist word but in no way do I think it should be seen as offensive!
jamamb
Lightweight
Posts: 14329
Joined: 17 Sep 2017, 05:37

Re: why do non black fighters almost never get called athletic?

Post by jamamb »

ya, kelly came to mind too

kiwi,....i know ppl can descend into chaos with race stuff, but i am genuinely curious about this and if other ppl notice it

it just seems like no matter how fast, agile, etc, if a boxers not black they dont get considered as particularly athletically gifted

it might be more of an american phenomenon
SAPFO
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2732
Joined: 06 May 2010, 16:48

Re: why do non black fighters almost never get called athletic?

Post by SAPFO »

Never heard Whyte or Chisora being discribed as either.
KiwiRider
Super Lightweight
Posts: 26650
Joined: 11 Feb 2017, 22:25

Re: why do non black fighters almost never get called athletic?

Post by KiwiRider »

SAPFO wrote: 23 Mar 2018, 18:59 Never heard Whyte or Chisora being discribed as either.
:lol: But Miller does :lol:
jamamb
Lightweight
Posts: 14329
Joined: 17 Sep 2017, 05:37

Re: why do non black fighters almost never get called athletic?

Post by jamamb »

neither really possess the physical attributes that ppl seem to consider atletic

the issues more that certain fighters do fit the bill for those attributes , but if there hispanic, white, asian etc they dont get the same natural athlete/athletiscm treatment that seems demographically reserved
jamamb
Lightweight
Posts: 14329
Joined: 17 Sep 2017, 05:37

Re: why do non black fighters almost never get called athletic?

Post by jamamb »

KiwiRider wrote: 23 Mar 2018, 19:08
SAPFO wrote: 23 Mar 2018, 18:59 Never heard Whyte or Chisora being discribed as either.
:lol: But Miller does :lol:
funny thing is ive actually seen him described as such more then ppl like loma

as i said before, maybe its an american thing, to look at the top in the nba etc and just associate the brothers with athleticsm
KiwiRider
Super Lightweight
Posts: 26650
Joined: 11 Feb 2017, 22:25

Re: why do non black fighters almost never get called athletic?

Post by KiwiRider »

jamamb wrote: 23 Mar 2018, 19:11
KiwiRider wrote: 23 Mar 2018, 19:08
SAPFO wrote: 23 Mar 2018, 18:59 Never heard Whyte or Chisora being discribed as either.
:lol: But Miller does :lol:
funny thing is ive actually seen him described as such more then ppl like loma

as i said before, maybe its an american thing, to look at the top in the nba etc and just associate the brothers with athleticsm
Maybe. It is an odd phenomena.
Muscle definition shows better on darker skin too, that's why all those white body builders are orange.
keirw
Middleweight
Posts: 2681
Joined: 03 Nov 2013, 10:55

Re: why do non black fighters almost never get called athletic?

Post by keirw »

In the cases of Wilder and Eubank, i would say that neither has a particularly well developed boxing brain and rely heavily on natural attributes to win fights.

So their respective athleticism is their most notable quality.

Cleverly is an example of a non black boxer known more for his athleticism than his boxing skill.
dookus
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 4490
Joined: 17 May 2005, 06:00

Re: why do non black fighters almost never get called athletic?

Post by dookus »

Thing is, "athletic" is such a wide term. In a very real sense someone like Froch, for example, was definitely an athletic fighter - his extraordinary fitness and strength won him many fights his skills couldn't.

Khan is another one - that speed of his can only be described as athletic.
Coco
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 28516
Joined: 08 May 2007, 05:42

Re: why do non black fighters almost never get called athletic?

Post by Coco »

Why are non Ghanian fighter never called teak tough?
world ranked
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2199
Joined: 21 Jan 2008, 14:21

Re: why do non black fighters almost never get called athletic?

Post by world ranked »

dookus wrote: 23 Mar 2018, 19:20 Thing is, "athletic" is such a wide term. In a very real sense someone like Froch, for example, was definitely an athletic fighter - his extraordinary fitness and strength won him many fights his skills couldn't.

Khan is another one - that speed of his can only be described as athletic.
Froch and athletic not sure about that. It a lot of his fights he seemed clunky. If you watch Froch vs Dirrell or Pascal the froch wasn't in the same category as an athlete.
samwbr
Middleweight
Posts: 10164
Joined: 11 Mar 2014, 15:34

Re: why do non black fighters almost never get called athletic?

Post by samwbr »

world ranked wrote: 23 Mar 2018, 22:39
dookus wrote: 23 Mar 2018, 19:20 Thing is, "athletic" is such a wide term. In a very real sense someone like Froch, for example, was definitely an athletic fighter - his extraordinary fitness and strength won him many fights his skills couldn't.

Khan is another one - that speed of his can only be described as athletic.
Froch and athletic not sure about that. It a lot of his fights he seemed clunky. If you watch Froch vs Dirrell or Pascal the froch wasn't in the same category as an athlete.
Frochs engine was the pretty much the definition of athleticism. One of the fittest fighters of recent times and a big part of his success.
keirw
Middleweight
Posts: 2681
Joined: 03 Nov 2013, 10:55

Re: why do non black fighters almost never get called athletic?

Post by keirw »

Coco wrote: 23 Mar 2018, 21:23 Why are non Ghanian fighter never called teak tough?
Simmons was refered to as teak tough the other night.
Just before getting stopped early with a single shot.
jamesmcdonnell
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 45235
Joined: 12 Nov 2003, 06:11

Re: why do non black fighters almost never get called athletic?

Post by jamesmcdonnell »

dookus wrote: 23 Mar 2018, 19:20 Thing is, "athletic" is such a wide term. In a very real sense someone like Froch, for example, was definitely an athletic fighter - his extraordinary fitness and strength won him many fights his skills couldn't.

Khan is another one - that speed of his can only be described as athletic.
Athletic is about as meaningless as the word 'nice.'
jamesmcdonnell
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 45235
Joined: 12 Nov 2003, 06:11

Re: why do non black fighters almost never get called athletic?

Post by jamesmcdonnell »

world ranked wrote: 23 Mar 2018, 22:39
dookus wrote: 23 Mar 2018, 19:20 Thing is, "athletic" is such a wide term. In a very real sense someone like Froch, for example, was definitely an athletic fighter - his extraordinary fitness and strength won him many fights his skills couldn't.

Khan is another one - that speed of his can only be described as athletic.
Froch and athletic not sure about that. It a lot of his fights he seemed clunky. If you watch Froch vs Dirrell or Pascal the froch wasn't in the same category as an athlete.
Depends what you mean by athletic. It seems you take Athletic to mean agile, which is not what it means.
Deleted_Scenes
Middleweight
Posts: 633
Joined: 29 Oct 2013, 17:02

Re: why do non black fighters almost never get called athletic?

Post by Deleted_Scenes »

I'm sure I heard darts players referred to as 'athletes' once...

:confused:
lillywhite14
Heavyweight
Heavyweight

Re: why do non black fighters almost never get called athletic?

Post by lillywhite14 »

Coco wrote: 23 Mar 2018, 21:23 Why are non Ghanian fighter never called teak tough?
Expected better from a man of your experience Coco.

Or maybe you’ve never watched a fight where one of the fighters was from Argentina? Those boys are teak tough...well, actually, maybe just tough, wild, durable? Come to think of it, I don’t think I’ve even heard an Argie fighter described as teak tough! Damn
lillywhite14
Heavyweight
Heavyweight

Re: why do non black fighters almost never get called athletic?

Post by lillywhite14 »

jamesmcdonnell wrote: 24 Mar 2018, 05:22
world ranked wrote: 23 Mar 2018, 22:39
dookus wrote: 23 Mar 2018, 19:20 Thing is, "athletic" is such a wide term. In a very real sense someone like Froch, for example, was definitely an athletic fighter - his extraordinary fitness and strength won him many fights his skills couldn't.

Khan is another one - that speed of his can only be described as athletic.
Froch and athletic not sure about that. It a lot of his fights he seemed clunky. If you watch Froch vs Dirrell or Pascal the froch wasn't in the same category as an athlete.
Depends what you mean by athletic. It seems you take Athletic to mean agile, which is not what it means.
Yep. Another misconception.

I read a newspaper article where a coach from the GB Olympic squad followed Eddie Hall around for a day, watched him train and eat etc

Afterwards he said he was one of the most incredibly gifted athletes he’d ever seen. To be fair, pound for pound Eddie Hall is probably incredibly agile! Still, from a glance you’d forgive people for chuckling if they heard Eddie Hall being described as athletic.
jamesmcdonnell
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 45235
Joined: 12 Nov 2003, 06:11

Re: why do non black fighters almost never get called athletic?

Post by jamesmcdonnell »

lillywhite14 wrote: 24 Mar 2018, 06:42
jamesmcdonnell wrote: 24 Mar 2018, 05:22
world ranked wrote: 23 Mar 2018, 22:39

Froch and athletic not sure about that. It a lot of his fights he seemed clunky. If you watch Froch vs Dirrell or Pascal the froch wasn't in the same category as an athlete.
Depends what you mean by athletic. It seems you take Athletic to mean agile, which is not what it means.
Yep. Another misconception.

I read a newspaper article where a coach from the GB Olympic squad followed Eddie Hall around for a day, watched him train and eat etc

Afterwards he said he was one of the most incredibly gifted athletes he’d ever seen. To be fair, pound for pound Eddie Hall is probably incredibly agile! Still, from a glance you’d forgive people for chuckling if they heard Eddie Hall being described as athletic.
Eddie Hall was a national schoolboy champion swimmer wasn't he? He obviously was naturally athletic to begin with, but then I'd say that's going to be the case with all of those strongmen. Terry Hollands is another, he was a professional rugby player before turning to Strongman.
skanksta
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 16809
Joined: 17 Oct 2008, 10:25

Re: why do non black fighters almost never get called athletic?

Post by skanksta »

keirw wrote: 24 Mar 2018, 05:08
Coco wrote: 23 Mar 2018, 21:23 Why are non Ghanian fighter never called teak tough?
Simmons was refered to as teak tough the other night.
Just before getting stopped early with a single shot.
Proof that it can only be applied to Ghanains !
ElJefe
Middleweight
Posts: 2545
Joined: 22 Apr 2014, 13:13

Re: why do non black fighters almost never get called athletic?

Post by ElJefe »

I noted a few other stereotypes that our commentators love to use in a thread a couple of years ago, this one definitely falls into that category.

http://boxrec.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f ... it=cliches
jamamb
Lightweight
Posts: 14329
Joined: 17 Sep 2017, 05:37

Re: why do non black fighters almost never get called athletic?

Post by jamamb »

:clap:
Stuarty
Middleweight
Posts: 27293
Joined: 20 Aug 2014, 10:28

Re: why do non black fighters almost never get called athletic?

Post by Stuarty »

Because blacks are the superior race remember! Just ask big humble hole AJ :OhYes:
Post Reply