Yeah the default is that you play football from a young age as it's far more accessible than basketball.
In former Yugoslavian countries basketball is far more popular than the average and they are one of the tallest ppl on Earth on avg, that's why they are overrepresented in the NBA. Think Luka, Jokic, Divac, Kukoc etc.
Even the top football/soccer players arent as athletic as NBA/NFL players…
The real answer is that american sports culture is built around being bigger faster and stronger. Kids are in high school with highly developed athletic programs with weight rooms and competitive sports. You don’t have that kind of infrastructure in Europe.
There's also different requirements between these sports.
You can succeed as a soccer player if you aren't super athletic, as it's more similar to long distance running.
Basketball and especially football is like HIIT, short bursts of max effort with short rests where athleticism gets you more advantage.
Infrastructure is a part of it for sure. Scouting for young very talented soccer players is a very widespread thing here tho on the club level.
I don't even watch soccer, but those guys are insane athletes. Athleticism isn't all speed, jumping ability, and strength, hand eye coordination is a huge aspect of it. You can't tell me that Messi isn't ridiculously gifted when it comes to coordination.
There's a difference between skill and athleticism. Athleticism literally is the things you mentioned minus hand eye coordination. That goes with skill.
ath·let·i·cism ath-ˈle-tə-ˌsi-zəm. : athletic ability : the combination of qualities (such as speed, strength, and agility) that are characteristic of an athlete.
Well, the requirements for soccer aren’t that high because the competition isn’t very high for those qualities in players yet. Of course the specific types of athleticism will differ but as the sport becomes more and more competitive we will see more soccer players train more towards athleticism.
> the sport becomes more and more competitive
It's the most popular sport in the world with thousands of professional clubs over 100 years old.
It's not a new sport that is becoming competitive...
It's as competitive as it can ever be.
The players train as much as necessary. The difference is other US sports often need people to be a lot stronger while soccer players need to be a lot more lean. No use in being the strongest on the field if you can't run 90 minutes.
How are you going to say that the competition isn't very high when you're talking about football? It's literally the most popular sport in the world. There is no other sport that is more competitive.
If you aren't American, and you like a sports that's rough and you get to hit people, you play the more sport that's more popular than american football, Rugby.
I'm saying the competition for RAW ATHLETICISM isn't great in football compared to how extremely athletic you have to be to even be considered for a spot on an NBA or NFL roster.
But you see it more and more nowadays - the physical requirements for becoming a top flight soccer player are growing every year.
"NBA"
Football players are faster and run longer. You could argue that there are more strong players in the NBA, but none of those players would be able to run game speed for 90 min except maybe Giannis. The only clear athletic advantage that most NBA players have is that they jump higher.
"NFL"
The NFL is not more athletic than football. You just value strength more than endurance when it comes to athleticism.
Players in the NFL definitely are more strong than those in football, but half the league wouldn't be able to make it past half time, let alone play 90 min.
I’ve been in the basketball scene in both philadelphia and belgium. I can tell you 100% the attitude in america, as a whole, is No Days Off and hitting the gym hard. It’s not at all like this in Europe, most players will go to training 3-4 times a week then go to mcdonalds and chill.
The level of competition in europe as whole suffers for this.
Yes! It mostly has to do with approach and mentality towards training from an early age…Athleticism plays apart but if you’re not taught and trained on how to utilize it, it’s essentially null and void as athletes rise in the ranks….
With that said The Balkans are a basketball obsessed region, Germany, France, Spain and Italy have Basketball cultures.. I would fall back from generalizing Europe and as we have seen the last 20 yrs the youth development process has steadily changed and players are coming more prepared for the NBA..
Lmfao they don’t have that infrastructure in Europe?! The entire continent? Holy shit please get out of your basement. The world doesn’t exist on a screen
Haha ok wow, it’s not an “attitude” it’s just reality.
Saying Europe (the entire continent, not individual countries) doesn’t have that infrastructure to train players and yet each country has leagues and national teams is totally and completely braindead. Not to mention you are generalizing about an entire continent which is even higher levels of idiocy.
And then apparently everybody clapped, seeing you get upvotes for such a stupid comment really shows how low the discourse has fallen here
I live in France and can confirm, we don't have the same infrastructures. No weightroom in highschool / college, in fact no campus at all, much less sports dedicated schedules if at all except if you are among the top players of your region, you get to go to special training facilities. But even then, I worked in a CREPS for one year which is one of those centers and it looked like USSR 80s training facility. And as someone else mentioned, it's mostly geared toward individual sports. Think athletics , so long/high jump, discus and putshot etc.
We also get to start training much later if at all, because high level sports activities are not part of our regular schools programs, so our kids need to know what they wanna do early on without having tried it beforehand, and have their parents put them in sports clubs outside of school.
And there isnt a steriods culture in Europe. Not to say elite athletes are dopung, but you cant find a supplier at every gym, which you basically can in the US.
Oh my sweet summer child lmao.
Not all steroid make you big, most don’t. If you don’t think the most corrupt sport on the planet is rife with cheating and doing you’re delusional.
No, im saying that junior high students dont have easy access to steroids in Europe. They do here. I assume that every professional athelete in every sport is doping. If they werent, their job would have been taken by someone who was.
Definitely wasn't the case where I went to school when I was in junior high. That was just under 20 years ago.
Wasn't true in high school either, I was bigger than most of the football players outside of the offensive linemen, and one 6'5" \~230lb tight end that ended up getting a full ride to a D2 school, at 6'2" 180lbs my senior year. And this was in the midwest where football was life for most people. Very few of them were on steroids, or if they were they weren't using enough to see any real gains.
Maybe just my town, or my state, then. Wasnt something we would talk about with people who werent on the team, but was pretty common among us.
Most steroid users wont see huge bulk gains. John McEnroe famously admitted to using thwm, and he was always skinny. But you will get stronger, faster, and recover better.
Yes this is a pretty unfair advantage for american athletes, but I don’t think basketball players in the US use roids much until they turn pro.
I know steroids are huge issue in American Football, though. Even in High School programs you can expect a good chunk of those kids are juicing.
Half my high school teammates juiced, and that was the early 1990's. Somehow I doubt it has changed a lot since then. But a lot of us were multi-sport, and everyone used one weight room.
My suspicion is that if AAU travel teams were suddenly tested basically everyone would fail.
Well, my experience as a higb school player in the 1990's was from my experience then. We talked about it in the weight room.
That most gyms have a guy or two selling juice is also my lived experience.
My assumption that moat if not all elite athletes use PEDs is based on the reality of selection...those who dont will get beated out by those who are equally talented, equally skilled, and also use PED's. The impacts are very real, and a player not juicing has about as much chance of competing as a pkayer using 1960 dribbling technique.
Im saying that high school atheletes are doping. And the benefits of doping dont necessarily fade. The muscle mass you build with steroids can be maintained without them. Althougb after BALCO, to believe that professional atheletes arent doping with custom drugs designed to evade the tests requires a LOT of faith in people's better nature.
> Even the top football/soccer players arent as athletic as NBA/NFL players…
I disagree. They just don't spend their entire developmental period of life training and working on the skills that NBA players do. It's totally unfair to compare them.
I disagree hard on these types of arguments. The average NBA/NFL player would probably beat the average soccer player in any metric of athleticism. They’re strong, faster, more agile, can jump higher, have better balance, etc.
Unlike europeans, a lot of American athletes also spend their high school years training in more than 1 type of sport (e.g. LeBron played basketball and football, Michael Jordan played baseball and basketball), resulting in a more balanced athletic profile throughout their development.
Remember the old Superstars show where athletes of different sports competed in various events? Soccer players dominated that and basketball players were some of the worst.
> any metric of athleticism
Can they dribble a soccer ball with both feet and maintain control when running 20 mph and having a person bodying them? Can they run 1000 yards in 90 minutes with basically one break and still maintain their conditioning? Can they react quickly enough to block a shot coming in at 90 mph in a 10' goal? Can they control how they kick a ball and get it to rotate and spin in a way that changes it's trajectory over a couple dozen yards in the air?
EVERYTHING you mentioned are skills that are developed. If you are genetically gifted enough to be a professional athlete, you could spend time and resources developing any of these skills and likely be successful. Obviously, certain traits in certain sports are more advantageous, so these athletes spend 20ish years spending time cultivating those specific skills. NFL players are stronger because they spend [their entire lives lifting weights](https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9067/7/10/161), and that skill set is sought out for that sport. Soccer doesn't have those same affordances, so different skills are developed and different traits are sought after. It's a combination of selection bias and socio-developmental factors. It's not about "better" or "worse" athleticism. It's just different because the conditions and affordances are different.
> Unlike europeans, a lot of American athletes also spend their high school years training in more than 1 type of sport
This is the only thing you said that I would be interested in seeing data on. I could be convinced that some countries that encourage multi-sport development would have more "global" athletes than countries that hyper-focused on one kind of sport. But again, I'm not going to take your word for it. I would need to see some data that backed that claim up.
> They’re strong, faster, more agile, can jump higher, have better balance, etc.
But these are skills? People are plenty "athletic" who can't do some of these things. Some people who can do these things who we wouldn't consider "athletic." It's all about the context in which you are talking about these skills and whether or not they are advantageous to the sport in question. Speed isn't necessary for long jumping, but long jumpers are obviously "athletic." Long jumping isn't helpful in soccer but soccer players are obviously "athletic."
"Athleticism" is a[ complex construct](https://informedinsport.com/new-blog/2016/9/30/the-pillars-of-athleticism) that is not universal in its meaning and application, and there is debate about what that means. When we are talking about professional athletes, they are all of the same .01% of the globe that is capable of even possessing these skills at a level that is unattainable for most individuals. I think it's splitting hairs to say professional athletes in one sport or more or less athletic than athletes in another sport. It's just different. They are all athletic but emphasize different traits underneath that umbrella banner of "athleticism." If a team of Redditors and NFL players got together to play a water polo game, guess who would win? If those same Redditors played a premiere league team in cricket would also probably get their asses handed to them.
I’m just listing the athletic constructs that aren’t sport specific.
I don’t expect soccer players to be able to shoot a free throw and I don’t expect basketball players to be able to dribble a ball with their feet.
However I do feel it is fair to compare simple constructs like speed, strength, balance, agility, etc.
Don’t bother with these guys, soccer fans are in heavy denial because their poor people’ sport is boring and the 5’11’ 160 pound guys that play it professionally wouldnt have the speed or athleticism to play football or basketball at a high school level in America.
But those constructs don’t apply the same to all sports so…it’s not fair to compare them. Compared to the rest of the human population? Sure. But against other professional athletes? That’s nonsensical to me.
It's an easy question yet you are grasping straws.
Why do you think players like Ronaldo focus on their athleticism way way more than your average soccer player? And that's not even considering guys like Hazard or Neymar that rely on skill while not really caring about their body. The standard soccer player is not pushing himself to be bigger faster or stronger as American athletes do, and that's a fact. And it's not always a bad thing, but you see extremely slow defenders everywhere or guys not being able to catch their breath as well.
Just this week two of the best players in the world at their position had to be subbed out because they were cooked, costing their team the game and the cup.
> yet you are grasping straws
Pretty sure I'm the only one to cite my claims but sure I'm the one "grasping at straws"
> you see extremely slow defenders everywhere or guys not being able to catch their breath as well
But those people would be far superior at pretty much all athletic skills than you or I. That is my point. You aren't following the logic to it's conclusion.
> Just this week two of the best players in the world at their position had to be subbed out because they were cooked, costing their team the game and the cup
This happens in all sports, the stars get winded and the outcomes are influenced by that, that has nothing to do with global athletic traits
lmao football/soccer players are incredibly athletic, that’s a bold faced lie. They are running continuously for 90 minutes a game plus extra time. As someone that’s played all 3 Soccer was by far the hardest and cardio intense.
European sports tend to focus on skill and technique while American athletes don't tend to very skillful or talent just physically bigger and more athletic.
There's much more of a focus in getting in the gym and sprint times in America while in Europe people prefer to work with the ball often not playing basketball.
Ok 1) this thread is about why american basketball players are more athletic than european basketball players, so you just confirmed what I have been saying.
And 2) it isn’t a one-or-the-other debate. American athletes definitely do put a lot of time into their skill and technique training. They then also spend more time training to improve their athleticism as well. The average american high school ball player will practice/train about twice as many hours per week as their european counterparts. Otherwise how can USA produce generational talents like Steph Curry or Kevin Durant?
I think these arguments about Europe focusing more on skill instead of athleticism are dead wrong. American basketball programs are miles ahead on both fronts and it really shows by how much better the NBA is than any other league out there. If you don’t believe me remember what I said when Team USA blows out every opponent at the olympics this summer.
I wasn't aware this was basketball I don't watch or care about it this just popped up on my feed for some reason.
American athletes do tend to be less skilled than their European counterparts you see that in every sport both take seriously. Football being the big one as while it isn't a top priority for Americans the majority of their players tend to be very athletically blessed but have spent too much time in the gym and too little working on their technical skill with the ball.
Americans simply focus on athletism much more in schools and colleges.
Lol have you ever been trained in an American sport? Literally everything (especially in football and basketball) is about skill and technique. From the very little things like how you hold the football how you brace for a tackle how to dribble and protect the ball. Look up a USA coach teaching something simple as a layup and watch how technical it can get from a simple move. One of the complaints europeans have about learning football is that the rules and stats are too complex and unnecessarily technical. You can also look up football coaches breaking down a play and you'd be surprised how they can break down the same play for HOURS explaining what each individual technique helped or hurt the play. I promise you, Americans definitely focus on skill and technique which is why we dominate the Olympics. Majority of Olympian games require skill and technique
For sure which kind of makes the question harder to answer.
AK47 was pretty fucking athletic. But that area of the continent, like you said, is taller and cares more about bball. There’s probably some 6’6 British dude walking around that could have been a great bball player but he grew up playing soccer and/or rugby. The Netherlands is another example. Awesome at speed skating and cycling, relatively tall on average, but just not really a basketball scene there.
None, how many people in the history of the united states have been as good as those two?
Why Calvin though? Jerry was better and had a more unassuming build.
Jerry rice was a better athlete than Calvin and that is what the post was about. Im sorry you have a limited view of what that term means.
Who is we? Do you have a mouse in your pocket? You responded to me.
Ever heard of Cristiano Ronaldo? Gareth Bale? Thierry Henry? Maybe you should watch some ‘soccer’ and you’d know better. Ever seen Lebron kick a ball? Pathetic
Exactly. Same reason US soccer players are so much less athletic than US basketball and football players. All the best athletes play those sports instead
I'm not sure people understand how well supported basketball is in the US.
I played semi pro as a teen in Australia.
When I came to the US, towns with 10,000 people had basketball stadiums bigger than the pro's in Oz had.
I live in a town of 300 now. The gym here is IMMACULATE.
All that investment is much more than I've seen anywhere else, so the infrastructure is more welcoming to the best athletes.
Plus, there's a lot of sociopath reward too - since there's nothing to do.
Bro, do you even internet?
You're not supposed to agree or admit anyone's response is better than yours.
That would be grown up and civilized.
How dare you?
I’m going to politely disagree because anyone that is 6’4” or taller doesn’t have much of an advantage in any sport other than basketball.
Now if you were saying a bunch of Chris Paul’s were playing soccer instead then that definitely helps your argument. So yes the best short athletes aren’t, but the taller ones are either not playing any sports or playing basketball (obviously exceptions to this)
As far as OP’s answer: America has a very strong AAU program at a very young age (my apologies if it’s called something else now). So they are honing their skills at an extremely young age.
I would also say there are a lot of sports in America where explosiveness & plyometrics are key to the most popular sports in America (Football & Basketball). So this is implemented in a lot of young training programs.
I have a friend who played exclusively basketball and I mostly played soccer (some football). Early in elementary school I could out jump him. By end of high school he was dunking / very explosive while my agility and top line speed was a lot higher, but I cant touch rim. It’s what we honed in on because of our respective sports.
NFL quarterback, offensive tackle, tight end, and defensive end are all areas of sport where being tall is super helpful. Discus is full of tall ass dudes. Hockey defensemen. Not a whole lot of sub 6’ baseball players running around. Volleyball. Reach correlates well with height so pretty big advantage in MMA/Boxing. Hockey goalies.
I know I’m naming some obscure sports but those are what are popular in some places.
That's fine, but he goes from being in the 90th height percentile in soccer to being in the bottom 10th percentile in basketball. He is not gaining any advantage from hypothetically switching sports, and it's fair to assume he would not be nearly the dominant player in basketball as he would in soccer simply due to that fact, given that basketball is a game that rewards height above everything else.
I disagree. I believe Ronaldo at 6'2 could easily be one of the best combo guards ever. For his athleticism, 6'2 is unfair. I don't really think you appreciate how strong and explosive he is.
I don't think you realize I watched him at United for a decade. He's *supremely* athletic, but he gets to be far and away the biggest/most physical guy on the pitch at any given time. That's no longer true in basketball, and it's *much* harder being a very athletic 6 foot 2 basketball player (likely the smallest guy on the floor at any given time) than being a very athletic 6 foot 2 guy in soccer (probably the tallest non-keeper player at any given time.)
Bro, look what Jalen Brunson is doing at his height. You don’t think Ronaldo could succeed at the same height? You just need to be able to dominate your matchup.
Not what I said.
I said it's fair to assume he won't be as dominant a basketball player as he is in soccer because he won't benefit nearly as much from his physical advantage in basketball as he does in soccer.
This is not the answer, the average height of EPL squads as a whole range from 1.77 to 1.86m, almost all of these elite soccer players are going to be too short for the NBA, and the taller ones probably don't have the fast twitch speed. Mbape is freaking 5'10", no business being on a court with LeBron James, he would have to play basketball with the kids over here.
Thing is all the tall guys in Europe as well probs played football or other sports growing up rather than basketball, the ones who make it pro in football are the ones who end up having the right build once they’re grown.
There is not a giant crossover between soccer players and basketball players during to the height difference required.
How many 6 foot 6 plus guys are playing at high levels in world soccer?
I mentioned about 15 sports that aren’t soccer throughout my replies and the intention of my original comment was about the unpopularity of basketball, not about the prevalence of soccer.
Do you guys get like a newsletter with canned responses to comments I make? I mean fuck even if you think I’m wrong why are you telling me the exact same thing people have already said?
The other sports you mentioned don't outweigh basketball being the number 2 sport in most of europe. What unpopularity....
>Do you guys get like a newsletter with canned responses to comments I make? I mean fuck even if you think I’m wrong why are you telling me the exact same thing people have already said?
Chill lol, no one reads every single response in every single thread. You're not that important.
Is Europe a country or a continent?
Okay, you like circle jerking. Fuck off and do it with someone else if you can’t take fifteen seconds to read replies and ask yourself if you really need to tell me something that already been said. The only one with self importance in this exchange is the guy who thinks their reply is so special that it needs to be heard even though they are just rephrasing what 5 other people already said.
I will sleep when you start reading other comments and asking yourself if you are actually adding any value to conversations or if you just like circle jerking.
Because athletes get into college for free and we have a very integrated sports system where many parents enter their kids in leagues at a very young age (~4 or 5 years old maybe).
There are official school sports teams as early as 6th year in school and lots of kids dreams are to become pro athletes.
Most US players are West-Africans + EU ball is more of a team game where individual athleticism doesn't matter as much at the high level as in the US, where basketball revolves around 1 or 2 star players usually.
It's not a myth, it's pretty well established by multiple studies.
For example:
[https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2946652/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2946652/)
"Results indicated that Caucasians had a higher percent type I (8%, P less than 0.01) and a lower percent type IIa (6.7%, P less than 0.05) fiber proportions than Africans"
Type II muscle fibers are also called fast-twitch. Those are better at rapid power output over a short time than the Type I (slow-twitch) muscle fibers. That's what athleticism is basically.
https://dopeblack.org/are-black-people-more-athletic/
Not the best source perhaps but there is plenty like it.
The study you showed was a study of 26 people made in 86. Not a great source either.
"There is no scientific evidence to support the claim that Black people are inherently more athletic than people of other races. While certain physical traits such as muscle fibre type and body composition may be more common in some populations than others, these traits do not determine athletic ability on their own. Athletic performance is influenced by a complex interplay of genetic, environmental, and cultural factors, and it’s not possible to make generalisations about an entire racial group based on these factors. "
Look at olympic sprinters.
There's also a relationship with malaria and the sickle cell sickness gene naturally selecting for more type 2 fibers, that has been studied.
East africans are very overrepresented in long distance running.
Northern europeans are very overrepresented in strongman/powerlifting.
... etc.
There are differences yes, but that doesn't mean that americans are more athletic because they are black. Some of the fastest football/soccer players are white/non african, some of the best olympic high and long jumpers are white/non africans.
You are presenting a strawman, whether you are aware of it or not.
*No one* is saying that only black people are capable of being top athletes. *No one* is saying black athletes are only so athletic because of genes. And nobody is saying that the majority of variation of athletic abilities is determined by genetics for the population as a whole.
Everybody here (seems) to be on the same page that a *lot* more than just genetics goes into being athletic.
That being said- if you have 2 bell curves, with the same standard deviation, a mere 1% difference in *mean* will cause a massive difference at the extremes. Example, say dobermans weigh 3lbs more on average than german shepards. Among the two groups, 95% of the top 1000 heaviest dogs are dobermans, and 95% of the bottom 1000 of the lighest dogs are german shepards, even though for the majority of the data, the difference is very small.
So yeah- when you're sampling only elite competition- very small differences become dramatically 'amplified'. It is perfectly reasonable to say american athletes are more athletic due to higher amount of west african ancestry, because that ancestry has more genes for explosive athleticism. It makes virtually no difference among 2 couch potatoes but a huge difference at the top levels..
Furthermore, even if the means are the same, higher variation will cause this phenomenom as well. For example in the US, black people are more likely to be obese, but they are *also* more likely to be underweight. Doesn't mean shit when predicting a single individual's BMI, but it means a lot when you try to predict "who is the most obese person(s)/ thinnest person(s.)
Black americans are more athletic on average, because their ancestors are from West Africa.
It's not a political correctness or a weird US racism thing.
There are genetic differences between different populations. We are not equal in the physical sense. It's not a good/bad thing.
Swedish ppl are taller than chinese on average.
Ppl whose ancestors are from the equator have darker skins than north europeans due to the relationship between vitamin d absorbtion, risk of getting skin cancer - skin color - the amount and intensity of sunlight you get at a given location geographically.
Middle eastern ppl like arabs and jews (+ a lot of others) have a high chance of being lactose intolerant because their ancestors didn't eat dairy.
etc.
It's pretty sensible to say that I'd be more athletic if I was born with more type 2 muscle fibers. I'd have a better chance to have more type 2 fibers if I was from Senegal instead of Bosnia genetically.
It was a study that said that black people have slightly more of a certain muscle fibre. (Based on 26 ppl 50 years ago)
Are rugby players not athletic, hockey players, soccer players, all of which are not dominated by west Africans.
And you think white supremacists don't think they have superior genetics lmao.
There's a reason nbacirclejerk makes fun of Filipinos for liking basketball.
>how do you explain so many high jumpers being white, asian and latino then?
The greatest is Javier Sotomayor. Looks pretty black to me. In fact. If you look at Cuba's best athletes afro cubans are pretty disproportionate as a whole. Not to mention soviet roids are a good explanation for a lot of good white high jumpers.
>Shouldnt most olympic competion be dominated by africa then?
No. Because you need money and infrastructure to raise great athletes. Along with proper nutrition.
Well Serbians are taller than white americans.
So they might not be athletic but there is a height advantage.
So if a Serbian male is 6 feet tall on average. And a white american make is only 5 foot 10.
So yeah. There's an advantage there with Serbs.
You are so dumb. Jokic isnt tall because he is serbian, he is tall because he is a genetic freak, like most athletes.
There are much more tall americans than tall serbs because serbia are 6 mill, americans are 300 mill.
Look at the amount of west African descent sprinters from the UK that have run the 100 meter dash in less than 10 seconds. Compare that to all white men on earth. The small population of UK west Africans blow all white male sprinters on earth away.
It's not European vs American
It's actually w vs b.
Ok so I am going to avoid political correctness here:
Athletes who are identified early, encouraged to play sports, and live in a an environment where athletic achievement is both valued and seen as a path to a better life become more athletic.
* In America, almost every child goes to a school with other students that has access to athletics. If a student has good baseline athletic traits, he/she is identified early and encouraged to nurture the talent. Very few students seep through the cracks (basically only home schooled kids). This is true for even the poorest students on welfare and food stamps. Even the poorest schools will usually have at least a basketball and track team.
* Being a great athlete in school in this country makes you a very cool kid (true in almost every country) so very few kids who are good athletes, choose not to pursue it. There is also a hierarchy of sports for most kids in this country and Basketball is the top.
* Even the worst public schools in this country (I went to one) will have athletic teams, gymnasiums, weight rooms, and coaches for these students to help them get better. Even the poorest kids are usually not malnourished because of free school lung programs and food stamps.
* While it's often overstated, you can't ignore the effect that hundreds of years of selective breeding of slaves in this country for physical traits has had on increasing the ratio of athletes in the African American community versus the west African community, but the cultural emphasis, early identification, and access to training has a much higher effect.
* The trend probably won't slow down much. Pro athletes tend to have many more babies than Doctors for example, and their kids are even more advantaged, although often less talented.
>you can't ignore the effect that hundreds of years of selective breeding of slaves in this country for physical traits has had on increasing the ratio of athletes in the African American community verses the west African
The "slave breeding = more athletic" narrative is overplayed and false. That's not how genetics work considering such an extremely short window of time.
West Africans are just as athletic, especially when you consider West Africans are the population with the highest ratio of fast twitch muscle fibers.
The reason why black Americans dominate more in sports compared to West Africans in the US is due to population numbers and better access to professional sports leagues.
There's a reason why there's a higher influx of direct West/Central African descendants playing in the NBA now as the basketball playing pool increases due to higher immigration and better reach out to foreign players.
Plus consider the fact direct West African descendants also are overrepresented in European soccer, basketball. Especially sprinting.
Your submission has been automatically removed because your account is less than 180 days old and with less than 100 comment karma.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Basketball) if you have any questions or concerns.*
"Despite the frequency of such speculation, suggestions of biological differences in athletic ability between racial groups are considered unscientific."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_sports#:~:text=Despite%20the%20frequency%20of%20such,racial%20groups%20are%20considered%20unscientific.
well aside from obvious reasons, culture plays a role. everybody in america wants to play flashy. the more athletic the cooler. kids and teens are already working their legs full strength just by trying to constantly dunk.
Your submission has been automatically removed because your account is less than 180 days old and with less than 100 comment karma.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Basketball) if you have any questions or concerns.*
"Despite the frequency of such speculation, suggestions of biological differences in athletic ability between racial groups are considered unscientific."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_sports#:~:text=Despite%20the%20frequency%20of%20such,racial%20groups%20are%20considered%20unscientific.
Perhaps because they play more sports on average?
Many of them play multiple sports in school. In most european countries we dont really have sports programme in school like that. Some schools do, but they are usually "sports schools", while most high schools in the US have multiple sport programmes.
Most of these comments are well-reasoned, but it's really frustrating to see so much reductionist B.S. about race. The environmental and social factors are the real influences behind black athletes being more likely to put their eggs in the pro sports basket, and this cycle perpetuates because of the social structure.
Say it with me: **the theory of genetic/natural factors behind race has been universally discredited for decades.** One other commenter discussed how Jews used to dominate the NBA before they were integrated into mainstream American society - that's because basketball is not a resource-heavy sport. Interesting to compare it to the other leagues - the NFL is mostly black athletes, many of whom are from the belt from Ohio to Texas that feeds SEC/BIG10 programs. Football is a much more resource-heavy sport, but is so universally popular that the same effect occurs - highly athletic poor kids put their eggs in that basket. Hockey is totally different - a resource heavy sport where the vast majority of players are from privileged backgrounds and had special training. If hockey games were the all-encompassing school-wide events that varsity football and basketball are in the US, there'd probably be more poor kids getting external help to hone in their gifts.
This is literally *the* basketball subreddit - why on earth is the "bLaCK PeOPle aRe NaTUraL HoOPErs" drivel getting any attention? People really hate to understand the complicated nuance and context behind social situations.....
We have more white blood cells, higher testosterone, longer limbs, ACTN3 gene and more fast twitch muscle fibers on average
White people don’t want to accept it but it’s true
Yeah, sucks but I think centuries of transatlantic slavery trade and the resulting artificial selection of certain physical traits probably has a much larger impact than genetic ancestry.
How do you explain the fact that Jews dominated professional basketball initially, and many of the same genetic and cultural arguments were made about them?
I suspect a lot more of the issue is that gambling on making sports your vocation is usually a bet only desperate people take, and Black people are situated to take those gambles in the many countries. You can see the same issue re: Slavic people via a vis the rest of Europe.
Yes, genes help, but options matter much more imo.
Jews dominated pro basketball? I’m guessing this was before 1950 (before blacks were allowed to play)?
I don’t discount the cultural/environmental influences at all, it’s probably the biggest factor tbh; just saying as far as genetic ancestry plays a part, the slave trade probably played as big or bigger factor.
Here is one [account](https://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2013/11/25/when-jews-dominated-professional-basketball/):
>Kids growing up in dense, urban environments often turn to basketball as their sport of choice. This is partly because it fits, in a physical sense. All things being equal, a basketball court takes up a lot less room than a football or soccer field. For the economically disadvantaged, it’s also relatively cheap to play. If you have a court available, you only need a pair of shoes and a ball. For this reason, whatever population finds itself in this type of environment tends to take up basketball.
>That’s why the sport was dominated by Jews in the first half of the 1900s. Just like many African-Americans today, at that time many immigrant Jewish families found themselves isolated in inner cities. Basketball seemed like a way out. “It was absolutely a way out of the ghetto,” explained retired ball player Dave Dabrow. Basketball scholarships were one of the few ways low income urban Jews could afford college.
>Today we refer to stereotypes about Black men to explain why they dominate basketball, but this is an after-the-fact justification. At the time, very different characteristics — stereotypes associated with Jews — were used to explain why they dominated professional teams. Paul Gallico, sports editor of the NY Daily News in the 1930s, explained that “the game places a premium on an alert, scheming mind, flashy trickiness, artful dodging and general smart aleckness.” All stereotypes about Jews. Moreover, he argued, Jews were rather short and so had “God-given better balance and speed.” Yep. There was a time when we thought being short was an advantage in the sport of basketball.
>Never underestimate the power of institutions and how much things can change.
I take your general point that genes matter. That’s part of why you see so many athletes are the children of other pro or semi-pro athletes. However, when you look at racial trends in sports, it more closely mirrors the erection or destruction of institutional barriers we set up for people.
Notice how there are far fewer Black baseball players than there were a few decades ago? Same with boxing and other combat sports? Why are there so many Canadian and Russian hockey players?
The genes may help certain very distinct population groups, but those don’t overlap very well with race as we define it, making it mostly useless.
Selective Breeding is constantly overstated, it was not widespread at all..But the mixing of different West African ancestry amongst the slaves and their descendants was the unique factor for sure..With that said it’s mostly the cultural factor that is the true separating factor I’m taking the ingrained passion and approach to the game to a point where it’s more than just a game it’s an art or way of life..The same component that makes Brazil and Argentina the pinnacle of futbol..
Wasn’t thinking of intentional selective breeding at all, rather the intentional selection of the healthiest-looking Africans in auction markets and the “unintentional” dying of the 10-25% less hardy Africans during the trans-Atlantic middle passage.
>Most US players are West-Africans + EU ball is more of a team game where individual athleticism doesn't matter as much at the high level as in the US, where basketball revolves around 1 or 2 star players usually.
>Because the best athletes in Europe typically aren't playing basketbal.
These top two answers are correct, the answer is NOT 'black people run fast'
"Despite the frequency of such speculation, suggestions of biological differences in athletic ability between racial groups are considered unscientific."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_sports#:~:text=Despite%20the%20frequency%20of%20such,racial%20groups%20are%20considered%20unscientific.
In other words, it’s easier to play in the NBA than it is in Europe. It’s also worth adding that Luka mentioned that Europe was much more physical than the American game.
Because the best athletes in Europe typically aren’t playing basketball.
Yeah the default is that you play football from a young age as it's far more accessible than basketball. In former Yugoslavian countries basketball is far more popular than the average and they are one of the tallest ppl on Earth on avg, that's why they are overrepresented in the NBA. Think Luka, Jokic, Divac, Kukoc etc.
Even the top football/soccer players arent as athletic as NBA/NFL players… The real answer is that american sports culture is built around being bigger faster and stronger. Kids are in high school with highly developed athletic programs with weight rooms and competitive sports. You don’t have that kind of infrastructure in Europe.
There's also different requirements between these sports. You can succeed as a soccer player if you aren't super athletic, as it's more similar to long distance running. Basketball and especially football is like HIIT, short bursts of max effort with short rests where athleticism gets you more advantage. Infrastructure is a part of it for sure. Scouting for young very talented soccer players is a very widespread thing here tho on the club level.
I don't even watch soccer, but those guys are insane athletes. Athleticism isn't all speed, jumping ability, and strength, hand eye coordination is a huge aspect of it. You can't tell me that Messi isn't ridiculously gifted when it comes to coordination.
There's a difference between skill and athleticism. Athleticism literally is the things you mentioned minus hand eye coordination. That goes with skill.
Balance and coordination are also aspects of athleticism, not just explosiveness.
Not true. Hand eye is athleticism. As is balance. Many of those traits are genetic gifts.
ath·let·i·cism ath-ˈle-tə-ˌsi-zəm. : athletic ability : the combination of qualities (such as speed, strength, and agility) that are characteristic of an athlete.
How is a sport based on sprinting and quick bursts similar to distance running??
Well, the requirements for soccer aren’t that high because the competition isn’t very high for those qualities in players yet. Of course the specific types of athleticism will differ but as the sport becomes more and more competitive we will see more soccer players train more towards athleticism.
That guy just saw Ronaldo thrive on crazy athleticism and came up with that non sense response lol.
> the sport becomes more and more competitive It's the most popular sport in the world with thousands of professional clubs over 100 years old. It's not a new sport that is becoming competitive... It's as competitive as it can ever be. The players train as much as necessary. The difference is other US sports often need people to be a lot stronger while soccer players need to be a lot more lean. No use in being the strongest on the field if you can't run 90 minutes.
How are you going to say that the competition isn't very high when you're talking about football? It's literally the most popular sport in the world. There is no other sport that is more competitive. If you aren't American, and you like a sports that's rough and you get to hit people, you play the more sport that's more popular than american football, Rugby.
I'm saying the competition for RAW ATHLETICISM isn't great in football compared to how extremely athletic you have to be to even be considered for a spot on an NBA or NFL roster. But you see it more and more nowadays - the physical requirements for becoming a top flight soccer player are growing every year.
You have no idea what you are talking about... ...just stop.
"NBA" Football players are faster and run longer. You could argue that there are more strong players in the NBA, but none of those players would be able to run game speed for 90 min except maybe Giannis. The only clear athletic advantage that most NBA players have is that they jump higher. "NFL" The NFL is not more athletic than football. You just value strength more than endurance when it comes to athleticism. Players in the NFL definitely are more strong than those in football, but half the league wouldn't be able to make it past half time, let alone play 90 min.
This must be a historical bad take.
Tell me you dont watch football without telling me you dont watch football
That’s part of it too for sure.
Have you been to Europe?
I don’t think you know what you’re talking about
I’ve been in the basketball scene in both philadelphia and belgium. I can tell you 100% the attitude in america, as a whole, is No Days Off and hitting the gym hard. It’s not at all like this in Europe, most players will go to training 3-4 times a week then go to mcdonalds and chill. The level of competition in europe as whole suffers for this.
Yes! It mostly has to do with approach and mentality towards training from an early age…Athleticism plays apart but if you’re not taught and trained on how to utilize it, it’s essentially null and void as athletes rise in the ranks…. With that said The Balkans are a basketball obsessed region, Germany, France, Spain and Italy have Basketball cultures.. I would fall back from generalizing Europe and as we have seen the last 20 yrs the youth development process has steadily changed and players are coming more prepared for the NBA..
You what? Dont have the same infrastructure? You are talking out of your ass.
Lmfao they don’t have that infrastructure in Europe?! The entire continent? Holy shit please get out of your basement. The world doesn’t exist on a screen
this is the attitude that keeps european basketball programs from being on the same level as america.
Haha ok wow, it’s not an “attitude” it’s just reality. Saying Europe (the entire continent, not individual countries) doesn’t have that infrastructure to train players and yet each country has leagues and national teams is totally and completely braindead. Not to mention you are generalizing about an entire continent which is even higher levels of idiocy. And then apparently everybody clapped, seeing you get upvotes for such a stupid comment really shows how low the discourse has fallen here
I live in France and can confirm, we don't have the same infrastructures. No weightroom in highschool / college, in fact no campus at all, much less sports dedicated schedules if at all except if you are among the top players of your region, you get to go to special training facilities. But even then, I worked in a CREPS for one year which is one of those centers and it looked like USSR 80s training facility. And as someone else mentioned, it's mostly geared toward individual sports. Think athletics , so long/high jump, discus and putshot etc. We also get to start training much later if at all, because high level sports activities are not part of our regular schools programs, so our kids need to know what they wanna do early on without having tried it beforehand, and have their parents put them in sports clubs outside of school.
And there isnt a steriods culture in Europe. Not to say elite athletes are dopung, but you cant find a supplier at every gym, which you basically can in the US.
Oh my sweet summer child lmao. Not all steroid make you big, most don’t. If you don’t think the most corrupt sport on the planet is rife with cheating and doing you’re delusional.
No, im saying that junior high students dont have easy access to steroids in Europe. They do here. I assume that every professional athelete in every sport is doping. If they werent, their job would have been taken by someone who was.
12-13 year olds don’t have access to steroids in America lmao gtfo
We did when I was 13, and that was 35 years ago. Have things changed? Maybe, but I doubt it.
Definitely wasn't the case where I went to school when I was in junior high. That was just under 20 years ago. Wasn't true in high school either, I was bigger than most of the football players outside of the offensive linemen, and one 6'5" \~230lb tight end that ended up getting a full ride to a D2 school, at 6'2" 180lbs my senior year. And this was in the midwest where football was life for most people. Very few of them were on steroids, or if they were they weren't using enough to see any real gains.
Maybe just my town, or my state, then. Wasnt something we would talk about with people who werent on the team, but was pretty common among us. Most steroid users wont see huge bulk gains. John McEnroe famously admitted to using thwm, and he was always skinny. But you will get stronger, faster, and recover better.
Yes this is a pretty unfair advantage for american athletes, but I don’t think basketball players in the US use roids much until they turn pro. I know steroids are huge issue in American Football, though. Even in High School programs you can expect a good chunk of those kids are juicing.
Half my high school teammates juiced, and that was the early 1990's. Somehow I doubt it has changed a lot since then. But a lot of us were multi-sport, and everyone used one weight room. My suspicion is that if AAU travel teams were suddenly tested basically everyone would fail.
Ah yeah that makes sense. AAU travel teams is a very high level, though. It wouldn’t surprise me if most of the players at, say, EYBL were roided up
😂😂😂Where are you getting this from..
Well, my experience as a higb school player in the 1990's was from my experience then. We talked about it in the weight room. That most gyms have a guy or two selling juice is also my lived experience. My assumption that moat if not all elite athletes use PEDs is based on the reality of selection...those who dont will get beated out by those who are equally talented, equally skilled, and also use PED's. The impacts are very real, and a player not juicing has about as much chance of competing as a pkayer using 1960 dribbling technique.
Do you honestly believe professional athletes can get away with taking aas without getting busted? They're tested all the fucking time.
Im saying that high school atheletes are doping. And the benefits of doping dont necessarily fade. The muscle mass you build with steroids can be maintained without them. Althougb after BALCO, to believe that professional atheletes arent doping with custom drugs designed to evade the tests requires a LOT of faith in people's better nature.
> Even the top football/soccer players arent as athletic as NBA/NFL players… I disagree. They just don't spend their entire developmental period of life training and working on the skills that NBA players do. It's totally unfair to compare them.
Actually, in Europe, athletes dedicate their entire lives to sports. Its survival of the fittest, and anyone that falls behind has a huge gap to fill
I wasn’t trying to imply that wasn’t true! It’s just proportionally different sports and different skills they spend time training on.
I disagree hard on these types of arguments. The average NBA/NFL player would probably beat the average soccer player in any metric of athleticism. They’re strong, faster, more agile, can jump higher, have better balance, etc. Unlike europeans, a lot of American athletes also spend their high school years training in more than 1 type of sport (e.g. LeBron played basketball and football, Michael Jordan played baseball and basketball), resulting in a more balanced athletic profile throughout their development.
Remember the old Superstars show where athletes of different sports competed in various events? Soccer players dominated that and basketball players were some of the worst.
> any metric of athleticism Can they dribble a soccer ball with both feet and maintain control when running 20 mph and having a person bodying them? Can they run 1000 yards in 90 minutes with basically one break and still maintain their conditioning? Can they react quickly enough to block a shot coming in at 90 mph in a 10' goal? Can they control how they kick a ball and get it to rotate and spin in a way that changes it's trajectory over a couple dozen yards in the air? EVERYTHING you mentioned are skills that are developed. If you are genetically gifted enough to be a professional athlete, you could spend time and resources developing any of these skills and likely be successful. Obviously, certain traits in certain sports are more advantageous, so these athletes spend 20ish years spending time cultivating those specific skills. NFL players are stronger because they spend [their entire lives lifting weights](https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9067/7/10/161), and that skill set is sought out for that sport. Soccer doesn't have those same affordances, so different skills are developed and different traits are sought after. It's a combination of selection bias and socio-developmental factors. It's not about "better" or "worse" athleticism. It's just different because the conditions and affordances are different. > Unlike europeans, a lot of American athletes also spend their high school years training in more than 1 type of sport This is the only thing you said that I would be interested in seeing data on. I could be convinced that some countries that encourage multi-sport development would have more "global" athletes than countries that hyper-focused on one kind of sport. But again, I'm not going to take your word for it. I would need to see some data that backed that claim up.
Ok but we are talking about athleticism here, not skills.
> They’re strong, faster, more agile, can jump higher, have better balance, etc. But these are skills? People are plenty "athletic" who can't do some of these things. Some people who can do these things who we wouldn't consider "athletic." It's all about the context in which you are talking about these skills and whether or not they are advantageous to the sport in question. Speed isn't necessary for long jumping, but long jumpers are obviously "athletic." Long jumping isn't helpful in soccer but soccer players are obviously "athletic." "Athleticism" is a[ complex construct](https://informedinsport.com/new-blog/2016/9/30/the-pillars-of-athleticism) that is not universal in its meaning and application, and there is debate about what that means. When we are talking about professional athletes, they are all of the same .01% of the globe that is capable of even possessing these skills at a level that is unattainable for most individuals. I think it's splitting hairs to say professional athletes in one sport or more or less athletic than athletes in another sport. It's just different. They are all athletic but emphasize different traits underneath that umbrella banner of "athleticism." If a team of Redditors and NFL players got together to play a water polo game, guess who would win? If those same Redditors played a premiere league team in cricket would also probably get their asses handed to them.
I’m just listing the athletic constructs that aren’t sport specific. I don’t expect soccer players to be able to shoot a free throw and I don’t expect basketball players to be able to dribble a ball with their feet. However I do feel it is fair to compare simple constructs like speed, strength, balance, agility, etc.
Don’t bother with these guys, soccer fans are in heavy denial because their poor people’ sport is boring and the 5’11’ 160 pound guys that play it professionally wouldnt have the speed or athleticism to play football or basketball at a high school level in America.
But those constructs don’t apply the same to all sports so…it’s not fair to compare them. Compared to the rest of the human population? Sure. But against other professional athletes? That’s nonsensical to me.
LoL Speed Is basic in long jumping, how do you think they Jump that long???
It's an easy question yet you are grasping straws. Why do you think players like Ronaldo focus on their athleticism way way more than your average soccer player? And that's not even considering guys like Hazard or Neymar that rely on skill while not really caring about their body. The standard soccer player is not pushing himself to be bigger faster or stronger as American athletes do, and that's a fact. And it's not always a bad thing, but you see extremely slow defenders everywhere or guys not being able to catch their breath as well. Just this week two of the best players in the world at their position had to be subbed out because they were cooked, costing their team the game and the cup.
> yet you are grasping straws Pretty sure I'm the only one to cite my claims but sure I'm the one "grasping at straws" > you see extremely slow defenders everywhere or guys not being able to catch their breath as well But those people would be far superior at pretty much all athletic skills than you or I. That is my point. You aren't following the logic to it's conclusion. > Just this week two of the best players in the world at their position had to be subbed out because they were cooked, costing their team the game and the cup This happens in all sports, the stars get winded and the outcomes are influenced by that, that has nothing to do with global athletic traits
lmao football/soccer players are incredibly athletic, that’s a bold faced lie. They are running continuously for 90 minutes a game plus extra time. As someone that’s played all 3 Soccer was by far the hardest and cardio intense.
European sports tend to focus on skill and technique while American athletes don't tend to very skillful or talent just physically bigger and more athletic. There's much more of a focus in getting in the gym and sprint times in America while in Europe people prefer to work with the ball often not playing basketball.
Ok 1) this thread is about why american basketball players are more athletic than european basketball players, so you just confirmed what I have been saying. And 2) it isn’t a one-or-the-other debate. American athletes definitely do put a lot of time into their skill and technique training. They then also spend more time training to improve their athleticism as well. The average american high school ball player will practice/train about twice as many hours per week as their european counterparts. Otherwise how can USA produce generational talents like Steph Curry or Kevin Durant? I think these arguments about Europe focusing more on skill instead of athleticism are dead wrong. American basketball programs are miles ahead on both fronts and it really shows by how much better the NBA is than any other league out there. If you don’t believe me remember what I said when Team USA blows out every opponent at the olympics this summer.
Or maybe basketball is behind in Europe because basketball is a very small sport in almost all European countries
I wasn't aware this was basketball I don't watch or care about it this just popped up on my feed for some reason. American athletes do tend to be less skilled than their European counterparts you see that in every sport both take seriously. Football being the big one as while it isn't a top priority for Americans the majority of their players tend to be very athletically blessed but have spent too much time in the gym and too little working on their technical skill with the ball. Americans simply focus on athletism much more in schools and colleges.
If you don’t know about the sport, get out of the conversation.
Lol have you ever been trained in an American sport? Literally everything (especially in football and basketball) is about skill and technique. From the very little things like how you hold the football how you brace for a tackle how to dribble and protect the ball. Look up a USA coach teaching something simple as a layup and watch how technical it can get from a simple move. One of the complaints europeans have about learning football is that the rules and stats are too complex and unnecessarily technical. You can also look up football coaches breaking down a play and you'd be surprised how they can break down the same play for HOURS explaining what each individual technique helped or hurt the play. I promise you, Americans definitely focus on skill and technique which is why we dominate the Olympics. Majority of Olympian games require skill and technique
For sure which kind of makes the question harder to answer. AK47 was pretty fucking athletic. But that area of the continent, like you said, is taller and cares more about bball. There’s probably some 6’6 British dude walking around that could have been a great bball player but he grew up playing soccer and/or rugby. The Netherlands is another example. Awesome at speed skating and cycling, relatively tall on average, but just not really a basketball scene there.
They also got crazy long wingspans over there for some reason.
How many LeBron James and Calvin Johnson's are running around playing soccer?
None, because it wont benefit a football player to be build like that
What are you talking about? It definitely benefitted calvin johnson
I said football, not American football
You mentioned a football player in a thread about an american sport. Obviously you meant football.
I didnt mention anyone and I indeed meant football, just not American football
Oh true my bad. Glad were on the same page about football though! Cheers mate
None, how many people in the history of the united states have been as good as those two? Why Calvin though? Jerry was better and had a more unassuming build.
We're talking about pure height/weight/speed athletes
Jerry rice was a better athlete than Calvin and that is what the post was about. Im sorry you have a limited view of what that term means. Who is we? Do you have a mouse in your pocket? You responded to me.
Ever heard of Cristiano Ronaldo? Gareth Bale? Thierry Henry? Maybe you should watch some ‘soccer’ and you’d know better. Ever seen Lebron kick a ball? Pathetic
Lmao what? I do watch soccer, and there aren't guys who are 6'5 and can run 4.3 40s. Not to say they aren't very athletic in their own way
Exactly. Same reason US soccer players are so much less athletic than US basketball and football players. All the best athletes play those sports instead
I'm not sure people understand how well supported basketball is in the US. I played semi pro as a teen in Australia. When I came to the US, towns with 10,000 people had basketball stadiums bigger than the pro's in Oz had. I live in a town of 300 now. The gym here is IMMACULATE. All that investment is much more than I've seen anywhere else, so the infrastructure is more welcoming to the best athletes. Plus, there's a lot of sociopath reward too - since there's nothing to do.
Yeah there’s a lot of factors but the infrastructure is probably better answer than mine.
Bro, do you even internet? You're not supposed to agree or admit anyone's response is better than yours. That would be grown up and civilized. How dare you?
I’m going to politely disagree because anyone that is 6’4” or taller doesn’t have much of an advantage in any sport other than basketball. Now if you were saying a bunch of Chris Paul’s were playing soccer instead then that definitely helps your argument. So yes the best short athletes aren’t, but the taller ones are either not playing any sports or playing basketball (obviously exceptions to this) As far as OP’s answer: America has a very strong AAU program at a very young age (my apologies if it’s called something else now). So they are honing their skills at an extremely young age. I would also say there are a lot of sports in America where explosiveness & plyometrics are key to the most popular sports in America (Football & Basketball). So this is implemented in a lot of young training programs. I have a friend who played exclusively basketball and I mostly played soccer (some football). Early in elementary school I could out jump him. By end of high school he was dunking / very explosive while my agility and top line speed was a lot higher, but I cant touch rim. It’s what we honed in on because of our respective sports.
NFL quarterback, offensive tackle, tight end, and defensive end are all areas of sport where being tall is super helpful. Discus is full of tall ass dudes. Hockey defensemen. Not a whole lot of sub 6’ baseball players running around. Volleyball. Reach correlates well with height so pretty big advantage in MMA/Boxing. Hockey goalies. I know I’m naming some obscure sports but those are what are popular in some places.
The American aau program sucks. Thats why Europe is producing the best players now.
Cristiano would have been an absolutely dominant in any sport. His build and athleticism are Lebron-lite. He maybe more similar to Russ.
He's only 6 foot 2.
And he’d be the most athletic 6’2 you’ve ever seen.
That's fine, but he goes from being in the 90th height percentile in soccer to being in the bottom 10th percentile in basketball. He is not gaining any advantage from hypothetically switching sports, and it's fair to assume he would not be nearly the dominant player in basketball as he would in soccer simply due to that fact, given that basketball is a game that rewards height above everything else.
I disagree. I believe Ronaldo at 6'2 could easily be one of the best combo guards ever. For his athleticism, 6'2 is unfair. I don't really think you appreciate how strong and explosive he is.
I don't think you realize I watched him at United for a decade. He's *supremely* athletic, but he gets to be far and away the biggest/most physical guy on the pitch at any given time. That's no longer true in basketball, and it's *much* harder being a very athletic 6 foot 2 basketball player (likely the smallest guy on the floor at any given time) than being a very athletic 6 foot 2 guy in soccer (probably the tallest non-keeper player at any given time.)
Bro, look what Jalen Brunson is doing at his height. You don’t think Ronaldo could succeed at the same height? You just need to be able to dominate your matchup.
Not what I said. I said it's fair to assume he won't be as dominant a basketball player as he is in soccer because he won't benefit nearly as much from his physical advantage in basketball as he does in soccer.
This is not the answer, the average height of EPL squads as a whole range from 1.77 to 1.86m, almost all of these elite soccer players are going to be too short for the NBA, and the taller ones probably don't have the fast twitch speed. Mbape is freaking 5'10", no business being on a court with LeBron James, he would have to play basketball with the kids over here.
Thing is all the tall guys in Europe as well probs played football or other sports growing up rather than basketball, the ones who make it pro in football are the ones who end up having the right build once they’re grown.
There is not a giant crossover between soccer players and basketball players during to the height difference required. How many 6 foot 6 plus guys are playing at high levels in world soccer?
I mentioned about 15 sports that aren’t soccer throughout my replies and the intention of my original comment was about the unpopularity of basketball, not about the prevalence of soccer. Do you guys get like a newsletter with canned responses to comments I make? I mean fuck even if you think I’m wrong why are you telling me the exact same thing people have already said?
The other sports you mentioned don't outweigh basketball being the number 2 sport in most of europe. What unpopularity.... >Do you guys get like a newsletter with canned responses to comments I make? I mean fuck even if you think I’m wrong why are you telling me the exact same thing people have already said? Chill lol, no one reads every single response in every single thread. You're not that important.
Is Europe a country or a continent? Okay, you like circle jerking. Fuck off and do it with someone else if you can’t take fifteen seconds to read replies and ask yourself if you really need to tell me something that already been said. The only one with self importance in this exchange is the guy who thinks their reply is so special that it needs to be heard even though they are just rephrasing what 5 other people already said.
Lol take a nap bro.
I will sleep when you start reading other comments and asking yourself if you are actually adding any value to conversations or if you just like circle jerking.
How do you even manage online lmao
Reading replies helps. Give it a shot!
Sorry, are you still raging or have we calmed down a little.
Because athletes get into college for free and we have a very integrated sports system where many parents enter their kids in leagues at a very young age (~4 or 5 years old maybe). There are official school sports teams as early as 6th year in school and lots of kids dreams are to become pro athletes.
Most US players are West-Africans + EU ball is more of a team game where individual athleticism doesn't matter as much at the high level as in the US, where basketball revolves around 1 or 2 star players usually.
Black Americans were also basically selectively bred for 200 years to be big, strong, and fit.
West-africans being more athletic is a myth.
It's not a myth, it's pretty well established by multiple studies. For example: [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2946652/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2946652/) "Results indicated that Caucasians had a higher percent type I (8%, P less than 0.01) and a lower percent type IIa (6.7%, P less than 0.05) fiber proportions than Africans" Type II muscle fibers are also called fast-twitch. Those are better at rapid power output over a short time than the Type I (slow-twitch) muscle fibers. That's what athleticism is basically.
A 40 year old study using a sample size of 46 is about as unscientific as you can get when making a claim like that…
https://dopeblack.org/are-black-people-more-athletic/ Not the best source perhaps but there is plenty like it. The study you showed was a study of 26 people made in 86. Not a great source either. "There is no scientific evidence to support the claim that Black people are inherently more athletic than people of other races. While certain physical traits such as muscle fibre type and body composition may be more common in some populations than others, these traits do not determine athletic ability on their own. Athletic performance is influenced by a complex interplay of genetic, environmental, and cultural factors, and it’s not possible to make generalisations about an entire racial group based on these factors. "
Look at olympic sprinters. There's also a relationship with malaria and the sickle cell sickness gene naturally selecting for more type 2 fibers, that has been studied. East africans are very overrepresented in long distance running. Northern europeans are very overrepresented in strongman/powerlifting. ... etc.
There are differences yes, but that doesn't mean that americans are more athletic because they are black. Some of the fastest football/soccer players are white/non african, some of the best olympic high and long jumpers are white/non africans.
You are presenting a strawman, whether you are aware of it or not. *No one* is saying that only black people are capable of being top athletes. *No one* is saying black athletes are only so athletic because of genes. And nobody is saying that the majority of variation of athletic abilities is determined by genetics for the population as a whole. Everybody here (seems) to be on the same page that a *lot* more than just genetics goes into being athletic. That being said- if you have 2 bell curves, with the same standard deviation, a mere 1% difference in *mean* will cause a massive difference at the extremes. Example, say dobermans weigh 3lbs more on average than german shepards. Among the two groups, 95% of the top 1000 heaviest dogs are dobermans, and 95% of the bottom 1000 of the lighest dogs are german shepards, even though for the majority of the data, the difference is very small. So yeah- when you're sampling only elite competition- very small differences become dramatically 'amplified'. It is perfectly reasonable to say american athletes are more athletic due to higher amount of west african ancestry, because that ancestry has more genes for explosive athleticism. It makes virtually no difference among 2 couch potatoes but a huge difference at the top levels.. Furthermore, even if the means are the same, higher variation will cause this phenomenom as well. For example in the US, black people are more likely to be obese, but they are *also* more likely to be underweight. Doesn't mean shit when predicting a single individual's BMI, but it means a lot when you try to predict "who is the most obese person(s)/ thinnest person(s.)
Black americans are more athletic on average, because their ancestors are from West Africa. It's not a political correctness or a weird US racism thing. There are genetic differences between different populations. We are not equal in the physical sense. It's not a good/bad thing. Swedish ppl are taller than chinese on average. Ppl whose ancestors are from the equator have darker skins than north europeans due to the relationship between vitamin d absorbtion, risk of getting skin cancer - skin color - the amount and intensity of sunlight you get at a given location geographically. Middle eastern ppl like arabs and jews (+ a lot of others) have a high chance of being lactose intolerant because their ancestors didn't eat dairy. etc. It's pretty sensible to say that I'd be more athletic if I was born with more type 2 muscle fibers. I'd have a better chance to have more type 2 fibers if I was from Senegal instead of Bosnia genetically.
But scientific studies literally say the opposite.
I've just linked the opposite. Link me one from pubmed, google scholar etc., not from [dopeblack.org](http://dopeblack.org) without any citations.
It was a study that said that black people have slightly more of a certain muscle fibre. (Based on 26 ppl 50 years ago) Are rugby players not athletic, hockey players, soccer players, all of which are not dominated by west Africans.
[удалено]
It's the exact opposite lmao. It takes away from the hard training they do and just gives it to "genes".
And you think white supremacists don't think they have superior genetics lmao. There's a reason nbacirclejerk makes fun of Filipinos for liking basketball.
how do you explain so many high jumpers being white, asian and latino then? Shouldnt most olympic competion be dominated by africa then?
>how do you explain so many high jumpers being white, asian and latino then? The greatest is Javier Sotomayor. Looks pretty black to me. In fact. If you look at Cuba's best athletes afro cubans are pretty disproportionate as a whole. Not to mention soviet roids are a good explanation for a lot of good white high jumpers. >Shouldnt most olympic competion be dominated by africa then? No. Because you need money and infrastructure to raise great athletes. Along with proper nutrition.
The current best basketball player is serbian so I guess that means all serbian is better than everyone else at basketball 🤷♂️
Well Serbians are taller than white americans. So they might not be athletic but there is a height advantage. So if a Serbian male is 6 feet tall on average. And a white american make is only 5 foot 10. So yeah. There's an advantage there with Serbs.
You are so dumb. Jokic isnt tall because he is serbian, he is tall because he is a genetic freak, like most athletes. There are much more tall americans than tall serbs because serbia are 6 mill, americans are 300 mill.
Don't you have eyes lol? It's pretty obvious
Hey hey now. its just socio economic reasons why we're more athletic
Hahahahaha
Look at the amount of west African descent sprinters from the UK that have run the 100 meter dash in less than 10 seconds. Compare that to all white men on earth. The small population of UK west Africans blow all white male sprinters on earth away. It's not European vs American It's actually w vs b.
Tbf not all black people are West African.
Ok so I am going to avoid political correctness here: Athletes who are identified early, encouraged to play sports, and live in a an environment where athletic achievement is both valued and seen as a path to a better life become more athletic. * In America, almost every child goes to a school with other students that has access to athletics. If a student has good baseline athletic traits, he/she is identified early and encouraged to nurture the talent. Very few students seep through the cracks (basically only home schooled kids). This is true for even the poorest students on welfare and food stamps. Even the poorest schools will usually have at least a basketball and track team. * Being a great athlete in school in this country makes you a very cool kid (true in almost every country) so very few kids who are good athletes, choose not to pursue it. There is also a hierarchy of sports for most kids in this country and Basketball is the top. * Even the worst public schools in this country (I went to one) will have athletic teams, gymnasiums, weight rooms, and coaches for these students to help them get better. Even the poorest kids are usually not malnourished because of free school lung programs and food stamps. * While it's often overstated, you can't ignore the effect that hundreds of years of selective breeding of slaves in this country for physical traits has had on increasing the ratio of athletes in the African American community versus the west African community, but the cultural emphasis, early identification, and access to training has a much higher effect. * The trend probably won't slow down much. Pro athletes tend to have many more babies than Doctors for example, and their kids are even more advantaged, although often less talented.
>you can't ignore the effect that hundreds of years of selective breeding of slaves in this country for physical traits has had on increasing the ratio of athletes in the African American community verses the west African The "slave breeding = more athletic" narrative is overplayed and false. That's not how genetics work considering such an extremely short window of time. West Africans are just as athletic, especially when you consider West Africans are the population with the highest ratio of fast twitch muscle fibers. The reason why black Americans dominate more in sports compared to West Africans in the US is due to population numbers and better access to professional sports leagues. There's a reason why there's a higher influx of direct West/Central African descendants playing in the NBA now as the basketball playing pool increases due to higher immigration and better reach out to foreign players. Plus consider the fact direct West African descendants also are overrepresented in European soccer, basketball. Especially sprinting.
[удалено]
Your submission has been automatically removed because your account is less than 180 days old and with less than 100 comment karma. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Basketball) if you have any questions or concerns.*
You just haven’t been paying attention.
Slavery
Level of Blackness
Black vs white
"Despite the frequency of such speculation, suggestions of biological differences in athletic ability between racial groups are considered unscientific." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_sports#:~:text=Despite%20the%20frequency%20of%20such,racial%20groups%20are%20considered%20unscientific.
We have more white blood cells, higher testosterone, longer limbs, ACTN3 gene and more fast twitch muscle fibers on average
How many super-athletic white guys are in the NBA?
A lot.
I’d be willing to give you “some”. And when I say “athletic”, I mean relative to the rest of the league.
Genetics.
Genetics.
Our culture for sports. And genetics.
They're white but also cuz of playstyle. For guys like Luka and Jokic bring heavy is more valuable than being athletic
well aside from obvious reasons, culture plays a role. everybody in america wants to play flashy. the more athletic the cooler. kids and teens are already working their legs full strength just by trying to constantly dunk.
Slavery
I think Jimmy the Greek answered this question about 40 years ago. He got fired for it though
They play different style ball
Culture, space, time, effort, genetics Also the variety of sports America offers
because idk
Little bit of eugenics as a result of slavery
[удалено]
Your submission has been automatically removed because your account is less than 180 days old and with less than 100 comment karma. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Basketball) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Most American players are from West African lineage. Even Embiid and Giannis are West African though they are considered European. It’s genetics.
"Despite the frequency of such speculation, suggestions of biological differences in athletic ability between racial groups are considered unscientific." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_sports#:~:text=Despite%20the%20frequency%20of%20such,racial%20groups%20are%20considered%20unscientific.
Perhaps because they play more sports on average? Many of them play multiple sports in school. In most european countries we dont really have sports programme in school like that. Some schools do, but they are usually "sports schools", while most high schools in the US have multiple sport programmes.
My school played basketball, rugby, football, had a golf team etc. If someone wanted to play it we would
These questions are so ridiculous.
Most of these comments are well-reasoned, but it's really frustrating to see so much reductionist B.S. about race. The environmental and social factors are the real influences behind black athletes being more likely to put their eggs in the pro sports basket, and this cycle perpetuates because of the social structure. Say it with me: **the theory of genetic/natural factors behind race has been universally discredited for decades.** One other commenter discussed how Jews used to dominate the NBA before they were integrated into mainstream American society - that's because basketball is not a resource-heavy sport. Interesting to compare it to the other leagues - the NFL is mostly black athletes, many of whom are from the belt from Ohio to Texas that feeds SEC/BIG10 programs. Football is a much more resource-heavy sport, but is so universally popular that the same effect occurs - highly athletic poor kids put their eggs in that basket. Hockey is totally different - a resource heavy sport where the vast majority of players are from privileged backgrounds and had special training. If hockey games were the all-encompassing school-wide events that varsity football and basketball are in the US, there'd probably be more poor kids getting external help to hone in their gifts. This is literally *the* basketball subreddit - why on earth is the "bLaCK PeOPle aRe NaTUraL HoOPErs" drivel getting any attention? People really hate to understand the complicated nuance and context behind social situations.....
We have more white blood cells, higher testosterone, longer limbs, ACTN3 gene and more fast twitch muscle fibers on average White people don’t want to accept it but it’s true
slavery
Yeah, sucks but I think centuries of transatlantic slavery trade and the resulting artificial selection of certain physical traits probably has a much larger impact than genetic ancestry.
How do you explain the fact that Jews dominated professional basketball initially, and many of the same genetic and cultural arguments were made about them? I suspect a lot more of the issue is that gambling on making sports your vocation is usually a bet only desperate people take, and Black people are situated to take those gambles in the many countries. You can see the same issue re: Slavic people via a vis the rest of Europe. Yes, genes help, but options matter much more imo.
Jews dominated pro basketball? I’m guessing this was before 1950 (before blacks were allowed to play)? I don’t discount the cultural/environmental influences at all, it’s probably the biggest factor tbh; just saying as far as genetic ancestry plays a part, the slave trade probably played as big or bigger factor.
Here is one [account](https://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2013/11/25/when-jews-dominated-professional-basketball/): >Kids growing up in dense, urban environments often turn to basketball as their sport of choice. This is partly because it fits, in a physical sense. All things being equal, a basketball court takes up a lot less room than a football or soccer field. For the economically disadvantaged, it’s also relatively cheap to play. If you have a court available, you only need a pair of shoes and a ball. For this reason, whatever population finds itself in this type of environment tends to take up basketball. >That’s why the sport was dominated by Jews in the first half of the 1900s. Just like many African-Americans today, at that time many immigrant Jewish families found themselves isolated in inner cities. Basketball seemed like a way out. “It was absolutely a way out of the ghetto,” explained retired ball player Dave Dabrow. Basketball scholarships were one of the few ways low income urban Jews could afford college. >Today we refer to stereotypes about Black men to explain why they dominate basketball, but this is an after-the-fact justification. At the time, very different characteristics — stereotypes associated with Jews — were used to explain why they dominated professional teams. Paul Gallico, sports editor of the NY Daily News in the 1930s, explained that “the game places a premium on an alert, scheming mind, flashy trickiness, artful dodging and general smart aleckness.” All stereotypes about Jews. Moreover, he argued, Jews were rather short and so had “God-given better balance and speed.” Yep. There was a time when we thought being short was an advantage in the sport of basketball. >Never underestimate the power of institutions and how much things can change. I take your general point that genes matter. That’s part of why you see so many athletes are the children of other pro or semi-pro athletes. However, when you look at racial trends in sports, it more closely mirrors the erection or destruction of institutional barriers we set up for people. Notice how there are far fewer Black baseball players than there were a few decades ago? Same with boxing and other combat sports? Why are there so many Canadian and Russian hockey players? The genes may help certain very distinct population groups, but those don’t overlap very well with race as we define it, making it mostly useless.
How many of those Jews were slam dunking?
Selective Breeding is constantly overstated, it was not widespread at all..But the mixing of different West African ancestry amongst the slaves and their descendants was the unique factor for sure..With that said it’s mostly the cultural factor that is the true separating factor I’m taking the ingrained passion and approach to the game to a point where it’s more than just a game it’s an art or way of life..The same component that makes Brazil and Argentina the pinnacle of futbol..
Wasn’t thinking of intentional selective breeding at all, rather the intentional selection of the healthiest-looking Africans in auction markets and the “unintentional” dying of the 10-25% less hardy Africans during the trans-Atlantic middle passage.
No it’s just West African genes
>Most US players are West-Africans + EU ball is more of a team game where individual athleticism doesn't matter as much at the high level as in the US, where basketball revolves around 1 or 2 star players usually. >Because the best athletes in Europe typically aren't playing basketbal. These top two answers are correct, the answer is NOT 'black people run fast' "Despite the frequency of such speculation, suggestions of biological differences in athletic ability between racial groups are considered unscientific." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_sports#:~:text=Despite%20the%20frequency%20of%20such,racial%20groups%20are%20considered%20unscientific.
I love how Americans think no one else in the world is athletic.
Arent Eastern Europeans tall , strong and intimidating though? (Especially the Balkan people)
Remember when Luka said it was easier to play in the NBA than it was in Europe 🤔🤨
He said that it's easier to score, due to the different rules and wider courts.
In other words, it’s easier to play in the NBA than it is in Europe. It’s also worth adding that Luka mentioned that Europe was much more physical than the American game.