A video of big brained Oprah arm wrestling Jewish Rosanne Barr:
According to HBD, blacks are the most masculine, aggressive and athletic race, so I was surprised to discover a large subset of HBDers (on the internet) who believe whites are stronger than blacks.
One reason they believe this is because of Allen’s Rule, a theory claiming that body types evolve to become more linear in warm climates and more rounded and compact in cold climates. Round forms, having smaller surface area to volume ratios, are thought to freeze less easily. There’s also Bergmann’s Rule which asserts, for similar reasons, that body size evolves to be large in cold climates and small in warm climates.
Thus, it’s assumed that blacks evolved to be tall and small (good for warm climates) while whites evolved to be short and big (good for cold climates). A short and big physique is then presumed to be good for weight-lifting.
The problem with this view is it’s too simplistic. Allen’s Rule and Bergmann’s Rule are not the only factors that influence the evolution of physique. There’s also Rushton’s rule, which argues cold climates select for less masculine, dominant and sexual traits.
One reason Allen’s rule makes sense to people is their image of black physiques comes from Third World African countries where malnutrition is rampant. Of course people in those countries are especially skinny, but when you compare blacks and whites reared in the same country, blacks are heavier, despite being a bit shorter.
The average male American white age 20-39 is 70.4 inches tall and 193.5 lbs.
The average male American black age 20-39 is 70.1 inches tall and 202.4 lbs.
See table 6 and table 12.
The average black American can bench press more than the average white American
Of course weight and strength are not the same thing. In order to compare the races in strength, I found a study of police officers which compared the bench pressing ability of black and white officers, both at the time they were recruited, and after years on the job. The study found that upon recruitment, the average white man could bench press 84.2 kg (standard deviation = 21.2), the average black could bench press 95.1 kg (SD = 24.6). In other words, black men are 0.51 SD stronger than white men. If we convert strength to farmilliar IQ scale, where the white mean is set at 100 and the white SD is set at 15, then white men have a (sex adjusted) SQ (Strength Quotient) of 100, and black men have an SQ of 108.
Both races improved after years of on the job training, but the gap remained. Black women could also bench press more than white women, both at recruitment, and especially after training in both groups.
Blacks dominate American body building
What happens when we move from the average and look at the extremes? Here’s a list of the top 15 body builders of all time. For apples to apples comparison, I excluded all the non-Americans, to make a list of the top AMERICAN body builder’s of all time:
1. Ronnie Coleman (Black)
2. Arnold Schwarzenegger (White)
3. Kai Greene (Black)
4. Phillip Health (Black)
5. Flex Wheeler (Black)
6. Johnnie O. Jackson (Black)
7. Lee Haney (Black)
8. Lou Ferrigno (White)
9. Kevin Levrone (Black)
So blacks are only 12.6% of America, but 78% of the top body builders in American history. And this is what we should expect. The nature of the bell curve is such that if black men are 8 points higher than white men in SQ, they should be dramatically overrepresented among those with the most extreme SQs. This is analogous to how American Jews (with IQs 10 points higher than U.S. whites) are greatly overrepresented among Nobel Prize winners.
World’s Strongest Man
There is a major anomaly however. As blogger Racerealist told me, nine Americans have won the World’s Strongest Man competition, and not a single Black was among them. Indeed not a single Black has won from any country.
If the average black is stronger than the average white, and if top black body builders outcompete top white body builders, why has there not been a single black among the World’s Strongest men winners?
There are several possibilities:
1) It’s just a statistical anomaly caused by small sample size. Most well nourished blacks live in America, and only 9 Americans have won. Once 20 Americans have won, we might see several blacks included.
2) The average white is weaker than the average black, but there might be certain white ethnic groups that are especially strong
3) whites have lower mean strength but might have a greater standard deviation; however the police study above did not find this, and it fails to explain why black dominate body building
4) whites dominate strongest man competitions because they’re not athletic enough to do anything else, while the strongest blacks play lucrative sports like boxing, football and basketball instead.
What’s your OQ (Oprah quotient)**
”The problem with this view is it’s too simplistic.”
Seems the capacity to sculpt muscles is not exactly the same thing than ”born with this greater body strenghtness”
Then body builders are the strongest of the strongest* or, on avg, they tend to APPEARS strongest*
Exhibit muscles is not the same, of course, than prove that have greater muscular force
(i don’t know what i’m talking about, despise me, what you guys already do, ;))
look like iq versus intelligence
iq is the exhibition of the intelligence, usefull/logical/revolutionary is the prove of the intelligence itself
iq is the exhibition of the intelligence, usefull/logical/revolutionary
cRReativity
is the prove of the intelligence itself
I hate you ”adhd” =(
I would say muscle mass is like brain size. Big muscles mean you’re probably strong just as big brain means you’re probably smart
Weight lifting is like the direct measure of strength just as fluid IQ tests are the direct measure of intelligence
PP,
Strength coach Mark Rippetoe:
“A bigger muscle is a stronger muscle.”
However, this does not take into account muscle fiber typing.
Weightlifting (The Big 3, squat, bench, and deadlift are the best measure of strength. Overhead press as well, but it was taken out of strength competitions due to how people cheated the lift. The best I’ve seen is a crazy 500+ pound press!)
”I would say muscle mass is like brain size. Big muscles mean you’re probably strong just as big brain means you’re probably smart”
but the correlation between brain size alone and iq is lower, is not*
I thought human paradigm is this dualism
be muscular strong
or
brainly-muscular strong***
non-human animals usually have a more intra-paired body-mind system than humans…
humans have ”more free brains”, thought, they/we can think more independently to ”the body”
non-human bodies works like natural weapons,
strong intra-integrated body-mind system
humans are usually the physically weakest animals
but they/we have more ”free” brains (less subordinate or unite to the ”body”)
we have more manual than automatic/instinctive brains, still pretty instinctive
(or all of it above is just a collection of bullshitisms, you choice)
we are more manual thinkers
we can for example reavaliate ourselves, self-awareness
such like read our own ”manual of operationality”
(orrrrr not)
On the muscle size/strength correlation, this is on older people, men and women 50 plus, so I’d say up the correlation a bit:
“This study quantified the positive association between muscle mass and muscle strength in older adults, and found that muscle mass explained about 13% of variance in muscle strength, independent of age and gender. After adjusting for age and gender, every one unit increase in aASM was associated with a corresponding 31.6 newton increase in IQS. As these results are derived from a cross-sectional study, any causal inference is precluded. Nevertheless, these data underscore the need for further prospective research that evaluates the downstream effects of interventions, which are aimed at preserving muscle mass, on muscle strength and physical function.”
http://bmcgeriatr.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2318-13-74
I can’t find anything on a younger sample, this is pretty good.
But I’ve seen plenty of tiny people (muscle wise) who were extremely strong despite not looking it.
That’s awesome. Muscle size explains 13% of the variation in strength implying a 0.36 correlation (the square root of 13%). That’s virtually the same as the brain size IQ correlation
That is in an older population though, over 50 years of age with a sample of men and women.
I’d like to see one with people aged 19 to 30. I’d guess the correlation would be higher as strength deteriorates with age, let’s say a correlation of .25. The only studies I can find on this are on older cohorts.
” Muscle size explains 13% of the variation in strength implying a 0.36 correlation (the square root of 13%). That’s virtually the same as the brain size IQ correlation”
That is, ridiculously weak.
I wouldn’t use it for anything, and PP shouldn’t either.
It does sound very weak. It would imply (in rare cases)that some scrawny 90 lb nerds are a lot stronger than most 300 lb muscle men.
That’s because muscle fibers play more of a factor than muscle size.
“It does sound very weak”
It is weak. That’s what I’m saying. Muscle fibers mean more.
“It would imply (in rare cases)that some scrawny 90 lb nerds are a lot stronger than most 300 lb muscle men.”
Don’t get ahead of yourself. The nerd wouldn’t know proper form.. There’s no way in hell a nerd would have the neurological ability, as well as mind muscle connect, to be able to put lift a 300 pound body builder. But for the general population? Yea. It holds. I’ve seen smaller people lift a lot. But no way will a 90 scrawny nerd outlier a professional m
1. blacks weigh more because their bones are denser. hence they may have a disadvantage at swimming. but few blacks ever try swimming.
2. weightlifting strength is reduced ceteris paribus by longer limbs. blacks tend to have longer limbs. thus they must have even more muscle strength to lift the same weight.
3. all powerlifting and olympic weightlifting records are held by caucasoids. the only exception might be some chinese women.
“1. blacks weigh more because their bones are denser. hence they may have a disadvantage at swimming. but few blacks ever try swimming.”
Yup. And a narrower chest cavity and less fat free body mass (can’t float as well).
https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2016/05/30/white-men-cant-jump-thats-ok-black-men-cant-swim/
I’ve seen beast East Asian power lifters. East Asians are also great Olympic lifters as well. Body proportion, limb length and muscle fiber typing all play a role.
This article already seems bias to me as they seem to have forgotten a ton of white bodybuilders who dimante the sport as well as two top olympians such as jay cutler and i believe 6 or 7 time winner dorian yates who created the mass era. Not that i dsispute blacks having great genetics but those stats are off
in strength blacks are NOT better. are they?
in endurance running west africans are NOT better. do they even try?
the sports advantage for west africans is skeletal not muscular.
west africans tend to have longer legs and especially longer fore-legs/calves.
and in the case of strength the advantage of northern europeans/iranians may also be skeletal, shorter levers, not muscular.
just as with intelligence there’s a huge overlap in the distribution of ability.
so there are reasons to believe that blacks would not be good swimmers. but hardly any ever try to be good swimmers. so it’s just speculation.
namely great swimmers tend to have short legs for their height. and swimming is more about endurance than strength.
“This article already seems bias to me as they seem to have forgotten a ton of white bodybuilders who dimante the sport as well as two top olympians such as jay cutler and i believe 6 or 7 time winner dorian yates who created the mass era. Not that i dsispute blacks having great genetics but those stats are off”
I love Jay Cutler. I love Dorian Yates. I love Ahnold. But clearly blacks are more genetically gifted than whites when it comes to bodybuilding.
ian smith,
“in strength blacks are NOT better. are they?”
No.
https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2017/03/17/racial-differences-in-muscle-fiber-typing-cause-differences-in-elite-sporting-competition/
“in endurance running west africans are NOT better. do they even try?”
Muscle fibers matter. Morphology matters. They have an abundance of fast-twitch fibers. They fire and tire quickly. It’s not conducive to endurance running.
“the sports advantage for west africans is skeletal not muscular.”
Fibers too.
“and in the case of strength the advantage of northern europeans/iranians may also be skeletal, shorter levers, not muscular.”
It’s both. The hips/pelvis are also conducive to strength.
“so there are reasons to believe that blacks would not be good swimmers. but hardly any ever try to be good swimmers. so it’s just speculation.”
Inference can be made from skeletal morphology. Black Americans also have a higher percent of ectos than whites, which is another reason why they’re not good swimmers.
“namely great swimmers tend to have short legs for their height. and swimming is more about endurance than strength.”
West-African blacks and their descendants aren’t good at endurance-anything. ‘Cuz muscle fibers.
Bodybuilders are not the strongest of the strongest. C’est facile.
Not the strongest of the strongest but some of them are ridiculously strong and can still deadlift 495+ days out from competition.
There is no anomaly. Why are you looking at bodybuilders? Go for powerlifters or something like that.
The strongest of whom have almost always been Northern Europeans.
And you’re not even adjusting for participation rates across the board. Dear God.
East Asians are also outstanding powerlifters.
Look at the WSM at the moment, Brian Shaw. He fucking deadlifted 1000 pounds, not with tires (which lowers the ROM for the lift), but with fucking regular weights!
Fucking insane strength! And he did it doubleoverhand which is harder!
It’s still an anomaly without the body builders. Why would the strongest power lifters be white when the average American black can bench press more than the average American white?
It was one study, which I can’t find another done. Good that it was longitudinal, but I’d like more information on the diets and lifestyles of the participants to get a better view of what went on. That’s extremely critical.
As I said, from my general 10-year observation and 3 years in the business, Caucasians are consistently stronger than blacks.
I’d like to see heights for these officers as well. Those with longer arms have a harder time with pressing movements since there is a bigger ROM. Longer arms corresponds better to pulling movements, for instance chin-ups and deadlifts.
All of these guys take steroids anyway, why is that not factored in
Because hard work still means more. They still bust their asses in and out of the gym with perfect nutrition. Steroids takes you above and beyond your genetic limit.
I personally won’t use until I hit my genetic muscle potential which is around 175 at 5 percent body fat.
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-gain/whats-my-genetic-muscular-potential.html/
Everyone knows that pro BBers use. It doesn’t matter because everyone else is using as well.
Oy vey PP I feel honored you made this post because of our conversation. =^)
On top of that, you have somatype as well. Blacks are more mesomorphic, which fits with their lower than average FFB (fat-free body).
On the contrary PP, black Americans with more African ancestry have lower average body fat and thus are less likely to be obese.
https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2016/06/12/black-american-men-with-more-african-ancestry-less-likely-to-be-obese/
Great research by the way.
From the discussion of the first study on police officers and bench pressing:
“The literature suggests that increases in body mass correspond with increases in
lean mass by as much as 44% (11). The officers in this study gained a significant amount of body mass and correspondingly, a significant amount of lean mass. Lean mass is associated with increases in strength (11, 25, 27). Therefore, we would expect to see an increase in absolute bench press strength related to lean mass gain alone. However, the strength gains were negated when dividing the body mass of
the officers into their bench press scores. This pattern was not seen in the black
males, where they actually decreased in the bench press/body mass ratio. Even though the bench press/body mass measure did not increase over the 12.5 years for black males, it also did not decline as indicated in cross-sectional research (42).”
It seems this is anomalous. The researchers say this is the only study looking at this, and from what I can tell, they didn’t ask about dietary and or exercise habits, correct me if I’m wrong. They also say that blacks were heavier in BMI at the onset, but not in the follow-up.
I’d like to see another study like this before any conclusions are drawn. Because what I see in actual powerlifting competitions from people who go above and beyond their genetic potential when everyone is using, Caucasians (whites, MENA people) and East Asians are consistently always stronger than blacks.
PP you’re a madman! Coleman over Arnold?! Coleman is a genetic freak of nature, but Arnold is the top dog. Kai Greene over Phil Heath?! Heath has beaten Greene 3 years in a row. Greene won’t beat Heath either. Heath is 10 years younger than Greene. Levrone was great as well, but The Blade Dexter Jackson isn’t on the list. Bad list IMO.
I’m too lazy to see how many blacks have competed in the WSM right now. I’m going to make a response to this on friday right before the WSM and update it after the event to see. I’m also going to watch and take notes during it.
But there are few black Strongmen, and muscle fiber typing is the reason.
Northern Europeans dominate in Strongman. Blacks are more lanky, yet they are also more mesomorphic which correlates with strength so it cancels out. From what I see at my own gym I go to, which is a powerlifting/bodybuilding gym, Caucasians and East Asians are consistently stronger than blacks. I’ve been lifting going on ten years and this is my personal observation. I’ll see the outlier here and there, but the whites and East Asians are consistently stronger. Southern Europe does do bad in Strongman, so it may be that only Central and Northern Europe are more strength oriented, probably coinciding with Rushton’s Rule.
No way do whites have a lower mean strength. From what we can see from the genetic freaks of nature, the best of the best, Caucasians and East Asians dominate in these types of competitions.
Strength doesn’t matter in bodybuilding, PP.
You’re right; whites dominate Strongman because of a genetic predisposition, Type I muscle fibers. This is why whites aren’t as athletic as blacks, muscle fiber typing and the fact the whites, on average, hold more body fat than blacks, as seen above in the article of mine that I linked.
It’s not about blacks playing the more lucrative sports. Blacks gravitate towards sports where they can showcase their athleticism and people pay to see that.
Here’s a BB.com thread:
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=603117
Of course ‘da socialization!!’ trots out and at least one person says genes and another says ‘speed’. Which is the correct answer. You didn’t bring up muscle fibers either PP. For instance, as I said, Type I fibers lead to more strength and muscular endurance as they are slow to fire off, while Type II fibers fire quicker and tire faster. This is why West African blacks and their descendants dominate in sprinting and other competitions where fast twitch muscle fibers dominate in comparison to slow twitch. The two fibers also fire through different pathways (aerobic and anaerobic) which also dictate the rate of force production, muscle contraction, and whether or not the muscles fire off fast or slow.
Here’s more information on whites and blacks when it comes to swimming and I go a bit indepth about Type I and II muscle fibers.
https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2016/05/30/white-men-cant-jump-thats-ok-black-men-cant-swim/
Good post, I enjoyed it. I’d like to see more evolution posts and things such as this.
I have to agree with you racerealist. Pumpkin is obviously trying to oversimplify this so that it fits with his triarchic theory. Which makes it quite ironic when he claims that we are doing the same. You can take a look at notthern asians like mongols and you’ll notice they have short stocky bodies even paleo eurasians had this same body type. “Rushton’s rule” is made up bullshit its obvious that reason whites are getting taller and more gracile (just like east asians) simply because of self domestication while blacks have yet not attained this level. This is reinforced by a study (i dont have the link right now) that showed that females of all races preferred white men EXCEPT black females who viewed black men as the most attractive this shows differing sexual selection pressures bewteen the macro races. Also american blacks are in a colder environment and seeing as how society does not control sexual selection in blacks the same way it does with whites allows this data to perfectly coincides with bergman and allen.
Short, stocky somatypes were better for colder climes. It makes sense that they were shorter while Africans were taller. When Eurasians had yet to split before 10kya, they were a single population.
““Rushton’s rule” is made up bullshit”
I wouldn’t say it’s made up bullshit. It’s a great theory and fit’s the r/K model.
Hell, Rushton was proven <strong?RIGHT 3 times a few months ago all in one month,
His theory on brain size leading to earlier births in Eurasians, confirmed His theory for the fitness of Eurasians and Africans with the r/K model confirmed: His theory for r/K and violence, confirmed. See the first three links here:
https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/?s=rushton+r%2Fk&submit=
And here’s one showing that Asian American speed-daters match on genotype, evidence for GST:
https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2016/05/26/even-more-evidence-for-gst-speed-daters-match-on-genotype/
Rushton is damn right on a lot of things.
“its obvious that reason whites are getting taller and more gracile (just like east asians) simply because of self domestication while blacks have yet not attained this level.”
Sexual selection plays a factor. Women prefer tall men and of course, this continues today. With the correlation and relationship between height, IQ, facial symmetry, and physical attractiveness, women select for these traits while men select for beauty.
Too bad this can’t off set the current dysgenic trend in America. =(
Also better nutrition. I saw some data showing that Northern Europeans are on average 6 foot one.
Also, a .3 inch difference in average height is negligible.
“This is reinforced by a study (i dont have the link right now) that showed that females of all races preferred white men EXCEPT black females who viewed black men as the most attractive this shows differing sexual selection pressures bewteen the macro races.”
http://www.humanbiologicaldiversity.com/articles/Kanazawa,%20Satoshi.%20%22Why%20Are%20Black%20Women%20Less%20Physically%20Attractive%20Than%20Other%20Women%3F%22%20Psychology%20Today,%20May%2015,%202011.pdf
https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2016/01/28/black-crime-black-physical-attractiveness-and-testosterone/
“Also american blacks are in a colder environment and seeing as how society does not control sexual selection in blacks the same way it does with whites allows this data to perfectly coincides with bergman and allen.”
How are American blacks in a colder (I guess relative to Africa) environment when they live mostly in the SE of the US?
Approve comment please PP. Too many links.
Short, stocky somatypes were better for colder climes. It makes sense that they were shorter while Africans were taller. When Eurasians had yet to split before 10kya, they were a single population.
““Rushton’s rule” is made up bullshit”
I wouldn’t say it’s made up bullshit. It’s a great theory and fit’s the r/K model.
Hell, Rushton was proven <strong?RIGHT 3 times a few months ago all in one month,
His theory on brain size leading to earlier births in Eurasians, confirmed His theory for the fitness of Eurasians and Africans with the r/K model confirmed: His theory for r/K and violence, confirmed. See the first three links here:
https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/?s=rushton+r%2Fk&submit=
And here’s one showing that Asian American speed-daters match on genotype, evidence for GST:
https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2016/05/26/even-more-evidence-for-gst-speed-daters-match-on-genotype/
Rushton is damn right on a lot of things.
“its obvious that reason whites are getting taller and more gracile (just like east asians) simply because of self domestication while blacks have yet not attained this level.”
Sexual selection plays a factor. Women prefer tall men and of course, this continues today. With the correlation and relationship between height, IQ, facial symmetry, and physical attractiveness, women select for these traits while men select for beauty.
Too bad this can’t off set the current dysgenic trend in America. =(
Also better nutrition. I saw some data showing that Northern Europeans are on average 6 foot one.
Also, a .3 inch difference in average height is negligible.
“This is reinforced by a study (i dont have the link right now) that showed that females of all races preferred white men EXCEPT black females who viewed black men as the most attractive this shows differing sexual selection pressures bewteen the macro races.”
http://www.humanbiologicaldiversity ((dot)) /articles/Kanazawa,%20Satoshi.%20%22Why%20Are%20Black%20Women%20Less%20Physically%20Attractive%20Than%20Other%20Women%3F%22%20Psychology%20Today,%20May%2015,%202011.pdf
https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2016/01/28/black-crime-black-physical-attractiveness-and-testosterone/
“Also american blacks are in a colder environment and seeing as how society does not control sexual selection in blacks the same way it does with whites allows this data to perfectly coincides with bergman and allen.”
How are American blacks in a colder (I guess relative to Africa) environment when they live mostly in the SE of the US?
When Eurasians had yet to split before 10kya, they were a single population.
I’m pretty sure the mongoloids split from caucasoids much earlier than 10,000 years ago.
Rushton put the splitting date at 40,000 years ago & remember that East Asians split from Native Americans 25,000 years ago & that must have been long after Mongoloids split from Caucasoids
Whoops, don’t want to flood. plz delete 2 of them thanks
“I’m pretty sure the mongoloids split from caucasoids much earlier than 10,000 years ago.”
Peter Frost says that that’s the cause for the retarded Solutrean hypothesis. That they were a single breeding population stretching Southwestern Europe to Beringia. Frost says they didn’t become distinct populations until after the last glacial maximum.
“I believe that the earliest humans in the Americas were physically and culturally similar to the Solutreans of Western Europe. But this simply reflects the fact that prior to 20,000 BP a single breeding population extended from southwestern France to Beringia. It was only after the glacial maximum that west and east Eurasians became different from each other.”
http://evoandproud.blogspot.com/2012/02/were-they-right-after-all.html
There is recent data that the split occurred around 40 kya though. However there still must have been a single Eurasian population (Siberian and yamnaya) that accounts for the “European affinities” in the Americas as Nordicists like to claim.
Got a source on the mongoloid/”Native” split?
And even then, modern day Europeans as we know them are 4500 years old. The last base population is the Yamnaya, a bronze age Siberian culture.
Thanks for the links, anyways im starting to think bergman was a little more right than allen. Larger size creatures tend to live in colder environments whether it has to do with bodyfat or mucle is irrelevant. Also proprtions between appendages is much more variable within similar climates.
I had meant relative to an african environment. There are still blacks in about every part of america. I apologize for the simple reply im on a cellphone.
whites have thicker joints and shorter tenons, which helps at power lifting
But there are few black Strongmen, and muscle fiber typing is the reason.
imho it probably also to do with blacks who are physically very strong choosing more lucrative sports like Football ,which pays more than lifting. Blacks are better at sprinting, which is necessary to play football
https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2016/02/07/hbd-and-sports-football/
I’ll check out the data on bench press of the combine in the recent years and make a post on that as well. What I’m saying about muscle fibers is correct.
I cannot stress muscle fibers enough because that is the true reason.
Although you arrived at the correct conclusion, I have to fault your research methodology. Stated differently, you’re more right than you realize once you take a look at a more accurate list of who the greatest bodybuilders are.
That list of bodybuilders is flawed, to say the least. It’s basically a list of names pulled out of a hat. The author appears to have based the choices on celebrity rather than physiques. No one with any real knowledge of bodybuilding would consider Arnold or Lou among the top 15 physiques to grace the Olympia stage. In fact, they wouldn’t even qualify for an IFBB pro card today. The standards are much higher and the Mr. Olympia and Arnold Classic, the two biggest bodybuilding shows in the world, have gotten progressively blacker over the years.
A more accurate list of the greatest bodybuilders would look like the following:
1) Ronnie Coleman (eight time Mr. Olympia)
2) Phil Heath (five time and current Mr. Olympia)
3) Dexter Jackson (2008 Mr. Olympia)
4) Kevin Levrone (half white but Sicilian so not too white)
5) Chris Cormier
6) Flex Wheeler
7) Lee Haney (another eight time Mr. O)
8) Kai Greene
9) Jay Cutler (four time Mr. O)
10) Dorian Yates (six time Mr. O)
in that order.
And only two of those men (Dorian and Jay) are white. You’ll notice I ranked several Mr. Olympias lower than guys who never won the premiere show. That’s because several black bodybuilders in the 90s were better even by today’s standards than the guys who were champions later on. The sport kind of peaked in the mid 90s and physiques have actually gotten worse due to things like Synthol. White guys did a lot better back when the judging standards were different–athletes were judged more on things like posing and symmetry than just being a massively muscled hulk. Of course, the judging panels were probably a lot more racist back then as well!
It is odd to me how there’s no mention anywhere of slavery or eugenics in this article. Ronnie Coleman, hands down the GOAT of bodybuilding, is obviously the beneficiary of slave plantation eugenics. He’s a dark skinned black man from Louisiana and people often comment while listening to him speak that he even sounds like a character from Roots.
I strongly believe bodybuilding would look very differently if not for eugenics, to say nothing of the NFL, NBA, UFC, et cetera. Of course blacks would still do better than whites on average but I don’t think it would be so very lopsided.
It’s also worth noting that the white guys in bodybuilding who do well (Jay Cutler, Dennis Wolf, et al) tend to be fair skinned, blond haired, blue eyed northern European types. Those are the same guys who dominate the World’s Strongest Man competitions.
You’re a madman too. Where the hell is Arnold? Dexter Jackson, The Blade is another good one.
It’s still be very lopsided. Blacks have lower fst free body mass on average, obviously due to ancestral xonfidoton) conditions.
I love Cutler. He’s really good. I was kinda upset when Heath beat him.
The sport didn’t peak on the 90s. I personally think that the 60s and 70s were better. I like Arnold and Zane better. Zane because he’s an ectomorph pile myself.
Blacks dominate bodybuilding. It’s due to muscle insertions, lower average fst free body, which is ancestral on nature and high testosterone.
“NUTTIN BUT A PEANUT BABYYYYYY!! ”
Do you not think that Coleman and Heath are well proportioned? Heath is a monster. He won’t be beaten for a few years. Greene will never beat him.
You’re a madman too. Where the hell is Arnold?
I said Lou and Arnold wouldn’t even qualify for an IFBB pro card today with the physiques they had in the 70s. And they wouldn’t.
Dexter Jackson, The Blade is another good one.
I agree, which is why I rated him the third greatest bodybuilder of all time.
Do you not think that Coleman and Heath are well proportioned?
Did you even read what I wrote? I literally said Ronnie is the GOAT and Phil is no. 2. Obviously I think they’re well proportioned. They just don’t have the “aesthetic” look of Apollonian bodybuilders like Frank Zane. That look is now virtually nonexistent at the pro level, having been replaced by the Herculean body as an ideal.
It sounds like we basically agree on everything else. I’d say the sport peaked by its own modern standards in the 90s. I’d personally rather look like Steve Reeves in his 50s prime but I’m not a dysmorphic steroid addict, as many contemporary bodybuilders tend to be.
As you can tell from my personal favorites, I think a smaller physique is better. Not really a fan of mass monsters. That’s another reason why I like Jackson. Shaun Rhoden is another beast and I was so surprised when Wolfe placed 3rd three years ago.
Greene will never win. Heath is too proportionate in comparison and beats him in all of the poses that matter.
Wait Levrone is Sicilian? I remember reading an article in Muscular Development where he said he’s part black.
And no Sicilians cluster close to all Italians. Fucking sick of the bullshit about Southern Italians:
“Combined data from two large mtDNA studies provides an estimate of non-Caucasoid maternal ancestry in Italians. The first study sampled 411 Italians from all over the country and found five South Asian M and East Asian D sequences (1.2%) and eight sub-Saharan African L sequences (1.9%). The second study sampled 465 Sicilians and detected ten M sequences (2.2%) and three L sequences (0.65%). This makes a total of 3% non-white maternal admixture (1.3% Asian and 1.7% African), which is very low and typical for European populations, since Pliss et al. 2005, e.g., observed 1.8% Asian admixture in Poles and 1.2% African admixture in Germans. (Plaza et al. 2003; Romano et al. 2003)
Similar data from the Y-chromosome reveals Italians’ even lower non-Caucasoid paternal admixture. Both studies obtained samples from all over the mainland and islands. No Asian DNA was detected anywhere, but a single sub-Saharan African E(xE3b) sequence was found in the first study’s sample of 416 (0.2%), and six were observed in the second study’s sample of 746 (0.8%). The total is therefore a minuscule 0.6%, which decreases to 0.4% if only Southern Italians are considered and 0% if only Sicilians are considered. Again, these are normal levels of admixture for European populations (e.g. Austrians were found to have 0.8% E(xE3b) by Brion et al. 2004). (Semino et al. 2004; Cruciani et al. 2004)
An analysis of 10 autosomal allele frequencies in Southern Europeans (including Italians, Sicilians and Sardinians) and various Middle Eastern/North African populations revealed <strong<a “line of sharp genetic change [that] runs from Gibraltar to Lebanon,” which has divided the Mediterranean into distinct northern and southern clusters since at least the Neolithic period. The authors conclude that “gene flow [across the sea] was more the exception than the rule,” attributing this result to “a joint product of initial geographic isolation and successive cultural divergence, leading to the origin of cultural barriers to population admixture.” (Simoni et al. 1999)”
https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2016/01/10/refuting-afrocentrism-part-2-are-italians-black/
True Romance is a shit tier movie.
Tarantino said he got the idea for the scene hearing a black guy talk about the black Moors. We know this is garbage Afrocentric lies.
Also with that logic, Germans, Poles, and Austrians are less white. Italians have lower than average non-European DNA.
This posting is just too dumb to believe.
1. Black Americans are a selected group out of slaves. Of course they would be stronger than the average African. only the strong where chosen and out of them only the strong survived.
2. Africans are very diverse, those from West Africans have always been described as strong and big, those from the rain forests as rather stocky and those from the East as very skinny (Allen’s rule does not fit Africa, anthropologists said this pretty much from the beginning! As people travel and culturally adapt those rules often do not really fit)
3. Northern Europeans are not really cold-adapted BTW. Europeans are kinda diverse, too, from very skinny to really, really big. Northern Europeans in general are tall and big and much more masculine/mature (as in removed from the morphology of a child) than blacks.
4. Blacks live much tougher lives than Whites who mostly sit in front of a PC and eat shit food. Of course, they would have less testosterone, testosterone is heavily dependent on your lifestyle! And of course, White who actually live a testosterone-raising lifestyle could be naturally stronger than black people. Do you honestly think those Vikings, people from the Balkans or those Europeans that discovered and conquered the world would have a lower testosterone count than modern Africans? I heavily doubt it.
5. Neurological factors play a large part in body strength
6. There are also other “(sub-)races” that could be contenders for the strongest race: think about Polynesian, North-East Native Americans (mostly extinct, called Silvid) or the South American Indian people from the Pampa. Those people are also strong, big and athletic but do not belong to the Caucasoid or Negroid races. But no one knows them.
7. Comparing the big three races (Mongoloid, Caucasoid, Negroid) only works in some cases, like basic morphology and perhaps some psychological things. For other factors those groups are way too big and diverse.
Greetings,
the Genetic Horst
Correct. The three way patter works a lot but not in this case. Muscle fiber typing, ad I’ve been saying here for months is the cause. Pacific islanders are also beasts
Don’t even get me started on the Russian squat programs. Russians are beasts too.
Also, on average, blacks have 2.5 to 5 percent more testosterone than Whites. That’s biological in nature, not environmental.
Whites are stronger because of muscle fibers. Testosterone also has no effect on GH and muscle size.
I agree with you. Rushton’s rule is great for single things and some complex things, but it’s more complicated once you start talking bodybuilding and strength sports (lower FFB means more in bodybuilding while muscle fiber typing and leverage means more in strongman and powerlifting).
PP no offense, I can tell you’re not too knowledgeable on kinesiology and human movement science
Does anyone here think technology have soften the younger generation of black men, with less masculine traits?
No. Their environment actually increases the chance for violence, the MAOA-L gene variant, due to child abuse and no father which in and of it self it generic (high test men leave their family, low test men stay and take care of them).
I haven’t gotten to the part in the book on violence I’m reading on environmental causes for crime yet. I’ll probably learn a few things about GxE in regards to violence.
Hispanic men are in the same environment, but for some reason, many of them eventually grow up, where they do better than blacks.
Right and a lot of them are extremely violent. I don’t remember maoa rates for them off the top of my head. I’ll get back to you. Mexicans also have pretty high test as well.
Hispanic men, unlike black men have a tendency not to completely abandon their bastard children. They do see their children from time to time, periodically.
Also in NYC, Dominicans, even the darker ones, are able to run a store. black Dominicans are not completely black, and have less White admixture than American blacks.
I once spoke to a Dominican, who was college educated. He had a discussion with me that blacks are inherently less intelligent, and Hispanics are giving American blacks a run for their money, essentially replacing them in occupations that were once taken up by them. He think it’s all part of a capitalistic conspiracy, because many White and Jewish American elites genuinely do not really like blacks, but don’t want to offend them. Capitalism is one way to push them in the back corner so to speak.
Ashkenazi Jews in Israel are more testosterone oriented, because they have macho culture, and thus they have lower IQs and high Ts, than the American kind who sit in front of the office computer and eat shit food?
Which race is physically strongest?
North Europeans – that is, the Germanics and Slavs.
Of whom, in turn, Icelanders are probably strongest.
I’ve been intending to do a post on this for a long time and with the Olympics on the next couple of days would be as good a time as any.
The weakest (major) race are Indian subcontinentals.
I’ve seen extremely strong Indians in powerlifting. I’m going to compete myself next year when I’m strong enough. But northern Europeans consistently win the strongman. Powerlifting is dominated by east Asians and whites.
RaceRealist,
and this*
http://newobserveronline.com/first-phoenician-dna-european/#comment-698688
What about it.
This seems nordicist-esque…
People on the north immigrating to the Mediterranean …
It says that the haplogroup U5b2c1 marker is very dominant among Spaniards, also common among North Western Spanish people like Francisco Franco
Basically, a guy like Francisco Franco could have possibly, not been descended from Jews, as some people have claimed, but his appearance is that of Middle Eastern, from the pre-history times.
He looks North African, Syrian or Lebanese, basically anyone from the Islamic Mediterranean.
Using the idea that colder climates require a greater weight/surface area argument- head shapes could also be explained (Blackw have more SA per volume) Asians less (enlongated v. circular). I suppose it could be that we are hearing from the “wah wah wah my race is best” segments of HBD. They can’t have their cake and eat it to. If the argument on strength is true than the ratio plays out in headshapes, not evolutionary preference.
Yes, climate likely influenced the evolution of head shape and size DIRECTLY, but also indirectly by requiring more IQ to survive.
It’s not even about “my race is best”. It’s about the truth. This is a fact. Whites are stronger on average. This is not even up for discussion.
Especially when I myself am pretty knowledgeable on this (one of my other interests other than hbd and obesity research). I cringe seeing wrong things written about lifting and the like. But the average person doesn’t look into it and takes any “guru’s” advice as gospel.
You are. I was just pointing out that your argument could also be applied to head shapes and hence size.
Sports one has look has to determine who is the strongest:
1. olympic wrestling
2. Judo
3. olympic weightlifting
4. powerlifting
5. strongman competitions
6. arm wrestling
7. MMA
8. boxing
9. Timbersports
one sport which certainly not belongs on this list is Body Building (by the way one could say that what was selected for in West Africa was especially Body Building)
All these sports show that Westafricans are not clearly superiors or maybe even worse than Caucasians when it comes to physical strength.
On the other side basic measures like average grip strength, bench press ability etc. are equally important
Muscular strength correlates with morality.
http://www.bmj.com/content/337/bmj.a439
Blacks are natural bodybuilders due to lower fat mass on average. They were selected for it you’re right through evolution.
Wear African descended blacks are weaker than Whites on average. This is a fact looking at all types of the elite strength competitions.
Also with how strength and mortality are correlated, yet another one where whites are stronger and live longer compared to blacks who are weaker and, surprise, live shorter lives.
Muscular strength correlates with morTality, 😉
another interesting data point:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weightlifting_at_the_2015_African_Games
in the last African games weightlifting championship Egypt with its 80 million people alone has beaten all of subsaharan Africa with its 1 billion people.
Now, of course subsaharan Africa is extremely poor, and maybe they simply do not have the money to (a) select the talented lifters and (b) train them sufficiently.
Also it is possible that the vast majority of subsaharan Africans have never heard of weightlifting in their life. Still it is interesting to see that “African Games” turn out to be actually a competition between the few non-black African countries when it comes to weightlifting.
And at the time the 100 m run is dominated by West Africans and the 1500 m and 5000 m run is dominated by East Africans, like it could be expected, showing that there are at least some resources for professional sports in Subsaharan Africa https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athletics_at_the_2015_African_Games.
Judo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judo_at_the_2015_African_Games and Wrestling https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wrestling_at_the_2015_African_Games are also dominated by non-blacks.
By the way Congo is really good in table tennis, thanks to its star players Bin Hu and Jinan Wang https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Table_tennis_at_the_2015_African_Games.
Pingback: Muscle Fiber Typing, HBD, and Sports « NotPoliticallyCorrect
Pingback: Blacks Are Not Stronger Than Whites « NotPoliticallyCorrect
I just had a genius idea which I’m pissed that I did not realize earlier.
I don’t know if you follow American sports, but the NFL does a combine every year for the incoming rookies. They test feats of speed, strength, jumping, etc. They use a free-weight bench press which is done, if I recall correctly, AMRAP (as many reps as possible).
I know the formula to estimate one-rep-maxes, so after controlling for age, height and weight we can get a solid answer.
What do you think about this PP? To put this to bed once and for all?
I think it’s brilliant. Obviously the NFL is not a representative sample so I don’t thin it would put the issue permanently to bed, but it would still be a pretty powerful piece of evidence.
Yes, put it to bed! a nice comfy one
um Rosanne Barr is a Jew
Looks like article written by small pinky black boy.
Firslty, majority of disciplines are dominated by white people, the only disciplines that arent are these where white people are not ineterested in. Secondly, about strenght – i laughted when solebody brought the ampunt of black people participiating 😀
Eh black people, learn your place
I have not read everything above, so perhaps this has allready been mentioned.
If blacks on average have narrower hips than whites, it explains the bodybuilder/strongman-issue. Narrow hips are an advantage in bodybuilding as they contribute to the v-shape and makes both shoulders and thighs relatively wider. In fact, everything above and below the hips are wider, relative to the hips. On the other hand, narrower hips allows for less muscle to be build in this area. And this area potentially carry quite a bit of muscle mass. Muscles that are involved in deadlifts, squats, pulling trucks, lifting stones and even pressing things overhead. Virtually every strongman exercise there is. However, it does not affect the benchpress in any substantial way. So its also compatible with blacks in general performing better than whites here.
The same phenomenon, narrower hips, is an advantage in bodybuilding, but a disadvantage in strongman.
“And this area potentially carry quite a bit of muscle mass. Muscles that are involved in deadlifts, squats, pulling trucks, lifting stones and even pressing things overhead.”
Based just on morphology, blacks would excel at deadlifts whereas they’d suffer at all the other lifts (the main ones). I’ve the same exact thoughts as you here, morphology and physiology explain racial strength differences.
https://pumpkinperson.com/2017/12/24/race-and-strength-on-the-big-four-lifts-by-race-realist/
And I’ve made the same exact point on pelvis width and strength back in July. My example used neanderthals and Homo sapiens as proxies for Europeans and Africans respectfully.
https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2017/07/04/homo-neanderthalis-vs-homo-sapiens-sapiens-who-is-stronger-implications-for-racial-strength-differences/
‘And I’ve made the same exact point on pelvis width and strength back in July.’
Im sure you did. It makes sence.
Do you also think that it explains, at least partly, blacks overrepresentation among top bodybuilders? Perhaps along with the fact that darker skin better show the seperation and definition among the muscles, which is why the white bodybuilders work at there tan as well.
“Do you also think that it explains, at least partly, blacks overrepresentation among top bodybuilders?”
Of course. With narrower hips/pelvis you can get a better v-taper.
“Perhaps along with the fact that darker skin better show the seperation and definition among the muscles, which is why the white bodybuilders work at there tan as well.”
They tan because they stand under bright ass lights and you can’t see muscle separation if you’re pale.
I’ve also written a piece on why blacks dominate bodybuilding.
https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2017/12/12/why-do-blacks-dominate-bodybuilding/
Lol your biggest argument is that they dominate bodybuilding but bodybuilding has absolutely nothing to do with strength and everything to do with just packing on muscle and focusing on areas that make you look more physically appealing.
This. Not to say that bodybuilders aren’t strong, but strongmen are stronger. See here for 2hy blacks dominate bodybuilding.
https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2017/12/12/why-do-blacks-dominate-bodybuilding/