Usain Bolt... Bloody 'ell!

4? what abput Australia and Canada? and I though Scotland was just another county of England?

Right, let's settle this.

England
Australia
Canada
America (but not the USA*)
Ireland
Scotland
Cornwall
Africa
India

And The Isles of:

*Scilly
*Man
* Viking
* North Utsire
* South Utsire
* Forties
* Cromarty
* Forth
* Tyne
* Dogger
* Fisher
* German Bight
* Humber
* Thames
* Dover
* Wight
* Portland



* Plymouth
* Biscay
* Trafalgar
* FitzRoy (formerly Finisterre)
* Sole
* Lundy
* Fastnet
* Irish Sea
* Shannon
* Rockall
* Malin
* Hebrides
* Bailey
* Fair Isle
* Faeroes
* Southeast Iceland

Are all part of The Commonwealth Empire of Great Britain, London England.

Other parts of the world, such as France, The Congo, Wales and Germany are subject to British rule (they all worship at the church of England and have pictures of His Majesty The Queen** in every household+) Places like Italy, Spain and the Island of Benidorm are owned and run by The Saracens, and are dangerous and brutal third-world no-go areas, your local British Consul can help with information on how to leave these places.

*the bit where Bruce Springsteen lives
**in Wales they have pictures of that "Hannibal Lecter" bloke
+in Wales "households" are often mud huts, or a rudimentary shelter made from grasses

When in foreign parts and questioned as to whether I am British, I generally respond: "No, I'm from London".

Seems to do the trick.

I vaguely remember listening to some radio 4 documentary try to explain why certain ethnicities do better at certain sports. they came to the conclusion that people from the Caribbean tend to have a higher proportion of 'twitch' muscle cells (their definition for the muscle cells better suited to fast explosive exertion like sprinting) and that a lot of African athletes, particularly for some reason from Ethiopia, showed a higher proportion of the other type of muscle cells (i can't remember their hilarious name for these cells but they are the ones more suited to endurance, like marathons.

it was all terribly patronising and in a radio 4 'this stuff sounds racist but honestly we're not, I even buy the Guardian' type of way. I think it cam about when somebody wanted to know why the better sprinters tended to be black and someone else said, well what about marathons, or something

sum total of this posts worth in the conversation = 0.5

but yeah, Usain Bolt, bloody hell, good work

Nothing to do with one of the laxest drug testing regimes know to sport. The next great scandal just waiting to happen...

Anyone who has studied Psychology, will know that Hans Eysenk (the modern father of behaviour therapy, which was based on conditioning), had the public view, that black were less intelligent than whites, based on IQ scores.

I believe that he was right. But an IQ score is a test for certain brain functions, and are not an entire test of a brain's memory and calculation abilities. So in part he may have been right, but I'd pitch him against Dr.Mae Jemison, and he'd lose.

The whole race thing is a comfortable discussion for me, as I am black, and confident. I think I am not stupid, but as has been pointed out rather nicely from BMMF, I do lack wit. Its a defiency that I am strangely proud of.

I would be surprised if the current bunch of sprinters are drug cheats.

But I do wish they would remove Flo-Jo's records. They are a total disgrace.

I vaguely remember listening to some radio 4 documentary try to explain why certain ethnicities do better at certain sports. they came to the conclusion that people from the Caribbean tend to have a higher proportion of 'twitch' muscle cells.......

it was all terribly patronising and in a radio 4 'this stuff sounds racist but honestly we're not, I even buy the Guardian' type of way.

You mean fast twitch and slow twitch.

No, it isn't patronising/racist it could be true.

Exctract from wiki'

The president of the Jamaica Urological Society Dr. William Aiken has, among others, forwarded the idea that Afro-Caribbean runners have a genetic benefit derived from the slave trade, with people on the western-most parts of the Caribbean being the progeny of "only the fittest of the fit slaves". **Usain Bolt **also stated that he believed genetics and the slave trade are factors in the disparity between runners. Aiken said that "This hypothesis in no way minimises the important contributions of good sport administration, excellent coaching and proper nutrition but rather looks at one aspect of the puzzle in attempting to explain the raw athletic talent that seems to be disproportionately high in Jamaicans.

sum total of this posts worth in the conversation = 0.5

Probably less.

When in foreign parts and questioned as to whether I am British, I generally respond: "No, I'm from London".

Seems to do the trick.

cockney twats

Nothing to do with one of the laxest drug testing regimes know to sport. The next great scandal just waiting to happen...

Double standards?

http://www.londonfgss.com/post884000-3.html

Do you also believe that Contador, Armstrong and Co. are clean?

Do you also believe that Contador, Armstrong an Co. are clean?

No, but I do believe they descended from slaves

Anyone who has studied Psychology, will know that Hans Eysenk (the modern father of behaviour therapy, which was based on conditioning), had the public view, that black were less intelligent than whites, based on IQ scores.

I believe that he was right. But an IQ score is a test for certain brain functions, and are not an entire test of a brain's memory and calculation abilities. So in part he may have been right, but I'd pitch him against Dr.Mae Jemison, and he'd lose.

The whole race thing is a comfortable discussion for me, as I am black, and confident. I think I am not stupid, but as has been pointed out rather nicely from BMMF, I do lack wit. Its a defiency that I am strangely proud of.

You don't lack anything mate, there are huge numbers of black people from many different nationalities who are in extremely intellectual jobs + in high positions.

I think sometimes the research in a certain time/age can have large biased on results/tests.

There have been very prominent scientists/researchers in the past who have made claims for women having inferior IQ's too. All bollocks ;-)

Right, let's settle this(...)
Are all part of The Commonwealth Empire of Great Britain, London England.

bollocks. Dublin and Ealing are vassal states of Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth with local authorities ruling from the "Polski Sklep" institutions with great deal of autonomy.

IQ tests are also culturally biased, and bollocks. That's a fact, someone with a high IQ told me that

Wellllllllllllllll

IQ tests have seen a number of modifications over the years. There are versions aimed at different cultures, mainly due to a section which has sort of bog standard general knowledge questions. And adjustments are made based on things like age - we all get slower at processing beyond a certain age, so scoring 123 aged 16 would equate to a lower raw score if taking the test many years later. People tend to stay at the same centile throughout their lifespan, barring acquired cognitive impairments.

I was similarly sceptical about its worth, but having discussed the WAIS-III with a number of professionals from multi-disciplinary teams, it seems to be widely acknowledged as a very reliable indicator of cognitive ability in its broadest sense.

It's one of the principal ways in which cash-strapped authorities decide whether someone's situation is clinically significant enough for them to be allocated treatment/therapy/intervention of some kind. Raw scores are moot. It's the centile that's important. I can't rember the thresholds used, and they vary between boroughs, but people at either end of the bell/normal curve can get help i.e. significantly learning disabled or what's known as 'gifted & talented'. Both of these groups can otherwise have difficulty functioning in a society that operates around the people I like to think of as 'the norms'.

I'm glad I'm not one of them, TBH, but a little help might've been nice. Unfortunately the 80s were rubbish in that respect.

There have been very prominent scientists/researchers in the past who have made claims for women having inferior IQ's too. All bollocks ;-)

I'm pretty sure we all can work hard to improve our IQ - it's not all God's given privilege of Caucasians. it's easy to get false result while comparing a Harvard educated Jew with peasant from outskirts of Basra or bushmen from South Africa etc. i'm uni educated and all, but sometimes show less common sense than a street wise crook from Beaumont Estate in Leyton :-)

You can't really train IQ performance very much. A few practice tests to get familiar with the format, might be worth a few points along the centile scale, but that's all.

Your working memory, pattern spotting, verbal reasoning, etc, are all hard-wired. The South-African bushman might outperform the Harvard Jew. It's down to the individual.

Dunno, it hadn't really occurred to me to be honest. It's hardly news that black people excel at such sports. Was it the first athletics event you've watched?! ;) Just seems provocative to go on about it when all people want to do is discuss and celebrate such an amazing achievement.

Oh sod off, you po-faced dullard.
(I know you won't mind me saying this...)

Double standards?

http://www.londonfgss.com/post884000-3.html

Not quite; it's about evidence. And credulity. And not being a relentless dullard who's gone from Mr Attack Dog to Mr Kiss Arse because he realised so many people were laughing at him and his pathetic homophobic, sexist and brainless piffle.

The South-African bushman might outperform the Harvard Jew. It's down to the individual.

and thanks god for that. i wouldn't have the chance with my parents being peasants

If we want an intelligent discussion of why Bolt is so much faster than anybody else, we need to look at the iconoclastic coaching decision to stick with a man who, by the conventional wisdom, was too tall to be a sprinter. Now that people realise that a tall guy can sprint, expect to see some other tall guys coming through in the next decade, but maybe not soon enough to really push Bolt to his limit. He won that race by over a tenth coasting over the line, and he is maybe five years away from his peak, so sub 9.50 looks well within his grasp as long as he has to do it. I think he'd rather run 9.6 looking easy than 9.5 balls out to the line as long as the competition is only (!) doing 9.7

so what you're saying: A white man wants to win first, look good second. A black man wants to look good first, win second?

Quite interesting debate, the kind of thread I like to read, and not talk.

.