Why India Cannot Win Athletic Medal At Olympics

Seen in this light the achievements of Milkha Singh, GS Randhawa, Sriram and PT Usha were truly extra ordinary



07_10_2009_001_020.jpg


TOP
 

Attachments

  • olympic_why_not.jpg
    olympic_why_not.jpg
    11.4 KB · Reads: 448

kds1980

SPNer
Ever wonder why it is so hard to bulk up at the gym? The reason may be genetic, says a team of Canadian researchers.

The scientists analysed volunteers of European, Chinese, Aboriginal and South Asian descent, and found that even among individuals with the same percentage of body fat, South Asians have a lower percentage of skeletal muscle, one of the body’s main muscle groups and the one responsible for all voluntary actions.

The difference in lean muscle mass may be why Indians are more likely than other ethnic groups to develop diabetes and cardiovascular disease, said the researchers. The study is the first to look at ethnic differences in muscle mass as a potential reason for disease risk.

“In general, excess body fat tends to be accompanied by an increase in muscle mass,” said Scott Lear, a researcher at Simon Fraser University in Canada and lead author of the study. “But South Asians had significantly less lean mass than each of the three other groups.”

The researchers found that South Asian men had at least 3 kg less of skeletal muscle than Chinese and European men. South Asian women also had less muscle mass than their counterparts of other ethnicities — by at least 2 kg.

The findings will appear

in the Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism in December.
 

kds1980

SPNer
I agree with above research .India has produced champions in chess,billards,Doubles tennis
where extreme fitness is not required.But even in game like cricket where there is everything money ,fame We are struggled and we are still struggling to find fast bowlers
which is the always one of the main reason for our defeat.For those who don't have much knowledge of cricket let me tell you that Fast bowling is the only department in cricket where extreme fitness is required
 

Gyani Jarnail Singh

Sawa lakh se EK larraoan
Mentor
Writer
SPNer
and isnt it also POLITICS ??
In India it is all about POLITICS....
Even in SPORTS..India must be "represented" not by MERITOCRACY..BUT POPULATION WISE !!!..ALL ginntee minntee MUST be kept "politically correct"....How can the Punjabis/Sikhs with a mere 2% of Indian population..be all over the place ?? BRING THEM DOWN ot their 2%....let the rest 98% INDIANS be there..representing..even if they are UNFIT.
I SEE that as the main problem...Same applies to ARMED FORCES recruitment...Civil Service..etc etc...SUBA WISE..not "merit wise"...WHY was the Sikh army representation reduced from 13% in 1947 to under 2% NOW ?? To fit this policy.
 

kds1980

SPNer
But has anyone even reached the final of an Olympic event?

This time Abhinav Bindra won gold and boxer vijander and wrestler sushil kumar won bronze

Btw not all sports require stamina many of them require financial Government support which is not easy to get.My cousin brother itself opted for becomming
discuss throw player and his career is not so successful at present hopefully in future he will do better so there is not much for youths to join sports.It could ruin a persons entire life.
 

kds1980

SPNer
and isnt it also POLITICS ??
In India it is all about POLITICS....
Even in SPORTS..India must be "represented" not by MERITOCRACY..BUT POPULATION WISE !!!..ALL ginntee minntee MUST be kept "politically correct"....How can the Punjabis/Sikhs with a mere 2% of Indian population..be all over the place ?? BRING THEM DOWN ot their 2%....let the rest 98% INDIANS be there..representing..even if they are UNFIT.
I SEE that as the main problem...Same applies to ARMED FORCES recruitment...Civil Service..etc etc...SUBA WISE..not "merit wise"...WHY was the Sikh army representation reduced from 13% in 1947 to under 2% NOW ?? To fit this policy.

Gyani ji

Let punjab first produce a fast bowler who could bowl 150 kmph at then see whether he could make it to cricket team or not.I agree with you that there is politics in sports but in most south Asian countries there is politics.I don't think Youths of Punjab at present are strong enough to compete at international level.

Btw On Army I agree with you that merit wise should be recruitment but still
There are about 11-12 % youths from punjab in army
 

kds1980

SPNer

Randip Singh

Writer
Historian
SPNer
But still I never heard that any sikh playing soccer champions league?
also is there any sikh player in UK rugby team?


Many of the Sikh players play at lower levels or are in the academy's.

In the UK we have had problems with games like Football, where it has been shown there is discrimination against people of the Asian subcontinent. Scouts used to just ignore them.

As for Rugby players, again a lot play, but not sure whether their are any candidates for England.
 

kds1980

SPNer
Many of the Sikh players play at lower levels or are in the academy's.

In the UK we have had problems with games like Football, where it has been shown there is discrimination against people of the Asian subcontinent. Scouts used to just ignore them.

As for Rugby players, again a lot play, but not sure whether their are any candidates for England.

I watched IPL in both the season and there are not much sikhs in in teams
and sikhs that were playing for team were the some of the worst performers.
So sikhs should improve their performance both in UK and in India
in all the sports.
 

Tejwant Singh

Mentor
Writer
SPNer
I do not agree with the above research. Marathon runners do not need to bulk up. The best examples of long distance runners in the world come from Kenya and Ethiopia, both of which are quite poor countries. Why can't Indians be good long distance runners? That would be a good start.

In India, the main thing is the politics and its lack of vision for the sports orientation from the very young age. Let us look at China, and we can see how far it has come in sports in almost every field because the Chinese government invested in its kids with the long term goals.

More investment in needed in all kinds of sports events with long term goal in mind not just in Cricket.

The country that has amazed me the most is Australia. It has a population of about 21 million and it has found ways to excel in almost every sport. We should borrow from their page and implement what and how they have done in sports in their country.

Tejwant Singh
 

kds1980

SPNer
I do not agree with the above research. Marathon runners do not need to bulk up. The best examples of long distance runners in the world come from Kenya and Ethiopia, both of which are quite poor countries. Why can't Indians be good long distance runners? That would be a good start.

Kenyans and ethopians are blacks and From past 30-40 years Blacks are dominating in athletic sports.Even there is corruption in these countries.

I agree with you that there is politics in sports.But still that did not stop vishwanathan anand in chess ,geet sethi in billiards, Leander and Bhupati in doubles in tennis.The question is why Indians always failed in sports where extreme stamina and fitness is requied
Even in cricket Indians never produced genuine fast bowlers.Is there any explanation why India produced batsmen,spinners but not fast bowlers
 

kds1980

SPNer
Nobody Does It Better

Why Black Athletes Dominate Sports and Why We Are Afraid to Talk About It.



t is pretty obvious that certain racial and ethnic groups are naturally gifted at playing certain sports. Take basketball. That's a Jewish sport. So, at any rate, people thought in the 1930's. After all, the star captain of the original New York Celtics, Nat Holman, was Jewish, as were four of the starters among St. John's famed ''wonder five,'' who ruled college basketball in the late 20's. Jews were believed to have a genetic edge, being endowed by nature with superior balance, greater speed and sharper eyes -- not to mention, in the words of one sportswriter, a ''scheming mind'' and ''flashy trickiness.''

Oddly, though, Jews soon vanished from the top ranks of basketball. Did evolution suddenly rob them of their natural advantage? A more likely explanation is that basketball has always been an inner-city game, and in the early 20th century New York and Philadelphia teemed with Jewish immigrants, whose children saw the sport as a ticket out of the ghetto. By the late 40's their place was being taken by blacks migrating out of the agricultural South, and basketball's ethnic profile began to change.

So it is culture, not nature, that explains the onetime Jewish dominance of basketball. Ditto, presumably, for the continuing Canadian dominance of ice hockey, the Japanese dominance of sumo wrestling, the English dominance of . . . um . . . darts. But the case of black athletes seems somehow different. They are pre-eminent in such a broad range of sports today. African-Americans make up 65 percent of the N.F.L. and 80 percent of the N.B.A. The world's top sprinters and marathoners nearly all trace their ancestry to Africa. Blacks have excelled even in sports where, for reasons of culture or geography, they are unlikely competitors -- bobsledding, for instance. Could it be that they have some sort of physical advantage, one that evolution encoded in their genes?

This conclusion has been embraced, more or less recklessly, by sports figures ranging from Al Campanis and Jimmy the Greek to O. J. Simpson and Carl Lewis. It has also been promoted by a somewhat marginal group of scientists, who have accumulated a body of genetic and physiological evidence that, they claim, lends it support.

In ''Taboo,'' Jon Entine, a journalist, brings this evidence together to make a painstaking case that race and genetics are indeed ''significant components'' of the ''stunning and undeniable dominance of black athletes.'' The book, a highly readable blend of science and sports history, had its origins in a 1989 NBC television documentary on black athletes that Entine wrote with Tom Brokaw. That show drew charges of racism when it was broadcast, and Entine clearly expects that ''Taboo'' will do the same, judging from all the space he devotes to defending his decision to write it.

Why should it be taboo even to raise the hypothesis that evolution has given people of African ancestry an athletic edge? There are several reasons. On the one hand, the idea rankles white racial chauvinists, who until the last century clung to the myth that Africans were inferior to Europeans not only mentally but physically too. On the other, it seems to diminish black sports achievement, making it a matter of biology rather than of training, drive and heart.

Entine, for his part, could not be more admiring of the courage black athletes have shown in triumphing over barriers put in their way by the white sports establishment. He gives stirring profiles of figures like Jack Johnson, the flamboyant heavyweight who won the world title in 1908, and of lesser-known ones like the black jockeys who dominated horse racing after the Civil War. Yet just talking about people of African ancestry having ''innate'' athletic aptitudes, as Entine does, seems to legitimize race as a natural category and hence to play into the hands of racists. And there lurks a more unsettling implication. If there really are genetically based physical differences between the races -- differences that go deeper than skin color -- then there might be genetically based psychological differences too. Compounding this is the disagreeable notion, drawn from 19th-century race science, that brains and brawn must be inversely correlated. As the sportswriter Frank Deford put it, ''People feel if you say blacks are better athletically, you're saying they're dumber.''

It would be nice, of course, if there were no innate differences of any kind among racial groups, at least besides the obvious cosmetic ones. A lot of modern science has seemed favorable to the view that traditional notions of race are biologically meaningless. Research in the 1970's, for example, suggested that genetic variation among European, African and Asian populations was minuscule compared to differences between individuals within those populations. DNA studies in the 1980's indicated that the human species emerged less than 100,000 years ago, insufficient time for significant physical or mental differences among the races to have evolved.

More recent discoveries in molecular biology, however, have muddied matters a bit. The split between African and non-African populations is now estimated to have occurred more than 200,000 years ago, and genetic variation between population groups looks as if it may be greater than previously thought. ''The claim that there are no functional differences between populations or ethnic groups appears increasingly passe,'' Entine declares.

The alleged ''functional differences'' are in physique, musculature, metabolic efficiency, hormone levels and reaction time. Entine cites credible research, for example, that blacks of West African ancestry (which would include most African-Americans) have a higher ratio of ''fast-twitch'' muscle fiber than whites do, which gives them an edge at leaping and sprinting. East African blacks have more energy-producing enzymes in their muscles and seem to process oxygen more efficiently, which translates into greater aerobic endurance.

But why conclude that such differences are encoded in the genes? Mightn't there be an environmental explanation? It is true that Kenyans have won every Boston Marathon since 1990, but these runners come from a mountainous region whose altitude is perfect for building aerobic capacity.

Hoping to bolster his case that athletic superiority is at least in part genetically based, Entine notes that some racial differences are apparent from birth. Black babies mature faster on average than their white counterparts, even when they are poorer and eat a less healthy diet; they show better hand-eye coordination and walk earlier by about a month. Suggestive though such data may be, the claim of genetic innateness remains completely speculative. Geneticists today hardly understand how traits like size and weight are inherited in fleas, let alone how athletic aptitudes are passed along in humans.

Still, it seems wise to keep an open mind, as Entine urges. The explanation for why every men's world record at every standard track distance belongs to an athlete of African descent may turn out to be purely sociological -- hard work, a dearth of opportunities elsewhere. But the possibility that genetics has something to do with it should not be ruled out a priori for political reasons.

That said, there remain three caveats to make. Entine gets partial credit for making two of them. First, as he observes, the competitive nature of sports magnifies even the tiniest physical differences. (In the 100-meter dash, one-hundredth of a second can separate the gold medalist from the also-ran.) Second, as Entine also observes, the genetics of sports ability has nothing to tell us about the genetics of intelligence. Differences in endurance or reaction time, which depend on relatively few genes, can evolve quickly among population groups; not so differences in intelligence, which are rooted in an organ -- the brain -- that is the product of nearly half the human genome.

A third needed caveat is missed by Entine: any genetic differences that may exist between racial groups are, in the long run, utterly swamped by environmental influences. This has become obvious for I.Q., which, in defiance of genetic determinists, has been rising by an average of three points a decade over the last half-century. A similar phenomenon can be observed in the sports world. Does anyone doubt that a decent college basketball team today, whether predominantly black or white, would clobber the best pro team of 50 years ago?

Anyone who writes a book like ''Taboo'' can expect to have his motives questioned. When Charles Murray and Richard Herrnstein published ''The Bell Curve,'' which also dwelt on interracial differences, they did not attempt to disguise their antiliberal political agenda. Entine, by contrast, disclaims any political agenda at all; nor is it obvious how the thesis of his book, if true, would support one. Then why go on about how, genetically speaking, ''white men can't jump'' if it has no practical effect other than to deepen our sense of racial separateness? Because, Entine replies, science itself is ''on trial.'' That may be. And considering its highly fallible record on matters of race, science should be assumed guilty until proved innocent.
 

Tejwant Singh

Mentor
Writer
SPNer
Kanwardeep ji,

Guru fateh.

I have read this interesting piece before and many other papers like that but this still does not explain why do the Australians which have almost no black in all the sports they practice, excel in every sport in comparison to other countries with the population ratio they have as compared to the world?

One can check the Beijing Olympics and the amount of medals they won as compare to the other countries.

Tejwant Singh
 

kds1980

SPNer
Kanwardeep ji,

Guru fateh.

I have read this interesting piece before and many other papers like that but this still does not explain why do the Australians which have almost no black in all the sports they practice, excel in every sport in comparison to other countries with the population ratio they have as compared to the world?

One can check the Beijing Olympics and the amount of medals they won as compare to the other countries.

Tejwant Singh


Australia is rich country and they have great sporting culture.As I said in my previous post that many sports require financial support so its obvious that rich countries like Australia are going to win medals in that type of sports.

Australia's Medal Winners - Beijing 2008 Olympic Games

Above is the list of Australian medal winners.Most of their medals are coming from swimming and water sports.

For success in many sports along with best genes you require very good facilities like equipments,grounds, pools, coaching ,diet,hard work etc.except America
Hardly any black country is rich and could provide facilities that matches
with the Rich countries.
 

Tejwant Singh

Mentor
Writer
SPNer
Australia is rich country and they have great sporting culture.As I said in my previous post that many sports require financial support so its obvious that rich countries like Australia are going to win medals in that type of sports.

Australia's Medal Winners - Beijing 2008 Olympic Games

Above is the list of Australian medal winners.Most of their medals are coming from swimming and water sports.

For success in many sports along with best genes you require very good facilities like equipments,grounds, pools, coaching ,diet,hard work etc.except America
Hardly any black country is rich and could provide facilities that matches
with the Rich countries.


You mean Australia is richer than the UK? Check how many sports did the Australians get selected to participate in as compared to other countries.

Tejwant Singh
 

kds1980

SPNer
You mean Australia is richer than the UK? Check how many sports did the Australians get selected to participate in as compared to other countries.

Tejwant Singh

As I said richness alone cannot be the factor and UK too have won 47 medals and that is not a bad performence at all.Btw I will further read about Australians participating in beijing olympics.
 

Recommended Websites


JOIN US ON SPN-TELEGRAM


Sikhi Vichar Forum (Malaysia)


Sikhi Gems
Top