"Caucasian Record"


Forum devoted to track & field items of an historical nature.

"Caucasian Record"

Postby GYM » Sun Sep 30, 2007 11:57 am

Say, folks, I hope that no one minds me asking this question. Does anyone know what the fastest legal boys high school time in the 100 is by a Caucasian sprinter? Shane Crawford's 10.34 this year has to rank very high.
GYM
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 11:44 am
Location: Indiana

Re: "Caucasian Record"

Postby gh » Mon Oct 01, 2007 6:31 am

GYM wrote:Say, folks, I hope that no one minds me asking this question. Does anyone know what the fastest legal boys high school time in the 100 is by a Caucasian sprinter? Shane Crawford's 10.34 this year has to rank very high.


The all-time list in last year's High School Track goes through 10.31 and nobody there meets your requested classification.
gh
 
Posts: 46327
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Postby Jacksf » Mon Oct 01, 2007 6:40 am

If Shane Crawford's 10.34 is a FAT, allowable wind, time, then I think it is the fastest white HS time ever.
Casey Combest and Trey Griffin both had 10.31w times, but nothing that fast without wind.
Jacksf
 
Posts: 1684
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby paulthefan » Mon Oct 01, 2007 8:01 am

OK "I hate to rain on your parade" and I know "I sound like a broken record" and of course "no one likes a wise guy" but does anyone else think that it is kind of odd to be placing this HS runner atop Frank Wykoff on a HS alltime list?.. Im sure there are at least 10 other historical HS 100m boys that were better than this fine talented fellow but lets keep things in perspective.

This talk, is like saying that Jamee samuels is the greatest HS dasher of all time.
paulthefan
 
Posts: 5034
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Location, Location.

Postby Jacksf » Mon Oct 01, 2007 8:12 am

Casey Combest was credited with a 10.06 hand time at the Mobile Meet of Champions in 1999.
http://www.dyestat.com/9out/us/april/mo ... ps403.html
Jacksf
 
Posts: 1684
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby tafnut » Mon Oct 01, 2007 8:18 am

Jacksf wrote:Casey Combest was credited with a 10.06 hand time at the Mobile Meet of Champions in 1999.

So it was a 10.1 HS hand-time, so the best it could probably be is 10.40 FAT.
tafnut
 
Posts: 26684
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Lost at C (-minus)

Postby paulthefan » Mon Oct 01, 2007 8:26 am

one way to handle hand timesis to determine what FAT times all the runners in the field ended their year with that season, including of course combest. Do a regression analysis and get a number for how biased this hand time was.
paulthefan
 
Posts: 5034
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Location, Location.

Postby Justin Clouder » Mon Oct 01, 2007 9:04 am

Jacksf wrote:... a 10.06 hand time ...

There is no such thing.

Justin
Justin Clouder
 
Posts: 1200
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 4:14 am
Location: London, UK

Postby tafnut » Mon Oct 01, 2007 9:15 am

Justin Clouder wrote:
Jacksf wrote:... a 10.06 hand time ...

There is no such thing.
Justin

Tell that to football coaches!
tafnut
 
Posts: 26684
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Lost at C (-minus)

Postby dj » Mon Oct 01, 2007 9:35 am

tafnut wrote:
Justin Clouder wrote:
Jacksf wrote:... a 10.06 hand time ...

There is no such thing.
Justin

Tell that to football coaches!


For football coaches there's no such thing as 100 meters!
dj
 
Posts: 6199
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Postby tafnut » Mon Oct 01, 2007 11:21 am

dj wrote:For football coaches there's no such thing as 100 meters!

Tell that to a coach who's kick returner just caught a kick-off right in front of the back line of the end-zone with no time left, down by 5! (and has a weak-armed QB that can't throw the Hail Mary!) :twisted:
tafnut
 
Posts: 26684
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Lost at C (-minus)

Postby Justin Clouder » Tue Oct 02, 2007 4:21 am

tafnut wrote:
Justin Clouder wrote:
Jacksf wrote:... a 10.06 hand time ...

There is no such thing.
Justin

Tell that to football coaches!

I don't much care what football coaches think, but I would quite like it if track and field officials and also fans contributing to these forums didn't continually make the same mistake. Football coaches know no better, track people should. IMHO!

Justin
Justin Clouder
 
Posts: 1200
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 4:14 am
Location: London, UK

Postby tafnut » Tue Oct 02, 2007 5:27 am

Justin Clouder wrote:Football coaches know no better, track people should.
I do! :D
tafnut
 
Posts: 26684
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Lost at C (-minus)

Postby Justin Clouder » Tue Oct 02, 2007 5:56 am

tafnut wrote:
Justin Clouder wrote:Football coaches know no better, track people should.
I do! :D

I never doubted it! :)

Now all we need to do is persuade Jacksf and the others who still don't get it.!

Justin
Justin Clouder
 
Posts: 1200
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 4:14 am
Location: London, UK

Postby Jacksf » Tue Oct 02, 2007 7:08 am

I'm quoting the article from DyeStat that I originally posted as a reference for the time:

http://www.dyestat.com/9out/us/april/mo ... ps403.html

The article is credited to "Mark Friedline, timer and computer operator."
Jacksf
 
Posts: 1684
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby mrbowie » Thu Oct 04, 2007 6:53 pm

paulthefan wrote:OK "I hate to rain on your parade" and I know "I sound like a broken record" and of course "no one likes a wise guy" but does anyone else think that it is kind of odd to be placing this HS runner atop Frank Wykoff on a HS alltime list?.. Im sure there are at least 10 other historical HS 100m boys that were better than this fine talented fellow but lets keep things in perspective.

This talk, is like saying that Jamee samuels is the greatest HS dasher of all time.


Totally agree.
mrbowie
 
Posts: 1474
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Lexington, Kentucky

Postby mrbowie » Thu Oct 04, 2007 6:58 pm

Does this category include albinos of mixed parentage that can pass for a so-called Caucasian? I am talking about these flaxen haired, red-freckle-faced guys with almost yellow eyelashes and bright yellow hair? Because one of them might have slipped below 10.31. I wonder where the photo archive is located with all of the snapshots of each of these guys? Maybe the FBI could be of some assistance in this important matter of deep national interest.
mrbowie
 
Posts: 1474
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Lexington, Kentucky

Postby Justin Clouder » Fri Oct 05, 2007 5:12 am

Jacksf wrote:I'm quoting the article from DyeStat that I originally posted as a reference for the time:

http://www.dyestat.com/9out/us/april/mo ... ps403.html

The article is credited to "Mark Friedline, timer and computer operator."

I repeat: there is no such thing as a 10.06 hand time. It doesn't matter that someone else wrongly listed/claimed it; you, as a T&F fan, should know better. IMHO!

Justin
Justin Clouder
 
Posts: 1200
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 4:14 am
Location: London, UK

Postby Justin Clouder » Fri Oct 05, 2007 5:14 am

mrbowie wrote:Does this category include albinos of mixed parentage that can pass for a so-called Caucasian? I am talking about these flaxen haired, red-freckle-faced guys with almost yellow eyelashes and bright yellow hair? Because one of them might have slipped below 10.31. I wonder where the photo archive is located with all of the snapshots of each of these guys? Maybe the FBI could be of some assistance in this important matter of deep national interest.

Nice post, quite right. The obsession with sprinters' skin colour is very troubling, at least to me.

Justin
Justin Clouder
 
Posts: 1200
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 4:14 am
Location: London, UK

Postby Texas » Fri Oct 05, 2007 5:20 am

When we see such a small % of a population totally dominating something, it's makes ya curious. It's not like we see a few more black athletes than whites. We see 99.9% black in some athlectic events/positions. What it's not cool to wonder ...why?
Texas
 
Posts: 2790
Joined: Sat May 06, 2006 4:51 am

Postby Justin Clouder » Fri Oct 05, 2007 6:53 am

Texas wrote:When we see such a small % of a population totally dominating something, it's makes ya curious. It's not like we see a few more black athletes than whites. We see 99.9% black in some athletic events/positions. What it's not cool to wonder ...why?

Please define "black" and "white" in as you understand it. Are lily-skinned rednecks with 20% black ancestry white? Is a dark-skinned man with two light-skinned grandparents black, or white? What about people with one light and one dark skinned parent? Is there a difference between light brown-skinned people and deep ebony-skinned people? What does it take to be counted as "black" or "white" in this discussion? Just one drop? One parent? One grandparent?

Define the terms in a coherent way and the debate becomes interesting. Until then it is simply racist.

Justin
Justin Clouder
 
Posts: 1200
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 4:14 am
Location: London, UK

Postby paulthefan » Fri Oct 05, 2007 8:25 am

mrbowie wrote:Does this category include albinos of mixed parentage that can pass for a so-called Caucasian? I am talking about these flaxen haired, red-freckle-faced guys with almost yellow eyelashes and bright yellow hair? Because one of them might have slipped below 10.31. I wonder where the photo archive is located with all of the snapshots of each of these guys? Maybe the FBI could be of some assistance in this important matter of deep national interest.


I dont think this category could be included. It obviously deserves a place of its own. The big question is does Edgar Winter belong.
paulthefan
 
Posts: 5034
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Location, Location.

Postby paulthefan » Fri Oct 05, 2007 8:27 am

Texas wrote:When we see such a small % of a population totally dominating something, it's makes ya curious. It's not like we see a few more black athletes than whites. We see 99.9% black in some athletic events/positions. What it's not cool to wonder ...why?


Could not agree more, and there is nothing racist about it. It is a benign observation.

Racism is a moral dilemma, the treatment of people in a biased way based on their race. It is evil and wicked.
paulthefan
 
Posts: 5034
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Location, Location.

Postby Justin Clouder » Fri Oct 05, 2007 9:25 am

paulthefan wrote:...and there is nothing racist about it. It is a benign observation.

Racism is a moral dilemma, the treatment of people in a biased way based on their race. It is evil and wicked.

What is it you think is being benignly observed? Presumably the dominance of the sprints by athletes with dark skin. The problem is that "athletes with dark skin" is not a defined category which can be compared to any other defined category (such as "athletes with light skin") in a way which allows any useful conclusions to be drawn. Athletes come in all skin colours, from very dark to very light. Where is the line drawn between light and dark? What colour is Wallace Spearmon?

Define these groups in some coherent way an I'll be happy to debate why one dominates the other at any event.

I also disagree with your definition of racism. As written, your definition requires an active and perhaps conscious bias by one person towards another. I think that is too narrow - more problems are caused by unconscious, unrealised racial assumptions on the part of people who would never fit your definition.

Thus, I consider this subject racist because it inevitably requires one to draw conclusions about some people based entirely on their skin colour. This is the very essence of racism, whether consciously so or not. IMHO!

Justin
Justin Clouder
 
Posts: 1200
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 4:14 am
Location: London, UK

Postby paulthefan » Fri Oct 05, 2007 9:40 am

Justin Clouder wrote:What is it you think is being benignly observed?

the dominance of west african ancestry in sprinting events.

Justin Clouder wrote:Presumably the dominance of the sprints by athletes with dark skin. The problem is that "athletes with dark skin" is not a defined category which can be compared to any other defined category (such as "athletes with light skin") in a way which allows any useful conclusions to be drawn. Athletes come in all skin colours, from very dark to very light. Where is the line drawn between light and dark? What colour is Wallace Spearmon?

what are useful conclusions?... we are only making observations.
regarding Spearmon, he has more west african ancestry than the average of people in other categories in which you could slot him, for instance american, college student, male etc.




Justin Clouder wrote:I also disagree with your definition of racism. As written, your definition requires an active and perhaps conscious bias by one person towards another. I think that is too narrow - more problems are caused by unconscious, unrealised racial assumptions on the part of people who would never fit your definition.

Well thats my definition, I like it but yours is useful too.
paulthefan
 
Posts: 5034
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Location, Location.

Postby Justin Clouder » Fri Oct 05, 2007 9:52 am

paulthefan wrote:...regarding Spearmon, he has more west african ancestry than the average of people in other categories in which you could slot him, for instance american, college student, male etc.

See, this is my problem. How much West African ancestry is required to define someone as part of the perceived dominance? How little makes someone an exception? Is Jeff Williams (one white parent, one black) white or black? What of someone with one black grandparent?

It is also entirely possible to have light skin but to have majority African genetics or to be dark skinned but have majority European ancestry. For all we know the fastest mostly-European-ancestry sprinter is actually dark skinned while plenty of those who are visually dark-skinned might be exceptions to the rule rather than examples of it.

Our ill-defined categories of "black sprinters" and "white sprinters" are thus not reliable enough to do anything than to make the broad observation that the relevant gene packages which make someone fast are more prevalent in West Africa (and thus people with some West African ancestry) than in Europe. Skin colour is only coincidentally (not causatively) linked with this broad observation.

IMHO!

Justin
Justin Clouder
 
Posts: 1200
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 4:14 am
Location: London, UK

Postby paulthefan » Fri Oct 05, 2007 11:57 am

Justin Clouder wrote:See, this is my problem. How much West African ancestry is required to define someone as part of the perceived dominance? How little makes someone an exception? Is Jeff Williams (one white parent, one black) white or black? What of someone with one black grandparent?


I would say if the athlete has more african ancestry than is in the gene pool of the nation in which he resides then I would say it is significant. So a US top tier athlete with more than 12% african ancestry in a sprint event would not disturb the "perceived" dominance of black athletes.


Justin Clouder wrote:It is also entirely possible to have light skin but to have majority African genetics or to be dark skinned but have majority European ancestry. For all we know the fastest mostly-European-ancestry sprinter is actually dark skinned while plenty of those who are visually dark-skinned might be exceptions to the rule rather than examples of it.


only to a pedant would these issues be mind boggling. The hypothesis of a suntan increasing my 100m talent level is not worth discussing. I am not aware of skin tones being a dominant or only indicator of african or european or asian origins..

Im not suggesting that present representation in WC 100m finals is an accurate indication of actual west african sprint talent dominance but it clearly has some inferential power.
paulthefan
 
Posts: 5034
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Location, Location.

Postby Justin Clouder » Fri Oct 05, 2007 12:25 pm

paulthefan wrote:
Justin Clouder wrote:It is also entirely possible to have light skin but to have majority African genetics or to be dark skinned but have majority European ancestry. For all we know the fastest mostly-European-ancestry sprinter is actually dark skinned while plenty of those who are visually dark-skinned might be exceptions to the rule rather than examples of it.


only to a pedant would these issues be mind boggling. The hypothesis of a suntan increasing my 100m talent level is not worth discussing. I am not aware of skin tones being a dominant or only indicator of african or european or asian origins..

I think you are saying that skin colour is not a good indicator of geographic origin. I agree. That is why I believe it to be bogus to discuss black sprinting dominance as opposed to the dominance of a particular geographic ancestry.

You have of course consistently referred to West African ancestry, which we both agree (it seems, tell me if I'm wrong) is not the same as being racially "black". If only those forever posting whether so-and-so will be the first white man under 10 had as sophisticated an understanding.

I agree with you that the question of why West African genes help make fast sprinters is interesting. Sadly, that is not the form these sorts of discussions usually take.

Justin
Justin Clouder
 
Posts: 1200
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 4:14 am
Location: London, UK

Postby Texas » Fri Oct 05, 2007 1:37 pm

You can have any "degree" of black ya want. The bottom line is "without" black in the mix, we aren't going to be seeing a sub10.00 sprinter.

There is a reason athletes from Nigeria,Trinidad and Jamaica have ran far more sub10.00 than athletes from Asia and Europe. There is a reason the fastest Canadian is black, the fastest American is black, the fastest Frenchmen is black. Now look at countries with no black athletes like Poland or Germany. No sub10.00 sprinters.

That is not racist, that is reality!

Now you can play around with... "oh yeah, well what if"... all ya want. The facts are, we won't be seeing sub10.00 sprinters without some % of black in the mix.

Is "reggae" a black thang? Well so is world class sprinting.
Texas
 
Posts: 2790
Joined: Sat May 06, 2006 4:51 am

Postby paulthefan » Fri Oct 05, 2007 2:43 pm

Justin Clouder wrote:You have of course consistently referred to West African ancestry, which we both agree (it seems, tell me if I'm wrong) is not the same as being racially "black". If only those forever posting whether so-and-so will be the first white man under 10 had as sophisticated an understanding.

I agree with you that the question of why West African genes help make fast sprinters is interesting. Sadly, that is not the form these sorts of discussions usually take.

Justin



Except that white or a simplification or condensation to describe european or certainly at least non-west-african ancestry....
paulthefan
 
Posts: 5034
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Location, Location.

Postby paulthefan » Fri Oct 05, 2007 2:44 pm

Justin Clouder wrote:You have of course consistently referred to West African ancestry, which we both agree (it seems, tell me if I'm wrong) is not the same as being racially "black". If only those forever posting whether so-and-so will be the first white man under 10 had as sophisticated an understanding.

I agree with you that the question of why West African genes help make fast sprinters is interesting. Sadly, that is not the form these sorts of discussions usually take.

Justin



Except that "white" is used as a simplification or condensation to describe european or certainly at least non-west-african ancestry....
paulthefan
 
Posts: 5034
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Location, Location.

Postby paulthefan » Fri Oct 05, 2007 2:50 pm

Texas wrote:There is a reason athletes from Nigeria,Trinidad and Jamaica have ran far more sub10.00 than athletes from Asia and Europe. There is a reason the fastest Canadian is black, the fastest American is black, the fastest Frenchmen is black. Now look at countries with no black athletes like Poland or Germany. No sub10.00 sprinters. That is not racist, that is reality!

agree,

Texas wrote:Now you can play around with... "oh yeah, well what if"... all ya want. The facts are, we won't be seeing sub10.00 sprinters without some % of black in the mix.

disagree.
Last edited by paulthefan on Sat Oct 06, 2007 7:03 am, edited 2 times in total.
paulthefan
 
Posts: 5034
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Location, Location.

Caucasoid Sprinters

Postby bijanc » Sat Oct 06, 2007 6:26 am

There is also a reason all the premier golfers are of Asian descent- Tiger Woods, Vijay Singh, K.J. Choi, Se Ri Pak, Grace Park, Birdie Kim, Iyako Okamoto.

BCB
bijanc
 
Posts: 1415
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Caucasoid Sprinters

Postby Per Andersen » Sat Oct 06, 2007 5:21 pm

bijanc wrote:There is also a reason all the premier golfers are of Asian descent- Tiger Woods, Vijay Singh, K.J. Choi, Se Ri Pak, Grace Park, Birdie Kim, Iyako Okamoto.

BCB

Yeah, you're not far off. Especially when you consider that more Korean women made the cut at the US Open than American women this year.
Per Andersen
 
Posts: 3736
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Postby Jacksf » Sat Oct 06, 2007 5:33 pm

Justin Clouder wrote:
Jacksf wrote:I'm quoting the article from DyeStat that I originally posted as a reference for the time:

http://www.dyestat.com/9out/us/april/mo ... ps403.html

The article is credited to "Mark Friedline, timer and computer operator."

I repeat: there is no such thing as a 10.06 hand time. It doesn't matter that someone else wrongly listed/claimed it; you, as a T&F fan, should know better. IMHO!

Justin


Obviously the guy has a stop watch that times to the hundredth of a second.
Yes, I know it's not official, but apparently the time on his stopwatch was 10.06!
Jacksf
 
Posts: 1684
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby tandfman » Sat Oct 06, 2007 5:46 pm

Jacksf wrote:Obviously the guy has a stop watch that times to the hundredth of a second.
Yes, I know it's not official, but apparently the time on his stopwatch was 10.06!

It isn't official, and it isn't unofficial either. When a stopwatch says 10.06, it is properly read as 10.1. As Justin said, there is no such thing as a hand time of 10.06.
tandfman
 
Posts: 15042
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Postby Track fan » Sat Oct 06, 2007 6:32 pm

Texas wrote:You can have any "degree" of black ya want. The bottom line is "without" black in the mix, we aren't going to be seeing a sub10.00 sprinter.

There is a reason athletes from Nigeria,Trinidad and Jamaica have ran far more sub10.00 than athletes from Asia and Europe. There is a reason the fastest Canadian is black, the fastest American is black, the fastest Frenchmen is black. Now look at countries with no black athletes like Poland or Germany. No sub10.00 sprinters.

That is not racist, that is reality!

Now you can play around with... "oh yeah, well what if"... all ya want. The facts are, we won't be seeing sub10.00 sprinters without some % of black in the mix.

Is "reggae" a black thang? Well so is world class sprinting.
I don't think so, 10.00 is a number no different than 20.00 or 44.00. Most likely you won't see a non "black" do it, but there have been so many white and East Asian sprinters who under the right conditions would have broken the barrier. And one non black who could be defined as white did it. Also how many people thought no white man could ever run sub 44 in the quarter? Until I have empirical proof I will never believe these pseudo scientific fact. Also how many sub 10 sprinters have been clean?
Track fan
 
Posts: 1335
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Google [Bot] and 6 guests