Don't discount the local cultural influences that steer athletes into one sport, vice another. Exhibit A would be the LPGA, how many females in the top 20 of a golf tournament are South Korean? Exhibit B would be the great competitiveness of former Yugoslavian men from Croatia and Serbia in water polo, while their swim squads are not at all relevant.

(02-07-2023 03:49 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(02-07-2023 03:34 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  There's a ton of upper middle class (and higher) in myriad sports and leagues around the world. American baseball and soccer players tend to be wealthy. Hockey is mostly a wealthy sport worldwide. Rugby has a long history of affluency, as does lacrosse (despite its origins). Besides, the number 1 predictor for becoming a professional in any sport is having parent(s) that were pros, and they are often rich. It's a lot more than "hungry people achieve".

Nobody is saying genetics isn't a factor. A Manning is going to have a good shot in football because of genetics. Napoleon Dynamite and Steve Urcle have no chance no matter how hard they work. My only point was white people can also benefit from genetics. They can choose to play basketball as well... they just don't in large numbers in most of the more heavily populated areas of this country. In other words, genetics can determine whether you are a potential NBA player, but it doesn't solely explain why 10/10 players on the court in a given game are black.

Well that can discourage white players, just as it might discourage Black golf and tennis players. I have a niece who had no interest in college soccer because of the lesbian culture. She didn't fit in.