Sure, we know there are lots of things we don't know yet. But we do know generally in almost every case every ethnic group has individuals whose genetic makeup overlaps with those from other ethnic groups.
It's hard not to conclude that you're purposefully trying to fool someone here. It never occurred to you that more than one gene might be involved in sprinting?
My point is that there is a lot more involved in sprinting (and high-performance generally) than just genetics.
One of the best examples of this is the cross country skier Eero Mäntyranta[1]. His family carries a genetic mutation called Polycythemia[2] which means they produce a very high proportion of red blood cells (basically like the EPO doping Lance Armstrong did, but natural).
Juvonen described lab-testing samples of Eero’s bone marrow cells, which produce red blood cells. The plan was to add EPO to the cells and track the creation of red blood cells. A typical human’s bone marrow cells won’t start making blood cells in the lab until EPO is added. But Eero’s bone marrow cells began the process of creating red blood cells before Juvonen could even stimulate them with EPO. Whatever tiny speck of EPO that was already in the sample was enough to keep the red cell factories humming. Eero’s body was hypersensitive to even trifling traces of EPO.[3]
He was a very successful cross country skier (Olympics: 3 Gold, 2 Silver & 2 Bronze over 3 games), but he was still beatable, even with this unprecedented genetic advantage.
A quote from [3]:
This is why any sensible person, in response to the questions: “Is there a genetic test for performance? Is there a performance gene?”, can only ever answer “No, it’s too complex to reduce to a single gene, and tests cannot assess this level of complexity. Yet”.
Mäntyranta is about as close as it gets to that. However, despite that, I want to point out that even with this mutation, one which saw his hemoglobin levels increase by around 50% compared to the typical male, he still didn’t wipe the floor with everyone, every time. Yes, he dominated his events in unmatched fashion in 1964, but he still got beaten, and that single mutation did not confer invincibility, only advantage. That’s again an illustration that performance is multi-factorial, and it suggests that many other factors are responsible.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eero_M%C3%A4ntyranta
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Familial_erythrocytosis
[3] http://www.sportsscientists.com/2013/12/eero-mantyranta-finl...
> Sprints: The ACTN3 gene[1] is associated with the fast-twitch muscles, and is more prevalent in people of West African descent. Out of the last 7 Olympic 100m mens finals all 56 finalists have been of West African descent. Only 2 out of the top 500 100m race times are by people without African descent.
> Case closed? No. The proportion of sprint wins by West Africans is much higher than the prevalence of the ACTN3 gene would explain, and other power sports (notably weight lifting) are dominated by other ethnic groups with a more average distribution of the gene.
It's hard not to conclude that you're purposefully trying to fool someone here. It never occurred to you that more than one gene might be involved in sprinting?