Why is Serbia so much better at sports than their neighbours?

[Kraftwerk]

Yeah i2a2 which is almost absent now in east Europe. Either we’re killed or fled west during the steppe migration

Perhaps r1a and r1b men were ultra patriarchal, violent assholes and genocided all native European male lineages they met. Perhaps, this is how Indo-European cultures dominated Europe. Then, they should be named Indo-Central Asian, because of being alien to Europe actually.

[MustafaTekin]

[Dick]

Perhaps r1a and r1b men were ultra patriarchal, violent assholes and genocided all native European male lineages they met. Perhaps, this is how Indo-European cultures dominated Europe. Then, they should be named Indo-Central Asian, because of being alien to Europe actually.

Neolithic culture was not war like. Of course they had clannish battles but they didn’t care fir conquering they were more interested in farming

[Dorian]

Phenotypes are like body somatotypes. But, it's a fact general populations' autosomal DNA and phenotypes are somehow related. A +90% Early European farmer autosomal person can't look Nordic, nor Sinic for example.

That's what's wrong , If we were to assume there's enough selective pressure ,you can (hypothetically) create any autosomal looking like any phenotype ..just think how these r1 "amerindians" or whatever they were turned into modern european types ,using your example all this 90 %eef needs is the recessive genes for the other types you used and them being repeatedly selected once expressed ,basically that's what happened with nordics already.
Example:2 populations, a 100% eef + a 100% whg mix ,the "eef phenotype" is favoured and selected =half people looking "eef" ,these half mix again with other 100% whgs and favor eef again ,repeat&repeat ,you get the point ...and here we are talking about genetic pools that have more than 2 types with no obvious selections&results.
If your country has 7-8 phenotypes you sure have most If not all of them in your tree ,now how you end up a specific way is something more complex ,a metaphor would be like how mtdna passes in men instead of the predictable y ,these things are for quantitative genetics.
The only info that you can get from autosomal(from my pov)is you can get to guess what "phenotypes" each component could have "thrown" into a "pool" but how they are distributed into that pool or individual,you can't know exactly.
On the other hand the logic of some here is that it's like mixing cocktails or paints ,"oh this region is 2% this-shifted compared to that ,look where it plots I always knew they were different ".
If physical anthropology wasn't unpc ,it could have progressed to something better with the modern technology available and in cooperation with genetics have the underlying genetic mechanisms that form "types" identified ,then you could get to "play" with that knowledge and find correlations with other things such as the autosomal but that seems like it would never happen.
PS: Last thought ,the only reason you can guess trends of autosomal&phenotypes it's because there are no selective pressures against the current phenotypes (like in the example) and not because majority of autosomal has the power to shape phenotype.