Which sport has the best athletes?
- Thread starter entremet
- Start date
- Status
No, hitting major league pitching is pretty unanimously one of the most difficult feats of skill and coordination in any sport.
Given the physical limits of human reaction time, hitting a major league fastball is the closest thing to evidence of ESP that we have.
Then there is fielding, where 3 mistakes out of 100 chances at fielding a ball makes you an absolutely terrible defender, and these are decisions that have to be made in split seconds, then you have to perfectly execute a throw on target 100+ feet away, or more from the outfield.
Then there is pitching which is completely insane, the ability to throw 100 mph into a tiny target(remember the size of the strike zone is not the target, as anything in the upper mid section of the zone is going to get crushed by hitters at that level), plus all of the crazy movement pitchers can get on a ball.
Is this supposed to represent a terrible goalie or how fast the line judges are?
So anyone who can marathon flappy bird then? I don't want to turn this into disparaging drivers, some of whom happen to be amazing athletes, but it's not the sport that makes it so.
entremet
Member
The tests are ridiculously easy to beat--see Lance Armstrong or any recent tainted athlete. They were all found out due to eyewitness testimony, not testing.
Soccer isn't as demanding as people make it out to be. The guys aren't running full speed for 90 min. Most of them are walking around the field or slowly jogging. Few of the players are actually running full speed at any given time (mostly around the ball) so I would slightly disagree. It is demanding and all but the whole no stoppage is kind of overrated imo.
Why is best athlete limited to those with the most stamina? This is a bad question because there are no specific criteria.
As for baseball, no one would argue it has the best athletes on average I don't think but the immense amount of skill required to be good at it is unquestionable. Hitting a baseball thrown by a decent pitcher is very arguably the hardest thing routinely done in any sport.
paradise_circus
Member
fighting athlets and every other sport athlets where technique and stamina is more important than pure strength
Witchfinder General
punched Wheelchair Mike
TheFightingFish
Member
I'm actually surprised how many are saying basketball. I love the sport, so I have no axe to grind, but because you can be successful at the sport by main virtue of your height, I would not really say that the sport has the best athletes. Obviously there are tons of crazy physical specimens in basketball, but you can also have players who are 7'2" and are clearly very athletic for their size, but not what I would consider athletic overall. Sports like Hockey or Soccer have the same basic physical requirements as Basketball, but without the same height requirement so I feel like they have better athletes overall.
Obviously the definition of this question is pretty open, but I'd say that Olympic Decathletes are probably the most impressive to me in terms of overall athletic talent. Can't think of any other sport that requires such a blend of different types of ability and different talents.
Obviously the definition of this question is pretty open, but I'd say that Olympic Decathletes are probably the most impressive to me in terms of overall athletic talent. Can't think of any other sport that requires such a blend of different types of ability and different talents.
Neoriceisgood
Member
Curling.
I disagree.
Professional Baseball can and often does take anybody in their 20s with high physical capabilities even if they haven't even played the sport. They will mold them in the minors and some of em even make it to the majors. You wanna use loaded examples to support arguments? How about a couple random indian dudes that didn't even know the sport existed making it into the majors playing the absolute hardest position in the sport.
If we're talking about endurance and stamina in the context of motorsport then you have to consider the conditions in the car. The environments in open wheel cars, stock cars, prototype cars, trucks, or motorcycles is far from pleasant. You're not sitting all that comfortably at race speed and you have forces to deal with like climate and g-forces on your body. Doing that for over an hour is exhausting.
Most combat sports would be my choice.
Endurance over many rounds while still needing to be explosive, reflexes to counter or slip, mental strength to influence your opponent and not be baited yourself, and of course physical strength paired with technique.
It's gotta be Australian Rules Football.
You've really got to excel at just about everything be it fitness, strength in all areas and a wide range of skills. You have to be mentally and physically strong.
It's extremely fast paced and involves wide, long running, short burst sprints, gritty and dirty close quarters tackling and handballing, kicking of the ball, timing etc, placement of yourself on the field and who to ship it off to etc.
Basically you have to be a perfect balance of athlete. Extremely strong to remain physically imposing, but also fit and fast enough to stay in the contests. You have to have the skills to kick it to another running player with pinpoint accuracy, or take a screaming mark, or weave in and out of incoming opposition, but also the smarts to know who to kick it to. Footy's the best (except the rules. The rulebook is a joke at this point).
Also Tennis - once again, incredible skill set requiring perfect precision and the strength to return extremely difficult balls back into court. But also fitter than probably any other sport. The matches can go on for longer than any other sport, sometimes around 5 hours, which is ridiculous. Especially in the Australian summer during the Australian Open - some incredible athletic feats there.
You've really got to excel at just about everything be it fitness, strength in all areas and a wide range of skills. You have to be mentally and physically strong.
It's extremely fast paced and involves wide, long running, short burst sprints, gritty and dirty close quarters tackling and handballing, kicking of the ball, timing etc, placement of yourself on the field and who to ship it off to etc.
Basically you have to be a perfect balance of athlete. Extremely strong to remain physically imposing, but also fit and fast enough to stay in the contests. You have to have the skills to kick it to another running player with pinpoint accuracy, or take a screaming mark, or weave in and out of incoming opposition, but also the smarts to know who to kick it to. Footy's the best (except the rules. The rulebook is a joke at this point).
Also Tennis - once again, incredible skill set requiring perfect precision and the strength to return extremely difficult balls back into court. But also fitter than probably any other sport. The matches can go on for longer than any other sport, sometimes around 5 hours, which is ridiculous. Especially in the Australian summer during the Australian Open - some incredible athletic feats there.
Dark Octave
Banned
Not discounting how hard it is to hit a 100mph fastball but in the same sense for tennis they are trying to hit 140 mph serves. And a tennis serve is aimed to not be where you are expecting it where in baseball you figure it is at least trying to be in the strikezone.
Racket vs tiny bat, yes. But range a tennis server can be in vs where a pitcher throws. I'd say they may equal out.
My wife went to an exhibition tennis match and they let people from the crowd try to return a serve from Andy Roddick and no one even came close to touching the ball. I'd assume you'd get the same results in baseball.
Just trying to say that argument is probably a wash for baseball and tennis.
Racket vs tiny bat, yes. But range a tennis server can be in vs where a pitcher throws. I'd say they may equal out.
My wife went to an exhibition tennis match and they let people from the crowd try to return a serve from Andy Roddick and no one even came close to touching the ball. I'd assume you'd get the same results in baseball.
Just trying to say that argument is probably a wash for baseball and tennis.
Not only that, those guys barely have any time off. When they're not playing in league games (I'll use the EPL for this example), they're playing in the cup games like the Champions League or Europa League, FA Cup and Capital One Cup. So on average, they can play two to three games a week from early to mid August to May. In between that time, they're also playing for their national team trying to qualify for the World Cup and the various other regional cups.
Vulcano's assistant
Banned
Depends on whether you define athleticism as strength/endurance or as skill. I can see the argument being made for most sports, but yeah, soccer and basketball are in the sweet spot for both cases.
depends on the position though, some attackers are lazy pieces of shit. I play(ed) both sports, imho basketball is way more demanding. Sure there are timeouts but you have to go up and down the fucking court ALL the time no matter if you're the big fat center or a guard.
Nameless
Member
You're arbitrarily putting a premium on endurance. Get back to me when soccer players start wearing pounds of hot, heavy equipment and mercilessly inflict physical damage on one another.
Athletically, no soccer player in the Metaverse is on the same level as an Adrian Peterson.
BFIB
Member
Seriously?
"Mold" in the minors? Do you have any idea how many players that have tremendous skill in the minors never even make it to the majors to begin with? The fact that even in the minors, you have to constantly prove that you can, at your best, fail 7 out of 10 times to even be considered good, because of how demanding your concentration, skill, and physical attritubes must maintain?
I guess the frontier league I was cut from had it all wrong then. It wasn't the fact that I can hit a 95 MPH fastball, but could not ever get good wood on anything offpseed wasn't my fault. I just wasnt molded enough.
Give me a break.
Looks like a guy without a Super Bowl ring.
I think a few people here are vastly discounting NFL linemen. They may look obese and seem like just rolls of fat, but they are built like a fucking tank underneath. They have to be able to go from a starting position to engaging another 300+ pound linemen trying to push them back in seconds. Yeah they are not constantly exerting energy, but think of it as doing massive weight training for 3 hours straight.
Also they all run the 40 yard dash faster than most of this board.
Also they all run the 40 yard dash faster than most of this board.
I don't think so. The racket is flat and huge compared to the ball. The area a baseball can make contact with the bat and go anywhere in play is absolutely minuscule. Never mind the pitcher is actively putting movement on the ball and the batter is also often thinking about where he wants the ball to go. I think returning a serve in tennis is difficult but not as difficult.
from wikipedia : The highest values in absolute terms for humans are often found in rowers, as their much greater bulk makes up for a slightly lower VO2 max per kg.
also cyclists do very well in terms of VO2, but their upper bodies are mostly useless lol
thelatestmodel
Junior, please.
Basketball? Maybe. Soccer? Absolutely not. Hockey players are way tougher, carry 20-30lbs of equipment, and have to play their sport while being hit. They are also on skates. Not to mention the fact that soccer players have a reputation for diving and generally being pussies.
All they do is ski. Impressive fitness, but I believe the measure of an "athlete" is in more than just fitness.
Tatersalad
Member
Good point, overall I'd say football but for skill specifically then it's baseball.
Ninja Scooter
Member
Basketball and football, depending on the player and position.
So there are 12 7' players in the NBA (of around 400 players) being 'paid for their height' so to speak. I understand what you're trying to illustrate, but at the same time, ther are hundreds of other players still need to demonstrate a high level of athletic ability to be considered for their positions. Basketball, by virtue, is a sports that favors height, but being proficient in basketball does not strictly depend on height. There's a multitude of players that flop or underperform that are tall as shit. Meanwhile, if you were to take a guard, who isn't as tall as the rest of the players on better court, you could find him at the very least comparable to similarly built football or soccer players. Shit, isn't the incoming median vertical for the NBA draft like 36-38 inches?
I think the whole 'being paid on height alone' is misleading. It's a big factor, yes, but it's relatively easily overcome by other NBA level players. Not to mention that the "big men" which represent such a small number of the NBA are nowhere near indicative of overall performance, with the exception of players like Cody Zeller (Kid's a monster 7'0 230 with a 36" standing vert)
Vulcano's assistant
Banned
I'm talking about endurance. But I don't know if you are just being facetious or not.
Yep, rugby is relentless.
Because its a false equivalence.
Mj is the goat at basketball but sucked at baseball, therefor baseball is harder.
Baseball and basketball are two completely different skillsets, just because you're the best at one doesn't guarantee you'll even be good at another.
bananafactory
Banned
Probably hockey IMO.
I think soccer/basketball players might have more stamina, but the brutal physicality of hockey combined with the incredible speed and finesse/skill required to control the puck makes for very well rounded athletes.
I think soccer/basketball players might have more stamina, but the brutal physicality of hockey combined with the incredible speed and finesse/skill required to control the puck makes for very well rounded athletes.
There is pretty much not a single position in baseball I'd be able to play. And this just from experience in P.E. playing softball.
Soccer, Basekball, Football... I mean, at least I could do something.
figadapaura
Member
Tennis/rugby/football (soccer)
One of those 3.
Hockey is probably up there too.
One of those 3.
Hockey is probably up there too.
Vulcano's assistant
Banned
Baseball and Hockey are arguably the hardest to play out of the major sports.
Logic would dictate that the sport with the best athletes would be football (soccer)
It's not my favorite sport but here is my reasoning.
The player pool.
Just think of how many soccer players there are on a global level,
then think of how many high level teams there are.
(Mostly the teams making the Champions League)
Then put in what the chances are of an athlete making one of these teams given the player pool.
To even make a crappy amateur team is hard (MLS or other low tier leagues)
It's not even close given the player pool which sport has the best athletes.
And it'll never be close, seeing as it's the cheapest sport to play.
Even poor 3rd world people can aspire to become one of the best. (And they have)
On a side note, my favorite sport is Hockey.
I know it's a tough sport to learn, even harder to master.
If it had the player pool soccer had, I'd say Hockey.
It's not my favorite sport but here is my reasoning.
The player pool.
Just think of how many soccer players there are on a global level,
then think of how many high level teams there are.
(Mostly the teams making the Champions League)
Then put in what the chances are of an athlete making one of these teams given the player pool.
To even make a crappy amateur team is hard (MLS or other low tier leagues)
It's not even close given the player pool which sport has the best athletes.
And it'll never be close, seeing as it's the cheapest sport to play.
Even poor 3rd world people can aspire to become one of the best. (And they have)
On a side note, my favorite sport is Hockey.
I know it's a tough sport to learn, even harder to master.
If it had the player pool soccer had, I'd say Hockey.
BFIB
Member
Oh, I get that. But to say that you could take "any athlete in their 20's" and "mold" them into a baseball player is completely ridiculous.
I was pointing out that MJ might be one of the greatest athletes to ever play a professional sport, but it proves that skill wise, baseball holds no equal.
TheFightingFish
Member
I totally agree with your most of your statements above, but for me at least the basic point still stands. In my estimation I'd consider things like strength, endurance, stamina, and coordination to be athletic qualities. At the same time I would consider stuff like height or weight to be traits, not athletic qualities. Even if you rule out the crazy 7'2" guys basketball still has a very strong correlation for height as a measure of success, even at the guard positions. Or course tall NBA player are still incredible athletes but I feel that it's still clearly true that the sport in general draws across a specific height range for many of its players. Given that the qualities that I consider athletic should be pretty evenly distributed across height ranges it's clear that even aside from Manute Bol more NBA players would be selected for a non-athletic quality of height as opposed to other sports.
Logic would dictate that the sport with the best athletes would be football (soccer)
It's not my favorite sport but here is my reasoning.
The player pool.
Just think of how many soccer players there are on a global level,
then think of how many high level teams there are.
(Mostly the teams making the Champions League)
Then put in what the chances are of an athlete making one of these teams given the player pool.
To even make a crappy amateur team is hard (MLS or other low tier leagues)
It's not even close given the player pool which sport has the best athletes.
And it'll never be close, seeing as it's the cheapest sport to play.
Even poor 3rd world people can aspire to become one of the best. (And they have)
On a side note, my favorite sport is Hockey.
I know it a tough sport to learn, even harder to master.
If it had the player pool soccer had, I'd say Hockey.
By that logic, the best athlete in the world must be Usain Bolt.
And I'm not entirely against that concept.
speculawyer
Member
Decathalon
zorlaczerohero
Banned
Boxing in my opinion. Takes massive amounts of stamina, strength, agility and concentration. At 15 or so I was very fit, trained 5 times a week and boxed twice a week. Even though I was very fit I could maybe do 3 rounds before my body just said "screw you, I'm going home". The worst is the concentration it takes, that really knackers you out.
I can agree with that. I do believe sports that don't necessarily favor height like football, hockey, and soccer are better indicators of strictly athletic ability as well as skill.
- Status