Today in sports medicine me, the teacher and the class got into a debate about what sport requires you to be the most athletic/in shape. The teacher, who used to be a pro wrestler, said boxing. I asked why not rugby or wrestling. Then the class, full of football players, said rugby required the least athleticism (if they knew what it was). They said rugby players were basically fat people who didn't have to wear pads and couldn't hit as hard or run as fast or for as long.
So this is obviously from people who don't watch rugby much at all, never mind as much as me. So I want a valid opinion.
Poll: Which sport requires you to be in the best overall shape? (Vote): American Football (Vote): Boxing (Vote): Rugby (Vote): Soccer (Vote): Wrestling (Vote): Other
poker but i voted for boxing anyone who says otherwise doesn't know what they are talking about although voting for wrestling could be understood
ill back up why if people are too stupid to understand on their own
and yeah sports like swimming and rowing are very tough, but the only person stopping you from doing good is yourself. Boxing and wrestling you have someone else there in the ring with you.
I remember reading in the paper that they did a study and its hockey of all things that takes the most athletisim to play. I never played hockey before, but I guess I could see how all that skateing and hitting that littil puck around could be hard.
Voting for anything that isn't a "total body" sport just doesn't make sense. I voted for wrestling, but I wouldn't argue with anyone who said boxing, tennis, or swimming. Hockey, eh, I guess you could make a case for it, but anyone who says soccer, rugby, or football is deluding himself.
But Boxer are the most conditioned athletes. Serious boxers dont drink alcohol, and eat clean every day of the week. Boxing is such a tough sport because there isn't any time outs, or teammates to help out in a fight. You have to be in the best shape of your life to survive.
Champions like Bernard Hopkins start training months before a fight. They train 6days a week and wake up at 5 in the morning to do roadwork. Bernard then trains the entire day and goes to bed at 8. This goes on for months.
Bernard isnt the only boxer who does this. All serious boxers go through this punishment.
On February 10 2005 09:36 SurG wrote: Team sports are not even close.
That's a stupid thing to say. Atheticism is a combination of strength and speed, which boxing definitely has. but the feats boxers acheive isn't as impressing as the amazing combination of agility and strength that a running back has. those guys can run twice as fast as i can, weighing like 60 lbs more, while shrugging off 250 lb linebackers.
On February 10 2005 09:49 Hot_Bid wrote: espn took a panel of experts and made a chart categorizing everything, with aspects like strength speed flexibility agility etc: http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/sportSkills
On February 10 2005 09:49 Hot_Bid wrote: espn took a panel of experts and made a chart categorizing everything, with aspects like strength speed flexibility agility etc: http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/sportSkills
I agree with that list for the most part.
yeah thats a nice list. supprised to see Rodeo so high up there lol.
On February 10 2005 10:32 LeJester wrote: I cant believe they have Baseball/Softball rated higher then Soccer on that list. Thats a joke.
well soccor takes more endurance, but baseball takes a hell of alot of hand eye cordination . Thats part of being a great athleat.
EDIT:The scores they gave soccer I think are fair. Only thing I would change is maybe bring its endurance score up to a 8, and its flexablity up to a 6/7. You need to be pretty damn flexable to raise your leg that high. That would be enough to move it to about number 5 on the list.
On February 10 2005 10:32 LeJester wrote: I cant believe they have Baseball/Softball rated higher then Soccer on that list. Thats a joke.
Apparently hitting a major league pitcher is about the hardest thing to do in any sport. When you look at the breakdown of all the various critera they're judging on, the fact that baseball is rated higher than soccer makes a lot more sense.
a lot of the stuff baseball players do is not flashy, but extremely difficult, like fielding hard hit grounders, fouling off 95mph fastballs on the edge the strike zone, etc
anyone know what the diffrance between strength and power is? Im guessing power is like explosiveness in one move. While strength is over the corse of the game/event.
Cheerleading got robbed lol. The agility for cheerleading should be like at least a 7, and so should the nerve scores. You have to have a hell of alot of agility and guts to get thrown in the air like that.
EDIT: Also wtf is basketball doing that high? 6s for strength and power wtf? I know you need some power in your legs to jump that high, and there a bit of pushing in the paint. Still all in all there not that much strength involved. I give it at the most a 4.5 for strength and 5.5 for power.
are you kidding? you need SO much strength in basketball... it's about exploding to the basket, absorbing contact, and still finishing... not to mention boxing out, which is basically pure strength and leverage
I am of the opinion that boxers are #1 because they combine speed, agility, reflexes, strength, endurance and toughness in a way that no other sport does.
However, one could make an argument for something like tennis, where agility is so important, hand eye coordination is unmatched, speed and endurance are huge factors, and precision is of the utmost importance.
On February 10 2005 11:30 Hot_Bid wrote: are you kidding? you need SO much strength in basketball... it's about exploding to the basket, absorbing contact, and still finishing... not to mention boxing out, which is basically pure strength and leverage
I agree explosive moves to the basket are a huge part of basketball, but thats speed not power I would say. Boxing out I think would fall under strength, but it does not take all that much. Boxing out is more about being smart then strong anyway because the guy cant really push you out of the way. He more or less has to go around you not threw you. Still I guess people at ESPN know more then I do so maybe your right lol, but thats how i see it.
but top tier badminton requires ridiculous stamina, agility, monster reflexes, sheer power, footwork, hand eye coordination, very quick thinking. its a fucking shame we're all pansies.
edit: and flare AND deception i mean just watch Peter Gade's cross court drops, he flips the racket over at the last minute omg its just fucking art.
Though the term "athletisism" is vague and open to interpretation, I read an article the other day that said Nascar Drivers are the most well conditioned athletes and furthermore that their sport is the most exhaustive and physically draining of all.
I understand that point, even though I can't stand that red neck hillbilly "sport"...
On February 10 2005 11:53 ManaBlue wrote: Though the term "athletisism" is vague and open to interpretation, I read an article the other day that said Nascar Drivers are the most well conditioned athletes and furthermore that their sport is the most exhaustive and physically draining of all.
I understand that point, even though I can't stand that red neck hillbilly "sport"...
I think the ESPN poll does a great job defining everthing that goes into being a athleat. while the scores are open to debate, I cant think of any categories, or skills they left out.
and if you count it as a sport, i guess i would undoubtedly vote for those "extreme marathon" runners. if you don't know what im talking about ill find a link to one
about nascar, yeah they sit in a car and make a left turn like a couple thousand times, and it probably requires a lot of precision and strength and ability, but generally people tend to undervalue the sports/games where the athletes do the same thing very repetitively, like running or swimming, because while you can be amazing at them, they're generally not impressive
i mean you can just make up a sport where you have to walk on spikes and eat poisonous fish and have sex with smelly goats, and that would be the most difficult sport, but really it's the athletes that make a sport what it is.
boxing is arguably #1, it's hard to argue that some nfl/nba players would have been better boxers than ali or tyson or whoever. but just look at rugby, if you put ray lewis on a rugby team i guarantee you some of his opponents would be DEAD after the game. the fringe sports and x-games crap is really hard to argue because none of the top tier athletes are really participating in them.
NFL players are probably very good in shape except for linemen.. I think tennis requires athleticism because of all the quick reaction/running around/ swinging. You need strong arms, legs, wrists, etc..
generally tennis players aren't that strong with regards to pure arm strength, comparitively to the other sports.. a lot of it is technique and legs and torso
On February 10 2005 11:59 travis wrote: and if you count it as a sport, i guess i would undoubtedly vote for those "extreme marathon" runners. if you don't know what im talking about ill find a link to one
On February 10 2005 09:01 travis wrote: poker but i voted for boxing anyone who says otherwise doesn't know what they are talking about although voting for wrestling could be understood
ill back up why if people are too stupid to understand on their own
and yeah sports like swimming and rowing are very tough, but the only person stopping you from doing good is yourself. Boxing and wrestling you have someone else there in the ring with you.
What about MMA then eh? EH?
Especially under older rules, or special rules (think Kazushi Sakuraba vs Royce Gracie, 1 hour 30 minute fight, hehe).
But yeah, wouldn't those triathlon (swimming running cycling) thingies be pretty exhausting?
Also, I dunno if this is to be considered a sport but.. 100 man kumite in kyokushin sounds damn hard..
Basically it's fight 30 opponents (knockdown full contact), short break, another 30 opponents, short break, another 30 opponents, short break, another 10 opponents *win*.
And they get harder and harder (ie higher and higher ranked fighters) the further they progress... Sounds fucking hard to me..
On February 10 2005 09:49 Hot_Bid wrote: espn took a panel of experts and made a chart categorizing everything, with aspects like strength speed flexibility agility etc: http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/sportSkills
Boxing is #1
keep in mind that the most difficult sports do not necessarily have the best athletes.
espn also had a poll about best athletes... i think michael vick won over barry bonds in the finals...
right now, i'd say that's pretty accurate... it's really hard to compare freaks like bonds, vick, and garnett in their respective arenas
and where do you put someone like Jordan?
That list sucks, how can fishing be below sports like bowling. It can take a lot of work to fly-fish and walking miles just to get back into a river area. Billiards you just stand around and move you arm a few inches to hit a shot. Man us fisherman get no respect ;x
On February 10 2005 09:36 SurG wrote: Team sports are not even close.
That's a stupid thing to say. Atheticism is a combination of strength and speed, which boxing definitely has. but the feats boxers acheive isn't as impressing as the amazing combination of agility and strength that a running back has. those guys can run twice as fast as i can, weighing like 60 lbs more, while shrugging off 250 lb linebackers.
While I can understand your fascination with running backs, when was the last time you saw RB running for more than 10 seconds? Why don't you calculate how much time during the game they just stand around or sit. Football players work in bursts.
Baseball is a very lazy sport, but It takes a good patience and skill to hit a good slider/curveball
also, I dont know if any of you have ever really boxed before but it takes WAY more stamina than any other sport, takes hand eye co-ordination, it takes power, it takes fucking everything boxing is fucking HARD. Hell you have to use strategy in boxing.. I will commonly give up a round to tire out my opponnet. I used to box like every day after school at my friends house but we dont do that much anymore sinec basketball practice started for most of my friends, i am a lazy bastard and quit last year anyways enough rambling
On February 10 2005 08:46 Orome wrote: Badminton is proven to be the most exhausting game.
being (most) athletic is about much more than stamina alone
Another vote for badminton - badminton is not merely about stamina although boasting more shots per rally by far compared to tennis. It's also the fastest racket sport by a wide margin, and although played with a court half the size of a tennis court, players must cover much more ground.
It requires agility and footwork in retrieving shots, body posture in doing 300+km/h (200+mph) smashes, and an _incredible_ amount of deception in play. Players have to be explosive in their movements and moving from shot to shot is a blast in one direction and regaining balance. Incredible game.
1 more worth mentioning would be gymnastics, if u take into account all the events that entails.
the top few have to be (not in ordeR) gymnastics fighting (MMA is like kickboxing and wrestling combined so it'd have to beat both of those right?) hockey squash AND WORLDS STRONGEST MAN!!
On February 10 2005 13:19 OneOther wrote: NFL players are probably very good in shape except for linemen.. I think tennis requires athleticism because of all the quick reaction/running around/ swinging. You need strong arms, legs, wrists, etc..
I dunno its just my opinion
Though it may seem like blocking doesn't take much, it is actually harder than it seems. Linemen do have to be in good shape to be able to block the whole game. The defensive linemen also need endurance to continuously rush.
i wouldn't count boxing as being truly athletic, athletics requiring a much more diverse range of movement in my mind.
however, i have to say boxing is (one of) the toughest sports requiring both mental strength and speed as well as the physical. where you do have to the punches, and where hundreds of a second really do count.
Badminton is an awesome sport that requires a huge amount of athletic ability. Another sport I havent heard anyone mention that is really demanding is water polo.
On February 10 2005 13:19 OneOther wrote: NFL players are probably very good in shape except for linemen.. I think tennis requires athleticism because of all the quick reaction/running around/ swinging. You need strong arms, legs, wrists, etc..
I dunno its just my opinion
Though it may seem like blocking doesn't take much, it is actually harder than it seems. Linemen do have to be in good shape to be able to block the whole game. The defensive linemen also need endurance to continuously rush.
yeah, once you've tried to block for 60 minutes.. see what your arms do afterwards.
Well I do MMA and it is just as exhausting as boxing IMO.
When you take the person down and start grappling and ground + pounding them, that does tire you out, but I would still put it on the same level as boxing. Sometimes you can't control the pace of the boxing round, if someone goes at you all out, keeping up with them is exhausting.
I could ground and pound + grapple for like 8 minutes, but a 8 minute round in boxing would kill the fuck out of me.
MMA isn't mentioned because it is not very recognized in North America. More in Euro and Asia.
One more thing to add. MMA fighters can sometimes walk out of the ring with their heads intact, just get tapped out. Boxers either get Knocked Out or go the distance. Watch Ali vs Frazier III, round after round of pure non stop punishment.
I played a ton of sports in my day and by far the hardest for myself and most people I talk to is rowing and swimming. Both sports are so demanding.. you use every muscle in your body for both and you have to be close to 100% health in order to be the best. The internal, mental struggle is the hardest. You are your own worst enemy and the clock. I still row to this day.
and whoever said boxers because tehy get punched in the face a lot, it doesnt take any athleticism to have a high pain tolerance. not saying boxer isnt a possibile #1 sport, but just not for that reason. also - ping pong yo, fastest sport alive
On February 10 2005 20:39 FroST(TE) wrote: and whoever said boxers because tehy get punched in the face a lot, it doesnt take any athleticism to have a high pain tolerance. not saying boxer isnt a possibile #1 sport, but just not for that reason. also - ping pong yo, fastest sport alive
lololoolol too bad you don't have to move more than 3 feet ;D
and wtf is hand-eye coordinatin as criteria for soccer. soccer requires insane coordination between your eyes and every part of your body besides your hands
kickboxing requires more stamina, overall body athleticism and toughness than boxing
ps. and the answer to your question sure as hell isn't rugby or nfl
And although i might be biased i think australian rules football requires just as much stamina and probably more athleticism than soccer/'real football' (consider that game length is like 2 hours and how big the ground is)
if it was raw athletic abilty I'd probably say basketball but theyre not a fit as soccer player/afl players etc
athletics probably requires athleticism
yeh i'd choose kickboxing cos of overall combination of toughness, agility, quickness, strength and stamina
On February 10 2005 20:12 Tien wrote: Well I do MMA and it is just as exhausting as boxing IMO.
When you take the person down and start grappling and ground + pounding them, that does tire you out, but I would still put it on the same level as boxing. Sometimes you can't control the pace of the boxing round, if someone goes at you all out, keeping up with them is exhausting.
I could ground and pound + grapple for like 8 minutes, but a 8 minute round in boxing would kill the fuck out of me.
MMA isn't mentioned because it is not very recognized in North America. More in Euro and Asia.
One more thing to add. MMA fighters can sometimes walk out of the ring with their heads intact, just get tapped out. Boxers either get Knocked Out or go the distance. Watch Ali vs Frazier III, round after round of pure non stop punishment.
but the question was about athleticism, not what is the most exhausting or the toughest. MMA requires more atheticism than boxing standing because feet are involved. then you have to be a whole other kind of athlete on the ground. seems pretty obvious to me.
when it comes to athleticism:
MMA > K-1 > boxing. simple as that.
Anyone argueing for another sport I can understand. Though since Thiathlon is an official sport mentioning swimming/running/biking is pretty useless.
On February 10 2005 20:39 FroST(TE) wrote: and whoever said boxers because tehy get punched in the face a lot, it doesnt take any athleticism to have a high pain tolerance. not saying boxer isnt a possibile #1 sport, but just not for that reason. also - ping pong yo, fastest sport alive
On February 10 2005 20:39 FroST(TE) wrote: and whoever said boxers because tehy get punched in the face a lot, it doesnt take any athleticism to have a high pain tolerance. not saying boxer isnt a possibile #1 sport, but just not for that reason. also - ping pong yo, fastest sport alive