Common sports narratives that aren't true (or are greatly exaggerated)

[Madmick]

Like I said, 5' 8" doesn't work is just about any sport, even swimming and track.

Indeed! This is why I once wrote:

Smaller men are naturally inferior in the majority of contests. It sucks, but it's the truth, and we all know it. Even women know it. This pains smaller men, but there's no point blinking when surveying the truth of the universe.

It's ironic that on a board devoted to MMA and combats sports someone would overlook this truth in favor of P4P feel-good drivel. There's a reason weight classes exist. Smaller men require a handicap in the most primal, purest competition of them all: physical combat.

This is a general truth. Height and reach are favorable to success in nearly every athletic endeavor. There is always an inverse parabola, but the higher end is almost invariably favored. Know what short limbs and large torsos are favorable for? Surviving the winter. In the grand scheme of the species that is more important than a basketball game, but in terms of assessing the supreme athletes, a basketball game is far more useful than handicapped holds-barred combat like weight class wrestling.

As I mentioned, the selection for height is particularly acute in basketball.

Also, FYI, swimming is another sport which aggressively selects for height. This is due to a simple hydrodynamic principle pertaining to drag coefficients: a longer boat is a faster boat. So it's a really silly sport to highlight as some sort of casual example for how men who are below average in height struggle. Of course they struggle. You picked a sport where almost all the male finalists in the distances at 200m or below (the majority of events) are between 6'0-6'7".

Would you say hight is most important in swimming?

Yes. Height and reach are the single most important anthropomorphic traits contributing to success in swimming at an elite level. The tallest swimmers can produce the greatest stroke efficiency. It becomes less important the longer the distance. Just as with sprinting this is counterbalanced by other factors contributing to success. That's why it's not as favorable to swimming as it is to basketball, for example.

How many 5' 8" professional mens tennis players have you seen? Just about all athletics benefit from being over normal human average size.

Coordination, skill and game smarts are still more important than hight in basketball. Taller players have an advantage but only up to a point. Hight won't make you a great or even a good player. Also, it can't be news to you that players are generally measured in shoes and that their hight is almost always overstated.

Why isn't Wilt or Kareem considered the best player ever? Because shorter guys were better. Hight is not that important.

How many ATP Top 500 professional tennis players have you seen that are 6'5" and taller? Want to count them up to compare them to the NBA? What do you think you're proving by pointing out short men are naturally inferior in most sports? This doesn't speak to degree.

 

[colorles]

The thing that I find most ironic about modern sports, is that, like Madmick says, that almost all select for traits that are warmer weather adapted - namely taller bodies with longer limbs and hands. A shorter but stockier body with shorter arms and legs and smaller, more compact feet and hands but larger torsos were the physical traits that were actually selected for for much of human history to survive the extreme cold - going back to the last ice ages. But hey like they say: the traits for extreme winter survival arn't sexy until your fingers and toes are freezing off and then you wish you had them.

 

[FyrFytr998]

The thing that I find most ironic about modern sports, is that, like Madmick says, that almost all select for traits that are warmer weather adapted - namely taller bodies with longer limbs and hands. A shorter but stockier body with shorter arms and legs and smaller, more compact feet and hands but larger torsos were the physical traits that were actually selected for for much of human history to survive the extreme cold - going back to the last ice ages. But hey like they say: the traits for extreme winter survival arn't sexy until your fingers and toes are freezing off and then you wish you had them.

Based.

Tell me how being bigger and taller helps you when you need cover from sniper fire, lol.

 

[colorles]

Based.

Tell me how being bigger and taller helps you when you need cover from sniper fire, lol.

While I do agree with what you are saying as would anybody with firearms experience...in the picture you posted it would help to be built like this :

All he would have to do is do a headstand and he would blend right in. But that only counts if you are trying to hide behind narrow young trees.

 

[codfather]

The importance of hight in basketball is way overrated.

If you look at the top 50 highest-paid athletes of all-time, in terms of inflation-adjusted earnings, ignoring NBA players, the tallest according to celebheights.com are:

1. Peyton Manning - USA - 6'5 ¼ - 25th
2. Tom Brady - USA - 6'4 ¼ - 21st
3. Ernie Els - South Africa - 6'3 - 35th
4. George Foreman - USA - 6'3 - 27th

...though there are 6 people in that top 50 who don't have a measurement on celebheights.com:

1. Arnold Palmer
2. Michael Schumacher
3. Greg Norman
4. Jeff Gordon
5. Fernando Alonso
6. Kimi Raikkonen

 

[Revolver]

That defense was actually played in the 80’s and 90’s NBA.

 

[gspieler]

The thing that I find most ironic about modern sports, is that, like Madmick says, that almost all select for traits that are warmer weather adapted - namely taller bodies with longer limbs and hands. A shorter but stockier body with shorter arms and legs and smaller, more compact feet and hands but larger torsos were the physical traits that were actually selected for for much of human history to survive the extreme cold - going back to the last ice ages. But hey like they say: the traits for extreme winter survival arn't sexy until your fingers and toes are freezing off and then you wish you had them.

What traits nature selected would have varied greatly from region to region, I imagine.

 

[fica]

What traits nature selected would have varied greatly from region to region, I imagine.

how about scandinavia ,balkans benelux all in colder area and on average tallest people in world

 

[colorles]

how about scandinavia ,balkans benelux all in colder area and on average tallest people in world

The Indo-Europeans are not originally from an arctic or subarctic climate though. Whereas the Inuit and various Siberian Native ethnic groups have been living in the arctic and subarctic for tens of thousands of years if not longer.

 

[HomeCheese]

If you look at the top 50 highest-paid athletes of all-time, in terms of inflation-adjusted earnings, ignoring NBA players, the tallest according to celebheights.com are:

1. Peyton Manning - USA - 6'5 ¼ - 25th
2. Tom Brady - USA - 6'4 ¼ - 21st
3. Ernie Els - South Africa - 6'3 - 35th
4. George Foreman - USA - 6'3 - 27th

Those are listed hight or actual measurements in bare feet? Hight is important in most sports but just being tall won't cut it. Coordination and mindset is more important.

 

[HomeCheese]

Indeed! This is why I once wrote:

As I mentioned, the selection for height is particularly acute in basketball.

Also, FYI, swimming is another sport which aggressively selects for height. This is due to a simple hydrodynamic principle pertaining to drag coefficients: a longer boat is a faster boat. So it's a really silly sport to highlight as some sort of casual example for how men who are below average in height struggle. Of course they struggle. You picked a sport where almost all the male finalists in the distances at 200m or below (the majority of events) are between 6'0-6'7".

Yes. Height and reach are the single most important anthropomorphic traits contributing to success in swimming at an elite level. The tallest swimmers can produce the greatest stroke efficiency. It becomes less important the longer the distance. Just as with sprinting this is counterbalanced by other factors contributing to success. That's why it's not as favorable to swimming as it is to basketball, for example.

How many ATP Top 500 professional tennis players have you seen that are 6'5" and taller? Want to count them up to compare them to the NBA? What do you think you're proving by pointing out short men are naturally inferior in most sports? This doesn't speak to degree.

TBH - you sound short. To me 6"5" isn't that tall, most folks that are good at sports are bigger than average. However, just being tall doesn't make you good.

Plenty of 7 foot tall guys suck at basketball and most of the top scorers play on the wing or the back court. If hight was paramount, the taller players would score more and more easily but this is not the case.

There is a diminishing return on a players hight. It helps to a certain extent then the taller a player gets the less speed and the less coordination they seem to have. Like most 7 footers don't have great jump shots or are good at passing. It helps but it also takes something away.

Think about it, in basketball a 7 footer should have better court vision and more passing lanes open to him because he is taller. Assist should be easier for them. Yet, seldom will you see a 7 footer than is a really good passer. Why is this? When you are taller it's harder to have the fine motor skills.

The less someone knows about basketball the more importance they place on hight.

 

[Madmick]

TBH - you sound short. To me 6"5" isn't that tall, most folks that are good at sports are bigger than average. However, just being tall doesn't make you good.

I'm 6'5". It's exceptionally tall. This isn't subjective. I've quoted percentiles to you.

Plenty of 7 foot tall guys suck at basketball and most of the top scorers play on the wing or the back court. If hight was paramount, the taller players would score more and more easily but this is not the case.

Have you stopped to consider what percent of the global population is 7'0" tall, and then stopped to compare what percent of NBA players are that tall? Ever looked at American Samoa's population and made any casual observations about their representation in the NFL? Or Iceland and strongmen competitions?

There is a diminishing return on a players hight. It helps to a certain extent then the taller a player gets the less speed and the less coordination they seem to have. Like most 7 footers don't have great jump shots or are good at passing. It helps but it also takes something away.

There is a diminishing return, because of gravity, mostly, as it's far less about their height and more about their weight, but this diminishing return is incredibly weak relative to the advantages that height brings in basketball versus other sports. That's why they're so tall. It has far more to do with the increasingly diminishing percentage of humans who are that height. The talent pool becomes incredibly thin. The number of humans who are 7' is already a tiny fraction of a percent. The number that are 7'3" are a fraction of that fraction.

Think about it, in basketball a 7 footer should have better court vision and more passing lanes open to him because he is taller. Assist should be easier for them. Yet, seldom will you see a 7 footer than is a really good passer. Why is this? When you are taller it's harder to have the fine motor skills.

The less someone knows about basketball the more importance they place on hight.

This last bit is just a bunch of stupid shit written by someone without an understanding of the game.

 

[volodya]

I'm 6'5". It's exceptionally tall. This isn't subjective. I've quoted percentiles to you.

Have you stopped to consider what percent of the global population is 7'0" tall, and then stopped to compare what percent of NBA players are that tall? Ever looked at American Samoa's population and made any casual observations about their representation in the NFL? Or Iceland and strongmen competitions?

There is a diminishing return, because of gravity, mostly, as it's far less about their height and more about their weight, but this diminishing return is incredibly weak relative to the advantages that height brings in basketball versus other sports. That's why they're so tall. It has far more to do with the increasingly diminishing percentage of humans who are that height. The talent pool becomes incredibly thin. The number of humans who are 7' is already a tiny fraction of a percent. The number that are 7'3" are a fraction of that fraction.

This last bit is just a bunch of stupid shit written by someone without an understanding of the game.

The best player on the planet is 7 foot tall and fat. What are you even on about here sadmick?

 

[Madmick]

The best player on the planet is 7 foot tall and fat. What are you even on about here sadmick?

You're talking to the wrong guy. I'm not the one arguing that height is a disadvantage.

 

[volodya]

Copy that. I misread as you were quoting a whole mess of posts.

 

[Unknown Pleasures]

Oh Home Cheese, lot of 7 footers aren't great passers because they practice other skills that emphasize their size.

Generally one advantage of being a bit shorter is dribbling and ball handling without turning it over; hence, point guards tend to be some of the shorter players all else being equal.

Anyhow, at this point you are either trolling or just unwilling to learn anything.

 

[haysus31]

That profesional athletes are all loaded super wealthy. Reality most of their careers are short lived. The stars score big contracts while the guy you never heard of gets 5 years of pay then is out of the sport they play. Now add taking care of their parents and siblings then divorce child support and God knows what. You realize there's a reason coach so and so is working the sidelines, he has no choice. The stars are set but remember the player from your favorite team you never heard of, well he only played in the league 2 seasons.

 

[codfather]

Those are listed hight or actual measurements in bare feet? Hight is important in most sports but just being tall won't cut it. Coordination and mindset is more important.

Those are estimated barefoot heights. The people who run the website are super-finicky about establishing real heights; it's their entire selling point.

 

[Fedorgasm]

Of course it doesn't. Skills are the divider. But to say being tall isn't massively important to basketball is downright ignorant, and wrong. The statistics about player heights at the elite level are straightforward.

FFS, stop. His pre-draft measurement profile put Jordan at 6'6". At best, you can try the unofficial "height without shoes" to call him 6'5". Paging @HomeCheese: 6'5" is tall. That puts an American male in the Top 1% of height.

And that's really the baseline to finally find yourself under the tall side of the curve for elite players. The vast majority of them are 6'5" or taller.

So what? Again, 6'3" is tall. That's not a short man. Furthermore, Curry is an outlier. Even in the age of moneyball he spearheaded he's an outlier among shooters. Almost all of the best scorers and shooters are still tall. You're talking about this like it isn't unusual for the best players to only be 6'3". Once again, wrong.

Look at the MVP vote getters in the quarter century since the dawn of the new millennium that spans this moneyball era. Usually anywhere from 12-20 players a season earns a vote. Stephen Curry, Derrick Rose, Steve Nash, Chris Paul, Tony Parker, Damian Lillard, Donovan Mitchell, Deron Williams, Chauncey Billups, Baron Davis, Rajon Rondo, Ja Morant, John Wall, Kyle Lowry, Sam Cassell, De'Aaron Fox, Jalen Brunson, and Ty Lawson are the only players to have gotten even a single vote. That's 18 total players. All but three were at least 6'2". Only three ever won the MVP, and two of those are generally considered to be among the weakest individual players to ever win it.

Even to allow up to 6'3", the number of players in the NBA, especially the most elite players, are a very slim minority.

Today I learned that Sam Casell got MVP votes

 

[Area809]

“Basketball was better in the 90s”.

No, it was a sluggish game. 2/3 of the league didn’t average 100 points per game. You even had teams that didn’t average 90 points per game. There’s a reason why they changed the rules. People were bitching at the time.