Who’s the best or most well rounded athlete…

[vision1]

Again, broaden your definition of athleticism. You're comparing apples and oranges.
And you sound like a 13 year old on X-box live.

 

[No Skill Gap]

Again, broaden your definition of athleticism. You're comparing apples and oranges.
And you sound like a 13 year old on X-box live.

Xbox no need to hyphenate.

I'm not sure why I should broaden my definition of athleticism to acquiesce to your desires. This became a discussion about athleticism and you were the one who replied to me making it that way.

You on the other hand are arguing for something entirely different, which is what makes someone "an athlete" in general. Your definition is subjective and so broad and inclusive that it makes this debate absurd. What is your point here? You want to include literally any physical action as being athletic? Anyone who plays any "Sport" is an athlete, and therefore counts in a discussion on raw athleticism?

So we now circle back. Do you consider Powerlifting or Strongman to have amazing athletes? If they were in the olympics it seems that you would. And that's both arbitrary and hypocritical.

Do you consider Ma Long to be one of the best athletes on the planet? Gold medalist in ping pong. A "sport" that is now in the olympics, table tennis aka ping pong. It does require physical action, god tier hand eye and reaction times. So how is this much different athletically under your definition than a marathon runner who has a 2.3% better vo2 max and is genetically engineered to run extremely fucking slow for extremely long or a cyclists doing the same on a bike?

And there lies the problem. When you broaden the definition to include anyone and everything to such ludicrous levels beyond reason, well then anything arbitrarily included in the olympics or considered a sport that people follow with X popularity levels will have "athletes" and their feats of athleticism will be counted. When in reality, Tyreek Hill is a billion times the athlete that Ma Long or Kenyan #14 or French guy cycling is.

 

[vision1]

I didn't make this discussion about athleticism, look at the thread title.
In your opinion, which position in American football requires the most athleticism and why?

 

[No Skill Gap]

I didn't make this discussion about athleticism, look at the thread title.
In your opinion, which position in American football requires the most athleticism and why?

To answer your question, I can easily do so. Cornerback. Why?

1. The minimum level of athleticism to even play CB in the NFL at all is basically 90th+ percentile for the NHL or pro Soccer I'd say. It is probably the most demanding position out of any sport on the Earth easily. I'd go as far as to say it's above Olympic sprinting because they are so specialized and run in a straight line, or a slight curve I guess.

2. It requires all aspects of athleticism. Yes there is cardio for the record, for sure. But great to exceptional acceleration, speed, change of direction, reaction time, jumping ability, physicality and strength (relative to size).

3. Less skill requirement in the position vs say WR which is also an absurdly athletic position. Many CBs are failed WRs because they did not have the hands or route running or feel to play offense. So therefore, it's just more pure athleticism.

I know you get triggered when I cite an athletic testing event for a sport, but I will do so regardless. Here is the average scores for a CB in the NFL combine:

4.47 second 40-Yard Dash; 15 reps on 225lb Bench Press; 36.26 inch Vertical Jump (standing); 6.88 three-cone (sub 7 is a good-great mark); 121.9 inch broad jump.

To compare to the NHL combine in 2015, the best vertical jump was 28.74 inches. The best Bench Press rep, with ~155-165lbs on the bar, was 20 reps by Jesse Gabrielle. The best "consecutive pull-ups" was 14.

Conor McDavid for example had a combine that consisted of a 19.5 inch vertical, 6 pull-ups in a row, and 9 reps with a bench press of 70-80% of his total BW (he's listed at 193, so let's just say 150-160lbs on the bar).

These are just drills and tests, but its abundantly clear. How do you honestly think the average EPL soccer player would fare in this kind of testing? I'd bet they would be pretty good at three cone drills and agility stuff, still probably not as good as NFL skill positions and possibly significantly worse still. But they would just get eviscerated in explosive vertical/horizontal jumping and sprinting testing, and obviously strength.

Beyond all of this we have to account and factor for size. But in this example, the NFL CB is pretty much the same size as an average NHL player and bigger than the average soccer player I'd say, without a doubt.

 

[No Skill Gap]

Define cardio though in terms of sport/athlete...

I feel like "best athlete" isn't going to be defined by having amazing slow pace long distance cardio nor is it defined by slow maximal strength either. Can't think of any great or all-time athletes that excel specifically in that as their best trait.

I hate picking on you but I can't help it.
Never heard of an endurance sport? The major professional leagues in North America aren't the only sports out there.

Can you stop the strawman shit though. I saw you say multiple times you were roped or dragged into this discussion. No you weren't bro, you fucking started being a dickhead to me and criticizing my post.

You also are saying cardio is being attacked, where was it attacked? I was specifically criticizing long-distance niche cardio sports/events and you were defending endurance sports. That was the first interaction. Don't lie about it at least.

I didn't come in here an attack you for the country you were born in and live in, you did that to me. Kind of fucking weird but okay. You continually just ignore all the points I make too. The olympics has ping pong now, table tennis. Ma Long gold medalist. Hand eye coordination + reaction time + physically hitting a ball with a paddle, so by YOUR definition of athleticism that you want to force onto me and others, Ma Long and ping pongers(?) are all amazing athletes?

 

[gspieler]

You continue to equate SKILLS with ATHLETICISM even in this example above. I'm not talking shit but that is what you're doing. Just because someone throws a ball like a sissy nanny girl doesn't mean they're not a stud athlete. It means they probably never played baseball or QB, they never specialized and learned that motor pattern, technique, skill.

So imagine Tyreek Hill, let's just pretend he never touched a soccer ball in his life and thinks it's a pussy sport. He's not going to look like Messi out there, he's going to be horrible at dribbling the ball and using his feet with that level of dexterity and motion, at least bad.

Another example we probably have all seen is Jon Jones. He handles a basketball like a retarded 6th grader in gym class, yet he obviously is a very good athlete coming from a family of very good athletes. Maybe he's not top tier, but he's probably close and then he chose a sport where the athletic pool isn't all too high and dominated the fuck out of it.

I'm not a big hockey fan but of course I know who Tavares is. If that's true that's very cool. But I think the "answer" to your point there is that hockey and LAX are also pretty big skill sports. Lacrosse is basically just dudes who couldn't make it in hockey imo, blunt truth of it. Obviously a far less athletic talent pool than hockey. The NHL/Hockey has a respectable talent pool but again we're talking about a sport that's quite literally over 99% white and has a skill requisite of skating on ice to even begin to play. Putting the skates on imo just automatically lowers athletic requirements out the gate. Baseball is another skill sport but I think it's clear it has better top tier athletes than Hockey does, perhaps overall better as well despite not requiring it from a lot of positions.

Do you really think that John Tavares or Tyler Seguin or Bergeron or Sidney Crosby would have the athletic chops to hang with even bottom tier guards in the NBA or RB/DB/WRs in the NFL? Purely athletically. I would say, no they would get fucking smoked. That's the point I've been making 90,000 words ago. You're still looking at skill based shit. And yeah, there's definitely other aspects of athleticism that matter for other sports that guys excel at like Khabib/Matt Hughes for example. There's obviously some trait that makes guys like that super strong in grappling/wrestling, that's when muscular endurance and cardio (not marathon 40 mile cardio) matter and there's almost certainly genetic factors for that imo.

Basketball, several positions in football, are every bit(arguably more) skill-based as soccer.

 

[gspieler]

To answer your question, I can easily do so. Cornerback. Why?

1. The minimum level of athleticism to even play CB in the NFL at all is basically 90th+ percentile for the NHL or pro Soccer I'd say. It is probably the most demanding position out of any sport on the Earth easily. I'd go as far as to say it's above Olympic sprinting because they are so specialized and run in a straight line, or a slight curve I guess.

2. It requires all aspects of athleticism. Yes there is cardio for the record, for sure. But great to exceptional acceleration, speed, change of direction, reaction time, jumping ability, physicality and strength (relative to size).

3. Less skill requirement in the position vs say WR which is also an absurdly athletic position. Many CBs are failed WRs because they did not have the hands or route running or feel to play offense. So therefore, it's just more pure athleticism.

I know you get triggered when I cite an athletic testing event for a sport, but I will do so regardless. Here is the average scores for a CB in the NFL combine:

4.47 second 40-Yard Dash; 15 reps on 225lb Bench Press; 36.26 inch Vertical Jump (standing); 6.88 three-cone (sub 7 is a good-great mark); 121.9 inch broad jump.

To compare to the NHL combine in 2015, the best vertical jump was 28.74 inches. The best Bench Press rep, with ~155-165lbs on the bar, was 20 reps by Jesse Gabrielle. The best "consecutive pull-ups" was 14.

Conor McDavid for example had a combine that consisted of a 19.5 inch vertical, 6 pull-ups in a row, and 9 reps with a bench press of 70-80% of his total BW (he's listed at 193, so let's just say 150-160lbs on the bar).

These are just drills and tests, but its abundantly clear. How do you honestly think the average EPL soccer player would fare in this kind of testing? I'd bet they would be pretty good at three cone drills and agility stuff, still probably not as good as NFL skill positions and possibly significantly worse still. But they would just get eviscerated in explosive vertical/horizontal jumping and sprinting testing, and obviously strength.

Beyond all of this we have to account and factor for size. But in this example, the NFL CB is pretty much the same size as an average NHL player and bigger than the average soccer player I'd say, without a doubt.

You’re equating tests specifically designed to measure athletic carryover to football, to athleticism as a whole. This is a false equivalency IMO. Of course football players are going to outperform athletes from other other sports in tests specifically-designed for football players.

 

[No Skill Gap]

You’re equating tests specifically designed to measure athletic carryover to football, to athleticism as a whole. This is a false equivalency IMO. Of course football players are going to outperform athletes from other other sports in tests specifically-designed for football players.

You think the vertical jump and bench press were specifically designed for football players?

Come on.

I guess an MMA athlete that can somehow run a 9.9 100M sprint, a 4.30 forty yard dash, has a 44 inch vert, and can run a 6.67 on a three-cone drill is only athletic if he can wrestle well and has good MMA-BJJ. That's your argument.

Jumping and running aren't sport specific in general. Those are measures of athleticism. Skating on ice (generally), hitting the top shelf with a wrist shot, or hitting a single leg against a cage are not. You also say the NBA is just as skill based, yes there are skills like dribbiling the ball or shooting obviously, but the requisite athleticism is just way higher than hockey or soccer. Not sure what else to say, you guys can think whatever you want it's becoming too irrational to respond to.

 

[vision1]

To answer your question, I can easily do so. Cornerback. Why?

1. The minimum level of athleticism to even play CB in the NFL at all is basically 90th+ percentile for the NHL or pro Soccer I'd say. It is probably the most demanding position out of any sport on the Earth easily. I'd go as far as to say it's above Olympic sprinting because they are so specialized and run in a straight line, or a slight curve I guess.

2. It requires all aspects of athleticism. Yes there is cardio for the record, for sure. But great to exceptional acceleration, speed, change of direction, reaction time, jumping ability, physicality and strength (relative to size).

3. Less skill requirement in the position vs say WR which is also an absurdly athletic position. Many CBs are failed WRs because they did not have the hands or route running or feel to play offense. So therefore, it's just more pure athleticism.

You're making this really difficult for me.
The cornerback position requires the most athleticism because 1) it requires the highest level of athleticism. lol what? Number 2 answers it a little bit better. So to group those qualities, it basically requires the most speed and quickness of any position, it requires high levels of relative strength, and it requires a solid baseline of conditioning. I agree with that assessment.
That brings me to what I've been trying to get at all along.
The physical qualities that you believe are MOST important towards athleticism are those traits of a cornerback. You're giving priority to specific physical traits and then calling the athletes who display those traits at the highest level to be the best athletes. Do you see the problem here? Someone could easily come here and place more importance on different physical qualities and they would therefore think a different group of athletes are the best athletes. You would say they are wrong (and you will probably say that).

Athleticism is very broad and you're making it very narrow. Different sports require different physical qualities.
Tyreek Hill could have grown up playing tennis instead of track and football. He could have spent 10,000+ hours developing his tennis skills and he would have never been as good as Djokovic. Mike trout could have spent his entire life training to be a hockey goalie. He could have developed the same skills as Carey Price but he would have never been as good of a goalie. Kevin Durant could have never been a Adrian Peterson. Usain Bolt could have never been Lance Armstrong. All of these amazing athletes have athletic qualities that are specific to the sport that they excel at.

Can you stop the strawman shit though. I saw you say multiple times you were roped or dragged into this discussion. No you weren't bro, you fucking started being a dickhead to me and criticizing my post.

You also are saying cardio is being attacked, where was it attacked? I was specifically criticizing long-distance niche cardio sports/events and you were defending endurance sports. That was the first interaction. Don't lie about it at least.

I didn't come in here an attack you for the country you were born in and live in, you did that to me. Kind of fucking weird but okay. You continually just ignore all the points I make too. The olympics has ping pong now, table tennis. Ma Long gold medalist. Hand eye coordination + reaction time + physically hitting a ball with a paddle, so by YOUR definition of athleticism that you want to force onto me and others, Ma Long and ping pongers(?) are all amazing athletes?

I never once said that you attacked cardio. You said the best athletes won't have amazing long distance cardio. That's because your definition of the best athletes are athletes in sports (NFL) that don't require long distance cardio. There are plenty of sports that do require good cardio. Why is that so difficult to grasp?

 

[Volador]

So how is this much different athletically under your definition than a marathon runner who has a 2.3% better vo2 max and is genetically engineered to run extremely fucking slow for extremely long or a cyclists doing the same on a bike?

I don't follow the NFL or NBA too much, so I can't say much about them. But they do have a point in that elite long distance runners are more impressive than you make them out to be.

Look a the world's best marathoner:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eliud_Kipchoge

He ran 26miles in 2:01:39. That's a pace of about 4:40/mile sustained over 2 hours. He then ran an unofficial sub 2 hours marathon too. That is complete insanity to me, I almost can't fathom how that's humanly possible. Yet it is. Mind you, this guy also won gold in the 5,000m and 10,000mts and broze at 3,000mts. His best mile time is listed at 3:50. He's not some slow fuck lol. This fucker is averaging 17 seconds every 100mts... for 2hs straight. I don't think it's comparable to ping pong, those skinny long distance runners are also fast as fuck and insanely impressive to an almost superhuman level, even if they are 115lbs. He is an elite and completely exceptional athlete under any definition imo.

Mo Farah is another marathoner who also was a champion at 5k, 10k and ran 800mts in 1:48. Meaning, he averaged 13.5"/100mts 8 times in a row. He also ran a 2:05 marathon for the European record. This is insane. They would trash any NFL player at any running event except 40m and perhaps 100mts.

 

[gspieler]

You think the vertical jump and bench press were specifically designed for football players?

Come on.

I guess an MMA athlete that can somehow run a 9.9 100M sprint, a 4.30 forty yard dash, has a 44 inch vert, and can run a 6.67 on a three-cone drill is only athletic if he can wrestle well and has good MMA-BJJ. That's your argument.

Jumping and running aren't sport specific in general. Those are measures of athleticism. Skating on ice (generally), hitting the top shelf with a wrist shot, or hitting a single leg against a cage are not. You also say the NBA is just as skill based, yes there are skills like dribbiling the ball or shooting obviously, but the requisite athleticism is just way higher than hockey or soccer. Not sure what else to say, you guys can think whatever you want it's becoming too irrational to respond to.

Acceleration speed(40yd dash, vert, etc) is a huge component of athleticism. But you seem to think that it’s the be-all, end-all of athleticism.

For example, you keep citing soccer as just a skill game(which, tbf, soccer requires a lot of skill). But it also requires high levels of coordination, agility, reaction time, and both aerobic/anaerobic capacity, which are all components of athletic ability.

 

[Robocok]

For endurance athletes, John Stamstad is incredible though not very well known. I got to ride with him at the Sea Otter Classic in 2000.

https://www.outsideonline.com/1845131/which-does-not-kill-me-makes-me-stranger

https://www.mountainzone.com/mtbiking/99/features/stamstad/

There's also a documentary about him on Amazon prime called Into the Divide about his mountain bike ride from Canada to Mexico.

https://www.amazon.com/Into-Divide-John-Stamstad/dp/B08FFCDPCK

 

[No Skill Gap]

You're making this really difficult for me.
The cornerback position requires the most athleticism because 1) it requires the highest level of athleticism. lol what? Number 2 answers it a little bit better. So to group those qualities, it basically requires the most speed and quickness of any position, it requires high levels of relative strength, and it requires a solid baseline of conditioning. I agree with that assessment.
That brings me to what I've been trying to get at all along.
The physical qualities that you believe are MOST important towards athleticism are those traits of a cornerback. You're giving priority to specific physical traits and then calling the athletes who display those traits at the highest level to be the best athletes. Do you see the problem here? Someone could easily come here and place more importance on different physical qualities and they would therefore think a different group of athletes are the best athletes. You would say they are wrong (and you will probably say that).

Athleticism is very broad and you're making it very narrow. Different sports require different physical qualities.
Tyreek Hill could have grown up playing tennis instead of track and football. He could have spent 10,000+ hours developing his tennis skills and he would have never been as good as Djokovic. Mike trout could have spent his entire life training to be a hockey goalie. He could have developed the same skills as Carey Price but he would have never been as good of a goalie. Kevin Durant could have never been a Adrian Peterson. Usain Bolt could have never been Lance Armstrong. All of these amazing athletes have athletic qualities that are specific to the sport that they excel at.



I never once said that you attacked cardio. You said the best athletes won't have amazing long distance cardio. That's because your definition of the best athletes are athletes in sports (NFL) that don't require long distance cardio. There are plenty of sports that do require good cardio. Why is that so difficult to grasp?

1. I'm not sure what you proved there, seems fallacious to me. Could have responded that way to literally any answer. I'll easily include other positions like guard/wing in the NBA, WR/RB and many LB/DE/TE/QB in the NFL, etc.

2. You're still equating skills. Tyreek Hill might never be Djokovic? Yes because tennis is a massive skill sport. I think we can hypothetically say that Tyreek Hill has the requisite lateral agility and athleticism to be a great tennis player, he just doesn't have the skills. And right, maybe he's not built or good at specific things too but that is far too niche. But this is an odd example considering Tyreek's forte and exceptional trait is lateral movement, change of direction, cutting on a dime, on top of being a legit 4.3-4.4 speed guy.

Didn't we see Serena Williams fucking dominate women's tennis already? Would you be using her as an example if she was the best female sprinter/boxer instead? But she did it. She was raised learning the sport and honing the skills required to ascend in the sport.

Honestly, it's amazing that you are still strawmanning me on the cardio after I just posted verbatim quotes. I never once said cardio was worthless to every sport or in general. If this discussion was about fucking MMA then I would hold cardio in FAR higher regard than a discussion about raw athleticism where I consider it but it's not on the top of the list or close.

You're just focusing far too much on the niche. I genuinely don't know if you just refuse to admit being wrong and care to win online arguments this much or you actually believe it, but it turns the entire "debate" into a exercise of absurdity. You are warping the definition of "athleticism" where any human who excels at any niche physical movement or anything relating to the human body is a fucking super athlete or worthy of consideration.

 

[No Skill Gap]

I don't follow the NFL or NBA too much, so I can't say much about them. But they do have a point in that elite long distance runners are more impressive than you make them out to be.

Look a the world's best marathoner:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eliud_Kipchoge

He ran 26miles in 2:01:39. That's a pace of about 4:40/mile sustained over 2 hours. He then ran an unofficial sub 2 hours marathon too. That is complete insanity to me, I almost can't fathom how that's humanly possible. Yet it is. Mind you, this guy also won gold in the 5,000m and 10,000mts and broze at 3,000mts. His best mile time is listed at 3:50. He's not some slow fuck lol. This fucker is averaging 17 seconds every 100mts... for 2hs straight. I don't think it's comparable to ping pong, those skinny long distance runners are also fast as fuck and insanely impressive to an almost superhuman level, even if they are 115lbs. He is an elite and completely exceptional athlete under any definition imo.

Mo Farah is another marathoner who also was a champion at 5k, 10k and ran 800mts in 1:48. Meaning, he averaged 13.5/100mts, 8 times in a row and also ran a 2:05 marathon. This is insane. They would trash any NFL player at any running event except maybe 40m.

I never said it wasn't impressive though. I find it impressive. I just don't think it's all too relevant to finding out what makes the best athlete or is athleticism.

The hand eye to play ping pong is pretty fucking impressive too. Did you know someone held their breath under water for over 22 minutes? That is insane as well. 700+ feet freedive record, etc. All these things are impressive. Are they athleticism?

Mo Farah would get destroyed by many NFL players too btw, you're wrong there. Farah's 100m PR is 12.9 seconds in the 100m - https://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=4974206 (edit maybe not PR but idk, doubt he's running much faster or sub 11? idk)

DK Metcalf just recently ran a 10.36 second 100m in a qualifier for the olympics -

Bo Jackson ran a 10.3 in college, Herschel Walker ran a 10.1 in college which was apparently 7th in NCAA overall. And there have been many comparable talents to Metcalf in the NFL purely in straight line speed, many better too. So no, Farah would absolutely get dominated by many NFL athletes in the 100m, let alone the 40 yard dash which is an even more acceleration, short burst distance and the combine measurement.

That would be the pit trap. Assuming long distance guy's paces (which are fucking insane I agree) just translate to them somehow being fast twitch athletes in short events. It doesn't. But for fighting, I guess you can have a Nate Diaz marathon level cardio argument, although I'd argue the marathon aspect is mislabeled there and it's an entirely different type of endurance. The Diaz brothers also probably have trash times for their events? But I have no clue.

(DK Metcalf doesn't even have a top 20-25 time at the combine for the 40 yard dash aka 36.57M dash all-time, which only started in the early 2000s with lasers I think)

 

[vision1]

What niche??? I'm opening this up to literally all sports. You're narrowing it down to the NFL and the NBA. There are so many sports out there that all require different physical attributes. A gold medal gymnast will not demonstrate the same qualities as a heavyweight champion. They can both be in the talks of best athlete. Why can't you grasp that?

Athleticism: The physical qualities that are characteristic of athletes ...
Athletes: A person who is proficient in sports ...
Sports: An activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or team competes against another or others for entertainment.

 

[No Skill Gap]

What niche??? I'm opening this up to literally all sports. You're narrowing it down to the NFL and the NBA. There are so many sports out there that all require different physical attributes. A gold medal gymnast will not demonstrate the same qualities as a heavyweight champion. They can both be in the talks of best athlete. Why can't you grasp that?

Athleticism: The physical qualities that are characteristic of athletes ...
Athletes: A person who is proficient in sports ...
Sports: An activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or team competes against another or others for entertainment.

Lmao, imagine having a shred of intellectual honesty.

 

[Volador]

I never said it wasn't impressive though. I find it impressive. I just don't think it's all too relevant to finding out what makes the best athlete or is athleticism.

The hand eye to play ping pong is pretty fucking impressive too. Did you know someone held their breath under water for over 22 minutes? That is insane as well. 700+ feet freedive record, etc. All these things are impressive. Are they athleticism?

Mo Farah would get destroyed by many NFL players too btw, you're wrong there. Farah's 100m PR is 12.9 seconds in the 100m - https://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=4974206

DK Metcalf just recently ran a 10.36 second 100m in a qualifier for the olympics -

Bo Jackson ran a 10.3 in college, Herschel Walker ran a 10.1 in college which was apparently 7th in NCAA overall. And there have been many comparable talents to Metcalf in the NFL purely in straight line speed, many better too. So no, Farah would absolutely get dominated by many NFL athletes in the 100m, let alone the 40 yard dash which is an even more acceleration, short burst distance and the combine measurement.

That would be the pit trap. Assuming long distance guy's paces (which are fucking insane I agree) just translate to them somehow being fast twitch athletes in short events. It doesn't. But for fighting, I guess you can have a Nate Diaz marathon level cardio argument, although I'd argue the marathon aspect is mislabeled there and it's an entirely different type of endurance. The Diaz brothers also probably have trash times for their events? But I have no clue.

(DK Metcalf doesn't even have a top 20-25 time at the combine for the 40 yard dash aka 36.57M dash all-time, which only started in the early 2000s with lasers I think)

Ok, I edited before you responded to add 100mts too. We could even add 200mts and maybe 400mts, although I'm sure they would beat plenty of guys. Not sure taking a charity event and comparing it to a guy actually competing in 100mts is an equivalent comparison, but fair enough, he would lose to good 100mts sprinters. But those marathon runners would fuck anybody in the NFL roster at anything above 600mts for sure. They might be lapping guys in a mile race and running it sub 4', and that's not even their specialty. So they're not running "extremely slow at extremely long distances" and that's it. They're running extremely fast at medium and long distances and excel at everything but peak acceleration. That was the point of it. They are exceptionally gifted athletes at anything but the shortest distances. I don't think it's just some pointless athletic achievement. That would be the same as saying a jumper is not athletic because high or long jumping is niche. Elite running ability above 100-400mts is not "niche" , or equivalent to juggling or some circus act. Seems a bit arbitrary to make that distinction.

 

[Deleted member 512089]

So we now circle back. Do you consider Powerlifting or Strongman to have amazing athletes? If they were in the olympics it seems that you would. And that's both arbitrary and hypocritical.

Powerlifting only requirement is max effort on an extremely short period of time so powerlifters are athletes only in the context of powerlifting.

Strongmen are all around well rounded athletes. Exerting strength and power in a plethora of events all different one from the other and having cardio. Yes strongmen have cardio, of course it's not marathon runners aerobic cardio, but to lift 5 gigantic atlas stones back to back while running between you need a very good glycolysis energy system and cardio within it.

 

[vision1]

Lmao, imagine having a shred of intellectual honesty.

Where have I been dishonest?

 

[ASUThermo]

DK Metcalf looks like a fucking giant compared to those guys he was running against. I would assume that is a really amazing 100m time for someone that weighs as much as he does, impressive.