What sport has the best athletes?

[Skydog]

Sounds like the Hunger Games scenario basically. Seems to me that shotputters and javelin throwers have the upper hand on the weaponry...

I think I could avoid getting hit by a shotput!

[mkirsh]

Why not define athleticism with athletics? Pick a 20 person team from every sport and make them compete in every single Olympic event. Who would have the best overall aggregate results relative to teams of other professional sports? And no specialization, everyone competes in every event. I’ll need to think this through more before I answer my own question.

[Skydog]

A curious but interesting concept. But change the rules and you likely change the answer. Why 10 acres? Why not one? Or 100? Or 1,000? Why not require a long march predatory to combat? Put a body of water in the equation. Or a dense forest that occupies all of the area. Is the field flat? What happens if you add some steep hills? Is it raining? Brutally hot? Frigidly cold?

Any criteria we come up with for your hypothetical (I hope) death match will be arbitrary and will benefit some survival skills at the expense of other survival skills.

All true. I tried to come up with some kind of neutral situation that might resemble common prehistoric battle conditions (males protecting their brood or the foraging area around them). 50 people battling in 1 acre (208’ X 208’) seemed like it would just be a bloodbath won by the big guys. 1000 acres- they could just avoid each other forever. Also those don’t fit my made-up picture of common evolutionary scenarios. Water could be added but not sure how that would help (good swimmers are going to keep paddling until everyone is dead?). Extreme cold or heat seems to be cherry picking situations. Hills might affect things, maybe favoring NBA players due to endurance.
But sticking to my original - 10 acres, half plain, half forest, only weapons are sticks and stones, which group would you pick? I have to go with NFL. A bunch of very quick ~6’5” 240lbs guys I guess? NBA would be close behind. Soccer players have endurance and would be able to hide effectively but I just don’t see them doing a lot of damage with their sticks, stones or fists.

[Acymetric]

Why not define athleticism with athletics? Pick a 20 person team from every sport and make them compete in every single Olympic event. Who would have the best overall aggregate results relative to teams of other professional sports? And no specialization, everyone competes in every event. I’ll need to think this through more before I answer my own question.

I like the idea, except that the Olympic events aren't evenly distributed across various athletic skills/talents. It probably comes down to "who can swim the best*". I would expect NFL players to clean up every track event 800m and under (including hurdles and relays), and in the "field" events that rely on upper body strength like the shot put/javelin throw, etc. Soccer players probably do the best in the distance runs.

On the other hand, if we're talking winter Olympics you probably have to give it to the hockey players for seemingly obvious reasons.

*Without getting disqualified?

[jimsumner]

We're defining athleticism in terms of cavemen fighting with rocks and sticks?

It should be apparent that I'm a bit of a skeptic here. People keep mentioning football players. But a 6-2, 190-pound receiver or defensive back has significantly different physical attributes than a 6-2, 290-pound lineman. The latter would use sticks and stones to break the former's bones all day long. But only if they could catch them. And if the chase lasted more than a few seconds, the lineman likely would collapse, gasping for breath, leaving them very, very vulnerable.

Football is a very specialized sport.

I do think we're undervaluing endurance here.

My bet would be on a less-specialized sport, like soccer or tennis, one which places a higher premium on endurance. But again, defining the rules goes a long way towards determining the outcome.

[Acymetric]

We're defining athleticism in terms of cavemen fighting with rocks and sticks?

It should be apparent that I'm a bit of a skeptic here. People keep mentioning football players. But a 6-2, 190-pound receiver or defensive back has significantly different physical attributes than a 6-2, 290-pound lineman. The latter would use sticks and stones to break the former's bones all day long. But only if they could catch them. And if the chase lasted more than a few seconds, the lineman likely would collapse, gasping for breath, leaving them very, very vulnerable.

Football is a very specialized sport.

I do think we're undervaluing endurance here.

My bet would be on a less-specialized sport, like soccer or tennis, one which places a higher premium on endurance. But again, defining the rules goes a long way towards determining the outcome.

For what its worth, when I talk about football players I'm almost exclusively talking about skill position guys (WR, RB, LB, CB, and S) and not linemen. I also think people are underselling the level of endurance that players at those positions have. As much endurance as a competitive marathon runner? Surely not. As much as a basketball player? Probably.

Tennis is interesting, because it requires a lot of endurance, but there isn't really much straight line running or sustained running, it is basically a ton of short sprints with a lot of lateral movement and some (short) pauses in between.

Looking at track, for example, I don't think endurance really becomes a significant negative factor for football players until you get past 1500m (I would expect the 1500m to be dominated by a mix of soccer and football players with a sprinkling of other sports like basketball/tennis, with soccer players dominating any event longer than 1500m and football players dominating any event shorter).

[jimsumner]

For what its worth, when I talk about football players I'm almost exclusively talking about skill position guys (WR, RB, LB, CB, and S) and not linemen. I also think people are underselling the level of endurance that players at those positions have. As much endurance as a competitive marathon runner? Surely not. As much as a basketball player? Probably.

Tennis is interesting, because it requires a lot of endurance, but there isn't really much straight line running or sustained running, it is basically a ton of short sprints with a lot of lateral movement and some (short) pauses in between.

Looking at track, for example, I don't think endurance really becomes a significant negative factor for football players until you get past 1500m (I would expect the 1500m to be dominated by a mix of soccer and football players with a sprinkling of other sports like basketball/tennis, with soccer players dominating any event longer than 1500m and football players dominating any event shorter).

Linebacker is a skill position?

But I digress.

Football is played in short bursts. Most plays last a few seconds, then players get 40 or so seconds off, rinse and repeat. And of course players play offense or defense and timeouts are all over the place. It's not unusual for a soccer player to run eight, even nine miles in a game. I guarantee you no football player even remotely approaches that. In terms of cardiovascular endurance, it's not even close.

And I suspect world-class soccer players match football players in speed. But no one checks soccer players in a 40-yard dash because such a short distance is meaningless in that sport. Because, you know...

[Acymetric]

Linebacker is a skill position?

Technically not, but I consider them somewhat a defensive skill position as they are expected to cover the run and the pass (they seem to be the defensive analog to running backs, although I guess you could argue it should be Safeties). In any case, not central to the point I'm just trying to explain that I'm excluding 300 pound linemen from the equation when I talk about winning the 4x100 relay (and of course I would allow someone who wants to advocate for basketball players to exclude Shaq or Sean May in the same vein).

But I digress.

Football is played in short bursts. Most plays last a few seconds, then players get 40 or so seconds off, rinse and repeat. And of course players play offense or defense and timeouts are all over the place. It's not unusual for a soccer player to run eight, even nine miles in a game. I guarantee you no football player even remotely approaches that. In terms of cardiovascular endurance, it's not even close.

And I suspect world-class soccer players match football players in speed. But no one checks soccer players in a 40-yard dash because such a short distance is meaningless in that sport. Because, you know...

I believe the average for soccer players is around 7 miles, of course it can be more or less depending on the position and style of play. It is fair to note that players in soccer aren't literally running nonstop for 90 minutes, there is plenty of walking, jogging, or even just standing over the course of a game (plus throw ins, set pieces, etc)*. Also note that I am not disputing that soccer players would have better endurance than football players, that's why I would expect soccer players to dominate any event beyond the mile (well, 1500m in the Olympics). NFL receivers can run ~1.5-2 miles from what I recall, but that only counts actual routes run and not jogging/running back to the line of scrimmage or on/off the field (and for deep threat receivers a lot of those routes are full speed sprints) so you could probably add another mile or two to that if you wanted a fair comparison to soccer players (obviously they are still traveling far less). Basketball I believe is somewhere around 2-3 miles as well from what I remember.

As far as football being played in short bursts, is the argument that football players are literally incapable of running further than 40-80 yards at a time? We can probably dig up all manner of articles detailing NFL workout regimens that include running multiple miles at a time. Just because they aren't doing it in games doesn't mean they are incapable of doing it (if we had to go only by what we see during live play you would probably have to throw out Tennis players...)

It is also fair to point out there is some fair history of football players being track stars at the high school or even college levels, it seems unlikely that those guys just completely forgot how to run. A guy like Tedd Ginn Jr. might have had a decent shot at qualifying for the Olympics if he weren't busy catching footballs. I will admit, as you mentioned, that this is probably true for elite soccer players as well.

*This is even more true in basketball, for those advocating for basketball players.

[jimsumner]

How did we get away from the idea that decathletes are the world's best athletes?

As an aside, do we think that any football player is a better athlete than Usain Bolt at his peak? Had he grown up in the U.S. maybe he becomes a football player.

Which leads me to perhaps my major quibble with this thread; way too America-centric for my taste. American-style football is basically played in one country on the planet and we seem awfully eager to forget the rest of the world and its sports. Humans evolved running down their prey on the African plains. Maybe marathoners are the world's best athletes.

[sagegrouse]

The Superstars competition ran from 1973 to 2003 -- with a three-year gap from 1995-1997. A natural place to look for great athletes.

You may remember the competition-ending obstacle course. In one of the early ones, Reggie Jackson and Pete Rose (neither a winner) charged through the finish line in a dead heat.

So how do winners sort out by sport, as listed in the Wikipedia article?

Football -- 13 times (O.J. once, Herschel Walker twice, Willy Gault twice)
Track & Field -- 7 times (Renaldo Nehemiah won twice as a track ath-a-lete and twice as a football player)
Soccer -- 3 times -- all Kyle Rote Jr.
Skiing -- 3 times -- including Bode Miller
Baseball -- 1 time (Kelly Gruber)
Water skiing -- 1 time

The inclusion of more international athletes might have shown more winners for soccer.

Most unusual football winner -- DE Mark Gastineau of the Jets.

[jv001]

1) Roller Derby players
2) Ladies swim suit contestants
3) LPGA athletes
4) Ladies Volley Ball players
and not to forget #5) Lady Throw Ball players.

Psst. Don't reveal my list to Mrs. JV001

[Acymetric]

How did we get away from the idea that decathletes are the world's best athletes?

As an aside, do we think that any football player is a better athlete than Usain Bolt at his peak? Had he grown up in the U.S. maybe he becomes a football player.

Which leads me to perhaps my major quibble with this thread; way too America-centric for my taste. American-style football is basically played in one country on the planet and we seem awfully eager to forget the rest of the world and its sports. Humans evolved running down their prey on the African plains. Maybe marathoners are the world's best athletes.

The original premise of the thread was about which major sports (which I think a lot of people interpreted as "the most popular team sports") had the best athletes, which is why nobody is bringing up Usain Bolt, or marathon runners. That the best sprinter in the world is the best sprinter isn't a discussion, it is just a tautology (and I don't think anyone is saying there's another Usain Bolt hidden on the roster of the Chiefs or Man U, or at least that is not a claim I am making).

[PackMan97]

In a hunger games scenario, I'm going to go with Soccer Players. Why?

Simply put, most soccer players I remember in high school were straight up thugs. Football players? Sure, they were mean on the field, but they wouldn't hurt a fly by nature. Soccer players were just plain old mean.

Not to mention I think soccer would give players speed and endurance necessary to win. Speed to either close with a target, or to stay a safe distance. Football players would seldom have a chance to use their strength because those strong enough wouldn't be able to catch the soccer player...and as strong as a DB or WR might be, I don't think they'll significantly outclass a soccer player. Especially if the soccer player gets in a few kicks.

[OldPhiKap]

In a hunger games scenario, I'm going to go with Soccer Players. Why?

Simply put, most soccer players I remember in high school were straight up thugs. Football players? Sure, they were mean on the field, but they wouldn't hurt a fly by nature. Soccer players were just plain old mean.

Not to mention I think soccer would give players speed and endurance necessary to win. Speed to either close with a target, or to stay a safe distance. Football players would seldom have a chance to use their strength because those strong enough wouldn't be able to catch the soccer player...and as strong as a DB or WR might be, I don't think they'll significantly outclass a soccer player. Especially if the soccer player gets in a few kicks.

In my high school, the thugs were the hockey defensemen. Big, mean people.

[jimsumner]

The original premise of the thread was about which major sports (which I think a lot of people interpreted as "the most popular team sports") had the best athletes, which is why nobody is bringing up Usain Bolt, or marathon runners. That the best sprinter in the world is the best sprinter isn't a discussion, it is just a tautology (and I don't think anyone is saying there's another Usain Bolt hidden on the roster of the Chiefs or Man U, or at least that is not a claim I am making).

Track and field is a major sport to a much-larger portion of the world than football or baseball or ice hockey.

And besides, this being the internet and all, we left the original premise a long, long time ago.

[camion]

Track and field is a major sport to a much-larger portion of the world than football or baseball or ice hockey.

And besides, this being the internet and all, we left the original premise a long, long time ago.

I'm still trying to come up with a definition of athlete where I am at/near the top. That's a toughie.

I do know that the list of attributes will have to include keyboard shortcut skills (speed) and movie marathons (endurance).

[OldPhiKap]

I'm still trying to come up with a definition of athlete where I am at/near the top. That's a toughie.

I do know that the list of attributes will have to include keyboard shortcut skills (speed) and movie marathons (endurance).

You must be under 50, or else have an olympic-grade bladder.

[camion]

You must be under 50, or else have an olympic-grade bladder.

Have you heard of the Trucker's Friend? Legal equipment in my world.

[OldPhiKap]

Have you heard of the Trucker's Friend? Legal equipment in my world.

In my day, that meant little white pills to keep you awake.

[camion]

In my day, that meant little white pills to keep you awake.

Keep on trucking, no need to stop for a bathroom break.

truckers-friend.jpg