Who’s the best or most well rounded athlete…

[No Skill Gap]

Fair point re cross fit, but I think a lot of those people miss out on a some of the properties that lead to success in sports, hence why they're in CrossFit.

TS stated some criteria, but admittedly he implied it wasn't definitive:
Strength
Strength endurance
Conditioning
Explosiveness/Power
Quickness/Speed
Maybe coordination

I guess I value size as a criteria also, with most of the traits being more important in a 'relative to size' context.

Many guys in the NFL have great cardio, they need to be able to run max effort sprints for hours.

Yes I think size and physicality is important in this discussion too. It's way easier for a 148 pound "twink" Tennis player to be agile and quick with directional movement than a 245 lb in shape man who's just naturally outlier big at 6'4 to 6'7 let's say.

It's something that can't really be ignored if we were to honestly evaluate what athleticism is. For example, the rarity of finding an athlete like Magic/Lakers Shaq is far higher than finding someone like Deveison Figuerado (sp) or Messi even. Kind of a weird comparison but I think it holds true.

 

[vision1]

NFL Football or any sport that has a huge revenue is going to therefore recruit the best athletes, general statement

Only true in the United States and Canada.
The best athletes in Africa, Europe, South America, etc do not pursue American Football. Doesn't matter how much money is there, it's just not in their vision. They know little to nothing about it and have no way of getting involved. That's why all the best athletes can't be in the NFL. That doesn't mean that NFL athletes are absurdly good athletes but most of the World's best athletes don't pursue American Football.

General statement is true though. But that makes football/soccer the biggest draw for the largest pool of best athletes in the world.

 

[gspieler]

Rob Konrad former Dolphins full back swam 27 miles of night time sea to get back to shore after falling off his boat.

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/13/...counts-his-27-mile-swim-to-florida-coast.html

Yeah, I think the NFL is probably the ultimate display of athleticism.

That’s insane. A 1-mile swim is a workout, in and of itself.

That said, no way that’s representative in any way of a median athlete in the NFL. Hell, many endurance athletes would struggle with that.

 

[Phlog]

That’s insane. A 1-mile swim is a workout, in and of itself.

That said, no way that’s representative in any way of a median athlete in the NFL. Hell, many endurance athletes would struggle with that.

I know right! Retired too, a 16hr swim. Just a different kind of human.

 

[No Skill Gap]

Only true in the United States and Canada.
The best athletes in Africa, Europe, South America, etc do not pursue American Football. Doesn't matter how much money is there, it's just not in their vision. They know little to nothing about it and have no way of getting involved. That's why all the best athletes can't be in the NFL. That doesn't mean that NFL athletes are absurdly good athletes but most of the World's best athletes don't pursue American Football.

General statement is true though. But that makes football/soccer the biggest draw for the largest pool of best athletes in the world.

Most of the world's best athletes do play in the NFL/NBA though, I still stand by that. How low are you setting the bar for "best athlete" that is the core problem here.

From some sources I looked up, 81% + of all professional soccer players are white. ~33% of the EPL was non-white, that's black-asian-hispanic-anything else obviously. So here's a huge point of context you're just ignoring outright by continually focusing on "volume".

You're counting a ton of junk volume. 1.4 billion China + 1.4 billion India + 1.2 billion African continent = ~4 billion people. How many of them are pro soccer players? Tack on US/Canada because virtually none play in the top leagues, 4.36+ billion people. Now obviously some of the best soccer athletes come from Africa I'd imagine, but again refer to the demographics above, at most we're talking 10-15% of pro soccer players max (and that's generous?).

To use the EPL as a sample point again: 7 players since 1992 (when EPL began) have been from the country of China. 0 players from India.

I'm not trying to be myopic on China/India here but just those two countries combined is 2.8 billion people roughly, so obviously there's a logical reason to look at them. Africa provides talent, but this is the crucial difference. With the possibly "charged" point of genetics, which shouldn't be political but probably is considered a political topic now a days...

In addition to tons of other context, obviously black kids in the US are getting a dramatically better opportunity to play a sport, get requisite nutrition, be safe. I don't want to get into some bullshit politics, but versus fucking Africa this is clearly true. This is probably the biggest difference.

For every Cristiano Ronaldo soccer has there are 10 WRs/CBs the NFL has that aren't even starters. (well again obviously not in volume total because I agree obviously soccer has more players, I'm talking peak athleticism here).

To tie this together, again - Soccer is more a skill based sport. You can excel in soccer without being an awesome athlete. You cannot play CB without being an awesome athlete. You basically cannot play WR or RB without being an awesome athlete. Every DB/WR/RB, many TEs/LBs/DEs, some QBs-etc, are all better athletes than the top 5-10% of soccer athletes barring maybe a few exceptions here and there. This isn't even talking NBA players, and this isn't even factoring in size to a real degree.

 

[vision1]

You've created a definition of athlete. Your vision of the ultimate athlete is an NFL/NBA player. Since your definition of the ultimate athlete is someone competing in those two leagues, obviously you'd believe the world's best athletes are in the NFL/NBA.
Can you understand that the traits making up the ultimate athlete in your mind are just your opinion and are up for debate? Just because a soccer player doesn't demonstrate the qualities that YOU like to see in an athlete, does not make them a worse athlete.
Many people consider Tom Brady one of the greatest athletes of all time. He doesn't look like or have the abilities that you consider most important in an athlete but can you at least appreciate their perspective? Now if Tom Brady can be one of the greatest athletes, surely other athletes in other sports, who wouldn't do well in an NFL combine, can also be some of the greatest athletes in the world.

 

[vision1]

You're counting a ton of junk volume. 1.4 billion China + 1.4 billion India + 1.2 billion African continent = ~4 billion people. How many of them are pro soccer players?

I don't even know what to say to this. How do you know it's junk volume? Why does it matter if they play pro soccer? The USA definitely exposes the most athletes. Somewhere like Africa, the opportunities in sports don't present themselves in the same way. Do you think it's possible many Francis Ngannous don't pickup boxing in their 20's and don't become world famous?

 

[Robocok]

I think fighting is the ultimate test of athleticism. Who cares if you can run or swim faster or farther or put balls in nets better or lift more than someone if they can kick your ass

 

[Volador]

that makes football/soccer the biggest draw for the largest pool of best athletes in the world.

If we define athleticism as the ability to excel in the typical categories of physical performance like strength, endurance, speed, power, running or jumping ability, then this isn't necessarily true.

Soccer doesn't place as much of a premium on pure athleticism as other sports, it's a very specific skill based sport, and there are all time great players who aren't particularly great in any of those categories. Some of the greats were just great at playing soccer ie.: field vision, passing accuracy, free kick/long shot accuracy, ball handling skill, finishing instincts, etc. Not that they were horrible athletes or anything.

I don't mean that there aren't great athletes in soccer, there are, but the conclusion that because it has the biggest talent pool, then it must have the best athletes is erroneous, at least if we go by the typical categories listed. It ignores the nature of the sport. And I say this as someone who used to be a huge soccer fan.

I do agree that this changes according to the definition of "athleticism" you use, I'm just going by what I consider most people to have in mind when they say it. That's something worth discussing too I guess.

 

[vision1]

If we define athleticism as the raw ability to excel in the typical categories of physical qualities like strength, endurance, speed, power, running or jumping ability, then this isn't necessarily true. Soccer doesn't place as much of a premium on pure athleticism as other sports, it's a very specific skill based sport, and there are all time great players who aren't particularly great in any of those categories, they are just great at playing soccer ie.: field vision, passing accuracy, free kick/long shot accuracy, ball handling skill, finishing instincts, etc.

If we were to define athleticism as you did, then it is possible that the best athletes are not playing soccer. However:

1) That’s not the definition of athleticism. It is “The physical qualities that are characteristic of athletes” and athletes being “a person who is proficient in sports”. A lot of the characteristics that make someone good are not included in your definition. Some people are just very good at sports and they’re not always the strongest or fastest.

2) Where are all the best athletes from the rest of the world if not in soccer? They’re not all pursuing basketball or football, like I’ve said earlier, most people don’t pursue those sports. They could be in other sports. They could also not be playing sports at all and just working a job trying to put food on the table.

I don’t think all the best athletes are in soccer btw. I think they’re all over. And I don’t think you can rank the physical traits of an athlete in importance because the importance will vary between sports.

 

[Robocok]

It really doesn't matter much if someone scores the highest in tests of strength, endurance, agility, and skill if some other guy can just make him say uncle. This is a way for people who can't fight to feel better about themselves by inventing silly parameters to stroke their ego. The superior fighter can just come and take your best athlete trophy from you and slap your wife's ass and there's nothing you can do about it except type on a forum about your PRs and how great they are compared to everyone else after you just got your face rubbed into the carpet.

 

[Volador]

1) That’s not the definition of athleticism. It is “The physical qualities that are characteristic of athletes” and athletes being “a person who is proficient in sports”. A lot of the characteristics that make someone good are not included in your definition. Some people are just very good at sports and they’re not always the strongest or fastest.

2) Where are all the best athletes from the rest of the world if not in soccer? They’re not all pursuing basketball or football, like I’ve said earlier, most people don’t pursue those sports. They could be in other sports. They could also not be playing sports at all and just working a job trying to put food on the table.

I don’t think all the best athletes are in soccer btw. I think they’re all over. And I don’t think you can rank the physical traits of an athlete in importance because the importance will vary between sports.

I added an edit regarding the definition issue just before you responded. This is from Merriam-Webster:

ath·let·i·cism | \ ath-ˈle-tə-ˌsi-zəm \
Definition of athleticism

: athletic ability : the combination of qualities (such as speed, strength, and agility) that are characteristic of an athlete

Sounds pretty close to what I said above. I wasn't trying to make an exhaustive list of attributes, just list some of them.

What I meant was that someone who is exceptionally strong, fast, tough, powerful, can jump high, run fast, has great endurance and is very coordinated will have advantages at almost every sport compared to people of similar skill level and experience. Someone with great soccer-specific skills won't necessarily have as much of an advantage as our hypothetical perfect athlete.

I'm aware all sports place a premium on sport specific skills. I just think soccer is more biased towards the specific skill side than the purely physical side than many others.

Regarding point 2)

I think China, Russia and many of the Soviet countries produce incredible Olympic weightlifters, wrestlers and gymnasts. The level of exceptional athleticism in those sports is insane imo. Parts of Africa and Jamaica produce the best track & field athletes.

India has about 20% of the world's population, but they don't excel at almost any sports. Maybe hockey. Australia and NZ have great rugby players. Russia, China and the US place an exceptional premium on athleticism and invest lots of resources, so I don't have many qualms saying that they have most of the best athletes (but not all), together with some African countries. I'm South American, but we don't produce much outside of soccer and some basketball. Colombia has some good weightlifters and maybe Brazil some track. There just isn't a culture, infrastructure or an economy conducive to that over there.

I agree that comparing extremely different athletes e.g.: the fastest guy vs the strongest guy, doesn't make a ton of sense.

 

[Fahcough]

Man you guys bring that shit deep. Need to qualify for Ninja Warrior to get over those walls of text

Athlete gotta be quick and nibble on feet, not the fastest in straight line. Gotta be strong and able to perform body weighted lifts over duration with burst of energy, not the strongest at picking something up. Must be able to adapt to situational changes not be a 1 talent all star. And if it's a requirement, he must play with balls.

Find your champ at the finish line of Spartan Ultra race

 

[wufabufa]

I think fighting is the ultimate test of athleticism. Who cares if you can run or swim faster or farther or put balls in nets better or lift more than someone if they can kick your ass

It's certainly the most basic and real form of competition that's ever existed.

 

[Fahcough]

It's certainly the most basic and real form of competition that's ever existed.

Everything ends up in a huge circle jerk debate. You can get blessed with a granite chin, monstrous overhand, with a 60 lb beer belly and kick ass but not be athletic.

 

[maximus__]

I don't know if it's been mentioned but I believe Rugby players on average are the fittest and most well rounded athletes. Special mention to NRL (Australian version) for similarities to the stop/start of NFL. You need to be strong, agile, fast and much more conditioned overall than any other sport. The difference being you play both offence and defence and there are less specialised players.

 

[vision1]

I added an edit regarding the definition issue just before you responded. Anyway, I'm just going by what I perceive most people to commonly mean when they think about athletics. This is from Merriam-Webster:

ath·let·i·cism | \ ath-ˈle-tə-ˌsi-zəm \
Definition of athleticism

: athletic ability : the combination of qualities (such as speed, strength, and agility) that are characteristic of an athlete

Sounds pretty close, if not exactly the same, to what I said above. I wasn't trying to make an exhaustive list of attributes, just list some of them. Soccer-specific skills aren't usually what people have in mind.

What I meant was that someone who is exceptionally strong, fast, tough, powerful, can jump high, run fast, has great endurance and is very coordinated will have advantages at almost every sport compared to people of similar skill level and experience. Someone with great soccer-specific skills won't necessarily have as much of an advantage at other athletic endeavors as our hypothetical perfect athlete.

I'm aware all sports place a premium on specific sport skills and also on general physical qualities. I just think soccer is more biased towards the specific skill side than the purely physical side than many others.

Regarding point 2)

I think China, Russia and many of the Soviet countries produce incredible Olympic weightlifters and gymnasts. That's a pool of about 2 billion people. The level of exceptional athleticism in those sports is insane imo. Parts of Africa and Jamaica produce the best track & field athletes in several events. That alone is about half of the world or more.

India has about 20% of the world's population, but they don't excel at almost any sports. Maybe hockey. In places where athletics aren't as culturally important, you won't see as many great athletes produced. Russia, China and the US place an exceptional premium on athleticism compared to other countries, so I don't have many qualms saying that they have most of the best athletes (but not all), together with some African countries. I'm South American btw, but we don't produce much in large numbers outside of soccer and some basketball. There just isn't a culture, infrastructure or an economy conducive to that over there.

I agree that comparing extremely different athletes e.g.: the fastest guy vs the strongest guy, doesn't make a ton of sense.

I don’t really disagree with what you’ve said. I only got pulled into this thread when I saw someone say that good cardio isn’t an athletic trait that’s important in sports.

When I was growing up I played two sports, hockey and lacrosse (box). Good Canadian sports, both require a high level of skill but are also very physically demanding and full contact. From kindergarten through grade 12, six months of the year were dedicated to hockey and six months of the year were dedicated to lacrosse. There was a kid I use to play with named John Tavares. He was the best hockey player in the world his age. He was also the best lacrosse player in the world his age. Bar none. He wasn’t the biggest, he wasn’t the strongest, he wasn’t the fastest, he wasn’t even the most skilled but he just had it. I don’t even think you can put into words what made him so good. He was tough and resilient and he worked his ass off. Most importantly he was just smarter than everyone else, he knew what moves to make, how to score, how to win. He was a very good athlete (and how the captain of the Maple Leafs).

On the other end of the spectrum, when I was at University, the Running Back at our school was an athletic freak based on the traits you listed. He was extremely fast. In the gym he would rep out twice his bodyweight on the bench and watching him do med ball slams was frightening. He was a very good running back too, he set season records at my school in TDs and rushing yards. I spent a week with him in Punta Cana on our grad trip. A bunch of us were tossing a football around on the beach. I remember seeing him throw a football and feeling embarrassment for him. It was like watching a girl throw with her wrong hand. To see such a good “athlete” be so uncoordinated was shocking. He chose the right position in the right sport to excel at because I don’t think he would have been good at much else.
My roommate at the time was very similar. He was very good at exercising but he was always the worst of us at pickup sports. He’s now a prominent S&C coach and he could have been competitive in something like Crossfit but I wouldn’t consider him a great athlete.

There are a lot of physical traits that make up a good athlete. You could make an extremely long list and it would still be incomplete. The importance of each one of those physical traits will also change depending on the sport. It’s a lot more complicated than strength+speed+size+endurance+skill.

 

[ChickenBrother]

Joey Chestnut drinks everyone else's milkshake. Hot dogs, fried asparagus, chicken wings, mac n' cheese, this man don't give a fuck and takes on all comers. Going for 14 Nathan's Famous wins this year and he's already ahead of any other major league athlete.

Savage eye of the tiger while de-throning the previous champ:

 

[No Skill Gap]

I don’t really disagree with what you’ve said. I only got pulled into this thread when I saw someone say that good cardio isn’t an athletic trait that’s important in sports.

When I was growing up I played two sports, hockey and lacrosse (box). Good Canadian sports, both require a high level of skill but are also very physically demanding and full contact. From kindergarten through grade 12, six months of the year were dedicated to hockey and six months of the year were dedicated to lacrosse. There was a kid I use to play with named John Tavares. He was the best hockey player in the world his age. He was also the best lacrosse player in the world his age. Bar none. He wasn’t the biggest, he wasn’t the strongest, he wasn’t the fastest, he wasn’t even the most skilled but he just had it. I don’t even think you can put into words what made him so good. He was tough and resilient and he worked his ass off. Most importantly he was just smarter than everyone else, he knew what moves to make, how to score, how to win. He was a very good athlete (and how the captain of the Maple Leafs).

On the other end of the spectrum, when I was at University, the Running Back at our school was an athletic freak based on the traits you listed. He was extremely fast. In the gym he would rep out twice his bodyweight on the bench and watching him do med ball slams was frightening. He was a very good running back too, he set season records at my school in TDs and rushing yards. I spent a week with him in Punta Cana on our grad trip. A bunch of us were tossing a football around on the beach. I remember seeing him throw a football and feeling embarrassment for him. It was like watching a girl throw with her wrong hand. To see such a good “athlete” be so uncoordinated was shocking. He chose the right position in the right sport to excel at because I don’t think he would have been good at much else.
My roommate at the time was very similar. He was very good at exercising but he was always the worst of us at pickup sports. He’s now a prominent S&C coach and he could have been competitive in something like Crossfit but I wouldn’t consider him a great athlete.

There are a lot of physical traits that make up a good athlete. You could make an extremely long list and it would still be incomplete. The importance of each one of those physical traits will also change depending on the sport. It’s a lot more complicated than strength+speed+size+endurance+skill.

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.

 

[Oblivian]

I think fighting is the ultimate test of athleticism. Who cares if you can run or swim faster or farther or put balls in nets better or lift more than someone if they can kick your ass

Just bleed