The definition of athleticism is the physical qualities that are characteristic of athletes, such as strength, fitness, and agility. I believe you are confusing skills that can be trained to a high level with athleticism.Hardartery wrote: ↑Sun Nov 06, 2022 12:19 pmBoth athletes are demonstrating athletic ability, sure. But they are demonstraing a very specific skill set within narrow parameters. Hitting a 90 mph baseball might be difficult, but way too many people demonstrate the ability to do so for it to be particularly elevated in rank versus other things. Alexeev was a transcendent Weightlifter, but he's not making anyone's list either in spite of incredible strength and speed, and I'm sure a massive vertical as well. But all of that adds up to basically one dimensional athletic ability because it's all that he did. In contrast, every single decathlete that reaches the top of their sport is required to possess a fairly incredible ability in 10 different disciplines that are frankly quite different from each other. That event is by it's very design proof of all around athleticism. American Football, as much as I enjoyed playing it, is a very narrowly defined skillset. It is arguable that your list of qualities combined in it is actually BETTER demonstrated and tested in Rugby which also requires significantly better conditioning. Football players are good at Football, and I honestly do not value Baseball at all as a test of athleticism or even a real sport. These two sports are very much niche activities, not made less so by numbers of participants. Frankly, outside of the US American Football is not poplular or particularly contested, and baseball is only slightly more popular than Football. They are both very much tiny minority sports compared to Futbol, or as it is called in North Americ Soccer. Which would make it much more powerful of an argument to sayy that Messi, or Ronaldo, or Pele or several others are in fact vastly superior athletes to anyone found in Football or Baseball.
Not many people can see much less hit a 90+ mph fastball. Let alone do it well. I don't particularly put any stock in baseball as it essentially boils down to 'can you hit a 90+ mph fastball' which is what Moneyball is all about. I simply pointed out that Jackson and Sanders aren't 1D athletes. Why they are 1D athletes is a concept you have yet to really explain.
Futbol is not a great test of overall athleticism. IMO, strength, power, and explosiveness are the most important athletic qualities. They are the least trainable and have the most genetic variation. For an athlete that competes in a sport that eliminates two of them disqualifies that athlete as a 'greatest athlete'. Would Ronaldo survive on an American Football or Rugby field? He'd have to hold up to the physicality where other athletic qualities such as strength and power become important factors. In essence, Ronaldo could be a real big sissy. We just don't know.
Conditioning is interesting as an athletic quality to mention. What type of conditioning? The ability to perform moderate activity for long periods? Almost anyone with 'normal' genetics can train that conditioning to a high level. What about the ability to perform explosive movements repetitively? I played both futbol and American football in high school. I could barely play one American football game per week (the physicality). And I was exhausted after every American football game. I could play 3 futbol games in a day. 6-7 futbol games over a weekend. I even played games back-to-back futbol at tournaments. This claim to American football players having poor conditioning is simply false. As everyone that has pushed a prowler can attest to. Explosive movements done in less than 30 second intervals are exhausting. While we are on conditioning let us throw some love to the grapplers! Grappling is legit ridiculous hard: A 5-minute Jiu Jitsu session can completely gas me. When I see a wrestler with an endless gas tank (condition: God-tier) I am always super impressed and would avoid any physical confrontation with that person. Nightmare fuel.
Rugby. They have tried to put rugby players on a US football field (collegiate and NFL). Has not gone well. [I like Rugby. Great sport.]
We know the quality of athlete by the competition they face. Full stop. Decathletes (and the majority of Olympic athletes) don't face the quality of competition a collegiate athlete in a D1 major sport in the US faces (US has a very large population). They are playing in the genetic kiddy pool. This same logic can be applied to a myriad of other Olympic sports that athletes compete in.
Regarding football: based on the definition of athleticism, I disagree. American football selects for genetic freaks. The physicality of the sport combined with the different types of athletes that compete directly against one another on the same field forces this selection. I don't know of another sport that does that.
Our disagreement is how we define 'greatest athlete'. I define 'greatest athlete' as an individual that possesses freak level athleticism while demonstrating their superiority against a large group of competitors. I read you as selecting an individual that has trained in a variety of skills. I'm not trying to diminish the dedication and skill of those that compete in decathlons or golf. Golf is fucking hard yo. I am pointing out that Aaron Darnold could run down, rip the arm off, and beat to death the greatest decathlete. And probably anyone not a heavyweight MMA fighter/grappler so maybe not a great example...
Personal story: I once had a foot race with Ty Warren when at school at Texas A&M. Ty Warren went on to play nose tackle for the New England Patriots. He was listed at 6'5" and 300 pounds. He giggled if you told him that weight. He said he weighed that in high school and they just stopped updating it. I played multiple sports in high school. Was pretty quick. Thought no way Ty Warren could best me in a 20 yard dash. It wasn't even close. He had 5 yards on me when he crossed the line. There are monsters among us.
I picked a wrestler as my vote. I agree as the most demanding sport. Another knock against wrestling is it does not test the ability for an athlete to move in open space.hector wrote: ↑Sun Nov 06, 2022 3:52 pmI think there's a strong case for wrestling to be the most demanding sport requiring the broadest array of individual attributes (as opposed to skills, where decathlon obviously would win).
What's not as present in wrestling, or decathlon for that matter, is the ability to work as part of a team. Which would be critical for lots of other sports.
So before you decide the greatest individual athlete, you have to decide whether you're going to consider team sports or not.
Unless, maybe, you were arguing for Jordan.