Sport that gives the best "look"

Roper

Okay, so...

What do you think is the sport that gives people the best physique? I'm currently in the midst of a debate with a friend thats lasted about 4 nights conversations now and we have radically different views! I won't tell you mine to influence you in any way but I'd be interested in what you all think.

Cheers!

Maccattack

Without question it is Rugby League.

The Australian players are the fittest in the world because of the intense pysichal demands of the sport. Google men of league and see for yourself.

cousin_borat

I'd say water polo for males. Women soccer players here is the US are pretty hot

Dragan

I would say sprinters or fighters normally. Rugby players can make it in as well.

g'em

Dragan wrote:

I would say sprinters or fighters normally. Rugby players can make it in as well.

seconded. Oooh but sprint swimmers are mighty tasty too. And top-end gymnasts. Or Olympic lifters. Dammit now I'm going to spend all afternoon on Google Images

brianthebard

I would say sprinters too. I have no doubt that rugby players are incredibly fit but we are just talking about superficials/aesthetics here and a lot of the rugby guys chests and shoulders are almost too big if you know what I mean.

roastie

swimming is the answer for sure , its a total body workout as well as high cardio , pity i don't do more of it !!!

RuggieBear

aesthetically speaking:

Swimmers/waterpolo for a bloke.


not sure for women...good few attractive high jumpers

Hanley

Gymnatics for the men. No doubt in my mind on that one. The lads in every other sport such as rugby and sprinting look the way they do from weight training sessions. So it would be unfair to attribute that look to their "sport". It's the look associated with the sport alright, but it's not as a result of playing the sport.

Dragan

I can't think of any powerlifter who's build failed to impress me when they were lean.

Gymnasts are awesome though.

Pherekydes

No question about it, the definitive answer is Athletics, specifically the explosive events. For males and females.

justsomebloke

I would have to say that it depends on what you classify as the best physique.

I would either go for rugby league/ aussie rules/ gynamistic rings competitors

edit: oh and the no pants dance is hard to beat as well

Hanley

Dragan wrote:

I can't think of any powerlifter who's build failed to impress me when they were lean.

True story Generally up til about 110kg they're ripped!

Slowcoach, I'd nearly say with upmost certainty he doesn't look that way solely because of his sport. I would imagine the look was achieved with a serious amount of supplemental gym work.

thirtyfoot

Hanley wrote:

True story Generally up til about 110kg they're ripped!

Slowcoach, I'd nearly say with upmost certainty he doesn't look that way solely because of his sport. I would imagine the look was achieved with a serious amount of supplemental gym work.

That doesn't make sense. He is a discus thrower so he has to be as strong as possible to throw the discus as far as possible. Getting into the best physical nick is fundamental to his sport and if Riedal wasn't a world class discus thrower he wouldn't be in the shape he is in. Do gymnasts not do supplemental work in the gym?

Male javelin throwers are the best built males in my opinion, big, seriously fast and very strong. Go with slowcoach on the female polevaulters, strong, fast and like gymnasts in the air.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

justsomebloke

ye I would agree with hanley but also dave.

I was going to say it earlier but got distracted. Anyway how many of the physiques actually come from the sport as oppose to the supplemental work that brings them to that point. For most athletes I would say that it is the training for the sport and building their bodies in such a way as to help them the most in relation to their sport rather then the sport itself that actually leads them to have good physiques

Vegeta

for mass appeal 100m male sprinters

but as the lads have pointed out its all probably from lifting weights anyway

Hanley

Tingle wrote:

That doesn't make sense. He is a discus thrower so he has to be as strong as possible to throw the discus as far as possible. Getting into the best physical nick is fundamental to his sport and if Riedal wasn't a world class discus thrower he wouldn't be in the shape he is in. Do gymnasts not do supplemental work in the gym?

Male javelin throwers are the best built males in my opinion, big, seriously fast and very strong. Go with slowcoach on the female polevaulters, strong, fast and like gymnasts in the air.

Being STRONG is part of his sport. Not looking good.

Gymnasts MAY (I would imagine most do not) do some supplemental work, but the demands that events such as the rings but on the body mean it would be impossible to get to a high level without having an awesome phsyique.

And before you try and turn my argument back around on me, being lean is a neccessary part of their sport. Mainly because when you're trying to shift your own bodyweight then anything other than muscle is useless and a hinderance.

thirtyfoot

Hanley wrote:

Being STRONG is part of his sport. Not looking good.

Gymnasts MAY (I would imagine most do not) do some supplemental work, but the demands that events such as the rings but on the body mean it would be impossible to get to a high level without having an awesome phsyique.

The demands that an event that requires you to throw a 2kg disc over 70m from within an 8ft circle puts on the body also means it would be impossible to get to a high level without an awsesome physique, its a prerequisite for being world class. Riedal is a 6ft 5in giant, most gymnasts are 4ft 5in midgets, I'd go for the giant anyday!!!

justsomebloke

I have to go with Hanley on this. yes to get to a point where you can throw a 2kg over 70m requires awesome power, but is all this power actually achieved by only throwing the disc probably not, chances are that he does alot of work in the gym to improve his strenght and thus get from power from his throwing and thus a lot of his physique would come from his gym work as oppose to the rest of his workouts

Smellyirishman

Sprinters and gymnasts.

Female dancers ain't half bad.

cowzerp

The key thing here is what is usually the most attractive look?
Athlethic looking build is usually the favoured look-this is usually from explosive sports such as sprinting, any type-running swimming etc..other sports that have all sorts of body types would be football, all kinds-boxing, mma etc..but no matter the sport it will be the explosive body types that will always score more imho!!

Santa Claus

For females - Dancers body ftw!
For Males - Swimmers I suppose...their bodies seem more toned than any of the lifters in the gym!

rubadub

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

Yep it is part of being a pro in the sport.

The OP asked

What do you think is the sport that gives people the best physique?

That could be taken in 2 ways, what pro atheletes have the best physique. Or taking part in which sport results in the best physique (without supplemental work).
i.e. you won't get a pro sprinters body by just sprinting.

I reckon swimmers look the best, both men & women. I presume they workout in the same fashion which should be noted by women who fear of becoming "too big" by doing weight training.

What sport (minus the supplemental work) would give the best body? I would imagine working out on those rings would give a good upperbody. Perhaps rowing too.

LegacyUser

Sprinters and Quarter Backs! Good Christ!

Oh and LL Cool J and 50 Cent deserve shout outs too! Strong men. Respect.

g'em

Santa Claus wrote:

For Males - Swimmers I suppose...their bodies seem more toned than any of the lifters in the gym!

If you're comparing top-level swimmers and the average gym rat, that's a bit silly :rolleyes: The *average* swimmer will not look better than the *average* lifter.

The guys at the top end of their respective sports are a different story. And what on earth do you mean by "toned"??

Can we ban that word... puh-leeeease??

Nothingcompares

Judo

Vegeta

I would have to say the opposite about swimmers to be honest. I don't find them one bit impressive. As far as good bodies go they're average beyond belief infact.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Smellyirishman

Cheesedude, Quarter-backs? Running backs (aka, sprinters ) usually have the better physique.

Frank Bullitt

Male-MMA fighter(Rich Franklin IMO has a great physique, as do most of the top stars) or sprinters.
Im surprised that no one has mentioned a pro body builder, Ronnie or Cutler or even arnie

Female-Tennis player or dancer(yeeerrrrrrrrooooooooo)

JayRoc

I was gonna point out the same thing, Gintonious, but I think what the OP was getting at was how training in particular sports has a side-effect of aesthetics, as opposed to the sport of bodybuilding whose entire purpose is aesthetics.

I'd have to go with those who said sprinters.

maxi-twist

Honestly cant say ive never seen a non ripped surfer!

Roper

Okay thanks for all the comments. My shout is for men, gymnastics, and for women, foxy boxing. Ah no seriously I think swimmers for the ladies.

On a point, and I know I'll probably get abuse for this, but I don't think Bodybuilding is a sport... youch! Just waiting on the flaming returns here... I'll qualify that statement:

I admire the dedication, strength, and work rate of bodybuilders. But as JayRoc said the purpose is aesthetics, not athleticism. That doesn't diminish them in my view but just puts them in a different category of excellence.

hunnymonster

<personal opinion only>

I have a problem with anything that is "judged" rather than "measured" being a sport. I think the twists and twirls divers do are amazing but the fact that the results are determined by judges. I realise it's partly on the technical aspects but it's a bit subjective from what I can tell. I think of sports as higher, heavier, longer, faster,.... anything measured by a clock, ruler or weighing scale

yes
track and field
powerlifting (yes I realise it's judged but only on correctnedd not because someones 150 kgs plates are prettier)
triathlon (of course!!!)

no
syncronised swimming
formula one (too much technology bias)
figure skating.




while I'm saying things that are going to get me into trouble.... What's the deal with boxing.... What kind of sport is it where the sole purpose of the game is to knock the opponent into the middle of next week?

hunnymonster

oh and as for perfect physique. I quite like male swimmers who do a bit of running and biking on the side :-) I still haven't made my mind up on women.

nesf

hunnymonster wrote:

I have a problem with anything that is "judged" rather than "measured" being a sport. I think the twists and twirls divers do are amazing but the fact that the results are determined by judges. I realise it's partly on the technical aspects but it's a bit subjective from what I can tell. I think of sports as higher, heavier, longer, faster,.... anything measured by a clock, ruler or weighing scale

By that rationale would you consider darts a sport, strongman events a sport and not boxing/mma/gymnastics/etc? At what point does subjectivity become a problem for you? Does soccer not count because it's only the linesman's opinion on off-sides or is that amount of subjectivity ok by your book?

cowzerp

hunnymonster wrote:

<personal opinion only>
while I'm saying things that are going to get me into trouble.... What's the deal with boxing.... What kind of sport is it where the sole purpose of the game is to knock the opponent into the middle of next week?

Boxing is 1 of the oldest sports along with wrestling and is highky skilled and disciplined-just because you may not like something does not make it a sport or not, i personally dont think darts, cricket, pool, snooker are sports and would classify them as games! imo. sports to me need some athlethicism to them..and usually where 1 opponent is trying to prevent another from scoring etc..

nesf

cowzerp wrote:

Boxing is 1 of the oldest sports along with wrestling and is highky skilled and disciplined-just because you may not like something does not make it a sport or not, i personally dont think darts, cricket, pool, snooker are sports and would classify them as games! imo. sports to me need some athlethicism to them..and usually where 1 opponent is trying to prevent another from scoring etc..

Cricket doesn't require some athleticism?

hunnymonster

cowzerp wrote:

just because you may not like something does not make it a sport or not,

I even called it a sport in my post asking what's the deal. It may be old, it may be powerful it may be very athletic but personally (and that's all it is, my personal opinion) the idea of an "event" (sport/game/hunt/.....) where the purpose is to inflict damage is worrying.


Several years ago I had the honour to meet Muhammad Ali in Toronto. Even with very slurred speech and obvious difficulty in walking he was a presence in the room. I've heard it's not possible to know if his illness is caused by his boxing career but quite a few experts appear to believe so. He said he has no regrets at all so I guess I'm worrying over nothing.

to drag this back on topic a little. Boxer bodies get the thumbs up from me M. Ali

brianthebard

hunnymonster wrote:

while I'm saying things that are going to get me into trouble.... What's the deal with boxing.... What kind of sport is it where the sole purpose of the game is to knock the opponent into the middle of next week?

Don't mean to be rude but how much do you understand about the sport? I only ask because when I first saw UFC stuff it just seemed like two guys rolling around on the ground, but when you start to figure out the aims of the fighters, and the techniques involved you start to understand why they are rolling around on the ground and suddenly it becomes interesting. I find boxing interesting because its just one man against another trying to see who's the strongest, fittest, most agile and smartest. there is a lot of thinking involved in the sport that most people don't give credit to. Also most fights don't end in knock outs, so its not merely about knocking someone into next week.

cowzerp

hunnymonster wrote:

I even called it a sport in my post asking what's the deal. It may be old, it may be powerful it may be very athletic but personally (and that's all it is, my personal opinion) the idea of an "event" (sport/game/hunt/.....) where the purpose is to inflict damage is worrying.


Several years ago I had the honour to meet Muhammad Ali in Toronto. Even with very slurred speech and obvious difficulty in walking he was a presence in the room. I've heard it's not possible to know if his illness is caused by his boxing career but quite a few experts appear to believe so. He said he has no regrets at all so I guess I'm worrying over nothing.

to drag this back on topic a little. Boxer bodies get the thumbs up from me M. Ali

Im anti hunting-boxing is nothing like hunting as both fighters choose to enter the ring and are well paid- also Ali has a disease not an injury, boxers can get brain damage but ali is not brain damaged, this is something anybody could get including you and me.
Boxers are usually quite lean and look fit-boxing training trains your whole body so most boxers will be fairly solid looking..

hunnymonster

it's not rude at all. Most of what I know would be from newspaper reports because I just can't watch it. If I saw the same thing happening on the street I would call the Guards. Growing up my Dad and brother would pay for the pay per view matches on tv and I used to go hide. It scared me. I understand that there is skill, power, agility, intelligence involved, but afaik, the aim is still to thump the other guy!
I also realise I'm in the minority here. Both people are there of their own free will and if others want to watch, go ahead. Again, it's just my personal opinion.

brianthebard

hunnymonster wrote:

it's not rude at all. Most of what I know would be from newspaper reports because I just can't watch it. If I saw the same thing happening on the street I would call the Guards. Growing up my Dad and brother would pay for the pay per view matches on tv and I used to go hide. It scared me. I understand that there is skill, power, agility, intelligence involved, but afaik, the aim is still to thump the other guy!
I also realise I'm in the minority here. Both people are there of their own free will and if others want to watch, go ahead. Again, it's just my personal opinion.

Thats cool I just wanted to check. Of course its your personal opinion and not everyone is going to like one sport, but at least you understand the ideas behind it even if you don't like it. Even though I understand the thinking behind golf I'm not going to watch it.

Regards the Ali thing cowzerp, I thought he had parkinson's syndrome? Can you show us a source saying what exactly he has? Just curious.

hunnymonster

I'm 100% behind you on the golf thing. although If it's the only exercise my mother is willing to take I'll be the first to buy her clubs for christmas.


according to the enclyopedia Britannia (sp) who say they check their info

Damage to his brain caused by blows to the head have resulted in slurred speech, slowed movement, and other symptoms of Parkinson syndrome. However, his condition differs from chronic encephalopathy, or dementia pugilistica (which is commonly referred to as “punch drunk” in fighters), in that he does not suffer from injury-induced intellectual deficits.

Hanley

hunnymonster wrote:

I'm 100% behind you on the golf thing. although If it's the only exercise my mother is willing to take I'll be the first to buy her clubs for christmas.


according to the enclyopedia Britannia (sp) who say they check their info

Damage to his brain caused by blows to the head have resulted in slurred speech, slowed movement, and other symptoms of Parkinson syndrome. However, his condition differs from chronic encephalopathy, or dementia pugilistica (which is commonly referred to as “punch drunk” in fighters), in that he does not suffer from injury-induced intellectual deficits.

Since when was that a medical text?

Im not saying it's right or wrong, but to cite it as a source of definate knowledge is a bit unfair.

brianthebard

hunnymonster wrote:

I'm 100% behind you on the golf thing. although If it's the only exercise my mother is willing to take I'll be the first to buy her clubs for christmas.


according to the enclyopedia Britannia (sp) who say they check their info

Damage to his brain caused by blows to the head have resulted in slurred speech, slowed movement, and other symptoms of Parkinson syndrome. However, his condition differs from chronic encephalopathy, or dementia pugilistica (which is commonly referred to as “punch drunk” in fighters), in that he does not suffer from injury-induced intellectual deficits.

That's what I heard before on a documentary.

hanley, no one is quoting it as a definite knowledge, but Britannia is a respected group and you can be sure that they have researched as much as possible before making claims. Also even in the quote they don't say for definite that it is parkinson syndrome, but that Ali displays many or most of the symptoms.

hunnymonster

Hanley I'm not quoting it as medical text. If I quote from medical texts most people won't have access to the material. I just chose the first public access, reviewed link that came up.... it's not the definitive answer, it's a starting point.

maxi-twist

I once sparred and the adrenalin rush u get is great,nothing like the feeling when you knock someone out.Boxers have amazing physiques.

Hanley

If I'm reading that right, it says blows to his head caused parkinson like symptons, but they seem to be implying that's not what he actually has, nor is he "punch drunk"?

hunnymonster

From what I understand (have only read a few articles) is that he has an injured brain caused by repeated trauma but that is differs from the punch drunk that other boxers suffered. It appears to differ in that although his speech and movement is affected, his intellectual ability is not. I'm not that kind (medical) of doctor though so I didn't understand everything in the articles.