It's "official," the toughest of them all is..

walshb

The Toughest Sport Of All...
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/sportSkills

Views?

I see from looking that only one sport scored a 10 in any category, and who can disagree with it?

cowzerp

Boxing is the toughest and Wrestling is close 2nd-much tougher than it looks.

Soccer is easy as a boxer-full match used to be easier than our boxing warm ups!!

Littlehorny

Damn right boxing is the toughest, most complete athletes on the planet!
If Hurling was global it would be top ten as well.

walshb

Littlehorny wrote: »

Damn right boxing is the toughest, most complete athletes on the planet!
If Hurling was global it would be top ten as well.

That is it. It is the most complete sport ever. Demands so much from so many aspects and qualities from an athlete. And, as man to man goes, nothing is more intense and concentrated.

Maravilla33

Cant disagree with the number 1 spot but also cant believe horse racing is only 50th. Such a tough sport and jockeys are as hard as nails. Definitely top 5 for me.

walshb

Maravilla33 wrote: »

Cant disagree with the number 1 spot but also cant believe horse racing is only 50th. Such a tough sport and jockeys are as hard as nails. Definitely top 5 for me.

If there was a bravery category then jockeys, and particularly jump jockeys, would be right up there. Overall I wouldn't rate it top ten though as regards being the toughest overall sport. For the horses yes!:)

MrJoeSoap

Looked like a good chart until soccer got in ahead of rugby. No chance.

califano

This op is even more bland than you accused ooPabsoo's Mayweather v Cotto link.

boxinginfo

walshb wrote: »

The Toughest Sport Of All...
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/sportSkills

would of taught rugby was harder/tougher - more physically demanding than tennis,but appeerantly the american's think different.

cowzerp

boxinginfo wrote: »

walshb wrote: »

The Toughest Sport Of All...
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/sportSkills

would of taught rugby was harder/tougher - more physically demanding than tennis,but appeerantly the american's think different.

Having played Tennis a few times it is cardio wise fairly intense and in a pro level goes on for hours, Rugby has hard points but lots of rest times too-it's like people who think MMA is tougher than Boxing, it can be at times but lot's of opportunity to rest/spoil and that is why 5 min rounds are possible, 5 min Boxing rounds would be silly as it is so intense with no rests during rounds.

megadodge

I've never had any doubt about boxing being the toughest sport in the world. I like the way they have the different catagories explained and marked, BUT, when you see Rugby behind baseball, tennis, basketball and worst of all soccer, I think the survey has to be flawed.

There is no arguement whatsoever that will convince me that soccer is in the top 25 toughest sports not to mind top 10. That's just laughable. At the top level it's just a bunch of overpaid cheating fairies playing one of the world's most boring sports. Sorry, it's just wrong to have it rated so highly.

cowzerp

megadodge wrote: »

There is no arguement whatsoever that will convince me that soccer is in the top 25 toughest sports not to mind top 10. That's just laughable. At the top level it's just a bunch of overpaid cheating fairies playing one of the world's most boring sports. Sorry, it's just wrong to have it rated so highly.

Soccer is a very soft sport in fairness, even cardio wise it is quite easy-i also would not put it high on the list, Rowing should be higher-thats tough.

walshb

Guys, I disagree on the soccer thing. The categories in the link are quite clear, and soccer IMO deserves its rating. A midfield player in soccer to me needs to be very very fit. Balance, speed, strength, coordination, feet, quick thinking and a serious engine. At the top I feel it is quite tough.

The word toughest I feel is being lost a bit, and folks may associate more so with endurance/stamina. There are ten categories used to score each sport.

Pit rugby vs. soccer in each category, and I don't see anything wrong with how they are scored.

Rugby wins in power, strength, nerve and durability. Soceer wins in speed, agility, analytical aptitude, hand to eye coordination, endurance and flexibilty. I can't really argue with these. Soccer requires speed, stamina, flexibilty and hand to eye a lot more than rugby. Rugby is more power and strength, quick bursts, rests, repeat. Soccer is more fluid and non stop

Rowing is mentioned. Yes, stamina wise it's hell. But really overall I feel other sports require more ability/mechanics from the body. Soccer fits that bill, rugby too. Gymnastics to me should be second. Unreal what is required.

makl

i was suprrised a badminton tennis and squash ratings being so far apart. defo didnt have tennis on top.

im not sure if makes sense to apply some categories to some sports but as a far as some sort of stab at a universal rating its not too bad.

sxt

Muay thai is one of the toughest sports in the world.

walshb

sxt wrote: »

Muay thai is one of the toughest sports in the world.

Horrendously tough. Probably even physically tougher than boxing.

crazyeyz

DARTS, takes its toll on ur body for the long tournaments

walshb

crazyeyz wrote: »

DARTS, takes its toll on ur body for the long tournaments

So much so that you need a few beers after, or even during!

wonton

walshb wrote: »

Guys, I disagree on the soccer thing. The categories in the link are quite clear, and soccer IMO deserves its rating. A midfield player in soccer to me needs to be very very fit. Balance, speed, strength, coordination, feet, quick thinking and a serious engine. At the top I feel it is quite tough.

The word toughest I feel is being lost a bit, and folks may associate more so with endurance/stamina. There are ten categories used to score each sport.

Pit rugby vs. soccer in each category, and I don't see anything wrong with how they are scored.

Rugby wins in power, strength, nerve and durability. Soceer wins in speed, agility, analytical aptitude, hand to eye coordination, endurance and flexibilty. I can't really argue with these. Soccer requires speed, stamina, flexibilty and hand to eye a lot more than rugby. Rugby is more power and strength, quick bursts, rests, repeat. Soccer is more fluid and non stop

cant disagree with boxing being up there !


how does soccer has more hand eye coordination than rugby ?


also soccer 5.1 for power and only rugby 6.3?.......just no.


I think a hard part about putting rugby in there is the diversity of the players on the team for different positions.

walshb

wonton wrote: »

cant disagree with boxing being up there !


how does soccer has more hand eye coordination than rugby ?


also soccer 5.1 for power and only rugby 6.3?.......just no.


I think a hard part about putting rugby in there is the diversity of the players on the team for different positions.

There are two categories, strength and power. Rugby gets a higer score in strength as opposed to power. Power to me is more a sharp burst or explosion. Strength is more sapping and prolonged. And, rugby scores higher than soccer in both categories, but scores best in strength. I agree here.

Overall soccer for me is tougher in more categories. There are rugby players/postions who don't need very much at all except size, weight, and fitness. They lack agility, speed and flexibilty. Any soccer position needs flexibility, speed, agilty and coordination.

wonton

walshb wrote: »

There are rugby players/postions who don't need very much at all except size, weight,.

I shall *have* to assume you don't understand the game if you think that.

walshb

wonton wrote: »

I shall *have* to assume you don't understand the game if you think that.

John Hayes? Really. A legend he is, but apart from size, weight and a level of fitness, are you going to tell me he has agility, speed, flexibility? Yes, as a human he has to have to some degree, but no way is it an essential for the man and his position.

POC is a legend. Again, far from speedy, agile or flexible. Strong, powerful, fit he is. That is what he needs for his position. Speed, agility, flexibilty are more associated with the fast and attacking ball players like BOD. Scrum halfs and wingers etc.

You said it perfect: "I think a hard part about putting rugby in there is the diversity of the players on the team for different positions."

In soccer nearly every position requires speed, agility, flexibility; as well as stamina and strength.

gene_tunney

Soccer is a beautiful sport, very skillful and enjoyable to watch but it is in no way "tough."

walshb

gene_tunney wrote: »

Soccer is a beautiful sport, very skillful and enjoyable to watch but it is in no way "tough."

Define tough?

Soccer is not as tough as some other sports, but it is tough. No doubt.

It's a very physically demanding sport. Very fast paced, and requires speed, agilty, strength, balance and footwork.

wonton

walshb wrote: »

John Hayes? Really. A legend he is, but apart from size, weight and a level of fitness, are you going to tell me he has agility, speed, flexibility? Yes, as a human he has to have to some degree, but no way is it an essential for the man and his position.

POC is a legend. Again, far from speedy, agile or flexible. Strong, powerful, fit he is. That is what he needs for his position. Speed, agility, flexibilty are more associated with the fast and attacking ball players like BOD. Scrum halfs and wingers etc.
.

The scrum is not all about size and weight, its more technique. Ireland actually had the heaviest rugby player in world rugby two years ago but one of the worst scrums.

and as far as poc, hes hardly just strong and powerful.

walshb

wonton wrote: »

The scrum is not all about size and weight, its more technique. Ireland actually had the heaviest rugby player in world rugby two years ago but one of the worst scrums.

and as far as poc, hes hardly just strong and powerful.

I never said POC was "just" strong and powerful. I said he was big, strong, powerful, and fit, and that speed, agility and flexibility wouldn't be traits that a man of his size and position would boast of.

You said it best when you mentioned the diversity of the positions in rugby. That point is spot on, and it's why rugby scores less than soccer in certain categories.

Both sports are tough, but they require different levels of each of the ten categories in the report.

wonton

you mistook what I meant by diversity, I meant its hard to put in because of the complex nature of rugby and trying to analyse it within the criteria.

how do you rate a rugby player on agility ? do you take each position and average them off? my point is a rugby team has players that would top most of the ratings in different positions, so what do you take as the average rugby player? soccer players general have the same skills and build etc

but not many sports can you have someone the size of paul o connell smashing into peter stringer. ( in the circumstances dictating their size)

Bobby Baccala

I'd rate boxing 1 and rugby 2.

Haven't a clue how football got in there ahead of rugby, footballers go off the pitch after being lightly tackled and falling over.
I've seen rugby players play on with broken fingers, noses, ears nearly hanging off, gashes across their heads etc.

Still i agree boxing should be number 1. Ridiculous levels of toughness required for it.

walshb

P4DDY2K11 wrote: »

I'd rate boxing 1 and rugby 2.

Haven't a clue how football got in there ahead of rugby, footballers go off the pitch after being lightly tackled and falling over.
I've seen rugby players play on with broken fingers, noses, ears nearly hanging off, gashes across their heads etc.

Still i agree boxing should be number 1. Ridiculous levels of toughness required for it.

But the link rates it on ten categories, and pain threshold and bravery aren't listed. Soccer scores well on several categories, and rightly so.

Bobby Baccala

walshb wrote: »

But the link rates it on ten categories, and pain threshold and bravery aren't listed. Soccer scores well on several categories, and rightly so.

very true soccer rated well on speed and agility, not surprised at all.
But rugby should have rated better on hand eye coordination and should have rated higher in endurance than soccer imo.

I just find it very hard to accept soccer being above rugby. Just doesn't seem right, maybe that's just me.

cowzerp

walshb wrote: »

Define tough?

Soccer is not as tough as some other sports, but it is tough. No doubt.

It's a very physically demanding sport..

skillfull yes, tough-no way, I played from about 7-27 and my main position was center mid as a worker, and it's a physically easy sport-only reason football players find it hard is there training is easy-