Where does athletics rate in terms of "toughest" sports?

Pisco Sour

Saw this link on the boxing forum and the athletics events are rated very low in this list. What are people's thoughts? Any credibility to this list?

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/sportSkills

myflipflops

SPEED: The ability to move quickly. Example: Marion Jones, Maurice Green.

Hmmmm.

RoyMcC

I see soccer above pole vault and just laugh. Agree with boxing as #1 though.

Harto45

Even as a lay person looking at that list it appears there's a fundamental lack of understanding of the sports. For example, more strength in water polo than gymnastics, and more hand eye coordination in soccer than lacrosse ??

ultrapercy

04072511 wrote: »

Saw this link on the boxing forum and the athletics events are rated very low in this list. What are people's thoughts? Any credibility to this list?

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/sportSkills

I rate snooker as the toughest of all sports. Its only sport where if your opponent is in good form there is nothing you can do. You just have to sit there and wallow in your own emotions,the worst form of mental torture. At least in boxing you can defend yourself and all other sports you get your turn,takes unreal concentration and mental toughness. Athletics is tough too as you personaly control the pain and you can stop it by not giving 100% so it takes a high level of mental toughness to keep the effort level or training up.

gerard65

04072511 wrote: »

Saw this link on the boxing forum and the athletics events are rated very low in this list. What are people's thoughts? Any credibility to this list?

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/sportSkills[/QUOTE]
Eh no, put together by someone who has never tried most of those events. Certainly never ran middle-distance.
Rugby league must be one of the toughest sports.

drquirky

ultrapercy wrote: »

I rate snooker as the toughest of all sports. Its only sport where if your opponent is in good form there is nothing you can do. You just have to sit there and wallow in your own emotions,the worst form of mental torture. At least in boxing you can defend yourself and all other sports you get your turn,takes unreal concentration and mental toughness. Athletics is tough too as you personaly control the pain and you can stop it by not giving 100% so it takes a high level of mental toughness to keep the effort level or training up.

Snooker is not a sport. It is a game

rom

"Cheerleading" a sport ?

ultrapercy

drquirky wrote: »

Snooker is not a sport. It is a game

Whats your definition of a sport?What about golf ? And baseball {which I love }Snooker is as much a sport as anything else.

Harto45

rom wrote: »

"Cheerleading" a sport ?

And what a sport!!!

JohnnyCrash

Badminton 12 places higher than bull/bareback/bronc riding?? Heard those shuttlecocks can give you a nasty stamping alright!!:D

Bugsy2000

I see that distance running has been given a 'Hand Eye Co-ordination' value of 1.88. This person has obviously never ran local GAA fundraising 10k race down a back boreen full of potholes whilst trying to grab a flimsy plastic cup of water off a table & manage to not stick it in your eye & trip over yourself whilst attempting to drink it.

walshb

the list was compiled by many researchers and experts. No list will be perfect to everyone.

There are ten categories. One must look at each one.

And, I guarantee if everyone here did that and compiled a list, then no two would match.

Is there really any glaring inaccuracy when you stop and think about it?

Show me one that is glaringly off the mark?

walshb

We even have folks here trying to determine what is and is not a sport.

BTW, golf, darts and snooker are IMO games...

walshb

Bugsy2000 wrote: »

I see that distance running has been given a 'Hand Eye Co-ordination' value of 1.88. This person has obviously never ran local GAA fundraising 10k race down a back boreen full of potholes whilst trying to grab a flimsy plastic cup of water off a table & manage to not stick it in your eye & trip over yourself whilst attempting to drink it.

Possibly a funny story, really, distance running, what hand to eye coordination rank should it be? Read what they define as hand to eye.

Pherekydes

walshb wrote: »

the list was compiled by many researchers and experts. No list will be perfect to everyone.

There are ten categories. One must look at each one.

And, I guarantee if everyone here did that and compiled a list, then no two would match.

Is there really any glaring inaccuracy when you stop and think about it?

Show me one that is glaringly off the mark?

The ten categories are weighted equally. Why?

Some of the scoring is laughable. The heavy throws, aka Track and Field: Weights, scores lower in strength than boxing. It scores way behind weightlifting in power. Shot Putters are the most explosive and strongest of athletes.

Sprinting scores a derisory 2 in "nerve". Who the fcuk calculated that?

Long and Triple Jumps score below Middle Distance in speed. That for me is the funniest one. So far. As mentioned earlier, whoever compiled this list hasn't a clue.

walshb

Pherekydes wrote: »

The ten categories are weighted equally. Why?

Some of the scoring is laughable. The heavy throws, aka Track and Field: Weights, scores lower in strength than boxing. It scores way behind weightlifting in power. Shot Putters are the most explosive and strongest of athletes.

Sprinting scores a derisory 2 in "nerve". Who the fcuk calculated that?

Long and Triple Jumps score below Middle Distance in speed. That for me is the funniest one. So far. As mentioned earlier, whoever compiled this list hasn't a clue.

Why would a sprinter score high in nerve? Read what nerve is defined at. To me it's similar to bravery, guts, balls. What braverey does a sprinter need?

Also, speed is not just flat out top speed. Read what they define as speed. Change of pace, burst, or acceleration, change of speed with direction. So, middle distance runneres need that change of pace and speed, hence they score well.

apocalypseDG

Absolutely ridiculous chart, couldn't disagree more. Pretty terrible to even consider its accuracy...

walshb

apocalypseDG wrote: »

Absolutely ridiculous chart, couldn't disagree more. Pretty terrible to even consider its accuracy...

Why? Any reasons or examples?

RoyMcC

walshb wrote: »

Is there really any glaring inaccuracy when you stop and think about it?

Show me one that is glaringly off the mark?

We'll give you boxing, though the squash boys and girls would argue.

But seriously, pole vault is far and away the toughest t&f discipline and very, very few can get to the stage of clearing a bar. Yet it's in 16th place with soccer, which anybody with two legs can play, is 8th

(Agree about your non-sports )

Pisco Sour

Golf scores 2.5 for nerve. WTF! Billiards 1.63? :eek: I'm sure Jimmy White would argue otherwise, with that shakey missed black in the final frame of the 1994 Crucible Final.

RayCun

The whole idea is silly from start to finish. Of course you can rate every sport on a scale from 1 to 10 in ten different categories :rolleyes: and obviously your rating can be correct to two decimal places :rolleyes: It's science!
Makes about as much sense as comparing performances in long jump and shot put

walshb

04072511 wrote: »

Golf scores 2.5 for nerve. WTF! Billiards 1.63? :eek: I'm sure Jimmy White would argue otherwise, with that shakey missed black in the final frame of the 1994 Crucible Final.

I'm chasing you around:

I reckon neve is more death defying and balls and real bravery as opposed to extreme concentration under pressure. Really, that is what I see it as.

Example: F1 drivers at top speed in Monaco; downhill skiers, ski jumpers etc. That daredevil aspect.

"NERVE: The ability to overcome fear. Example: High-board divers, race-car drivers, ski jumpers.

walshb

RoyMcC wrote: »

We'll give you boxing, though the squash boys and girls would argue.

But seriously, pole vault is far and away the toughest t&f discipline and very, very few can get to the stage of clearing a bar. Yet it's in 16th place with soccer, which anybody with two legs can play, is 8th

(Agree about your non-sports )

The two are compared over ten categories. If there was a category called complex, difficulty, then yes I reckon it scores very high.

Nothing is meant to be perfect, that is why they came up with categories. Comparing some sports to others is very difficult.

rom

A game of top trump anyone ? :P

walshb

In relation to this thread, how does athletics compare. Well, seeing as there are many disciplines in track and field, I guess decathletes should be used to broaden the sport of athletics for this test. If so I would rate it top 5 on the chart. Possibly number 1. The range of events over two days and the times and distances and heights achieved really are remarkable. Plus, the use of the body. So much versatility.

ultrapercy

walshb wrote: »

the list was compiled by many researchers and experts. No list will be perfect to everyone.

There are ten categories. One must look at each one.

And, I guarantee if everyone here did that and compiled a list, then no two would match.

Is there really any glaring inaccuracy when you stop and think about it?

Show me one that is glaringly off the mark?

Your right, I understand it now. Its a definitive list a defining list. A list that can give us personaly and as a group, a blueprint for success. I wonder how highly the compilers rated having a fat arse when placing baseball number9? Pretty high Id say some of those sluggers have holes as big a small country.

Harto45

walshb wrote: »

Why? Any reasons or examples?

I think anyone that has done more than one sport on the list will be able to pull out examples of how arbitrary it is. But then somebody else will come along with their own perfectly legitimate but contradictory view.

For example, I've played soccer and competed in gymnastics years ago. In no way would I say that soccer requires greater agility than gymnastics (AGILITY: The ability to change direction quickly).

Or some of the cycling forum will tell you that distance cycling is amongst the most punsihing of sports - who is able to take the most pain the longest. Is basketball really that much tougher, durability wise?

couerdelion

gerard65 wrote: »

Rugby league must be one of the toughest sports.

Agree with that.

The hits alone are bad enough but the fitness too makes it a real tough sport.

Pherekydes

walshb wrote: »

Why would a sprinter score high in nerve?

Did Usain Bolt lose his nerve last year in Daegu?

Also, speed is not just flat out top speed. Read what they define as speed. Change of pace, burst, or acceleration, change of speed with direction.

Tell me, what change of pace, burst, acceleration, change of speed with direction do swimmers have that ranks them above Pole Vaulters? And middle distance runners require more of the above than Long Jumpers? In which universe?

Regarding speed, Sprinters are rightly top, but Long Jumpers require just as much speed, and Pole Vaulting, well that's just sprinting with a pole, followed by jumping, followed by the gymnastic bit at the end.

walshb

ultrapercy wrote: »

Your right, I understand it now. Its a definitive list a defining list. A list that can give us personaly and as a group, a blueprint for success. I wonder how highly the compilers rated having a fat arse when placing baseball number9? Pretty high Id say some of those sluggers have holes as big a small country.

Open your eyes, Baseball is quite a and tough sport. Have you played it? I haven't, but I have respect for those who do. I would imagine at the top that it's a tough sport. Ice Hockey too; NBA, American Football, water polo etc etc

Read each catgeory definition and it does help when then applying a reasoning to each mark.

Pherekydes

walshb wrote: »

Also, speed is not just flat out top speed. Read what they define as speed.

Here it is for everyone else in the thread:

ENDURANCE: The ability to continue to perform a skill or action for long periods of time. Example: Lance Armstrong
STRENGTH: The ability to produce force. Example: NFL linebackers.
POWER: The ability to produce strength in the shortest possible time. Example: Barry Bonds.
SPEED: The ability to move quickly. Example: Marion Jones, Maurice Green.
AGILITY: The ability to change direction quickly. Example: Derek Jeter, Mia Hamm.
FLEXIBILITY: The ability to stretch the joints across a large range of motion. Example: Gymnasts, divers.
NERVE: The ability to overcome fear. Example: High-board divers, race-car drivers, ski jumpers.
DURABILITY: The ability to withstand physical punishment over a long period of time. Example: NBA/NHL players.
HAND-EYE COORDINATION: The ability to react quickly to sensory perception. Example: A hitter reacting to a breaking pitch; a drag racer timing acceleration to the green light.
ANALYTIC APTITUDE: The ability to evaluate and react appropriately to strategic situations. Example: Joe Montana reading a defense; basketball point guard on a fast break.

walshb

Pherekydes wrote: »

Did Usain Bolt lose his nerve last year in Daegu?
.

Like I said, read the definition of nerve. Bolt lost his extreme concentration level moreso.

They apply nerve to what I said: F1, Divers, downhill skiers etc. Death defying and daredevil type stuff.

Really, I don't see what is difficult with the list.

It includes a whole heap of sports, even sports many here don't rate as sports.

Also, it was not complied ny nobodies. It was compiled by people in the filed, experts, analysts, researchers etc.

walshb

Pherekydes wrote: »

Here it is for everyone else in the thread:

Yes, move quickly. Where does it mention top speed? They gave two examples, they did not limit it to these two types of examples.

Lionel Messi moves damn quick. Top speed is slow compared to Bolt, but sudden burst and movement is very comparable. 0-20 metres.

And, I bet his change of direction whilst moving quick wipes Bolt out.

It's not just top level flat speed.

I expected more thinking from a lot of you athletics guys. No disrespect, but at least I am thinking outside the box too.

Speed and strength are too subjective categories. Folks mentioned shot putters. Yes, strong as hell in that discipline. How strong in a wrestling or judo match? It's all down to technique as well as raw strength. Strength is very subjective. Same way a wrestler or judo man may not be all that strong when asked to apply their strength to a different discipline.

ultrapercy

walshb wrote: »

Open your eyes, Baseball is quite a and tough sport. Have you played it? I haven't, but I have respect for those who do. I would imagine at the top that it's a tough sport. Ice Hockey too; NBA, American Football, water polo etc etc

Read each catgeory definition and it does help when then applying a reasoning to each mark.

I love baseball and your right every sport is tough at the top level. I was trying to express how stupid these comparison tables are. Which do you prefer ice cream or holidays? They are just daft.

walshb

ultrapercy wrote: »

I love baseball and your right every sport is tough at the top level. I was trying to express how stupid these comparison tables are. Which do you prefer ice cream or holidays? They are just daft.

Yes, but people love to compare, I wouldn't call it daft that we as humans try this. That is what we do. I just think that when looking at a list like this we should be wide open and think outside the box. So many variables to consider. No matter what example in the list is used to slag the list, I bet folks can sure argue a good case. I could. And, those in each sport also could.

Harto45

walshb wrote: »

I just think that when looking at a list like this we should be wide open and think outside the box.

But the experts put the categories in a box. A big one.

Pherekydes

walshb wrote: »

Lionel Messi moves damn quick. Top speed is slow compared to Bolt, but sudden burst and movement is very comparable. 0-20 metres.

And, I bet his change of direction whilst moving quick wipes Bolt out.

It's not just top level flat speed.

I expected more thinking from a lot of you athletics guys. No disrespect, but at least I am thinking outside the box too.

Speed and strength are too subjective categories. Folks mentioned shot putters. Yes, strong as hell in that discipline. How strong in a wrestling or judo match? It's all down to technique as well as raw strength. Strength is very subjective. Same was a wrestler or judo man may not be all that strong when asked to apply their strength to a different discipline.

The speed you are talking about is defined in their list as agility.

Speed and strength are not subjective; they are easily measurable, and therefore wholly objective.

Lionel Messi looks fast on a soccer pitch. He is not fast.

walshb

Pherekydes wrote: »

The speed you are talking about is defined in their list as agility.

Speed and strength are not subjective; they are easily measurable, and therefore wholly objective.

Lionel Messi looks fast on a soccer pitch. He is not fast.

Ok, I did see that there.

Speed. The ability to move quickly. Soccer players need speed. Sprinters more so. Track athletes need speed. I assume from the list without checking again that sprinters scored very high? If so, no problem is there.

Edit: Sprinters don't seem to be listed. I see no issue with the speed score for soccer. It is a very fast game overall.

CoachDudie

Are people taking this list seriously?
A list of the toughest sports and not a mention of hurling. Disgraceful.

walshb

Pherekydes wrote: »

The speed you are talking about is defined in their list as agility.

Speed and strength are not subjective; they are easily measurable, and therefore wholly objective.

Lionel Messi looks fast on a soccer pitch. He is not fast.

How is strength easily measureable when comparing across many sports? What test would you use?

Who is physically stronger? A boxer or a shot putter? How would you propose to pit them in a strength test that is fair to each? Tug of war, dead lift, pushing contest against each other? Chin ups? Sit ups? How?

Guarantee if you put a shot putter in the ring against a HW boxer he would be man handled in close (and I am not talking about striking with fists). Ask a boxer to do what a shot putter does and he wouldn't get close to their level. Technique and skills are very important when assesing strengths across sports.

jimmurt

Rugby should be a lot higher IMO

apocalypseDG

walshb wrote: »

Why? Any reasons or examples?

Absolutely; watch this. Terrible editing&image quality aside, this video gets my point across nicely. 0:50 is where it starts proper.

To compare just one random sport ranked too low vs boxing:

-Endurance. Try playing a singles to 30... Then try to play multiple back to back and tell me it isn't exhausting.

-Strength. Just because the racquet only weighs ~80 grams doesn't mean it doesn't require strength. Boxing is just throwing punches whereas Badminton requires you to be able to quickly hit shuttles at awkward overhead behind the back angles.

-Power. Badminton is an extremely explosive sport. Jumping, smashes, clears, etc.

-Speed. This should be fairly obvious. The immense skill required to have proper footwork is definitely beyond that of boxing.

-Agility. The deceptive nature of the game (especially doubles) requires constant, and I mean constant changes in direction.

-Flexibility. Lunges and behind the back shots require a level of flexibility thousands of times greater than what is required with dodging punches.

-Nerve. 17-19. You must not lose the next point. Before you know it you are back in the game. 19-20. Then a tie. By now you are incredibly nervous not willing to have wasted all your effort over the last 40 points. Miraculously, you get the point. 21-20. For the first time you in the match you are winning. Match point. You must win by two - your nerves are exploding. Your serve. Mess this up and you realize you'll probably have lost as you cant see yourself recovering, or alternatively win the game. A split second may be the deciding factor of the whole match. Controlling your nerve in badminton separates the good from the amazing player.

-Durability. The fact that a non contact sport is so severely discriminated against in this category should be sufficient evidence that to show that this chart is fc:Dking bull.

-Hand-eye coordination. Only an imbecile believes squash, baseball, table tennis, tennis and... baseball :eek: require more hand eye coordination than Badminton.

-Analytic aptitude. Badminton is the fastest game in the world. Knowing the correct responses to a properly placed tough-to-get shot is not only vital to not losing the point or tiring oneself out unnecessarily, it is exceptionally hard to do when you have to make a decision within a fraction of a second.

Weird then isn't it, that it ranks a pathetic 30th on the chart.:mad:
Wonder why

...

*Oh wait, I know!*
Because it doesn't look nice on TV and westerners generally suck at it:rolleyes:.

drquirky

jimmurt wrote: »

Rugby should be a lot higher IMO

Why? The lads aren't anywhere near as fit as footballers and it certainly takes nowhere near the skill as football....

walshb

apocalypseDG wrote: »

-. Boxing is just throwing punches :.

I stopped reading here....

I played badminton. Love it. Easy enough game to play if you have any amont of coordination and balance and can hold a racket.

RoyMcC

drquirky wrote: »

Why? The lads aren't anywhere near as fit as footballers and it certainly takes nowhere near the skill as football....

Whah?? I think you're fishing for a reaction Doctor Q.

apocalypseDG

walshb wrote: »

I stopped reading here....

I played badminton. Love it. Easy enough game to play if you have any amont of coordination and balance and can hold a racket.

walshb wrote: »

I stopped reading here....

I played badminton. Love it. Hard enough game to play if you are playing someone half competent.

FYP:)

Walshb, if you had ever played someone close to your skill level you would notice it is quite difficult and also, you would soon discover that badminton gets progressively harder as both your and your opponent's skill increases. It is not an easy game.

I never boxed, but of course I realize how much more depth it has than simply punching each other. I just wanted to demonstrate how some people's mentality "I get to punch people in my sport so its tough and you hit feathers so its not tough and easy" appears to others who play a different sport.

Just as badminton appears "easy enough" to you because - for example, one is able to "hold a racket" - Boxing might look like a simple punch-fest to others.

Personally I am of the opinion that a sport's toughness is dependent on one's opponent(s). Difficulty therefore should be a completely independent aspect of a sport's toughness.

thirtyfoot

Is toughness the same as macho? I think in someways an individual non contact sport is toughest of them all. In that one person determines how hard it's going to be. That person can stop the punishment and pain at anytime. The pain is totally voluntary. In a weird way you inflict the pain yourself. You can stop it at anytime.

The main ESPN sports do pretty well on that ESPN survey. Their rugby to football (NFL) comparison show the proximity bias.

apocalypseDG

thirtyfoot wrote: »

Is toughness the same as macho? I think in someways an individual non contact sport is toughest of them all. In that one person determines how hard it's going to be. That person can stop the punishment and pain at anytime. The pain is totally voluntary. In a weird way you inflict the pain yourself. You can stop it at anytime.

The main ESPN sports do pretty well on that ESPN survey. Their rugby to football (NFL) comparison show the proximity bias.

Very True.

Also, its interesting to note it lacks extreme sports such as aerobatic sky diving, or Redbull air racing/ X fighters. Maybe X fighters aren't tough, just suicidal:p

thirtyfoot

I think you need to look at the training requirements of the sport. Everyone knows the training is the toughest part of any sport. Competing is easy with adrenaline etc. Grinding out a gym session at 6am in the morning when you had to hobble to the jacks out of bed that morning because of the session the night before and the damage it did to your knees. That is toughness.

Breakdown the training requirements and how much time the elites in each sport spend on each category and that will help to see how relevant the scoring is.

thirtyfoot

Using the training requirements rationale, apparently soccer players spend 1.5 times more time on agility than a pole vaulter. As regards Pole Vault, they work through so many plains in the space of 2 seconds that to not be agile means you can't do the event.