"Athletes"

Spartacus88

I'd like to think its hardly just me who is noticing this spike in what appears to be predominately fitness models, bodybuilders and crossfitters labelling themselves "athletes".

Bodybuilding, crossfit and fitness modelling are all something anyone can do if they dedicate themselves to it, especially with the aid of drugs, let's be honest for the best part they all take them competing.

For me there is no skill to what they do, no special talent required to set them apart from the rest. Hard work and dedication yes, most definitely, but theres nothing athletic about what they do.

It seems like a supplement company endorsement and a Facebook page is all you need to proclaim yourself as an athlete these days.

BTW I can see an arguement for crossfit more so than the other two, but the flip side of the coin is, its circuit training with the best part ridiculously bad form thats rife with drugs at the top level, again no real talent or skill required.

Alf Veedersane

So what defines an 'athlete'?

Edwardius

An athlete is someone who puts training, competition and improvement in front of everything else consistently and for years (regardless of ability). Anything outside those things are obstacles. Work is something that has to be done to facilitate food and training.

An athlete is not someone with an instagram account and an under armor fetish.

coffee_cake

Spartacus88 wrote: »

Bodybuilding, crossfit and fitness modelling are all something anyone can do

And they don't

Spartacus88

Edwardius wrote: »

An athlete is someone who puts training, competition and improvement in front of everything else consistently and for years (regardless of ability). Anything outside those things are obstacles.

Is say a local lad playing divsion 4 soccer an athlete because he's happened to do all of the above for years too?

I'm not being smart but it's the same scenario.

Edwardius

Spartacus88 wrote: »

Is say a local lad playing divsion 4 soccer an athlete because he's happened to do all of the above for years too?

I'm not being smart but it's the same scenario.

I think so anyway.

papu

What difference does it make to you?

Spartacus88

Edwardius wrote: »

I think so anyway.

Ofcourse there not. I know of overweight lads that can barely kick a ball hence playing divsion 4 and live in the pub, there not athletes, the same way as you're local gym rat isn't regardless of how many videos they bombard us with of their training and diet.

A person trained or gifted in exercises or contests involving physical agility, stamina or strength; A participant in a sport, exercise or game requiring a physical skill.

There is no skill set to all of the above, there isn't one component of fitness in bodybuilding or fitness modelling, let's all be honest. I know its going to upset a few of you here who might be involved in them, but its reality.

Inspector Coptoor

Anyone can be an athlete.

That's why we have adjectives.

If someone is ****€, they are bad.

If they are good,they are good.

You can be an average athlete and a very small percentage can be elite athletes.

Hammar

Spartacus88 wrote: »

Ofcourse there not. I know of overweight lads that can barely kick a ball hence playing divsion 4 and live in the pub, there not athletes, the same way as you're local gym rat isn't regardless of how many videos they bombard us with of their training and diet.

A person trained or gifted in exercises or contests involving physical agility, stamina or strength; A participant in a sport, exercise or game requiring a physical skill.

There is no skill set to all of the above, there isn't one component of fitness in bodybuilding or fitness modelling, let's all be honest. I know its going to upset a few of you here who might be involved in them, but its reality.

I love how you took the dictionary definition of athlete and added "gifted" to it to try and twist it around to your liking.

"A person who is trained or skilled in exercises, sports, or games requiring physical strength, agility, or stamina"

There is no level of any of those fitness components which deem one to be an athlete and others not to be. Your Division 4 footballer is an athlete just as your premier league footballer is. The former is just nowhere near as good an athlete as the latter.

Spartacus88

Hammar wrote: »

I love how you took the dictionary definition of athlete and added "gifted" to it to try and twist it around to your liking.

"A person who is trained or skilled in exercises, sports, or games requiring physical strength, agility, or stamina"

There is no level of any of those fitness components which deem one to be an athlete and others not to be. Your Division 4 footballer is an athlete just as your premier league footballer is. The former is just nowhere near as good an athlete as the latter.

No I actually genuinally googled some definitions on my phone and that was one of the first ones I saw.

I disagree with you, If it was the case anybody who par-takes in any sport at any level can be deemed an athlete which is a bogus and laughable theory. Its a bit like saying I changed the fuse in a plug, I'm an electrician, I changed the oil in my car, I'm a mechanic etc etc.

And more specificly fitness modelling and bodybuilding alone are not sports, there more like fashion shows if anything, so how can they be athletes ?

Mellor

Spartacus88 wrote: »

Bodybuilding, crossfit and fitness modelling are all something anyone can do if they dedicate themselves to it, especially with the aid of drugs, let's be honest for the best part they all take them competing.

For me there is no skill to what they do, no special talent required to set them apart from the rest. Hard work and dedication yes, most definitely, but theres nothing athletic about what they do.

Could you not say the same about any number of sports?
Sure anybody could dedicate themselves to crossfit. But so too could anybody dedicate themselves to a sport traditionally under the umbrella of athletics.

I'm not sure how you arrived at the conclusion that there no skill at the top level.

The 100m sprint is just running fast. A marathon is jogging for a long time. Any body can do that. Weightlifting is just picking up heavy barbells, etc
Does that mean that Usain Bolt and Geoffrey Mutai aren't athletes?

Hammar

Spartacus88 wrote: »

No I actually genuinally googled some definitions on my phone and that was one of the first ones I saw.

I disagree with you, If it was the case anybody who par-takes in any sport at any level can be deemed an athlete which is a bogus and laughable theory. Its a bit like saying I changed the fuse in a plug, I'm an electrician, I changed the oil in my car, I'm a mechanic etc etc.

And more specificly fitness modelling and bodybuilding alone are not sports, there more like fashion shows if anything, so how can they be athletes ?

I have news for you, the word "Athlete" is not a protected term, It's not like a MD or a Chartered Physiotherapist. Anyone can call themselves an athlete as long as they are training some/all of the different components of fitness . There is no level of skill/ability in the practice of those components of which determines if one is an athlete or not.

Edwardius

Spartacus88 wrote: »

Ofcourse there not. I know of overweight lads that can barely kick a ball hence playing divsion 4 and live in the pub, there not athletes, the same way as you're local gym rat isn't regardless of how many videos they bombard us with of their training and diet.

A person trained or gifted in exercises or contests involving physical agility, stamina or strength; A participant in a sport, exercise or game requiring a physical skill.

There is no skill set to all of the above, there isn't one component of fitness in bodybuilding or fitness modelling, let's all be honest. I know its going to upset a few of you here who might be involved in them, but its reality.

Erm, read the post again. Living down the pub hardly counts as putting their sport first.

I think competitive bodybuilding is silly but saying there's no skill to it is fairly shortsighted.

Hanley

Bodybuilding is up there with cycling, rowing and distance running as one of the hardest sports in the world in my opinion.

It's daily destruction of yourself for decades at a time. Inflicting as much physical trauma as your pain threshold allows, and then going a little further.

Not only that but you're NEVER "off" because of the eating needed to support it.

Top level BB'ers have more dedication than most "athletes".

As for things like "oh i go to the gym and sling a few barbells around therefore I'm an athlete"... that makes me laugh.

But good on em for trying.

MightyMandarin

Not sure about fitness modelling, but crossfit and bodybuilding are as much a sport as cycling or rowing are.

Crossfit is an assimilation of sports like Weightlifting and Athletics, so why wouldn't that make it a sport? Is the decathlon or pentathlon not a sport because it's a load of events put into one? Would you invalidate Jessica Ennis' gold medals and not call her an athlete just because her sport was Heptathlon?

Bodybuilding is a sport all the same too. Talent is required; anybody with poor genetics has little hope of success. Skill is needed to perfect posing and to get max. effort from your muscles each session. On top of all of this is the incredible dedication and time put into dieting. I don't see how it can't be called a sport, whether you think it's a good sport is a totally different matter though.

LuckyLloyd

A Crossfit box referring to people who turn up three times a week as "athletes" is a little lol and inappropriate. But the suggestion that those engaged in physical strength / endurance / preparation sports at a high level are not athletes is very incorrect.

BTW I can see an arguement for crossfit more so than the other two, but the flip side of the coin is, its circuit training with the best part ridiculously bad form thats rife with drugs at the top level, again no real talent or skill required.

These days at the top level of the sport the elite competitors tend to move really well, and that aspect is improving year on year.

Zillah

Spartacus88 wrote: »

Ofcourse there not. I know of overweight lads that can barely kick a ball hence playing divsion 4 and live in the pub, there not athletes, the same way as you're local gym rat isn't regardless of how many videos they bombard us with of their training and diet.

A person trained or gifted in exercises or contests involving physical agility, stamina or strength; A participant in a sport, exercise or game requiring a physical skill.

There is no skill set to all of the above, there isn't one component of fitness in bodybuilding or fitness modelling, let's all be honest. I know its going to upset a few of you here who might be involved in them, but its reality.

What a bizarre mix of insecurity, pretension and elitism. Are you upset about people misusing the word athlete or are you angry about people showing off online?

I'll draw a comparison:
Anyone who uses a camera frequently and does so at a level above and beyond the majority of people can call themselves a photographer, but only someone that is doing it for their bread and butter can call themselves a professional photographer.

So while I would never use the word I don't think it would be wrong to call myself an athlete - even as a poor gym rat peasant - but I'm certainly not a professional athlete.

Sundy

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

A Crossfit box referring to people who turn up three times a week as "athletes" is a little lol and inappropriate. But the suggestion that those engaged in physical strength / endurance / preparation sports at a high level are not athletes is very incorrect.

I agree with this so much. The crossfit I go to sells t-shirts with athlete written down the back. I actually think some of the people that buy them believe they are athletes but then don't show up on the days its a running workout.

In my mind competing in events is what differentiates between being an athlete and not being one.

Mellor

Sundy wrote: »

In my mind competing in events is what differentiates between being an athlete and not being one.

That doesn't really work as a benchmark either though. If I enter the Dublin city marathon, I am competing in an event - but it doesn't make me an athlete.

Staying with Crossfit, 246k people entered the Open this year, 150k people entered scores for all 5 weeks. Obviously all of these people aren't athletes, yet the 40 or so guys who qualify for the "Games" are certainly athletes in my eyes.

I would consider an athlete somebody who makes a living from competing (or competes at an equivalent sort of level in their sport) - and I'd expect that's probably open to lots of exceptions too

Oryx

I consider an athlete to be someone who dedicates their life to their sport. They dont have to make a living at it, but the reason they work is to fund training I know many phenomenal athletes; all have day jobs, all compete at international level in sport.

Why would seriously competitive bodybuilders not be athletes? The commitment and dedication is there. Its not based on skill... running in a straight line is pretty fundamentally unskilled, but sprinters are athletes, so skill is not the defining factor.

Has your sport changed your body?
Are all aspects of your lifestyle affected by what you do?
Are you trained beyond the levels of the general population?
If so, I reckon you can call yourself an athlete.

Though in fairness, anyone who slings around the title as a boast or wears it on their back, probably isnt.

Mellor

Oryx wrote: »

I consider an athlete to be someone who dedicates their life to their sport. They dont have to make a living at it, but the reason they work is to fund training I know many phenomenal athletes; all have day jobs, all compete at international level in sport.

That's why included the second part. People who may not necessarily make a living from sport, but compete at a similar level.

Its not based on skill... running in a straight line is pretty fundamentally unskilled, but sprinters are athletes, so skill is not the defining factor.

I know nothing about sprinting, but I'd be surprised if there wasn't minute technical nuances at the elite end.

Oryx

Mellor wrote: »

That's why included the second part. People who may not necessarily make a living from sport, but compete at a similar level.


I know nothing about sprinting, but I'd be surprised if there wasn't minute technical nuances at the elite end.

To be honest I was trying to make a point that skill alone can't be used to rule out something. But at the top level in anything, skill is involved. There is skill in running any distance well (marathons too though theyve been disparaged here) but a lay person might not see that, same as a lay person might think bodybulding was unskilled.

El_Duderino 09

Zillah wrote: »

Anyone who uses a camera frequently and does so at a level above and beyond the majority of people can call themselves a photographer, but only someone that is doing it for their bread and butter can call themselves a professional photographer.

I was thinking about the example from earlier in this thread about the person who wires a plug not being an electrician and you illustrated it nicely here.

If I wire a plug is definitely electrician work. So I have done some electrician work but I'm not a professional electrician. Besides, 'electrician' is a protected term and you need to follow a prescribed path to become one.

Spartacus I took your position in this debate about what constitutes a sport before. I ended up conceding the point because you probably need to include a competitive element in the definition. As soon as you do that it blows the category open to some activities and closes it off to others.

You could be a marathon runner in which case running is a sport but if you play a field sport like rugby, then running is just training and not a sport.

Equally, rock climbing can be competitive and extremely physical (probably a sport). Or it can be purely recreational (is it still a sport? ).

I think the term 'athlete' is probably equally difficult to pin down. Unless you're some kind of authority who can define these things, then it's probably best to leave people to call themselves what they want.

Funny thing is that I can't imagine a certifiably athlete, like Paul o connell, telling a body builder they aren't an athlete.

LuckyLloyd

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Funny thing is that I can't imagine a certifiably athlete, like Paul o connell, telling a body builder they aren't an athlete.

Good point. In my experience people training hard at some sport or activity tend to have great respect for people pushing hard at something totally different to them. The only exceptions to that general rule I have seen are lads who play (and have only played) one of soccer / GAA but there are cultural conditioning things at play there that would take a much broader discussion to unwind.

Hanley

Oryx wrote: »

I consider an athlete to be someone who dedicates their life to their sport. They dont have to make a living at it, but the reason they work is to fund training I know many phenomenal athletes; all have day jobs, all compete at international level in sport.

Why would seriously competitive bodybuilders not be athletes? The commitment and dedication is there. Its not based on skill... running in a straight line is pretty fundamentally unskilled, but sprinters are athletes, so skill is not the defining factor.

Has your sport changed your body?
Are all aspects of your lifestyle affected by what you do?
Are you trained beyond the levels of the general population?
If so, I reckon you can call yourself an athlete.

Though in fairness, anyone who slings around the title as a boast or wears it on their back, probably isnt.

Best post.

Mr. CooL ICE

Zamboni

#pubrow

This is a pub row. Other examples include;
"Is darts a sport?"
"Sheflin is the greatest Hurler of all time"
"Stephanie Roche scored the best goal out of the three"
No actual right or wrong answer, just lots of people getting their knickers in a twist over something that is of very little importance in the grand scheme of things.

Oryx

Zamboni wrote: »

#pubrow

This is a pub row. Other examples include;
"Is darts a sport?"
"Sheflin is the greatest Hurler of all time"
"Stephanie Roche scored the best goal out of the three"
No actual right or wrong answer, just lots of people getting their knickers in a twist over something that is of very little importance in the grand scheme of things.

You just described all of boards

ectoraige

Glenn Pendlay wrote an excellent article about what an athlete needs to do to be competitive where he quotes Juma Ikangaa as saying “the will to win means nothing without the will to prepare” - meaning the real effort is in the preparation to be competitive. Pendlay brings this further by pointing out that while a competitive athlete puts themselves through a lot of pain in training, there are people up and down the country in gyms, crossfit boxes, and on the roads putting themselves through similar pain, but with different goals - health, vanity, and so on. The distinction Pendlay makes is in those who make sacrifices in their lifestyle in order to be able to train - those "prepared to prepare".

Consider this. Somewhere out there is a guy working a crappy part time job, chosen because it does not interfere with training. He is talking on a 4 year old cell phone and driving a 10 year old car because earning the money for newer, more expensive things would require working more hours and that would interfere with his training. He is going to bed at 10pm every night, hasn’t been to a bar in several years and he trained on Christmas day, and on his birthday. He is busy preparing his meals ahead of time instead of watching “Two and a half men” or some other asinine TV program.

He is doing everything he can OUTSIDE the training hall, to allow himself to prepare harder and more thoroughly INSIDE the training hall. And he is going to be very, very hard for you to beat unless you do the same.

For me, I've adjusted my diet so I can train better, I tell myself what time I should be going to bed at, and I know what meals I should have prepared. Yet I'll still happily eat crap when it's put in front of me, usually end up in bed an hour later than I should have, and run around in the morning throwing food together to get out the door to work. I wouldn't like to call myself an athlete, because I know the sacrifices that I'm not making. I've entered competitions, but never with an expectation of winning, only to serve as a yardstick of my own progress. Maybe one day I'll be making enough sacrifices to be close to winning something, but until then I wouldn't feel right being labelled an "athlete".

I don't know much about fitness modelling, but I assume they have to do specific training in order to achieve particular physical characteristics. A sprinter needs particular physical characteristics to sprint well, and they too train to achieve these characteristics. There may be less skill involved in posing, but it's still something they'd have to train at. I suspect the level of sacrifice made by the top fitness models is comparable to that of any top athlete. Athletic woulnd't be the first word to spring to my mind if I saw somebody holding a pose, but there's plenty of posing and attention to form in gymnastics too. Maybe it's "explosiveness" that makes the distinction, but in order to be able to do the level of training required of a fitness model, I suspect they have to develop their explosiveness. If somebody is making as high a level of sacrifice to put in the training and wants to call themselves athletes, I wouldn't begrudge them that. [troll]I suspect the top fitness models are doing more training than most people on this forum.[/troll]

conzy

Senior GAA players are not pro and definitely are athletes. Clarence Kennedy is not pro but has an elite total, hes an athlete.

I'm far from an athlete, but I'd like to think that if I'm ever skwatting 2.5x my bodyweight that I'd be considered an athlete. At that point you have invested a lot of time in the pursuit of strength / athleticism.