50 Fittest Athletes in the World

osm wrote:

Interested in people's thoughts on this list that Sports Illustrated compiled.

http://www.si.com/edge/photos/2014/08/05/sports-illustrated-fittest-50-athletes-sports

Highlights include Meb at 46, Rich Froning at 33, Ashton Eaton at 19, and Bolt at 3.

I'm curious as to how they calculated the endurance aspect, considering that Bolt is given 9/10 in that category, which seems laughable. Still an interesting list.

That list is arbitrary and dumb!!!

Fitness is more than long distance running. Rather its agility, power, speed, strength endurance, flexibility, etc. In this respect Mo wouldn't be close. The fastest runner? Yes. The fittest? Not even close.

Dean Karnazes can run forever. Thanks to a "low sweat rate" and special "alkaline diet" Deans body can clear lactate forever! And, he does cross fit! So he is crazy strong! He should be in the top 5 easy.

http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/the-running-blog/2013/aug/30/dean-karnazes-man-run-forever

I don't think Dean runs fast enough to near to clear lactate

Ashton Eaton's speed is a 6, but Cristiano Ronaldo is given a 10. Ri-f***in-diculous.

Put them in a 100m race and Ronaldo wouldn't get within 6 or 7 metres of Eaton

runlongandhard wrote:

This is a joke. James couldn't even make it through a game when the air conditioning went out. He should be scored closer to a 4 or 5 on endurance.

10/10 my exact thought when I head LeBron was number 1

They really don't know how to rate endurance. No way James or Bolt has more endurance than soccer and tennis players.

I think Roger Federer should be rated higher. In his prime, he could duke out 5-set matches and never be winded after a point, no matter how long the point was. And like all tennis players, he had superb footwork. Just watch how many quick little steps tennis players have to take before each shot (and to recover back to the middle of the court to prepare for the next): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3zeh8xJxvY.

Sam F wrote:

Dean Karnazes can run forever. Thanks to a "low sweat rate" and special "alkaline diet" Deans body can clear lactate forever! And, he does cross fit! So he is crazy strong! He should be in the top 5 easy.

http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/the-running-blog/2013/aug/30/dean-karnazes-man-run-forever

Except for his speed would be .01. Not to mention, nearly everyone in the 3 major sports would have much higher strength and agility. Heck, I know average runners who would have better strength and agility.

I know you're joking, but there are people thinking this.

List is a total joke. How could CrossFit champ Froning, at No. 33, rank lower than soccer and tennis players, especially when it comes to physical strength? And how could any legit list not include David Rudisha, maybe the greatest middle-distance runner ever? This list is bizarrely weighted toward basketball and football players, and omits a wide, wide range of great athletes whose fitness levels routinely blow soccer and basketball players out of the water -- from Olympic wrestlers, to martial arts stars, to Olympic weight-lifters and gymnasts, to stars on the burgeoning obstacle racing circuit, including the celebrated Amelia Boone. Forget this list. Its only purpose is to serve as click bait.

El Keniano wrote:

Does Sports Illustrated know anything about football? Seriously [..] Tim Howard?

MORON.

Tim Howard plays soccer, not football.

Besides, if I had to rank one soccer player that should be among the likes of Rich Froning on that list, it would be Christiano Ronaldo. He has the strength, endurance and power to compete with the worlds bests in every sports (except CrossFit) and on top of that as a great PHYSIQUE.

The more I think about this list, the more I realize how stupid and silly it is. How much effort did SI put into compiling it? Not much, apparently. I guess they asked a couple of their summer interns to put it together, judging from its insipidness.

As everyone has undoubtedly noticed, the list makes no mention of what metrics were used to determine the listees' ratings for strength, speed or agility. The list gives LeBron James a 10 for strength, yet does not cite what his best bench press is. Nor do we know how fast he can run 200m.

The list is notable for who it omits. Not just David Rudisha, but two other extraordinary athletes: rock climbers Adam Ondra and Alex Honnold, whose proven strength, endurance and agility put football, hockey, basketball and tennis players to shame. And of course there is the most fit man of all: Swiss climber Ueli Steck, who is famous for his record-setting ascents of difficult and dangerous rock walls in the Alps and Himalayas. None of the super-rich athletes in the SI Top 50 list can touch Steck even on his worst day.

I learned that Lebron has better endurance than Chris Froome

osm wrote:

I'm curious as to how they calculated the endurance aspect, considering that Bolt is given 9/10 in that category, which seems laughable. Still an interesting list.

Clearly they made up their list, then invented numbers to justify selections. Pretty funny, actually.

Besides, This list was done before Lebron had cramps in game 1.

erik wrote:

I learned that Lebron has better endurance than Chris Froome

It would be interesting to see Lebron attempt to chase Ray Allen around on defense for a game, since Lebron rates a 10 for endurance and that is better than Ray's 8.

I also notice that if they gave Rich Froning the 1 for speed that he deserves for that 61+ second 400, he doesn't make the list.

keen observer wrote:

The list is total, complete trash

Absolutely. The bar for the following three things should be set by the following:

Endurance - Meb and other top Marathoners

Speed - Gaitlin and other top Sprinters

Strength - Top Powerlifters

Fu,ck my stupid iPad why won't it load this shit

Tennis also requires extremely rigorous mental stamina since you need to focus on reacting to 120-130 mph serves one after the other for long stretches. Almost every other sport is a walk in the park compared to this.