Distance runners are not athletes. I am a distance runner.
Distance runners are not athletes. I am a distance runner.
No.The most basic traits for athleticism are strength, agility, and stamina. Distance running requires only the third.
> It's also worth noting that cyclists, boxers, and world-class rowers have never run anything faster than a 2:29 marathon.
No it isn't. No world class runner has ever broken 15 minutes in the 1500M freestyle. I'd therefore put swimmers above runners.
readrun wrote:
Skills McKenzie wrote:"Athleticism is not synonymous with skill".
This is a half truth. Piano players are skilled but not athletes. I'm not a soccer fan, but they are in "good shape", so should not be disqualified because it also requires skill, as does basketball. There is no right or wrong answer, but given no skill component whatsoever in distance running, they would not be in most conversations regarding the best athletes. Decathletes make the conversation, but given how few people compete in decathlons, it is unlikely that they are the best either
There is ABSOLUTELY a skill component to elite distance running. Otherwise, Meb Keflezighi wouldn't be where he is today.
Everyone can run. Some people can run faster, and some people have more endurance, which can be improved by training. I suppose training could be called skill training, but I seriously wonder if Meb would call it that.
Skill trainer wrote:
readrun wrote:There is ABSOLUTELY a skill component to elite distance running. Otherwise, Meb Keflezighi wouldn't be where he is today.
Everyone can run. Some people can run faster, and some people have more endurance, which can be improved by training. I suppose training could be called skill training, but I seriously wonder if Meb would call it that.
My guess is that he was talking about Meb having racing skills.
readrun wrote:
3. Distance runners - For the reasons I listed above. It's also worth noting that cyclists, boxers, and world-class rowers have never run anything faster than a 2:29 marathon.
Very stupid point. Rowers aren't failing to go 2:29 because they aren't fit enough or "the best athletes" like runners. It's because they train for full-body strength and 5-15 minute events. Heavyweights are massive. Lightweights at 165 pounds have upper bodies that make Solinksy look like Rupp.
Running does have a component of skill and specificity, otherwise of course rowers, cyclists and swimmers with unreal aerobic fitness could hop in marathons and readily go sub-2:30, to use your examples. Your argument is easily countered by saying that you can't just drop an Olympic 5,000 finalist in a 1500 freestyle, 50 km XC ski or cycling TT and expect world-class performance.
Of these, runners are actually NOT at the top in terms of measurables like VO2, and it is actually the LEAST full-body activity of these (close tie with cycling for zero upper body development).
I'd give the nod to XC skiing for best fitness, and basketball, wrestling or boxing for best ATHLETES.
ttc wrote:
Best conditioned.
Ask other athletes to run 80-120 mpw, even at a reduced pace for their abilities, & watch them s.h|t themselves. Ask them to hold near top speed for 1/2 mile or do a 22 mile long run, followed by doubles the next 6 days, then another 22. And after a race, tell them they shouldn't breathe hard, but instead go into a jogged lap. Watch their reactions.
Laughable.
Translate all of that to time spent at a given HR, and XC skiers or swimmers would ask when the workout starts.
Because of the reduced impact and injury risk, swimmers and skiers can and do train 3-4 hours a day. Not hopping around doing drills and stretches, but GOING. Runners actually go HARD for a fraction of the time these other athletes do. 100mpw seems like a lot to you? Nothing. Even at a sluggish 8 minutes per mile that is just 12 hours. That is Monday-Wednesday for a swimmer. And time spent at LT, VO2 max or actually sprinting is very low for runners.
14 year-old swimmers are doing 8000m workouts. That is like 30k of running in terms of time spent.
I think you are having a debate with yourself. I don't think anyone would ever think distance runners are in the discussion.
you created a debate that does not exist.
runners not that fit wrote:
Of these, runners are actually NOT at the top in terms of measurables like VO2, and it is actually the LEAST full-body activity of these (close tie with cycling for zero upper body development).
.
People who don't understand body mechanics always underestimate the strength component of running. To keep proper posture for an entire marathon is something even elites struggle with. You need a tremendous amount of core strength as well as a strong upper back.
What is strength? I bet you can't give a defnition of how the nervous system is involved in strength?
Bryan Clay scored football rating of 130.40, Soccer rating of 96.50, baseball rating of 102.00, basketball rating of 90.00 and athletic assessment of 145.00 in SPARQ testing.
http://www.topendsports.com/testing/sparq-rating-system.htm
Decathletes are the best athletes in the world.
Whatever bruce lee did to stay in insane shape has to be what you are looking for. Running,Biking,Swimming,Stretching,Lifting weights. You name it he did it.
Nordic Skiing
runners not that fit wrote:
ttc wrote:Best conditioned.
Ask other athletes to run 80-120 mpw, even at a reduced pace for their abilities, & watch them s.h|t themselves. Ask them to hold near top speed for 1/2 mile or do a 22 mile long run, followed by doubles the next 6 days, then another 22. And after a race, tell them they shouldn't breathe hard, but instead go into a jogged lap. Watch their reactions.
Laughable.
Translate all of that to time spent at a given HR, and XC skiers or swimmers would ask when the workout starts.
Because of the reduced impact and injury risk, swimmers and skiers can and do train 3-4 hours a day. Not hopping around doing drills and stretches, but GOING. Runners actually go HARD for a fraction of the time these other athletes do. 100mpw seems like a lot to you? Nothing. Even at a sluggish 8 minutes per mile that is just 12 hours. That is Monday-Wednesday for a swimmer. And time spent at LT, VO2 max or actually sprinting is very low for runners.
14 year-old swimmers are doing 8000m workouts. That is like 30k of running in terms of time spent.
I think you forgot to factor in the whole "weight bearing" aspect of running and how much more difficult that makes it. The reason you can push yourself along for hours on skis or in the water is because the load is lessened.
ttc wrote:
Best conditioned.
Ask other athletes to run 80-120 mpw, even at a reduced pace for their abilities, & watch them s.h|t themselves. Ask them to hold near top speed for 1/2 mile or do a 22 mile long run, followed by doubles the next 6 days, then another 22. And after a race, tell them they shouldn't breathe hard, but instead go into a jogged lap. Watch their reactions.
^^This says it all.
The answer you're looking for is rock climbers. An outdoor climbing day of 10-12 hours is not abnormal. Training days are usually 3-5 hours + most climbers run ~5 days a week to keep really lean. You need to be very powerful for certain moves but have enough endurance to keep moving through move after move.
45 wrote:
Distance runners are not athletes. I am a distance runner.
Hmm...why then have the Europeans always called running "athletics"?
outsiderunner wrote:
45 wrote:Distance runners are not athletes. I am a distance runner.
Hmm...why then have the Europeans always called running "athletics"?
Because of the sprinting. The distance runners got thrown in as a package deal.
8/10
*golf clap*
Many serious responses and no one realized that you were trolled. Nicely done!
for the Gladiators. The ultimate winner take all athlete.
Anyone that disagrees is an idiot, jk.
Outside Magazine reported that Navy Seal recruiters get their most successful recruits (meaning highest success rate of passing the insanely rigorous BUDS training) from endurance athletes. The Seals now stage recruiting events at triathlons, ultras, extreme races, etc.
It was also noted in that article that generally the "football player" types fail at at a much higher rate than endurance athletes. Also, the average size of a SEAL is 5'10 175 lbs, not the massive hulks the movies want you to think they are. Mental toughness and ability to withstand long periods of discomfort/pain, and still focus on the job, are really more important than physical size or skills.