Are Distance Runners the Best Athletes on Earth?

Whoa! Distance runners ranked 40th.

DC Wonk wrote:

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.

Is that why the gey scenes in American Sniper where there keep hosing the guys down?

Exactly. And why they are so much more developed aerobically.

runners not that fit wrote:

Not A Jogger wrote:

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.

Exactly. And why they are so much more developed aerobically.

By your logic swimmers & skiers should be proud that it takes then exponentially longer to achieve the same level of fitness as it does by running. Ain't nobody got time for dat.

I've gotta throw ultimate fighting into the mix. At the top elite level, of course.

I would define athleticism as a combination of agility, speed, and explosiveness . Fitness is a combination of endurance and strength. Competiveness is the ability to perform under pressure and in unexpected conditions.

If you told me I had to prepare a team for a series of unknown sports competitions but could only pick athletes from one sport or discipline I would pick a bunch of 400 M hurdlers.

Many 400 hurdlers actually were or are high level basketball and football players. See RG III. They likely have the coordination to do well at skill sports like baseball, hockey, and soccer. The strength and explosiveness required to clear ten hurdles at sub 48 pace would allow them to become strong power lifters if they focused on that. Although they probably have too much fast twitch to be world class at true endurance events, I don't see any reason why they couldn't go well under BQ standards with a couple months training. The one high-level 400 m hurdler I knew was an absolute rock mentally, and I would not want to go one on one against him in anything, regardless of our comparative "skill" or "fitness"

XC skiers without a doubt. You say that running is a full body sport but you're only really working your legs whereas with skiing you are using your whole body. Skiers have the highest VO2 max values of any sport (84.8 +/- 3.4 for the Norwegian national mens team) and log upwards of 1300 training hours per year (with a significant portion being high intensity). A lot of them also log 100km/week running during the offseason. Take any runner and ask him/her to skate, or even classic ski, Holmenkollen 50km course and they wouldn't make it 5km. Also, a couple of years ago I think a xc skier ran a sub 2:20 although I can't find the result

readrun wrote:

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.

Perhaps you should try the 90k Vasaloppet XC ski race where the elites double pole without grip wax for 4 hours or the Marcia Longa race where the best men finish the 70k race by double poling up a 4k very steep uphill. To call distance runnners "strong" is pathetic.

i tried nordic for the first time of my life this weekend, only managed 3 miles of skiing. and needless to say my 800s workout the next day was cancelled 2 reps in. I was a wreck. XC skiing i think is harder even with my terrible form and balance, i knew this was tougher even if i had the mechanics down

Decathletes have the greatest endurance. Look at Bruce Jenner, his tits aren't even sagging.

RichardJFronning wrote:

Crossfitters are definitely the most versed / best athletes on the world.

^this

Gymnasts.

Balance, strength, flexibility and body awareness/control.

How many pro athletes in other sports could do some of their "easier" skills?

They are incredible athletes.

Tumble knots wrote:

Gymnasts.

Balance, strength, flexibility and body awareness/control.

How many pro athletes in other sports could do some of their "easier" skills?

They are incredible athletes.

I agree that gymnastics might very well be the most difficult sport to achieve perfection in and they very well may be the best athletes on earth. Also, the length of an athletes career in this sport should tell you something. At 20 you are washed up. Who is incredibly fit and strong? I don't know a lot about gymnastics but it looks like you have to be aerobically fit to handle the floor exercise and you need to have incredible strength, balance, and coordination for the other events.

I don't know how you compare some sports against others. They are all so very different. And it depends on how you define the qualities of the best athletes. If BMI or aerobic capacity is a factor you can definately rule out those NFL players that some on this thread feel are the best.

Nordic skiing has been mentioned a few times. I race on skis, bikes and foot and all top athletes are equally impressive. Cross country skiers stand out since they not only need endurance and speed, but they need to do a lot of work on power and technique. Coordinating the power and adjusting technique to conditions in xc skiing requires a supreme athlete with top balance and coordination (genetic and trained). If you have ever tried xc skiing you know that fitness is just one part of the equation. There is a high degree of coordinating the arm and leg fitness that takes subtle and powerful athleticism.

A friend of mine graduated as one of the top 20 NCAA xc skiers in the USA. Not quite US Ski Team material, and no career skiing opportunities exist, so he took a job in Boston and stopped skiing. He started running seriously that summer and raced the Boston Marathon the following spring. I was blown away by his 2:24 time. That is not a lot of running training and a testimony to his base fitness. Ben True also comes to mind as a top NCAA skier who chose to run over ski only because he could make a living running. Of course, a top 20 NCAA xc runner could train for the marathon and run 5 to 10 minutes faster, but these xc guys are fit and amazingly coordinated athletes.

Skiing, unlike running, does not typically cause overuse injuries, so these guys can and do put in mega hours on skis. They can spend 3-4 hours on skis average per day.

I would bet that most top xc sprinters would be unbelievable decathletes. Keep in mind that XC sprints last 3 - 4 minutes, so these guys have miler engines, with quick twitch muscles and super strong upper bodies.

LennyZ wrote:

I would bet that most top xc sprinters would be unbelievable decathletes. Keep in mind that XC sprints last 3 - 4 minutes, so these guys have miler engines, with quick twitch muscles and super strong upper bodies.

I would agree with most of your post except for this. For most decathletes the 1500 is their weak event. Fast twitch muscles are a MUST for the jumps, sprints, and throws. Upper body strength helps but without the combination explosive speed they go nowhere as a Decathlete. You either are born with that or not.

I contend that rowers are similarly athletic.

Big wave surfers brah. They run with heavy rocks in their arms ON THE BOTTOM OF THE OCEAN for training.