billsfan89 Posted February 6, 2010 Posted February 6, 2010 in pro golf there is no cart allowed, so its an endurance issue as well, walking 18 holes, plus playing the game itself, usually in hot and humid temp., combine it all, it is a sport Are kidding me? There is no time limit you can sit down take a drink and not worry. Saying walking 18 holes isn't at all hard. Playing a game where competitors are actively trying to prevent you from accomplishing a task is a lot harder then hitting a stationary ball that you have to walk to as a caddy carries your clubs. Bottom line if you can't tell if someone is athletic by how they play it then its not a sport. Sorry I can't tell if Tiger Woods is fast or quick by how he plays golf.
nostyle126 Posted February 6, 2010 Author Posted February 6, 2010 I can't tell how athletic those guys are by watching that video. Are they fast? Are the quick? Do they have good hand eye coordination? Sure strength and dexterity is displayed but that's about it. All I see are two guys locking arms and seeing who is stronger. They are both stationary and have their arms locked at the starting point how are they showing off speed or hand eye coordination (Their arms are locked as soon as they start), I might see an argument for quickness but I would throw that in doubt. See, that's the thing. This video actually DOES reveal speed and quickness, but if you don't study professional armwrestling you can't see it. I will admit that hand-eye coordination isn't so much a part of armwrestling but dexterity, speed, quickness, power, strength, core strength, and smarts certainly are. It is VERY common that a superior armwrestler defeats a "stronger" opponent, because armwrestling does not simply pit strength against strength. There is far more going on, as difficult as it might be to tell in a vid like this. I don't know if this is gonna help, but check out another vid: These two guys are a bit lighter than the last two guys I posted, but they're two of the fastest armwrestlers out there. Within the first second of the "go" both have hit incredibly hard and with incredible speed/power that would normally have defeated an opponent with what is known as a "flash pin", because it would've happened so fast. But these two are pretty evenly matched, so the match continues. The guy on the right does a maneuver known as "toproll", putting incredible pressure on his opponent's hand (you can see this by the :01 mark when the guy on the right is already dropping his body and the guy on the left is about to have his wrist fold back). The match looks virtually over but the guy on the left does something amazing. He forces the match from a toproll into a hook match (the point of contact moves from the fingers...where he was losing...to being wrist-on-wrist, known as a hook) and brings the match back up to the middle of the table. Ultimately the guy on the right manages to pin the guy on the left, even in a hook (wrist-to-wrist), but this match demonstrates the initial speed necessary to take control of the match, incredible power required to exploit your opponent's weaknesses, the adjustments necessary to overcome bad positions and your opponent's strategy, and maybe most of all, core strength, as you can see both competitors are using their whole bodies, not just their arms. There is a lot going on there. More than meets the eye.
billsfan89 Posted February 6, 2010 Posted February 6, 2010 See, that's the thing. This video actually DOES reveal speed and quickness, but if you don't study professional armwrestling you can't see it. I will admit that hand-eye coordination isn't so much a part of armwrestling but dexterity, speed, quickness, power, strength, core strength, and smarts certainly are. It is VERY common that a superior armwrestler defeats a "stronger" opponent, because armwrestling does not simply pit strength against strength. There is far more going on, as difficult as it might be to tell in a vid like this. I don't know if this is gonna help, but check out another vid: These two guys are a bit lighter than the last two guys I posted, but they're two of the fastest armwrestlers out there. Within the first second of the "go" both have hit incredibly hard and with incredible speed/power that would normally have defeated an opponent with what is known as a "flash pin", because it would've happened so fast. But these two are pretty evenly matched, so the match continues. The guy on the right does a maneuver known as "toproll", putting incredible pressure on his opponent's hand (you can see this by the :01 mark when the guy on the right is already dropping his body and the guy on the left is about to have his wrist fold back). The match looks virtually over but the guy on the left does something amazing. He forces the match from a toproll into a hook match (the point of contact moves from the fingers...where he was losing...to being wrist-on-wrist, known as a hook) and brings the match back up to the middle of the table. Ultimately the guy on the right manages to pin the guy on the left, even in a hook (wrist-to-wrist), but this match demonstrates the initial speed necessary to take control of the match, incredible power required to exploit your opponent's weaknesses, the adjustments necessary to overcome bad positions and your opponent's strategy, and maybe most of all, core strength, as you can see both competitors are using their whole bodies, not just their arms. There is a lot going on there. More than meets the eye. Sorry but how quickly you can move arms that are locked into place isn't a showing of speed more so quic=kness. Those guys aren't showing how fast they are by how they arm wrestle. They are both stationary and in a locked position its not a sport I can't tell if those guys are athletic just by how they are wrestle.
nostyle126 Posted February 7, 2010 Author Posted February 7, 2010 Sorry but how quickly you can move arms that are locked into place isn't a showing of speed more so quic=kness. Those guys aren't showing how fast they are by how they arm wrestle. They are both stationary and in a locked position its not a sport I can't tell if those guys are athletic just by how they are wrestle. Define "fast" for me then. Are you referring to foot speed?
billsfan89 Posted February 7, 2010 Posted February 7, 2010 Define "fast" for me then. Are you referring to foot speed? Going from point A to point B (In a good distance) by using your body (by running or skating). Can you run fast can you skate fast are those things measured by arm wrestling? No they aren't thus arm wrestling isn't a sport. As I have told you its not to put down arm wrestling but rather just to put more meaning into what a sport is.
nostyle126 Posted February 7, 2010 Author Posted February 7, 2010 Going from point A to point B (In a good distance) by using your body (by running or skating). Can you run fast can you skate fast are those things measured by arm wrestling? No they aren't thus arm wrestling isn't a sport. As I have told you its not to put down arm wrestling but rather just to put more meaning into what a sport is. But I guess my point is that I'm not sure there is a single sport that truly tests every dimension of athleticism that you named. Lots of non-athletes play football, by your definition. Linemen, kickers, punters, and quarterbacks have very specific skill sets that don't meet your criteria. Therefore football isn't a sport. How about baseball? Baseball pitchers hardly ever show the athleticism necessary to qualify them as athletes. It's also hard to say that baseball players are agile. Almost all the movements in baseball are straight line running...can you really determine agility from this? So again you have non-athletes playing baseball...meaning it's not a sport? Tennis? Tennis players show incredible agility, dexterity, hand-eye coordination, but they're quick, not necessarily fast. They play on very tight dimensions, so you might call a tennis player quick, but can you really judge if they're fast? And what about their strength? Isn't tennis a rather limited test of strength? How about Soccer? Can you really tell how strong soccer players are? Sure, they are fast with strong legs, great dexterity, eye-foot coordination...but what about upper body strength? It barely comes into play. Another non-sport, but your definition. In fact, I'm having trouble thinking of a sport that DOESN'T have non-athletes, by your definition. What sport so thoroughly measures athleticism across the board? Hockey? A good candidate, but how strong do you have to be? Is Derek Roy strong? Nathan Gerbe? Perhaps basketball? Basketball is a decent candidate, but again, does it really measure strength? Dominant players are surely strong, but there are lots of NBA players that don't exactly have bragging rights in the gym. IMO your definition of a sport is too stringent, if a single sport must reveal ALL of these elements.
BuffaloBill Posted February 7, 2010 Posted February 7, 2010 In baseball the ball is thrown at you with the intent of you not hitting it. In fact in baseball when a ball is easy to hit they say that it is put on a tee in golf the ball is just sitting there with the intent of you hitting it. Hitting a stationary ball (Which is all you are doing in golf) is far from the same as baseball which also involves fielding the ball and running bases (Which requires reacting to something in an instant manner and speed as apposed to golf when you can take your time with your shot). Baseball requires a lot more skill and athletic ability to be a complete player at it. Golf you don't need to be fast, strong, or have reactionary skills its simply a game that requires a lot of skill. Tiger isn't an athlete fact. Have you ever played golf .... better yet have you played it well?
CarolinaBill Posted February 7, 2010 Posted February 7, 2010 Are kidding me? There is no time limit you can sit down take a drink and not worry. Saying walking 18 holes isn't at all hard. Playing a game where competitors are actively trying to prevent you from accomplishing a task is a lot harder then hitting a stationary ball that you have to walk to as a caddy carries your clubs. Bottom line if you can't tell if someone is athletic by how they play it then its not a sport. Sorry I can't tell if Tiger Woods is fast or quick by how he plays golf. golf is a sport, so is arm wrestling, you cant tell how athletic olineman are so is football not a sort, or are they just not athletes? You cant determine athleticism by watching a wrestling match but I know that is a sport. You don't determine what a sport is, and your definition of what is and is not sport is terrible.
billsfan89 Posted February 7, 2010 Posted February 7, 2010 golf is a sport, so is arm wrestling, you cant tell how athletic olineman are so is football not a sort, or are they just not athletes? You cant determine athleticism by watching a wrestling match but I know that is a sport. You don't determine what a sport is, and your definition of what is and is not sport is terrible. Yes you can tell if O-line man are athletic if they constantly get beat off the ball they are slow, if they get no push they aren't as strong as they should be. Then if you really want to look at hand eye coordination you have to look at the hand techniques used in the trenches. If you are fat or slow in a wrestling match you will be eaten alive and exposed in various ways. How is hitting a stationary ball with no interference in any form a spot?
billsfan89 Posted February 7, 2010 Posted February 7, 2010 But I guess my point is that I'm not sure there is a single sport that truly tests every dimension of athleticism that you named. Lots of non-athletes play football, by your definition. Linemen, kickers, punters, and quarterbacks have very specific skill sets that don't meet your criteria. Therefore football isn't a sport. How about baseball? Baseball pitchers hardly ever show the athleticism necessary to qualify them as athletes. It's also hard to say that baseball players are agile. Almost all the movements in baseball are straight line running...can you really determine agility from this? So again you have non-athletes playing baseball...meaning it's not a sport? Tennis? Tennis players show incredible agility, dexterity, hand-eye coordination, but they're quick, not necessarily fast. They play on very tight dimensions, so you might call a tennis player quick, but can you really judge if they're fast? And what about their strength? Isn't tennis a rather limited test of strength? How about Soccer? Can you really tell how strong soccer players are? Sure, they are fast with strong legs, great dexterity, eye-foot coordination...but what about upper body strength? It barely comes into play. Another non-sport, but your definition. In fact, I'm having trouble thinking of a sport that DOESN'T have non-athletes, by your definition. What sport so thoroughly measures athleticism across the board? Hockey? A good candidate, but how strong do you have to be? Is Derek Roy strong? Nathan Gerbe? Perhaps basketball? Basketball is a decent candidate, but again, does it really measure strength? Dominant players are surely strong, but there are lots of NBA players that don't exactly have bragging rights in the gym. IMO your definition of a sport is too stringent, if a single sport must reveal ALL of these elements. Wrong about lineman without speed they can't handle a speed rush or get to the second level without strength they can't runblock. As far as kickers and punters go its such a specialized position that it doesn't measure the sport. QB's can be great without speed BUT the lack of speed does expose an element of their game. Also Tennis your strength is measured by your serve, speed by how much ground you cover, hand eye coordination by reaction to the ball, dexterity by how you reach out to the ball, and quickness is measured by how quickly you react to the serve.
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted February 7, 2010 Posted February 7, 2010 Yes you can tell if O-line man are athletic if they constantly get beat off the ball they are slow, if they get no push they aren't as strong as they should be. Then if you really want to look at hand eye coordination you have to look at the hand techniques used in the trenches. If you are fat or slow in a wrestling match you will be eaten alive and exposed in various ways. How is hitting a stationary ball with no interference in any form a spot? Because to most people, including the folks who wrote most dictionaries, a sport is simply a physical competition. You're the one with the absurdly specific definition. I could go around claiming that a poem is only a poem if the author uses simile, metaphor, personification and onomatopoeia...doesn't mean I'm right.
nostyle126 Posted February 7, 2010 Author Posted February 7, 2010 Yes you can tell if O-line man are athletic if they constantly get beat off the ball they are slow, if they get no push they aren't as strong as they should be. Then if you really want to look at hand eye coordination you have to look at the hand techniques used in the trenches. If you are fat or slow in a wrestling match you will be eaten alive and exposed in various ways. How is hitting a stationary ball with no interference in any form a spot? By your own definition an offensive lineman may be "quick", but you cannot say they are "fast". And while hands may be used in blocking, I hardly think it is at a level which would allow us to evaluate "hand eye coordination" from an athletic sense. As to golf, I'm not sure I disagree with you. Golf is such a 'delicate' sport it's hard to give it much credit for the 'rigors' its competitors face. There is complete silence from the gallery while they swing. A caddy carries their clubs as they walk from hole to hole. It's not exactly rough. But certainly there is skill to it...core strength, hand eye coordination, power, I'll give you those. IMO there are probably just enough elements of athleticism to golf to call it a sport.
billsfan89 Posted February 9, 2010 Posted February 9, 2010 Because to most people, including the folks who wrote most dictionaries, a sport is simply a physical competition. You're the one with the absurdly specific definition. I could go around claiming that a poem is only a poem if the author uses simile, metaphor, personification and onomatopoeia...doesn't mean I'm right. So chess is a sport what is the distinction between a game and a sport? My definition of a sport is one that distinguishes a sport above a game or a competition. Granted that's my definition but I stand by it. Just because the dictionary definition is very loosely oriented doesn't mean any game is a sport.
billsfan89 Posted February 9, 2010 Posted February 9, 2010 By your own definition an offensive lineman may be "quick", but you cannot say they are "fast". And while hands may be used in blocking, I hardly think it is at a level which would allow us to evaluate "hand eye coordination" from an athletic sense. As to golf, I'm not sure I disagree with you. Golf is such a 'delicate' sport it's hard to give it much credit for the 'rigors' its competitors face. There is complete silence from the gallery while they swing. A caddy carries their clubs as they walk from hole to hole. It's not exactly rough. But certainly there is skill to it...core strength, hand eye coordination, power, I'll give you those. IMO there are probably just enough elements of athleticism to golf to call it a sport. If you can't block a linebacker or get downfield as an offensive lineman then you are slow. How about chasing down an INT? Lineman's speed get measured all the time. I am not saying Golf doesn't require skill but I am saying not being a good athlete doesn't have a negative impact on your game. I mean wasn't 57 year old man leading a major for multiple rounds?
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted February 9, 2010 Posted February 9, 2010 So chess is a sport what is the distinction between a game and a sport? My definition of a sport is one that distinguishes a sport above a game or a competition. Granted that's my definition but I stand by it. Just because the dictionary definition is very loosely oriented doesn't mean any game is a sport. I said physical competition...chess isn't a physical competition. Obviously definitions are subjective. But regarding "sport", you are in the vast minority.
nostyle126 Posted February 9, 2010 Author Posted February 9, 2010 Lineman's speed get measured all the time. The verdict? THEY'RE SLOW. So maybe their athleticism is challenged, but they fail miserably in terms of speed. But they're still athletes, right?
billsfan89 Posted February 10, 2010 Posted February 10, 2010 The verdict? THEY'RE SLOW. So maybe their athleticism is challenged, but they fail miserably in terms of speed. But they're still athletes, right? NO BUT YOU CAN TELL THEY ARE SLOW BY HOW THEY PLAY FOOTBALL. My point isn't that everyone who plays a sport is super athletic but rather solely by looking at how they play a sport you can tell if they are athletic. In golf and arm wrestling you can't tell if someone is athletic by how they golf or arm wrestle
Recommended Posts