ajzepp Posted February 19, 2007 Posted February 19, 2007 That's quite a narrow view. Race car drivers are in a continual state of high physical and mental tension and stress for long periods of time They don't rest between shifts, changes of possession, sets, innings and the like. The large majority of us, even if we had the skill and coordination, would be physically and mentally drained in short order. I'm not saying it's an easy thing to do, necessarily....I simply don't think it requires any sort of athletic skill.
The Senator Posted February 19, 2007 Posted February 19, 2007 Yesterday's Daytona 500 shoulda been called the Daytona Five - 5 hours of utter boredom, followed by a 2-lap, 5-mile race to decide the winner. What a ridiculous waste of time, I think.
JimBob2232 Posted February 19, 2007 Posted February 19, 2007 I think NASCAR is a sport - one that I have little to no interest in - but I dont' consider them athletes by any means. With all due respect to the women on the board, any sport where females can compete in the same competition as males pretty much indicates to me that it doesn't take an athlete to perform. You don't see WNBA players competing in the NBA. There are no women NFL players. I have yet to see a female pro tennis player beat a male pro tennis player. The list goes on and on. I know it's not "PC" to say it, but men are physically superior to females when it comes to athletics, and when Danica Patrick can equally compete with Jeff Gordon or Earnardt Jr, then to me those are not athletes. Is Micheal Phelps an athlete? Is Tiger Woods an athlete? Is Roger Federer an athlete? Is Lance Armstrong an athlete? Is Justin Gatlin an athlete? Is Shawn White an athlete? Is Bode Smith an athlete? Because, given the right circumstances, all of them could be beat by "a girl". I know you havent seen a female tennis player beat a male tennis player... but you cant tell me Serena Williams or Maria Sharapova couldnt kick the crap out of Frank Dancevic, Canada (Random guy I picked from the bottom of the mens ranking list.). And for the record, no woman has ever won a nextel cup race. In fact, there isnt even one on the circuit right now. Nobody has really competed on a widescale basis with the men in Nascar. Danica is running indy cars, and as far as that goes, she finished 9th in the standings. Sounds impressive until you realize only 19 cars run each week. Despite the press, she may be heading the Anna Kounrnakova route. Not to dispute your point though, Women can race with the men. But i dont think it takes men to be athletes.
ajzepp Posted February 19, 2007 Posted February 19, 2007 But i dont think it takes men to be athletes. I don't think you're really understanding what I'm saying.
The Tomcat Posted February 19, 2007 Posted February 19, 2007 I actually watched most of it...maybe its because Fox just went HD here in Jamestown. As a side note. I used to be a limo driver and drove 5 people from Jamestown (1 1/4 hrs south of Buffalo) to Daytona for the race. Darryl Waltrip won that year in his Tide Car..... Also I drove to Watkins Glenn a couple of times as well as going to watch the race and ANY event I can bring in a cooler of beer, drink all day and see women flashing is ok in my book. ok..enough reminiscing....
JimBob2232 Posted February 19, 2007 Posted February 19, 2007 I don't think you're really understanding what I'm saying. Then I'll use your words "...any sport where females can compete in the same competition as males pretty much indicates to me that it doesn't take an athlete to perform." If female cannot compete with the males, its because the males are athletes. If females can compete with the males, its because neither are athletes. Females either can or cannot compete with males in a given competition Therefore, females are not athletes. Perhaps you meant to say something different...but im not getting it from your postings.
ajzepp Posted February 19, 2007 Posted February 19, 2007 Then I'll use your words "...any sport where females can compete in the same competition as males pretty much indicates to me that it doesn't take an athlete to perform." If female cannot compete with the males, its because the males are athletes. If females can compete with the males, its because neither are athletes. Females either can or cannot compete with males in a given competition Therefore, females are not athletes. Perhaps you meant to say something different...but im not getting it from your postings. I feel that women and men can both be athletes, but generally speaking, men are superior athletes to women. Thus, if both men and women can compete in a given sport w/out having their own divisions, then the sport must not require a lot of athletic ability.
The Poojer Posted February 19, 2007 Posted February 19, 2007 sorry to jump into this one, but because there is a womens tennis tour, a womens gymnastics division, a womens swimming circuit, WNBA, this indicates that alot of athletic ability is not required??????? I feel that women and men can both be athletes, but generally speaking, men are superior athletes to women. Thus, if both men and women can compete in a given sport w/out having their own divisions, then the sport must not require a lot of athletic ability.
ajzepp Posted February 19, 2007 Posted February 19, 2007 sorry to jump into this one, but because there is a womens tennis tour, a womens gymnastics division, a womens swimming circuit, WNBA, this indicates that alot of athletic ability is not required??????? Nope...that's the opposite of what I mean, lol.
The Poojer Posted February 19, 2007 Posted February 19, 2007 OK, i see it now, my bad, doesnt mean you are not going down a slippery slope, but I do see that I twisted your meaning Nope...that's the opposite of what I mean, lol.
Buftex Posted February 19, 2007 Posted February 19, 2007 But on to your other points- make no mistake, these guys are athletes. Sure they arent pumped up on roids. They dont "look" like an athletes. How tired are you after a 500 mile drive? These guys do that every week, in a car that is very hot and uncomfortable. They have to stay in good physical shape to be able to do this. I understand your point, and respect your opinion if you dont like the sport, but I think you are short changing these guys. I guess you have to try to define what an athlete is. There are plenty of jobs, that require stamina, strength, under adverse conditions...it doesn't make meat cutters athletes, roofers, etc etc..don't want to short change these guys, true, but I don't want to give them too much change either.... Personally, I think NASCAR has been crammed down our throats so much by the corporate sports media (FOX especially), and has done a tremendous job of marketing itself...still a pretty dull product though...there is just so much friggin' coverage of it, you can't help but be aware of it.
ajzepp Posted February 19, 2007 Posted February 19, 2007 OK, i see it now, my bad, doesnt mean you are not going down a slippery slope, but I do see that I twisted your meaning Yeah, I know it's not PC....but I just don't see a lot of sports where women post higher/better numbers than men, you know? And I'm not necessarily saying that men are TOUGHER than women, cause I know some pretty tough ladies....but when it comes to pure athletic ability in a physical sense, I don't see how anyone can make an argument that women are the equals of men.
ajzepp Posted February 19, 2007 Posted February 19, 2007 I guess you have to try to define what an athlete is. There are plenty of jobs, that require stamina, strength, under adverse conditions...it doesn't make meat cutters athletes, roofers, etc etc..don't want to short change these guys, true, but I don't want to give them too much change either.... Personally, I think NASCAR has been crammed down our throats so much by the corporate sports media (FOX especially), and has done a tremendous job of marketing itself...still a pretty dull product though...there is just so much friggin' coverage of it, you can't help but be aware of it. That's a great point...the marketing is so good that I even find myself getting into the hype momentarily....then they bring out the actual product and I start wondering what the hell I'm watching this for. But I definitley give them kudos for the marketing aspect, cause even though I don't watch a lick of it, I still feel like I have some idea what's going on in the world of NASCAR. Unfortunately what I find most interesting about the sport is all the stuff that goes on outside of the actual racing part.
JimBob2232 Posted February 19, 2007 Posted February 19, 2007 Unfortunately what I find most interesting about the sport is all the stuff that goes on outside of the actual racing part. You and 95% of race fans! Thats actually one of the points I was trying to make earlier. This is reality tv at its finest. Things that happen off the track manage to find their way on the track and vice versa. Watch this sport long enough and you will know a whole soap opera worth of information on these guys. This helps build suspense. You know the guys everyone will rally around, the guys who will be alienated. You know the teamates of the drivers, who is helping who. Who is making deals with other teams. Its the reality tv aspect that is so appealing to many race fans. Rivalries get built up and torn down, but the dynamic changes weekly. It really has alot more to do with the peronalities of the drivers than it does making "left turns" every week.
Recommended Posts