The greatest athlete in the world?

[Craig Mallett]

Wow and here I was thinking coming into this thread everyone would be talking about the MovNat guys. Oh well I guess I'll do it then

I think they show a really good base for what an "all round" athlete requires to be skilled at in terms of basic human movement, which they list as follows (anyone care to add? I cant think of anything else really...):

Lifting

Carrying

Throwing

Catching

Walking

Running

Balancing

Jumping

Crawling

Climbing

Swimming

Fighting (striking)

Wrestling

I think Gymnasts come pretty close to ticking all those boxes with the exception of the fighting skills and possibly swimming, which are mostly technical anyways (their insane strength and increased coordination would definitely help though). Chinese performers, whilst not quite as strong as gymnasts, still train in a lot of gymnastics ability, basic tumbling etc, and are usually strong enough to do the FSPs relatively properly, as well as having awesome fluidity in movement...Jackie Chan is an awesome example of this and even at almost 60 is still a better athlete than most other humans. Given I've mentioned MovNat already, I probably have to mention Erwan LeCorre as well. What about the guys from Ninja Warrior?

[seiyafan]

No tiger woods :wink:

[RatioFitness]

Point 2: I agree again that sprinting is not as complex as say …. Gymnastics I feel I could have written my previous post better. What I am suggesting is since sprinting is such a (proven and) EXCELLENT predictor of athleticism the best Sprinter should not be ignored as having a place among the world’s top athletes though it surely wouldn’t make him by default the best athlete.

I still have to disagree. Sprinters should be ignored because they never develop any skills with higher complexity.

Well to suggest that I believe that a good definition of the most athletic sport or athlete is how easy they “crossover†to other sport abilities – such as a the use of Olympic lifting and Gymnastics to train athletes in all other sports (especially in the Eastern Bloc countries) is an incredible argument for the superiority of those athletic endeavors as being so good that athletics must/should train in them to reach the pinnacle of their chosen skill sport.

I think this is an important point ignored by both me and the author of the article series. Transfer of skills definitely seem like a great variable to consider, and I certainly agree with you that gymnasts are at the top of the heap at this.

[RatioFitness]

RF, your argument in the OP is fundamentally flawed as you're using only a selection of the sport's attributes as arguments, not the actual skills of the athletes themselves. "Gymnastics is ruled out because the movements are carried out in a pre-fabricated routine". That does not imply that gymnasts aren't able to produce strong movements outside the context of a routine.

Same with sprinting. Maybe it is low-skill, but sprinters have excellent power production, which is a good indicator of atlethic ability.

...but I don't really care about who is the best. Just that arguments are logical.

True, just because gymnasts display their skills under constant environmental conditions that doesn't mean they can't display complex skills in one that is changing. But, since gymnasts don't typical train in this way, it would seem the burden of proof would be on those claiming that they do have great skill at doing so.

[Marlon]

uTX5ouJVJ84

Well he get's my vote

I'd have to disagree with you, RatioFitness about valuing "in the moment" skill over all others. For one thing, I dont think "In the moment" is really what you mean (I'd like to see this Marcus “Buchecha†Almeida swap places with Uchimura in the middle of a double piked arabian and see how much skill he's able to demonstrate "in the moment" before he hits the ground 8) ) think what you really mean is some kind of skill expressed despite the attempts of other sentient beings to stop you. Frankly that just seems quite arbitrary to me :? Personally, I'm more impressed by skills demonstrated in controlled and predictable environments because it allows the skills in question to be taken to extreme levels.

IMO the best way to think about the difference is simply as technical skill at difference sides of a spectrum, In sports where you are in direct competition with other athletes (the most extreme example being combat sports like BJJ or MMA) the actual demonstrated skills really aren't very impressive, they honestly are just rolling around on the ground and grabing each others clothes. The practitioners skill is demonstrated by their ability to execute these reletively simple movements when another highly skilled person is trying to stop them. Being able to do that isn't an inherently better than being able to perform incredibly complex movements in a controlled environment, it's just a different kind of skill that the athletes in question have developed.

If we don't value so called "in the moment" skill over pre-rehearsed skills then I don't see how Uchimura doesn't have this in the bag. Male artistic gymnastics is absurd, I mean, if we're honest here, it's really 6 different sports in one. Ridiculous strength, power, flexibility, body awareness, balance etc. and most of those attributes need to be utilized at the same time to perform even simple gymnastics skills

Last note:

If we're biasing skills here as an indicator of athletecism, then I think Anthony Gatto should be in the running

juggling takes far more raw skill and coordination than any other discipline I'm aware of.

riyqrC1qrZ8

[Joshua Naterman]

That's true.

As an aside, it's kind of silly to think that gymnasts don't play around and just string stuff together randomly, because they do. I have watched a few of Coach's gymnasts play a game of horse with tumbling at one of the earlier seminars, and it's not like anyone asked them to do that, yet they had no trouble just busting out random tumbling runs with no preparation.

Soccer players drill to a degree that very few other sports drill, in terms of skill drills. This doesn't seem to stop them from being able to string those skills together in whatever order is required on the field, so if we are going to say that soccer players are super awesome for their ability to randomly do things in games despite the majority of their skill practice time being spent on specific combinations then it's silly and completely biased to think that a gymnast can't do the same.

You think Damian Walters doesn't just screw around? People are people, and gymnastics is a lot like play. When you have a body that is physically capable, you always inherently try to test it and that involves doing random stuff just to see if you can. They pretty much all do it. You just don't see it on TV.

[RatioFitness]

If that's the argument, BJJ is off the radar. Every single person here who practices BJJ knows that you drill your triple attacks over and over and over. You practice moving from one move to the next to the next. You develop sequences that are practiced so many times that you don't even have to think, it happens automatically and allows you to plan strategically and pre-fabricate your next 8-10 moves. That's what makes a black belt a black belt, that automation.

Yes, this is the best way to train BJJ, and it is certainly the goal is to become automated. But isn't that the goal of any sport when you need to make a quick decision? When an NFL running back is makes all kinds of dekes, he is doing that automated. He has to, because the decision on which way to move must be made faster than conscious thought.

While the BJJer does train paths, trying to catch someone in the trap of a multi-move "pre-fabricated" path often doesn't work perfectly as predicted.

The only honest measure of athleticism is the capability of the body, not what it is asked to do in competition. That is a measure of sport-specific skill, and is not enough of an indicator.

Motor problems are movement, and cognitive problems are dealing with competitors.

So you don't consider the ability to quickly choose movement in the moment (to deal with the tactics of a competitor) as being a motor problem?

[RatioFitness]

I'd have to disagree with you, RatioFitness about valuing "in the moment" skill over all others. For one thing, I dont think "In the moment" is really what you mean (I'd like to see this Marcus “Buchecha†Almeida swap places with Uchimura in the middle of a double piked arabian and see how much skill he's able to demonstrate "in the moment" before he hits the ground 8) ) think what you really mean is some kind of skill expressed despite the attempts of other sentient beings to stop you. Frankly that just seems quite arbitrary to me :? Personally, I'm more impressed by skills demonstrated in controlled and predictable environments because it allows the skills in question to be taken to extreme levels.

And this is why there is ultimately no correct answer. Your preference for skills being displayed in a controlled environment is subjective, just as my preference is.

I don't see what I've got wrong about the "in the moment" concept.

I just like the "flow" of not knowing where you are ultimately going.

IMO the best way to think about the difference is simply as technical skill at difference sides of a spectrum, In sports where you are in direct competition with other athletes (the most extreme example being combat sports like BJJ or MMA) the actual demonstrated skills really aren't very impressive, they honestly are just rolling around on the ground and grabing each others clothes.

I completely disagree. To say that BJJ is simply nothing more than rolling around and grabbing each other... I can't even wrap my head around a critique like that. You and I are obviously from completely different planets for us to see things so differently.

I think you could make anything sound stupid by reducing it in such a way.

"Gymnastics is honestly just swinging on a bar and flipping around."

[RatioFitness]

That's true.

As an aside, it's kind of silly to think that gymnasts don't play around and just string stuff together randomly, because they do. I have watched a few of Coach's gymnasts play a game of horse with tumbling at one of the earlier seminars, and it's not like anyone asked them to do that, yet they had no trouble just busting out random tumbling runs with no preparation.

Soccer players drill to a degree that very few other sports drill, in terms of skill drills. This doesn't seem to stop them from being able to string those skills together in whatever order is required on the field, so if we are going to say that soccer players are super awesome for their ability to randomly do things in games despite the majority of their skill practice time being spent on specific combinations then it's silly and completely biased to think that a gymnast can't do the same.

You think Damian Walters doesn't just screw around? People are people, and gymnastics is a lot like play. When you have a body that is physically capable, you always inherently try to test it and that involves doing random stuff just to see if you can. They pretty much all do it. You just don't see it on TV.

Good post!

[RatioFitness]

I don't even know where to start with this post, I mean there is a lot more to the running and jumping, especially the combined run/jump events, that are extremely high up on the complexity list. Explain how pole vaulting is any less complex than a butterfly sweep or a triple threat. I think that if you had more experience with track and field, not that I have a WEALTH, but I have tried most everything and really only excelled at discus (but didn't stick with it... too interested in video games at the time) you would have a whole new respect for the complexity

Same goes for hurdles. Same goes for high jump. Discus. Shot put (especially spin technique). Even Javelin requires quite a bit of fine control. The pure running events are certainly lower on the list, but there's a lot more technique and motor coordination than you apparently think.

I wasn't misjudging it. I said half the stuff is not that complex, not all of it. 100m, 1500m, long jump. Well, a little less than half. But ultimately, a decathlon is only 10 techniques, BJJ is thousands.

I mean really... rolling around grabbing at each other's clothes is a skill inherent in everyone who wants to reproduce, and everyone who has ever gotten into a fight, so I don't see how that somehow became such a high and mighty distinctively complex skill. Sure, there's a big difference between a BJJ match and two guys in a bar, but the basic skill is there : Grab them, make something move the wrong way. I don't know one person who isn't a quadriplegic that can't do that.

An armbar from the guard is a 1000x more less inherent than sprinting. That's an exact figure by the way.

As far as in the moment skills go, the ability to run a route, adjust for people in your way, stay just inside the sideline while looking backwards (at full speed), jumping up, catching a ball that is both moving quickly through the air and spinning, often while turning around backwards in the air, and then landing on your feet if you're lucky and continuing to run at full speed is highly, highly complex AND requires enormous in-the-moment changing of skills. Any kind of pro-level receiver is a highly, highly skilled athlete by any measure.

I agree. It's a very impressive display of "in the moment" skill.

A good running back in PE? Dude! DUDE! DUUUUUDE. We're talking about professional athletes.

LOL.

I didn't say I was a good running back in PE (although I was). I just said I played football in PE and recess, because you asked if I ever played.

Many of those track and field events also have multiple phases where you are doing very different things, so what's the justification for saying they don't show "in the moment" skill? I will agree that this is, by and large, not a factor in the straight runs, but all the other events require a rapid succession of very different movements.

"In the moment" doesn't mean doing different things at different phases. It means having to change what you are doing due to an unpredictable change in the environment.

[Joshua Naterman]

HAHAHA!!! I'm glad to know we are talking about precision math here!

[FritsMB Mansvelt Beck]

The OP’s 4-S (speed, strength, stamina and skills) definition of athletic ability is far too limited. I suggest he leaves out skills and includes power, endurance, coordination, flexibility, agility, coordination, balance, and concentration. Skill is the trained ability to combine a number of these basic athletic abilities for a certain activity. I think, in the opinion of the OP, BiJJ requires 1000+ skills needed “in the moment†to win from your opponent and therefore ... etc.. Maybe, maybe not. It is no skin of my back.

However, I do want to use this opportunity to ask the question that always comes up (in my mind) when I come across this kind of discussion (who is the greatest athlete .. etc.). What about commitment? Should that not be included in the This-Defines-a-Great-Athlete equation. You can extend “being in the moment†to “needing to be in the moment, or else ..â€. I have a nice example here in the person of Alex Honnold. Super athlete over the whole spectrum, I defined, including commitment. 1000+ skills in the way the OP defines them. Up to anything his opponent (Nature and gravity) throws at him.

Here is a really nicely done video showing his athleticism (go to 4.39 if you don’t want to watch all 9 minutes):

M2dIZt4FCeE

And here a video showing how his skills allow him to commit to being “in the moment†with no room for error (and not for just a couple of minutes but during a couple of hours):

yzA5S-5w13M

[Craig Mallett]

I mentioned Erwan LeCorre in my last post, here is a vid:

SKGF-ErsJiI

[Andrew Long]

I would love to know where that guy is in the mov nat video. It looks amazing!

[Marlon]

I completely disagree. To say that BJJ is simply nothing more than rolling around and grabbing each other... I can't even wrap my head around a critique like that. You and I are obviously from completely different planets for us to see things so differently.

I think you could make anything sound stupid by reducing it in such a way.

"Gymnastics is honestly just swinging on a bar and flipping around."

Of course I don't really think that that's all BJJ practitioners are doing. I know nothing about BJJ but I did wrestle for years, and I'm well aware that any even half decent BJJ (player? Wrestler? Not sure what to call Such athletes) would absolutely destroy me in a match, and that there is a whole lot more going in a match than i could possibly understand or appreciate without spending years learning and training.

That said, in the spirit of Internet forum debates for much of the video that you posted, they really were just rolling around on the ground grabbing each others clothes. The skill set of BJJ becomes incredibly difficult to execute when a skillful opponent is trying to stop you from doing it. But all Im saying Is that given a complicite partner allowing me to perform the skill, I'm quite confident that I could learn to do any BJJ movement (poorly) in a day. The same isn't true for acrobatic sports like gymnastics. Almost any movement done in a high level gymnastics competition is almost incomprehensible to an untrained observer and most if them would take years if intense training to even attempt.

Also, If "rolling around and grabbing each others clothing" is equivalent to gymnasts "just swinging around a bar and flipping around" in terms of unfair simplifications, then I think you've made my point for me swinging around a bar and flipping around is hard! That's not something people can just up and do without intensive training!

[Joshua Naterman]

Craig, that is literally how I grew up. Well, not quite, because A) GA just doesn't have streams or lagoons like that and B) I wore all my clothes lol! But seriously, I would just be out in the woods, thinking "Can I lift that tree?" And I would lift it or drag it or something. Jumping over the creek in progressively wider places, lifting stones to make dams, digging them out of the ground and carrying them to where I wanted them... my friends were always like "Dude you are not going to lif... whoa..." and to be honest I really enjoyed that. I also think that that and having an extremely heavy BMX bike that I regularly jumped over standing trash cans with led to my being very strong with deadlifts from the first time I touched the bar.

Of course I ran and swam a lot too, and climbed trees. Didn't do any muscle ups on the limbs though! Just going outside and pushing yourself a bit each day in a few different ways is a very fun way to become reasonably strong and fit.

Frits: That climber is INSANE! Holy crap! My stomach knotted up just watching those videos, I am just not made for that kind of stuff

[Larry Roseman]

To say for sure you're going to need objective standards that encompass all measures of athletics.

Chances are that someone who is good at all things and not really exceptional

in any of them would win. That person would probably be an all-around performer

who is not very exciting to watch. So then the question becomes ...somewhat uninteresting.

[RatioFitness]

The OP’s 4-S (speed, strength, stamina and skills) definition of athletic ability is far too limited. I suggest he leaves out skills and includes power, endurance, coordination, flexibility, agility, coordination, balance, and concentration. Skill is the trained ability to combine a number of these basic athletic abilities for a certain activity.

Power=strength + speed.

Stamina=endurance.

Coordination, balance, agility would all fall under the rubric of skill.

However, I do want to use this opportunity to ask the question that always comes up (in my mind) when I come across this kind of discussion (who is the greatest athlete .. etc.). What about commitment? Should that not be included in the This-Defines-a-Great-Athlete equation. You can extend “being in the moment†to “needing to be in the moment, or else ..â€. I have a nice example here in the person of Alex Honnold. Super athlete over the whole spectrum, I defined, including commitment. 1000+ skills in the way the OP defines them. Up to anything his opponent (Nature and gravity) throws at him.

Here is a really nicely done video showing his athleticism (go to 4.39 if you don’t want to watch all 9 minutes):

M2dIZt4FCeE

And here a video showing how his skills allow him to commit to being “in the moment†with no room for error (and not for just a couple of minutes but during a couple of hours):

yzA5S-5w13M

I love it!!!

[Joachim Nagler]

Craig, thanks for posting this video. It's really inspiring!

I would love to know where that guy is in the mov nat video. It looks amazing!

I saw another video with some of the same footage, and the description said it was shot in corsica.

Alex Honnold is just crazy. Climbing the Big Walls free solo.. :shock:

Holy crap! My stomach knotted up just watching those videos, I am just not made for that kind of stuff

You should look at some slacklining solos of Andy Lewis.

[Craig Mallett]

Craig, that is literally how I grew up. Well, not quite, because A) GA just doesn't have streams or lagoons like that and B) I wore all my clothes lol! But seriously, I would just be out in the woods, thinking "Can I lift that tree?" And I would lift it or drag it or something. Jumping over the creek in progressively wider places, lifting stones to make dams, digging them out of the ground and carrying them to where I wanted them... my friends were always like "Dude you are not going to lif... whoa..." and to be honest I really enjoyed that. I also think that that and having an extremely heavy BMX bike that I regularly jumped over standing trash cans with led to my being very strong with deadlifts from the first time I touched the bar.

Of course I ran and swam a lot too, and climbed trees. Didn't do any muscle ups on the limbs though! Just going outside and pushing yourself a bit each day in a few different ways is a very fun way to become reasonably strong and fit.

I'm really totally all for LeCorre's approach, and this thread really highlights his point nicely. To be the "greatest athlete in the world" you have to be a non-specialist. Unfortunately that means you wont be the strongest, or the fastest, or the best swimmer or climber, specialists in those fields are always going to beat you because you are practicing a wide variety of skills. However you can still be really good at all the skills and that is more important for LeCorre as it allows you to deal with any situation. Like the OP said, you have to be able to deal with the unknown, and nature really provides that...uneven surfaces, different shapes and sizes to grip on, different size space to move through and so on.

Do you still train like that at all? Ive been getting out as much as I can recently and its really hard work, but more importantly its really really fun to just go out and be a random wildman (for me at least )

JN12: No probs, it really inspires me every time I watch it too. Hopefully going to attend their thailand week long workshop early next year

[Joshua Naterman]

Craig, that is literally how I grew up. Well, not quite, because A) GA just doesn't have streams or lagoons like that and B) I wore all my clothes lol! But seriously, I would just be out in the woods, thinking "Can I lift that tree?" And I would lift it or drag it or something. Jumping over the creek in progressively wider places, lifting stones to make dams, digging them out of the ground and carrying them to where I wanted them... my friends were always like "Dude you are not going to lif... whoa..." and to be honest I really enjoyed that. I also think that that and having an extremely heavy BMX bike that I regularly jumped over standing trash cans with led to my being very strong with deadlifts from the first time I touched the bar.

Of course I ran and swam a lot too, and climbed trees. Didn't do any muscle ups on the limbs though! Just going outside and pushing yourself a bit each day in a few different ways is a very fun way to become reasonably strong and fit.

I'm really totally all for LeCorre's approach, and this thread really highlights his point nicely. To be the "greatest athlete in the world" you have to be a non-specialist. Unfortunately that means you wont be the strongest, or the fastest, or the best swimmer or climber, specialists in those fields are always going to beat you because you are practicing a wide variety of skills. However you can still be really good at all the skills and that is more important for LeCorre as it allows you to deal with any situation. Like the OP said, you have to be able to deal with the unknown, and nature really provides that...uneven surfaces, different shapes and sizes to grip on, different size space to move through and so on.

Do you still train like that at all? Ive been getting out as much as I can recently and its really hard work, but more importantly its really really fun to just go out and be a random wildman (for me at least )

JN12: No probs, it really inspires me every time I watch it too. Hopefully going to attend their thailand week long workshop early next year

No, not in a long time. I am starting to think about doing some more non-traditional things, now that I have a really firm grasp on how to be strong and how to develop pretty much everything. Too much of my week is spent well inside the city proper, and there just aren't enough different things to do. Besides, I'm still doing rehab, but I'm starting to strength train again a little bit

[FritsMB Mansvelt Beck]

RatioFitness, before I forget.

Power=strength + speed.

Stamina=endurance.

Coordination, balance, agility would all fall under the rubric of skill.

No, stamina is not the same as endurance. Endurance is cardiovascular work capacity. Stamina combines strength and endurance.

No, Power is not Strength + Speed.

Power is Strength x Speed.

No, all basic athletic attributes that do not start with an S can not conveniently be called skills. Skills as a category is not the Kitchen Sink.

You forgot about flexibility, accuracy and concentration? Also into the kitchen sink?

Otherwise, like so many threads on this Forum that start with a so-so premise, yet again, this one has become a really interesting one. Goes to show that a little cow shit can help to grow a beautiful flower garden (old Dutch proverb). Keep it coming RatioFitness. Good effort.

[Rik de Kort]

Goes to show that a little cow shit can help to grow a beautiful flower garden (old Dutch proverb).

I doubt that that has ever been a Dutch proverb. I certainly don't know the phrase.

[FREDERIC DUPONT]

Goes to show that a little cow shit can help to grow a beautiful flower garden (old Dutch proverb).

I doubt that that has ever been a Dutch proverb. I certainly don't know the phrase.

een beetje koe stront kan helpen om een ​​mooie bloementuin te groeien

[FritsMB Mansvelt Beck]

Wow, Fred! That translation is spot on. Too bad most of the board members won't be able to appreciate this example of the poetic beauty of the Dutch language. Well, maybe the realization of having missed out on something unique here will get them started.

Rik (or is it Rick?). I said OLD Dutch proverb. You clearly have not been around long enough.