Fighting is the purest expression of athleticism?
- Thread starter Ted-P
- Start date
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2005
- Messages
- 61,710
- Reaction score
- 25,945
Yes, and Joe Rogan explained why, as concisely as any human will ever be able to explain it, numerous times before.
I've played many sports at many levels. One thing that all sports have in common is that sooner or later, in a heated exchange, two guys will throw down and fight one another. It happens on a soccer pitch, a baseball diamond, a basketball court, on racetracks, on freaking bicycles...hell, even in swimming pools. Sooner or later, in any given arena or apparatus of sporting competition, that sport will be abandoned and a fight will break out to settle a dispute.
You will never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever see a basketball game randomly break out on a wrestling mat, or in a boxing ring, or in a cage. Never.
Simple as that. Combat sports are the ultimate expression of athletic contest. Always have been and always will be.
I've played many sports at many levels. One thing that all sports have in common is that sooner or later, in a heated exchange, two guys will throw down and fight one another. It happens on a soccer pitch, a baseball diamond, a basketball court, on racetracks, on freaking bicycles...hell, even in swimming pools. Sooner or later, in any given arena or apparatus of sporting competition, that sport will be abandoned and a fight will break out to settle a dispute.
You will never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever see a basketball game randomly break out on a wrestling mat, or in a boxing ring, or in a cage. Never.
Simple as that. Combat sports are the ultimate expression of athletic contest. Always have been and always will be.
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2007
- Messages
- 12,835
- Reaction score
- 11,740
No. If it were, it wouldn't be such a learned skill.
People would also marvel at the athleticism of fighters, which doesn't happen, rather than marvel at the violence. It's too sluggish, slow, and restrictive.
I think football has the most variety and frequency displays of athleticism. There are roles for strong guys, powerful guys, fast guys, and the really co-ordinated guys. Not sure if that is "pure" but I would assume it is purer than a sport like boxing which lacks the variety that football has.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2005
- Messages
- 61,710
- Reaction score
- 25,945
Zero endurance in NFL (at any position). Your chosen sport lacks one of the three primary biomotor abilities. It's not even in the discussion as an AIO offering.
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2005
- Messages
- 61,710
- Reaction score
- 25,945
No, that's just the argument that devastates any including those (like this one) that can't even flourish in the absence of it. If football is such a "pure" expression of athleticism, then how come nobody is seeking to compete in it outside football stadiums?
Combat sports. Basketball. Decathlon (saying "inb4" doesn't make this any less devastating to your failed rhetorical question). Soccer. In fact, pretty much any sport which meaningfully challenges the aerobic system.
You appear to be confusing this question with the one asking which professional sports' league has the highest caliber of raw, overall, natural athletic talent. After all, you named a single criterion to dismiss combat sports, and that one criterion also clearly devastates your own selected sport, doesn't it? That it's a "learned skill"? If we're going by that, then just go straight to the original "sport": Running.
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2007
- Messages
- 12,835
- Reaction score
- 11,740
Your reasoning was that fighting was the "ultimate expression of athletic contest" because people do it when they are mad. I understand you are trying to pick the most derivative primal thing, but you didn't even question why people fight and correlate that to athleticism. Intimidation =/= athleticism. No one is going to bully someone by jumping really fast or showing to have excellent hand-eye co-ordination.
The NFL, and football in general, has one of the lowest barriers of entry for athletes and is also pretty free form which allows for a lot of athletic traits to be useful. On any given pass play you have receivers showing off speed, agility/co-ordination, balance, hand-eye co-ordination, linemen showing off balance and raw strength, quarterbacks showing hand-eye co-ordination and the reaction time of the defense. The majority of it is so average and mundane that it doesn't even stand off the charts.
I think basketball and track & field are close but basketball requires too much skill and track & field is too myopic in scope; everything in track is so singular to a point. Soccer doesn't deal with the upper body at all and is way too sluggish with the number of people on the field and the lack of co-ordination people have with their feet compared to their hands.
You can't be serious with combat sports. You even said it yourself, the original sport is running and there is 0 running in combat sports. The movements are so incredibly limited based on the rules and equipment they have to wear. And it is more than acceptable to hug-n-tug, lay-n-pray, clinch, disengage, stall, etc. to make the match into a giant uneventful mess.
- Joined
- May 1, 2007
- Messages
- 14,935
- Reaction score
- 1,263
No. Athleticism is not even a required trait in combat sports.
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2013
- Messages
- 23,842
- Reaction score
- 6,834
Probably something like running or wrestling
- Joined
- May 11, 2005
- Messages
- 3,961
- Reaction score
- 0
I say fighting someone is far more innate than anything in displayed in american football. Just saying.
It seems that fighting someone is far more of a natural instinct than playing something like football football.
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2011
- Messages
- 28,217
- Reaction score
- 15
No Harpastum is
And why cant rugby and football be considered team wrestling?
And why cant rugby and football be considered team wrestling?
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2011
- Messages
- 28,217
- Reaction score
- 15
The thing is though real fighting is to the death, and no rules, and not time limits. So I can sneak up on you and whack you with a hammer. None of the combat sports is really helpful with that.
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2011
- Messages
- 28,217
- Reaction score
- 15
That may be true, but still uses a lot of biomotor thingamjigs.
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2012
- Messages
- 8,125
- Reaction score
- 125
Revo is gonna be charged with murder for killing corona in this post
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2007
- Messages
- 12,835
- Reaction score
- 11,740
I'd say running is far more natural than fighting someone. Something that happens in football but doesn't in combat sports.
I also don't think an action being innate means it is athletic. Eating is innate, much more so than fighting, but no one thinks Joey Chestnut as a paradigm of athleticism.
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2012
- Messages
- 5,664
- Reaction score
- 2,138
Athleticism is a very vague term. Even when talking about running in football, some guys can run extremely fast on a straight line, but they cannot change direction very well. Some people would say he is not athletic but simply a person that has good straight line speed.
To the OP, I think fighting requires a fighter to be at least a jack of all trades when it comes to just about every physical attribute under the sun.
To the OP, I think fighting requires a fighter to be at least a jack of all trades when it comes to just about every physical attribute under the sun.
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2012
- Messages
- 88,818
- Reaction score
- 41,101
Offensive lineman running marathons would say otherwise. NFL track stars would say otherwise.
