EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › General Skiing Discussion › ESPN top 50 ranking most difficult sports (skiing 11)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

ESPN top 50 ranking most difficult sports (skiing 11) - Page 2

post #31 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by chanwmr View Post
I question the validity of the panel and the catagory results like the others mentioned. Here is another one that is way off...

On the topic of competitive gymnastics (unless they are talking about the most entry level), they make it sound like the only thing that's needed is flexibility. What a crock! On strength and endurance, have they ever seen gymnasts train, even the mid level ones.
I went to high school with Tim Dagget, talk about strength. His arms and shoulders were huge.
post #32 of 59
Boxing and combat style martial arts should have been ranked, about the same, since they use the same sets of skills.

Pro roads cycling takes huge nerve. Try riding 60+ down hills on less than perfect roads.

Track cycling takes huge power, just watch the guys doing pursuit.

Like others have said, the list is flawed, ridiculously in my opinion.

Kevin
post #33 of 59
One of my favourite bumper stickers: Rugby Players Eat Their Dead

There actually are at least three sports that I think might be rougher than rugby: Gaelic Football, Hurling, and Aussie Rules Football, but of course they did not make the list.
post #34 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phatboy View Post
Badminton is more difficult they Auto racing, Calf roping, Bull riding…..
You never watched badminton where it is a big sport. Check out a Malaysia-Indonesia Olympic final sometime. The shuttlecock goes faster than a tennis ball. It looks like Bruce Lee with a rackett.

Less dangerous yes, but skill speed etc all were taken into play in this seriously flawed process.
post #35 of 59
The list is meaningless. It's like saying an apple is more of a fruit than an orange.

(IMHO, Rugby is way harder than football, let alone alpine skiing. )
post #36 of 59
I'm glad to see that golf is so easy.
post #37 of 59
Rugby very hard, guys are big, but football guys are even bigger and hit harder, so I would say they are about even. DH WC skiing....thats more of like a daredevil.
post #38 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richie-Rich View Post
Rugby very hard, guys are big, but football guys are even bigger and hit harder, so I would say they are about even.
Not to beat this into the ground, but I've played both. You don't have pads in rugby.
post #39 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by UtahPowderPig View Post
Not to beat this into the ground, but I've played both. You don't have pads in rugby.
I know, that being said you aren't going to charge someone without protection like you are with the false sense of invincibility you get in body armor. Even if the armor does offer great protection, nothing is going to protect you against the forces you will encounter by a 350lb man charging you at top speed and hitting your mid back with hard shoulder.
post #40 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richie-Rich View Post
I know, that being said you aren't going to charge someone without protection like you are with the false sense of invincibility you get in body armor. Even if the armor does offer great protection, nothing is going to protect you against the forces you will encounter by a 350lb man charging you at top speed and hitting your mid back with hard shoulder.
As compared to being kicked full force in the head or Gonads?
Full contact combat martial arts are "tougher" imho.
post #41 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richie-Rich View Post
I know, that being said you aren't going to charge someone without protection like you are with the false sense of invincibility you get in body armor. Even if the armor does offer great protection, nothing is going to protect you against the forces you will encounter by a 350lb man charging you at top speed and hitting your mid back with hard shoulder.
Not to beat this into the ground, but I'm going to..... but a 270 lb. lock sprinting at you knowing that he won't be "rescued" by a whistle being blown every 7-10 seconds stopping play is also a little different--he knows he has to finish the job and not wait for the play to stop. And he'll hit you mid-back, mid-chest, mid-anything, and he'll grab anything he can.

There's also an argument to be made that an offensive lineman in American football is encouraged to get up to 350 lb. because he won't be expected to run and he won't be expected to be flexible enough to survive a scrum or a maul, ruck, etc.

Another difference between the two is the role of coach during the game. Rugby players have to think more on their feet.

American football has much more specialty of position, encouraging players to develop highly in their skill sets, e.g. quarterbacks, running backs, punters, etc., so the passing and kicking is more precise.

Whereas in rugby football, there is the general separation between forwards and backs, but each player has to be more well-rounded, able to kick, start plays, win mauls/rucks, kick, etc., and score.

An interesting way to settle the friendly rivalry between the two sports is to ask players: rugby players are typically more than willing to try American football (look at the growing number of Islanders in the NCAA and NFL); football players don't often want to play rugby (unless they are a special teams player who has been coached in the "rugby style.")

Of course, we can get into the differences between rugby union v. rugby league, too, not unlike American football v. Canadian football.
post #42 of 59
I think the intent of that analysis was difficulty or such at the level of top pros. In other words not about how we ordinary people compare at performing those those sports at functional levels but rather what top pros need to attain competion level. Obviously if doesn't take much skill to competantly play many of the top rated sports as tennis at merely amateur levels.

One thing that poll didn't assess is the relative difficulty in performing the sport at ANY level. On that count boxing that was rated tops would rate really low. If one took one hundred men and taught them the basics of boxing for a week, a high percentage could at least go through the motions. On the other hand very few beginers after a week of ski training would be able to make good linked turns at all much less between a set of slalom gates even on modest gradient slopes no matter how slow they skied. And even after a year of intensive training for freestyle mogul skiing, one could count with the fingers on one hand the number of men out of 100 that would be even to stay in a fall line of easy 40% gradient moguls for say a short 300 feet. -dave
post #43 of 59
Being a jock of all trades, master of none, I've tried a lot of these (not rodeo). Here's my $.02. Only going to comment on sports that I've played more than a few times.

Wrestling is harder than boxing - by a long shot. I only did Tae Kwon Do for a year, but I thought that was more difficult than boxing

Football, basketball, and baseball do not belong in the top 15.

Swimming is much harder than skiing - try swimming a 400 meter individual medley. A 100 meter butterfly race is a sprint and therefore way down on the list. 99% of pro athletes could not even complete half of that race.

Tennis is not all that difficult - at the highest levels it is an elegant sport, but not that difficult to master if you have basic hand-eye coordination and average agility. Shouldn't be in the top 15.

Ice hockey amazes me. I can skate (a little) but my 15 yo son could flat kill me on the ice. I haven't played in a father-son hockey game since he was 11. I would put it at #1.

Putting soccer ahead of lacrosse is asinine. Lacrosse is like full contact soccer with a hard ball that travels close to 100 mph flying all over the place. Lacrosse goalies need to be institutionalized.

Water polo is like soccer except you could drown. Oh, by the way, you wouldn't believe what happens under water. Sorta like mixed martial arts and the ref can't see it.

Flame on....
post #44 of 59
Interesting poll, with a reasonable set of evaluation factors. Having played many of the sports at varying levels, I can see some validity with the general basis of comparison. However, as an absolute measurement, there is just too much information missing to consider this information alone as a reliable benchmark ranking.
post #45 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by bjohansson View Post
Swimming is much harder than skiing - try swimming a 400 meter individual medley. A 100 meter butterfly race is a sprint and therefore way down on the list. 99% of pro athletes could not even complete half of that race.
Just for fun...

I would say the 400 m IM is very difficult because of the aerobic fitness required, but the skill level is more easily attained than with skiing.

Anticipating the first rebuttal, you would be correct in guessing that I've never done a 400 m IM

My limit was a 200 m IM, and butterfly was my weakest stroke. I wasn't strong enough to do a longer race or achieve better results, but my technical skills were solid. (In other events & training, I have regularly swam 400m and more.)
post #46 of 59
I'll agree with Hockey, I used to play, and still skate with my son (who now plays). But Golf that far down!!!!!! It is a lot harder then it looks (but not that physically demanding), still hard to master though................
post #47 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yuki View Post
Mixed Martial Arts like the Gracie systems, I could buy that especially when you look at their rating criteria. I have boxed and done lots of karate (old school, not McDojo), but for fear factor, going against a Gracie/MMA : .... these writers are totally clueless!
Yeah, that is ridiculous. Their "Martial Arts" is certainly not the "Mixed Martial Arts" we see in the UFC, etc. Boxing tougher than real MMA? Uh, NO. How could it be when boxing is (just) one of the mixed martial arts used in MMA???!
post #48 of 59
Enough of this baseball bashing.

As Ted Williams once said, the single hardest thing to do in sports is hitting a baseball!

I think it's a great list because of the discussion it generates. But it's unanswerable and ultimately subjective. I think you have to separate endurance vs athleticism vs fine motor skills (golf), team vs individual all comes into it.
post #49 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogulmuncher View Post
Just for fun...

I would say the 400 m IM is very difficult because of the aerobic fitness required, but the skill level is more easily attained than with skiing.

Anticipating the first rebuttal, you would be correct in guessing that I've never done a 400 m IM

My limit was a 200 m IM, and butterfly was my weakest stroke. I wasn't strong enough to do a longer race or achieve better results, but my technical skills were solid. (In other events & training, I have regularly swam 400m and more.)
Having competed in both at the collegiate level, I respectfully disagree. There's a ton of technical skills required to compete in the IM. It's all perspective, but I found skiing to be easier. I wasn't as competitive at it as I was in swimming but I liked it better and found it easier. It's just that the competition at UVM was too stiff for me to stay on the ski team - swimming was Div 2 back then so I swam junior and senior years.
post #50 of 59
A better way to decide this would be this simple:

Put a gun to someones head, preferably an average man who does not participate in any sports. Tell him that he has to list 5 sports that he can thinks he can have the most success at in order of what he things will be his success rate and he then has to actually do the activity at the best of his abilities or he will be terminated. Once done do it again and again and again. You will then have the best list around. If during one of the rounds he manges to die or be disabled from injuries sustained then you know that that sport should get bumped up. Find another victim and start form where the other left off. Perfection.

My guess, in 2 sec or less he will be out in any fighting activity, broken nose and or concussion. Rodeo, he will also instantly be out but may scrape by with minor injuries, or then again he might be killed. Nordic ski high jump, death on skis, for sure.
post #51 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by ct55 View Post
Enough of this baseball bashing.

As Ted Williams once said, the single hardest thing to do in sports is hitting a baseball!

I think it's a great list because of the discussion it generates. But it's unanswerable and ultimately subjective. I think you have to separate endurance vs athleticism vs fine motor skills (golf), team vs individual all comes into it.
Although I think it is terribly difficult to hit a 90+ mph fastball. I hadn't played baseball in 10 years and I made solid contact on every 75 mph ball in a batting cage recently. None of my baseball friends can so much as even shoot a puck, let a lone skate.

Baseball takes skills but it requires no where near as many skills as ice hockey does.
post #52 of 59
Hey I have the scars to prove I played hockey. It depends on the position you play. Just like football there are skill positions and shall we say the others
post #53 of 59
We'll, I've competed at or near the national level in a few sports on that list, and of the sports I've done, nothing even comes close to pole vaulting. The blend of speed, power and agility just is not matched in any other sport. Then, when you consider all 10 events of the decathlon are in the top 48, couldn't a strong argument be made for that? I guess they wouldn't consider it a single sport?
post #54 of 59
While golf isn't physically demanding, to master I would say it is definitely in the top 5. I think Lacrosse should be 3-5ish, and if we are talking about successful dry fly fishing in a spring creek, it should be moved up 40 places...
post #55 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phatboy View Post
Badminton is more difficult they Auto racing, Calf roping, Bull riding…..
Those two aren't sports, that's just plain animal abuse.
post #56 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldSchool View Post
Those two aren't sports, that's just plain animal abuse.
Read up on rodeo or talk to people who do it. Abusing animals is not what they do: it would end their livelihood and is not in their best interest. They know what they can do with animals without hurting them. In fact, rodeo animals are fairly pampered compared to ranch stock. Remember, in most rodeo events, half the score is the animal's.

And if you've ever watched bull riding, you'd probably say it's cowboy abuse
post #57 of 59
Six essential qualities of training: balance, coordination, flexibility, endurance, speed, and strength.

Interesting that balance and coordination were left out of the "10" categories ....
post #58 of 59
no really the animals love it! Especially the rope tied around their privates

As far as golf - it's kind of like measuring fitness. I'd argue there are many aspects - endurance, raw strength, quickness, explosive strength, balance and body control, fine muscle control etc. Golf (esp putting) and shooting are good examples of fine motor skills. I always thought biathalon was interesting because of the combination of cardio capacity, heart rate control and fine motor skills.

Not to mention the mental aspects - the head games in golf have to be the worst because of all the variables that can come into play. The frustrating thing is trying to figure out what I did right when things are going well as much as what I'm doing wrong when they're not.
post #59 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by ct55 View Post
no really the animals love it! Especially the rope tied around their privates
What kind of rodeo are you watching?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Skiing Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › General Skiing Discussion › ESPN top 50 ranking most difficult sports (skiing 11)