THE FITTEST ATHLETES?

J · Post by J » 22 Jul 2004, 05:29

YIP FAIR COMMENT.

dondada · Post by **dondada** » 22 Jul 2004, 05:33

Oh yes, that Andy Ripley must be up there with the fittest guys in all sports (for his age) as was Brian Hooper.

'Fitness' just has so many elements to it. My old chemistry teacher used to be a big sports fan and I remember getting brownie points by telling him that the women's 100m world record was (then) Evelyn Ashford at 10.76.

He then went on to say that at his peak, Geoff Capes could run the 100m in 11 seconds!

I think he was explaining velocity!

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 22 Jul 2004, 05:57

More likely momentum with Geoff's enormous bulk. I remember reading that about Geoff too...

Some people are just naturally amazing physical specimens. Brian Blessed is like something from a fairy tale. Clambering up everest without oxygen at the age of 55!

You can just picture him bellowing with laughter as he punches holes in the mountain to haul himself up with.

"HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH, DIEEEE MOUNTAIN DIEEEE!"

dondada · Post by **dondada** » 22 Jul 2004, 06:41

[quote="jamesmcdonnell"]More likely momentum with Geoff's enormous bulk.quote]

More than likely. I was shit at science. Always remembered the lesson though, if not the point of it!

Wales · Post by **Wales** » 22 Jul 2004, 06:56

Shows you how powerful rowers are, Matthew Pinsent dwarfs Williams there.

Williams must be standing on a lower level, even the bird looks almost as big, is that linekar to the right of him or just a look-a-like?

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 22 Jul 2004, 07:13

Course that ain't lineker. Have you got cataracts.

Matthew Pinsent is 6' 5", Williams is around 6' 2"-6'3", fighters always lie about their heights for some reason.

knockout · Post by **knockout** » 22 Jul 2004, 07:15

jamesmcdonnell wrote:Course that ain't lineker. Have you got cataracts.

Matthew Pinsent is 6' 5", Williams is around 6' 2"-6'3", fighters always lie about their heights for some reason.

williams is short for a heavy, probably 6'1..

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 22 Jul 2004, 07:27

Actually yes, I saw him listed at that on one site, but he is listed at 6' 3" on boxrec. Having stood next to him, he was definetly shorter than me, and I am only 6' 3". The fact that he is a very solid 240 at the minumum is amazing when you consider he is only 6' 1"....he has the biggest legs of any heavyweight I've seen outside of David Tua.

knockout · Post by **knockout** » 22 Jul 2004, 07:53

jamesmcdonnell wrote:Actually yes, I saw him listed at that on one site, but he is listed at 6' 3" on boxrec. Having stood next to him, he was definetly shorter than me, and I am only 6' 3". The fact that he is a very solid 240 at the minumum is amazing when you consider he is only 6' 1"....he has the biggest legs of any heavyweight I've seen outside of David Tua.

yeah, untypically for black guys he has massive calves.
his back and shoulders are also really thick.....

he gets a lot of criticism for coming in out of shape at 18 stone plus but he seldom has much body fat...
amazing how he did 91kg for a while before he turned pro

lamphey · Post by **lamphey** » 22 Jul 2004, 16:56

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:
He then went on to say that at his peak, Geoff Capes could run the 100m in 11 seconds!

This is one of those myths that keeps getting passed down.

As a young teenager Geoff was a pretty decent all-rounder - sprints, jumps, middle-distance.
He ran 10.5 for 100 YARDS which equates to about 11.5 for 100 METRES. This was a long time before he became the bulked-up Shot Putter that we remember.

When he was weighing 20st and throwing the 16lb Shot Putt over 70ft, no way he was hauling his arse down the 100 metres straight in 11 seconds.

Wales · Post by **Wales** » 22 Jul 2004, 17:16

Course that ain't lineker. Have you got cataracts

ha ha, no just a very dicey TFT monitor in work, looks nothing like him now im at home but in all seriousness the works pc monitor must be crap.

dondada · Post by **dondada** » 22 Jul 2004, 17:26

lamphey wrote:
Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:
He then went on to say that at his peak, Geoff Capes could run the 100m in 11 seconds!

This is one of those myths that keeps getting passed down.

As a young teenager Geoff was a pretty decent all-rounder - sprints, jumps, middle-distance.
He ran 10.5 for 100 YARDS which equates to about 11.5 for 100 METRES. This was a long time before he became the bulked-up Shot Putter that we remember.

When he was weighing 20st and throwing the 16lb Shot Putt over 70ft, no way he was hauling his arse down the 100 metres straight in 11 seconds.

Oh right, thanks for that. Always thought it was incredible but I do like to believe in the unbelievable if you check the thread that spawned this one! 8)

tonyevs · Post by **tonyevs** » 22 Jul 2004, 18:34

getting back to the question,
for me the fittest have to be the distance runners, they are as lean as racing snakes.
Boxers go into camp before fight time to lose the weight and fitness they have lost since their last fight.

richter-scale · Post by **richter-scale** » 22 Jul 2004, 20:22

lamphey wrote:
Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:
He then went on to say that at his peak, Geoff Capes could run the 100m in 11 seconds!

This is one of those myths that keeps getting passed down.

As a young teenager Geoff was a pretty decent all-rounder - sprints, jumps, middle-distance.
He ran 10.5 for 100 YARDS which equates to about 11.5 for 100 METRES. This was a long time before he became the bulked-up Shot Putter that we remember.

When he was weighing 20st and throwing the 16lb Shot Putt over 70ft, no way he was hauling his arse down the 100 metres straight in 11 seconds.

Remember when i lost the 100meters to a fat kid in my class on sports day.

THE FAT B*****D

.... I'd go for Lance Armstrong, that tour de france looks one long bloody tour

DIRT SUGAR · Post by **DIRT SUGAR** » 23 Jul 2004, 07:13

I did 7:15 for 2,000m on the Concept last year and I'm only 13st7lb'ish' and not an athlete, so I'm well chuffed with that. It's a fuckin' orrible exercise. As close as you get to what you feel like when you box, minus the punches. Your lungs are on fire by the time you finish and your legs useless when you try and stand up.

Danny looks so small compared to Pinsent and even Cracknell. You forget how big these rowers are!

Didn't Danny and Cracknell break an indoor rowing world record for 2,000m last year?

knockout artist · Post by **knockout artist** » 23 Jul 2004, 07:15

knockout wrote:
jamesmcdonnell wrote:Course that ain't lineker. Have you got cataracts.

Matthew Pinsent is 6' 5", Williams is around 6' 2"-6'3", fighters always lie about their heights for some reason.
williams is short for a heavy, probably 6'1..

Yeah, Ive met Williams a couple of times. He's no more than 6'1".

I'd say Tyson is 5'10"

The only fighter I know who appeared to understate his height was John Mugabi. He's listed as 5'8" but looked more like 5'11" to me.

This is one for Kovit

DIRT SUGAR · Post by **DIRT SUGAR** » 23 Jul 2004, 07:17

tonyevs wrote:Boxers go into camp before fight time to lose the weight and fitness they have lost since their last fight.

A decent pro doesn't. A real pro ticks over and keeps himself in very good shape, but goes into hardcore training when a fight is coming up. They can't maintain the level of preparation required for a 12-round fight every day they're in the gym, otherwise they'd be shagged, but good pros keep their weight within reaching distance of their division.

knockout · Post by **knockout** » 23 Jul 2004, 07:19

knockout artist wrote:
knockout wrote:
jamesmcdonnell wrote:Course that ain't lineker. Have you got cataracts.

Matthew Pinsent is 6' 5", Williams is around 6' 2"-6'3", fighters always lie about their heights for some reason.
williams is short for a heavy, probably 6'1..
Yeah, Ive met Williams a couple of times. He's no more than 6'1".

I'd say Tyson is 5'10"

The only fighter I know who appeared to understate his height was John Mugabi. He's listed as 5'8" but looked more like 5'11" to me.

This is one for Kovit

a classic understate i see all the time, is the klitchkos reach listed as 79".... no way someone who is 6 8" has a short ass reach like that

Lickszz · Post by **Lickszz** » 23 Jul 2004, 15:11

I'll say world class Triathlon athletes are very fit. The difference is with boxing is that your working very hard and taking direct punishment at the same time which zaps your strength and takes your stamina.

TheRiverCityHippy · Post by **TheRiverCityHippy** » 23 Jul 2004, 15:35

Wales wrote:
Shows you how powerful rowers are, Matthew Pinsent dwarfs Williams there.
Williams must be standing on a lower level, even the bird looks almost as big, is that linekar to the right of him or just a look-a-like?

i could be wrong but that looks like ex new zealand second rower ian jones to me.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 23 Jul 2004, 15:35

The VO2 max test is considered the gold standard method of assessing aerobic capacity. Consistently over a number of years the two sports whose elite participants have highest VO2 max are Cross Country Skiers and Cyclists (i.e. road as opposed to track cyclists). Boxers have been usually in the top 10-15 sports, but although its hard to assess because even the elite boxers have different levels of fitness.

Cyclists definately have the most "freakish" athletes, Miguel Indurian's resting heart rate was 29 bpm (average is somewhere around the 60-70 mark). Lance Armstrong has also been the subject of many scientific tests and is freakishly above the norm in things like heart rate and lung and kidney size.

Freiheit · Post by **Freiheit** » 23 Jul 2004, 15:44

A couple of years ago there was a very big teswt of german athletes to see who was the fittest. It was the Motocross rider Pit Beier that won with a biathlete on 2nd place. As I recall it Michael Schumacher was 5th.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 23 Jul 2004, 15:52

You have to question the validity of such test Freihart as they are designed for TV as opposed to science. Its like the world strongest man contest, they are not necessarily the worlds strongest men but the best at those particular events.

Freiheit · Post by **Freiheit** » 23 Jul 2004, 16:00

It wasnt a designed for TV test, it was a university that made the test, it didnt test which sport was the fittest but what athlete that was the fittest. And maybe Beier was just a rare case but the athletes in top motorsport do have to be in exelent shape, if any of you have tried to do a 1 hour motocross race I think you will agree that its alot harder than you would think, your whole body is just beat up.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 23 Jul 2004, 16:16

Freiheit wrote:It wasnt a designed for TV test, it was a university that made the test, it didnt test which sport was the fittest but what athlete that was the fittest. And maybe Beier was just a rare case but the athletes in top motorsport do have to be in exelent shape, if any of you have tried to do a 1 hour motocross race I think you will agree that its alot harder than you would think, your whole body is just beat up.

Fair enough, didn't realise it wasn't a TV thing.