Athletic Test?

[Dunlopkid]

Is there any sort of test that measures raw athleticism? There are tests that measure IQ, so why not this?

[burosky]

Are you thinking about just pure athleticism or athleticism that is specific to a sport? If you are thinking of the latter, sure. Have you heard of the combines for the NFL? I suppose something similar can be done for tennis. Maybe Etcheberry or those other fitness and training gurus can figure something out.

[Dunlopkid]

I did think of the NFL combines, but I'm thinking more of athletic potential that could be applied to any sport.

[lethalfang]

I did think of the NFL combines, but I'm thinking more of athletic potential that could be applied to any sport.

NFL Combine tests for a lot of athleticism important on the football field: explosiveness, speed, strength, agility, etc.
You can add endurance to that Combine.

[burosky]

I did a quick search and found this site. I don't know anything about it but it looks like it addresses your question. http://www.v e l o c i t y s p .com/parsippany/sparq_testing

[SystemicAnomaly]

A couple of years ESPN rated quite a few of the world's major sports. They use 10 criteria to rate these sports on degree of difficulty. Perhaps most of these and perhaps some others could be used to determine some sort of athleticism IQ or rating. However, it is probably rather arbitrary how much weight is assigned to each criteria. Here are those ESPN ranking & the criteria that they used:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/sportSkills (http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/sportSkills)


ENDURANCE: The ability to continue to perform a skill or action for long periods of time. Example: Lance Armstrong
STRENGTH: The ability to produce force. Example: NFL linebackers.
POWER: The ability to produce strength in the shortest possible time. Example: Barry Bonds.
SPEED: The ability to move quickly. Example: Marion Jones, Maurice Green.
AGILITY: The ability to change direction quickly. Example: Derek Jeter, Mia Hamm.
FLEXIBILITY: The ability to stretch the joints across a large range of motion. Example: Gymnasts, divers.
NERVE: The ability to overcome fear. Example: High-board divers, race-car drivers, ski jumpers.
DURABILITY: The ability to withstand physical punishment over a long period of time. Example: NBA/NHL players.
HAND-EYE COORDINATION: The ability to react quickly to sensory perception. Example: A hitter reacting to a breaking pitch; a drag racer timing acceleration to the green light.
ANALYTIC APTITUDE: The ability to evaluate and react appropriately to strategic situations. Example: Joe Montana reading a defense; basketball point guard on a fast break.

[SystemicAnomaly]

Speaking of IQ, Howard Gardener developed the idea of multiple intelligences. I would think that at least 2 of intelligences would apply to athletes:

www.thomasarmstrong.com/multiple_intelligences.htm (http://www.thomasarmstrong.com/multiple_intelligences.htm)


Bodily-kinesthetic intelligence entails the potential of using one's whole body or parts of the body to solve problems. It is the ability to use mental abilities to coordinate bodily movements. Howard Gardner sees mental and physical activity as related.

Spatial intelligence involves the potential to recognize and use the patterns of wide space and more confined areas.
.

[FitzRoy]

A couple of years ESPN rated quite a few of the world's major sports. They use 10 criteria to rate these sports on degree of difficulty. Perhaps most of these and perhaps some others could be used to determine some sort of athleticism IQ or rating. However, it is probably rather arbitrary how much weight is assigned to each criteria. Here are those ESPN ranking & the criteria that they used:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/sportSkills (http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/sportSkills)


ENDURANCE: The ability to continue to perform a skill or action for long periods of time. Example: Lance Armstrong
STRENGTH: The ability to produce force. Example: NFL linebackers.
POWER: The ability to produce strength in the shortest possible time. Example: Barry Bonds.
SPEED: The ability to move quickly. Example: Marion Jones, Maurice Green.
AGILITY: The ability to change direction quickly. Example: Derek Jeter, Mia Hamm.
FLEXIBILITY: The ability to stretch the joints across a large range of motion. Example: Gymnasts, divers.
NERVE: The ability to overcome fear. Example: High-board divers, race-car drivers, ski jumpers.
DURABILITY: The ability to withstand physical punishment over a long period of time. Example: NBA/NHL players.
HAND-EYE COORDINATION: The ability to react quickly to sensory perception. Example: A hitter reacting to a breaking pitch; a drag racer timing acceleration to the green light.
ANALYTIC APTITUDE: The ability to evaluate and react appropriately to strategic situations. Example: Joe Montana reading a defense; basketball point guard on a fast break.


Seems like tennis was severely underrated on the "nerve" category. It got just a 3? I mean I can see why it was rated lower than boxing, but baseball got over 5 on "nerve". Tennis should be at least be even with baseball on that one.

[SystemicAnomaly]

^ This goes to show you how subjective and arbitrary these things can be. I would have put badminton in the top 15 or 20, not at #30. There are quite a few other assignments that I would question as well.

[FitzRoy]

^ This goes to show you how subjective and arbitrary these things can be. I would have put badminton in the top 15 or 20, not at #30. There are quite a few other assignments that I would question as well.

I don't know, it could just be an issue of what exactly they take into account when defining the category. Most of the ratings for tennis seemed sensible to me, other than the "nerve" one; I have difficulty agreeing with baseball receiving nearly twice as many points in that category. I would have to say that they severely underrated the mental aspect of tennis on that one.

But as for the others, I don't know - they give tennis a 6.7 on analytics, which they define as ability to evaluate and react to strategic situations. The score was lower than both football (American football) and basketball. I wonder what exactly they took into account here. Are we talking about two professional football teams playing, or a bunch of guys playing out in the yard?

If we're talking professionals, then certainly there's more overall strategy in a football game than a tennis match, but is that really true when you look at it from the perspective of an individual player? Especially when you consider that the players in football have constant on-field coaching between plays?

I guess that's just splitting hairs on those, because the tennis rating for analytics was only marginally lower than football and basketball. My main issue was the "nerve" thing, as a professional tennis match is all about maintining nerve and focus, recognizing and dealing with the big moments, fighting nerves and fear. On the other hand, I notice that the highest scoring sports in those categories were things like race car driving and bull riding, where death is a legitimate concern. I guess in that sense, tennis would be at the lower end of the spectrum. But come on, it should be at least even with baseball.

[punch]

^ This goes to show you how subjective and arbitrary these things can be. I would have put badminton in the top 15 or 20, not at #30. There are quite a few other assignments that I would question as well.

Yeah agreed there, Badminton at a high level is a demanding sport. Have to be very fit, and alot of touch/skill is involved.

[pro_staff]

I don't think you can measure your court sense, intuitions, etc, in any sport. There's the intangible that some athletes possess that make them stand out above the rest.

[phoenicks]

Agree withFitzRoy, I think tennis is a bit underrated in terms of speed and analytic aptitue as well.

[SystemicAnomaly]

To the OP: hope we've not gotten too tangential too early in this thread.


Seems like tennis was severely underrated on the "nerve" category. It got just a 3? I mean I can see why it was rated lower than boxing, but baseball got over 5 on "nerve". Tennis should be at least be even with baseball on that one.

Note that you can click on the Nerve column to get a good perspective on how tennis stacks up against other sports for this criteria. It looks like the Nerve score is meant to be very high for dangerous, fear-instilling sports. But it is hard to say why baseball/softball is higher than wrestling & tennis.

You've made some very good points in post #10 as well. Something else to consider: should all 10 criteria be given the same weight? Also, the score for each criteria is going to be highly dependent on how you define that criteria -- subjective & arbitrary as I said before.

[lethalfang]

Seems like tennis was severely underrated on the "nerve" category. It got just a 3? I mean I can see why it was rated lower than boxing, but baseball got over 5 on "nerve". Tennis should be at least be even with baseball on that one.

Getting hit by Roger Clemens' 100 mph fastball when he's on roid rage is pretty scary.

[5263]

Pretty funny/odd, to see martial arts below boxing and wrestling, since both are contained within martial arts.

Guess that makes Martial Arts their true #1, as it contains those 2 top ten sports + much more in addition!

[FitzRoy]

Getting hit by Roger Clemens' 100 mph fastball when he's on roid rage is pretty scary.

Yeah, I agree that it is. It's not scary enough that I would be scared to step into the batters box if I'd played baseball my whole life.

I'm not saying that getting hit by a baseball isn't scary - people have certainly died from it - I just don't think it means that baseball players are more fearless or better at dealing with fear than tennis players. Baseball is about that pitch being inside a specific zone, and the batter attempting to hit it. The point of the game isn't getting fastballs thrown at you by roid-ragers.

Now, if the main aspect of the game was dodging 100 mph fastballs aimed directly at you, that would be a different story.

[spiritdragon]

I honestly don't get y baseball got put up so high on the list. you spend most of your time standing still or sitting.

[SystemicAnomaly]

Getting hit by Roger Clemens' 100 mph fastball when he's on roid rage is pretty scary.

It could be worse. Pitches in cricket are often around 100 mph and the bowlers (pitchers) are often intentionally trying to hit the batsmen - it is considered a very legit part of the game.


I honestly don't get y baseball got put up so high on the list. you spend most of your time standing still or sitting.

Yup, it seems like the pitcher is the only one out there expending much energy at all. But these days, pitchers don't even pitch 9 innings any more. In many respects, tennis should be much higher than baseball.

On the other hand, the ESPN list is focused on degree of difficulty. While tennis skills are rather difficult for most people to master, the ability to hit a major league baseball pitch successfully is considered one of the most difficult tasks in sports. If you are able to hit successfully only 30% of the time, you are performing at a high level. If you get close to 40%, you are considered phenomenal. This is why I find baseball rather boring to watch -- it's all drama and only a hint of action.

If you failed to hit the ball in tennis 70% of the time, you should give up and play tic-tac-toe.

[5263]

If you are able to hit successfully only 30% of the time, you are performing at a high level. If you get close to 40%, you are considered phenomenal. This is why I find baseball rather boring to watch -- it's all drama and only a hint of action.

If you failed to hit the ball in tennis 70% of the time, you should give up and play tic-tac-toe.

No, they hit the ball quite regularly, much like in tennis. Some of their most beautiful struck balls end up as a line drive right to someone or a long fly ball.

It's a little more like they have to hit winners 30-40% of the time. If you could do that in tennis, you would win a true Grand Slam!

[north4t]

You can't say that tennis has more nerve than baseball. I just know that I play both sports and with not only the chance of getting hit by a pitch. Another scary thing that happends often is a ground ball being hit to you and it takes a bad bounce or a line drive being hit off of a fastball strait at you when you are playing the infield.

[SystemicAnomaly]

No, they hit the ball quite regularly, much like in tennis. Some of their most beautiful struck balls end up as a line drive right to someone or a long fly ball.

It's a little more like they have to hit winners 30-40% of the time. If you could do that in tennis, you would win a true Grand Slam!

That is exactly what I meant when I said successfully hit 30-40% of the time. They do not hit the ball regularly at all in baseball. If you include foul tips and balls that are caught or cases where that batter is thrown out at first base, then perhaps the best batters actually "hit" the ball a little better than 1/2 the time they are at bat. This % would still not cut it in tennis.

We should also consider that a batter will often already have 1 or 2 strikes before hitting a good clean ball. This means that the batter has swung & missed (or mishit) or has failed to swing at a ball that probably should have been swung at. If you take these into account, then even the best betters have failed much more than 70%.

.

[FitzRoy]

That is exactly what I meant when I said successfully hit 30-40% of the time. They do not hit the ball regularly at all in baseball. If you include foul tips and balls that are caught or cases where that batter is thrown out at first base, then perhaps the best batters actually "hit" the ball a little better than 1/2 the time they are at bat. This % would still not cut it in tennis.

I think it's not the best comparison; hitting a baseball with a bat is definitely harder than hitting a tennis ball with a racquet.

I just don't think baseball requires a better capacity for handling fear/nerves.

[SystemicAnomaly]

I think it's not the best comparison; hitting a baseball with a bat is definitely harder than hitting a tennis ball with a racquet.

I just don't think baseball requires a better capacity for handling fear/nerves.

That was my very point. Hitting a baseball pitch is far more difficult than hitting a tennis ball that is in play. I agree with you that the nerve rating for baseball should not be much higher than tennis. Many tennis players have a fear of net play, especially if the opponent has an easy or juicy shot. Fear of injury, is very real in tennis. I have damaged both of my eyes due to framed ball while volleying. I have also been hit in the back, in doubles, by an errant first serve by my partner. One of these serves was well in excess of 120 mph (or perhaps only 100+ mph by the time it hit my back). I'm am grateful that this serve did not hit me in the kidney or some other sensitive area.

Aside from getting beaned by a ball, there are other fear factors in both sports.
.

[FitzRoy]

That was my very point. Hitting a baseball pitch is far more difficult than hitting a tennis ball that is in play. I agree with you that the nerve rating for baseball should not be much higher than tennis. Many tennis players have a fear of net play, especially if the opponent has an easy or juicy shot. Fear of injury, is very real in tennis. I have damaged both of my eyes due to framed ball while volleying. I have also been hit in the back, in doubles, by an errant first serve by my partner. One of these serves was well in excess of 120 mph (or perhaps only 100+ mph by the time it hit my back). I'm am grateful that this s3erve did not hit me in the kidney or some other sensitive area.

I agree with that. I've been fairly afraid of standing too far toward the middle of the court while at net with my partner serving (IE, too far to the right in the deuce court) after my friend who has a very good serve hit a 100+mph fault that grazed my ear.

In other words, I'm not saying that there isn't an element of fear to deal with when playing baseball. I just don't think it's enough to actually deter someone who really wants to play baseball - and therefore it's not a useful criteria for judging the athletic skill of the sport. When a person plays baseball, I don't think there's a general, reasonable fear of dying. So it's not in a different league than tennis. Now, climbing onto the back of a gigantic, raging bull that could very easily trample a person to death, or gore a person - that's an example of where 'fear' could become a useful category for measuring the sport.

I think you and I are in agreement.