Insofar as VO2 max goes, cross-country skiers seem to win. If one measures VO2 max in absolute, as opposed to per kg of bodyweight, rowers do very well. That would make sense, as XC skiers and rowers use more of their bodies than cyclists or runners.
VO2 max isn't everything, but it is an objetive measure that, with the appropriate tests, is valid accross all forms of endurance sport.
I remember a BBC programme that purported to do a general sports fitness assessment with a number of people, won by an American Football player, but is was awful. They had a female xc mtb rider (no dissing them, but to compare them with male power-based athletes is silly) competing!
If you want to look beyond VO2 max, to include elements of speed and power, I suspect that rugby (either code) would have some very impressive ahtletes. Rugby union forwards have a constant workrate far higher than footballers, the backs are more anaerobic. Rowers would also have impressive balance (as anyone who's sat in a rowing shell will know) and co-ordination.
Personally, the atheletes I most admire are biathletes. The combination of xc skiing and shooting has an "it's a knockout"-esque quality (for those old enough to remember the original "Superstars") but is very demanding (intense physical effort punctuated with periods in which supreme calm and concentration required) and makes great TV.
Backs on a rugby pitch do a hell of a lot of running these days. Running across the pitch god knows how many times - that's a lot of aerobic running. Just watch how far Shane Williams runs in a game.
Oh as for ultimate exhaustion - XC skiers and triathletes are the ones that you most often see collapsing immediately after crossing the line. That's hard man/woman stuff that is.
Following on from a previous thread about if you are training your body or your mind. Most top athletes will have a simmilar mindset which seperates them from the rest of the feild. Most of them will be quick learners and/or will have been doing their sport for many, many years so know the technique inside out and backwards. Hence in many situatons (with the exception of activities like weightlifting, sprinting etc which are really just a test of the human form) if you placed an athlete from one discipline into another that required a simmilar bodyshape they would probably excell in that as well. What has made the athletes great in the first place is not the bodyshape they are it's the mindset that has formed that bodyshape. There is nothing natural about Chris Hoy's legs for example, he has forged them if you will as a result of his desire to win. Obviously genetics will play a part, a rugby player will not be able to be a top cyclist etc. I should imagine if you gave say a top cyclist, runner and an xc skiier a year to become a world class rower and had a race at the end the one which had the biggest drive to win probably would. It would be nice to see this in evidence next year if Lance Armstrong does indeed do Ironman Hawaii, I would quite enjoy seeing him win proving that he is an incredable athlete, or see him get beaten by Chrissie Wellington proving he is a little over the hill and the Ironmen and Women are very driven and competent athletes in their own right.
Iain
Not as good as canoeists - ask James Cracknell!Rowers would also have impressive balance (as anyone who's sat in a rowing shell will know)
Then again as well as the physical stuff, XC skiers also have extremely good balance.
I should imagine if you gave say a top cyclist, runner and an xc skiier a year to become a world class rower and had a race at the end the one which had the biggest drive to win probably would.
I'd put my money on the XC skier - is a fairly common crossover, and the runner and cyclist would have to work on upper body strength in a way the skier wouldn't.
if you gave say a top cyclist, runner and an xc skiier a year to become a world class rower and had a race at the end the one which had the biggest drive to win probably would.
I'd argue that it'd probably be the one who picked up rowing technique fastest and that's to a large extent going to be based on who's got the better co-ordination (not hand-eye, mind) and feel for what makes boats move fast. As a largely counter-intuitive sport (from a technical POV), you'd be suprised how many people who should be brilliant rowers (eg can do the numbers on a rowing machine) don't turn out to be.
Yeah but XC skiing is all a limited set of movements. You don't have to be as agile as say a rugby player.
What has made the athletes great in the first place is not the bodyshape they are it's the mindset that has formed that bodyshape
It's both, at the top level.
ditto. At the top level of any properly competitive sport, the luck of the draw (eg genetics) is very important.
I'd argue that it'd probably be the one who picked up rowing technique fastest and that's to a large extent going to be based on who's got the better co-ordination
Another plus for the skiers - what they do is far more complex than rowing, involving far more degrees of freedom. I'm also less than convinced by the "XC skiing is all a limited set of movements." line - maybe, but there's an awful lot of subtlety in there, at least as much as sidestepping down a rugby pitch.
" ... [i]It would be nice to see this in evidence next year if Lance Armstrong does indeed do Ironman Hawaii, I would quite enjoy seeing him win proving that he is an incredable athlete, or see him get beaten by Chrissie Wellington proving he is a little over the hill and the Ironmen and Women are very driven and competent athletes in their own right. "
It would be surprising if LA did win an Ironman - leaving aside the allegations against him, OK, he was a successful triathlete and (even if the allegations are true) was an outstanding athlete, but he's in his late 30's, hasn't competed in triathlon (so I understand) for a long time, and would be competing against the best Ironmen in the World. To be beaten by Chrissie Wellington could hardly be called a disgrace, any more than Magdalena Neuner whupping him on skis would be, or being beaten by Paula Radcliffe in a marathon.
Another issue with Ironman - like rowing or skiing, and unlike (to a larger extent) running or cycling, the swim has a significant technical element to it.
I'm also less than convinced by the "XC skiing is all a limited set of movements." line
Well I've XC skiied a fair bit, and it really is just swish swish swish the same repetitive movements each time - until you come to an up or downhill, then you switch to a different swish swish 🙂 Swivelling your way past some lunging forward's out-stretched arms, flat out sprinting for the line, piling into a ruck, twisting on the floor to set up a ball, full stretch pass, dummy side-step, hand off, tackles, kicks, any number of different kinds of passing - definitely far more different movements on a rugby pitch than on a ski track!
I'd argue that it'd probably be the one who picked up rowing technique fastest
That is kind of my point, it is the athlete with the strongest mind that will win, say one needs 8 weeks to perfect the technique and only works one week in every two at it, they will not pick it up as fast as one that needs 15 weeks but works at it every week. My point is "fittest" is a misnomer, a physical state that can be achieved by the mentally strong and tenacious. Although I had rowing on a Concept 2 or the like in mind when I set the hypothetical challenge to counteract most of the technique, probably should have mentioned that.
ditto. At the top level of any properly competitive sport, the luck of the draw (eg genetics) is very important.
I'm not saying everyone can be a world champion cyclist but you can choose a sport to suit your genetic make up. For example I'm 6'5 and 75Kgs so I wouldn't take up weightlifting, rugby etc, I'd pick running, cycling etc If you take out reasoning that you want to be good at something and start wanting to be good fullstop then you can select something that gives you the best possible chance of being good at. I'm sure every one on here can find a sport where the champion has a simmilar physical structure to them selves. Wiggins hardly has the most far out physical structure there are many people that are 6'3 and 71kgs, his bodyfat % could be achieved by anyone in that physical boundary by training, what is seperating him from others is his mind.
Iain
I'd argue that it'd probably be the one who picked up rowing technique fastest
That is kind of my point, it is the athlete with the strongest mind that will win
The strongest mind isn't necessarily the one that picks up the technique fastest.
Plus, body shape isn't the same (or possibly even as important) as physiological make-up.
Well I've XC skiied a fair bit
Cool - which races have you done?
Swivelling your way past some lunging forward's out-stretched arms, flat out sprinting for the line, piling into a ruck, twisting on the floor to set up a ball, full stretch pass, dummy side-step, hand off, tackles, kicks, any number of different kinds of passing
That's just putting one foot in front of another, then switching to a different way of putting one foot in front of another when you do a side step or a kick. I was made to play a fair amount of rugby when I was at school and I'm sure nothing I did was ever more complicated than that.
I've never raced XC, I just did it a lot for a winter. I said 'a fair bit' to mean not just tried it once 🙂
I was made to play a fair amount of rugby when I was at school and I'm sure nothing I did was ever more complicated than that
piling into a ruck
If you only put one foot infront of the other when playing rugby then you certainly were not trying very hard at all 🙂 Get stuck in lad! Rucking and tackling is a lot more than just putting one foot in front of the other! In contrast, in XC skiing you are doing the same three or four different motions all the time, are you not? It is repetitive motions.
I've never raced XC
Oh.
in XC skiing you are doing the same three or four different motions all the time, are you not?
No, not if you're trying to go as fast as possible - at least there are an awful lot of different parts to each of the "three or four motions", and a lot of subtleties to the timing, which you'd probably have missed if you've not raced and/or had proper race coaching. Not to mention that there are two different types of XC skiing, and if you think you just do a different swish swish going downhill, I'd guess you've not done downhills on a World Cup XC course on skinny skis.
If you only put one foot infront of the other when playing rugby then you certainly were not trying very hard at all
Well I've probably taken the rugby I've done just about as seriously as you've taken your XC skiing - if you were just doing swish swish swish you weren't trying very hard at all.
Pff.
I did try to go as fast as possible thanks a lot 🙂
You're getting mixed up here. Refining the same few motions to a high degree of complexity isn't relevant to this discussion. I'm not saying it's not complicated (it is) and I'm not saying it's really easy and technique doesn't matter (it does of course, as I know first hand).
What I am saying is that I reckon there's more different motions, muscle groups and different types of physical activity in a top level rugby game than there is in top level XC skiing.
PS I reckon I was faster than most people with only one season under their belt 🙂
I did try to go as fast as possible thanks a lot
There's a difference between trying to go as fast as possible and actively getting coached and working on the subtleties of technique in order to go as fast as possible in a race.
What I am saying is that I reckon there's more different motions, muscle groups and different types of physical activity in a top level rugby game than there is in top level XC skiing.
What you were saying is "XC skiing is all a limited set of movements" when it's anything but. To look at V2 skating, there are at least 6 different phases in there, each composed of multiple different movements - and that's not even considering the 3 other techniques commonly used for propulsion in XC skating ski racing, let alone cornering technique, downhill technique or even classic technique. I suppose it depends how you define "limited". What I'm suggesting is that as a recreational XC skier who hasn't taken performance coaching you might think you understand the sport, but you've barely scratched the surface.
I reckon I was faster than most people with only one season under their belt
Maybe, but I doubt you're faster than me, and I'm pretty rubbish (didn't make the top half at the last race I did).
Mate, for flippin heck's sake, only a complete moron would think they know all about skiing from one season! Don't be daft.
I'm not a pro skiier or a pro rugby player. However, when you look at the movements involved in each sport it's clear to see that rugby players move their bodies a lot more and do more stuff - both aerobic, anaerobic and PC cycle in all sorts of different directions and activities.
Running about and staying upright when being clattered by 20 stone blokes is very complex and technical just as skiing is, but it comes natural to people so you don't need as much specific coaching 🙂
PS where do you do your skiing?
This year Sjusjoen (in the hills above Lillehammer) was my only trip, and I didn't race - though I did also get 10 days of skiing in England!
Have also been to Kvitavatn (above Rjukan), Jotunheimen and Hallingen in Norway. Dobbiaco in Italy. Seefeld, St Johann and Hochfilzen in Austria. Various places in the Engadine in Switzerland. West Yellowstone and YNP in the US.
You need to look at body types as well.
Which is the science of somatotyping.
Basically, there are 3 body types (ectomorph, endomorph and mesomorph). Some body types are better at some sports than others.
[img] 
[/img]
Oh FFS the answer's boxing alright, it's [b]****ING BOXING ALRIGHT??!![/b]