"Fitness" in sport

timestar

The extract below is taken from today's Independent (28/12/07):

Which sport has the fittest participants?

The sport of triathlon began with an argument between a group of US Navy Seals in San Diego. They wondered who were the fittest – swimmers, runners or cyclists – and attempted to find a way to answer the question. The solution they thrashed out was to conduct races in all three disciplines and see which they found the hardest. Furthermore, they would compete in each event consecutively which, while hardly scientific, appealed to their machismo – especially when their commander decided to award the title of "Ironman" to the winner. The first formally organised ironman race to invite all-comers was staged in 1978, when 15 entrants paid $3 each to attempt a 2.4-mile swim, a 112-mile bike ride and a 26.2-mile run under the Hawaiian sun. All but three entrants made it to the finish.

"Fitness" is a term that refers to five traits: cardiovascular efficiency, muscle-to-fat ratio, strength, agility and flexibility. In this sense, there are different kinds of fitness for different sports, yet researchers have tacitly agreed upon a common currency. The preferred unit of measurement when comparing different athletes' fitness is VO2 max – the maximum volume of oxygen that one can consume while exercising, expressed in terms of millilitres of oxygen per kilogram of bodyweight per minute. In 1996, a team at the University of Paris compared the VO2 max of groups of national-class cyclists, runners, swimmers and kayakers. There was little to separate the runners and cyclists, but the former had the edge over the latter with an average of 74.9ml/kg compared to 72.4ml/kg. Both were well ahead of the swimmers (59.6ml/kg) and kayakers (53.8ml/kg).

However, the researchers acknowledged that the cyclists were hamstrung by their larger body masses in this particular trial and the fact that they were operating in winter, out of season. Under different circumstances, they would normally beat the runners. Another study of top German cyclists gave an average VO2 max of 78ml/kg. Lance Armstrong's VO2 max is 83.8ml/kg. He also boasts a resting heart-rate of 32 beats per minute – compared with 60-70 for the average man – which rises to 201 at full exertion. According to his biographer Dan Coyle, these attributes make him "the world's greatest human power plant". He needed to be to win the Tour de France a record seven consecutive times. As Coyle put it: "The Tour is the hardest event on the planet, nothing comes close. Tour riders spend more daily energy than Everest climbers. During those three weeks they expend energy at a rate that exceeds the capabilities of all but four animal species."

Yet, there is something harder, for cyclists are not quite the fittest athletes in terms of VO2 max. That honour goes to cross-country skiers. Since they must use their arms as well as their legs to propel themselves, they are sending oxygen to the entire body. A study of elite German biathletes – a sport in which competitors also have to be skilled in rifle shooting and so can be expected to fall below the standards of pure skiers – found an average VO2 max of 81.7ml/kg among a group of six men. The fittest of them was on a par with Lance Armstrong. Pure cross-country skiers have reported scores of over 90ml/kg.

andy_wrx

I bet pro footballers aren't that fit.


It would be interesting to compare a 'typical' club cyclist with a 'typical' club runner, Sunday footballer, tennis player, etc

a_n_t

read recently that nicolas anelka was around 60ml.

oldwelshman

To be honest I dont think it makes a lot of difference how fit you are or who you compare to.
Each sport has different requirements and you may be more naturally suited to one more than another.
I have done several sports to a good standard but I would say cycling is the "hardest" to do competatively. That is road and track racing, not sportives and club runs
In rugby, it may be more physically dmending with respect to injuries, but there are times where you can recover in the game.
Also most sports have a level where almost anyone can compete.
In cycling for example, if your in a race and get dropped, that is end of race, so when your flat out and getting dropped you still have to try to go faster to survive.
It is also more difficult to compete in initially as you have to be a good standard to race at all. There are not many standards, with 4th being the lowest, but even in most of those 4th cat racers, most average club riders and sportive riders would struggle even to stay in bunch for a few miles let alone finish in the bunch.
In squash, there are dozens of different league levels so you can start at bottom and progress through as you improve and find your level.

Personally I think with increasing popularity in cycling, sportives etc, and with lots of races over subscribed, maybe we need more lower categories to introduce people to racing as the more racing, the higher the overall standard will get and the better the cyclist gets.

Tom Butcher

My money would be on greyhound racing having participants with substantially higher vo2max than cycling, running or cross country skiing. Sled dog racing probably a step up again.

Blonde

Tom Butcher is right there! Both greyhounds and huskies have a massive VO2 max - much higher than humans. I think I read it is about 142 for huskies.

Anyway, no one has really mentioned skill yet, but sport isn't just about fitness or natural assets such as V02 max (mostly something you are born with, rather than being mainly due to training). Probably the least 'skilled' and therefore perhaps the most accessible sport is running, but all the others require a level of learned skills or techniques which makes them about more than pure fitness. Perhaps that's why I find running the hardest of the three (from swimming, running, cycling) in terms of pure physical effort - it's not possible for me to 'hide' behind a good technique or skill with running; it's just bloody hard work!

bahzob

Interesting thread. Think reason VO2 is used to measure "fitness" is because its easy to do (at least in the lab). However suffers the same issue as, say IQ tests do when measuring "intelligence", since fitness is a lot more than a simple physiological lab measure.

timestar

The measures of fitness also do not take into account the level of proffiiciency that the individual has at their chosen sport, i.e. I assume that a skillful cyclist (good, consistent cadence, pedalling technique etc.) would use less "energy" than a less skilled rider.

HarryB

Interesting debate and one that has interested me since my younger days. I've been a decent club runner for many years and yes, a hard fell race or a muddy, hilly cross country certainly gets the old heart and lungs working hard.

I also played squash to a pretty good standard and to be honest, compared to the running it was, from a physical exertion point of view, a piece of piss.

I cycle, though not competitively and can average about 18-19mph on a 60-80 mile outing. On a hard hill, it's tough but overall I don't find it that challenging annd most of the time my HR doesn't go over 140 (my max is 176)

This brings me nicely to my current No 1 sport, indoor rowing. Of all the sports I've taken part in, nothing hurts as much and is so debilitating as a 2,000m race on a Concept 2 rowing machine.

I thought it was just me until I got talking to a couple of blokes at events. Both reckon rowing is the toughest thing they've ever done. One of them represented Scotland as a 400m and 800m runner while the other played rugby for England and played for the British Lions agains the All Blacks. To hear someone like that say that a rowing machine is the toughest thing they've ever done certainly makes you wonder.

Having said all that, watching elite cyclists tackle massive climes on the TdF makes me swoon with admiration.

bahzob

I would also say that measures of fitness should include recovery ability. It is one thing to be able to ride 100 miles. It is quite another to be able to do that day after day.

Actually this is one factor that I think can make cyclists seem "fitter" than is merited. It is quite common to hear that events like the TDF are the ultimate fitness tests because of the need to repeat performance day after day. I know events like this are hard, however I think the fact they exist at all is an indicator that cycling requires a different (and dare I say it easier) form of "fitness" than say running. This is because (falls excepting!) cyclists dont have to endure impact wear and tear.

e.g. taking the 2 iron-man distances 112 cycling and 26 running. I can, and have, done tours of many consecutive 112 days. I cant imagine doing a similar number of 26 running days. However accept that may just be me and running, so others out there may have different experience.

oldwelshman

HarryB wrote:

Interesting debate and one that has interested me since my younger days. I've been a decent club runner for many years and yes, a hard fell race or a muddy, hilly cross country certainly gets the old heart and lungs working hard.

I also played squash to a pretty good standard and to be honest, compared to the running it was, from a physical exertion point of view, a piece of wee-wee.

I cycle, though not competitively and can average about 18-19mph on a 60-80 mile outing. On a hard hill, it's tough but overall I don't find it that challenging annd most of the time my HR doesn't go over 140 (my max is 176)

This brings me nicely to my current No 1 sport, indoor rowing. Of all the sports I've taken part in, nothing hurts as much and is so debilitating as a 2,000m race on a Concept 2 rowing machine.

I thought it was just me until I got talking to a couple of blokes at events. Both reckon rowing is the toughest thing they've ever done. One of them represented Scotland as a 400m and 800m runner while the other played rugby for England and played for the British Lions agains the All Blacks. To hear someone like that say that a rowing machine is the toughest thing they've ever done certainly makes you wonder.

Having said all that, watching elite cyclists tackle massive climes on the TdF makes me swoon with admiration.

Hmm interesting
I am not sure what "pretty good standard" in squash means to you, but if you say you found it a piece of pish compared to running you are either the world squash champion, or only played people not as good as you? What standard team did you play for? Which league? What was your national ranking?
I have been literally out on my feet in some games, in others, such as friendlies with lesser standard players it is really easy.
This is similar to how I felt on rowing machine, but both of these are for short durations. In a hard squash rally, maybe for a couple of minutes, then you get a chance to recover, also breaks between games. On the the rower, ok almost flat out for 800m but thats not far and over after a few minutes.
As i mentioned, riding socially up hills is not too hard as you also say, but in a race it is completely different. It is probably the same as you feel in a 800m rowing event, difference being in a cycle race you have to keep going and may have to repeat the same climb several times.
To be honest most people would tend to suggest their current sport is the hardest
In squash, rowing, cycling etc all of them can be easy, it is dependent on the effort put in and this effort tends to increase when doing these sports in a competative environment.

Will we be seeing blood doping from Huskies this year I wonder? 8)

bahzob

oldwelshman wrote:

HarryB wrote:

To be honest most people would tend to suggest their current sport is the hardest

Think there may be a germ of truth in this but the opposite way round. If its something you will be spending significant time/investment on most people will probably end up doing the sport that comes to them easiest. This is what makes comparisons between sports so hard. I find cycling "easy" and running "hard", which is why I cycle, cos if I train hard I want it to be in a sport that at least I am good at to start with.

PS on Concept 2. there are I believe bonkers challenges like rowing across the channel that makes any cycling easy by comparison (at least cycling the scenery changes and if you think a cycle saddle makes your b*m sore, try rowing a Concept 2 for 30 minutes)

HarryB

Bahzob, 30 minutes on the rower is nowt really but you're right it does make your arse sore. I did that (30 minutes)this morning and will be doing my second session of the day very shortly.

Oldwelshman, I played in the county leagues when I was in my early 20s. Most of my opponents were technically better than me but most of them were older but nowhere near as fit. I was running half marathons in about 1hr 20min at the time so stamiina wasn't an issue. Lack of ability usually lost me the points rather than lack of fitness.

Can you really row 800m in a couple of minutes?

Alex_Simmons/RST

The comparison must have been with large mammals as some small birds (think humming bird) and insects (think bees) have VO2 Max (relative) levels order(s) of magnitude higher than humans.

As has been said before, VO2 Max is exercise modality dependent. So you would expect different values from running, swimming, cycling, xc skiing etc.

However, at the elite level in any well establish aerobic endurance sport, the best simply go as hard as they can. Alls you can do is alls you can do.

nasahapley

I'm with HarryB on this one; I've competed in a number of sports to a decent level and rowing is by far the hardest I've ever done - competitive indoor rowing is torture and the real thing (i.e. on the water) - is, I reckon, even harder.

Having said that, Alex has hit the nail on the head when he says 'all you can do is all you can do' - if you're at the point of fainting having vomited and are unable to move your legs, then whatever sport you've just done is bloody hard. I and many members of my old rowing club got to this stage regularly after races and 5k tests. It hasn't happened to me cycling yet - got it all to look forward to I guess...

Alex_Simmons/RST

And competition rowing would be akin to track pursuiting in terms of event duration, IOW an event with a not insignificant contribution (roughly 25%) from anaerobic energy production, which requires the development of a large anaerobic work capacity, hence the vomit inducing nature of training.

I know I have leaned over the fence at the track to "have a spit" so to speak after many maximal efforts of 30-40 second duration.

chunkytfg

HarryB wrote:

Bahzob, 30 minutes on the rower is nowt really but you're right it does make your ars* sore. I did that (30 minutes)this morning and will be doing my second session of the day very shortly.

Oldwelshman, I played in the county leagues when I was in my early 20s. Most of my opponents were technically better than me but most of them were older but nowhere near as fit. I was running half marathons in about 1hr 20min at the time so stamiina wasn't an issue. Lack of ability usually lost me the points rather than lack of fitness.

Can you really row 800m in a couple of minutes?

800M in 2 mins has got to be pretty hard IMO.

I average about 1 min 52/500m over 2000m and have seen as low as 1min 35/500 on the final push so i guess 800m in 2 mins is doable but got to be torture.

HarryB

chunkytfg wrote:

800M in 2 mins has got to be pretty hard IMO.

I average about 1 min 52/500m over 2000m and have seen as low as 1min 35/500 on the final push so i guess 800m in 2 mins is doable but got to be torture.

Chunky, trust me on this one. 800m in 2mins is not going to be torture, it's going to be impossible for anyone. Even the best in the world wouldn't get anywhere nnear that.

Well done on your 7:30ish for 2000m. Don't know how old you are or how big you are but in most age group categories (even skinny old fellas like me) the benchmark is sub 7 minutes. That's 1:45 pace per 500m or faster. I can assure you, it hurts like f**k

Mike Willcox

HarryB wrote:

Bahzob, 30 minutes on the rower is nowt really but you're right it does make your ars* sore. I did that (30 minutes)this morning and will be doing my second session of the day very shortly.

Oldwelshman, I played in the county leagues when I was in my early 20s. Most of my opponents were technically better than me but most of them were older but nowhere near as fit. I was running half marathons in about 1hr 20min at the time so stamiina wasn't an issue. Lack of ability usually lost me the points rather than lack of fitness.

Can you really row 800m in a couple of minutes?

Welshman is spot on. I played Surrey League squash Division 4/5 for many years and Vets squash League 1 at number 1 for my club playing against other clubs whose members included the Surrey Vets Team.

In one match against the number 1 Vet in Surrey I got to 6-6 in the first game and was totally stuffed after about 15 minutes of lung bursting 20 / 30 shot rallies when my HR was zoomimg up, whereas he was still ike spring lamb. I lost 9-6 9-0 9-0. in 30 minutes.

If you are a determined player then all you do is to concentrate on the rallies and play through the pain barrier. You can be quite fit but if you are playing a better player then you and your fitness allows you to keep in the rallies it can be a very tough physical test.

On a bike you can slow down so on occasions playing squash is harder than you could ride any 10 mile TT.

oldwelshman

I played in Herts premier recently for few games and for several years in Welsh premier.
I once had the fortune (or misfortune lol ) to play a guy in a cup game who won British open and was ranked 4 in the world. He is a great guy and did not take the pish as he could have done and just kept the game going. I lost 93, 9-0 9-0 in one hour 15 minutes which is a ridiculous time for such a scor ebut the bugger just kept hitting the ball back to a point he knew I could just get to and he was not trying to win quickly
He could have beaten me 9-0, 9-0 9-0 easily and later I wishe dhe had as I was physically sick
As hard as cycling is, in road race I have not felt sick yet, but have on track as that is shorter duration with higher effort in short bursts. They are the ones that tend to lead to the sick feeling, but not hurt the legs as bad as endurance events.

SteveR_100Milers

oldwelshman wrote:

I played in Herts premier recently for few games and for several years in Welsh premier.
I once had the fortune (or misfortune lol ) to play a guy in a cup game who won British open and was ranked 4 in the world. He is a great guy and did not take the pish as he could have done and just kept the game going. I lost 93, 9-0 9-0 in one hour 15 minutes which is a ridiculous time for such a scor ebut the bugger just kept hitting the ball back to a point he knew I could just get to and he was not trying to win quickly
He could have beaten me 9-0, 9-0 9-0 easily and later I wishe dhe had as I was physically sick
As hard as cycling is, in road race I have not felt sick yet, but have on track as that is shorter duration with higher effort in short bursts. They are the ones that tend to lead to the sick feeling, but not hurt the legs as bad as endurance events.

I got the shakes last sunday climbing gospel pass, my HR was about 10 BPM more than I have seen before, and was sustained for about 15 minutes (either that or fall off). I doubt I could have done much more at that effort without some form of vomiting/death. Do you know the climb David? It's the unclassified road from Hay to Capel y fin. I think its in the Tour of the Black Mountains, in which case you'd love it.

ricadus

With cross-country skiing if you haven't got the technique sorted then no amount of strength or massive VO2 capacity will help you.

Watching the biathlon racing in Slovenia before Christmas I was impressed with Sandrine Bailly almost catching Magdalena Neuner (a much more powerful skiier – typical German perhaps – think Jan Ullrich in a TT) on a very long steep climb, largely due to the sustained perfection of her skating technique on the steep gradient.

oldwelshman

I have to say I watch the cross country events on sky and am impressed, that look very hard
Steve I do not know the climb but would not mind doing it one day if your up for same route?
I am down on weekend and will be down a few times over next few weeks track and road.

I might see if I can do the black mountains this year, I also would like to do Dave's challenge but hat might be tpp close for track champs in newport

wildmoustache

I have recently run a half marathon in 1 hr 20. the impact from running is what I find tough.

cycling is tough when it's very hot, very long and very steep. doing 5 or 6 cols in a day when racing 120 miles or so is tough towards the end.

squash i find easy in terms of physical demands.

swimming i'm rubbish at.

chunkytfg

HarryB wrote:

chunkytfg wrote:

800M in 2 mins has got to be pretty hard IMO.

I average about 1 min 52/500m over 2000m and have seen as low as 1min 35/500 on the final push so i guess 800m in 2 mins is doable but got to be torture.

Chunky, trust me on this one. 800m in 2mins is not going to be torture, it's going to be impossible for anyone. Even the best in the world wouldn't get anywhere nnear that.

Well done on your 7:30ish for 2000m. Don't know how old you are or how big you are but in most age group categories (even skinny old fellas like me) the benchmark is sub 7 minutes. That's 1:45 pace per 500m or faster. I can assure you, it hurts like f**k

ONly a pup at 26 years old but currently weiging in at 144kgs!!

rowed again last night at the gym but did 5000 m in 20min 12 secs after doing 30 mins on the treadmil.

wildmoustache

chunkytfg wrote:

HarryB wrote:

chunkytfg wrote:

800M in 2 mins has got to be pretty hard IMO.

I average about 1 min 52/500m over 2000m and have seen as low as 1min 35/500 on the final push so i guess 800m in 2 mins is doable but got to be torture.

Chunky, trust me on this one. 800m in 2mins is not going to be torture, it's going to be impossible for anyone. Even the best in the world wouldn't get anywhere nnear that.

Well done on your 7:30ish for 2000m. Don't know how old you are or how big you are but in most age group categories (even skinny old fellas like me) the benchmark is sub 7 minutes. That's 1:45 pace per 500m or faster. I can assure you, it hurts like f**k

ONly a pup at 26 years old but currently weiging in at 144kgs!!

rowed again last night at the gym but did 5000 m in 20min 12 secs after doing 30 mins on the treadmil.

144kg! holy 5hit! what bodyfat % are you? do you find you have any issues with bicyvle components not standing up to your mass - not trying to be funny here, guinely interested in what the key weakpoints are.

HarryB

chunkytfg wrote:

ONly a pup at 26 years old but currently weiging in at 144kgs!!

rowed again last night at the gym but did 5000 m in 20min 12 secs after doing 30 mins on the treadmil.

Hi Chunky. How convenient. You are exactly half my age and I'm exactly half your weight


Well done on the 5k. Pretty decent after the treadmill session. Your target is 18:33.7 to beat my season's best

How tall are you by the way?

nasahapley

chunkytfg wrote:

HarryB wrote:

chunkytfg wrote:

800M in 2 mins has got to be pretty hard IMO.

I average about 1 min 52/500m over 2000m and have seen as low as 1min 35/500 on the final push so i guess 800m in 2 mins is doable but got to be torture.

Chunky, trust me on this one. 800m in 2mins is not going to be torture, it's going to be impossible for anyone. Even the best in the world wouldn't get anywhere nnear that.

Well done on your 7:30ish for 2000m. Don't know how old you are or how big you are but in most age group categories (even skinny old fellas like me) the benchmark is sub 7 minutes. That's 1:45 pace per 500m or faster. I can assure you, it hurts like f**k

ONly a pup at 26 years old but currently weiging in at 144kgs!!

rowed again last night at the gym but did 5000 m in 20min 12 secs after doing 30 mins on the treadmil.

Yeah well done on the 5k Chunky; anything approaching 20 mins for a non-rower is good going, doubly so after a half-hour sesh on the treadmill. Sub 20 next time for sure!

chunkytfg

wildmoustache wrote:

chunkytfg wrote:

HarryB wrote:

chunkytfg wrote:

800M in 2 mins has got to be pretty hard IMO.

I average about 1 min 52/500m over 2000m and have seen as low as 1min 35/500 on the final push so i guess 800m in 2 mins is doable but got to be torture.

Chunky, trust me on this one. 800m in 2mins is not going to be torture, it's going to be impossible for anyone. Even the best in the world wouldn't get anywhere nnear that.

Well done on your 7:30ish for 2000m. Don't know how old you are or how big you are but in most age group categories (even skinny old fellas like me) the benchmark is sub 7 minutes. That's 1:45 pace per 500m or faster. I can assure you, it hurts like f**k

ONly a pup at 26 years old but currently weiging in at 144kgs!!

rowed again last night at the gym but did 5000 m in 20min 12 secs after doing 30 mins on the treadmil.

144kg! holy 5hit! what bodyfat % are you? do you find you have any issues with bicyvle components not standing up to your mass - not trying to be funny here, guinely interested in what the key weakpoints are.

Erm body fat % is in the high 30's IIRC from my last check up at the gym.

Weakpoints on the bike are wheels basically. When you are my wieght but have been active all you life you tend to have incredibly strong legs so when out of the saddle rocking the bike the wheels get out of true very quickly unless they are really strong. As for the reast of the bike it all seems to cope very well.

chunkytfg

HarryB wrote:

chunkytfg wrote:

ONly a pup at 26 years old but currently weiging in at 144kgs!!

rowed again last night at the gym but did 5000 m in 20min 12 secs after doing 30 mins on the treadmil.

Hi Chunky. How convenient. You are exactly half my age and I'm exactly half your weight


Well done on the 5k. Pretty decent after the treadmill session. Your target is 18:33.7 to beat my season's best

How tall are you by the way?

18:33 just aint gunna happen i'm afraid. Thats about 1:50/500m pace isnt it? if so bloody well done mate!!!!!!