RomansFiveEight

This comment brings up an exceptional point. Maybe it's healthy to consider ourselves athletes, if for no other reason that to have a sense of responsibility and obligation.

I like to take my dog to the park and there are these women (sorry ladies, it just so happens to be women in this case) who I occasionally chat with. They are there power walking 2 or 3 times a week. They have little pink weights, sweat bands, and wear all the right clothes. They power walk side-by-side with elbows cocked, and my dog and I walk behind them. Well, briefly, then we pass them. And sometimes lap them a couple times. I walk about a 15 minute mile and I would guess they are doing about that, if not a little slower. (My dog gets way too distracted to run with! I'll end up on my face.) When we chat they talk about weight loss. Often, what new fad diet they are doing or some new program. The thing is, this has been going on for a couple of years. Neither of these women are obese, per se, but they are 'bigger'. And that's not a shame thing, it's just a reality. Kudos for keeping active, and that combined with their crash diets is probably why they aren't obese. But, to my eyes, they haven't lost any weight. I go insane if I go a couple of WEEKS without advancing in some way, much less a couple years.

But the thing is, it's always bugged me that they always claim that nothing works and they can't lose weight. But, they continue to do the same thing. If there are no results, isn't it time for a change? If weight loss is important to them, then maybe they should try a different routine. Chances are, with all of this power walking, their bodies have adapted to that fitness level and they aren't getting any benefit from it anymore. They need to go faster, push harder. And, chances are, if they'd just reign in a good lifestyle with good nutrition, portions, and keep track of calories, then they wouldn't have a problem. Instead of fad crash diets where they exclude certain foods or something.

Maybe the difference between folks who go nowhere and do the same thing every day, and folks who advance in fitness and achieve their goals, is the attitude. An attitude of being an athlete. i.e., someone who is driven by advancement and will accept nothing less. Whether that advancement is weight loss, going faster, riding farther, or all three.

Heck, I might even have to put that on the inside of my helmet or something, to remind me when I head out. "You're an athlete. Act like it." There's something that separates me from the kids on their bicycles and the middle aged moms putting around with their fanny packs. It's a desire to advance, get better, and push myself.

(P.S., not that there's anything wrong with moms and fanny packs, or kids on bikes, or even the ladies power walking around the park. It just isn't what I am!)

tg16

I guess if you engage in an athletic activity, and that's a real broad definition since curling is considered an Olympic sport, then you're an athlete. Some are just more athletic than others.

I do agree with the post above about advancement but its a personal thing. I have to advance and when I run, I run a training program even if there's not a race coming up. Now that I ride more, I ride for fun and I also have to ride for training. Hmmmm, that brings up another thought. Do you have to compete to be an athlete?

Gerryattrick

So much food for thought in the above replies. I like the idea of some form of aiming for advancement as an athlete, but does that mean there's an age cut-off? Logic says we cannot improve physically for ever and at some stage we start getting slower and weaker (particularly if you've always been reasonably fit, less so if you start getting fit later in life). I know that despite always exercising and taking part in sport I am much slower and less strong than I was when I turned 50, some 17 years ago. I'm a stronger cyclist, but that's just because I wasn't cycling then. Can advancement be defined as slowing down normal deterioration in performance.

Can a person in their 80s who is fitter/faster/stronger than most of their peers and still works at it be considered an athlete, just as someone in their 20s would be within their age group?

I would hope so.

Doug64

These guys are athletes!


I think a person can participate in an athletic activity, even seriously, but not be considered an athlete, unless they are participating in that activity competitively. If the goal of riding is fitness and strength, no matter how hard we are working at it, it is just exercise. It is like the body builders at my gym. They work hard, are reasonably fit, but do nothing with the results of their labor other than look in the mirror. They don't go to body building competitions or weight lifting competition; it is something they do for their own personal gratification. I don't consider them athletes.

I don't consider myself an athlete any more. I just consider myself fortunate that I am fitter/faster/stronger than most of my peers.

Biker395 

Of course! We categorize athletes by gender too, don't we? Why not age?

Regarding the role of competition: IMHO, a person who can run a 4 minute mile is an athlete whether they do it competitively or not. In that paradigm, there are competitive and non-competitive athletes, but both are athletes.

I actually sat down some time ago to try to come up with a framework for deciding what qualifies as a "sport." As Mark Twain would have said: "It was the flattest failure there ever was."

TGT1

What does age have to do with it?


As far as a definition of sport,


I'd tend to trend to Hemingway's definition.

qcpmsame 

I was hoping someone else had seen the vid of the lady in the above reply, I watched the CBS news segment about her Tuesday evening, and I could not believe her strength and accomplishments in natural lifting competitions and running events for the National Senior Games. She dead lifts twice her current weight, benches more than most men her age and a few that are younger, too. Watching her one armed push ups as the reporter interviewed her blew my wife away, as it apparently did that reporter (a young woman.) I took away her attitude, and initiative, as the most inspiring aspect of the report. At 5'-0" she is almost total muscle, I doubt that she is concerned with osteoporosis, if you take the campaigns for older women and men to get into weights, so as to strengthen bone structure.

Watch the vid above if you skipped it, for some reason, and then think about the options of either sitting around in a recliner, or getting out and doing something for yourself, regardless of whether you think of your self as an athlete or not. I'd rather not put a label on myself, or anyone else, and erroneously stereotyping them.

Bill

bicyclelove

Seriously though, great thread with interesting points of view.

dbg

I would say no.
And I conclude that based on my experience playing pick-up football games most of my life. I used to be a speedster and could out-run and out-quick most opponents. I started back into it again as my kids were born and was still sort of quick. But as I progressed into my 50's and 60's --the mind was still trying to juke and out-run opponents, but the body was just not making it. And I was still trim and strong-ish. At 62 I can still ride well enough to impress the younger folks. But football with younger folks is definitely OUT. I'm ineffective and easily beaten --and usually end up with aches and pains that take months/years to recover from.

bruce19

I think this is a different question. To me there is no "as much of an athlete." There are different levels of accomplishment or success but an athlete is an athlete. Just my opinion.

bruised

No, absolutely not an athlete, never have been, never will.

What I did have, up until a year ago, was very good upper body strength. I could lift and carry a washing machine no problemo! But I couldn't jog more than 50 yards without blowing out a lung. Now, after cycling for a year and losing weight, I have no upper body strength but I can ride a century.

I'm the anti-athlete.

Awesome comments made by others, good read.