Is there a sport...

[Peter Pallotta]

Ken and Sean are correct.
And golf (with bowling) are the two answers to Jason's question.
Why?
Because as Tom Paul liked to point out, golf was the only  sport/game where opponents weren't 'vying for the same ball'.
(Not surprisingly, the word 'bowling' never crossed Tom P's lips or even entered his mind.)
Which means that 'relative athleticism' (the differences in size, strength, speed etc between one player and another, in the same era) aren't nearly as important in golf as in other sports.
If Bobby Jones could put down his legal documents and cigarettes and scotch for only 4 months a year and yet still manage to swing his driver over 100 mph, that's all that mattered.

[John Emerson]

The sport of Weightlifting has some records that might never be touched.  Several have fallen in the last decade but doping control has become more stringent also. 

[Peter Sayegh]

Fishing.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

Fishing.

"Is it really a sport when only one side knows they're playing?" (Stolen from some comedian, who I think was talking about hunting, but which applies to fishing too.) 

When a sport begins to decline (bowling?), you will often see the performance drop off. If bowlers could make $10M/year, you'd see the athleticism of bowling rise really quickly once again.


Generally speaking. Disc golf has Ken Climo, who won 12 world championships, but the guys playing now (they're still not making much, but the top 10 can at least earn a living doing it professionally now) are probably better than he was, and are definitely better than Climo plus the nearest nine guys to him were on average. Disc golf, if it continues to grow, will likely see athletes continue to improve.


Though at some point we reach the edge of what human beings can realistically achieve. I don't think a human being will ever run an unassisted 2:00 mile (the record is 3:43 so I was tempted to say 3:00 mile… and by including this parenthetical, I still kind of am…).

[V. Kmetz]

Badminton... Croquet... Table Tennis...

[Wayne_Kozun]

I went to the 2011 and 2015 Rugby World Cups.  Even in that short time frame, the difference in physical stature of individual players who played in both Cups (for example, someone like All Black center Conrad Smith) was noticeable.  There were no Phil Bennetts on the field.

But there was a Shane Williams on the pitch in the 2011 RWC and he is a wee mon and was one of the best wingers of his era.

[Kevin_Reilly]

Yes, my point was the apparent difference in players (who played in both cups) between 2011 and 2015. 

[Wayne_Kozun]

I agree that on average they are getting bigger, but the great thing about some sports, like rugby and golf, is that there is a place for all body types.  I hazard to guess that there will be great small rugby players in the future.  And there will be major golf champions in the past who are the same size as Corey Pavin or Mike Weir.  Francesco Molinari is one of the top players in the world as he is listed as 5'8" and 159 lbs.

[George Pazin]

In track and field, all the following world records were set in the 1990s or even 1980s...

1500 meters
mile
400 meter hurdles
4x400 meter relay
high jump
long jump
triple jump
discus
shot put
javelin

That's for men.  Even more women's records come from back then...

100 meters
200 meters
400 meters
800 meters
mile
high jump
long jump
triple jump
shot put
discus
heptathlon
hammer
4x400 meter relay

Interesting.  To my point above, I wonder if it’s because there is no money in those sports?

Money is certainly a big part of it. The other aspect is (sadly) improved drug testing. This affects the women even more, as drugs have a more pronounced effect upon them.


And yes, I follow track and field, if anyone chooses to question me on those pronouncements...


And also yes, I did post this before reading Jim Nugent's cogent follow up posts...

[John Kavanaugh]

The fact remains that track isn't cool. It was in the 70's, it ain't now. Kind of like Men's tennis in the USA.

[Kalen Braley]

Jim,

When I read that list, it looked cherry picked....and I was right. When you include ALL Track and Field Events, Half of the current world records have been set later than 2000 and most of those in the last 10 years.

And those 3 records in the 80s for Discuss, Hammer, and Javelin, I'm pretty sure that was pre-modern drug testing if any at all...

https://www.liveabout.com/mens-track-and-field-world-records-4686770

[Ken Moum]

... where the standard of excellence hasn't risen dramatically?*

An excellent point, but anyone who ever looked at the pictures Edgerton shot of him with his revolutionary strobe lights, or watched the short films he made after he quit playing tournament golf must conclude that Bobby Jones would have been at the top of the game regardless of when he was born.

 
He was extraordinary. But he wouldn’t be winning majors as a law practicing amateur in today’s era.

No doubt, but he probably wasn't actually practicing law until after he retired at age 28. But I would add there's virtually NO chance an amateur will win any of the current four professional majors going forward.


Hal Sutton thought he could play the Tour as an amateur, and more recently Maverick McNealy gave some thought to trying it.  but they both came to their senses.


I was actually echoing the Ben Hogan quote Shack has on his blog today.

"I have always felt and said that a man who can be a champion in one era could be a champion in any other era because he has what it takes to reach the top."  BEN HOGAN

[Bill Gayne]

I don't know a whole lot about boxing and amateur wrestling but I got to believe with weight classes it is pretty much what it's always been.


Nascar on the track has slowed the advance of speed and technology (and probably saved more than a few lives) with restrictor plates. Restricting the speed of race cars hasn't killed the sport and restricting the golf ball wouldn't kill professional golf. The rest of us can drive cars and play golf without restrictor plates.

[Jim Nugent]

Got another one (maybe).  MLB fastballs.  Bob Feller was timed at nearly 100 mph back in the 1940s.  But that was as the ball crossed the plate.  It's estimated that when the ball left his hand it may have been in the 107-108 mph range.

Nolan Ryan also was clocked around 100 mph in 1974.  But again correcting for radar gun placement his top speed may have hit 108 mph.

To my knowledge no one since has exceeded or matched either of those. 

[Kalen Braley]

https://www.mlb.com/news/indians-casey-weathers-can-throw-108-mph/c-167882016

[JMEvensky]

Put Ryne Duren in the mix. I once sat next to Harmon Killebrew on a plane and asked who threw the hardest of the pitchers he faced. He said Koufax and Ryan had the 2 best fastballs--but nobody threw as hard as Duren.

[Jim Nugent]

https://www.mlb.com/news/indians-casey-weathers-can-throw-108-mph/c-167882016

Kalen, 45 to 70 years later someone can finally match the old-timers? 

[George Pazin]

Got another one (maybe).  MLB fastballs.  Bob Feller was timed at nearly 100 mph back in the 1940s.  But that was as the ball crossed the plate.  It's estimated that when the ball left his hand it may have been in the 107-108 mph range.

Nolan Ryan also was clocked around 100 mph in 1974.  But again correcting for radar gun placement his top speed may have hit 108 mph.

To my knowledge no one since has exceeded or matched either of those.

Call me crazy, but I'm enough of a skeptic to doubt the numbers from 1940 and 1974.


Apples to apples means current apples to current apples, not current apples to 1940s or 1970s apples.


And I'm a huge Nolan Ryan fan, not a stat obsessed person who tries to figure out ways to discount his specialness.


-----


I don't know that track was ever cool, but it is a sport with objectively measurable results, and people who profit from both measuring and achieving those results. Those are key elements of quantifiable results that one can compare.

[V. Kmetz]

Got another one (maybe).  MLB fastballs.  Bob Feller was timed at nearly 100 mph back in the 1940s.  But that was as the ball crossed the plate.  It's estimated that when the ball left his hand it may have been in the 107-108 mph range.

Nolan Ryan also was clocked around 100 mph in 1974.  But again correcting for radar gun placement his top speed may have hit 108 mph.

To my knowledge no one since has exceeded or matched either of those.

Call me crazy, but I'm enough of a skeptic to doubt the numbers from 1940 and 1974.

Apples to apples means current apples to current apples, not current apples to 1940s or 1970s apples.

And I'm a huge Nolan Ryan fan, not a stat obsessed person who tries to figure out ways to discount his specialness.

-----

I don't know that track was ever cool, but it is a sport with objectively measurable results, and people who profit from both measuring and achieving those results. Those are key elements of quantifiable results that one can compare.

I have to join with GP in a mild eyebrow about the 1940 or 1970s numbers...I too have seen that film of Bob Feller throwing as a moving car whizzes past.


And while not wishing to disparage significant players, Feller and Ryan (and Duren and others) are only a handful of pitchers out of the dozens currently who perform these physically marvelous stuff. Even if the athletes of yore were not as well-trained and physically gifted as those of yore, there is one thing they had in greater measure than the athletes of today...the ability to suffer with injury and still perform at their high levels...legend says that Carl Hubbell's arm was backwards from his years of throwing screwballs... rotatory cuffs tears and grade 2 sprains and stress fractures were endured... there was no such thing as turf toe...god knows how many Tommy John surgeries some ancient greats would have  had...Cy Young pitched BOTH ends of a double-header, with complete games in both on occasion.