How can a boxer's fitness be comparably tested against athletes of other sports

I'm looking to put a fitness challenge together where sports people, of similar levels but from the disciplines of boxing, football, rugby (union and league), athletics, cycling, rowing, distance running, tennis, basketball, squash, badminton and triathlon can undertake a series of fitness tests to see who comes out on top. Has anyone got suggestions to what fitness tests I could include to determine various levels of fitness between sports? I thank you in advance for your help

Hit Bolt in the face as he sprints and see how he holds up.

In short you cant. Much as you cannot compare the fitness levels of a sprinter with that of a marathon runner.

Surely there must be individual tests to each sport, and if each sports person completes every test, they one will come out highest and one lowest. For example the tennis player takes the boxing fitness test and vice versa. I just don't know what good tests of fitness are for each sport - any suggestions?

GeoffSnapes wrote:Surely there must be individual tests to each sport, and if each sports person completes every test, they one will come out highest and one lowest. For example the tennis player takes the boxing fitness test and vice versa. I just don't know what good tests of fitness are for each sport - any suggestions?

Depends what a boxing fitness test is. Boxers also expend a lot of nervous energy which causes fatigue.

Different sports need different types of fitness making it impossible to determine which type of sportsman is the fittest. You're test would just determine who is the fittest person out of the group and have no real bearing on a general outcome on sportsman.

But the challenge would be open to all athletes of any sport - it would be interesting to find out who comes out on top and what sport they are from.

Depends what a boxing fitness test is. Boxers also expend a lot of nervous energy which causes fatigue.
.................................................................................................................

That is a good point although applies more to actually fighting. My own personal experience with sparring showed me this, I think you have to learn to relax (which happens the more you spar) & to control adrenaline.

I have replied with some ideas geoff on the other thread that you mentioned this on which I'm sure you will have thought of. I forgot the bleep test.

I disagree with azaina's 1st reply as the very best people I have been trained by have both said the same, that the basic foundation of strength, fitness & endurance training for almost all sports (within reason) are the same before you then train sport specific. You need to train the whole body & be supple. Its then up to you what else you do outside of it to maintain.

prettyboy1304 wrote:Different sports need different types of fitness making it impossible to determine which type of sportsman is the fittest. You're test would just determine who is the fittest person out of the group and have no real bearing on a general outcome on sportsman.

But when you have a lot of contestants from each sport I think a pattern will begin to emerge, but I understand your point that it could just determine out of that particular group.

Has anyone done a calculation as to how many kms a boxer moves in a 12 round fight?

A boxer has to move their feet as well as their arms for 36 minutes whilst taking hits to arms, head and body. Every blow is stamina sapping yet have to maintain strength and endurance the whole time. The basic foundations of fitness may be the same (I agree) but the stress to the body and the mind is far greater in boxing that any other sport. I recall Tex Cobb saying that if you make a mistake in tennin its 15 love. If you make a mistake in boxing its your a$$.

azania wrote:Has anyone done a calculation as to how many kms a boxer moves in a 12 round fight?

A boxer has to move their feet as well as their arms for 36 minutes whilst taking hits to arms, head and body. Every blow is stamina sapping yet have to maintain strength and endurance the whole time. The basic foundations of fitness may be the same (I agree) but the stress to the body and the mind is far greater in boxing that any other sport. I recall Tex Cobb saying that if you make a mistake in tennin its 15 love. If you make a mistake in boxing its your a$$.

I know exactly what your saying & this is the difference between combat sports, contact sports & individual sports. But as I have said before a lot of world champions are only at their peak of physical fitness for a couple of weeks a year & many drop off the training after title defenses. Take football & rugby, its a whole season & they train 6 days a week, they also have access to top conditioning coachs, sports therapists etc. Hatton was a disgrace in superstars, ok he wasn't in fight shape/condition, but you would expect him to do a lot lot better than he did, he couldn't do 10 dips! Would be interesting to have seen him in fight shape when he entered. I think if geof is able to do something like he wants it will be interesting to see the results but I wont hold my breath that boxers will come out on top. In superstars Khan & Mcculloch entered & neither won, contrast this to the 70's/80's edition boxers did very well, Conteh won a show. I just think many other sports have moved on since then & that boxing hasn't. I'm not trying to knock boxing or boxers I am a fan after all & obviously supported Hatton, Khan & Mcculloch in superstars, just not gonna write off other sportsmen.

Hatton is an exception to the rule amongst boxers. I expect most, bar some heavyweights, tostay in shape between fights. Floyd Mayweather seems to be in great shape all the time

GeoffSnapes wrote:Hatton is an exception to the rule amongst boxers. I expect most, bar some heavyweights, tostay in shape between fights. Floyd Mayweather seems to be in great shape all the time

Wishful thinking! Ok Hatton was probably a bad example but many fighters dont live in the gym between fights once they get to a certain level, its why many have a 12 week training camp. Money in the top end of boxing is huge now, as Hagler said its hard to be out running 6am in the morning when you wear silk pj's & have millions in the bank. Take Mosely, 17 months out of the ring before he stepped in against Mayweather. As I mentioned before up & coming fighters live in the gym & are always training, they will be fit. You know the fighters out there that are gym rats, they're cardio machines, Manny & Donaire spring to mind, it shows in their performances. With regards to Mayweather its one of the things I rate about the guy, he seems to be the ultimate pro, always in shape, studies his opponents & has a game plan for them, thats why he's unbeaton & p4p where he is. I to would expect fighters to stay in shape between fights but not fightnight fitness level, you run the risk of burning out.

All top level sportsmen/athletes train their bodies to attain maximum physical fitness. Different sports require the body to do different things, using different muscles and for varying durations. It would be impossible to test. All top level athletes are at the peak of human physical condition.

It's like saying which cyclist is the fittest?

200m sprint world champion, 1km time trial world champion, 5000m pursuit world champion, world road time trial champion, world road race champion, Tour De France winner.

It's impossible to quantify and that's just in one sport.

I take your point STC, but as an indicator there could be a set number of events across a number of sports that could show who is best adapted fitness wise over these.

It's like saying which cyclist is the fittest?

200m sprint world champion, 1km time trial world champion, 5000m pursuit world champion, world road time trial champion, world road race champion, Tour De France winner.

It's impossible to quantify and that's just in one sport.

............................................................................................................

I disagree. You could devise a competition along the lines of superstars with different events, swimming, running sprint & distance, gym press ups, dips, squat thrusts, clean & press to give you an example. Take a couple of top riders out of each type of cycling & get them to compete against each other. Its like in worlds strongest man you get strongmen from different strength backgrounds ie bodybuilding, powerlifting, weightlifting etc who've now moved over & compete against each other. Superstars gave you 8 or 10 different sportsman each week against each other. Didn't/doesn't proove which sports are fitter but more who over the couple of days was but still gives you an insight on how different sports can adapt in tests of different disceplines.

Geof I get the feeling a lot are opposed to this in case their favorite sport doesn't do as well as they'd like. We used to get a lot of this on the old 606 with regards to boxing & MMA, whose fitter, stronger, more skillful etc. Good luck with whatever you come up with.

Some sort of circut training to do the trick, each exercise working varying muscles groups, and involve strength, explosive and static, and endurance as well as flexibility.

D4thincarnation wrote:Some sort of circut training to do the trick, each exercise working varying muscles groups, and involve strength, explosive and static, and endurance as well as flexibility.

Exactly D4, its what I've been saying, speed, endurance, strength, power. To many seeming to be dissing it, did you ever see superstars?

sohotnot wrote:

D4thincarnation wrote:Some sort of circut training to do the trick, each exercise working varying muscles groups, and involve strength, explosive and static, and endurance as well as flexibility.

Exactly D4, its what I've been saying, speed, endurance, strength, power. To many seeming to be dissing it, did you ever see superstars?

Yes only the revived version. I would not separate the events though and turn it in to an hour circuits sessions.

sohotnot wrote:It's like saying which cyclist is the fittest?

200m sprint world champion, 1km time trial world champion, 5000m pursuit world champion, world road time trial champion, world road race champion, Tour De France winner.

It's impossible to quantify and that's just in one sport.

............................................................................................................

I disagree. You could devise a competition along the lines of superstars with different events, swimming, running sprint & distance, gym press ups, dips, squat thrusts, clean & press to give you an example. Take a couple of top riders out of each type of cycling & get them to compete against each other.

So they best way to test the fitness levels of cyclists is to have them swim and run against each other and see which one can do the most dips?

STC is right, athletes are well trained for specific events. Marathon runners have better endurance, mile runners probably have a better VO2 max. Which is 'fitter'? You can't devise an arbitrary mix of events and say which athlete is the best. The boxer is best trained for boxing, the runner for their event. It's completely dependant on what type of fitness you train for.

STC wrote:

sohotnot wrote:It's like saying which cyclist is the fittest?

200m sprint world champion, 1km time trial world champion, 5000m pursuit world champion, world road time trial champion, world road race champion, Tour De France winner.

It's impossible to quantify and that's just in one sport.

............................................................................................................

I disagree. You could devise a competition along the lines of superstars with different events, swimming, running sprint & distance, gym press ups, dips, squat thrusts, clean & press to give you an example. Take a couple of top riders out of each type of cycling & get them to compete against each other.

So they best way to test the fitness levels of cyclists is to have them swim and run against each other and see which one can do the most dips?

Yes, along with the other examples & superstars type events! Why do you disagree? Have you never heard of all round fitness? D4 mentioned having a constant circuit for a given length of time with multiple exercises. Can you see no logic in that? Do you think that fitness can not be compared or measured? Bleep test another example.

Scottrf wrote:STC is right, athletes are well trained for specific events. Marathon runners have better endurance, mile runners probably have a better VO2 max. Which is 'fitter'? You can't devise an arbitrary mix of events and say which athlete is the best. The boxer is best trained for boxing, the runner for their event. It's completely dependant on what type of fitness you train for.

Yes I admit that people train sport specific but you still need to have a foundation of basic fitness & core strength to build from & by devising some type of multi exercise event like superstars & what has been mentioned you are able to put different sports people against each other & you will get an outcome. For example 10 people in each event 10 pts for 1st 1pt for last. I really believe it stands up, as did D4's suggestion. I just dont see why you & STC are so opposed to the possabilities of it. With regards to any weightlifting events you do it weight lifted over bodyweight, wouldn't be the 1st time.

sohotnot wrote:Yes, along with the other examples & superstars type events! Why do you disagree? Have you never heard of all round fitness? D4 mentioned having a constant circuit for a given length of time with multiple exercises. Can you see no logic in that? Do you think that fitness can not be compared or measured? Bleep test another example.

So by that logic, Jessica Ennis is a lot fitter than Paula Radcliffe ever was, because she has more all round fitness. The fact that Radcliffe is one of the greatest female distance runners in history doesn't matter, her fitness levels don't compare to your average heptathlete.

Is that what you're saying?

STC wrote:

sohotnot wrote:Yes, along with the other examples & superstars type events! Why do you disagree? Have you never heard of all round fitness? D4 mentioned having a constant circuit for a given length of time with multiple exercises. Can you see no logic in that? Do you think that fitness can not be compared or measured? Bleep test another example.

So by that logic, Jessica Ennis is a lot fitter than Paula Radcliffe ever was, because she has more all round fitness. The fact that Radcliffe is one of the greatest female distance runners in history doesn't matter, her fitness levels don't compare to your average heptathlete.

Is that what you're saying?

Well if she has more all round fitness, then yes, it really is that simple. But as far as I know these two have never gone head to head in a fitness competition, so the outcome may surprise you.

Radcliffe is a great distance runner but would she beat Adlington in a race across the channel?

That why if you have a multi tasked event you will be able to test all aspects of fitness and the winner will be the fittest.

As far as fitness in cyclists goes, those who compete in the grand tours are far fitter than a track sprinter, they may lack the strength and power but there endurance is far superior.

The Mighty Atom wrote:As far as fitness in cyclists goes, those who compete in the grand tours are far fitter than a track sprinter, they may lack the strength and power but there endurance is far superior.

I wonder how good they will be at pad work, or the speed ball, non stop punching at the heavy bag compared to a boxer? I know who's my money on to get tired first.

STC wrote:

sohotnot wrote:Yes, along with the other examples & superstars type events! Why do you disagree? Have you never heard of all round fitness? D4 mentioned having a constant circuit for a given length of time with multiple exercises. Can you see no logic in that? Do you think that fitness can not be compared or measured? Bleep test another example.

So by that logic, Jessica Ennis is a lot fitter than Paula Radcliffe ever was, because she has more all round fitness. The fact that Radcliffe is one of the greatest female distance runners in history doesn't matter, her fitness levels don't compare to your average heptathlete.

Is that what you're saying?

No that is your speculation. I have not said or suggested that. We dont actually know until they compete in a type of competition that has been mentioned & what geof the OP was talking about. The fact about being a great athelete in her field doesn't come into it, we know she is & in time Ennis may or not go down as one of the greatest Heptathletes of all time/history. If one came out ahead of the other in the said fitness competition it would take nothing from their individual sporting achievements whatsoever.

The Mighty Atom wrote:As far as fitness in cyclists goes, those who compete in the grand tours are far fitter than a track sprinter, they may lack the strength and power but there endurance is far superior.

Thats right but the idea would be to test all round, speed, strength, power, endurance & not just one of them.

The Mighty Atom wrote:As far as fitness in cyclists goes, those who compete in the grand tours are far fitter than a track sprinter, they may lack the strength and power but there endurance is far superior.

Who says endurance is a better guage of fitness than strength and explosive...ness?

D4thincarnation wrote:

The Mighty Atom wrote:As far as fitness in cyclists goes, those who compete in the grand tours are far fitter than a track sprinter, they may lack the strength and power but there endurance is far superior.

I wonder how good they will be at pad work, or the speed ball, non stop punching at the heavy bag compared to a boxer? I know who's my money on to get tired first.

I would be fairly confident that an average domestique would outlast the fittest of boxers in any test of endurance

John Bloody Wayne wrote:

The Mighty Atom wrote:As far as fitness in cyclists goes, those who compete in the grand tours are far fitter than a track sprinter, they may lack the strength and power but there endurance is far superior.

Who says endurance is a better guage of fitness than strength and explosive...ness?

Nice to see somebody with an understanding of the original post from geof & the ideas submitted. Its what geof, D4 & myself are talking about/suggesting. People are not looking at the whole picture, rather just a part of it.

sohotnot , don't get to frustrated that people can't see what is so plainly obvious to you, and that they even misinterpret what you say. I've been there before.

The hard part is is devising a test that tests all aspects of fitness and not too heavy on one sort.

D4thincarnation wrote: sohotnot , don't get to frustrated that people can't see what is so plainly obvious to you, and that they even misinterpret what you say. I've been there before.

The hard part is is devising a test that tests all aspects of fitness and not too heavy on one sort.

You right, I tend to end up with 'we'll have to agree to disagree, I have my opinion & you have yours'. It just gets me sometimes, those that are to shortsighted to debate properly. Its like the armchair boxing fans who diss all modern training techniques, confuse training with weights for a boxer with a bodybuilding routine, diss padwork yet they've never done it & the top pro's do it, a guy on the old 606 who didn't think sprint drills or distance running was good for boxers, the list goes on. There are those that train & do sports and there are those who dont!

Then there are those of us who have trained far more and far more seriously than others too, swings and roundabouts

Sohotnot is right........By working out and other modern techniques it's amazing how you can improve your cardiovascular system.....

Once trained for a half marathon by jogging at night and felt exhausted....the next time I did said marathon I just trained with weights and squatted and did it much faster...

Old soothsayers just never seem to acknowledge there are other ways and means than the old ones..

STC wrote:

sohotnot wrote:Yes, along with the other examples & superstars type events! Why do you disagree? Have you never heard of all round fitness? D4 mentioned having a constant circuit for a given length of time with multiple exercises. Can you see no logic in that? Do you think that fitness can not be compared or measured? Bleep test another example.

So by that logic, Jessica Ennis is a lot fitter than Paula Radcliffe ever was,

She is. I'll qualify it by way of the fact that I''ve never knocked one out to a glossy picture of the latter at any point in her career.

The Mighty Atom wrote:Then there are those of us who have trained far more and far more seriously than others too, swings and roundabouts

Definately but you wouldn't always know it from peoples responses & comments on here. Afterall its a forum & nobody really knows who anybody is or what they're really about, we just have to have faith in each other & less point scoring & one upmanship.

I thought you were having a go at me, so thought i'd add i'm well aware of how to train

The Mighty Atom wrote:I thought you were having a go at me, so thought i'd add i'm well aware of how to train

Not at all, was just replying to D4 who was replying to me. It can feel that way sometimes, you often see a 'who me?' on this forum or the old 606, wires can often get crossed & humor doesn't always cross over aswell. Sometimes I feel there are slightly narrow minded people or those that just like to pick little holes & argue for the sake of arguing. I stand by everything I have said in the post with regards to fitness & this is through my own personal experiences aswell as talking with better informed, more experienced, higher level people/athletes/sportsman etc & of course reading. I also didn't like certain posters taking a snippet of what I said & then making out I'd said something or speculating or speculating on what I am thinking or saying. If people want to debate they should read & understand properly 1st & then reply, not just jump the gun, double guess & then spout their own rubbish because they dont like another opinion. Sorry to be so long winded just felt like explaining a few things & to let you know I was not having a go at you.

Sorry to be so long winded just felt like explaining a few things & to let you know I was having a go at you.

You were having a go at him?

D4thincarnation wrote:

Sorry to be so long winded just felt like explaining a few things & to let you know I was having a go at you.

You were having a go at him?

No! just noticed it was meant to say I wasn't having ago at him, a typo I think its called.

@The mighty Atom

Bit of a typo error in my reply, was meant to end with 'I was not having a go at you' but I missed the not out! Just logged back & their was a reply from D4 with the mistake in it! Have amended it, sorry to have caused any offence.

@D4 Thank F*** you quoted me in your post! We've all done it.

sohotnot

Yeah ghosty would have found it very insulting, you writing all that just to make clear you were having a go at him.

D4thincarnation wrote:sohotnot

Yeah ghosty would have found it very insulting, you writing all that just to make clear you were having a go at him.

Yeah I bet & cant say I'd blame him. Is the mighty atom imperial ghost? Better check my replies better in future. Good thing on this forum you can edit if you make a mistake. While I'm at it I meant to ask you about the 360 show, does each mini series finish on looking back at the fight? As the one you posted a link to went back over the Dirrelvs Abraham fight. Seems the Manny Vs Mosely episode 1 hasn't been so popular mostly due it seems that we all know about the fighters & its just looking to sell the fight, time will tell.

sohotnot wrote:

D4thincarnation wrote:sohotnot

Yeah ghosty would have found it very insulting, you writing all that just to make clear you were having a go at him.

Yeah I bet & cant say I'd blame him. Is the mighty atom imperial ghost? Better check my replies better in future. Good thing on this forum you can edit if you make a mistake. While I'm at it I meant to ask you about the 360 show, does each mini series finish on looking back at the fight? As the one you posted a link to went back over the Dirrelvs Abraham fight. Seems the Manny Vs Mosely episode 1 hasn't been so popular mostly due it seems that we all know about the fighters & its just looking to sell the fight, time will tell.

Think the Fight Camp stuff started with the Super 6 in boxing, Showtime have been lagging behind HBO for the last few years and this is the first big fight that they have had in a while.

The Super 6 was a tournament format so they had the pre fight hype and the post fight fallout for the episodes, well bar the first one and the last one.

Any ideas of for the the event/exercises that would make up this fit test?

D4thincarnation wrote:

sohotnot wrote:

D4thincarnation wrote:sohotnot

Yeah ghosty would have found it very insulting, you writing all that just to make clear you were having a go at him.

Yeah I bet & cant say I'd blame him. Is the mighty atom imperial ghost? Better check my replies better in future. Good thing on this forum you can edit if you make a mistake. While I'm at it I meant to ask you about the 360 show, does each mini series finish on looking back at the fight? As the one you posted a link to went back over the Dirrelvs Abraham fight. Seems the Manny Vs Mosely episode 1 hasn't been so popular mostly due it seems that we all know about the fighters & its just looking to sell the fight, time will tell.

Think the Fight Camp stuff started with the Super 6 in boxing, Showtime have been lagging behind HBO for the last few years and this is the first big fight that they have had in a while.

The Super 6 was a tournament format so they had the pre fight hype and the post fight fallout for the episodes, well bar the first one and the last one.

Any ideas of for the the event/exercises that would make up this fit test?

I see, well I think having a post fight analysis episode would be a good idea for the format & fit the title with regards to the 360. Be interesting to see what each fighter has to say after & to see what there future holds, though for Mosley anything less than a great performance I think we know the answer to.

With regards to the fit test exercises I think I've posted quite a few suggestions if you care to look over the 2 similar posts geof did on this, maybe take something from the superstars format, geof did look into that after I mentioned it. You remember the original series, 73 - 85?

You would need to do such a wide range of test covering all aspects of fitness and strength it would take years to complete and that would be without injuries to your subjects.

I think the bottom line here is that we have differing views on the definition of 'fitness'. As I said in my first post, it's hard to quantify.

Paula Radcliffe, at her peak, was at the very extreme of human physical conditioning. She absolutely smashed the women's marathon world record. The fact that she couldn't do 35 dips in 60 seconds is totally irrelevant to this. The same applies to athletes such as elite sprinters and middle distance runners, professional cyclists and triathletes. All have incredidibly high levels of fitness. The same applies to elite professional boxers, and many other sporting disciplines.

All of these athletes have put in years and years of intensive training to develop their bodies in a specific way to attain the very highest levels of 'fitness' but tailored specifically to their sporting discipline. The elite of each discipline will have the highest possible levels of 'fitness'. Each will have it in equal amounts.

Doing some sort of superstars competition isn't going to prove anything one way or the other.

Bob wrote:

STC wrote:

sohotnot wrote:Yes, along with the other examples & superstars type events! Why do you disagree? Have you never heard of all round fitness? D4 mentioned having a constant circuit for a given length of time with multiple exercises. Can you see no logic in that? Do you think that fitness can not be compared or measured? Bleep test another example.

So by that logic, Jessica Ennis is a lot fitter than Paula Radcliffe ever was,

She is. I'll qualify it by way of the fact that I''ve never knocked one out to a glossy picture of the latter at any point in her career.

Haha. I left myself wide open for that one

I think (hopefully without too much presumption on my part) that STC sees fitness in it's relevant context as readiness for the sport the athlete competes in.

I wouldn't deny that you could devise a competition that could give a good overall picture of a person's athletic abilities, just question the relevance.