"b-b-b-but Modern Nutrition" (PRIME Willis Reed posterized by nameless 6-3 guard)

[G-train]

http://youtu.be/5SV51pPKpWk

I am sitting on a lot of dunks and athletic plays like this in my archive... and we live in a world where Allen Iverson was addicted to McDonalds, Rodman was on every drug known to man, and Lamar Odom has a candy addiction... yet I can't tell you how many times I've heard people say "but modern nutrition!" like it's a secret key ingredient to creating athleticism

Honestly, from what I see - freak athletes are freak athletes, simple genetics. And from footage I have, it looks like they've been a part of EVERY nba era, they aren't something new.

I get the idea young fans see small super athletic guards like Westbrook or Rose doing their beastly dunks today and assuming that sh*t would be unfathomable in the 60's/70's - like it would stun the crowd or shell shock that eras defenders or some sh*t. But honestly, it's been done before.

Inb4 enraged teenage 60's/70's era haters

JJ Reddick can do that dunk.

[Rolando]

Yes, the nutrition thing is stupid.

The biggest difference that I can determine is simply the quality of the footwear. These guys were all playing in Chuck Taylors from Converse. The shoes that players wear today allow them to jump with confidence, knowing that they will come down on some padding. Also, moving side to side quickly in primitive sneakers like Chucky T's is more difficult because of the lack of good lateral support and shitty sole.

The next biggest difference are how the rules have changed regarding ball handling.

Athletes' bodies have not changed much in the last 40 or 50 years. The training is better though.

[KG215]

Oh, cool, did you happen to also come upon the article about 50,000 year old aborigines that were sprinting as fast as Usain Bolt in their bare feet?

This caught my interest and, for the record, I'm in your camp on this subject, but I'd like to know if there's anything more than the Googled articles I found that just simply state quotes from the Manthropology author.

Like this....

By analysing sets of footprints preserved in a fossilised claypan lake bed, Mr McAllister concluded that Australian aboriginals 20,000 years ago reached speeds of 23mph on soft, muddy ground.

I mean...how? How did he conclude that they could reach speeds that fast by analyzing some footprints?

I did find this interesting:

Turning to the high jump, McAllister said photographs taken by a German anthropologist showed young men jumping heights of up to 2.52 meters in the early years of last century. “It was an initiation ritual, everybody had to do it. They had to be able to jump their own height to progress to manhood,” he said.

That's from this article or blog or whatever about that book.

http://playthink.wordpress.com/2010/...manthropology/

[andgar923]

This caught my interest and, for the record, I'm in your camp on this subject, but I'd like to know if there's anything more than the Googled articles I found that just simply state quotes from the Manthropology author.

Like this....


I mean...how? How did he conclude that they could reach speeds that fast by analyzing some footprints?

I did find this interesting:



That's from this article or blog or whatever about that book.

http://playthink.wordpress.com/2010/...manthropology/

I'm assuming that they could run that fast out of necessity.

Just how Mexican natives were said to basically run for hours at high speeds, out of necessity.

[andgar923]

I mean...how? How did he conclude that they could reach speeds that fast by analyzing some footprints?

I might be wrong (somebody correct me), but can't scientists calculate the speeds of animals as well? animals that have been extinct for hundreds of years? so I'm sure they can calculate human's speed as well.

[eliteballer]

Yes, the nutrition thing is stupid.

The biggest difference that I can determine is simply the quality of the footwear. These guys were all playing in Chuck Taylors from Converse. The shoes that players whear today allow them to jump with confidence, knowing that they will come down on some padding. Also, moving side to side quickly in primitive sneakers like Chucky T's is more difficult because of the lack of good lateral support and shitty sole.

The next biggest difference are how the rules have changed regarding ball handling.

Athletes' bodies have not changed much in the last 40 or 50 years. The training is better though.

Really good post, people rarely mention the shoes. It's not even necessarily about nutrition. In many ways the food they ate back then was more wholesome, but you look at the other things.

#1 Training is just way more sophisticated, and they train more. Even Wilt used to say players in the 80's were more athletic.
#2 obviously the game has evolved. A kid growing up watching Jordan on tv will develop a more advanced handle than a kid who watched Oscar, and rarely at that

[BoutPractice]

Lots of good points in this thread.
I would add that there's a perception error of sorts, in which modern athletes appear to move more "gracefully" (due to various factors like equipment, filming and a different basketball culture) as if that had anything to do with performance.

But yeah, basically the genetics that make great athletes great are the same in the 60s as in today.

[SyRyanYang]

So you don't believe that the nutrition and training technique at present is far better than it was? Sure you can eat junk food 24/7, it is your choice to take advantage of it or not.
You're right about "freak athletes are freak athletes, simple genetics." But advanced technology is definitely a big icing on the cake.
As for why today's top players are more athletic than their predecessors, it's simply b/c there are way more professional basketball players than before.

[SyRyanYang]

Checkmate

[dunksby]

Keep in mind that 50s and 60s didn't have any kinda doping control body, not saying this guy was on something for sure but I would not be surprised if a lot of less athletic players doped.

[sundizz]

Here is what has changed: exposure.

The human body has not changed THAT dramatically since the 50's to now. However, the sport of basketball has grown exponentially in popularity. At the time the best athletes probably weren't as interested in basketball..there wasn't as much money, notoriety, womenz, etc.

Shoes don't matter. Nutrition doesn't matter. The court doesn't matter. Athletic people be athletic. Genetics dominate every other aspect. Michael Jordan could jump higher than Gerald Henderson after smoking a blunt, eating mickey's d, and wearing flip flops even if you let GHen train for two months for that one jump.

[dunksby]

Here is what has changed: exposure.

The human body has not changed THAT dramatically since the 50's to now. However, the sport of basketball has grown exponentially in popularity. At the time the best athletes probably weren't as interested in basketball..there wasn't as much money, notoriety, womenz, etc.

Shoes don't matter. Nutrition doesn't matter. The court doesn't matter. Athletic people be athletic. Genetics dominate every other aspect. Michael Jordan could jump higher than Gerald Henderson after smoking a blunt, eating mickey's d, and wearing flip flops even if you let GHen train for two months for that one jump.

Nobody is denying that you stupid ass mfer, the whole discussion is about the scrubs and role players' level of competitiveness.

[abuC]

Oh, cool, did you happen to also come upon the article about 50,000 year old aborigines that were sprinting as fast as Usain Bolt in their bare feet?

They could Sprint up to 23mph allegedly, that is not as fast as Usain who averaged 23mph but hit a top speed from 60-80m just under 28mph.

[NYK_Stan]

Checkmate

Bro, as a track and field guy I can quite easily explain this.

Back in the old days, tracks were either wood, cinder, or dirt.
Spikes were leathery pieces of shit with nails in the bottom.

Training was also less advanced at the time. Things like dynamics (versus static stretching) and plyometrics weren't always widely used.

Modern sprinters are better due to improvements in spikes, track design, and workout plans.

Also the field of competition in international track and field is bigger than ever.

Bigger pool of athletes = bigger chance to hit the genetic lottery.

[MrWarrior]

Bro, as a track and field guy I can quite easily explain this.

Back in the old days, tracks were either wood, cinder, or dirt.
Spikes were leathery pieces of shit with nails in the bottom.

Training was also less advanced at the time. Things like dynamics (versus static stretching) and plyometrics weren't always widely used.

Modern sprinters are better due to improvements in spikes, track design, and workout plans.

Also the field of competition in international track and field is bigger than ever.

Bigger pool of athletes = bigger chance to hit the genetic lottery.

So basically, todays athletes are more athletic ?