Yet another random question that I was curious about. Obviously everyone here is either physically fit or well on their way, but do you consider yourself to be an athlete? What do you consider an athlete to be?
Former Member
I know people who are athletic and even though they don't compete, I view them as athletes, after all, they are people who can play baseball, ice skate, run track, etc. extremely well.
I have been told by a man down here on the island that I am not an athlete, and he even went so far as to say I was an embarrassment to all athletes because I was so very old (57 when he told me this). My reply to him was this:
I may not look like an athlete to you, but I am a swimmer and I proved it in the triathlon 1 mile swim that year placing 2nd out of all women and most of the men.
Any person who engages in physical activity weekly, daily, etc., and continues with it, is both athletic and an athlete in my book, and as an athlete ages and continues to be athletic, they are true athletes. Because as body parts start to hurt a bit more with age and we continue in our athletic ways, this is a good indication of those who are athletes, competing or not.
So, yes, I am a swimming athlete.
Donna
I think there's a difference between going to the gym a lot and seriously training / competing in a sport. It's one thing to swim laps or to run for pleasure and another to swim in a meet or run a marathon. Both of the later activities take training, a focus on certain dietary things, and often extra activities like strength training.
Does that mean those people who train at the level of a competitive swimmer or runner or cyclist and choose not to compete are not athletes? No, I don't think that's the case. I think the defining criteria for the athlete is someone who can compete at some level (masters, college, professional, olympic, whatever you call marathon level). Whether or not they chose to is up to them.
This is an odd comment. Obviously, most people "can" compete, even if they are just going to the gym or swimming laps. Does the fact that you "can" compete make you an athlete? Or is there an athlete meritocracy? I work out pretty seriously and don't compete much due to time constraints. I consider myself an athlete. I think Donna's definition is pretty good.
It seems like some people never compete, some only compete at big meets or in good pools, and some only go to Nationals. What is the rationale for that? Is it a time issue or preference issue?
I consider myself an athlete. I think one thing that separates athletes from the rest is their goals or reasons for training/working out/etc. - they train to improve (or maintain, as the case may be), rather than just to get or stay in shape. It's hard to define what makes someone an athlete, but goals are a big part of it.
