Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

What sport would you want to be a pro in, why and if in a team, which one and position?

I would love to be a pro ice hockey player because it has speed, skill and physicality. All the things I like in a sport. As for team, there is only one choice, Boston Bruins, probably as a D-man.

Would it matter? The only pro women's sports that people watch is tennis, cause of the short skirts probably.

 Melissia wrote:
Would it matter? The only pro women's sports that people watch is tennis, cause of the short skirts probably.

Some Watch Basket Ball
Also, For me Boxing.

 Melissia wrote:
Would it matter? The only pro women's sports that people watch is tennis, cause of the short skirts probably.

Pro football, semi-pro ice hockey, golf, skating, hockey, rugby, wrestling, mma...Do you want me to continue?

And in most of them, women just aren't paid anywhere near as much as men. If I can't make big bucks, frankly I'd rather do something I enjoy, like chemistry

For example, WNBA salary is ~$30,000-$90,000 (minimum-maximum), while in NBA, the numbers are ~$385,000-$15,355,000 per player-- the minimum for men is ten times that of women, an the maximum for men is 170 times that of women. The first numbers I found were for 2005 rosters, for the record. The average NBA salary is fifty times that of women.

Other sports aren't that much different. Even in Tennis, men make about the same amount as women do despite the fact that women play more than men. And let's not even talk about football. The WPFL gives a salary of 100 USD per game, while the NFL gives a salary in the millions.

So... no . There's no incentive, ergo, I have no reason to choose any of them. Sorry for turning your thread in to a feminist rant, but sports are in the end stupidly unequal.

I don't watch any sports really outside of football, but let's go down the list and compare male and females in various sports.

Football - Only men have a pro league. If women did have a league, their comparative lack of athleticism and lower degree of upperbody strength would make the plays I watch to see very rare. Lightning bolt passes, leaping interceptions, earthshaking sacks, etc, would not occur in the woman's game.

Baseball/softball - They're both equally boring to me. Men can hit the ball a greater distance and make impressive defensive plays, but there isn't the a huge degree of difference to a spectator.

Volleyball - Who would watch men's volleyball in America? I can only name one volleball player, Destinee Hooker. I wished she played basketball. She has the most impressive vertical I've ever seen on a woman. Close to 36" standing. (That's on par with top tier NBA dunkers)

Soccer - Equally boring. Do not care. At all.

Basketball - Women's basketball is TERRIBLE. No one in the WNBA can actually jump, I've seen more impressive dunks and plays in 3A JV games in Alaska FFS. It is just awful. Hardly any of them (except Maya Moore, she's actually good) have the upper body strength to shoot a normal jump shot, I haven't seen any woman with the court vision of Bird, Magic, Nash, or Lebron. I don't watch NBA games, but you could not pay me to watch women's basketball.

Track and Field - Equally awesome. Unlike in team sports, the women here are actually amazing and impressive athletes. I don't understand how many NBA players can be such great athletes, but WNBA players don't even come close to their T&F counterparts.

Olympic Weightlifting - Also equally awesome.


TLDR: Any sport with a large emphasis on upper body strength will be much more visually impressive with male athletes. The same is true with any sport that involves a lot of jumping. Comparing women's basketball and men's basketball is probably the worst comparison because modern basketball fans are obsessed with athleticism and are not impressed by the women's game.

 Amaya wrote:
If women did have a league, their comparative lack of athleticism and lower degree of upperbody strength would make the plays I watch to see very rare. Lightning bolt passes, leaping interceptions, earthshaking sacks, etc, would not occur in the woman's game.

You have no actual evidence of this of course, it's nothing more than an ass-pull to try to make yourself feel better about sports. There's no motivation for womens' football players to actually push themselves to the limit when all they make is USD $100 per game-- not even enough to make a living, nevermind support a professional level training schedule.

 Melissia wrote:
Would it matter? The only pro women's sports that people watch is tennis, cause of the short skirts probably.

I like women's soccer (pro and college) a lot. I also enjoy women's college ice hockey.

I am drawn to women's MMA and boxing as well.

Freerunning, what team? There is only the community. But if i had to pick a choose a team probably Tribe.

I would be a darts player, you could have all that money but you dont need to train or do any exercise, and you can smoke tabs and drink fething pints while you compete!

 mattyrm wrote:
I would be a darts player, you could have all that money but you dont need to train or do any exercise, and you can smoke tabs and drink fething pints while you compete!

Arnt you a military man? Would you have to exercise regardless?

Arnt you a military man? Would you have to exercise regardless?

He's out

 Jihadin wrote:

Arnt you a military man? Would you have to exercise regardless?

He's out

Yeah I'm only kidding, I still exercise as vigorously as when I was in too.. I'm just thinking of when I'm older and my knees are knackered.

Think of it that way, most sports age kills you at about 35, if your a darts player you can play until you are 70 as well!

Or, at least until your blood pressure kills you.

I can see it happening Matty...I CAN SEE IT HAPPENING.....

Rifle shooting.

Could make money on the side as a hitman!

 Melissia wrote:

 Amaya wrote:
If women did have a league, their comparative lack of athleticism and lower degree of upperbody strength would make the plays I watch to see very rare. Lightning bolt passes, leaping interceptions, earthshaking sacks, etc, would not occur in the woman's game.

You have no actual evidence of this of course, it's nothing more than an ass-pull to try to make yourself feel better about sports. There's no motivation for womens' football players to actually push themselves to the limit when all they make is USD $100 per game-- not even enough to make a living, nevermind support a professional level training schedule.

Typical NFL CB or Safety has in excess of a 30" vertical leap. Probably closer to around 36". Only a handful of female athletes have anywhere near a 24" vertical. A women with a 30"+ vertical is even less common than a man with a 40" vertical. You can not begin to compare the leaping potential of men and women. Male HS football players can outjump the vast majority of world class female athletes. It is a fact.

There are many softball pitchers with fearsome fastballs, but there is no evidence that that ability correlates with the ability to throw a rocket spiral. No woman can throw a football pass as far, as fast, or as hard as the likes of Marino, Manning, or Favre. It is a fact that women have at most two thirds the upper body strength potential of men.

If you honestly think any woman will ever have the size, speed, explosiveness, and strength of athletes like Clay Matthews you are certifiably insane. Seeing a massive and fast man plow over a 6'4" 220 QB is more impressive to the typical spectator than a comparable female LB/DE sacking a female QB.

As usual, you nitpick posts to find something you don't like and show your typical complete lack of knowledge of anything in regards to athletics.

Even though top tier female athletes are far beyond what the average male is capable of, they are still significantly slower, weaker , and less explosive than their male counterparts. Spectators pay to watch the more impressive spectacle. It has nothing to do with sexism or misogny as you like to claim. It is a business and athletes are payed in accordance to the profits they generate.

Edit: On topic, I would be a strong or free safety for the Green Bay Packers or Denver Broncos.

Simple... pro golf.

Can play forever and make gak-ton of $$$.

Oh yeah, golfs another good one.

I read John Daley's book a few years ago, he said he played at Saint Andrews once so drunk, that he went home, and couldn't actually remember ever being in Britain at all a week later.

Azza007 wrote:What sport would you want to be a pro in, why and if in a team, which one and position?

Baseball. It has, by far, the most grossly-inflated salaries out of any sport, and you can play until you're 50. And it's a lot more fun to play than it is to watch.

I would like to be the backcatcher for the San Diego Padres, because while the Boston Red Sox are the greatest baseball team the world will ever know (okay, maybe not this year) even in my fantasies I cannot compete with their players for the same position. However, San Diego's team is the sux, always has been, and so that feels a little more attainable to me. Also, San Diego was the nicest weather.

Curling, because a sport that lets me drink while playing while also having a theoretical shot at making the Olympics in your 40s is great.

I'd rather do motorsport of some sort; F1 or World Rally.

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
I'd rather do motorsport of some sort; F1 or World Rally.

F1 is slowly getting more awareness in the States, but most our motor sports is still this drive around in a circle with all the cars being the same crap.

Is Professional Eating a Sport?

Bowling, or darts, or something that would have less potential to result in permanent chronic injury that could possibly screw me up pretty badly in my old age. Less potential than, say boxing or football, anyway. I'm sure professional dart players tear their rotator cuffs, etc, from time to time. Probably wouldn't make lots of money, though, unless I was exceptional.

You can get pretty bad elbow problems in any sport that involves throwing. Hell, anything with repetitive motion can lead to joint problems possibly.

People are good at darts are fething amazing. I used to throw everyday and at best I could get 3-4 Bull's Eyes in a row. These people can toss out 50 long streaks like its nothing.

 d-usa wrote:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
I'd rather do motorsport of some sort; F1 or World Rally.

F1 is slowly getting more awareness in the States, but most our motor sports is still this drive around in a circle with all the cars being the same crap.

Don't they all start behind a safety car and stop the race as soon as it rains? F1 has a standing start and you need almost zero visibility before they stop driving. Though they're lucky to have another crack at the US after that complete disaster that was Indianapolis a few years ago that led to only 6 cars starting the race.

 Amaya wrote:
You can get pretty bad elbow problems in any sport that involves throwing. Hell, anything with repetitive motion can lead to joint problems possibly.

People are good at darts are fething amazing. I used to throw everyday and at best I could get 3-4 Bull's Eyes in a row. These people can toss out 50 long streaks like its nothing.

50 bullseyes in a row? Who is that accurate? ...and which pro darts player is aiming at the bullseye so often anyway?

It's been a while since I've seen darts on ESPN, but a few years ago they had a competition on and each one of them was throwing bulls eyes every throw.




3/3 Inner
2/3 Inner
1/3 Inner
6/9 Inner 9/9 Inner and Outer Bullseyes.

That's Phil Taylor. He's the best there has ever been, and that wasn't 50 bulls in a row. Although, granted, what he can do is amazing enough.

 Howard A Treesong wrote:

 d-usa wrote:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
I'd rather do motorsport of some sort; F1 or World Rally.

F1 is slowly getting more awareness in the States, but most our motor sports is still this drive around in a circle with all the cars being the same crap.

Don't they all start behind a safety car and stop the race as soon as it rains? F1 has a standing start and you need almost zero visibility before they stop driving. Though they're lucky to have another crack at the US after that complete disaster that was Indianapolis a few years ago that led to only 6 cars starting the race.

US racing, or Indy and NASCAR at least, is very much focused on the driver. The cars are spec'd to death where in the end all teams are practically running the exact same car with the same specs. I think of it was up to the guys writing the rules each driver would be able to jump into any of the cars and put up the same times in each of them.

F1 us just as much about the teams as it is about the drivers. They do have to follow certain specs, but the mechanics and engineers can win you the race almost as much as the drivers can. It almost qualifies as a team sport.

I am looking forward to the race in Austin and might even try to make it down there. Really hoping for an American driver at some point which should help exposure as well. I think some people have an "Is an American driving? If not I don't care about it." mindset.