Didn’t find the Sports Illustrated article but found one from USAToday that said the same thing (or I just forgot where I read it in the first place).
For the rest of the top 10 list go to → http://www.usatoday.com/sports/ten-hardest-splash.htm
I read the USA Today article, and they are close to correct. Tennis is by far the most difficult sport to play at an elite level (I may have twisted the OP’s intent here).
Not only do you have to return a 130mph serve (per the USA Today article), but you have to do something with it. If you just plop it back over there, you will lose the point 99% of the time.
But that’s not all! You also have to serve the ball, trying to control the spin and angle of the ball, and the speed, all while adjusting your angle of entry to the court, WHILE reading your opponent’s return.
Baseball? Please…they have to get the ball in a (loosely) 3’ x 3’ box. If it ain’t there…don’t hit it…you’ll get on base. Tennis has a larger court, and no-one is standing still, EVER.
Let’s add endurance. If the ambient air temp is 90F, the court (hardcourt) is around 120F. you are running around for approximately 2 hours non-stop.
There is also NO COACHING. All of the mental decisions are yours. At the most elite levels of the game (for that matter, 4.0 USTA ratings mandate a “strategic control of points”), it resembles a chess match by superb athletes.
Soccer is #2. Golf…I love the game…but it’s a game. not a sport. And auto racing…please…
My opinions, of course. 
-Cem
My personal experience would tend to disagree with this and statistics of players in baseball and tennis lend more credence to a baseball being harder to hit than a tennis ball.
As mentioned in the article if you can hit 3 out of 10 pitches on average over the course of a season from a major league pitcher you’ll likely land a multi-million dollar contract. Any tennis player who only returns 3 out of 10 serves wouldn’t be close to the “elite” level of players. In all of baseball it is rare to see more than a half dozen or so .300 hitters in the entire sport.
The article I linked to above says a tennis player has 0.5 seconds to return a serve whereas a baseball player has 0.4 seconds to hit a fast ball. Not a big difference but there nonetheless. Add to that a tennis racket may have as much as 135 sq. in. head size (I know this can vary). A baseball bat may not be more than 2.5 inches in diameter. No matter how you slice it a baseball bat has a considerably smaller sweet spot than a tennis racket does. Finally, I believe a pitcher has more control over what the ball does than a person serving in tennis. That is, the batter does not know if he’s going to get a slider, curve ball, sinker, heater, knuckleball or what have you all of which make the hitter unsure of what he should swing at. A tennis player knows they’re getting a fast ball pretty much every time.
I will allow that tennis players are in much better physical condition than most baseball players but we are looking for what is hardest to do and training to learn to hit a fast ball seems to be among the toughest things in sports and that, per the OP, would be hardest to become elite in.
Well, a good baseball player will have an average of at least .300 (3 hits in 10 at bats). A “hit” has to result in the player getting on base. In real life, a player comes in contact with a pitch far more than 3 in 10 times. A very important difference. A tennis player doesn’t have nine other people actively trying to prevent him from successfully returning a serve.
Absolutely.
Soccer has more participants and more professional leagues than any other sport that I’m aware of. That, in addition to the physical and mental aspects of the game, makes it the hardest to be successful at.
How about motorsports?
If you take Formula One as the apex of its type (not to get into that argument but for open-wheel racing it probably is) there are only 20 seats per season and its incredibly hard to get into it. Unfortunatly money still counts for more than talent.
Yacht racing.
The cost is enormous, and you can’t spend your youth playing pick up games with cheap equipment like you can with almost everything mentioned so far — Formula 1 racing is the only exception I saw. And geography is important because this isn’t something you can do in Miller’s Pond or Dwiggen’s Creek.
Sure you can spend your youth playing pick up games with cheap equipment, for yacht racing. Ever hear of a 420? 420 cm long, olympic standard craft, any decent yacht club has a dozen. And that’s not even counting the old dinghys and various other small craft around your average New England town.
Of course, for F1, there’s go-karts.
No, I’m not joking. Modern karts are the closest thing you’ll find to a F-1 racer… we’re talking over a lateral G on some of them.
What’s the easiest sport to be an elite athlete, and where do I go to sign up?
First, be woman. Then, pick any organized, non-Olympic sport and work at it a couple years, and you very well might become one of the world’s best. (Tennis is probably the most competitive, but even that has limited depth. The LPGA is a complete joke, and the WNBA isn’t much better.)
If you’re a man, your best bet at reaching elite status easily is Murder Ball. The entrance requirement is a bit of a downer, however.
Boxing
All of the endurance training of a runner.
All or most of the strength training of a weightlifter.
Agility training.
Skills training.
Daily beatings with sparring partners to toughen up.
And, on your big day, broken bones & agonizing pain. If you win! Worse, if you don’t.
A retirement that may feature brain damage.
What could be tougher?
I’ll nominate MotoGP racing. Expensive as hell, elitist, requires razor sharp concentration, reflexes, physical conditioning and a a shiny pair of balls to boot.
I am going to approach this from a diffferent angle and say American Football. While I don’t think it takes anything special to throw the ball or cath it or necessarily to block and run, in order to master it you have to learn how to integrate these skills into a system and a team. To be a true elite football player then you need to be able to participate in highly organized level of play almost all along the line, playing catch in the backyard won’t cut it. It of course differs tremendously by position. Quarterback might be one of the hardest field positions in all of sports to master, it’s not something you can realy decide at 20 years old to take up like you can with running.
How about real motorbike road racing? eg: the Northwest 200 and similar races held in Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man TT?
Probably the single toughest sport in the sense that one slight mistake could literally be the difference between life and death.
Please forgive me for an IMHO rather than a debate case:
They are all equally difficult. When one operates on the limit of human ability, whether it is skiing or cup stacking, one is at a level of difficulty that is one ioata short of being too difficult for a human to achieve.
My vote’s for soccer (fütball, however you want to say it), for the sheer enormity of the player pool, and the incredible atheleticism required to excell in what is easily the world’s biggest sport.
Hockey has it beat at several different levels. You have to be able to skate, and it takes more lessons to learn how to skate than run. Then you have to be able to do it all backwards. They you have to be able to do it well. It has all of the physical contact of football, but requires far more speed, agility, mental ability, and stamina (there’s a reason those shifts are two minutes). The hand eye coordination requirements are greater (football vs. hockey puck: puck is smaller, harder, and faster). The level of skill is higher. Nope. American football is tough, but hockey is tougher.
As for the toughest sport, given the qualifications mentioned earlier, I’d have to go with soccer or basketball simply on the size of the potential talent pool alone. The number of possible players vs. the number of available spots is too great, and with the amount of money available as a reward for netting one of those rare spots, the number of people competing will only get larger.
The law of supply and demand applies to athletes too, doesn’t it? I would say the “toughest” one would be one that pays the most. According to this list from last year, the two highest paid athletes in the world are Tiger Woods and Michael Schumacher, making almost 2x as much as the next highest paid athlete.
It does to some extent, but not as simply as you’ve stated. Golfers are well-paid because the sport of golf is one that is enjoyed mainly by the upper class who have plenty of expendable income to blow on the newest celebrity-endorsed product that will improve their game by 0.04%. I’m not sure if racing works the same way, but it seems to me that performance automobiles are also quite lucrative. The highest paid athletes may not be in the hardest sports, but in the sports with the highest equipment profit margin.
An argument could be made for football, but not the one you offered.
Your argument is a compelling refutation of Gangster Octopus’s.
However, the reason it is, in fact, more difficult to become a professional football player than a professional hockey player is due to lack of football infrastructure.
My BIL played hockey in a league when he lived in Texas. Not pro, not minor pro, just a pick-up game type of league. There are such leagues all over the country, and (I imagine) the world.
There is no such thing as a private, pick-up football league. You cannot go play football with a group of buddies on the weekend like you could hockey or baseball/softball. The infrastructure simply doesn’t exist, and even if it did, the risk of injury is far too great for your wives/mothers to let you.
In one interview I saw of an NFL player – possibly Tiki Barber – the player stated that he felt both lucky and priviledged to be able to play the game he loved, which can only be played in the NFL. (Specifically, the rules are noticeably different in other leagues…even in NCAA football.) He went on to say that he couldn’t go out and play a pickup game, or any game. The only way he was aware of that he could put on his helmet and shoulder pads and go play a game was on Sundays in the NFL. That is why being an NFL player is so special.
Anyway, that was his argument, and I tend to buy into it, but (as many of you may already know) I’m a hardcore NFL fanboy, so take my words with a grain of salt. As to the specific points raised, I find I cannot resist:
You’re high if you think hockey has anywhere near the “physical contact” of football. You aren’t allowed to hit a guy who doesn’t have the puck. You can smash into anybody on the football field at any time at full speed if you like, and many player do “like”. (Warren Sapp on that Packer’s OL comes to mind, as well as that brutal Eagles shot on the Giants punter last season.)
But let’s just compare the guys with the puck/ball getting hit, as the rules are different for him in both sports. In football, I can slam the ball carrier directly into the ground, driving my entire body weight into him in the impact. How does that translate to hockey? It doesn’t. Smashing someone into the boards is simply not on the same level.
As for agility, I’m wondering if you actually watch football. Catching a ball and getting your feet inbounds as your body weight is forced out is a feat of agility unparalleled in hockey. Hand-eye coordination is way more advanced/important in hockey, I’ll grant you, but overall agility? No way. I would argue that the OL/DL interaction alone requires more agility than hockey, with the exception of the goalie. Even if you dispute the linemen, how can you possibly argue that hockey requires more agility than the CB/WR battles?
Finally, the mental aspect is simply ridiculous. There are far, far, far, far more unique situations in football than in any other sport. There is no other sport with the depth of strategy/tactics that exist in football. I’ve stated this repeatedly on this board over the last couple years, and nobody has yet refuted it. The best effort so far has been that soccer/hockey do not lend themselves to analysis due to the lack of the “reset” feature of football when the ball is snapped. But then again, that very reset is exactyly the feature that causes football strategy to fractal out into such incredible depth.
All that said, I’ll give you the hand-eye coordination and stamina, and offer no opinion on speed, as I can’t really compare sprinters with speed-skaters. The first two, however, are so clearly more in evidence in hockey than football as to be laughable. Stamina? Football may be the least-stamina-intensive sport there is. Hockey rivals, if not surpasses, soccer in the stamina department. And hockey may even approach baseball when it comes to hand-eye coordination, though I think baseball still has the edge in that respect.
Even so, I don’t think football is the toughest sport to be elite at. Baseball seems more difficult, and golf seems even moreso. Just MHO.
I cede that the following two statements are incorrectly overstated:
Change to quite possibly.
Thi is clearly incorrect, but still it is much closer to being true in football than in hockey. There are rules limiting how and when you can hit eligible receivers and quarterbacks, and in certain cases, pass defenders. (Anyone on defense can defend any route they like, but they have as much right to the ball as offensive receivers.)