This is possible, but seems unlikely to me. You need a ton of training to get to that level, and I doubt someone would go through all of that and then just keep it to themselves. Even if the athlete didn't say anything, the trainer(s) would probably want the credit, so they might notify the public.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I'm just saying though, out of the seven billion people out there, there could be some random beast sprinting 100m in 7 seconds or something just for fun.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I still think you'd need a competitive edge to get to that level, and if you have that competitive edge, wouldn't you want to, you know, compete? You're right, it is possible that someone out there can beat what we know as the world record in any given sport. I just don't think it's very likely.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

There's a reason athletes in developed countries still tend to perform better than invisible athletes in third world countries who may practice longer. It takes lots of nutrition and money to get to that level. Which can only be reached with popularity and sponsorship. Or just be Bruce Wayne.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

You don't think there are people out there who hate/ have no desire to compete but became Olympic standard through love of the sport?

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I guess it depends on the sport. Maybe in something based on accuracy, like archery or shooting, you can become excellent because you want to, but it seems to me like in speed-based sports, you usually get better by trying to outdo someone else.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Doesn't the use of the word 'usually' prove my point?

by Anonymous 11 years ago

No. It means that you can sometimes get better without competing with someone else; it does not mean that you can become the best that way. When it comes to speed-based sports, frankly, no, I don't think you can become Olympic standard without a competitive edge.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

It's completely ridiculous for you to claim that it's impossible for someone to get Olympic standard simply because they don't compete. Not only is it a weak premise but frankly it tells me a lot. I know a guy named Kyle who's a gymnast, the kind of guy who would be a sidney Crosby if people cared about trampoline like hockey. And he trains 5 hours a night every night of the week and declined to go to the Olympics in 2008 and this years and told them to send his back up. To the bare bones of it he just loves the sport and everything about it, showing people he's better than them holds no value in his life. How can you think that in the entire world of 7 billion people there isn't a single one in the exact same boat for the 100, 200, or 400 meter races? For some people the event itself is where their happiness stems.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Yeah John that's kinda what I was thinking in the post. Like out of 7 billion people SOMEONE out there has to have extreme natural ability that we don't know about.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

But Kyle isn't some anonymous nobody. He got two offers to go to the Olympics, meaning people know how good he is. YOU know how good he is. People who care can follow the qualifiers, and know who the top-ranked athletes are, and find out about someone who turns down the chance to go to the Olympics, so the #1 athlete would still become known. And as Anonymous said above, it takes money and nutrition to get to that level, so I am not convinced that there is someone out there, who no one knows about, sprinting around a track faster than Usain Bolt.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Besides that, someone who has had similar training and reached a similar level of skill but //does// enjoy competing would most likely work to become better than the person who doesn't care to compete. So while one strives to be the best he/she can for the love of the sport, another strives to be even better than that person, and that extra push more than likely puts the one who likes to compete ahead of the other. Sorry, Kyle.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I listen to your reasoning and it's incredibly cynical and out there. It HELPS to have money and nutrition, by god are you discounting natural talent as a myth or something? A man from Kenya who has never competed in a single race, but trains the 100 meter 3 hours a day, who had a very rich background of proud parents that fuelled his passion by building him a 100 meter Olympic style track and have helped through nutrition, supplements, and support all the way. This man has every single advantage of usain bolt, but he was also born with a noticeable chunk of extra talent. Through training, support, and love for what he does let's say he ends up getting an officially timed 100 meter of 9.42 seconds. He acknowledges this by smiling and mentioning it to his family that night at dinner. No scouts, no prospects, no attempts at glory. He just had the right resources and he was born better. You don't think there is a single human being of 7000000000 who could possibly fit that description...? How stupid is the premis 'most likely' help your case? Its 'most likely' because the unlikely exceptions are out there. Usain bolt doesn't strive to be better than that nobody... Have you not been

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Paying attention at all? He rests easy at home satisfied with his performance because he doesn't know and has never heard of the Kenyan man whos better than him but doesn't need the glory. He thinks he's the best. There are 7 billion reasons why he's probably wrong. 

by Anonymous 11 years ago

No, he's probably NOT wrong. Do you understand how probability works? One thousandth of a percent of the people on Earth are good enough to be in the Olympics. Odds of someone being good enough and NOT wanting to compete are tiny. That means that the athletes who win gold medals in the Olympics //probably// don't have someone else out there saying, "Heck, I'm faster than him. I shoot better than him. I can lift more than her." I never said it was impossible. The fact of the matter is that it is HIGHLY unlikely that the best athlete is not in the Olympics. And as I said, even if the number one athlete in a sport chose not to go to the Olympics, or not to compete, odds are he or she would gain attention anyway. Natural talent can only take you so far. Your hypothetical situation is preposterous, by the way. Your son says he wants to run, so instead of taking him to an established track and letting him socialize and work with professional trainers, you build him his own personal track? In what world does that make any sense?

by Anonymous 11 years ago

You lost me when you suggested humanity does, ever has, or ever will make sense, and your comment vote speaks for itself. You contradict yourself, you started off ADAMANT that it was impossible, you then changed to highly unlikely, which is *ahem* WHAT I'VE BEEN SAYING THE WHOLE TIME! My entire argument was about as highly unlikely as it is the chance still exists. Chances that a non competitive athlete will be fundamentally better than a competitive athlete? Not great. Chances that there isn't a single athlete in a population of 7000000000 that can be or is currently better than a gold metal athlete but chose not to compete? Also not great. "When it comes to speed-based sports, frankly, no, I don't think you can become Olympic standard without a competitive edge." saying you don't think it's actually possible... Is crap.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

If you look back, you'll see that I didn't start off "adamantly" at all. Until you jumped in, I was actually saying that it was highly unlikely, which is what you claim to have been saying, so I'm not sure why you came on so aggressively. And by the way, two people disagreeing with me doesn't make me wrong. I'm not sure how you think my "comment vote speaks for itself." But somehow I don't think I'm ever going to get through to you anyway.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Then why would you suddenly become adamant? You went from 'highly unlikely' to telling me there's no way the scenarios were possible and telling me my friend Kyle is a worse off athlete because he does the sport for himself. Our argument went a long way with either 1 or no votes on our comments so that means something shifted against you in your last one seeing as 3 people get comment notifications on this besides us. I also couldn't help but notice you just ignored the whole original topic in your comment. Does that mean I won?

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Yes.

by Anonymous 11 years ago