Superficial article on height is simply a tall tale.

[user4]

I found the article linked on the front page to be very superficial:
http://themeliorist.ca/2012/11/height-in-sports/

"Height is not everything in sports; it’s the only thing."

Can a more dubious statement about athleticism be found ?

Where to begin: Does the fact that the last 10 Deca champs being over 5'11" tell us anything at all. It may tell some that if your son is 5'5" better to not pour all your resources into being a track champ, but it does not tell you that being 6'6" is better than being 5'11".

Suggesting that the author is not a deep thinker, would be an understatement.

The data cited; The three recent decathletes: Can we learn anything about the advantage of height in the decathlon from three guys whose average height is under 6'1". Heck I think, Matthias was 6'3" , has the ideal height for the deca gone down in the last 50 years? Of course not but this is the kind of thinking that runs through the article.

Im amazed at the incredible success of short (under 5'9") players in the NFL. Athleticism comes in all shapes and sizes.

[Marlow]

It's from a Canadian STUDENT newspaper. Whadya spect?!

[aaronk]

Can't remember the exact issue, but I remember T&FN had an article (in the 60's or 70's?) about the average height of performers in each event.

You know, like maybe averaging the heights of all the Top Tens or Top 40's or whatever, concluding that the "best" height for, say, a high jumper would be XX or whatever.

Then there's all those lists that show, for high jumpers, the highest people have jumped over their own height. Again, T&FN has had several of those lists.