Which would garner more of your time, an intellect or athlete?

[Atheus]

Originally posted by: SpecialEd

Originally posted by: James3shin
Lets say you had the opportunity to meet either MJ (or any other athlete of your choice) or Stephen Hawking (or any intellect of your choice), which would you pick? I personally feel that most super star athletes are one in a billion, whereas geniuses are one in a million. I'd go chill with MJ.

If super star athletes are one in a billion, that would mean there are less than 7 in the entire world.

^ good point.

I hereby change the main point of my argument from the Kobe analogy to the people in the world thing.

 

[James3shin]

Originally posted by: Atheus

Originally posted by: SpecialEd

Originally posted by: James3shin
Lets say you had the opportunity to meet either MJ (or any other athlete of your choice) or Stephen Hawking (or any intellect of your choice), which would you pick? I personally feel that most super star athletes are one in a billion, whereas geniuses are one in a million. I'd go chill with MJ.

If super star athletes are one in a billion, that would mean there are less than 7 in the entire world.

^ good point.

I hereby change the main point of my argument from the Kobe analogy to the people in the world thing.

hahhaahha...I made that ratio just as a means of scale. I should have just said that superstar athletes are more rare then intellects.

 

[GeekDrew]

I'd rather have a conversation with *any person* that is more intelligent and mature than myself (yes, there are millions) than with anyone known only for being an athlete.

 

[SWScorch]

I think an intellect would result in more interesting conversation and open my eyes to new ideas, but then again, most of it would be over my head. On the other hand, if I could meet Paul Tergat or Haile Gebrselassie or Alan Webb I could learn about their training and try to incorporate their ideas into my training.