If each generation of men keeps getting weaker, than how does each generation of men outperform the last in athletic competition?

[Deserter3]

[Chazmatazz269]

Athletic prowess is far from the ultimate indication of strength. Our knowledge of anatomy, physiology, conditioning, peak training and ideal rest periods has come a long way in order to have athletes performing at or near peak, but usually only under ideal conditions. Take the best basketball player in the world and throw him on a snowy football field, and a high skool athlete will probably outperform him. That narrow bandwidth for “strength” is actually a weakness. This is why cross training has become so popular and why so many athletes are venturing into very different sports to prove themselves. Take the best cross trained athletes in the world and throw them into 1400 acres of wilderness without supplies and how long do you think they’ll last? If you can’t survive, you’re not strong at all. Survival is the bare minimum indicator for strength, and most people wouldn’t last a month without internet in the middle of the city.
Yes, every generation is weaker than the last and it will continue to be this way until some major cataclysmic events that force people to tap into survival mechanisms that they’ve long lost touch with.

[Deserter3]

You're still asserting without evidence

[Deserter3]

Even under non ideal conditions men outperform women, so if each gen of men is weaker why would conditioning matter?

[LazerBean]

Better education on how the body works and nutrition. People are motivated to break records. But also, it's the average man that has gotten weaker and has lower T. So that doesn't necessarily apply to the top of the top

[Deserter3]

Shouldn't it? High iq people from China are smarter than high iq people from Africa due to a smarter population

[LazerBean]

Right, but it's just not the same case with Americans. The average American man 50 years ago was more healthy than the average American man today, even if the top 5% today beats the top 5% from the past.

[Deserter3]

You're not understanding, if the top 5% today beats the top 5% from generations before than the same applies, at least in terms of potential for the current generation of average people.

[Deserter3]

A 6'0 tall man is more common than a 6'0 woman because the former doesn't deviate as much from the average.

[LazerBean]

You are right about the terms of potential, however that does not always translate out to averages. The gap between the average man and the men who meet the highest potential is much larger today than it was before. Also the 6-ft tall example doesn't work here because 6 ft tall is still within normal limits for a man, but not for a woman.

[dudeinohio]

There will always be that small percentage that excell athletically. They are the exception to the rule.