What is an athlete? How does that differ from an exerciser?
These questions are certainly as much philosophical as practical. I ask from a more pragmatic standpoint, particularly considering my occupation in academics and research. In research it is vital for a word to have a precise definition so that the word can be quantified and differentiated from other similar terms. For example, what is the difference between health, wellness, and fitness? How do the terms physical activity and exercise vary? Does public health differ from community health? For this writing, you might have to take my word for it that these examples have precise, quantifiable meanings that differentiate them from each other. Perhaps a future post can explore the differences.
What interests me is how we differentiate between an athlete, an exerciser, and anything in between. In particular, what do we call someone who finishes his/her athletic career either following high school or college? Is that person still an athlete? Or is s/he “reduced” to an exerciser? Does it matter? (Yes – or course it matters … well, it matters to some people at least.)
The definition of an exerciser is relatively straightforward. An exerciser is simply an individual who engages in exercise. Athletics can usually be included as a subset of exercise (I say “usually” because some, like ESPN, consider, for example, poker playing a sport and by necessary extension, poker players as athletes …. also a topic for another time), so athletes are actually a specialized form of exercisers, probably similar to how you would consider a quarterback a specialized form of a football player. You could also think of it this way: all athletes are exercisers, but not exercisers are athletes (the parallel being that all quarterbacks are football players, but not all football players are quarterbacks).
There is a quantifiable difference between an athlete and an exerciser. While Merriam-Webster, whom I assume is an authority on such things, defines an athlete as one who is “trained or skilled in exercises, sports, or games requiring physical strength, agility, or stamina”, I think professionals who study sport and exercise, such as myself, would also include an important qualifier to that definition: to be considered an athlete, the individual must participate in athletic events, either as an individual (think track, tennis, swimming, or golf) or as part of a team (such as baseball, basketball, etc.). This is an important distinction because without a team to play with/on/for or without an athletic event in which to compete, can this individual still be considered an athlete? Or are they merely someone who is athletic? The origin of the word “athlete” supports my contention that to be defined as an athlete, one must be “actively competing for a prize”. If one is not on a team or engaged in training for an athletic event, are they actively competing for a prize as the origin of the word suggests? (The answer is no.) And if they are not actively competing for a prize, it is my contention that they cannot be considered an athlete. Now, there is probably a little bit of allowable leeway for athletes who are injured or out of season and unable to participate, but at the same time, to be defined as an athlete, one must have more than a tenuous future inclination or intention to participate or compete.
So, to summarize this point, to be defined as an athlete one must be trained or skilled in exercises, sports, or games requiring physical strength, agility, or stamina AND be actively preparing for, or recovering from, an athletic competition with the intention, means, and motivation to reengage in competition in the foreseeable future. I’ll concede that my definition could be viewed as cumbersome, but I think it’s important to be as precise as possible, particularly if engaging in research and attempting to define and operationalize terms and variables.
Which brings me to the heart of this essay: What do we call the individual who is clearly highly athletic because s/he recently completed his/her athletic career OR because s/he maintains a substantially high level of athletic ability and training? An athlete? An exerciser? I maintain that this person cannot be defined as an athlete (for the reasons listed above), but I also submit that this person is probably more “advanced” than a simple exerciser and is therefore quantifiably different and distinct from an exerciser. Therefore, I propose the creation of a third category, called the athleciser.
I’ve been talking about this concept with student in my exercise science program for several years now. The need for such a term became apparent when one of my students, Katie, stopped participating on the University’s track team. She maintained her high level of training and fitness, and the only quantifiable difference between her and the others on the track team was the fact that she was not actively competing on a team. If you compared her level of ability (particularly in running) and fitness, measured by VO2max, body fat percentage, etc., she was at or beyond the level of her counterparts working out in the weight room (her counterparts in this case being exercisers). Another student, Travis, played baseball for the University team and suffered a season-ending injury to his knee, and in his case, it ended his athletic career because he was a senior at the time of the injury. If you measured his muscular strength, he would be comparable to other collegiate athletes and well beyond the norms of any exerciser. So why not just call both of these individuals athletes and be done with it? Well, because of the definition of an athlete – neither were pursuing competition for a prize of some sort. However, they were also, physically-speaking, well beyond what one would consider a typical exerciser. Thus the need for, and the practical use of, the term athleciser.
There is a potential weakness to this term. While I am very comfortable with the “upper-end”, it becomes a little more difficult determining how far an athleciser has to “fall” before s/he becomes a quantifiable exerciser. From a research perspective, one could operationalize the lower-end of the athleciser spectrum as someone who falls more than, say, one standard deviations below a reference athlete in terms of cardiovascular fitness, muscular strength, muscular endurance, body composition, etc. Obviously, this cut-off would need to be exact for the sake of precision, but my major concern at this point is getting the term “athleciser” out there for critique and discussion. We can always revisit the final details at a future time.
Let me summarize what we know about an athleciser: 1) an athleciser must be a former athlete. This is an important point that shouldn’t be overlooked – I contend that one cannot be an athleciser if one has never been an athlete. Think of a definitional continuum that looks like this:
|—————————————————————-|——————————-|————————-|
Exerciser Athleciser Athlete
It only works from right to left. That is, one must “max out” as an athlete and work (or un-work, as it were) his/her way back to the left into the athleciser zone and potentially back into the exerciser zone if s/he drops below the lower-bounds of an athleciser (whatever that lower-bound may actually be). 2) The break or cut-off between athlete and athleciser is the cessation of participating in (or active preparation for) an athletic event (race, meet, match, game, etc.). This will usually be caused by a career ending injury, “retirement” from the sport, and/or quitting the sport. 3) The ability and training of an athleciser is not distinct from that of an athlete. 4) The cut-off between an athleciser and exerciser is bound to both ability and training. While ability might be a bit nebulous, training is measured by strength, endurance, etc. At this point, the precise cut-off is still in question.
So in a nutshell, there it is. I understand that there are weaknesses to my idea, and I welcome comments, suggestions, ideas, and improvements. As someone who loves sport and exercise, my only intention is to help us understand this area in a more complete manner. Many of my students who played college sports and saw their playing days come to an end have embraced their transition from athlete to athleciser. They wear it as a badge of honor, and that’s pretty cool.
Related articles
- Am I an Athlete??? (bethefitmama.com)
Ruizetics 