Track and Field is the best sport there is

Thank you con for your rebuttals. I think I need to clarify something though. In your first round statement of the rules you said "BOP is on both of us, but more on me than con." In your last argument you said "The con has not, to this point, given definitive proof that track and field is not the best sport that exists." Your subtle attempt to shift the burden of proof has not gone unnoticed. I will remind you that I only need to provide reasonable doubt to your claim that track and field is the best sport." Ashton Eaton, is considered the world's fittest athlete." Nope! Your source for this is just a magazine article interviewing him that is titled The World's Fittest Athlete.( http://www.outsideonline.com...)This is not even real evidence. Do you seriously believe magazine articles never hugely dramatize anything? If you Google "world's fittest athlete" this is the top result.( http://www.menshealth.com...)For some reason Mr. Eaton wasn't even in the top ten. Maybe magazine title's aren't the most reliable information.Then you question my sources" Your claim that the top ten lists are "reliable sources" to tell which athletes are the best is false. All three sites (two are actually the same site) are very subjective lists, containing only opinions as basis for argument. No scientific knowledge was lent to either list. "Also false. Two are from the same web site but one is fittest athletes still alive and one is fittest athletes ever. Both were my Bleacher report sources (see my round 2 argument). Then you contradict yourself and say "I will give a small amount of credit to the bleacher report sources, as they are at least written by a sports journalist with some amount of knowledge of sports". You also question my ESPN source "The ESPN report is also somewhat subjective, though much less than the above two reports. Although it was conducted by experts, the rankings were solely based from opinion and no scientific testing. Therefore this cannot be used as scientific proof that boxing is the most difficult sport." As of right now there are not a whole lot of scientific studies available on the most fit athletes. What we do have however is expert analysis of these athletes which I sourced in round 2. And I will remind you again I do not need definitive proof but reasonable doubt on your claim. Oddly enough though you question my sources for not being "scientific" enough but you have failed to provide any scientific lists that prove your side. Perhaps there are none. " Debates may rage over whether LeBron or MJ is better, but Usain Bolt, due to his world record time of 9.58, is the fastest 100 meter runner of all time, definitively. And isn't the point of a sport to test which athlete is better? Track is a definitive test of this."Actually no. The difference is that in basketball it is to see what team is better not athlete. The controversy surrounding the MJ and Lebron controversy has actually gained basketball publicity and could be considered a positive part of the sport. When it comes to track you can't have friendly arguments with your friends about MJ vs Lebron, Brady vs Manning, or Ali vs Frasier. This takes away a huge entertainment aspect of any sport." Now for popularity. While soccer is definitely a very popular sport worldwide, it does not have the appeal of track and field."Appeal to who? You? Most people actually think other sports have more appeal because they are more interesting to watch and play. Please provide evidence that actually shows track and field has more appeal than other sports.You quote an Olympian here " 'The Olympics remain the most compelling search for excellence that exists in sport, and maybe in life itself.'- Dawn Fraser (Australian swimmer, 3-time winner at the Olympics)" Is your reasoning for Olympics being the best because an Olympian said they were? A football player would say football is the best sport. Same for any other sport. This is hardly evidence. The man is not even a track and field athlete.Your source that you used to claim that track and field is the best sport at the Olympics (http://www.topendsports.com...) actually said track and field did not place first. Or second. It was the third most popular! At the Olympics! Did you think I wouldn't read your sources?Your final argument "Lastly, one more argument. All other sports stem from track." Basically your saying that because track and field consists of running and jumping all other sports that also contain running and jumping are knockoffs. Track and Field containing basic athletic functions in no way makes it superior. Because bread products all contain baking powder does this mean baking powder will taste better? No. Just because track and field contains the building blocks of athletic movement it does not mean it is superior. It is practically obsolete.A sport is only as good as the people playing it. Every sport will eventually reach a point where the greatest player ever will set their records and retire. Once the best athletes are gone from a sport it loses some value. Track and Field is reaching this point. Athletes in track and field have reached the pinnacle of human athleticism and there is no going back. Eventually world records will become impossible to beat and track and field will lose entertainment value. Here are several articles detailing how the best athletes have already lived.(http://theweek.com...)(http://io9.com...)(http://www.ncsf.org...)(http://grantland.com...)Summary: All your arguments have been refuted and your rebuttals have been discredited. Your argument does not stand. Track and Field is not the best sport since the time of ancient Greece and it will never be again. Back to you Pro and good luck