>6'1
>210lbs
>too short for basketball
>too small for football
>too heavy for soccer
This sucks. Shorties get selected for Olympic lifting, wrestling and gymnastics. Lanklets get selected for basketball, rowing, swimming etc. giant freaks for rugby, football.
6'1 210bs / 6'0 200lbs is like the B- of sports genetics. Not good at anything. It's not a "special" build.
What do
Ice hockey
>>41605625
Rugby
>>41605625
Baseball.
Plus, it's an explosiveness sport, so being good at squats, cleans, and sprints would be beneficialfor it
>>41605687
From an athletic standpoint baseball is a fucking joke. It's a glorified carnival game.
>>41605625
I did a project on this a couple of years ago and saved the data.
6-0 and 200 is pretty much the prototype for an NFL WR or CB, or a Rugby Back. 6-0 is the right height for MLB Infielder but usually they are closer to 180.
6-1 and 210 is perfect for Ice Hockey as >>41605651 said, and is also the prototype for an NFL Strong Safety. 6-1 is also the right height for Bobsled (they're usually 230) or Lacrosse (195) or MLB Outfield (190) or 100m Dash (185), but the 210 is a bit heavy.
>>41605736
Quality post
>>41605625
crossfit, not even joking
>>41605625
6'1 for rowing is fairly ideal. Sure if you're 6'4 or '5 you're gonna be a monster but there's no reason you can't be a good rower at 6'1
>>41606112
he said SPORTS, not training to see who's the best at training
>>41605625
Cricket. 6'1 is a good height for an allrounder
>>41605625
Dude you have the perfect stats to play back three or centre in rugby. Most guys there are right around your stats.