Now that I think about it how is athleticism not considered a parameter of IQ? If you can learn to shoot a basketball 10x faster and with more accuracy than me, isn't your brain learning faster than mine?
It doesn't mean you know a lot or are good at high school maths.
IIRC an ideal IQ test would be something you could take even if you can't read and haven't learned maths and it will tell you something about your general problem solving skills.
And as we all know, people can be excellent problem solvers without being very athletic at all, so mixing that into the score would actually make it less useful.
A good AQ test would hopefully control for this? Though my understanding is that IQ doesn't control very well for practice either. It's a hard problem.
IQ is definitely not a specific thing at all, unless by that you mean “IQ is what gets measured by IQ tests”.
But even if you determine the proper amount of force and launch angle for a given position, that doesn't mean you'll be able to actually execute. Also, of course, basketball isn't played in a vacuum. No defender is going to let you sit there and calculate the proper trajectory or let you shoot the ball unimpeded.
A much better example would be pool - and in fact, pool is often used as a teaching method for basic geometry (angles/reflections/etc) and physics (elastic collisions).
It gets even more interesting once you start adding spin to your shots! Unfortunately, my physics skills are relatively lacking, so most of my pool knowledge/skills don't have much of a mathematical basis.
Even stating the problem precisely (on paper) requires PhD-level physics/math, there are dozens of moving parts involved, the timing of various actions must be perfectly choreographed, and the system is constantly changing.