Wow - I would expect for shooting sport that fast frames per second
would be the #1 priority - all other things being acceptable if not equal.
But the d1 shoots at 1.5 frames per second - any current Nikon dslr does
at least twice that, and will be like a speed machine.
OTOH - you appear to keep cameras for a long time.  If I was you (and
assuming that the price of a D2xs or D2Hs was out of the question - as
both are fully "pro" and will shoot at 8fps), then the D200, as it is
solidly made with weather sealing, and shoots at a respectable 5fps.
I know that when I shoot sport as an amateur (with my D70), then 3 fps
is frustrating - I would like more speed.  The D80 has about the same
fps as the D70.

The D200 is a very nice camera, I have had one for 10 months. Two
problems you may have, 1) much bigger files so your computer needs some
horse power (fine on my Athlon 2700 at home 1.5g mem, and my Thinkpad
at work, 1.7 mobile Pentium and 1gig). 2) Any of the high pixel Nikons
chew up the lesser Nikon lenses, folks seem fine with the 18-70 and the
18-200. But I really like it with primes and others with high end
zooms, no problems with aledged softness with the upper end lenses.
The 5fps is great for sports, the camera is fast, very short blackout,
my film Cannon FDs seem slow in comparison. The feel of the camera is
just right. With the prices coming down this is one nice camera.

Tom

I'd be scouring ebay for a used d2h body if I was a sports shooter.

cheers adrian www.boliston.co.uk

You will rapidly get disappointed by the D70 and D80.
Small viewfinder, slow(er) AF and metering, lower performance (longer write
times, smaller write buffers).

D200 or D2Hs are what you should be looking for, maybe even a D2Xs if you
have the budget.

I've been shooting a D200 since april and I really like that camera. Used a
D2H once (promo event) and loved it but for the price (3000 Euro at the
time).
Tried the D70s, found the viewfinder to be claustrophobic, the body poorly
balanced when used with heavy or long (read telephoto and pro zoom) lenses,
and the lack of a vertical release worrying (the D200 lacks it as well but
has it on the optional powerpack, the D70 doesn't have one of those).

The D200 + MB-D200 powerpack are likely the most cost effective package that
will give you what you want. Think about $2000 total, maybe a bit less
depending on where you are located, including taxes.
Battery life was originally rumoured to be very short (3-400 shots), but
I've since discovered that while the D200 does use quite a bit more power
when not in use than does my F100, when operating it doesn't use all that
much.
I can normally get 1000 or so shots out of a single charge, if all shot in a
relatively short period (a few days). When letting the camera sit still it
will use 1-2% charge per day.

Hi Dave,
I thought I'd throw my $0.02 in too.

You don't mention lenses. If you have any non-AF lenses that you like
to use, they will work better with the D200 than the others because the
D200 will still meter with them.

I think the shooting speed depends on image size. If you are happy with
low resolution pictures for sports, I think that any of the cameras
will likely meet your needs. For your need to shoot higher resolution
pictures, only you can decide if the extra gains from going to 10MP vs.
6MP will be worth it.

I'm shooting with a D50 and it meets my (strictly amateur) needs. Were
I shooting professionally, I would probably justify a D200.

HTH,
hank