126 replies to this topic

[mweb08]

Why does football just being an American sport exclude it?


And I believe Duffman asked you to back up the Bolt claim.

There has been enough smoke on the Jamaican track team. Then again track is an extremely dirty sport in general.


Obviously, it doesnt exclude it overall. I guess it doesn't necessarily exclude it for one of my top spots but I do deduct points. I'm sure there is some legendary Rugby player that deserves as much consideration as Rice.

So basically no real smoke with Bolt.

You want to consider cricket players too?

If your point is not as many athletes compete in football as some other sports, I can obviously get behind that to a degree.

[bnickle]

Part of it is the pure number of participants but part of it is simply that's it's not a global sport like hockey,basketball,tennis, or Olympic sports.

[mweb08]

Part of it is the pure number of participants but part of it is simply that's it's not a global sport like hockey,basketball,tennis, or Olympic sports.

I'd guess there's a lot more football participants than some other sports that are getting consideration.

[bnickle]

I'd guess there's a lot more football participants than some other sports that are getting consideration.

Sure, but that's not the point. It's a regionalized sport that only Americans are going to care about and play

[mweb08]

I'd guess there's a lot more football participants than some other sports that are getting consideration.

Sure, but that's not the point. It's a regionalized sport that only Americans are going to care about and play

I think the number of athletes is more important than the geographic range.

I also have no issue with the list being American centric.

[BSLChrisStoner]

Best athlete, and best athletic careers very different discussions imo.
 

[RShack]

IMO, everybody should try hard to remember as much of your experience of watching Phelps as you can, because it's like we're getting to watch Babe Ruth.

 

Simone Biles too....

[DuffMan]

Why does football just being an American sport exclude it?

And I believe Duffman asked you to back up the Bolt claim.

I've actually asked him twice previously in this thread to show me some links, articles, anythings and all we get is nothing.  Just another vague statement like the one I quoted below.

 

There has been enough smoke on the Jamaican track team. Then again track is an extremely dirty sport in general.

Obviously, it doesnt exclude it overall. I guess it doesn't necessarily exclude it for one of my top spots but I do deduct points. I'm sure there is some legendary Rugby player that deserves as much consideration as Rice.

[BSLChrisStoner]

ESPN / KVV: What will Michael Phelps be capable of out of water?

http://www.espn.com/...s-life-olympics

[SportsGuy]

Bomani Jones had the argument that Bolt is the greatest Olympian ever because the signature event is the 100 and the 200 may be second.

His thought was because it's such a huge event and because Bolt stands so tall in it, that he is the best Olympian...doesn't mean he thinks he's the best athlete. He thinks there is difference between best Olympian and best athlete.

It's an interesting argument.

[bnickle]

ALL these Phelps/Bolt takes were inevitable and will only intensify once he wins the 200 again. Bolt is the greatest sprinter of all time. Arguably the greatest track athlete of all time. Phelps is the better Olympian. 

[mweb08]

It must be considered that Phelps and swimmers in general have more opportunities for medals than do most other athletes.

I'm not sure exactly how to reconcile that, but just comparing medal totals isn't quite fair.

[bnickle]

It must be considered that Phelps and swimmers in general have more opportunities for medals than do most other athletes.

I'm not sure exactly how to reconcile that, but just comparing medal totals isn't quite fair.

Bolt could do the long jump like Carl Lewis. He could do hurdles. Plenty of things he could do in track. There is a few more relays in swimming but thats it. Phelps is rare to be able to diversify and swim butterfly, IM and freestyle. Most swim athletes focus on one discipline just like track athletes.

[bnickle]

Bolt is no different than Ledecky who is simply a dominant  freestyle swimmer over multiple distances

[BSLChrisStoner]

Number of different discussions here imo... but again, I think there is a big difference in discussion on who are the best athletes and who had the best careers.

 

Also agree with Mike's last point about the medal count.

Where I disagree with Mike, is a previous point he made in this thread... 

 

50 years from now, I might say that Phelps was the best of this era, but if swimmers are smashing his times and records... I won't continue to say he belongs in the discussion of best athlete ever.

 

Yes, it would be plausible (and even realistic imo) to say that in that scenario Phelps would have been that much better in the 2050-2066 range if he had the training benefits of that era.... but still think you'd have to judge him for what he was.

 

I think that vault example Sam posted earlier in this thread is extremely valid. I'm sure Latynina would be closer to the gymnasts today had she lived in this era... but based on what is known, I don't think she can belong in any discussion of the best gymnast ever, just because she was the best of her era.

 

I feel that about all sports and athletes.  Ruth always a big discussion point to me.  Career is insane. You can easily argue his career is one of the best of all-time. I'm not willing to go with saying he would be Matt Stairs, but I don't have much / any confidence he'd be the same player today (even when factoring in the likely better diet, training, etc).

 

Getting this back to Phelps and Bolt....  I'd have to really look at the totality of the events they competed in. Phelps had more attempts at medals, but did he also compete at more distances... both sprint, and distance? I can't hold it against Bolt that he also doesn't run 400, 800, 1500, and marathons...  golds in the 100, and possibly 200 over 3 Olympics is sick.

I guess you'd also have to consider competition. Is there better, deeper competition in the pool or on the track?

Seems awfully hard to choose between the two. Have to think an Olympics Mt. Rushmore on talent and results alone would have a great chance of including both.

 

[bnickle]

There is always going to be a progression of world records.  Ridiculous to look at that to discredit an athlete from years gone by. 100% someone like Phelps would put up whatever the world record time is 20 years from now had he lived in that era

[BSLChrisStoner]

There is always going to be a progression of world records.  Ridiculous to look at that to discredit an athlete from years gone by. 100% someone like Phelps would put up whatever the world record time is 20 years from now had he lived in that era

You think it's 100% that gymnast Latynina would be the equal of Biles? 

 

Hmm, can't agree there. 

 

With Phelps, there isn't judging to contend with in future evaluations. The distances will be the same, his times are what they are.

If his records fall, I'll think he could have competed in future eras... but that becomes just a guess. All I'll feel very comfortable saying is he was the best of his era.

Same thing with Bolt. You aren't going to convince me that if Scholz was transplanted from 1920, that even with the better training of today, he'd be the equal of Bolt.  I definitely agree he'd be 'better' though.
 

 

[mweb08]

It must be considered that Phelps and swimmers in general have more opportunities for medals than do most other athletes.


I'm not sure exactly how to reconcile that, but just comparing medal totals isn't quite fair.

Bolt could do the long jump like Carl Lewis. He could do hurdles. Plenty of things he could do in track. There is a few more relays in swimming but thats it. Phelps is rare to be able to diversify and swim butterfly, IM and freestyle. Most swim athletes focus on one discipline just like track athletes.

I don't think it's fair to compare hurdles and the long jump to being great at other strokes. Being proficient in the multiple strokes seems much more common.

[DuffMan]

You think it's 100% that gymnast Latynina would be the equal of Biles? 

 

Hmm, can't agree there. 

 

With Phelps, there isn't judging to contend with in future evaluations. The distances will be the same, his times are what they are.

If his records fall, I'll think he could have competed in future eras... but that becomes just a guess. All I'll feel very comfortable saying is he was the best of his era.

Same thing with Bolt. You aren't going to convince me that if Scholz was transplanted from 1920, that even with the better training of today, he'd be the equal of Bolt.  I definitely agree he'd be 'better' though.
 

 

This is a really great post.

 

On a related note, I'm currently reading "The Perfect Mile"  It follows Wes Santee, John Landy and Roger Bannister as they race to become the first runner to break four minutes in the mile.  Prior to that it follows runners training habits of earlier in the century and they are laughable to say the least.  Many feared that too much or too fast running could kill you!  So certainly most of these guys who had the WR would run faster today with better training, but how much faster remains to be seen.  That's why I"m a big fan "best of the era".  Takes the guessing out of it a bit.

 

And I can't make a post involving Roger Bannister without posting one of my favorite sports pictures ever!

[SportsGuy]

Bolt just went about 60% to win his heat for the 200.