Montana
Undisputed Greatest Of All Time
- Thread starter Paddy
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
[quote author=kingjulian link=topic=42302.msg1199861#msg1199861 date=1287396186]
[quote author=Rouge Penguin link=topic=42302.msg1199752#msg1199752 date=1287386579]
Senna was better.
[/quote]
Senna definitely was the master of qualifying. But come race-day Prost was better. It was proven in their days at McLaren. The score reads Prost 1-1 Senna, in their two years in the same team, but Prost held an edge on the race day. He was able to string together a consistent number of laps at high pace, while Senna had the edge over him in terms of outright pace over a single lap.
[/quote]
I suppose it's subjective though.
I actually thought Niki Lauda was better than Prost, but that Senna was a superior driver to either.
[quote author=Rouge Penguin link=topic=42302.msg1199752#msg1199752 date=1287386579]
Senna was better.
[/quote]
Senna definitely was the master of qualifying. But come race-day Prost was better. It was proven in their days at McLaren. The score reads Prost 1-1 Senna, in their two years in the same team, but Prost held an edge on the race day. He was able to string together a consistent number of laps at high pace, while Senna had the edge over him in terms of outright pace over a single lap.
[/quote]
I suppose it's subjective though.
I actually thought Niki Lauda was better than Prost, but that Senna was a superior driver to either.
Most of these aren't undisputed though, as people are disputing them 
[quote author=SaintGeorge67 link=topic=42302.msg1199933#msg1199933 date=1287404042]
Most of these aren't undisputed though, as people are disputing them
[/quote]
Heh ya...
Also, I'm not going to consider Track&Field athletics or swimming for this thread, because those records always get broken as Human Beings evolve over time.
There was a time when people said sub 10 second 100 meter run would result in heart failure. Now people say, Usain Bolt could probably do it in sub 9 second mark. His record too will be broken, and it's just a question of when. So i can't really say Usain Bolt is the undisputed champion of running. He is the best runner at present. Carl Lewis was at some point. May be Carl achieved what was humanly possible at that time, and we have just evolved a bit further since then....who knows? How can we say Usain Bolt was better than Carl Lewis?
Most of these aren't undisputed though, as people are disputing them
[/quote]
Heh ya...
Also, I'm not going to consider Track&Field athletics or swimming for this thread, because those records always get broken as Human Beings evolve over time.
There was a time when people said sub 10 second 100 meter run would result in heart failure. Now people say, Usain Bolt could probably do it in sub 9 second mark. His record too will be broken, and it's just a question of when. So i can't really say Usain Bolt is the undisputed champion of running. He is the best runner at present. Carl Lewis was at some point. May be Carl achieved what was humanly possible at that time, and we have just evolved a bit further since then....who knows? How can we say Usain Bolt was better than Carl Lewis?
[quote author=Asim link=topic=42302.msg1200162#msg1200162 date=1287424433]
Its easy to say Usain is better than Carl Lewis, cos he is miles faster.
[/quote]
Greatest doesnt mean 'better' though.
Of course Bolt is faster than Lewis, he's even faster than Ben Johnson on steroids.
Its easy to say Usain is better than Carl Lewis, cos he is miles faster.
[/quote]
Greatest doesnt mean 'better' though.
Of course Bolt is faster than Lewis, he's even faster than Ben Johnson on steroids.
For me, you can't really say Bolt is better than Lewis or that Lewis was better than Owens etc....
For every athlete the challenge is to raise to the bar set by people before him. All the records WILL be broken. It's just the way our civilization has worked. All these guys did that, and did that with aplomb.
There is a physical as well as a psychological barrier to this running fast and jumping long and high business. Once you know the mark, you are going to try your best to beat it, but you will not go too far above and beyond it.
Anyway coming back to the topic...
Can Chess be considered a sport?
If so - Gary Kasparov - legend
For every athlete the challenge is to raise to the bar set by people before him. All the records WILL be broken. It's just the way our civilization has worked. All these guys did that, and did that with aplomb.
There is a physical as well as a psychological barrier to this running fast and jumping long and high business. Once you know the mark, you are going to try your best to beat it, but you will not go too far above and beyond it.
Anyway coming back to the topic...
Can Chess be considered a sport?
If so - Gary Kasparov - legend
[quote author=Herr Onceared link=topic=42302.msg1200165#msg1200165 date=1287424810]
Senna was the fastest driver of all time but not the best.
Schumacher is the best F1 driver of all time and only a fucking **** would argue.
[/quote]
Yep. There is pace and then there is race craft. In Senna and Prost we saw two stalwarts who were unbelievably good in one aspect, and pretty strong in the other.
A more extreme case to make that point - a driver with amazing pace over a lap but not the race craft is Jarno Trulli. He could always qualify a shit car way above its limit, but he almost always went backwards in a race or managed to form the Trulli train in tracks where overtaking was hard.
Schumacher was freakishly strong in both aspects. That is also why he got the results he did.
Senna was the fastest driver of all time but not the best.
Schumacher is the best F1 driver of all time and only a fucking **** would argue.
[/quote]
Yep. There is pace and then there is race craft. In Senna and Prost we saw two stalwarts who were unbelievably good in one aspect, and pretty strong in the other.
A more extreme case to make that point - a driver with amazing pace over a lap but not the race craft is Jarno Trulli. He could always qualify a shit car way above its limit, but he almost always went backwards in a race or managed to form the Trulli train in tracks where overtaking was hard.
Schumacher was freakishly strong in both aspects. That is also why he got the results he did.
[quote author=monsieurdantes link=topic=42302.msg1199661#msg1199661 date=1287356424]
[quote author=Asim link=topic=42302.msg1199656#msg1199656 date=1287355874]
[quote author=monsieurdantes link=topic=42302.msg1199652#msg1199652 date=1287355533]
don bradman
[/quote]
Im sure Sachin would have a little something to say about that!
[/quote]
its similar to comparing ryan giggs and george best. whatever you want to argue or whatever reasons you come up with, best and bradman are in different leagues to giggs and tendulkar.
[/quote]
What a load of shit.
[quote author=Asim link=topic=42302.msg1199656#msg1199656 date=1287355874]
[quote author=monsieurdantes link=topic=42302.msg1199652#msg1199652 date=1287355533]
don bradman
[/quote]
Im sure Sachin would have a little something to say about that!
[/quote]
its similar to comparing ryan giggs and george best. whatever you want to argue or whatever reasons you come up with, best and bradman are in different leagues to giggs and tendulkar.
[/quote]
What a load of shit.
[quote author=kingjulian link=topic=42302.msg1200180#msg1200180 date=1287427261]
For me, you can't really say Bolt is better than Lewis or that Lewis was better than Owens etc....
For every athlete the challenge is to raise to the bar set by people before him. All the records WILL be broken. It's just the way our civilization has worked. All these guys did that, and did that with aplomb.
There is a physical as well as a psychological barrier to this running fast and jumping long and high business. Once you know the mark, you are going to try your best to beat it, but you will not go too far above and beyond it.
[/quote]
That last point doesn't really stand up with Bolt though, does it?
Whilst athletes have to primarily judged in their contemporary context, I think Bolt merits broadening that criteria to a historical aspect. From the time Jim Hines broke the world record (hand clocked) in 1965 to Asafa Powell smashing it in Rieti in 2007, the record dropped a combined 0.21 seconds. That was in 42 years.
Since then Bolt has lowered it a further 0.16 seconds. He basically accounts for three or four generations of sprinters all by himself. In Berlin he took over a tenth of a second off the record in one run.
Even if you narrow the field down to what we would consider modern sprinting, starting with Calvin Smith, the record falls on average 0.015 seconds every time it is broken. Bolt took 0.11 off it in Berlin.
What he has done is unprecedented in his sport. He doesn't just run fast. He devastated the natural progression of the 100m record in an almost incomprehensible fashion. No other human has run within a tenth of a second of him. That's basically twenty years of running right there. And that's before we get to the 200m, where only one other man has come within half a second of him. It's not difficult to believe that sprinters starting out now could be retired before Bolt's records are beaten. And that's assuming he's not going to lower them even further (he genuinely believes he will clock in the nine fours in the 100m).
He's a phenomenon. In the future someone will undoubtedly run faster than him, but I seriously doubt anyone will ever again destroy the benchmarks in the manner he has.
For me, you can't really say Bolt is better than Lewis or that Lewis was better than Owens etc....
For every athlete the challenge is to raise to the bar set by people before him. All the records WILL be broken. It's just the way our civilization has worked. All these guys did that, and did that with aplomb.
There is a physical as well as a psychological barrier to this running fast and jumping long and high business. Once you know the mark, you are going to try your best to beat it, but you will not go too far above and beyond it.
[/quote]
That last point doesn't really stand up with Bolt though, does it?
Whilst athletes have to primarily judged in their contemporary context, I think Bolt merits broadening that criteria to a historical aspect. From the time Jim Hines broke the world record (hand clocked) in 1965 to Asafa Powell smashing it in Rieti in 2007, the record dropped a combined 0.21 seconds. That was in 42 years.
Since then Bolt has lowered it a further 0.16 seconds. He basically accounts for three or four generations of sprinters all by himself. In Berlin he took over a tenth of a second off the record in one run.
Even if you narrow the field down to what we would consider modern sprinting, starting with Calvin Smith, the record falls on average 0.015 seconds every time it is broken. Bolt took 0.11 off it in Berlin.
What he has done is unprecedented in his sport. He doesn't just run fast. He devastated the natural progression of the 100m record in an almost incomprehensible fashion. No other human has run within a tenth of a second of him. That's basically twenty years of running right there. And that's before we get to the 200m, where only one other man has come within half a second of him. It's not difficult to believe that sprinters starting out now could be retired before Bolt's records are beaten. And that's assuming he's not going to lower them even further (he genuinely believes he will clock in the nine fours in the 100m).
He's a phenomenon. In the future someone will undoubtedly run faster than him, but I seriously doubt anyone will ever again destroy the benchmarks in the manner he has.
And he did it with his shoelaces undone, and slowing down about half way through
Breaking the record by a big margin in athletics has happened before. It always does when there or two or three athletes who are good enough to break the world record, because it calls for the extraordinary. Gay, Powell and Bolt were all runners who were capable of breaking the record by a good margin.
Eg: Bob Beamon's record of jumping over 29 feet. Jesse Owens' record of just over 26 feet had stood for nearly 30 years. Then two athletes came-along and absolutely shattered it. Ralph Boston and Bob Beamon. Beating the record by nearly 3 feet (thats about 100 CM - 1 Meter) is a bigger margin than what Bolt has managed in the 100m sprint.
People thought Bob Beamon's record will never be beaten. Carl Lewis pissed about in his 20s just doing what was needed to win the gold. But when Powell, and that Russian jumper came along, Lewis surpassed Beamon's record. He was nearly in his 30s then. Unlucky for him, Powell bettered him in the same meet and in his very next jump. In the end, the unsurmountable Bob Beamon record stood for lesser years than Jesse Owens' 26 feet record, that is very easily surpassed in present day.
Bolt's record will also be broken, and if there are two or three men around capable of beating Bolt's mark at the same meet, i would expect it to fall by a big enough margin too. That would not take any thing away from what Bolt achieved and they can't be considered greater Athletes than Bolt. Better may be, but they were better because Bolt had set the bar high and challenged them to be better. So the improvement is a product of time, rather than ability.
Eg: Bob Beamon's record of jumping over 29 feet. Jesse Owens' record of just over 26 feet had stood for nearly 30 years. Then two athletes came-along and absolutely shattered it. Ralph Boston and Bob Beamon. Beating the record by nearly 3 feet (thats about 100 CM - 1 Meter) is a bigger margin than what Bolt has managed in the 100m sprint.
People thought Bob Beamon's record will never be beaten. Carl Lewis pissed about in his 20s just doing what was needed to win the gold. But when Powell, and that Russian jumper came along, Lewis surpassed Beamon's record. He was nearly in his 30s then. Unlucky for him, Powell bettered him in the same meet and in his very next jump. In the end, the unsurmountable Bob Beamon record stood for lesser years than Jesse Owens' 26 feet record, that is very easily surpassed in present day.
Bolt's record will also be broken, and if there are two or three men around capable of beating Bolt's mark at the same meet, i would expect it to fall by a big enough margin too. That would not take any thing away from what Bolt achieved and they can't be considered greater Athletes than Bolt. Better may be, but they were better because Bolt had set the bar high and challenged them to be better. So the improvement is a product of time, rather than ability.
[quote author=DHSC link=topic=42302.msg1200514#msg1200514 date=1287469498]
Ric Flair.
[/quote]
Lol we are talking about sports...not staged drama.
Ric Flair.
[/quote]
Lol we are talking about sports...not staged drama.
[quote author=Avmenon link=topic=42302.msg1200520#msg1200520 date=1287470469]
Exactly.
Besides, it's Hulk Hogan.
[/quote]Hulk Hogan was a shite mat wrestler. All big guys are. Thats why they ham up the charecterization on bigger dudes. There are exceptions of course like The Rock who moved beautifully for a big guy, but almost all the finest actual wrestlers are smaller than your hogan, taker, batista types.
If pushed to name a top 5 (i do hate making lists) i would probably say the best are Guerrero, Flair, Michaels, Benoit and Angle, who are (or were) the best in the business and as well as being unbelievable athletes, they were great showmen, could all do heel or babyface with great results and could all do almost any move you could care to name.
Eddie Guerrero stands for me as the goat though. Amazing wrestler who held the crowd in the palm of his hand.
Exactly.
Besides, it's Hulk Hogan.
[/quote]Hulk Hogan was a shite mat wrestler. All big guys are. Thats why they ham up the charecterization on bigger dudes. There are exceptions of course like The Rock who moved beautifully for a big guy, but almost all the finest actual wrestlers are smaller than your hogan, taker, batista types.
If pushed to name a top 5 (i do hate making lists) i would probably say the best are Guerrero, Flair, Michaels, Benoit and Angle, who are (or were) the best in the business and as well as being unbelievable athletes, they were great showmen, could all do heel or babyface with great results and could all do almost any move you could care to name.
Eddie Guerrero stands for me as the goat though. Amazing wrestler who held the crowd in the palm of his hand.
[quote author=kingjulian link=topic=42302.msg1200180#msg1200180 date=1287427261]
There is a physical as well as a psychological barrier to this running fast and jumping long and high business. Once you know the mark, you are going to try your best to beat it, but you will not go too far above and beyond it.
[/quote]
[quote author=kingjulian link=topic=42302.msg1200499#msg1200499 date=1287463114]
Breaking the record by a big margin in athletics has happened before. It always does when there or two or three athletes who are good enough to break the world record, because it calls for the extraordinary.[/quote]
offers KJ his cake so he can have it and eat it too.
[quote author=kingjulian link=topic=42302.msg1200499#msg1200499 date=1287463114]
Eg: Bob Beamon's record of jumping over 29 feet. Jesse Owens' record of just over 26 feet had stood for nearly 30 years. Then two athletes came-along and absolutely shattered it. Ralph Boston and Bob Beamon. Beating the record by nearly 3 feet (thats about 100 CM - 1 Meter) is a bigger margin than what Bolt has managed in the 100m sprint.
People thought Bob Beamon's record will never be beaten. Carl Lewis pissed about in his 20s just doing what was needed to win the gold. But when Powell, and that Russian jumper came along, Lewis surpassed Beamon's record. He was nearly in his 30s then. Unlucky for him, Powell bettered him in the same meet and in his very next jump. In the end, the unsurmountable Bob Beamon record stood for lesser years than Jesse Owens' 26 feet record, that is very easily surpassed in present day.
Bolt's record will also be broken, and if there are two or three men around capable of beating Bolt's mark at the same meet, i would expect it to fall by a big enough margin too. That would not take any thing away from what Bolt achieved and they can't be considered greater Athletes than Bolt. Better may be, but they were better because Bolt had set the bar high and challenged them to be better. So the improvement is a product of time, rather than ability.
[/quote]
Of course, I agree with a lot of that. But as you point out, large margin breakings of the long jump record were not unprecedented. Boston and Ter-Ovanesyan destroyed Owens's record, and then Beamon completely destroyed theirs (although altitude obviously comes into play there).
I don't think, either as a discipline or as a competitive field, the long jump can be compared to the 100m sprint though. Far more athletes take part in the sprints, and in the modern era (i.e. when training and support facilities have taken advantage of cutting edge techniques and technology - say the last 20 years) a standard natural progression of times can be clearly established. The long jump is now almost a fringe event. The additional effort of sprint-specialising in very deep modern fields means that sprinters rarely double up as jumpers anymore, and there are less specialised jumpers (perhaps a result of it not being a glamour event anymore, and of the kind of athletes who might have previously chosen to specialise in jumping - sprinters who were quick but not quite quick enough - nowadays being attracted to the riches of other sports) which means it is a difficult discipline to historically evaluate. If you remove jumps at Mexico City, El Paso, and Darachichag (all 1000+m above sea level) then there have only been three jumps over 8.70 since Powell set his record. It is a discipline given to freak results simply because there is no standard 'baseline' established by continuous strong competition. By comparison, the ten fastest 100m sprinters ever all clocked their PBs within the last 20 years, and top four are running right now.
I believe where Bolt stands out is that he he not only competes in probably the most hotly contested track discipline, and the one with the finest margins due to its obvious time limits, but he broke the existing records in a way that had never been done before in the 100m. Not even close. He is currently competing with two other men who are faster than anyone else ever, and yet they cannot come within a tenth of a second of him. Like you said, when Powell's record shattered the existing one he was being pushed by the other great jumper in history, Lewis.
Even with other great sprinters, Bolt is still a full tenth of a second faster than anyone else. No other 100m athlete in modern athletics has held such an advantage. And this is just looking at the raw data. There are other things that make Bolt remarkable. He is 6'5'', which makes no sense for a sprinter. His technique is a complete mess, with his thighs often 'crossing' over himself, meaning he is incredibly inefficient in how he uses his own power.
I think the only other athlete who comes close to him is Michael Johnson, in terms of dominating his field, and he was remarkable because he perfected his technique, changing the way people thought about running. And yet Bolt has smashed his remarkable record too. It's scary to think what he might do if his technique can be altered to improve his speed even more.
Regardless of us coming to differing conclusions, good discussion.
There is a physical as well as a psychological barrier to this running fast and jumping long and high business. Once you know the mark, you are going to try your best to beat it, but you will not go too far above and beyond it.
[/quote]
[quote author=kingjulian link=topic=42302.msg1200499#msg1200499 date=1287463114]
Breaking the record by a big margin in athletics has happened before. It always does when there or two or three athletes who are good enough to break the world record, because it calls for the extraordinary.[/quote]
offers KJ his cake so he can have it and eat it too.
[quote author=kingjulian link=topic=42302.msg1200499#msg1200499 date=1287463114]
Eg: Bob Beamon's record of jumping over 29 feet. Jesse Owens' record of just over 26 feet had stood for nearly 30 years. Then two athletes came-along and absolutely shattered it. Ralph Boston and Bob Beamon. Beating the record by nearly 3 feet (thats about 100 CM - 1 Meter) is a bigger margin than what Bolt has managed in the 100m sprint.
People thought Bob Beamon's record will never be beaten. Carl Lewis pissed about in his 20s just doing what was needed to win the gold. But when Powell, and that Russian jumper came along, Lewis surpassed Beamon's record. He was nearly in his 30s then. Unlucky for him, Powell bettered him in the same meet and in his very next jump. In the end, the unsurmountable Bob Beamon record stood for lesser years than Jesse Owens' 26 feet record, that is very easily surpassed in present day.
Bolt's record will also be broken, and if there are two or three men around capable of beating Bolt's mark at the same meet, i would expect it to fall by a big enough margin too. That would not take any thing away from what Bolt achieved and they can't be considered greater Athletes than Bolt. Better may be, but they were better because Bolt had set the bar high and challenged them to be better. So the improvement is a product of time, rather than ability.
[/quote]
Of course, I agree with a lot of that. But as you point out, large margin breakings of the long jump record were not unprecedented. Boston and Ter-Ovanesyan destroyed Owens's record, and then Beamon completely destroyed theirs (although altitude obviously comes into play there).
I don't think, either as a discipline or as a competitive field, the long jump can be compared to the 100m sprint though. Far more athletes take part in the sprints, and in the modern era (i.e. when training and support facilities have taken advantage of cutting edge techniques and technology - say the last 20 years) a standard natural progression of times can be clearly established. The long jump is now almost a fringe event. The additional effort of sprint-specialising in very deep modern fields means that sprinters rarely double up as jumpers anymore, and there are less specialised jumpers (perhaps a result of it not being a glamour event anymore, and of the kind of athletes who might have previously chosen to specialise in jumping - sprinters who were quick but not quite quick enough - nowadays being attracted to the riches of other sports) which means it is a difficult discipline to historically evaluate. If you remove jumps at Mexico City, El Paso, and Darachichag (all 1000+m above sea level) then there have only been three jumps over 8.70 since Powell set his record. It is a discipline given to freak results simply because there is no standard 'baseline' established by continuous strong competition. By comparison, the ten fastest 100m sprinters ever all clocked their PBs within the last 20 years, and top four are running right now.
I believe where Bolt stands out is that he he not only competes in probably the most hotly contested track discipline, and the one with the finest margins due to its obvious time limits, but he broke the existing records in a way that had never been done before in the 100m. Not even close. He is currently competing with two other men who are faster than anyone else ever, and yet they cannot come within a tenth of a second of him. Like you said, when Powell's record shattered the existing one he was being pushed by the other great jumper in history, Lewis.
Even with other great sprinters, Bolt is still a full tenth of a second faster than anyone else. No other 100m athlete in modern athletics has held such an advantage. And this is just looking at the raw data. There are other things that make Bolt remarkable. He is 6'5'', which makes no sense for a sprinter. His technique is a complete mess, with his thighs often 'crossing' over himself, meaning he is incredibly inefficient in how he uses his own power.
I think the only other athlete who comes close to him is Michael Johnson, in terms of dominating his field, and he was remarkable because he perfected his technique, changing the way people thought about running. And yet Bolt has smashed his remarkable record too. It's scary to think what he might do if his technique can be altered to improve his speed even more.
Regardless of us coming to differing conclusions, good discussion.
For what he did with the crowd, I thought Stone Cold was phenomenal ...
But Oncey's list is rather accurate I think - though I never really liked Eddie Guerrero.
Rey Mesterio was great.
But Oncey's list is rather accurate I think - though I never really liked Eddie Guerrero.
Rey Mesterio was great.
[quote author=LeTallecWiz link=topic=42302.msg1200887#msg1200887 date=1287499775]
For what he did with the crowd, I thought Stone Cold was phenomenal ...
But Oncey's list is rather accurate I think - though I never really liked Eddie Guerrero.
Rey Mesterio was great.
[/quote]Stone Cold, Mankind, Kane etc are a direct decendant of your Tugboat, Ultimate warrior, Hulk Hogan etc Franchise superstars who may not have all the in ring savvy but ship t-shirts. American wrestling has always been more about commercialism than craft and thats why there have always been John Cena's and there always will be, and thats fine but if you go out to mexico or Japan the pro wrestling circuit is a million miles ahead when it comes to actual capabilities. They are still showmen out there but the mastery of the gymnastic and athletic arts are there for all to see. It was in fact the introduction of 4 wrestlers who learned their craft in the far east and Mexico (Benoit, Saturn, Guerrero and Dean Malenko) who finally showed Vince that franchise superstars neednt be huge lumbering giants. The night Guerrero and Benoit won the wwe and world heavyweight titles was the wwe's best ever moment and paved the way for many stars to follow like Mysterio, Kennedy, Punk etc
There will always be a Stone cold but thankfully true wrestlers are now given a chance to showcase their talents and long may it continue.
For what he did with the crowd, I thought Stone Cold was phenomenal ...
But Oncey's list is rather accurate I think - though I never really liked Eddie Guerrero.
Rey Mesterio was great.
[/quote]Stone Cold, Mankind, Kane etc are a direct decendant of your Tugboat, Ultimate warrior, Hulk Hogan etc Franchise superstars who may not have all the in ring savvy but ship t-shirts. American wrestling has always been more about commercialism than craft and thats why there have always been John Cena's and there always will be, and thats fine but if you go out to mexico or Japan the pro wrestling circuit is a million miles ahead when it comes to actual capabilities. They are still showmen out there but the mastery of the gymnastic and athletic arts are there for all to see. It was in fact the introduction of 4 wrestlers who learned their craft in the far east and Mexico (Benoit, Saturn, Guerrero and Dean Malenko) who finally showed Vince that franchise superstars neednt be huge lumbering giants. The night Guerrero and Benoit won the wwe and world heavyweight titles was the wwe's best ever moment and paved the way for many stars to follow like Mysterio, Kennedy, Punk etc
There will always be a Stone cold but thankfully true wrestlers are now given a chance to showcase their talents and long may it continue.
Just to make it clear, i was not contradicting myself.
I used the below as a qualifying statement to explain why there are instances where Records do get broken by a big margin.
"It always does when there or two or three athletes who are good enough to break the world record, because it calls for the extraordinary."
I should have said "It only ever happens when..." instead of "It always....".
Anyway...
Even taking sprinting alone. There have been several instances when runners have been at least a tenth to the good of other sprinters in their era. As you said Michael Johnson was a good example. He went unchallenged for a very long time in 200 and 400 meter. There are also other instances when someone didn't manage to get over the W.R but was still close to a tenth better than his competitors consistently. So if you look at it that way, it is a combination of the desire to get the world record and also beat the competition that has got the 9.58 WR for Bolt. The tenth, that Bolt has over Gay, Powell etc, is not an entirely new phenomena. All the great athletes we talk about, had that edge.
Carl Lewis again is a good example. His desire was to match Jesse Owens and get 4 Gold in one Olympic meet. He is on record stating that was a bigger desire than getting the WR in long jump, which he was certain he would get some day without any altitude or wind assistance. But when he was at his absolute peak, the long-jump competition was dire and he chose just to do one valid jump and get the gold and save himself for the other events (100m, 200m an 4x100m sprint - he had the world record on all three at some point or the other). So with out the desire to beat the mark and also the competition to push him to the limit - he was not beating the record. But when both came around we saw the record get shattered. In my opinion, same has just happened/still happening in the sprinting world, and we are lucky to be seeing the fireworks.
I will still stick to my idea that each one of them has been great, and it will be unfair to rank them just based on time they recorded in different era. Because the W.R mark they set is as much a product of time, as it a product of a desire to beat the competition. For me, Jesse Owens is just as great an athlete as Bolt.
I will give a skip to the 6'5 comment. That's another discussion where i have a lot of opinion. I would just say, Usain Bolt will not be the last freakishly tall athlete, and we will start to see more of them in track and field events and also in other sports.
I used the below as a qualifying statement to explain why there are instances where Records do get broken by a big margin.
"It always does when there or two or three athletes who are good enough to break the world record, because it calls for the extraordinary."
I should have said "It only ever happens when..." instead of "It always....".
Anyway...
Even taking sprinting alone. There have been several instances when runners have been at least a tenth to the good of other sprinters in their era. As you said Michael Johnson was a good example. He went unchallenged for a very long time in 200 and 400 meter. There are also other instances when someone didn't manage to get over the W.R but was still close to a tenth better than his competitors consistently. So if you look at it that way, it is a combination of the desire to get the world record and also beat the competition that has got the 9.58 WR for Bolt. The tenth, that Bolt has over Gay, Powell etc, is not an entirely new phenomena. All the great athletes we talk about, had that edge.
Carl Lewis again is a good example. His desire was to match Jesse Owens and get 4 Gold in one Olympic meet. He is on record stating that was a bigger desire than getting the WR in long jump, which he was certain he would get some day without any altitude or wind assistance. But when he was at his absolute peak, the long-jump competition was dire and he chose just to do one valid jump and get the gold and save himself for the other events (100m, 200m an 4x100m sprint - he had the world record on all three at some point or the other). So with out the desire to beat the mark and also the competition to push him to the limit - he was not beating the record. But when both came around we saw the record get shattered. In my opinion, same has just happened/still happening in the sprinting world, and we are lucky to be seeing the fireworks.
I will still stick to my idea that each one of them has been great, and it will be unfair to rank them just based on time they recorded in different era. Because the W.R mark they set is as much a product of time, as it a product of a desire to beat the competition. For me, Jesse Owens is just as great an athlete as Bolt.
I will give a skip to the 6'5 comment. That's another discussion where i have a lot of opinion. I would just say, Usain Bolt will not be the last freakishly tall athlete, and we will start to see more of them in track and field events and also in other sports.
[quote author=DHSC link=topic=42302.msg1200514#msg1200514 date=1287469498]
Ric Flair.
[/quote]
Fucking right, no one else comes close, including the hulkster, and his screwed up family.
Ric Flair.
[/quote]
Fucking right, no one else comes close, including the hulkster, and his screwed up family.