• You may have to login or register before you can post and view our exclusive members only forums.
    To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Who's better

Forums Unread posts
LeTallecWiz

LeTallecWiz

Doos
Moderator
Thought of this after the comment to Oncey re: Swann vs Stallworth.

So, pick a sport and players who played similar positions, or were of 'similar status' in their respective leagues and we can debate who was better:

I'll start with a doozy: Bird or Magic?
 
[quote author=DHSC link=topic=26559.msg660823#msg660823 date=1220000613]
Magic of course. 😉

[/quote]

and why?

I think they both had fantastic supporting casts (McHale, Parrish, Ainge etc vs Kareem, Worthy) but I feel that Bird got far more out of his talent than Magic ... I think if I had to build a team, I'd take Magic b/c he's a point guard and you want a leader like that to build a team around.
 
[quote author=LeTallecWiz link=topic=26559.msg660836#msg660836 date=1220001511]
[quote author=DHSC link=topic=26559.msg660823#msg660823 date=1220000613]
Magic of course. 😉

[/quote]

and why?

I think they both had fantastic supporting casts (McHale, Parrish, Ainge etc vs Kareem, Worthy) but I feel that Bird got far more out of his talent than Magic ... I think if I had to build a team, I'd take Magic b/c he's a point guard and you want a leader like that to build a team around.
[/quote]

Because I'm looking through blue and gold tinted glasses. 😉

Seriously though, I think Magic really transformed the Lakers into the Lakers that we know today. It's a close call between him and Bird but Magic could do almost anything right? I mean, a point guard who rebounds, scores and assists. He's a great leader to boot.
 
[quote author=Herr Onceared link=topic=26559.msg660827#msg660827 date=1220000979]
Senna v Schumacher.

[/quote]

Oooooooooh. Toughie. Schumacher. No Senna. Probably.

It's always hard when one is a hateful cunt and also taking into account the dominance of Ferrari over Schumacher's reign. I'm inclined to go with Senna as I think he had to defeat a higher calibre of driver for large parts of his career. I don't think there is a comparable rivalry in Schumacher's career to that of Senna and Prost.

In terms of success though, it's Schumacher without question. It would've been amazing to see them line up as team mates in the same era.
 
[quote author=Herr Onceared link=topic=26559.msg660827#msg660827 date=1220000979]
Senna v Schumacher.

[/quote]

Hmm. That's tough.

I would go for Schumacher though, based on the fact that he single handedly made Ferrari relevant again.

My answer might have been different if Senna's life wasn't cruelly taken away from him.
 
[quote author=Delinquent link=topic=26559.msg660840#msg660840 date=1220001866]
[quote author=Herr Onceared link=topic=26559.msg660827#msg660827 date=1220000979]
Senna v Schumacher.

[/quote]

Oooooooooh. Toughie. Schumacher. No Senna. Probably.

It's always hard when one is a hateful cunt and also taking into account the dominance of Ferrari over Schumacher's reign. I'm inclined to go with Senna as I think he had to defeat a higher calibre of driver for large parts of his career. I don't think there is a comparable rivalry in Schumacher's career to that of Senna and Prost.

In terms of success though, it's Schumacher without question. It would've been amazing to see them line up as team mates in the same era. [/quote]

I don't think so Del, both their egos wouldnt allow that. A 'dream' team in F1 is like Schumacher and Barrichello, i.e. the main man and the supporting teammate.

It would have been great to see Schumacher vs Senna, Ferrari vs McLaren though.
 
[quote author=LeTallecWiz link=topic=26559.msg660846#msg660846 date=1220002087]
Federer vs Sampras
[/quote]

Sampras. He had to face much tougher opponents along the way. Federer just steamrolled past anyone, bar Nadal.

Greztky vs Messiah vs Lemieux?
 
[quote author=Herr Onceared link=topic=26559.msg660827#msg660827 date=1220000979]
Senna v Schumacher.

[/quote]


This is such a hard question to answer. I loved Senna, i creid when he passed away. But in terms of success you have to pick Schumacher. Over one lap, no one could fucking touch Aryton. He was supremely talented. Both awesome in the wet too.

Schumacher, just.
 
[quote author=DHSC link=topic=26559.msg660850#msg660850 date=1220002232]

Greztky vs Messiah vs Lemieux?
[/quote]

Lemieux.

The most imposing player in NHL history - as gifted as Gretzky, who played for the greatest team not from Montreal, and bulit like an Ox, he was unplayable.

Messier was the best leader the sport has ever seen.
 
Haha, my spelling's all over the place.

You think we will ever talk of Crosby the same way we talk about those three?
 
[quote author=Stulikesdrums link=topic=26559.msg660853#msg660853 date=1220002424]
Maradonna v Zidane
[/quote]

Maradona, best ever.
 
[quote author=DHSC link=topic=26559.msg660874#msg660874 date=1220004000]
Haha, my spelling's all over the place.

You think we will ever talk of Crosby the same way we talk about those three?
[/quote]

I don't think the NHL will ever see 160-200 pt totals again, it was a different league back then. BUT, the way Crosby is playing and how obviously good he is, he could very well be mentioned amongst those names (though Messier doesn't belong on that list imo, Howe does - and possibly Richard).
 
[quote author=DHSC link=topic=26559.msg660848#msg660848 date=1220002135]
[quote author=Delinquent link=topic=26559.msg660840#msg660840 date=1220001866]
[quote author=Herr Onceared link=topic=26559.msg660827#msg660827 date=1220000979]
Senna v Schumacher.

[/quote]

Oooooooooh. Toughie. Schumacher. No Senna. Probably.

It's always hard when one is a hateful cunt and also taking into account the dominance of Ferrari over Schumacher's reign. I'm inclined to go with Senna as I think he had to defeat a higher calibre of driver for large parts of his career. I don't think there is a comparable rivalry in Schumacher's career to that of Senna and Prost.

In terms of success though, it's Schumacher without question. It would've been amazing to see them line up as team mates in the same era. [/quote]

I don't think so Del, both their egos wouldnt allow that. A 'dream' team in F1 is like Schumacher and Barrichello, i.e. the main man and the supporting teammate.

It would have been great to see Schumacher vs Senna, Ferrari vs McLaren though.
[/quote]

That's what was so heated about the early Senna-Prost rivalry though. That inter-team rivalry adds a touch of spice, as it pits personal pride and competition against team instructions. A bit like Hamilton and Alonso last year.
 
[quote author=DHSC link=topic=26559.msg660850#msg660850 date=1220002232]
[quote author=LeTallecWiz link=topic=26559.msg660846#msg660846 date=1220002087]
Federer vs Sampras
[/quote]

Sampras. He had to face much tougher opponents along the way. Federer just steamrolled past anyone, bar Nadal.

Greztky vs Messiah vs Lemieux?
[/quote]

I think there may be an element of truth in that. Although I also think that Federer's genius has a way of making his opponents look extremely ordinary. Federer needs to find his game again and show that he can come back from adversity - then he'll be recognized as the greatest tennis player ever to walk the earth.

In terms of ability though, I think he already is.
 
[quote author=Delinquent link=topic=26559.msg660946#msg660946 date=1220007073]
[quote author=DHSC link=topic=26559.msg660850#msg660850 date=1220002232]
[quote author=LeTallecWiz link=topic=26559.msg660846#msg660846 date=1220002087]
Federer vs Sampras
[/quote]

Sampras. He had to face much tougher opponents along the way. Federer just steamrolled past anyone, bar Nadal.

Greztky vs Messiah vs Lemieux?
[/quote]

I think there may be an element of truth in that. Although I also think that Federer's genius has a way of making his opponents look extremely ordinary. Federer needs to find his game again and show that he can come back from adversity - then he'll be recognized as the greatest tennis player ever to walk the earth.

In terms of ability though, I think he already is.
[/quote]

I don't really agree ... He is one of the best, but the best? He's finally got one adversary and now he's struggling ... Coincidence? Who did he have before that who was remotely as goods the challengers Sampras faced?

Aggasi ... Rafter ... Becker ... Stich ... Edberg ... Lendel ... Chang ... Ivanesevic ... etc

One played against the best consistently and won ... The other dominated a very average, and lacking, field.
 
Good one Doc.
Thats my era, i loved those fights.
Id say Leonard as hes the only one to beat all the others.
Hagler was a beast, hearns a freak of nature and duran just made out of nails, but leonard had it all for me.
This order -
Leonard
Duran
Hearns
Haggler

May change tmrw.
 
[quote author=LeTallecWiz link=topic=26559.msg660948#msg660948 date=1220007303]
[quote author=Delinquent link=topic=26559.msg660946#msg660946 date=1220007073]
[quote author=DHSC link=topic=26559.msg660850#msg660850 date=1220002232]
[quote author=LeTallecWiz link=topic=26559.msg660846#msg660846 date=1220002087]
Federer vs Sampras
[/quote]

Sampras. He had to face much tougher opponents along the way. Federer just steamrolled past anyone, bar Nadal.

Greztky vs Messiah vs Lemieux?
[/quote]

I think there may be an element of truth in that. Although I also think that Federer's genius has a way of making his opponents look extremely ordinary. Federer needs to find his game again and show that he can come back from adversity - then he'll be recognized as the greatest tennis player ever to walk the earth.

In terms of ability though, I think he already is.
[/quote]

I don't really agree ... He is one of the best, but the best? He's finally got one adversary and now he's struggling ... Coincidence? Who did he have before that who was remotely as goods the challengers Sampras faced?

Aggasi ... Rafter ... Becker ... Stich ... Edberg ... Lendel ... Chang ... Ivanesevic ... etc

One played against the best consistently and won ... The other dominated a very average, and lacking, field.
[/quote]

Some of those are before Sampras really rose to the top of the game. And some of them simply don't deserve to be listed among the greats. You can certainly discard Chang and Ivanisevic from that list and probably Stich too. Rafter was an excellent serve-and-volleyer at a time when it was dying but I don't think he's in the same league as the others. Agassi was still playing very well when Federer came to the fore. In fact, it was some of the devastating losses Agassi suffered at the hands of Federer, particularly in the Masters series, which led to his decision to retire. The game had moved on and he simply couldn't keep up. It was also Federer who ended Sampras' reign too, in a year when he was just as much the favourite as before. Sampras' didn't play badly in that quarter either - he was simply outplayed.

Federer is one of these rare talents who asks the entire world to step up and join him or face certain failure, just as Bolt has done in sprinting. He's inspired a new breed of tennis player. He has the skill and touch of the best serve-and-volleyers, and some of the most devastating ground strokes ever seen. Before, it tended to be that would have either serve-and-volleyers, or baseliners. A player chose a style that best suited his strengths and progressed along one path. It was almost as if learning the game in its entirety was too much for one man (or woman) to accomplish. That's why you'd have familiar players doing well on certain surfaces. Sure, there were a few who had all-round games but IMO Federer is the most complete all-court tennis player ever to have played the game. He's also one of the finest athletes on tour. In the same way that McEnroe did he seems to invent new shots every time he steps on court. If there had been no Federer then you may well have a long list of rivalries in the mens game like the ones you listed for Sampras. I think the fact that there isn't one is more down to Federer's unprecedented dominance than a lack of new talent.

He has brought the game on and forced the likes of Nadal, Djokovic and the like to raise their games to compete. The rest of the world needed a couple of years to get to grips with the task. It's only now that we're beginning to see the real rivalries develop. Just look at how hard Nadal has had to work on the weaknesses in his game to match Federer on grass.

Of course, whether Federer will go down as the greatest will depend on his ability to react to recent setbacks but I maintain that in terms of sheer ability, there has never been better.
 
Sampras' didn't play badly in that quarter either - he was simply outplayed.
Click to expand...

He was also at the twilight of his career ...

Again, Nadal has come to the surface as a 'valid' all-surface challenger to Federer and is it a coicidence that he looks shaken and struggling against his only REAL challenger since he really started his career?

I know Chang and Stich weren't 'the best', I was just showing the incredible depth of tennis in those days. It was far better back then.
 
[quote author=Herr Onceared link=topic=26559.msg660955#msg660955 date=1220007627]
Good one Doc.
Thats my era, i loved those fights.
Id say Leonard as hes the only one to beat all the others.
Hagler was a beast, hearns a freak of nature and duran just made out of nails, but leonard had it all for me.
This order -
Leonard
Duran
Hearns
Haggler

May change tmrw.
[/quote]

I'd have Haggler above Hearns, maybe even on a par with Duran, but I can't argue with Sugar Ray. Haggler and Duran both looked unbeatable at stages in their career. If we equated them with the later (inferior) British dominance of Super Middleweight Hearns kind of reminds me of Nigel Benn- a beast at times, but mentally vulnerable. By that analogy Steve Collins becomes Duran (not a bad fit) and Eubank becomes Haggler (not so apt). Leaves us with no Sugar Ray though.
 
[quote author=LeTallecWiz link=topic=26559.msg661023#msg661023 date=1220010833]
Sampras' didn't play badly in that quarter either - he was simply outplayed.
Click to expand...

He was also at the twilight of his career ...

Again, Nadal has come to the surface as a 'valid' all-surface challenger to Federer and is it a coicidence that he looks shaken and struggling against his only REAL challenger since he really started his career?

I know Chang and Stich weren't 'the best', I was just showing the incredible depth of tennis in those days. It was far better back then.
[/quote]

I would agree that there was more depth back then. But I don't think Federer can be blamed for that which is why I guess the question of his greatness is uncertain. To me, and I've watched a lot of tennis growing up and a lot retrospectively, he's the greatest I've ever seen and I think he would have held his own in any era.

If anything, I think he is playing a large part in creating new greats. As I said, were it not for him, there would have been no need for Nadal to work so hard on his game to match him. The next few years will reveal all I guess.
 
[quote author=Delinquent link=topic=26559.msg661037#msg661037 date=1220012597]
[quote author=LeTallecWiz link=topic=26559.msg661023#msg661023 date=1220010833]
Sampras' didn't play badly in that quarter either - he was simply outplayed.
Click to expand...

He was also at the twilight of his career ...

Again, Nadal has come to the surface as a 'valid' all-surface challenger to Federer and is it a coicidence that he looks shaken and struggling against his only REAL challenger since he really started his career?

I know Chang and Stich weren't 'the best', I was just showing the incredible depth of tennis in those days. It was far better back then.
[/quote]

I would agree that there was more depth back then. But I don't think Federer can be blamed for that which is why I guess the question of his greatness is uncertain. To me, and I've watched a lot of tennis growing up and a lot retrospectively, he's the greatest I've ever seen and I think he would have held his own in any era.
[/quote]

I'm not blaming Federer! 🙂

I'm sure he would have held his own in Sampras' era, I just don't think he would have breezed in so many majors like he has. Then again, I think if Sampras or Agassi or Connors or McEnroe or other greats of the games were in other eras, they would have held their own easily.

No one, I hope, is disputing how good Federer is. His place amongst the sport's greats is already set in stone -
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

rurikbird
    • Like
Different Gravy
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Replies
580
Views
21K
FreshRed
FreshRed
Squiggles
    • Like
  • Locked
05/10/2024 - Weeks Other Games Thread
2 3
Replies
60
Views
1K
rubans
rubans
Squiggles
  • Locked
Weekends Other Games 31-8-24
2 3 4 5
Replies
138
Views
3K
Mamma Mia
Mamma Mia
Squiggles
    • Like
  • Locked
Other PL Games 24-25/08/2024
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
156
Views
4K
CueEye
C
King Binny
    • Like
  • Locked
Google DeepMind unveils AI football tactics coach honed with Liverpool
Replies
3
Views
924
jan
jan
Back
Top Bottom