The greatest sportsperson.... ever?

This is not to take away from The Don’s other achievements. I was just trying to make a point about Tendulkar.

Robot Arm - when I said that Schumacher had broken every pretty much every record there was to break, I should have said almost. My mistake. You’re right, Schumacher did only just equal Fangio’s record, but there is no doubt in my mind that he will get his sixth, and record-breaking, title next season. The only record I don’t see him breaking is that of the highest number of pole positions, which I think belongs to Senna.

Gouda I do not wish to take away from Tendulkar, he is a great batsman. However, he isn’t a shadow on Bradman. Not even close.

And referring to your above quote, to play England they had to spend a month on a boat to get there, and they were allowed to bowl bouncers every ball.
If you have ever seen Documentaries on the Bodyline series, you will see that batting then was a bloody lot harder than it is now.
The pitches weren’t as good and every ball is coming at your head! Nowadays bowlers are allowed ONE ball per over above the shoulders.

Could Gary Kasparov be considered? I don’t know much about chess, but I think I remember reading a write-up about how Kasparov is the best chess player the world has ever seen.

My nomination for the athlete that dominated his sport would be Edwin Moses.

Some are having trouble listing the greatest American Football player, so I’ll nominate Jim Brown.

He quit at the top of his game. He says that it was because he was smarter than other athletes that don’t know when to quit. Truth is that he thought he was going to become a great movie star.

Greatest athlete? Jim Thorpe who else?

I didn’t mean to sound like I was coming down on you. I’m just a bit disenchanted with Formula 1 these days. I don’t doubt that Schumacher is spectacularly talented at what he does, but modern F1 just seems so passionless and clinical.

I’m too young to remember any of the Good Old Days, but the stories from back then are epic: Fangio in 1957 coming from behind to win at the Nurburgring; Eau Rouge and the Masta kink at Spa; the days when drivers were fat and tires were skinny. Now it’s a science, back then it was an art. I hate to see old legends forgotten, but maybe I’m just a curmudgeon in training.

One snag in comparing statistics, by the way, is that now there are so many more races per year than there used to be. I read somewhere that Fangio’s winning percentage is considered untouchable, but with the season Schumacher’s been having I’d have to see if that still holds up.

Jim Thorpe Gets my vote as well, at least for atheletes I’m familliar with.

BamBam: Your nominee of Bradman sounds like an incredible athelete as well. I’m sorry I’m not familliar with him or to any great degree the sports he played.

for rickjay and astorian:

still not quite buying it, and you can’t just look at pure numbers compared from the dead ball and live ball era, I could use my own. You say Wagner and Lajoie et. al. were Cobbs peers, but they didn’t come close - 11 batting titles, 6 SB titles, and 8 slugging titles in 13 years, and creating runs? over 2000 runs and rbi’s in that career. And Ruth had peers too, only they were as distant as Cobbs. In the early 20’s Rogers Hornsby hit .400 three times and won 2 triple crowns. Now, you say, yeah, but he was the only power hitter in the NL (except Cy Williams). This was Ruth’s absolute peak time when HE was the only modern power hitter in the AL, but he couldn’t do that, and by the late 20’s Foxx, Simmons, Gehrig, and Hack Wilson had joined the power gang. wait! I won’t go on like this, you guys’ll like what I’ll do next. Trust me.

This is the “most times leading the league” game, which (although not as spectacular as pure numbers), is a good measure of a player’s talent vs. competition. The players that pop up the most here are Ruth, Cobb, Hornsby, Williams, and Musial (he always gets lost, doesn’t he?) so I’ll only use them.

Average: Cobb 11, Hornsby 7, Musial 7, Williams 6, Ruth 1
On base %: Williams 12, Ruth 10, Hornsby 9, Cobb 7, Musial 6
Slugging %: Ruth 13, Hornsby 9, Williams 9, Cobb 8, Musial 6
OPS: Ruth 13, Hornsby 11, Cobb 10, Williams 10, Musial 7
Games played: Musial 5
Runs scored: Ruth 8, Williams 6, Cobb Hornsby Musial tied at 5
Hits: Cobb 8, Musial 6, Hornsby 4
Total Bases: Hornsby 7, Cobb Williams Musial Ruth tied at 6 (that’s gotta say something)
Doubles: Musial 8, Hornsby 4, Cobb 3
Triples: Musial 5, Cobb 4
Homers: Ruth 12, Williams 4, Hornsby 2, Cobb 1
RBI: Ruth 6, Cobb Hornsby Williams tied at 4, Musial 2
Walks: Ruth 11, Williams 8, others less than 5 (too lazy to look it up)
Strikeouts: Ruth 5 (this says more than you think, the other guys very rarely struck out)
Steals: Cobb 6 (none of the others ran and Cobb retired with both single season and career marks that lasted 50 years)
Adjusted OPS (for era, and this is a biggie): Ruth 13, Hornsby 12, Cobb 11, Williams 9, Musial 6
Extra base hits: Musial and Ruth 7, Hornsby 6, Williams 5, Cobb 3
times on base: Musial Ruth Williams tied at 8, Cobb and Hornsby 4
that was fun. if you look at the records, no other players (Wagner, Aaron and co. included) come close to these five, and you could argue that these were the five greatest hitters ever, dominating their eras like no other hitters did. Admittedly, Musial lags a bit in some of the categories, but who wouldn’t? And he was certainly the most gentlemanly and sportsmanlike of the pack. Williams was often surly, Cobb was a jerk, Ruth was a big little boy, and Hornsby was a bit of a nutcase who ate steak for breakfast, lunch, and dinner because he said it improved his vision (maybe it did). Curiousiy here prompts this question, what do you guys draw from this?

Indy

Another vote for Bradman here.

Not only is he head and shoulders above any other batsman of any era (in a game that has not altered materially since his era, same bat, same ball) he also redefined the rules (the legside fielding rule).

An American sport magazine (Sorry can’t remember which one) did a survey and Sir Donald won, as his average is so far in excess of his peers.

Sachin Tendulkar is the closesst I’ve seen to Bradman, and given the extraordinary pressures on him (think of who the most famous sportman in your country is and multiply by he population of India - yes all of them) he is fantastic.

Hey Robot Arm, no offense was taken! Its just that I’m a passionate Schumacher fan, and I think he’s the best ever :stuck_out_tongue:
I agree though, that F1 is too tech-intensive.

I did a read up on Jim Thorpe. He gets my vote!!

A small point though. In my OP, I asked about who amongst currently active athletes could be considered in a list of candidates. So far, almost all the nominees are dead!!

From what I hear about Bradman, he was an amazing athlete, far, far superior to his competition. One thing I am unsure of, what does Test Batting Average mean? Since I know very little of Cricket, I don’t know how to evaluate that stat.

WRT Baseball, the thing that really, IMHO puts Ruth head and shoulders above the pack is that he set records in statistics that have become very important, and his records lasted a long time. In fact, I just checked this morning, he STILL has the record in OPS (On base + Slugging) based on his 1920 season. OPS is considered a rather comprehensive offense statistic, referenced quite often these days. It includes Batting Average, Power and Selectivity.

Even Barry Bonds remarkable offensive year 2001 did not eclipse Ruth in this statistic (by a hair). Barry seemed to get either a homerun, a hit, or a walk every single time to the plate and was all but unstoppable, and he still didn’t break Ruth’s mark. Even with all of the expansion years, “juiced” balls, small ballparks, weight lifting regimens, etc. Ruth still owns overall offensive production. Heck, the Babe’s workout regimen was to eat a half dozen hot dogs before a game! For over 80 years players have been trying to match Ruth’s accomplishments, and have failed.

Add to that this fact, Ruth was a very successful pitcher before moving over to be a position player. Imagine today, an ace pitcher being asked to stop pitching and move to the outfield. It is unthinkable. Pitchers have traditionally been rather anemic offensive players, in large part due to a lack of practice in batting, I’m sure. Ruth was able to demonstrate such prowess with the bat (in limited opportunity) that his team was willing to give up his excellent pitching just to have him play every day. Truly an amazing player.

Hey Robot Arm, no offense was taken! Its just that I’m a passionate Schumacher fan, and I think he’s the best ever :stuck_out_tongue:
I agree though, that F1 is too tech-intensive.

I did a read up on Jim Thorpe. He gets my vote!!

A small point though. In my OP, I asked about who amongst currently active athletes could be considered in a list of candidates. Thats why my list of probables had only contemporary athletes. Otherwise, almost all the other nominees so far are dead!!

Damn!! Double post happened…

A batting average in cricket (test or otherwise) is calculated by adding up the number of runs scored and dividing by the number of times the batsman was dissmissed. A batting average of above 30 is considered adequate (for a specialist batsman), above 40 good, above 50 excellent and above 60 exceptional. In the light of that, an average of 99.94 is truly remarkable.

Some other career Test averages for comparison


Name                Mat    I  NO  Runs   HS     Ave 100  50  Team

DG Bradman           52   80  10  6996  334   99.94  29  13   AUS
RG Pollock           23   41   4  2256  274   60.97   7  11   RSA
GA Headley           22   40   4  2190  270*  60.83  10   5   WI
H Sutcliffe          54   84   9  4555  194   60.73  16  23    ENG
AC Gilchrist         31   44   8  2160  204*  60.00   6  11  AUS
E Paynter            20   31   5  1540  243   59.23   4   7    ENG
KF Barrington        82  131  15  6806  256   58.67  20  35   ENG
ED Weekes            48   81   5  4455  207   58.61  15  19   WI
WR Hammond           85  140  16  7249  336*  58.45  22  24  ENG
SR Tendulkar        100  160  15  8405  217   57.96  30  34   IND

Bradman was a truly remarkable batsman…

Grim

Let me guess…you are probably a Bears fan who is sick of Brett and the Packers beating Crapcago on a regular basis?

Or maybe you are a fan of the Minnechoka “Never won a Super Bowl, Never will!” CryKings?

So you did. I think that the qualifications as stated several times still apply - being clearly dominant compared to their peers - still apply.

In that case: Tiger Woods.

There is an argument for Michael Schumacher, but F-1 is so dependent on the car and he drives the best or nearly the best car.

So you did. I think that the qualifications as stated several times still apply - being clearly dominant compared to their peers - still apply.

In that case: Tiger Woods.

There is an argument for Michael Schumacher, but F-1 is so dependent on the car and he drives the best or nearly the best car.