i have a terrible memory for specifics but I would Martina Hingis should make the list. She won everything in her late teens and then feel off the map.
Okay, the williams sisters did arrive roughly at that point but by that logic she’d stay in the tournament until she met either one of them. That didn’t happen thopugh, she started losing to everybody, then she had a foot problem (related to her shoe, I think) then retirement. She tried a comeback but that has failed ths far.
Hmm
I think Mike Tyson should #1 and David Duval #2. Both were ranked number one in the world, and both soon fell off the charts.
Tyson was deemed unbeatable and then completely fell apart, both mentally and physically. :eek:
Why mention Nigel Mansell when Michael Schumacher is available for derision? The seven-time champ looked untouchable last year, but can’t sell his soul for a podium finish this year (there was no US race - I insist). There’s nothing obviously wrong, the Ferrari team is the same, only blaming Bridgestone for not adequately coping with the single-tire rule allows one to avoid saying Schumi is suddenly through.
In baseball, you could pick almost any pitcher after the age of 40. When those guys lose it, they lose it suddenly. Nolan Ryan was still a dominant performer at 46 and an injury-wracked washout at 47, but usually it happens earlier.
If we’re talking Formula One, it’s got to be Jacques Villeneuve.
1995: Indy 500 winner and Indy Car series champion.
1996: Switches to Formula One, wins 4 Grands Prix, is series rookie of the year.
1997: Wins 7 Grands Prix and is F1 world champion.
Has barely made the podium since.
What about Monica Seles, who got stabbed by some loony fan so Steffi Graf would win some tournaments? Prior to the stabbing in 1993, Seles was on fire: she had won 10 out of the previous 12 major titles in women’s tennis. After she came back from the stabbing two years later, she won just one major in her whole career.
Guess the bad guys win sometimes. Of course, we have politics to teach that lesson too.
That has an awful lot to do with his switching from Williams to Tyrrell. Schumacher and Ferrari haven’t changed.
It’s not that simple in F1. Teams move in cycles. Ferrari where shite before Schumacher joined them, and he helped the team to its first F1 championship in over 20 years. Maintained that for 5 seasons, and then it stops - the competition catched up with you. There’s a maximum a car can do, even with the best engine, aerodynamics, and drivers. When you’re in the lead, you can only fall back. It’s a testament to Schumacher’s talent that he kept the edge for so long.
Ferrari will be back. Will it be woth Schumi? Probably not - if he doesn’t retire after this season, he’ll do so halfway through 2006. Next year’s the battle between Kimi and Fernando - but this time, for real.
Jacques Villeneuve - another story altogether. He didn’t move to Tyrell but to BAR (yeah, founded on the remains of Tyrell, but that’s just for licensing purposes). Put all his stake in a team he had a partial ownership in. IMHO, JV got the 1997 title because Ferrari and Schumacher weren’t up to speed yet, and wasn’t able to defend it because McLaren became too strong in 1998. Both Williams cars suffered that year, it had little to do with his talent.
BAR does OK now, but JV should have realised you can’t win a title in your first few years. To me, he’s one of the more talented drivers still, but also one who makes poor career decisions.