In a list of the 10 greatest athletes, Bradman reigns
Columnist By Spiro Zavos, 19 Jun 2008 Spiro Zavos is a Roar Expert
- Tagged:
- Cricket, Don Bradman, Federer, gold medal, Greg Norman, IPL, Lance Armstrong, Mark Spitz, Michael Hussey, Olympics, Rod Laver, Roger Federer, squash, Tiger Woods, Tour de France, Wellington
Tiger Wood’s heroic and brilliant win on one leg (rather like Ben Hogan’s victories after his horrific car crash) have set sports writers away on naming their 10 best athletes of all time.
Here’s the Wellington Dompost’s Fred Woodcock’s list:
1. Muhammed Ali: ‘widely regarded as the sportsman of the 20th century’
2. Carl Lewis:’the best track and field athlete’
3. Pele: ‘widely regarded as the best footballer of all time’
4. Michael Jordan: ‘highest scoring average in the NBL’
5. Tiger Woods: ‘will undoubtedly eclipse any major records he currently doesn’t have’
6. Mark Spitz: ‘remains the only Olympian to win both a gold medal in every individual event he entered in a given year, and to set a world record in each event’
7. Haile Gebrsellaise: ‘two Olympic gold medals, eight world championships, and 25 word records’
8. Eddie Merckx: ‘the most successful and best all-round cyclist’
9. Don Bradman: ‘regarded as the best batsman to grace the game’
10. Rod Laver: ‘won 11 grand slams, including all four tournaments in the same calendar year twice.’
This seems like a good list to me, although I would dispute some of the placings.
The SMH also published an interesting article by Greg Baum on his 10 best:
Muhammed Ali; Pele; Lance Armstrong; Don Bradman; Jack Nicklaus; Roger Federer; Jesse Owens; Michael Schumacker; Mark Spitz; Michael Jordan.
The lists have five of the same athletes: Ali, Pele, Bradman, Spitz and Michael Jordan.
Baum prefers Federer as his tennis player over Laver. I’d support Laver on this one.
His two grand slams indicate that he was better on all surfaces than Federer, though both players won 80 per cent of all their matches.
Nicklaus over Woods?
I think we should wait until Woods’ career is finished until he is elevated above Nicklaus. This will happen.
Woods wins 28 per cent of the gold tournaments he enters, a phenomenal Bradman-like ratio given the fact that a golfer has to defeat everyone in the tournament, unlike, say, a tennis player who defeats only eight or so opponents to win a tournament.
Nicklaus won 12 per cent of his tournaments.
And to put these statistics into a context, Baum points out that Greg Norman won six per cent of his tournaments.
Jesse Owens over Carl Lewis?
Both were sprinters and long jump champions. Lewis won ten Olympic gold medals between 1984 and 1996. Jesse Owens won four gold medals at the only Olympics he ran at.
My inclination is for Jesse Owens for reasons purely of nostalgia for the Olympics before intensive coaching and drug-taking.
Eddie Merchx or Lance Armstrong?
The issue here seems to be specialisation (seven successive Tour de France’s for Armstrong) against all-round riding (in 1974 Merchx won cycling’s Triple Crown)
Greg Baum also throws up the names of squash’s Jahangir Khan (555 unbeaten matches in a row) and Heather Mackay (unbeaten in a 19-year career).
And Walter Lindrum, also unbeaten in 21 years and one of the few athletes whose extreme skill forced significant changes in the rules of his sport.
And finally, Baum reckons that Bradman is the greatest of the greats.
I would think that it is difficult to go past this assessment. Bradman’s average in Tests of 99.94 is more than 30 runs more than the next best, which includes Michael Hussey whose average is coming down from the 70s to the lower 60s as he plays more Tests.
It would be interesting to hear what readers of The Roar think about these best athletes lists.
Recommend this story.
June 19th 2008 @ 11:25am
David Sygall said | June 19th 2008 @ 11:25am | Report comment
Walter Lindrum is often compared to Don Bradman as Australia’s greatest sportsperson. So if Bradman is to appear in the list, so should Lindrum.
I also think Michael Phelps will be regarded as the greatest ever swimmer once he cleans up in Beijing.
June 19th 2008 @ 11:31am
sheek said | June 19th 2008 @ 11:31am | Report comment
Towser,
I understand what you’re saying. When I watch old clips of Wallaby test matches, it’s like watching 12 year olds running around (by comparison to today).
It goes without saying, todays players are fitter, faster, stronger, with better basic skills (presumedly). Better nutrition, better scientific training, better equipment, better playing conditions. better opportunities & media exposure. But let’s never confuse quantity with quality.
But here’s the thing, a player can only be judged by how he dominated his sport in his own time, his era. That’s the only comparable tool we have. Most of us, when we select our best in any sport, select players depending on the manner in which they dominated their sport in the time when they played.
The other thing to keep in mind is this. bring Pele, Puskas, Di Stefano, etc into the modern era. Assume they would be as strong, fast & fit as todays players with the same upbringing & opportunities. The same nutrition, training, equipment, etc.
Would they still be great champions? We can never know for sure, but logic says “Yes”! As Bradman suggested, a champion in his own era will be a champion in any era.
June 19th 2008 @ 11:35am
El Capitan said | June 19th 2008 @ 11:35am | Report comment
Sure one can excel in their pefered sport but only true atheltes excel in multipul sports. These players are freaks, and can compete at the highest level. Jordan tried to excel with the White Sox but couldn’t get into the majors. John Elway was one that was similar to Jordan, playing pro football, but only making the minors for the Yankees.
But I’d have to agree Jim Thorpe would be the ideal athelte. IMHO, an athlete is one that can over come all challanges, and play to the highest level. In today era, this is almost impossible as a professional athlete will concentrate on one particular sport all the way. The only current player that buckles this trend would be Brad Thorn. The fact that he played the highest level of RL for the Broncos, Qld and Australia, then make the transfer to RU for the Crusaders and All Blacks, then back to RL and back to RU at the highest level would put him up there. However since both codes are similar there is no extreme learning and switching (for example say Thorn left RU to play Cricket, like Stu Wilson)
June 19th 2008 @ 11:52am
TembaVJ said | June 19th 2008 @ 11:52am | Report comment
Where is Shane Warn?
June 19th 2008 @ 11:59am
sheek said | June 19th 2008 @ 11:59am | Report comment
El Capitan,
Purely from a practical time-management point of view, it is almost impossible for an athlete to be the best at more than one sport, even if he has the ability to do so.
Thorpe lived in a time when it was easier to do so, although this in no way diminishes his achievement. After all, few did what he did.
Decathletes like Daley Thompson are greatly admired, but the reality is, they are “jack of all trades, master of none”. Thompson was never the world champion in any of the 10 disciplines he competed in. He might have been, had he concentrated on one singular sport.
But as a decathlete, the trick is to be reasonably good at all disciplines, without being the master of a single one.
June 19th 2008 @ 12:00pm
David Sygall said | June 19th 2008 @ 12:00pm | Report comment
A couple more that were mentioned in the SMH letters to the editor today: Heather McKay, Margaret Court, Kelly Slater.. Hard to argue with any of them..
June 19th 2008 @ 12:06pm
El Capitan said | June 19th 2008 @ 12:06pm | Report comment
Sheek,
True in the same vein as the IM in swimming. Each swimmer has to be strong in all events and not just one.
But how can you put a value on the greatest athlete, when each particular sport has its own strengths and weaknesses?
Perhaps its part of a bygone era. There are no athletes like Thorpe anymore and just sportspersons in each field, and occasionally you’ll have one particular player who rises above the norm to be considered a star of thier chosen field?
June 19th 2008 @ 12:11pm
Al said | June 19th 2008 @ 12:11pm | Report comment
El Capitan, wasnt that Jeff Wilson?
Who was the guy in the 80′s who played both American football and baseball professionally from season to season?
June 19th 2008 @ 12:18pm
El Capitan said | June 19th 2008 @ 12:18pm | Report comment
Al,
My bad, yes it was Jeff Wilson.
June 19th 2008 @ 12:23pm
Jerry said | June 19th 2008 @ 12:23pm | Report comment
Al – yeah, it was Jeff WIlson who played for the Black Cap & All Blacks but not concurrently. He played a few games for the Black Caps while still a teenager and thereafter concentrated on his rugby career.
As far as “double All Blacks” go, Eric Tindill is probably the gold standard as the other players who’ve represented NZ in both cricket and rugby only played for NZ at one day cricket rather than in a test (as Tindill did). He then went on to referee a test match at rugby and umpire a test at cricket.
Bo Jackson was the US athlete who played major league baseball and in the NFL in the 1980′s, and Deion Sanders also did it in the 1990′s.