Atlete of The Decade

OddJack · Dec 7, 2009

http://sports.espn.go.com/espnmag/story?id=3297734

A month ago, during simpler times, Tiger Woods was presented with a tricky question: Who would he pick as the athlete of the decade?

Plenty of possible choices - Lance Armstrong, Roger Federer, Kobe Bryant, Barry Bonds, Tom Brady, among them. Tiger, too. Told the list of candidates, and leaving himself out of the mix, Woods contemplated their merits for two holes during a pro-am in China before he finally found himself torn between Federer and Bonds.

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/sports/baseball/78689912.html

Well, since Tennis is tougher to play than Basketball or Baseball, I would go for Federer.

coyfish · Dec 7, 2009

Meh federer definately deserves to be among the top of the list but I really hate sports comparisons. Its just not right. Too many variables and differences. They should at least separate team / individual sports.

President of Serve/Volley · Dec 7, 2009

Lance Armstrong or Federer.

OddJack · Dec 7, 2009

coyfish said:
Meh federer definately deserves to be among the top of the list but I really hate sports comparisons. Its just not right. Too many variables and differences. They should at least separate team / individual sports.

Even comparing eras within tennis is not right, let alone comparing different sports. Yet this is something people cant help doing.

boredone3456 · Dec 7, 2009

President of Serve/Volley said:
Lance Armstrong or Federer.

I'd agree with this, Bonds sorry no, not even in the discussion. Kobe, as popular as he is, athletically does not stack up to me. Brady, well I will admit I am a huge fan, being from New England, the man is an amazing QB and could probably be argued as the best QB of the decade....but best athlete....mehhhh I wouldn't go that far. He has a good tactical mind when it comes to football, but I would not say athletically he is up there. Armstrong, Fed, and maybe even Phelps or other olympic level athlete's could be in contention, but I would not put Barry Bonds and Fed in the same sentence in terms of athletic ability. My Choice would be either Armstrong, Fed or maybe Phelps. But I am sure there are other athlete's in sports that none of us would or are thinking of that could be up there to, at least further up there than Barry Bonds and Kobe Bryant

Feña14 · Dec 7, 2009

Federer, Armstrong, Zidane, Woods, Giggs, C. Ronaldo has been the best player in the world since 2006 which is a hell of an achievement also.

AAUS · Dec 7, 2009

boredone3456 said:
I'd agree with this, Bonds sorry no, not even in the discussion. Kobe, as popular as he is, athletically does not stack up to me. Brady, well I will admit I am a huge fan, being from New England, the man is an amazing QB and could probably be argued as the best QB of the decade....but best athlete....mehhhh I wouldn't go that far. He has a good tactical mind when it comes to football, but I would not say athletically he is up there. Armstrong, Fed, and maybe even Phelps or other olympic level athlete's could be in contention, but I would not put Barry Bonds and Fed in the same sentence in terms of athletic ability. My Choice would be either Armstrong, Fed or maybe Phelps. But I am sure there are other athlete's in sports that none of us would or are thinking of that could be up there to, at least further up there than Barry Bonds and Kobe Bryant

at the NFL combine, Tom Brady ran a 40 slower than 5 seconds
I dont know what to compare it to but I'll just let you know its absolutely terrible

shaysrebelII · Dec 7, 2009

the only viable argument that I can see against Federer is that he won his first slam in 2003. It would stand to reason that if this is an award for a decade's worth of accomplishments, it would count more than just the last 7 years.

that being said, Fed went from completely unknown to almost unanimously thought of as the greatest player to ever step on a court, all in the last ten years. how could you not pick him?

Knightmace · Dec 8, 2009

shaysrebelII said:
the only viable argument that I can see against Federer is that he won his first slam in 2003. It would stand to reason that if this is an award for a decade's worth of accomplishments, it would count more than just the last 7 years.

that being said, Fed went from completely unknown to almost unanimously thought of as the greatest player to ever step on a court, all in the last ten years. how could you not pick him?

Tru but it was more like last t6 years

Quite Please · Dec 8, 2009

No question: Ole Einar Björndalen
But biathlon doesn't get much attention sadly.

OTMPut · Dec 8, 2009

Usain BOLT. End of discussion.

tintin · Dec 8, 2009

Federer for making ALL 4 majors finals for the 3th time

Tsonga#1fan · Dec 8, 2009

Lance Armstrong, Tigger Woods, Roger Federer....in that order. Tigger's personal problems don't have any place in my consideration as his life outside his sport is of no big interest to me anyway. I always thought he was boring at least now he seems human and obviously likes to loosen up and have a little fun. Go Tigger!

Andres · Dec 8, 2009

OddJack said:
Well, since Tennis is tougher to play than Basketball, I would go for Federer.

Aha. Ehm. Ahum. It's not.

Seany · Dec 8, 2009

Decade would suggest from 2000 onwards, which puts fed out of the discussion.

Woods himself is the best candidate.

coyfish · Dec 8, 2009

Tsonga#1fan said:
Lance Armstrong, Tigger Woods, Roger Federer....in that order. Tigger's personal problems don't have any place in my consideration as his life outside his sport is of no big interest to me anyway. I always thought he was boring at least now he seems human and obviously likes to loosen up and have a little fun. Go Tigger!

Tigger is from winnie the pooh.

Anyway you just cant compare sports. TOOOOO many variables. What about boxing??? One of the most difficult sports. Its very difficult to dominate for a decade. Manny Paquiao?? Oscar??? Pretty boy Mayweather???

Or sports like soccer where not every player gets recognized. Sure C. Ronaldo can score goals. But R. Kaka is a much better all around player who glues teams together.

Michael phelps . . .

I think its an insult to name a "athlete of the decade" based on sporting performance.

mcshift · Dec 8, 2009

100% federer..no question. totally dominating the sport and making it to almost every slam final since 2003. Its easier to pick federer because tennis is an individual sport while kobe and bonds are occasionally carried by their teams.
With Tiger, sure hes a great athelete but i think all the recent events and his horrible sportsmanship should ruin his chances of getting it.

Rhino · Dec 8, 2009

Seany said:
Decade would suggest from 2000 onwards, which puts fed out of the discussion.

Woods himself is the best candidate.

Tiger Woods should not even be part of this discussion. He's a golfer not an athlete. Golfers walk slowly around a big field, with lots of rest breaks. That is not athleticism, which is why guys in their 50's and fat guys can be top golfers.

I'd go for Federer, Bolt, and Lance Armstrong (possibly Phelps too).

OddJack · Dec 8, 2009

Andres said:
Aha. Ehm. Ahum. It's not.

that's cute, but still say Being a top tennis player is tougher than being a top basketball player. So I put Fed above Jordan.

akv89 · Dec 8, 2009

OddJack said:
that's cute, but still say Being a top tennis player is tougher than being a top basketball player. So I put Fed above Jordan.

Physically, tennis is an easier sport to play than basketball. There is more technique involved in tennis, but you need more stamina and strength for basketball.

akv89 · Dec 8, 2009

Michael Schumacher has a case as well, despite participating in only 7 of the ten years this decade. In those 7 years, he won 5 driver's championships, came 2nd once, and 3rd once.

Cup8489 · Dec 8, 2009

Rhino said:
Tiger Woods should not even be part of this discussion. He's a golfer not an athlete. Golfers walk slowly around a big field, with lots of rest breaks. That is not athleticism, which is why guys in their 50's and fat guys can be top golfers.

I'd go for Federer, Bolt, and Lance Armstrong (possibly Phelps too).

maybe you should try walking a 54 hole round. don't think youll complain about them anymore.

Rhino · Dec 8, 2009

Cup8489 said:
maybe you should try walking a 54 hole round. don't think youll complain about them anymore.

Well my Grandad used to do it, and yes i agree he did get tired sometimes, but I wasn't about to compare him with Lance Armstrong.

OddJack · Dec 8, 2009

akv89 said:
Physically, tennis is an easier sport to play than basketball. There is more technique involved in tennis, but you need more stamina and strength for basketball.

See, it's not all about physicals. If it was so Pro Wrestlers who frequently die before the age of 40 would be considered the greatest athletes.
If you add skills required, and mental strength needed, the comparison becomes easier.

Changmaster · Dec 8, 2009

OddJack said:
that's cute, but still say Being a top tennis player is tougher than being a top basketball player. So I put Fed above Jordan.

I definitely think tennis is one of the hardest sports in which to go pro. Basketball is certainly hard as well, but I think that's mainly because if you're short, you have a slim to none chance of playing in the NBA (unless you're an athletic freak like Nate Robinson)

Serendipitous · Dec 8, 2009

Nalbandian

OJ ROD · Dec 8, 2009

Andres said:
Aha. Ehm. Ahum. It's not.

No. It is.

OJ ROD · Dec 8, 2009

akv89 said:
Physically, tennis is an easier sport to play than basketball. There is more technique involved in tennis, but you need more stamina and strength for basketball.

What? That's relative.

Cup8489 · Dec 8, 2009

OJ ROD said:
What? That's relative.

yeah... i dont agree either... basketball have shorter games and players are often rotated out. tennis you have to play the whole time, no one to switch with. and 5-set matches you can easily run a few miles on court..

akv89 · Dec 8, 2009

OddJack said:
See, it's not all about physicals. If it was so Pro Wrestlers who frequently die before the age of 40 would be considered the greatest athletes.
If you add skills required, and mental strength needed, the comparison becomes easier.

I enjoy playing both sports and while tennis is more taxing mentally, basketball is definitely the more physically difficult sport.
There probably are more skills to learn in tennis than in basketball, and I believe this because in general people seem to take a longer time to learn how to play tennis at a respectable level than to learn how to play basketball. However, the skills required to be a good basketball player can't be underestimated either.

So given that both sports have some athletic requriements that the other doesn't, I don't agree with your assessment that tennis is clearly the tougher sport to play.

Pro wrestling? Not a sport. It's more like a tv drama.

fps · Dec 8, 2009

Changmaster said:
I definitely think tennis is one of the hardest sports in which to go pro. Basketball is certainly hard as well, but I think that's mainly because if you're short, you have a slim to none chance of playing in the NBA (unless you're an athletic freak like Nate Robinson)

one of the reasons tennis is so difficult is that only the best make any money. the VERY best.

in football, being one of the top 50 players in the world in your position you can make millions. in tennis you're reliant on yourself and no-one else. basketball too, you can fit into different positions on the pitch/court/whatever.

Changmaster · Dec 8, 2009

fps said:
one of the reasons tennis is so difficult is that only the best make any money. the VERY best.

in football, being one of the top 50 players in the world in your position you can make millions. in tennis you're reliant on yourself and no-one else. basketball too, you can fit into different positions on the pitch/court/whatever.

Right, even if you ARE good enough at tennis to go pro, you'd have to be at least amongst the top 50 in the world if you wanted to have a comfortable living for yourself. Tennis players are underpaid IMO relative to other sports.

Chadwixx · Dec 8, 2009

Cup8489 said:
yeah... i dont agree either... basketball have shorter games and players are often rotated out. tennis you have to play the whole time, no one to switch with. and 5-set matches you can easily run a few miles on court..

I would like to play tennis in an air conditioned gym and take breaks every 4-5 mins or whenever i get tired.

Golfers, nascar drivers and bicycle riders shouldnt be in the conversation since they dont play a sport.

People who think basketball is tougher than tennis maybe correct. What people dont realize is the better you get at tennis, the harder it gets. Its based on level, you can play basketball and work your ass off missing shots all day, in tennis you miss the 2nd shot and it doesnt seem very hard.

President of Serve/Volley · Dec 8, 2009

akv89 said:
Michael Schumacher has a case as well, despite participating in only 7 of the ten years this decade. In those 7 years, he won 5 driver's championships, came 2nd once, and 3rd once.

Senna is better than Schumacher.

Fedex · Dec 9, 2009

OTMPut said:
Usain BOLT. End of discussion.

Ah but if you're not from the good old ultra parochial USA then it doesn't count.
Two that immediately spring to mind would be Kenenisa Bekele and Usain Bolt both freaks of nature and both competing in sports recognised throughout the world unlike baseball and American Football which, practically, no one outside the States is even remotely interested in.
Bekele is the greatest long distance runner of all time and Bolt is the greatest sprinter of all time.

Agassifan · Dec 9, 2009

fed. no doubt.

malakas · Dec 9, 2009

akv89 said:
Michael Schumacher has a case as well, despite participating in only 7 of the ten years this decade. In those 7 years, he won 5 driver's championships, came 2nd once, and 3rd once.

Definitely!That was my first thought actually.

Fedex · Dec 9, 2009

Interesting article:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/ot...le-is-the-Usain-Bolt-of-distance-running.html

"The winner of 24 world and Olympic titles, more than anyone in athletics history; the breaker of six world records; unbeaten in his career over 10,000 metres; undefeated in three years and 26 track races over 3,000m or more; the greatest cross country runner ever with 11 global titles."

To put this into perspective, Bekele's 10,000 m world record time of 26 minutes 17 seconds is equivalent to running an average 100m time of 15.77 seconds.
That means he ran one hundred times 100m sprints back to back at a rate of 15.77 seconds!
Go out to your nearest track and run a sub 16 second 100m then imagine having to do that another 99 times without a break and I guarantee your chin will be on the ground in disbelief.

akv89 · Dec 9, 2009

President of Serve/Volley said:
Senna is better than Schumacher.

People have their favorites. Who knows what Senna could have done if he didn't die in 94. But Schumacher holds all the records and holds them by a good margin. I can't put one clearly on top of another, but I believe Schumacher to be a better, more complete driver.

AM95 · Dec 9, 2009

Seany said:
Decade would suggest from 2000 onwards, which puts fed out of the discussion.

Woods himself is the best candidate.

so your saying the 15 majors he won from late 2003-2009 dont count

Quite Please · Dec 9, 2009

Fedex said:
Interesting article:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/ot...le-is-the-Usain-Bolt-of-distance-running.html

"The winner of 24 world and Olympic titles, more than anyone in athletics history; the breaker of six world records; unbeaten in his career over 10,000 metres; undefeated in three years and 26 track races over 3,000m or more; the greatest cross country runner ever with 11 global titles."

To put this into perspective, Bekele's 10,000 m world record time of 26 minutes 17 seconds is equivalent to running an average 100m time of 15.77 seconds.
That means he ran one hundred times 100m sprints back to back at a rate of 15.77 seconds!
Go out to your nearest track and run a sub 16 second 100m then imagine having to do that another 99 times without a break and I guarantee your chin will be on the ground in disbelief.

I agree, Bekele has to be taken into consideration as well, anything else would be close to blasphemy.

Cyan · Dec 9, 2009

Michael Schumacher.

Andy G · Dec 12, 2009

OddJack said:
http://sports.espn.go.com/espnmag/story?id=3297734

A month ago, during simpler times, Tiger Woods was presented with a tricky question: Who would he pick as the athlete of the decade?

Plenty of possible choices - Lance Armstrong, Roger Federer, Kobe Bryant, Barry Bonds, Tom Brady, among them. Tiger, too. Told the list of candidates, and leaving himself out of the mix, Woods contemplated their merits for two holes during a pro-am in China before he finally found himself torn between Federer and Bonds.

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/sports/baseball/78689912.html

Well, since Tennis is tougher to play than Basketball or Baseball, I would go for Federer.

Way off. Best player is Allison Fisher. 22 years at #1. Thats not a misprint.

This link even has a comparo of Allison, Tiger, and Federer.

http://www.allisonfisher.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=51&Itemid=73

Talker · Dec 12, 2009

Andy G said:
Way off. Best player is Allison Fisher. 22 years at #1. Thats not a misprint.

This link even has a comparo of Allison, Tiger, and Federer.

http://www.allisonfisher.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=51&Itemid=73

Wow, never heard of her. Those are some stats!
I was thinking of something more physical, using reflexes, timing with some endurance.

I would have to go with Fed, won all his GS's in the time frame, dominated like no one else. And the pages of other records. Never happened before to such a great extent.
In one stretch he won 6/7 GS's.

Andy G · Dec 12, 2009

Talker said:
Wow, never heard of her. Those are some stats!
I was thinking of something more physical, using reflexes, timing with some endurance.

I would have to go with Fed, won all his GS's in the time frame, dominated like no one else. And the pages of other records. Never happened before to such a great extent.
In one stretch he won 6/7 GS's.

Dude, 22, I repeat 22 years as #1. 165 titles, 32 majors. I get what you're saying about physical play, but still, to be the best for that long. These guys careers aren't even as long as she was #1. She was #1 from 1987 to 2009. How many #1's did tennis, or any other sport you want to pick, have in that time. Ivan Lendl was #1 when she first earned her #1.

Talker · Dec 12, 2009

Andy G said:
Dude, 22, I repeat 22 years as #1. 165 titles, 32 majors. I get what you're saying about physical play, but still, to be the best for that long. These guys careers aren't even as long as she was #1. She was #1 from 1987 to 2009. How many #1's did tennis, or any other sport you want to pick, have in that time. Ivan Lendl was #1 when she first earned her #1.

It's amazing. Just think of all the drinks she could win in a redneck bar.

Andy G · Dec 12, 2009

Talker said:
It's amazing. Just think of all the drinks she could win in a redneck bar.

She was #1 longer than you've been alive. Because by you're comment you must be about 17.

matchmaker · Dec 12, 2009

Any one saying Federer is delusional. He is quick for a tennis player, but nothing otherwordly.

He would be absolutely put to shame against other "real" athletes.

The athletes of the decade are Usain Bolt and Lance Armstrong, the former for explosivity, the latter for endurance.

Talker · Dec 12, 2009

Andy G said:
She was #1 longer than you've been alive. Because by you're comment you must be about 17.

Thank you!!!

Andy G · Dec 12, 2009

matchmaker said:
Any one saying Federer is delusional. He is quick for a tennis player, but nothing otherwordly.

He would be absolutely put to shame against other "real" athletes.

The athletes of the decade are Usain Bolt and Lance Armstrong, the former for explosivity, the latter for endurance.

How could you or anyone else here think Usain Bolt is Athlete of the Decade. Before the last Olympics, no one even knew who he was. He did awesome at one event (the olypics as a whole) at the end of the decade, and some how he qualifies for athlete of the entire decade??? No way, from 2000 to mid 2008 he was just another guy, July 2008 he's great, since then, nothing. What can he show for other than 1 months work. How good will he be at the next Olympics? He'll be the fastest at serving your fries with that burger.

Atlete of The Decade

G.O.A.T.

Hall of Fame

Semi-Pro

G.O.A.T.

G.O.A.T.

G.O.A.T.

Rookie

Professional

Professional

Rookie

Hall of Fame

Professional

Semi-Pro

G.O.A.T.

Banned

Hall of Fame

Rookie

Legend

G.O.A.T.

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

G.O.A.T.

Legend

G.O.A.T.

Rookie

Serendipitous

Guest

Semi-Pro

Semi-Pro

G.O.A.T.

Hall of Fame

Legend

Rookie

Banned

Semi-Pro

Legend

Hall of Fame

Banned

Legend

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Rookie

Hall of Fame

Semi-Pro

Hall of Fame

Semi-Pro

Hall of Fame

Semi-Pro

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Semi-Pro

Similar threads