Serve_Ace
Professional
No he was also competing in swim meets. Swimming Championships. Pretty much like Grand Slams in the swimming world, except no one knows about it because swimming isn't as popular.
Atlete of The Decade
- Thread starter OddJack
- Start date
No he was also competing in swim meets. Swimming Championships. Pretty much like Grand Slams in the swimming world, except no one knows about it because swimming isn't as popular.
Serve_Ace
Professional
LOL 2 weeks over the entire decade. So 2 outrageous Olympics (well 3 although he was only 15 years old and naturally did nothing at the 1st), 5 World Championships (multiple golds in all of them, most of them historic totals), multiple Pan Pacific Championships, many Summer and Winter Nationals, many World Cup short course meets, countless other meets, is just 2 weeks an entire decade? You really know what you are talking about there.
I would totally rate Federer over Woods in something like this for the simple fact golf is a very complex game, not even a true sport, but Phelps clearly rates over both on merit.
Go Anointedone!!!!! You know your stuff!!!! Respect, respect.
Last edited:
Andy G
Semi-Pro
LOL 2 weeks over the entire decade. So 2 outrageous Olympics (well 3 although he was only 15 years old and naturally did nothing at the 1st), 5 World Championships (multiple golds in all of them, most of them historic totals), multiple Pan Pacific Championships, many Summer and Winter Nationals, many World Cup short course meets, countless other meets, is just 2 weeks an entire decade? You really know what you are talking about there.
I would totally rate Federer over Woods in something like this for the simple fact golf is a very complex game, not even a true sport, but Phelps clearly rates over both on merit.
Yeah, those draw spectator records. Fact is, everyone here refers to his (and Bolt's) Olympic records when they talk about them and you know this. I made the point of Allison Fisher being world #1 in billiards for 22, yes 22 years, and it means nothing because it isn't physical enough. But in my opinion, anyone who has been world #1 for over 1100 weeks and all 520 of the decade is the athlete of the decade. But to you, I'm sure its meaningless. Just like the Olympics are to me.
Swimming you don't even break a sweat. Just like billiards.
Last edited:
Serve_Ace
Professional
Fact is, if people expanded their knowledge a little bit more, beyond just the Olympics. The whole Athlete of the Year debate just got a whole lot bigger.
anointedone
Banned
What was he doing those years. Ok here you are:
2002- won 3 golds and 3 silvers at the Pan Pacific Swimming Champions (all the top Americans and Australians, the main powers in mens swimming were there).
Set his 3rd and 4th World records.
2003- won 4 golds and 2 silvers at the World Swimming Championships. Set EIGHT more individual World records this year alone across 4 different events.
2004- won 6 golds and 2 bronzes at the Olympic Games. Set his 13th and 14th World records.
2005- Off year for Phelps. Merely won 5 golds and 1 silver at the World Swimming Championships out of 8 events entered and set no new World records (nearly all of those his own). A year anyone else would kill for but below his own usual standards.
2006- 5 golds and 1 silver out of 6 events entered at the Pan Pacific Champoinships. 3 more World records.
2007- 7 golds at the World Swimming Championships, the greatest performance ever at the event. Missed out on an 8th only since his teammate got the team DQed in the medley relay.
2008- 8 golds at the Summer Olympics, an all time record for any sport. Bringing his career total to 14 now, also a record in any sport. His medal total now at 16, a mens record. 9 more World records.
2009- 5 golds and 1 silver in 6 events entered at the World Swimming Championships. 5 more World records.
Swimmers compete in many other meets besides Olympics, Worlds, and Pan Pacs too. The Winter and Summer Nationals for Americans which Phelps often enters, World cup meets at the short course distance, Duel in the Pool meets, alot of invitationals, you name it. Phelps has kept long winning streaks in many different events competing year round.
Andy G
Semi-Pro
Are you really gonna compare 2 weeks to 10 years of work?
Serve_Ace
Professional
Phelps has done more than just those 2 weeks.
anointedone
Banned
Well this thread is about "ATHLETE" of the decade so yes on that subject I disregard someone who is dominating an activity that isnt truly a sport. Heck I dont even fully credit golf as being a sport, there is no way I would say billiards is.
That doesnt mean I downplay what Fishcher has accomplished. She is simply incredible, probably just as incredible as any of those we are speaking of if not more in her own right. She however is playing a game requiring no athletic skills at all, not a sport, so the right term for her would not be a top athlete.
Fisher has also not been #1 in Billiards for 22 years. She came over to the U.S transferring from Snooker to 9 Ball in the mid 90s and there have been some years (not many mind you) she hasnt ended the year as the player of the year. You obviously are misreading some of the stats listed on her when saying that.
Last edited:
Andy G
Semi-Pro
Allison Fisher, 22 years #1. Tiger + Fed= 14 total
Allison 32 majors, Tiger + Fed= 29
Allison 165 world titles, Tiger + Fed= 152
She has done more than the 2 "best" put together.
And don't read me wrong, I am in no way saying swimming isn't hard or isn't a sport. I don't want you to think that. I just don't think how (or not) physical something is, should matter. Billiards is a sport and no one in any sport has dominated their respective sport the way she has.
Allison 32 majors, Tiger + Fed= 29
Allison 165 world titles, Tiger + Fed= 152
She has done more than the 2 "best" put together.
And don't read me wrong, I am in no way saying swimming isn't hard or isn't a sport. I don't want you to think that. I just don't think how (or not) physical something is, should matter. Billiards is a sport and no one in any sport has dominated their respective sport the way she has.
anointedone
Banned
Billiards is not a "sport". Calling it is a sport is a true joke. It is a terrific game.
Andy G
Semi-Pro
Actually "billiards" is the all general term of all these games. Technically though, billiards is actually "French Billiards" and the table have no pockets and 3 balls, 2 red and 1 white. You will see this game all over Vietnam. "Pocket Billiards" is the term for all games where tables have pockets, so yes, she has been #1 for 22 years.
Last edited:
Andy G
Semi-Pro
Poker is a game.
Andy G
Semi-Pro
This is how I feel about auto racing. The car does all the work. Sure, there is human input, but in the end, its not a sport.
That's not totally true. Drivers experience huge G-forces and while the tech allows them to have to "handle" the car less then in previous times it's still quite a physical effort to get through a race. Also just the sheer courage to pilot that vehicle at high speeds knowing the slightest mistake could mean death.
FlamEnemY
Hall of Fame
I don't like auto racing at all. I find it dull and uninteresting, at least for now.
BUT I'd like to see anyone try to maintain focus for tens of laps, driving at hundreds kmph. Plus, like nCode said, drivers experience huge G-force.
crackbillionair
Rookie
As an athlete, i.e., having athletic ability, Kobe Bryant is far better than Federer or Woods. Tiger Woods hits a ball in a cup. And Roger wasn't about to make that shot against Milwaukee last night.
The man is a lot faster than the counterparts mentioned here, can jump a lot higher, and is also well accomplished in his sport.
Cross sport comparisons are a waste of time. Kobe though, is one of the best athletes to come around in many years. In any test of athletic ability, strength, speed, vertical/horizontal leap, Kobe would surely best Tiger Woods and ANY tennis player.
There may be some olympic athletes like Bolt and Phelps who are on par with Kobe Bryant. Surely no golfers or tennis players.
OddJack
G.O.A.T.
All you said was...he is better, vertical, horizontal, speed, leap... I can simply repeat that for Federer. If fast is your measure, then why are you not choosing Bolt? . I am almost certain that Federer would outrun Bryant in a marathon match.
Consistency and dominance over a long period of time are two good criteria to choose the best imo.
Last edited:
crackbillionair
Rookie
I chose Bryant because he is being assailed ridiculously. He plays a team sport and because of him, his team is an elite team just about every year.
Dominance over a long period of time? If you don't think Kobe has proven that, I don't know what to tell you. He's been the best in his class every year since he was about 12 years old.
I am not choosing Bolt since I only just heard of him last summer. I've known about Kobe for 15-16 years. A summer does not a decade a make. That said, Bolt and Bryant and Phelps are in the same class of athlete. For Roger and Tiger, I can't say that.
djokovicgonzalez2010
G.O.A.T.
This is ridiculous. It was done just for the controvercy. Phelps had more of a legitamate claim than any1 but Federer.
asafi2
Rookie
As I wrote earlier.....
Why would Kobe Bryant, a guy who has 1 regular season MVP, 1 NBA finals MVP and a guy who only won 1 championship as the leader of a team, and Lebron James, who has won absolutely nothing, be considered top athlete?
If you look at a lot of the polls, they have Tim Duncan listed for the NBA. He has been, by far, the best NBA player of the decade and is considered by most experts as the greatest power forward that ever lived. He has won THREE championships as the leader of his team, 2 NBA finals MVP's, 2 NBA regular season MVP's, and the best big defender of the decade.
Just because Kobe and Lebron are flashier they should be nominees? Hell Kobe would have 1 ring without Shaq (who is the second best player of this decade).
Explain to me how he has been dominant every year? You do realize once Shaq left he couldn't get out of the first round of the playoffs until they stole Gasol from the Grizzlies right?
Tennis_Hands
Banned
My list.
Roger Federer
Lance Armstrong
Julien Absalon
Ole Einar Björndalen
Kenenisa Bekele
Michael Schumacher
Valentino Rossi
Sebastien Loeb
Tiger Woods.
My preferences are to athletes who have the ballance between domination, achievements, rewards, recognition within the sport (since worldwide popularity can be hugely influenced by the nature of the sport, viewing audience's numbers, commercial influence etc.), recognition outside of the sport, personal preferences and all are athletes in individual sports.
I give slight preference to those athletes who compete in sports, where there are less chances for winning real awards (for example - in MTB bicycling you do not get very many chances to win big awards, compared to, say, Tennis, Cross Country running etc.). Sports, where equipment is essential part of success, get less recognition than those, with more influence of the equipment).
Tiger Woods gets last place not because he is not an outstanding athlete, but because the sport, in which he competes, is in its own league, compared to all other sports, the sport itself is less demanding on the body, so it is hard to compare careerwise (diminishing the meaning of such estimates as dominance and career achievements) and the fact, that part of his achievements were not in this decade.
Also, an offtopic remark to this poster.
You, Sir, are lacking some good manners. Heavily. I do not know how exactly this kind of attitude is being tolerated, but, regardless of whether you are going to be warned or else, I wanted to let you know that.
On the subject you have been discussing with Malakas and some other poster - not only is F1 more popular than Golf in Europe, but Michael Schumacher is more popular here (Europe) than Tiger Woods EVEN NOW, A COUPLE of years after he retired. In fact, this comparison doesn't make justice to what exactly his popularity in Europe is. He is one of the FEW athletes WORLDWIDE, who can rise the interest of the general public to certain sport by just announcing, that he might consider returning. As far as I remember that thing happened for the last time in USA when Michael Jordan announced his returning in the game. Tiger Woods is NOWHERE near this and will never be.
Also, Tiger Woods, and any other professional golfer, for that matter, has never been popular to the general (both interested in sports or not) public in Europe. Golf is considered elitist sport, that has turned into recreational, and most of the people do not even consider it a "real" sport. It falls in the category of such sports as snooker, polo etc.
All in all. You are wrong on both accounts:
F1 is more popular in Europe than Golf
Michael Schumacher is more popular, influential etc. than Tiger Woods, and I would say that achievementwise he is far superior too. That means moneywise too :twisted: .Worldwide.
BTW, I was enjoying your "logic".
Roger Federer
Lance Armstrong
Julien Absalon
Ole Einar Björndalen
Kenenisa Bekele
Michael Schumacher
Valentino Rossi
Sebastien Loeb
Tiger Woods.
My preferences are to athletes who have the ballance between domination, achievements, rewards, recognition within the sport (since worldwide popularity can be hugely influenced by the nature of the sport, viewing audience's numbers, commercial influence etc.), recognition outside of the sport, personal preferences and all are athletes in individual sports.
I give slight preference to those athletes who compete in sports, where there are less chances for winning real awards (for example - in MTB bicycling you do not get very many chances to win big awards, compared to, say, Tennis, Cross Country running etc.). Sports, where equipment is essential part of success, get less recognition than those, with more influence of the equipment).
Tiger Woods gets last place not because he is not an outstanding athlete, but because the sport, in which he competes, is in its own league, compared to all other sports, the sport itself is less demanding on the body, so it is hard to compare careerwise (diminishing the meaning of such estimates as dominance and career achievements) and the fact, that part of his achievements were not in this decade.
Also, an offtopic remark to this poster.
You, Sir, are lacking some good manners. Heavily. I do not know how exactly this kind of attitude is being tolerated, but, regardless of whether you are going to be warned or else, I wanted to let you know that.
On the subject you have been discussing with Malakas and some other poster - not only is F1 more popular than Golf in Europe, but Michael Schumacher is more popular here (Europe) than Tiger Woods EVEN NOW, A COUPLE of years after he retired. In fact, this comparison doesn't make justice to what exactly his popularity in Europe is. He is one of the FEW athletes WORLDWIDE, who can rise the interest of the general public to certain sport by just announcing, that he might consider returning. As far as I remember that thing happened for the last time in USA when Michael Jordan announced his returning in the game. Tiger Woods is NOWHERE near this and will never be.
Also, Tiger Woods, and any other professional golfer, for that matter, has never been popular to the general (both interested in sports or not) public in Europe. Golf is considered elitist sport, that has turned into recreational, and most of the people do not even consider it a "real" sport. It falls in the category of such sports as snooker, polo etc.
All in all. You are wrong on both accounts:
F1 is more popular in Europe than Golf
Michael Schumacher is more popular, influential etc. than Tiger Woods, and I would say that achievementwise he is far superior too. That means moneywise too :twisted: .Worldwide.
BTW, I was enjoying your "logic".
JennyS
Hall of Fame
Tiger went almost three years between majors (2002 US Open-2005 Masters) and didn't win one in 2009. So that could be used against him.
slice bh compliment
G.O.A.T.
Yeah, but, nah....I'd say there's more than enough being used against him these days.
''Leeeave Tigggerrr alooonnnne, sniff, sniff.;-)''
Anything where John Daley can beat you ISN'T an athletic event.
crackbillionair
Rookie
This is amusing. Look man, I watched Kobe drop 62 on my Knicks...I don't think Roger could have thrown in 62 @ msg that night. Who knows what would happen if someone had put a tennis raquet in kobe bryant's hands when he was a child and gave him proper coaching (1-hand backhand). Kobe could've had a ridiculous serve, and would've been able to cover the entire net, no problem. Kobe would be spiking tennis balls like they were volley balls...serve angles...quickness....
Tennis_Hands
Banned
dropshot winner
Hall of Fame
Cycling is definately a tough sport, but not because most people are unable to handle a 12 hour MTB race.
Most people can't eat 100 hotdogs either, but that doesn't mean competitive eating is a real sport.
big bang
Hall of Fame
the award will probably go to either Lance"the master of juice"armstrong or some NFL or NBA idiot who 99% of ppl outside US dont even know or gives a s... about!
please give it someone who deserves it and please choose an athlete from a sport not full of juice and one thats being practiced worldwide.. or you might as well give it to some russian chess-player..
please give it someone who deserves it and please choose an athlete from a sport not full of juice and one thats being practiced worldwide.. or you might as well give it to some russian chess-player..
Quite Please
Rookie
Great list, at least it contains more than just Americans and Federer. You could ad to the list:
Elena Isinbayeva
Zinedine Zidane (a bit diffucult because his dominance was around the century shift (98-02))
The Female Norwegian Handball Team
Last edited:
widmerpool
Rookie
this always boils down to two competing ideas of athleticism:
1. "Track and Field" athleticism
versus
2. "Skill set" athleticism
Tom Brady is a great athlete even if he can't bench 400lbs or run a 4.4 40.
Usain Bolt is a great athlete even if he can't hit a topsin backhand.
1. "Track and Field" athleticism
versus
2. "Skill set" athleticism
Tom Brady is a great athlete even if he can't bench 400lbs or run a 4.4 40.
Usain Bolt is a great athlete even if he can't hit a topsin backhand.
Tennis_Hands
Banned
Define "real sport". Why is not cycling (MTB and road pro cycling) worth of including in the list of sports, that "produce" contenders for this award?
Similar threads
- Poll
