Best Sportsman in the world?

[David]

Ali faced Liston twice, once as a 22 year old spring chicken ( Liston was at the peak of his prowess, being undefeated and 32 years old) and wimped out.
The next time they faced a year later, Ali knocked him out flat in the first round.

Well if you knew that then your above statement below was a bit nonsensical eh?

Ali wasnt in the amatuer era exactly.
But Sonny Liston ? Probably would've been KOed before the halfway mark by the likes of Ali, Fraser, Lennox, Tyson,Holyfield, etc.

 

[C_C]

Oh well, I've more pressing things to do (although I hardly rate Religion homework as important).
Agree to disagree, C_C?

I dont mind that you think what you do but the entire point of a forum is to debate your viewpoint....

 

[David]

Yous till havnt engaged your brain before engaging your fingers, i see.

I've seen a fair bit of that today

 

[David]

I dont mind that you think what you do but the entire point of a forum is to debate your viewpoint....

and not attack others whilst doing so

 

[C_C]

Well if you knew that then your above statement below was a bit nonsensical eh?

No...it highlights the difference between amatuer and professional.....it shows how a so-called professional heavyweight ( who mostly fought amatuers and held a day job) got beaten to a pulp by an upstart professional, who actually was professional in the modern sense (albeit the greatest fighter to have ever lived- still, nowhere close to at his best).

 

[King_Ponting]

If you bothered reading you'd notice that i said Gary Sobers is the best player EVER to play cricket.
What part of that dont you understand and where did Tendulkar come in ? I dont worship him like you worship Punter, ya know !


Yous till havnt engaged your brain before engaging your fingers, i see.

Umm yeh didnt read the non australian part did we............... it seems as if YOU havnt engaged your brain before engaging your fingers...

 

[David]

No...it highlights the difference between amatuer and professional.....it shows how a so-called professional heavyweight ( who mostly fought amatuers and held a day job) got beaten to a pulp by an upstart professional, who actually was professional in the modern sense (albeit the greatest fighter to have ever lived- still, nowhere close to at his best).

then why did you say PROBABLY?

 

[PY]

getting all personal and throwing yer toys outta yer pram like a typical teenage tw*t ?

Less of that thanks.

Everyone can make a point without whipping out the personal remarks about people.

Think all and sundry need to engage their brains before their fingers because in all honesty, this is the internet and no-one can win.

 

[C_C]

Umm yeh didnt read the non australian part did we............... it seems as if YOU havnt engaged your brain before engaging your fingers...

Look, kid, i have provided a logical train of thought to backup what i've said, instead of shouting 'Sobers Sobers Sobers' at the top of my lungs like you have when it comes to Bradman.
And another thing - till you inherit the mantle of John Howard, you dont have the right or the authority to speak for all Australians. So drop the 'we' and come back to earth with 'I'.

 

[C_C]

then why did you say PROBABLY?

because i have enough basic knowledge of science to never pass off a hypothetical scenario as definitive and instead, look at how probable a given scenario is.

 

[Waughney]

my problem is with Lance Armstrong compared to Federer is that cycling is a far different sport to tennis. There are so many different disciplines in cycling... Sprinting, Track, Tours. I don't really know much about it but the amount of champions that cycling spits out compared to tennis is unbelievable. In my opinion there are just as many if not more serious tennis players in the world as their are cyclists. However tennis players only have one arena of competition, whilst cyclists have many. Sure Lance Armstrong is great.

But Federer is on another level.

Not really sure what your point is. Armstrong's amazing achievements in road cycling aren't really degraded in any way because there are different disciplines. Most of the best track cyclists do road racing anyway (e.g. McGee).

I wouldn't say there are more cycling stars then tennis stars. It's just that cyclists are only in the spotlight in Australia once a year in the TDF, so a lot of attention is focused on for a short period of time.

If your talking about a greatest sportsman ever, you'd also have to take sportsmanship into account. Armstrong has showed his sprtsmanship countless times (e.g. always waiting for Ullrich if he crashed).

Federer may become the greatest tennis player ever, but it's a bit too early to say he's the greatest sportsman ever after he's only won a few grand slams.

 

[sledger]

has anyone mentioned lance armstrong yet?

 

[andyc]

has anyone mentioned lance armstrong yet?

I hope that was a joke

 

[Waughney]

I'm pretty sure everyone has.

 

[Cloete]

Look, to be blunt, dont be an idiot.
A quality allrounder is MUCH MORE VALUABLE than a quality batsman or bowler and that applies for ANY sport.

In Ice Hockey, Grestksy(the bradman) isnt as good a player as Bobby Hull ( Sobers).

YOU explain to me how the feck bradman is the 'most valuable player', setting aside your pro-aussie prejudice and bias.

That's where I stopped reading ^^

I skimmed through the next page to have a look at how many posts there were.

Anyway, you come into OT into a thread where people list their own personal views about great sportsmen and then try and argue with them that they're wrong?

Then when I tell you my views I get told that I'm being biased towards Australia, basing it soleley on one post which almost every other member of this forum would agree with. Hate to say it mate, but it's quite clear you're the one who's being prejudiced and it's against Australians. You have absolutely no right to stereotype people like that, your comment was not necessary at all.

This is the reason I stay out of Cricket Chat...

 

[Scaly piscine]

No...it highlights the difference between amatuer and professional.....it shows how a so-called professional heavyweight ( who mostly fought amatuers and held a day job) got beaten to a pulp by an upstart professional, who actually was professional in the modern sense (albeit the greatest fighter to have ever lived- still, nowhere close to at his best).

Bull, the most over-rated fighter to have ever lived - but as ever the gullible are easily taken in by all the hype.

 

[Piper]

Allan Donald
Graeme Smith
Alec Stewart
Brett Lee
Glenn McGrath
Shane Warne
Steve Waugh
Ricky Ponting
Stephen Fleming
Brendan McCullum
Brian Lara
Don Bradman
Jonny Wilkinson
Martin Johnson
Matt Dawson
Dan Carter
Carlos Spencer
Zinzan Brooke
Sean Fitzpatrick
Ben Cohen
Andy Roddick
John McEnroe
Pete Sampras
Goran Ivanisevic
Lyndsey Davenport
Maria Sharapova
Christen Olsen
Michael Johnson
Roger Black
Paula Radcliff
Andreas Thorkildsen
Justin Gatlin
Paul Sculthorpe
Sean Long
Zola
Frank Lampard
Eida Gudjohnsen
Ian Thorpe
Michael Phelps
Michael Schumachor
Lance Armstong

 

[andyc]

Ummmm..... Bradman, perhaps?

 

[Waughney]

Allan Donald
Graeme Smith
Alec Stewart
Brett Lee
Glenn McGrath
Shane Warne
Steve Waugh
Ricky Ponting
Stephen Fleming
Brendan McCullum
Brian Lara
Don Bradman
Jonny Wilkinson
Martin Johnson
Matt Dawson
Dan Carter
Carlos Spencer
Zinzan Brooke
Sean Fitzpatrick
Ben Cohen
Andy Roddick
John McEnroe
Pete Sampras
Goran Ivanisevic
Lyndsey Davenport
Maria Sharapova
Christen Olsen
Michael Johnson
Roger Black
Paula Radcliff
Andreas Thorkildsen
Justin Gatlin
Paul Sculthorpe
Sean Long
Zola
Frank Lampard
Eida Gudjohnsen
Ian Thorpe
Michael Phelps
Michael Schumachor

Where's the L Armstrong?

 

[Piper]

Where's the L Armstrong?

Oops i forgot about him