Mt. Rushmore of world Sports.

[lakers_forever]

Who would make your worldwide mt. rushmore of sports?

IMHO, Ali, Jordan and Pele are locks. I only have one spot left. I'd put Jesse Owens.

What about you guys?

[AJ2k8]

Jordan, Pele/Maradona, Ali, Lance Armstrong/Don Bradman

Can't decide between Cycling or Cricket... As for Pele and Maradona either would do.

[Pain of Thought]

George Brett, Detlef Schrempf, Ricky Williams, Brian Vickers.

[lakers_forever]

Jordan, Pele/Maradona, Ali, Lance Armstrong/Don Bradman

Can't decide between Cycling or Cricket... As for Pele and Maradona either would do.

Respectfully disagree. Maradona was a loser for much of his career to be considered the greatest. Lost 3 of 4 World Cups. Never won a Libertadores or a Champions League and was not among the all time greats at the main objective of the sport : scoring goals. Pele scored 1281. Maradona scored a little more than 300. Even players like Zico, who played in Maradona's time and same position had like 800 + goals. Maradona does not have the titles and does not have the stats. Plus he was not a complete footballer. He sucked at headers and could not shoot properly with his right foot.

Pele is Wilt + Russell. Record scoring plus titles. He is the GOAT. Just like Jordan had the stats and titles to back him.

Sorry about my ignorance on the subject, but who is Don Bradman?

[phoenix18]

Wayne Gretsky,MJ,Ali,Pele Honorable Mention(s):Jesse Owens, Jack Johnson, Babe Ruth,Jackie Robinson,Jim Brown,Hank Aaron.

[JtotheIzzo]

Pele
Jordan
Gretzky
Ali

[phoenix18]

Pele
Jordan
Gretzky
Ali
I guess we agree.

[ILballa]

Pele
Jordan
Gretzky
Ali
This.

[emsteez forreal]

who the **** is don bradman?

[hayden695]

Ali, Gretzky, Jordan or russell, and i guess Pele even though soccer is gay

[AJ2k8]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Bradman

Easily the best batsman to ever play professional cricket. Played professionally from 1928-1948, finished his career with a batting average of 99.94.

[emsteez forreal]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Bradman

Easily the best batsman to ever play professional cricket. Played professionally from 1928-1948, finished his career with a batting average of 99.94.

well god damn, i was getting ready to bash cricket, but 99.94?! that is out of 100 right?! lol

[hayden695]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Bradman

Easily the best batsman to ever play professional cricket. Played professionally from 1928-1948, finished his career with a batting average of 99.94.
yes but how many cricket followers are there? but i suppose the same could be said for hockey

[macmac]

An argument can be made for Tiger as well

[emsteez forreal]

but, 99.94? even if basketball was very, very little known, shooting 90%+ is unheard of. that's godly.

[AJ2k8]

Respectfully disagree. Maradona was a loser for much of his career to be considered the greatest. Lost 3 of 4 World Cups. Never won a Libertadores or a Champions League and was not among the all time greats at the main objective of the sport : scoring goals. Pele scored 1281. Maradona scored a little more than 300. Even players like Zico, who played in Maradona's time and same position had like 800 + goals. Maradona does not have the titles and does not have the stats. Plus he was not a complete footballer. He sucked at headers and could not shoot properly with his right foot.

Pele is Wilt + Russell. Record scoring plus titles. He is the GOAT. Just like Jordan had the stats and titles to back him.

Sorry about my ignorance on the subject, but who is Don Bradman?

I am by no means educated when it comes to soccer so i will take your word for it... All i knew was that they were both greats of the sport and shared the title for FIFA player of the century(i believe). Thanks for the insight:cheers:

[miller-time]

who the **** is don bradman?

Wisden hailed Bradman as, "the greatest phenomenon in the history of cricket, indeed in the history of all ball games".[1] Statistician Charles Davis analysed the statistics for several prominent sportsmen by comparing the number of standard deviations that they stand above the mean for their sport.[224] The top performers in his selected sports are:

http://img22.imageshack.us/img22/1507/bradman.jpg

but americans don't have cricket so i doubt he would be considered on this site.

i'd also add jordan, ali and michael schumacher

[emsteez forreal]

Wisden hailed Bradman as, "the greatest phenomenon in the history of cricket, indeed in the history of all ball games".[1] Statistician Charles Davis analysed the statistics for several prominent sportsmen by comparing the number of standard deviations that they stand above the mean for their sport.[224] The top performers in his selected sports are:

http://img22.imageshack.us/img22/1507/bradman.jpg

but americans don't have cricket so i doubt he would be considered on this site.

i'd also add jordan, ali and michael schumacher

yeah the last guy explained it. ridiculous. :eek:

[AJ2k8]

well god damn, i was getting ready to bash cricket, but 99.94?! that is out of 100 right?! lol

No, when it comes to cricket that is how much you average per inning, however it does take into account times when the team has declared or for some other reason the batsman finished not out.

So it's calculated by amount of runs divided by number of times a player gets out. So for every time Bradman got out he scored 99.94 runs.

Edit-Found this: In cricket, a player's batting average is the total number of runs he has scored divided by the number of times he has been out. Since the number of runs a player scores and how often he gets out are primarily measures of his own playing ability, and largely independent of his team mates, batting average is a good statistic for describing an individual player's skill as a batsman. The number is also simple to interpret intuitively, being approximately the average number of runs the batsman scores per innings. Batting average has been used to gauge cricket players' relative skills since the 18th century.

[emsteez forreal]

No, when it comes to cricket that is how much you average per inning, however it does take into account times when the team has declared or for some other reason the batsman finished not out.

So it's calculated by amount of runs divided by number of times a player gets out. So for every time Bradman got out he scored 99.94 runs.

:oldlol: excuse the american. but wow, that's ridiculous.

[big baller]

Jordan, Ali, Pele/Zico(Fav player of all time :D) and Gretzky.

[AJ2k8]

Does 99.94 mean he scores 99 runs in one inning? I don't know much about cricket so can anyone explain how things work in cricket compare to baseball?

Ok so in cricket you bat until you get out and there are two batsmen on the field at the same time. For every time you run to the other side of the pitch it equals a run, for every ball hit over the boundary on the full is counted as 6 runs and for every ball you hit past the boundary (not on the full) is counted as 4 runs.

An innings is basically a team's batting session which lasts until either 10players get out, time runs out or the side declares. A test match (the most commonly played type of cricket) lasts a maximum of 5 days and each team has 2 innings so the innings can go on for a while.

He's average is just his amount of runs scored in his career divided by how many times he got out.

The amazing thing about Bradman's average is that the next best average in test cricket history is by Graeme Pollock who averaged 60.97.


Dont know if that explains it well enough:confusedshrug:

[andgar923]

Jackie Robinson, Pele, Gretzki, Jordan

[LJJ]

Jordan, Pele/Maradona, Ali, Lance Armstrong/Don Bradman

Can't decide between Cycling or Cricket... As for Pele and Maradona either would do.

You put up a cyclist and you put up Eddy Merckx. Lance Armstrong wouldn't even be on the Mt. Rushmore of cycling if there where 8 heads.

[LJJ]

[quote=lakers_forever]Respectfully disagree. Maradona was a loser for much of his career to be considered the greatest. Lost 3 of 4 World Cups. Never won a Libertadores or a Champions League and was not among the all time greats at the main objective of the sport : scoring goals. Pele scored 1281. Maradona scored a little more than 300. Even players like Zico, who played in Maradona's time and same position had like 800 + goals. Maradona does not have the titles and does not have the stats. Plus he was not a complete footballer. He sucked at headers and could not shoot properly with his right foot.

Pele is Wilt + Russell. Record scoring plus titles. He is the GOAT. Just like Jordan had the stats and titles to back him.quote]

Football is a teamsport. Maradona didn't have the national teams Pele had.
Pele was only the best player on his team in one of those World Cup wins at any rate, so that puts him on par with Maradona.

And of course Maradona didn't score as many goals as Pele. Completely different era's, different level of competetion, almost a completely different sport. In the Brazilian league when Pele played there scores like 5-4 where casual scores. Maradona played his entire prime in the Italian League during the hey days of the Catenaccio, and on top of that he wasn't even a forward.


And you couldn't even get the main objective of football right. The main objective of football is not scoring goals.

[JtotheIzzo]

You put up a cyclist and you put up Eddy Merckx. Lance Armstrong wouldn't even be on the Mt. Rushmore of cycling if there where 8 heads.

really? I know nothing about cycling but this can't be true.

[LJJ]

really? I know nothing about cycling but this can't be true.

There you go.

[Manute for Ever!]

yes but how many cricket followers are there?

Melbourne Cricket Ground seats approximately 100,000 people. City of Melbourne has a population of about 3,000,000.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/34/Mcg_internal_odi_medium.jpg/800px-Mcg_internal_odi_medium.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/93/MCG_Crowd.jpg

http://media.lifehacker.com.au/mt/MCG_stadium.jpg

[hayden695]

Melbourne Cricket Ground seats approximately 100,000 people. City of Melbourne has a population of about 3,000,000.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/34/Mcg_internal_odi_medium.jpg/800px-Mcg_internal_odi_medium.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/93/MCG_Crowd.jpg

http://media.lifehacker.com.au/mt/MCG_stadium.jpg
Well phuck off

jk, guess im just partial to sports i like or at least find entertaining

[AJ2k8]

You put up a cyclist and you put up Eddy Merckx. Lance Armstrong wouldn't even be on the Mt. Rushmore of cycling if there where 8 heads.
http://www.cyclinghalloffame.com/images/alltime25graph.gif

Ok then you're correct in placing him above Lance... But can you explain how Lance Armstrong, who has the 3rd most points total in HOF designated races wouldn't make the 8 face Mount Rushmore of cycling?

[takeittothehoop]

Melbourne Cricket Ground seats approximately 100,000 people. City of Melbourne has a population of about 3,000,000.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/34/Mcg_internal_odi_medium.jpg/800px-Mcg_internal_odi_medium.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/93/MCG_Crowd.jpg

http://media.lifehacker.com.au/mt/MCG_stadium.jpg

Been there, but I really don't like cricket. I know crazy.

My Mount Rushmore of Sports:

Jordan, Ali, Pele/Maradona, Rod Laver (tennis).

[takeittothehoop]

I don't like to put Armstrong on there because all cyclists these days have a steroid cloud over there heads.

[Kebab Stall]

Been there, but I really don't like cricket. I know crazy.

My Mount Rushmore of Sports:

Jordan, Ali, Pele/Maradona, Rod Laver (tennis).
Good choice. I'm sure some will argue Federer, myself included, but you can't go wrong with Laver.

[Hermit]

I would pick Tiger Woods (golfer), Kobe Bryant (The hottest figure in basketball. I don't know any other player right now) Albert Pujols (the only player not to test possitive for steroids who hits a lot of homeruns), and Wayne Gretsky because I like hockey and my dad say hes the best.

[Manute for Ever!]

I would pick Tiger Woods (golfer), Kobe Bryant (The hottest figure in basketball. I don't know any other player right now) Albert Pujols (the only player not to test possitive for steroids who hits a lot of homeruns), and Wayne Gretsky because I like hockey and my dad say hes the best.

Serious? And as for Gretzky, you don't need your Dad to tell you how great he was. I'm from a country that doesn't really have ice and I know about his greatness.

[Butters]

Pele
Babe
Gretzky
Jordan

[AJ2k8]

Actually i think ill take someone out of my mount rushmore to replace them with Rodman, he would be awesome carved in stone:lol

[LJJ]

http://www.cyclinghalloffame.com/images/alltime25graph.gif

Ok then you're correct in placing him above Lance... But can you explain how Lance Armstrong, who has the 3rd most points total in HOF designated races wouldn't make the 8 face Mount Rushmore of cycling?

Lot at that graphic.

Let's compare some resumes (I highlighted where they blow out Armstrong to put them ahead):

Armstrong - 7 Grand Tours, World Champion, 2 classic wins

Indurain - 7 Grand Tours, Olympic Gold Medal TT, Time Trial WC, 6 classic wins.

Anquetil - 8 Grand Tour wins, 4 times highest ranked overall cyclist, over 10 classic wins

Coppi - 7 Grand Tour wins, World Champion, Over 10 classic wins, (Even though during most of his prime there was this war called the second world war, which lasted 5 years and during which there were no races)

Those are already 5 cyclists who have without a doubt much more impressive resumes than Armstrong. Then you have guys like Bartali and Zoetemelk who's resumes are as good as Armstrong.

Then add to that all of the legendary specialist riders such as sprinters and classics specialists. And all the cyclists from non road disciplines such as track cyclists, field cyclist, mountain bikers, etc. Those have not even entered the discussion yet.

[lakers_forever]

I am by no means educated when it comes to soccer so i will take your word for it... All i knew was that they were both greats of the sport and shared the title for FIFA player of the century(i believe). Thanks for the insight:cheers:

:cheers:

[lazerface]

michael jordan
muhammad ali
jim brown
hank aaron

[lakers_forever]

Wisden hailed Bradman as, "the greatest phenomenon in the history of cricket, indeed in the history of all ball games".[1] Statistician Charles Davis analysed the statistics for several prominent sportsmen by comparing the number of standard deviations that they stand above the mean for their sport.[224] The top performers in his selected sports are:

http://img22.imageshack.us/img22/1507/bradman.jpg

but americans don't have cricket so i doubt he would be considered on this site.

i'd also add jordan, ali and michael schumacher

Very Interesting. Repped. Where did you get this?

[lakers_forever]

Football is a teamsport. Maradona didn't have the national teams Pele had.
Pele was only the best player on his team in one of those World Cup wins at any rate, so that puts him on par with Maradona.

The Maradona did not have a great NT excuse is pretty old. He did not play for Venezuela. He played for Argentina. Pele played with great teammates? Yep. But you can't forget that Brazil had never won a world cup before Pele. In a matter of fact, Brazil was only the third football power in South America. With Pele they became the top football power in the world. After Pele retired, Brazil spent 24 years without winning a world cup.
And although Didi was great in 1958, you can certainly claim Pele was the best in that cup. A 17 year old boy playing in the biggest tournament in the world, scored 3 goals in the semi final and 2 in the final. So, That can easily make Pele the top dog in 2 world cups, 1958 and 1970.
Also, Maradona joined the World Cup winning team of Argentina in 1978 in the 1982 World Cup and had an average World Cup. He had great teammates like Kempes, Passarella, Ardiles, Fillol and could not do anything.
Actually that favours Pele, because even playing with great players, he was considered the king of them all.





And of course Maradona didn't score as many goals as Pele. Completely different era's, different level of competetion, almost a completely different sport. In the Brazilian league when Pele played there scores like 5-4 where casual scores. Maradona played his entire prime in the Italian League during the hey days of the Catenaccio, and on top of that he wasn't even a forward.

Players like Zico, who played in the same era of Maradona, scored much more goals than him.
Pele was never a forward. He was an attacking midfielder. He was always the number "10", the guy who could create and score just like Zico was.
And you
Brazilian football in Pele's time was the best in the world. It had all the players from the brazil national team who won the 1958, 62, and 1970 World Cups. No starters from that teams played in Europe.
And Pele had a better goal average against Italian Teams than against Brazilian teams. He often destroyed Heleno Herrera Internazionale, you know, the coach theat invented catenaccio.

There's no argument against Pele. No one dominated his own era like he did. His Santos was considered the best team in the world. Another case for Pele there. Santos was not a major force before Pele. With him they became the best team in the world. Without him, Santos waited untill 2002 to win something revelant again.


And you couldn't even get the main objective of football right. The main objective of football is not scoring goals.

Really?! What is then?

[miller-time]

Very Interesting. Repped. Where did you get this?

donald bradman page on wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Bradman

was just reading it, thought this was interesting to:


The statistics show that "no other athlete dominates an international sport to the extent that Bradman does cricket".[2] In order to post a similarly dominant career statistic as Bradman, a baseball batter would need a career batting average of .392, while a basketball player would need to score an average of 43.0 points per game.[225] The respective records are .366 and 30.1.[225]

When Bradman died, Time magazine allocated a space in its "Milestones" column for an obituary:[226]

... Australian icon considered by many to be the pre-eminent sportsman of all time ... One of Australia's most beloved heroes, he was revered abroad as well. When Nelson Mandela was released after 27 years in prison, his first question to an Australian visitor was, "Is Sir Donald Bradman still alive?"

[LJJ]

The Maradona did not have a great NT excuse is pretty old. He did not play for Venezuela. He played for Argentina. Pele played with great teammates? Yep. But you can't forget that Brazil had never won a world cup before Pele. In a matter of fact, Brazil was only the third football power in South America. With Pele they became the top football power in the world. After Pele retired, Brazil spent 24 years without winning a world cup.
And although Didi was great in 1958, you can certainly claim Pele was the best in that cup. A 17 year old boy playing in the biggest tournament in the world, scored 3 goals in the semi final and 2 in the final. So, That can easily make Pele the top dog in 2 world cups, 1958 and 1970.
Also, Maradona joined the World Cup winning team of Argentina in 1978 in the 1982 World Cup and had an average World Cup. He had great teammates like Kempes, Passarella, Ardiles, Fillol and could not do anything.
Actually that favours Pele, because even playing with great players, he was considered the king of them all.





Players like Zico, who played in the same era of Maradona, scored much more goals than him.
Pele was never a forward. He was an attacking midfielder. He was always the number "10", the guy who could create and score just like Zico was.
And you
Brazilian football in Pele's time was the best in the world. It had all the players from the brazil national team who won the 1958, 62, and 1970 World Cups. No starters from that teams played in Europe.
And Pele had a better goal average against Italian Teams than against Brazilian teams. He often destroyed Heleno Herrera Internazionale, you know, the coach theat invented catenaccio.

There's no argument against Pele. No one dominated his own era like he did. His Santos was considered the best team in the world. Another case for Pele there. Santos was not a major force before Pele. With him they became the best team in the world. Without him, Santos waited untill 2002 to win something revelant again.



Really?! What is then?

The main objective of football is not to score goals, but to score at least one goal more than your opponent. Those are two different things, and LMAO at you not knowing this.

Pele was not the best player on the Brazilian team in 1958. Garrincha was.
And you don't know d1ck about football in the sixties. No shame to admit that, because none of us do. Especially not the intricacies like which leagues where better.

Please amuse me by pulling up a couple of facts and showing all of Santos' results against European teams.

[darius15]

43 points a game?:eek:

This Bradman guy must be to cricket what Tiger Woods is to golf, and cricket has more fans worldwide than golf, I think.

[miller-time]

43 points a game?:eek:

This Bradman guy must be to cricket what Tiger Woods is to golf, and cricket has more fans worldwide than golf, I think.

it has to be marketing, i'm not a cricket fan but i am an australian so i should know more about bradman than tiger right? but i don't.

[lakers_forever]

The main objective of football is not to score goals, but to score at least one goal more than your opponent. Those are two different things, and LMAO at you not knowing this.

Pele was not the best player on the Brazilian team in 1958. Garrincha was.
And you don't know d1ck about football in the sixties. No shame to admit that, because none of us do. Especially not the intricacies like which leagues where better.

Please amuse me by pulling up a couple of facts and showing all of Santos' results against European teams.

I'm soth american and love football history. Garrincha was not the best player in 1958. He was the best player in the 1962 World Cup. If you make some research, you can find out.

You don't even know me. How can you say that I don't no anything about brazilian football in the 60's?

All Santos games with Pele against italian teams;
Note that all games were played in Italy, Santos always playing as the away team:

Friday June, 5 1959 Santos 2 x 3 Internazionale (Italy) Goals by Pele = 2
Friday June 26, 1959 Santos 7 x 1 Internazionale - Goals by Pele 4
Tuesday June, 30 1959 Santos 4 x 0 - No goals by Pele
Thursday May, 12 1960 Brasil 2 x 2 Internazionale - 2 goals by Pele
Wednesday June, 1 1960 Santos 3 x 2 Roma - 1 Goal by Pele
Friday June, 3 1960 Santos 0 x 3 Fiorentina
Sunday June, 18 1961 Santos 2 x 0 Juventus 1 goal by Pele
Wednesday June, 21 1961 Santos 5 x 0 - 2 Goals by Pele
Saturday June, 24 1961 Santos 4 x 0 Internazionale - 1 Goal by Pele
Saturday June, 15 1963 Santos 4 x 3 Roma - 2 goals by Pele
Wednesday June, 19 1963 Santos 0 x 2 Internazionale
Saturday June, 22 1963 Santos 0 x 4 Milan
Wednesday June, 26 1963 Santos 3 x 5 Juventus - 1 Goal by Pele
Wednesday October, 16 1963 Santos 2 x Milan 4 - 2 goals by Pele
Monday September 5, 1966 Santos 4 x 1 Internazionale - 1 goal by Pele
Saturday June, 17 1967 Santos 2 x 1 Manotva - 1 goal by Pele
Tuesday June, 20 1967 Santos 1 x o Veneza
Saturday June, 24 1967 Santos 5 x 1 Lecce - 3 goals by Pele
Tuesday June, 27 1967 Santos 1 x 1 Fiorentina
Thursday June, 29 1967 Santos 3 x 1 Roma - 1 goal by Pele
Saturday August, 26 1967 Santos 0 x 1 Internazionale
Sunday June, 9 1968 Santos 2 x 1 Cagliari
Wednesday June, 12 1968 Santos 2 x Alessandria 0 - 1 goal by Pele
Friday June, 21 1968 Santos 4 x 2 Napoli - 1 goal by Pele
Wednesday June, 26 1968 Santos 6 x 2 Napoli - 2 goals by Pele
Friday June, 28 1968 Santos 5 x 2 Napoli - 2 goals by Pele
Tuesday June, 24 1969 Santos 1 x 0 Internazionale
Wednesday September 24, 1969, Santos 7 x 1 Combined Genova/Sampodria - 2 goals by Pele
Wednesday June, 23 1971 Santos 2 x 1 Bologna 1 - 1 goal by Pele
Sunday June, 27 1971 Santos 1 x 1 Bologna
Wednesday June, 30 1971 Santos 1 x 0 BOlogna - 1 goal by Pele
Friday March, 3 1972 Santos 2 x 0 Roma
Sunday March, 5 1972 Santos 3 x 2 Napoli - 2 goals by Pele
Saturday April, 29 1972 Santos 1 x 0 Napoli
Monday May, 1 1972 Santos 3 x 2 Cagliari - 2 goals by Pele
Sunday June, 25 1972 Santos 7 x 2 Catanzaro
Friday May, 25 1973 Santos 3 x 0 Lazio - 1 goal by Pele
Monday May, 28 1973 Santos 4 x 2 Lazio - 2 goals by Pele

41 goals in 38 games. That gives him a 1.07 goals per game, better than his career average of 0.93 goals per game.

18 year old Pele in a tour in Europe against European teams.

Wednesday June, 24 1959. Valencia 4 x 4 Santos. 1 goal by Pele
Friday June 26, 1959, Internazionale (Italy) 1 x 7 Santos. 4 goals by Pele. :bowdown:
Sunday June, 28 1959. Barcelona 1 x 5 Santos. 2 goals by Pele.

Santos was the best team in the world. Pele had a better goal average in hundreds of games agaisnt european teams than he did in his career.

If you want, I can give you a list of all Pele goals in his career.

[lakers_forever]

South American Champion Santos against European Champion Benfica. Both teams played in Intercontinental Cup to decide who was the best in the world.
Santos beat Benfica 5 goals to 2 in Portugal. Pele scored 3 and gave on assist.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdLCqvSO3SM&feature=related

[LJJ]

Okay, that's cool. :cheers:

All those games played in june though, so they don't hold a lot of importance, but the European teams all on their home turf.

Still though, Maradona on the pitch is probably the most impressive I have seen. But I have only seen some of the early WC footage.

[lakers_forever]

Okay, that's cool. :cheers:

All those games played in june though, so they don't hold a lot of importance, but the European teams all on their home turf.

Still though, Maradona on the pitch is probably the most impressive I have seen. But I have only seen some of the early WC footage.

:cheers:

It does hold a lot of importance. Old football journalists say that all those teams wanted to beat Santos and slow down the Pele "hype".
Check some Pele hilights in youtube. You'll be impressed on how he dominated evert aspect of football abilty. :cheers:

I'm ignorant on Golf. Never liked it. Can anyone tell me if Tiger Woods is already considered the best ever? Does he have all time records and stuff like that already?

[lakers_forever]

BTW, last week the German newspaper Bild made a survey to chose the world's greatest sportsmen.

Here are the results:
1.Muhammad Ali
2.Pele
3.Michael Schumacher
4.Michael Jordan
5.Roger Federer
6.Franz Beckenbauer
7.Jesse Owens
8.Diego Maradona
9.Carl Lewis
10.Michael Phelps


A clear bias for German athletes. Maradona should be ahead of Beckenbauer and Jordan should definetly be ahead of Schumacher. Ali and Pele can be first or second place. You can't go wrong with either of them.


http://www.bild.de/BILD/news/bild-english/sport-news/more-sport/2009/07/07/worlds-greatest-ever-sportsmen/roger-federer-fifth-place-in-top-ten-list.html

[Zak]

kwame brown, rick ross, michael jackson, george w

[i seen hippos]

Peter Schmeichel >>>>>> Pele and Maradona.

[phoenix18]

BTW, last week the German newspaper Bild made a survey to chose the world's greatest sportsmen.

Here are the results:
1.Muhammad Ali
2.Pele
3.Michael Schumacher
4.Michael Jordan
5.Roger Federer
6.Franz Beckenbauer
7.Jesse Owens
8.Diego Maradona
9.Carl Lewis
10.Michael Phelps


A clear bias for German athletes. Maradona should be ahead of Beckenbauer and Jordan should definetly be ahead of Schumacher. Ali and Pele can be first or second place. You can't go wrong with either of them.


http://www.bild.de/BILD/news/bild-english/sport-news/more-sport/2009/07/07/worlds-greatest-ever-sportsmen/roger-federer-fifth-place-in-top-ten-list.html
What the hell is Shoe maker and Phelps doing on this list? Germans, gotta love em'.

[ukplayer4]

in order

michael schumacher- goat
michael jordan
roger federer


gap.


ali/tiger etc.

[lakers_forever]

Bump


I saw the thread in the nba forum and remembered this one.

So, most agree with Pele, Jordan and Ali. Who would be the 4th one?

I said Jesse Owens, but I'm not sure. Michael Schumacher, Bradman, Carl Lewis, Michael Phelps, Babe Ruth, Usain Bolt, Federer (maybe Nadal in the near future), Gretzky, Jim Brown. The problem with Gretzky, BRadman, Jim Brown and Ruth is that they have not transcended the sport. If you don't follow those sports and are not from their countries, chances are you never even heard of them.

I guess I would still choose Jesse Owens.

[HarryCallahan]

Bradman should be the unanimous #1.

Bradman
Jordan
Gretzky
Ali

[pauk]

Mohammed Ali
Michael Jordan
Diego Maradona
Michael Schumacher

[JohnFreeman]

MJ,Tiger, Ali and Pele

[sundizz]

MJ, Ali, Pele, Gretzy

They each redefined sport.

MJ in the air
Ali with his flair
Pele (i actually dunno anything about him)
"The Great One"

[Pointguard]

Pele
Ali
Jordan

Bradman Can someone speak on Bradman's defense tho? I mean defense as a fielder. The metric I see is an offensive measure. Also was he an ambassador for the sport. Can't put him there if he lacks in those dimensions.

Feels kind of weird that Track and Field or the Olympic athletes don't win out - Phelps and Carl Lewis don't quite get it for me. We got air, Ali for fire so Phelps makes sense if you want to do water.

Gretsky is definitely up there.

On the side:

Pele meant much more to Futbol than Maradona even without the goals and winning being in his favor in a big way. More people came to the sport and wanted to be skilled because of Pele than anybody else anyway. He transcended the sport and rivaled Ali on the world stage.

[RagaZ]

Messi, Ali, Jordan, Schumacher.

[MavsSuperFan]

99% of the posts in this thread are american centric.

With the exception of soccer most of the sports mentioned in this thread are basically popular north american sports. Basketball, boxing, golf, hockey, baseball etc

Badminton, Cricket, Rugby, Figure skating (its extremely popular in some countries), gymnastics, etc. Arent considered at all.

[lakers_forever]

MJ, Ali, Pele, Gretzy

They each redefined sport.

MJ in the air
Ali with his flair
Pele (i actually dunno anything about him)
"The Great One"

Pele redefined football/soccer. First, a teen prodigy. Then a the first real super athlete (strong, fast, if you look the footages, specially in the early 60's, he looks like a player from the future playing in the past) and the first worldwide football superstar who transcended the sport. Dude literally put Brazil on the map. Before Pele, the Brazilian NT was only the third football power of South America. With him, it became the greatest in the world and Brazil synonymous with football.

[lakers_forever]

On the side:

Pele meant much more to Futbol than Maradona even without the goals and winning being in his favor in a big way. More people came to the sport and wanted to be skilled because of Pele than anybody else anyway. He transcended the sport and rivaled Ali on the world stage.

Yep. Maradona himself was a huge Pele fan and like everyone after Pele, wore the 10 because of him. Because of Pele, the "10" became the symbol of the team's best player.

[KobesFinger]

Apparently the 4 most popular sports are football, basketball, cricket and tennis.

Pele
Jordan
Tendulkar
Federer

[Pointguard]

Yep. Maradona himself was a huge Pele fan and like everyone after Pele, wore the 10 because of him. Because of Pele, the "10" became the symbol of the team's best player.

Hey, you have some great post in this thread! Thanks for the education.

[Pointguard]

99% of the posts in this thread are american centric.

With the exception of soccer most of the sports mentioned in this thread are basically popular north american sports. Basketball, boxing, golf, hockey, baseball etc

Badminton, Cricket, Rugby, Figure skating (its extremely popular in some countries), gymnastics, etc. Arent considered at all.
Hockey Golf and Boxing are world wide. Golf is an expensive sport so not that popular But resorts around the world have it. Both Ali and Jordan were considered among the most recognizable faces on the planet and this was before the internet.

Badminton? Really?

[alenleomessi]

messi, jordan, lebron, federer, ali

[b1imtf]

MJ, Zidane, Tiger, Federer.

[Nick Young]

Kobe, Kareem, Magic, Shaq

[Sarcastic]

Jordan, Ruth, Pele, Ali

[nightprowler10]

Bradman Can someone speak on Bradman's defense tho? I mean defense as a fielder. The metric I see is an offensive measure. Also was he an ambassador for the sport. Can't put him there if he lacks in those dimensions.

Interesting thought, batting in cricket is just as much of an offensive measure as it is a defensive measure. A one-dimensional batsman is someone who only bats slow, or fast, or too defensively, etc. Versatility in batting style and temperament is a prerequisite to be even a "good" batsman at the top level, with a few exceptions (you can get away with being aggressive all the time if you have incredible hand-eye co-ordination and/or technique). So from a cricket POV he's got that well covered. He apparently had a great defensive technique that allowed him to bat for ages, while having an aggressive streak as well that allowed him to score a century in the first session of a Test match (a feat that is still unmatched I think). I mean that right there is video game stuff.

He was also a part time bowler (leg break) which would be baseball's equivalent to a relief pitcher. Though that is nowhere near as impressive as it sounds. Almost every experienced cricketer is a part time bowler of some sort.

I am not sure how much has been written about his fielding, but I'm curious now and shall start digging. I'll let you know if I find something. :cheers:

What do you mean by ambassador of the sport? Does this apply?


After retirement Sir Donald Bradman remained a great ambassador for the sport. He was knighted for his services to cricket and remained open to an adoring public, even though he remained publicity shy throughout the period. In 2001, the Australian Prime Minister, John Howard, said he was the greatest living Australian.

http://www.biographyonline.net/sport/cricketers/donald-bradman.html

[Pointguard]

Interesting thought, batting in cricket is just as much of an offensive measure as it is a defensive measure. A one-dimensional batsman is someone who only bats slow, or fast, or too defensively, etc. Versatility in batting style and temperament is a prerequisite to be even a "good" batsman at the top level, with a few exceptions (you can get away with being aggressive all the time if you have incredible hand-eye co-ordination and/or technique). So from a cricket POV he's got that well covered. He apparently had a great defensive technique that allowed him to bat for ages, while having an aggressive streak as well that allowed him to score a century in the first session of a Test match (a feat that is still unmatched I think). I mean that right there is video game stuff.

He was also a part time bowler (leg break) which would be baseball's equivalent to a relief pitcher. Though that is nowhere near as impressive as it sounds. Almost every experienced cricketer is a part time bowler of some sort.

I am not sure how much has been written about his fielding, but I'm curious now and shall start digging. I'll let you know if I find something. :cheers:

What do you mean by ambassador of the sport? Does this apply?

http://www.biographyonline.net/sport/cricketers/donald-bradman.html
Thanks, good stuff!

[HardwoodLegend]

Usain Bolt and Takeru Kobayashi deserve spots.

[BasedTom]

Bradman, Jordan, Gretzky, Ali

Pele is not the consensus greatest football player like the guys above are usually regarded as the greatest in their own respective sport. He's more like the Bill Russel of football.

[BasedTom]

Usain Bolt and Takeru Kobayashi deserve spots.
Bolt has been accused of roiding (I don't believe it though) and Kobayashi got screwed over by the establishment. Though he is, in my opinion, the greatest in his craft

[bladefd]

Muhammad Ali
Michael "Air" Jordan
Pele
Wayne Gretzky



-Tiger Woods came close but the big drop in performance last 5 years since the scandal has closed the book on him permanently.
-Babe Ruth comes very close, but I feel as if quite a few other mlb players come close to him in shear impact.

[Ass Dan]

Muhammad Ali
Michael "Air" Jordan
Pele
Wayne Gretzky


If we omit Babe Ruth we also omit any f*cking cricket player.

These are the consensus global sports (golf is not a sport, cricket is a colonial pass time).

I'd drop Ali for a track and field star but it is too tricky to find consensus.

[Ass Dan]

Melbourne Cricket Ground seats approximately 100,000 people. City of Melbourne has a population of about 3,000,000.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/34/Mcg_internal_odi_medium.jpg/800px-Mcg_internal_odi_medium.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/93/MCG_Crowd.jpg

http://media.lifehacker.com.au/mt/MCG_stadium.jpg

Whoop-dee-f*ckin-doo! Baseball draws half of that in 30 cities 81 times per year. Math skews baseball.

And leave the 'world sport' shit at home, it is ONLY popular in ex-colonial haunts and the numbers skew large because of India's participation.

We could make using chopsticks a sport and it would be the most popular because 2 Billion Asians use them.

UK, Aus, NZ, India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, SA, and West Indies...dassit! The only countries that can compete for a world championship.

That puts you similar to hockey or baseball. Take away British India (India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh) and you got a bunch of tiny countries, with small populations.

This is Mt. Rushmore, not Mt. Rushhour, cricket gets cut, so does baseball.

[nightprowler10]

What a useless rant. Take away the biggest country that plays the sport and that's supposed to mean something. Take away USA, how big is basketball? Cricket is at least as global as basketball. Yes, there are eight countries that are competitive. How many countries are competitive in basketball?

[JohnFreeman]

What a useless rant. Take away the biggest country that plays the sport and that's supposed to mean something. Take away USA, how big is basketball? Cricket is at least as global as basketball. Yes, there are eight countries that are competitive. How many countries are competitive in basketball?
India would contribute tonnes of viewers

[nightprowler10]

India would contribute tonnes of viewers
Im not sure i understand how that affects cricket's global standing. The sport was considered global before the '83 world cup when India won and cricket REALLY took off there. Having India as a key player has changed cricket but there were the same 8 major nations playing then that are still Test class.

[qrich]

Ok so in cricket you bat until you get out and there are two batsmen on the field at the same time. For every time you run to the other side of the pitch it equals a run, for every ball hit over the boundary on the full is counted as 6 runs and for every ball you hit past the boundary (not on the full) is counted as 4 runs.

An innings is basically a team's batting session which lasts until either 10players get out, time runs out or the side declares. A test match (the most commonly played type of cricket) lasts a maximum of 5 days and each team has 2 innings so the innings can go on for a while.

He's average is just his amount of runs scored in his career divided by how many times he got out.

The amazing thing about Bradman's average is that the next best average in test cricket history is by Graeme Pollock who averaged 60.97.


Dont know if that explains it well enough:confusedshrug:


All I need to hear. 99.94 drops to 60.97 :eek:

[Jackass18]

Bradman, Jordan, Gretzky, Ali

Pele is not the consensus greatest football player like the guys above are usually regarded as the greatest in their own respective sport. He's more like the Bill Russel of football.

Ali isn't the greatest boxer, either. It would probably be someone like SRR.


My Mt. Rushmore featuring my 4 fav sports:

Jerry Rice
Michael Jordan
Babe Ruth
Fedor Emelianenko or Anderson Silva

[AirFederer]

Jordan, Federer, Ali, Pele, Bekele, D

[Denitron]

MJ, Ali, Tiger, Stone Cold Steve Austin

:bowdown:

[nightprowler10]

All I need to hear. 99.94 drops to 60.97 :eek:
The thing with Pollock is that, through no fault of his own**, his career was cut short at the age of 26 after playing 7 years of cricket. In comparison Bradman's career spanned 20 years. Pollock went on to play a ton of domestic cricket where he averaged 55, so you could argue had he played more cricket at the top level his average would have most likely dropped below 60.97. Pollock is still a great of the game mind you, but his average has always been a bit suspect in my mind.

If you were to "disqualify" Pollock from this discussion I think the next best average is Garfield Sobers with an average of 57.78.

**Pollock was South African. During the Apartheid era his career was cut short when the rest of the World boycotted South Africa.

[Uncle Drew]

MJ, Ali, Cruijff, Federer

Merckx could be in there as well.

[dyna]

MJ
Ruth
Ali
Pele

[outbreak]

Don bradman /endthread

Also for people who don't know cricket he set his records playing on uncovered pitches in an era without Helmets shitty bats and poor padding. Plus he had to face legal bodyline. I don't think any sport had had a player as dominant

[QUIZZLE]

Don bradman /endthread

Also for people who don't know cricket he set his records playing on uncovered pitches in an era without Helmets shitty bats and poor padding. Plus he had to face legal bodyline. I don't think any sport had had a player as dominant

I don't think anyone could give less of a rat's ass about cricket.

[JtotheIzzo]

What a useless rant. Take away the biggest country that plays the sport and that's supposed to mean something. Take away USA, how big is basketball? Cricket is at least as global as basketball. Yes, there are eight countries that are competitive. How many countries are competitive in basketball?

Criket is nowhere near as global as basketball.

How many teams in continental Europe play cricket? how many for basketball? How many pro leagues are there?

How many teams in North and South America play cricket? how many for basketball? How many pro leagues are there?

How many teams in East Asia play cricket? How many for basketball? How many pro leagues are there?

So basically cricket is a ghost town in North and South America, Europe and East Asia.

You are huge in Australia and the Indian sub-continent.

Yeah, both about the same global footprint...:facepalm

[Akrazotile]

Scalabrine
Adam Morrison
Martin Gramatica
Kendrick Perkins

[outbreak]

Criket is nowhere near as global as basketball.

How many teams in continental Europe play cricket? how many for basketball? How many pro leagues are there?

How many teams in North and South America play cricket? how many for basketball? How many pro leagues are there?

How many teams in East Asia play cricket? How many for basketball? How many pro leagues are there?

So basically cricket is a ghost town in North and South America, Europe and East Asia.

You are huge in Australia and the Indian sub-continent.

Yeah, both about the same global footprint...:facepalm

Yet cricket is far more popular worldwide.....

[outbreak]

I don't think anyone could give less of a rat's ass about cricket.
Odd that you would think that considering more people worldwide care about cricket than basketball and this thread is about world sports. Very few people here care which is why we don't talk about it here but world wide it's very popular regardless of what you think due to ignorance.

You have to realise that basketball isn't even the most popular sport in the usa and a large number of countries that play it have small populations even if they are larger world powers. Cricket is the NATIONAL sport through out Pretty much every country that participates. Other areas of europe also play in the second tier as does other areas of africa.

[JtotheIzzo]

Yet cricket is far more popular worldwide.....

Only if you are a transplanted Brit living in a colony that didn't expunge most things British (Aus, NZ, SA) or from the Indian sub-continent. That is not the world.

East Asia - 1.6B people, *crickets* for cricket with basketball being number one in China.

Southeast Asia - 610M people, *crickets* for cricket with basketball being number one in the Philippines.

North America - 530M people, *crickets* for cricket outside of the tiny British colonies of the West Indies, with basketball being a top 3 sport.

South America - 390M people, *crickets* for cricket with basketball being a top three sport in most countries.

Continental Europe - 680M people, *crickets* for cricket with multiple thriving basketball leagues in every country, and basketball mad countries like Lithuania, Greece, Spain and Turkey.

Africa - 1B people, *crickets* for cricket outside of the white people in Zimbabwe and South Africa.

Yep, real world following...Here's an idea, turn off the Aussie TV and the BBC, go to a website from any other part of the world that isn't geared towards people in Oz or the UK and see how much they discuss cricket.

*crickets*

exactly

[outbreak]

Only if you are a transplanted Brit living in a colony that didn't expunge most things British (Aus, NZ, SA) or from the Indian sub-continent. That is not the world.

East Asia - 1.6B people, *crickets* for cricket with basketball being number one in China.

Southeast Asia - 610M people, *crickets* for cricket with basketball being number one in the Philippines.

North America - 530M people, *crickets* for cricket outside of the tiny British colonies of the West Indies, with basketball being a top 3 sport.

South America - 390M people, *crickets* for cricket with basketball being a top three sport in most countries.

Continental Europe - 680M people, *crickets* for cricket with multiple thriving basketball leagues in every country, and basketball mad countries like Lithuania, Greece, Spain and Turkey.

Africa - 1B people, *crickets* for cricket outside of the white people in Zimbabwe and South Africa.

Yep, real world following...Here's an idea, turn off the Aussie TV and the BBC, go to a website from any other part of the world that isn't geared towards people in Oz or the UK and see how much they discuss cricket.

*crickets*

exactly

I don't give a shit exactly which countries. Do you not understand how more people watching something = more popular? Go find a site that rates the popularity of sport worldwide. You will not find a single site rating basketball higher than cricket. It's not even debatable unless you are ignorant and live in a bubble.

Cricket isn't as far spread and at no point have I claimed it is, but it's followed by a far larger % of the world's population. Wake up and realise that just because america dominates the media it does not mean that the entire world follows the same things that are popular in america.

ping pong and badminton were the most popular sports in china last I saw rated as well.

Personally I prefer watching a good basketball game over cricket but it's amazing now naive some people can be when it comes to other countries cultures.

I don't really see cricket growing too much though, it's incredibly hard to compete on the world stage as the gulf between a good side and a mediocre side is probably the largest of any sport in the world.

[bdreason]

Pele
MJ
Gretzky
Ali

[Jasi]

Pel

[Andrei89]

Michael Jordan, Zinedine Zidane, Mohammad Ali and Michael Schumacher

[JtotheIzzo]

I don't give a shit exactly which countries. Do you not understand how more people watching something = more popular? Go find a site that rates the popularity of sport worldwide. You will not find a single site rating basketball higher than cricket. It's not even debatable unless you are ignorant and live in a bubble.

Cricket isn't as far spread and at no point have I claimed it is, but it's followed by a far larger % of the world's population. Wake up and realise that just because america dominates the media it does not mean that the entire world follows the same things that are popular in america.

ping pong and badminton were the most popular sports in china last I saw rated as well.

Personally I prefer watching a good basketball game over cricket but it's amazing now naive some people can be when it comes to other countries cultures.

I don't really see cricket growing too much though, it's incredibly hard to compete on the world stage as the gulf between a good side and a mediocre side is probably the largest of any sport in the world.

You don't see it growing because you don't see a possibility of another India being born.

Seriously, take away the sub-continent and the only contest of note is The Ashes.

The Indian sub continent has a huge population and are cricket mad, but you cant be a global game when the rest of the world doesn't even show the slightest interest. At least basketball has fans all over the globe.

[pezt]

Guys like Babe Ruth, Gretzky or this Cricket dude can't be on that list.
When we're talking about the 4 idols of World Sports, I expect these players to be known all around the world.
I don't care how many players live in India, go to Africa, South America, Europe (minus England) and ask people about this Cricket Legend. I bet not even 1% will know him. Now I'm not judging his accomplishments but can someone like this be on the Mt. Rusmore of World Sports when he is basically only known in a handful of countries? I don't think so. Same goes for Gretzky and Babe Ruth.


MJ and Ali are no brainers. The other 2 are a bit harder. 1 of the 2 spots should go to a Soccer player but its hard to decide between Pele and Maradona. My vote would go to Pele. The last one I have no idea though.

[outbreak]

Why is it that Americans have so much trouble understanding the world is bigger than America? Cricket is played in far more countries than your giving it credit for. More European countries than just England play it, more African countries play it, all the Pacific region plays it, all the sub continent plays it, all the carribean plays it. Wake up and realise most of the world doesn't give a shit about basketball beyond knowing who Jordan is.

[Sarcastic]

Babe Ruth was known outside of the US. He was known in Europe, and he is probably the biggest reason that baseball is so popular in Japan, and the rest of Asia, from his barnstorming tour in 1934.


http://www.nihonsun.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/bhf-babe-ruth.jpg


http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-B2-HfFJgGkA/TsOTWTnDDvI/AAAAAAAAC7U/BYDDTi05MgM/s1600/92%2BBabe%2BRuth.jpg


Good article from SI on his visit there:
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1130471/




Babe Ruth absolutely deserves to be on the MT Rushmore. He was the first international superstar athlete.