Press-ure's off

[maidstonevillain]

Come on then ......now deny Bolt isn't the best.

The best or the greatest. Presently the best 100m runner  around. Still well behind Carl Lewis and Jessie Owens, before you even start to compare him with all the other sport disciplines.

[TRO]

Come on then ......now deny Bolt isn't the best.

The best or the greatest. Presently the best 100m runner  around. Still well behind Carl Lewis and Jessie Owens, before you even start to compare him with all the other sport disciplines.

* greatest 100m runner EVER. Records dictate that.

Anyway, the linked article says that we have seen better runners than Bolt before . Not sportsman. Runner, and that's where it lost credibility in the first paragraph .

[dave.woodhall]

Come on then ......now deny Bolt isn't the best.

The best or the greatest. Presently the best 100m runner  around. Still well behind Carl Lewis and Jessie Owens, before you even start to compare him with all the other sport disciplines.

* greatest 100m runner EVER. Records dictate that.

Anyway, the linked article says that we have seen better runners than Bolt before . Not sportsman. Runner, and that's where it lost credibility in the first paragraph .

When Usain Bolt has set as many world records over as many distances as the original runner referred to, then you might have a case.

[kippaxvilla2]

Don Bradman. Almost twice as good as every other person to play his sport. For Bolt to be considered as good he would have to run a hundred yards in five seconds.

Don Bradman was inferior to Sir Garfield Sobers so not twice as good as him I would suggest.

[tomd2103]

Don Bradman. Almost twice as good as every other person to play his sport. For Bolt to be considered as good he would have to run a hundred yards in five seconds.

Don Bradman was inferior to Sir Garfield Sobers so not twice as good as him I would suggest.

Not as a batsman.  There is of course the argument that Sobers was a better all-round cricketer, but then the same could be said about Jacques Kallis. 

[Risso]

I think that in sports where the statistics are consistent you can compare players of different eras.

 In cricket, for example, the averages of the best payers are remarkably consistent.

 A good test match batsman from any era will average around the 40 mark. A great batsman will average over fifty.

 A batsman who averages 99 (only one, Don Bradman), proving himself to be approximately twice as good as anybody who ever played, can without doubt be called the greatest.

 Bradman, IMO, is not just the greatest batsman of all time, but the greatest sportsman.

I'd argue that he was the most consistent, certainly, but not the greatest ever.  Sports records obviously get harder to beat as time marches on, and Bolt just can't be touched by anybody.  Cricket is a different sport in that most top batsmen are capable of scoring centuries.  Bradman was rmarkable in that he scored so many of them, but no other runner in the history of the world is capable of what Bolt has achieved.  All about opinion I suppose.

[TRO]

Come on then ......now deny Bolt isn't the best.

The best or the greatest. Presently the best 100m runner  around. Still well behind Carl Lewis and Jessie Owens, before you even start to compare him with all the other sport disciplines.

* greatest 100m runner EVER. Records dictate that.

Anyway, the linked article says that we have seen better runners than Bolt before . Not sportsman. Runner, and that's where it lost credibility in the first paragraph .

When Usain Bolt has set as many world records over as many distances as the original runner referred to, then you might have a case.

Dont talk absurd. At what he does, he is history's best to date - by a country mile.

You can't compare a Jeep to an F1 car, different horse for a different course.

Your article writing friend, dropped a bollock in writing that ridiculous phrase, obviosly.

[PeterWithesShin]

At what he does is the key. Bolt is the best we've ever seen at 100m & 200m.

Shrubb was the best anyone had seen at the time from 1000 yards to 11 miles. That impresses me more than what Bolt does.

[dave.woodhall]

Come on then ......now deny Bolt isn't the best.

The best or the greatest. Presently the best 100m runner  around. Still well behind Carl Lewis and Jessie Owens, before you even start to compare him with all the other sport disciplines.

* greatest 100m runner EVER. Records dictate that.

Anyway, the linked article says that we have seen better runners than Bolt before . Not sportsman. Runner, and that's where it lost credibility in the first paragraph .

When Usain Bolt has set as many world records over as many distances as the original runner referred to, then you might have a case.

Dont talk absurd. At what he does, he is history's best to date - by a country mile.

You can't compare a Jeep to an F1 car, different horse for a different course.

Your article writing friend, dropped a bollock in writing that ridiculous phrase, obviosly.

According to a minority of one. You.

[Chris Smith]

I think that in sports where the statistics are consistent you can compare players of different eras.

 In cricket, for example, the averages of the best payers are remarkably consistent.

 A good test match batsman from any era will average around the 40 mark. A great batsman will average over fifty.

 A batsman who averages 99 (only one, Don Bradman), proving himself to be approximately twice as good as anybody who ever played, can without doubt be called the greatest.

 Bradman, IMO, is not just the greatest batsman of all time, but the greatest sportsman.

I'd argue that he was the most consistent, certainly, but not the greatest ever.  Sports records obviously get harder to beat as time marches on, and Bolt just can't be touched by anybody.  Cricket is a different sport in that most top batsmen are capable of scoring centuries.  Bradman was rmarkable in that he scored so many of them, but no other runner in the history of the world is capable of what Bolt has achieved.  All about opinion I suppose.

I think it's pretty difficult to compare athletes from such different eras objectively. Improvements in training methods, nutrition, running shoes and the standard of tracks that they compete on mean that you'll never have a like for like comparison.

[Irish villain]

Didn't know where to post this but well done on the H&V facelift. It looks fab.

[TRO]

Come on then ......now deny Bolt isn't the best.

The best or the greatest. Presently the best 100m runner  around. Still well behind Carl Lewis and Jessie Owens, before you even start to compare him with all the other sport disciplines.

* greatest 100m runner EVER. Records dictate that.

Anyway, the linked article says that we have seen better runners than Bolt before . Not sportsman. Runner, and that's where it lost credibility in the first paragraph .

When Usain Bolt has set as many world records over as many distances as the original runner referred to, then you might have a case.

Dont talk absurd. At what he does, he is history's best to date - by a country mile.

You can't compare a Jeep to an F1 car, different horse for a different course.

Your article writing friend, dropped a bollock in writing that ridiculous phrase, obviosly.

According to a minority of one. You.

Dave, don't be such a patronising tit.

Read all todays websites and their home pages to see the world is thinking the same.

[dave.woodhall]

Dave, don't be such a patronising tit.

Read all todays websites and their home pages to see the world is thinking the same.

Do you insult everyone who disagrees with you, or is it a special treat you reserve for us? Either way, it's not very impressive.

[TRO]

Dave, don't be such a patronising tit.

Read all todays websites and their home pages to see the world is thinking the same.

Do you insult everyone who disagrees with you, or is it a special treat you reserve for us? Either way, it's not very impressive.

So saying "I'm in a minority of one" wasn't your insult first , Dave ? Likewise not impressed either.

[dave.woodhall]

Dave, don't be such a patronising tit.

Read all todays websites and their home pages to see the world is thinking the same.

Do you insult everyone who disagrees with you, or is it a special treat you reserve for us? Either way, it's not very impressive.

So saying "I'm in a minority of one" wasn't your insult first , Dave ? Likewise not impressed either.

Of course it isn't an insult; it's stating a fact. Nobody on this thread has agreed with you, therefore you're in a minority of one. The only insulting words on this topic have come from you. If you're not impressed, nobody's forcing you to stay.