Press-ure's off

[PeterWithesShin]

5 years ago no one would have expected someone to come along and beat Powell's WR so comprehensively. And so one. Every 5 years or so someone new comes along who is faster. I still remember when Carl Lewis ran under 9.90 and thinking no one would ever beat it.

[Risso]

5 years ago no one would have expected someone to come along and beat Powell's WR so comprehensively. And so one. Every 5 years or so someone new comes along who is faster. I still remember when Carl Lewis ran under 9.90 and thinking no one would ever beat it.

I confidently predict that in five years, Usain Bolt will still be 100m record holder.  I think the same will be true in ten years time, unless they come up with some truly magical untraceable drugs.

[PeterWithesShin]

Would you have predicted 5 years ago that someone would run as fast as Bolt does? I'm guessing the answer would be the same for all of us, no. So who is to say that in 5 years time we won't be saying exactly the same about a new Mr F Astfecker?
I wouldn't be shocked if the record does stand for a while, but neither would I be shocked if someone new comes along. History shows us that there is pretty much always someone faster/stronger just around the corner.

[Percy McCarthy]

I confidently predict that no-one will get near Bradman's record in all eternity (average: 99.94 in tests), despite better pitches, fitness, training, equipment, nutrition and anything else you care to mention. Greatest sportsman ever, no doubt whatsoever in my mind.

Sobers? Great player, but that was a joke right? What's his batting average?

EDIT: just looked it up, 57 point something. Meh.

[Chris Smith]

Long Jump is another that doesn't get broken very often. It took 25 years for Jesse Owen's record to go, 23 years for Bob Beaman's Mexico City jump to be bettered by Mike Powell and that's now stood for 21 years.

[hilts_coolerking]

I confidently predict that no-one will get near Bradman's record in all eternity (average: 99.94 in tests), despite better pitches, fitness, training, equipment, nutrition and anything else you care to mention. Greatest sportsman ever, no doubt whatsoever in my mind.

Seconded.  Bradman is, as near as dammit, twice as good as any batsman in the history of Test cricket.  No-one else - including Pollock, Ponting, Lara, Tendulkar, Border - has even got close.  I'm not aware of any other sportsman that can claim a comparably superior record.

[Percy McCarthy]

If someone came along and carded a round of 36 in a major golf tournament, or ran the hundred metres in six seconds, or scored 20 goals in a World Cup finals tournament as well as 100 goals a season for his club, Bradman would have a rival

[Chico Hamilton III]

I'm a cricket lover and I was in Australia when Bradman snuffed it ( think Lady Di and multiply the public outpouring of grief by 100) and I understand how fantastic his record is ( would have been a complete 100 if we hadn't scuppered his final innings) .

But not everyone in the world has played cricket so who knows whether a kid in, say, China is a natural cricketing genius who will never realise his potential?

Everyone has sprinted over short distances at some point, so Bolt has a decent claim to be the best sportsman we've ever seen because he's outclassed allcomers in a sport that everyone has tried.

I reckon

[Percy McCarthy]

I get your point Chico, but it rules out a lot of sports. Who can say there wasn't a better boxer than Ali who had never tried boxing?

I stand by my theory that if he'd done it twice as fast as everyone else then it would be comparable to Bradman. You may say that it's not humanly possible, but neither is the Don's average - for all but one human.

[Risso]

I confidently predict that no-one will get near Bradman's record in all eternity (average: 99.94 in tests), despite better pitches, fitness, training, equipment, nutrition and anything else you care to mention.

Better opposition bowlers?  And Chico makes a valid point, not many countries in the world play cricket, especially the traditional powerhouses, eg China, USA, Russia etc.  Who were the test playing nations back then, other than England and Australia?


edit:  just checked, he averaged 178 against India, who didn't win a match for something like 30 years after they started playing Test matches. 

[peter w]

There was also New Zealand and the west Indies weren't there?

[Rudy Can't Fail]

I confidently predict that no-one will get near Bradman's record in all eternity (average: 99.94 in tests), despite better pitches, fitness, training, equipment, nutrition and anything else you care to mention.

Better opposition bowlers?   

I'd say Bradman met more than his match with Harold Larwood.

[hilts_coolerking]

The point though is that no other batsman got anywhere near Bradman's average including those who faced the same bowling.  The mark of a truly fine Test player has always been around the 50 mark, no matter what the era or the opposition so Bradman has always been out on his own, miles ahead of the rest.

[Percy McCarthy]

Exactly. If Risso's points were valid there would be a host of players from the same era with similar averages.

[dave.woodhall]

Wasn't that the time when they didn't cover pitches and tests could sometimes last about three hours?