Press-ure's off

[Risso]

Statistically Percy is correct, but as we all all know there are lies, damn lies and statistics.

I love this discussion by the way.

Anyway, best male athlete around at the moment? Whoever won the decathlon. Don't even know who he is but I'd like to see Bolt pole vault.

Viva Jess Ennis.

Statistically he isn't.  Usain Bolt is the only athlete ever to achieve a sprint double at the Olympics in successive games.  He is therefore, infinitely better than any other sprinter if you want to bring stats into it.

[Percy McCarthy]

Is he twice as fast as everybody else ever, or just a small percentage?

Actually, forget it. I think you're just pretending to be thick now to wind me up.

[Risso]

Is he twice as fast as everybody else ever, or just a small percentage?

Actually, forget it. I think you're just pretending to be thick now to wind me up.

That's it, when losing an argument, pretend that the other person doesn't understand.

I have never denied that Bradman was a brilliant batsman.  But his feats were mostly against ONE other country, and his average was brought up by "fill your boots" series against India and South Africa who had just started playing test cricket.  He also upped his average with tours in England after the end of WWII.  So he was undoubtedly the best batsman of his era, by a long way, but he played in circumstances that will never be repeated.  Tendulakar for example, has a lower average obviously, but has played far more tests, against a far wider range of teams and conditions.  So if you want to say he's the best batsmen ever, then fair enough, I can't really be arsed to argue, but claiming he's the best world wide sportsmen ever based on some spurious statistical argument, nah, not having it. 

[saunders_heroes]

Isn't a decathlete a jack of all trades but master of none? Bolt pisses all over the rest.

[Risso]

Not to plays Percy's games, but this "is Bolt twice as fast as anybody else" shows a startling lack of sense.  The 100m obviously isn't a sport where that's possible, whereas cricket with it's scoring system where a 100 is a good score, is.  For example, if somebody did the impossible next week, and ran the 100m in 9 seconds, they'd rightly be regarded as being the most sensational athlete ever, yet in percentage terms it's only really a small improvment.  Half a second in the 100m due to the nature of the event is a huge margin, and would be more like scoring a 1,000 in a test match.  To put it into context, a ten second 100 m is obviously twice as fast as a 20 second 100m.  When I was a kid at school, the crap fat kids who were shit at games could do a 20 second 100m.  It just demonstrates what a silly comparison Percy is attempting.

[dave.woodhall]

One runner who always gets overlooked is Lasse Viren, who did exactly what Bolt did by winning two events at successive Olympics.

[Percy McCarthy]

I'm not comparing Bradman to the crap fat kids at school. I'm comparing him to the best batsmen of all-time, and he's close to twice as good as all of them.

Myriad abstract concepts that you keep coming up with aside, the fact is that whoever you nominate (as the greatest ever), I can come up with records, facts and statistics of other sportsmen that prove them to be at least very close in ability. Unless of course you nominate Bradman, then I'd be stumped like you.

I mean, credit for your imaginative concepts, but athletes who can run a hundred metres in nine seconds and are therefore better than Bradman have to actually exist before you start bringing them up as evidence. Just my opinion like, you carry on if it convinces you.

[Risso]

I'm not comparing Bradman to the crap fat kids at school. I'm comparing him to the best batsmen of all-time, and he's close to twice as good as all of them.

Myriad abstract concepts that you keep coming up with aside, the fact is that whoever you nominate (as the greatest ever), I can come up with records, facts and statistics of other sportsmen that prove them to be at least very close in ability. Unless of course you nominate Bradman, then I'd be stumped like you.

I realise that statistics aren't your strong point, but surely even you realise that to compare people, you have to take into account the conditions encountered.  You can rightly compare Bradman with the other batsmen of the time, but not everybody since, and certainly not other sports with different systems of measurement.  It's completely meaningless.

[Percy McCarthy]

I'm not comparing Bradman to the crap fat kids at school. I'm comparing him to the best batsmen of all-time, and he's close to twice as good as all of them.

Myriad abstract concepts that you keep coming up with aside, the fact is that whoever you nominate (as the greatest ever), I can come up with records, facts and statistics of other sportsmen that prove them to be at least very close in ability. Unless of course you nominate Bradman, then I'd be stumped like you.

I realise that statistics aren't your strong point, but surely even you realise that to compare people, you have to take into account the conditions encountered.  You can rightly compare Bradman with the other batsmen of the time, but not everybody since, and certainly not other sports with different systems of measurement.  It's completely meaningless.

Funnily enough, it's often statisticians who are most convinced of Bradman's superiority, because of the store they put in facts. Remember them?

Tell me more about the bloke who can run the hundred metres in nine seconds, he sounds like a strong contender for runner-up.

[TopDeck113]

One runner who always gets overlooked is Lasse Viren, who did exactly what Bolt did by winning two events at successive Olympics.

Pity the suspicion of blood doping hangs over his record.

[Percy McCarthy]

One runner who always gets overlooked is Lasse Viren, who did exactly what Bolt did by winning two events at successive Olympics.

Pity the suspicion of blood doping hangs over his record.

Don't they all?

[Percy McCarthy]

You can rightly compare Bradman with the other batsmen of the time, but not everybody since, and certainly not other sports with different systems of measurement.  It's completely meaningless.

...says the bloke who just said 0.5 seconds = 1000 runs.

[TopDeck113]

Can I nominate  C B Fry as being one of the greatest ever all-round sportsmen?

With regard to the Bradman debate, I'd imagine that his Test average will never be beaten and that undoubtedly makes him the greatest ever batsman. Whether that makes him the greatest ever sportsman is an interesting discussion but one that I think is difficult to justify simply on the basis that, when taking the global perspective, cricket is a minority sport.

[TopDeck113]

One runner who always gets overlooked is Lasse Viren, who did exactly what Bolt did by winning two events at successive Olympics.

Pity the suspicion of blood doping hangs over his record.

Don't they all?

Unfortunately, yes.

[hilts_coolerking]

With regard to the Bradman debate, I'd imagine that his Test average will never be beaten and that undoubtedly makes him the greatest ever batsman. Whether that makes him the greatest ever sportsman is an interesting discussion but one that I think is difficult to justify simply on the basis that, when taking the global perspective, cricket is a minority sport.

I take that point but it's not just that Bradman is the greatest ever but the distance by which he is the greatest ever.  As I've said before, if there's another sportsman who is statistically twice as good as anyone else in their field then I'd like to hear about them.