Quote:
Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger
If you need to list more than 1 guy from a sport, he's not in the conversation.
These guys should be peerless in their own sports.
|
There is absolutely no reason why the greatest athlete of all time and the second (or third, or fourth, etc.) greatest athlete of all time can't come from the same sport... if two hockey players emerge who score 10 goals a game, they'd both be at the top of the list! The appropriate comparison is to the bell curve, and smaller sports will naturally have more separation at the top just because they have more discrete bell curves. There SHOULD be more soccer players in the conversation than horseshoe throwers because soccer has been around longer and has more participants.
If you don't consider participation, and start making statements like this....
Quote:
Originally Posted by CroFlames
The GOAT across all sports means he is the clearest cut GOAT in his own sport.
|
Then the winner is someone like
Alan Francis who has won 24 world championships over 30 years in a single discipline.
We're after the biggest fish here, not the one who's the most bigger than the other fishes in his pond.
I don't have a single answer, but I'd say the greatest athlete has to be compared to other athletes. How much strength does he have? Finesse? Speed? Endurance? Longevity? Versatility? Cultural appeal (because entertainment is part of an athletes job)? The nature of the sport matters, and if we're using dominance as a proxy for greatness then participation has to be considered. The greatest athlete isn't simply the most dominant in his field. And thus, proximity to others in his field doesn't rule anyone out either.