2014 Lou Marsh award: Who is your pick?

[CofR]

Humphries wins

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by CofR

Humphries wins

I still would rather Magali Harvey, but happy for Humphries.

[Mango]

The five finalists were (in no particular order):

- Raonic
- Bouchard
- Doughty
- Humphries
- Johnny Powless

[calgarygeologist]

Good for Humphries.

One athlete that I would have included is Jan Hudec.

[Mango]

Originally Posted by zukes

I'm not even a CFL fan, nor do I live out west, but I have heard of Jon Cornish and the type of year he had. That says something for an NFL only fan to know of a CFL player. He gets my vote.

He actually won the Lou Marsh last year. His performance in 2013 was something out of a fairytale.

[troutman]

I had to remind myself who Humphries is. Does that make her the wrong choice, in a sport not followed by many Canadians?

[Northendzone]

trout - if you were to get yourself into a bobsledding pool, you would follow ms. humphries mroe closely

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by troutman

I had to remind myself who Humphries is. Does that make her the wrong choice, in a sport not followed by many Canadians?

Restricting it to sports people care about routinely makes it a popularity contest. And popularity contests are how people like Zemgus Girgensons ends up as top vote getter for the NHL All-Star Game. I would rather prestigious awards be determined a little better than that.

[Roughneck]

Humphries just kept winning. Two-time defending Olympic gold medallist, two-time defending World Champion (good chance of it being three but they don't have the WCs in Olympic years), now piloting a 4-man sled. 3 Golds, a silver and a bronze on the season's world cup circuit to boot.

Eugenie was a great story but she didn't win a major. Humphries is one of the most dominant athletes this country has ever produced and had the year to back it up.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Restricting it to sports people care about routinely makes it a popularity contest. And popularity contests are how people like Zemgus Girgensons ends up as top vote getter for the NHL All-Star Game. I would rather prestigious awards be determined a little better than that.

That is a fair point that I agree with.

How about the argument that dominating a sport with few world-wide participants, is not the same as being top 10 in a sport with millions of participants? This kind of argument was often made with regard to Steve Nash, by people like McCown.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by troutman

How about the argument that dominating a sport with few world-wide participants, is not the same as being top 10 in a sport with millions of participants? This kind of argument was often made with regard to Steve Nash, by people like McCown.

Bobsleigh is a very competitive sport. I watch a lot of the events and on any given weekend there are at least half a dozen teams in a battle for podium spots.

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by troutman

That is a fair point that I agree with.

How about the argument that dominating a sport with few world-wide participants, is not the same as being top 10 in a sport with millions of participants? This kind of argument was often made with regard to Steve Nash, by people like McCown.

I generally feel it comes down to how you do among your peer group. There may be millions of tennis players, but only a relative few can be considered elite. Just because there isn't really recreational bobsledding doesn't make the competition to get to the top any less daunting than 'competing with millions' to get to the top in tennis or basketball or whatever else.

I don't really care how Steve Nash stacked up against the guys playing pickup at Talisman on a Saturday or how Eugenie Bouchard stacks up against the people playing in Stanley Park in the spring, I care about how they stack up against the other people competing to be best in the world. Shouldn't matter if it's a group of 50 or 50,000 or 50,000,000 IMO.

[octothorp]

Originally Posted by troutman

That is a fair point that I agree with.

How about the argument that dominating a sport with few world-wide participants, is not the same as being top 10 in a sport with millions of participants? This kind of argument was often made with regard to Steve Nash, by people like McCown.

Sure, it's a totally valid argument, and the fact that Raonic and Bouchard were finalists for this award over many athletes who actually were recognized as the best in their sport, or won major events, suggests that it was taken into account. (The difference with Nash, of course, is that he actually was recognized as the best in his sport, so at that point it's essentially using size of sport as a tie-breaker against other best-in-sport athletes. Rather than being used to put a 'top 10 in their sport' athlete ahead of a 'absolutely dominant in their sport' athlete).

[Dan02]

No offense to the tennis players but IMO you need to win a major to be in contention with those on this list who dominate their sport.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Dan02

No offense to the tennis players but IMO you need to win a major to be in contention with those on this list who dominate their sport.

That would never work. Christine Sinclair won the Lou Marsh for a bronze medal that lifted the entire country.

Glad Humphries won. That 4th run to overtake the Americans in the Olympics was spectacular.

[octothorp]

Interesting article by Cathal Kelly talking about what the debate was in the room. (Including some things that I personally don't really feel should be a factor, like amateur vs. professional.)

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sport...ticle22042048/

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

Bobsleigh is a very competitive sport. I watch a lot of the events and on any given weekend there are at least half a dozen teams in a battle for podium spots.

Bobsleigh is competitive, but women's bobsleigh is in its infancy still. And like many other women's sports, not many countries commit reasonable funding, let alone what they will give men. So from that perspective, I see Troutman's point. However, Humphries pretty much dominated her sport. That is an easy argument to get behind.

[Dan02]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

That would never work. Christine Sinclair won the Lou Marsh for a bronze medal that lifted the entire country.

Glad Humphries won. That 4th run to overtake the Americans in the Olympics was spectacular.

But did Sinclair not win the golden boot as the tournaments top scorer and arguably was the best female soccer player in the tournament?

[undercoverbrother]

I wonder if there should be a male and female catagory.

This started back in the '30's when female sport wasn't as big.

Why can't it evolve to include a top male and a top female?

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

That would never work. Christine Sinclair won the Lou Marsh for a bronze medal that lifted the entire country.

Different being in a team sport I'd say. An individual athlete's success is measured on how they perform and what they win. A team athlete's success can be measured independently from the team's success.

In Sinclair's case, she carried the team on her back and earned the team a medal not many thought they could get (and perhaps not even the one they deserved).