Quote:
Originally Posted by Kutcher55
Yes I agree athletes are stronger and faster than they used to be. It is true in golf as well, due to tech improvements in golf equipment and golf balls. So you can’t compare scores although it’s hard to dispute Tiger’s 97 Masters was the greatest performance of all time on that golf course. Because he won by 12 shots.
I think the most objective way is to compare relative dominance in one’s era but as you noted it doesn’t account for greater inclusion of races and nationalities, not to mention population growth. Based on that I suppose you can argue the best athletes today are more elite than the best athletes of yesteryear. Which is why best ever debates are pointless nonetheless reasonably entertaining ways of killing time.
|
Right. Plus they don't begin to account for intangibles - impossible to quantify skills. Like what Ty Cobb's daring base running and general intimidation did to distract and disrupt opponents. Or what effect Lou Gehrig waiting in the on deck circle had on the pitches hurlers were compelled to serve Ruth (when they would've preferred to just pitch around him.)
When people cannot agree on the definition of "greatest," they can't possibly agree on who deserves to hold that title.