Lance Armstrong wins another Tour, and we wonder how anyone could beat him. I’m always double impressed when an American wins at a sport that Americans traditionally don’t give much attention to. Now one comes along and doesn’t just wins, but dominates. What does that hold for the future?
I don’t know, but another question you could ask is, what does it mean for the present of sport. Can you call Lance the greatest all around athlete currently, or ever? There’s no question that he is the best rider every to compete in the Tour de France. He is right up there in the pantheon of all time cyclists as well. You might be hasty and throw out that he IS the best, but he’s taken a lot of criticism regarding his inability, or lack of desire anyway, to win other tours and races. Cycling, like other sports, is becoming a bit more specialized these days. The Tour is a race that combines several skill sets for the rider: Sprinting, Time Trials and Mountain climbing. You have to be the best for three weeks over several varying conditions to win that race. There isn’t a bike race in the world like it.
However, Lance isn’t the best at any of these things. He isn’t the best sprinter. He’s not the best at mountain climbing (although he’s close). You might make a statement for him being the best at time trials. But he really doesn’t have much in the trophy case outside of the Tour. So how does he compare with Eddy Merckx or Miguel Indurain, who had victories in other great cycling races throughout the world? How do you compare him with Merckx and Anquitil, who didn’t just want to win the Tour, they wanted to win every stage. And many times did.
But can you compare him to other athletes in other sports? Well, Skip Bayless of ESPN tries to do just that, and says that Lance just doesn’t compare. Hmmm.
But forgive me if I don't leap aboard the P.C. bandwagon and anoint him the greatest all-around athlete and greatest athletic performer ever. I'd just be selling out so the legion of Lance lovers would love me, too. My mission, as I see it, isn't to tell you what you want to hear.
It's to tell you the truth: Armstrong is limited when you compare him with the greatest athletes and clutch performers because he rides a bicycle.
What? Try telling a Nascar driver that he’s less of an athlete. Those guys have to be tough and in shape to do what they do. Even more-so a cyclist. You try and sit on those tiny little seats for four hours and push pedals up thousands of feet into the Alps and then say that, cowboy.
Armstrong doesn't qualify as the greatest all-around athlete because cycling doesn't test enough athletic talent or skill. And he doesn't qualify for greatest performer because his sport doesn't have the equivalent of last-second shots or throws or catches, of two-outs-in-the-ninth swings or of final-hole putts. The pressure through 21 Tour stages is constant, but rarely if ever acute.
No sport tests enough athletic talent or skill to really call you an “all around athlete.” And then proceeds to bring out the litany of athletes, like Jordan, Montana (and Nicklaus?), to underscore what he calls “huge moment fire” skills, like down to the wire games. Hitting the last second shot. Which is why I don’t understand the Nicklaus entry.
But anyway, there’s no way that Skip can really know how much pressure those guys are under. Armstrong makes it look easy. But then, so did Jordan and Montana.
I’m going to keep this short, because there’s so much more to rip in this article.
He rounds out the article by attempting to make a case for some guys who he thinks should qualify for the greatest all around athlete of all time. But then he basically keeps it in the arena of American sports like baseball, football and basketball. It’s the same old crap from American sports writers and enthusiasts, wherein if the player doesn’t make millions and play one of the big three, he must not be one of the greatest athletes.
He comes up with Deion Sanders, which is not a bad choice if you are limiting your field to players in one of those three leagues. He probably is the greatest all around athlete who gets paid millions of dollars in high-profile sports in America. Skip forgets that some of the greatest athletes in the world play things like Hockey and Soccer. Soccer is one of the sports where you need the greatest variety of talents. You need speed. You need endurance (the players don’t get breaks or time outs). You need tactical skill and intelligence. You need strength. You need last second heroics. Many great basketball players from other countries have also played extensive soccer. We’re not considering them, right? They don’t dominate their sport like Jordan or Armstrong, but neither did Sanders.
Who’s the greatest all around athlete of all time? Let’s go back to the sport that used to signify the best all around athlete in the world for decades. The decathlon.
Bruce Jenner.
Here’s ESPN’s little best athlete of all time ranking game. Where’s Pele? Where’s Jenner? At least Owens is there. Where’s Navratilova?
1 comment:
Trying to name the best athlete of all time is like trying to objectively pick the best ice cream flavor of all time. Start with the premise that you like ice cream in the first place. Then break it down by light or creamy. We'll call that summer and winter sports. Then break it down by flavor, ranging from gymnastics and swimming to ski jumping and biathlon. Now look at ice cream producers, which vary from big diverse corporations/countries to little specialty shops/individuals from tiny islands. Continue down that vein until you realise that there cannot be a best "athlete" of all time. There can be someone who has been victorious in their own sport(s) more than anyone else has. There can be someone who has successfully played more than one sport. But there will never be one human being who has shown so much skill in every possible discipline that someone else cannot be said to rival their talent. It would be like declaring Dreyer's Vanilla the undisputed champion ice cream of all time. You can say it, but as soon as you do, your champion is going to start to melt.
Post a Comment