• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Most dominant sports player of all time

oz_fan

International Regular
Bradman has to be the most dominant of all time. Federer is a strong candidate for 2nd. In every Grand Slam (apart from the French) he looks impossible to beat. The only question mark with him is the calibre of his opposition which isn't very high in men's tennis at the moment. Tiger Woods, Schumacher, Michael Jordan and Lance Armstrong would have to be pretty high up on the list as well.
 

Matteh

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Samuel_Vimes said:
No, he doesn't. For athletic performance, maybe, but Armstrong won three races (two of them stage wins to the big one) a year and trained for the remaining 11 months. That's not dominance.

Eddy Merckx does, tho.

So does Ingemar Stenmark (pretty much unbeatable in slalom for 10-12 years) and Eric Heiden (speed skater who won everything for four seasons at the start of the professional era of the sport).

Still thinks Bradman ranks top for sheer dominance.
In terms of just the Tour de France though, which is 'the' event of the year his success was unparalleled.

For someone to go and win most the classics, well that'd have to be Tom Boonen.

And btw Chubb, pretty sure Armstrong has won two jerseys in the same race before now.
 

Matteh

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
And just no to Schumacher. Longetivity and complete lack of competition distort the figures. Senna will always be the best qualifier and Prost the best driver.
 

Dravid

International Captain
mohammad16 said:
Not at all, non of his numbers are out of this world

hes the greatest bball player of time for various reasons

but overall if u wanna look at the most dominant sports persons ever

u gotta think bout

gretzky
armstrong
maybe tiger woods
I'm sure if Tiger Woods played bball, he wouldn't avg more than 10 ppg. It's really stupid to say who is the most dominant sports person of all time in all sports general..you gotta go by sport. Babe Ruth would have probably been another Afridi in Cricket. You can never tell.

And btw, Jordans numbers are out of this world, and so are his skills...32,000 points in his career...the guy avg 30 ppgs over a 15 year career. That's crazy!
 

PhoenixFire

International Coach
I can't really understand why people claim Tiger Woods is more dominant than Bradman. Woods has beeen beaten, and isn't outrightly by a mile the best golfer of all time. Bradman was just so much better than anyone else, and by a huge margin too.
 

cameeel

International Captain
Dravid said:
What are tries?
When a rugby player successfully scores, they call it a 'try'.

It makes no sense when you think about it, and reflects the average intelligence of those who watch the game.
 

Scaly piscine

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Dunno if he's a 'sports player' but Michael Johnson deserves a mention, he was so far ahead of other runners it was ridiculous. From late 1993 to 2000 he won everything of importance he ran in and his 200m world record is so far ahead of what anyone else has done it's incredible. He could have probably dominated the 100m at the time if he'd concentrated on that instead.
 

Magrat Garlick

Global Moderator
freely quoted from Matteh said:
And just no to Armstrong. Longetivity and complete lack of competition distort the figures. Indurain will always be the best time triallist and Merckx the best allrounder.
Just like I'd have said it myself. ;) :happy:
 

BoyBrumby

Englishman
cameeel said:
When a rugby player successfully scores, they call it a 'try'.

It makes no sense when you think about it, and reflects the average intelligence of those who watch the game.
Whereas AFL's terminology reflects its fans obsession with arseholes: one of the scoring modes is a "behind" & catching the ball is rewarded with a "mark".
 

Fusion

Global Moderator
Jamee999 said:
Babe Ruth
I agree. If we compare an athlete's domination in terms of how he performed in his era, then Ruth has to be up there. His individual home run totals would often be higher than the combined totals of most teams in the league! For most of career, he either led or was near the top in batting average, home runs, RBI's, OBP, and walks. At the end of his career, he was Baseball's all-time Home Runs Leader, and he did it without the aid of steroids. Also, he was a very successful pitcher at one point. Truly a giant in sport.
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
cameeel said:
When a rugby player successfully scores, they call it a 'try'.

It makes no sense when you think about it, and reflects the average intelligence of those who watch the game.
I believe it initially stemmed from Rugby being scored by goals, and they got a chance to kick at goal (or a try) by grounding the ball behind the line.
 

Top