the most dominant athlete in the history of sport.

based on the totality of his performances,i have come to the conclusion that usain bolt is the most dominant athlete in the history of sport.

i cannot think of any athlete who is as far ahead of his competition as bolt, that so routinely CRUSHES world records, etc.

it's like he is in another league.

now the nice thing about T&F is it's objective (at least in the scoring ) vs. sports like gymnastics, etc. but even in the subjective sports, i cannot think of any athlete that has ever dominated to the extent that bolt is now dominating.

his performance in the 200 meters with a time of 19.19 was the final determining straw for me.

not to mention his 9.58 100 meters time

he crushed his 19.30 world record by .11 seconds. that is a MASSIVE margin for a 200 meter race.

he is now the only person to run the 200 meters in the 19.2's as well as the 19.1's. he jumped right over the 2's and went right to the 1's.

his nearest competitor in this race at the WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP ran a 19.81.

that is simply an astounding margin of victory.

feel free to discuss. any athlete at the elite level that has ever dominated the competition by such a wide performance margin? i can;t think of any.

He's the best.

"Owens' greatest achievement came in a span of 45 minutes on May 25, 1935 at the Big Ten meet in Ann Arbor, Michigan, where he set three world records and tied a fourth. He equaled the world record for the 100 yard (91 m) sprint (9.4 seconds) and set world records in the long jump (26 feet 8¼ inches (8.13 m), a world record that would last 25 years), 220 yard (201.2 m) sprint (20.7 seconds), and the 220 yard (201.2m) low hurdles (22.6 seconds to become the first person to break 23 seconds)."

i don't think his margins are nearly as dominant, but i agree he's a viable candidate.

my gym has a jesse owens quote prominently displayed. the one about a lifetime of preparation and it all comes down to 10 seconds. so true.

change. He didn't just beat everybody else, he established a league of his own.

Career

* 118 - most games with 50 or more points
* 9 - most seasons leading league in field goal percentage
* 23,924 - most rebounds
* 22.9 - highest rebounds-per-game average (minimum 400 games)
* 7 - shares career record for most consecutive seasons leading league in scoring (1959-60 through 1965-66)

Single-Season

* 45 - holds single-season records for most games with 50 or more points (1962)
* 3,882 - most minutes played (1962)
* 4,029 - most points (1962)
* 50.4 - highest points-per-game average (1962)
* 2,707 - most points by a rookie (1960)
* 1,597 - most field goals made (1962)
* 35 - most consecutive field goals made (February 17 through February 28, 1967)
* 3,159 - most field goals attempted (1962)
* .727 - highest field goal percentage (1973)
* 1,363 - most free throws attempted (1962)
* 2,149 - most rebounds (1961)
* 1,941 - most rebounds by a rookie (1960)
* 27.2 - highest rebounds-per-game average (1961)

Single Game
* record set on March 2, 1962, vs. New York at Hershey, Pa.

* *100 - most points
* *59 - most points in one half
* *36 - most field goals made
* *22 - most field goals made in one half
* *63 - most field goals attempted
* *37 - most field goals attempted in one half
* *21 - most field goals attempted in one quarter<>
* 58 - most points by a rookie (January 25, 1960, vs. Detroit)
* 1.000 - highest field goal percentage (minimum 15 made)
(15-for-15, January 20, 1967, vs. Los Angeles;
18-for-18, February 24, 1967, vs. Baltimore; and
16-for-16, March 19, 1967, vs. Baltimore)
* 55 - most rebounds (November 24, 1960, vs. Boston)
* 45 - most rebounds by a rookie (February 6, 1960, vs. Syracuse)
* *28 - shares single-game record for most free throws made (March 2, 1962, vs. New York at Hershey, Pa.)

Points
* record set on March 2, 1962, vs. New York at Hershey, Pa.

* 118 - holds career records for most games with 50 or more points
* 7 - shares career records for most consecutive seasons leading league in scoring (1959-60 through 1965-66)
* 45 - most games with 50 or more points (1962)
* 4,029 - most points, single season (1962)
* 50.4 - highest points-per-game average (1962)
* 2,707 - most points by a rookie (1960)
* *100 - most points, game
* *59 - most points in one half
* *36 - most field goals made
* *22 - most field goals made in one half
* *63 - most field goals attempted
* *37 - most field goals attempted in one half
* *21 - most field goals attempted in one quarter
* 58 - most points by a rookie (January 25, 1960, vs. Detroit)

Rebounds

* 23,924 - most rebounds, career
* 22.9 - highest rebounds-per-game average (minimum 400 games)
* 2,149 - most rebounds—2,149 (1961)
* 1,941 - most rebounds by a rookie (1960)
* 27.2 - highest rebounds-per-game average (1961)
* 55 - most rebounds (November 24, 1960, vs. Boston)
* 45 - most rebounds by a rookie (February 6, 1960, vs. Syracuse)

Michael Jordon, probably the closest thing to Chamberlain since, didn't even come close to having the effect Wilt did.

:D

Harlem Globetrotters (1958–1959)

(snip)

Chamberlain became a member of the Globetrotters team which made history by playing in Moscow in 1959, enjoyed a sold out tour of the USSR and prior to the start of a game at Moscow's Lenin Central Stadium, were greeted by the General Secretary Nikita Khrushchev. One particular Trotter skit involved Trotters captain Meadowlark Lemon collapsing to the ground, and instead of helping him up, Chamberlain threw him several feet high up in the air and caught him like a doll. "{Chamberlain} was the strongest athlete who ever lived", the 210-pound Lemon recounted later.

(snip)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilt_Chamberlain

NBA rule changes made specifically for Wilt;

Widened the lane to try and keep Wilt farther away from the hoop.

Offensive goaltending.

Revised the rules for inbounding the ball.

And since Wilt was able to dunk free throws, the NBA banned dunking foul shots.

Of the 3 players that have equaled or surpassed any of his records, Jordan, Jabbar, and Malone, all had longer careers (15, 20, and 19 years respectively).

Oh yes, and he did all this, and much more, in spite of being on much poorer teams and in the face of blatant racism and a league that actively worked against him.

He was either in the right or wrong place at the time.

Russell was the perfect foil: Someone who didn't have Wilt's athletic gifts but had the heart and brains of a champion.

In basketball, the goal is to win championships and Wilt's lack of rings disqualifies him.

The question wasn't about winning championships, it was about individuals dominating their sport.

I'll stand by Wilt in this category.

Only Speed Racer would've been better.

Far and away the best athlete of his day. Never was even challenged.

I think he'd be exciting to see on the field - but what's with Philly and the stunt-recruiting lately?

an athlete by this metric is compared to others IN HIS SPORT.

put an NFL guy in some sneakers and get him to run a marathon and see how he does.

put an NFL player in a swimming pool

put a gymnast on the basketball court...

you get the picture

excel at many sports. there is certainly a place for a jim thorpe for example, in these comparisons.

but if versatility is the measure, that's another argument. then, guys like decathletes are going to be the ones to look at.

ime, elite athletes in any "hand/eye coordination sport" have pretty good crossover. anybody with the proprioception, hand/eye coord, reflex, etc. to hit a major league pitcher could probably do pretty well in any # of sports.

ime, that's generally true. i'm a competitive athlete myself, nationally ranked. (although recovering from surgery right now). i have seen this OVER and over again.

i had a decathlete in my fraternity, and that guy could play anything. he had NEVER played volleyball before he moved to cali and started college. within a semester, you would think he had played his whole life.

I was just putting a point on your point. Supernaturally gifted as he was on the courts, he was decidedly meh at baseball.

when comparing him to MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL (and even minor league players).

even a minor leaguer is many standards of deviation from the norm.

your average double AA ball player is still a VERY VERY good baseball player.

that's my point. he was more than good enough to be decent AA

sure, he kind of sucked, compared to the MOST elite baseball players, but he still could play better than 99.9% of baseball players, and it's not even "his sport".

I thought the point was measuring athletes by the metric of their chosen sport, contra what 1 suggested. I figured Jordan was a fine illustration of that sort of mismeasure, sucky at baseball, but his dominance in basketball is no way lessened by it.

I know Jordan could probably shellack players outside the national leagues, but that wasn't my point. Agreeing with your earlier point was my... point. (I've gotta hit the thesaurus for a synomym for point)

1) the metric was WITHIN their chosen sport. i didn't bring up the cross sport stuff. i was responding to it.
2) but i disagree he was sucky at baseball. my point is for a guy who didn't specialize in baseball (and even for one that does) he was still very good. the MLB is the very elite. even a AA player is still very good. the vast majority of people couldn't even hit a AA fastball, let alone a major league one.

two distinct point.

Yes, I KNOW you didn't bring up the cross sport stuff. I KNOW the metric was within their chosen sport, which is why I reiterated it. You responded to 1 and I CONCURRED. Whether or not Jordan is a good baseball player is immaterial to me, because measuring him by world class standards outside his chosen sport is a mismeasure, which is what you were talking about when I entered.

i THINK we agree. im very confused now.

i do believe the thing about crossover strength amongst elite athletes. i agree thought it's not relevant, because i specifically mentioned a DOMINANT athlete and one who DOMINATES in his chosen sport.

so we agree.

i think.

this is hard,.

We took the scenic route getting here, but we agree we agree.

Take five, I think we've earned it :D

"the most dominant athlete in the history of sport."

yeah, dude is quick. but dude is not "the most dominant athlete in the history of sport."

not by a long shot.

stop.

compared to others IN HIS SPORT.

iow, bolt is within his sport, more dominant, than any other player (i can think of) within their sport.

that's what i mean.

and that's why i used the word DOMINANT vs. the "best" athlete.


read my OP again. i make it very clear i am talking about domination of other athletes within one's own sport.

cross sport comparisons are obviously MUCH more difficult

When I saw the sub line was Jim Thorpe. Not sure of all the stats without "doing the google", but he was quite the native american stud back in the day. Olympics, Football, etc.

Never before or since, they finally returned his medals to his family several years ago. He did everything well, was a dominant football player and all around superior jock.

:P

:spray:

I agree. Bolt is the most impressive athlete I have ever seen. Totally jaw dropping and amazing.

Of course, with a game in which you're playing aginst other people, you can't be as objective as with something like athletics, but if you look at the batting averages in Test cricket (ie international matches of 'full length', which are the ones that have been played for years, rather than the more recent one-day and 20/20 matches), 37 players had a batting average in the 50s, 3 in the 60s (none higher than 61) - and Bradman's was 99.94. http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/content/records/282910.html

Bradman was so dominant that England developed the 'bodyline' tactic to use against him - bowling at the batsman, not the wicket (in the days when they didn't have helmets, just leg pads) to force him to literally defend himself. It caused an international diplomatic incident, and resulted in a law change to stop the English tactics: http://www.sportsonlive.com/2009/07/bodyline-series-that-rocked-cricket.html

Bradman's international career was 1928-48, so it was interrupted, when he may have been at his peak, by WW2.

many tests at home and Australian umpires were notoriously biased.

Have you considered Gretzky, though? He seemed to transcend his sport also.

could definitely be put in the running. no pun intended

http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/trackandfield/news/story?id=4412231

He's been a phenom since high school.


Happy 23rd birthday Usain.

not even close.

dude is quick. yeah, so what.

not "the most dominant athlete in the history of sport."

Didrickson, that is.

days when 1 mil meant sumpthing

Tiger Woods is no slouch...since turning pro...

I was a pretty good with a hacky sack back in the day.
:hide:

Like him or not, absolutly nobody could beat him when he was young.