Is Katie Taylor Ireland best athlete

Pisco Sour

walshb wrote: »

Mike, excellent article, and excellently written.

As for greatest ever Irish sports star. If Katie gets the gold I think it cements her as the GOAT.

Ah come on. Katie is a fantastic ambassador for our country and I dont want to take this thread off topic but I can't let that comment go. There is no way Katie (Olympic gold or otherwise) is in the same league as Sonia O'Sullivan who achieved incredible dominance and longevity in a long established, globalised, and MUCH more high profile sport with huge strength in depth. Olympic gold in womens boxing does not equate to Olympic gold (or silver or bronze) in track and field.

Also Sean Kelly was world number one for 5 years. Padraig Harrington has won 3 majors. Roy Keane was arguably the world's best player in the world's most popular sport, for a short time.

Best of luck to Katie in China.

walshb

04072511 wrote: »

Ah come on. Katie is a fantastic ambassador for our country and I dont want to take this thread off topic but I can't let that comment go. There is no way Katie (Olympic gold or otherwise) is in the same league as Sonia O'Sullivan who achieved incredible dominance and longevity in a long established, globalised, and MUCH more high profile sport with huge strength in depth. Olympic gold in womens boxing does not equate to Olympic gold (or silver or bronze) in track and field.

Also Sean Kelly was world number one for 5 years. Padraig Harrington has won 3 majors. Roy Keane was arguably the world's best player in the world's most popular sport, for a short time.

Best of luck to Katie in China.

Well, I disagree. She trumps them all. Of the names you mention only Sonia challenges. Roy Keane? A quitter never trumps Katie Taylor.

Pisco Sour

walshb wrote: »

Well, I disagree. She trumps them all. Of the names you mention only Sonia challenges. Roy Keane? A quitter never trumps Katie Taylor.

Take off the boxing blinkers, and show some respect to the other sports. Roy Keane may be a pr1ck, but he was a mighty fine player, and Manchester United wouldn't have won half of what they did had it not been for him. How can you compare winning a gold in a niche sport with no history, and minimal strength in depth to Sonia going toe to toe with Szabo in front of 110,000 people, in a sport played in every corner of the world by women, beating Ethiopians, Kenyans and what have ya!?

Don't want to disregard Katie's great success, but if you think a boxing gold equates in difficulty to a track and field gold then you are hugely mistaken.

walshb

04072511 wrote: »

Take off the boxing blinkers, and show some respect to the other sports. Roy Keane may be a pr1ck, but he was a mighty fine player, and Manchester United wouldn't have won half of what they did had it not been for him. How can you compare winning a gold in a niche sport with no history, and minimal strength in depth to Sonia going toe to toe with Szabo in front of 110,000 people, in a sport played in every corner of the world by women, beating Ethiopians, Kenyans and what have ya!?

Don't want to disregard Katie's great success, but if you think a boxing gold equates in difficulty to a track and field gold then you are hugely mistaken.

So because I rate Katie as the best, that means I am disrespecting other athletes?

Nothing to do with blinkers. I am a fan of many many sports. I think KT is the best. No big deal. Kelly and Sonia are fine examples. Padraig too, even if I believe that golf is more a game. Keane was a very good player, but temperament is also a trait I use in measuring ones worth.

cowzerp

walshb wrote: »

So because I rate Katie as the best, that means I am disrespecting other athletes?

Nothing to do with blinkers. I am a fan of many many sports. I think KT is the best. No big deal. Kelly and Sonia are fine examples. Padraig too, even if I believe that golf is more a game. Keane was a very good player, but temperament is also a trait I use in measuring ones worth.

Your spot on Bren, No Irish Athlete can compare to her feats and she is the greatest Athlete we have had, Keane was overrated and a loud mouth traitor as far as i am concerned-Katies achievements would be like Keane winning the European cup 3-4 times which of course he did not, and internationally he done nothing and let us down in our hour of need, EGOMANIAC.

Pisco Sour

cowzerp wrote: »

Your spot on Bren, No Irish Athlete can compare to her feats and she is the greatest Athlete we have had, Keane was overrated and a loud mouth traitor as far as i am concerned-Katies achievements would be like Keane winning the European cup 3-4 times which of course he did not, and internationally he done nothing and let us down in our hour of need, EGOMANIAC.

You cannot possibly be serious? :eek::eek:

A dose of reality is needed here.

Pisco Sour

walshb wrote: »

So because I rate Katie as the best, that means I am disrespecting other athletes?

Nothing to do with blinkers. I am a fan of many many sports. I think KT is the best. No big deal. Kelly and Sonia are fine examples. Padraig too, even if I believe that golf is more a game. Keane was a very good player, but temperament is also a trait I use in measuring ones worth.

Because you are not comparing like with like. Katie is immense but women's boxing has a low profile. In an Olympic Games where tickets are like gold dust, the women's boxing tickets have been simple to get hold of. It is not a very popular sport. Watch Katie's fight with Underwood on youtube and you'll see about 70 people in the arena. Compare that to Sonia winning gold in Gothenburg in front of a packed stadium, and live coverage in every country throughout the world. Women have been running in the Olympics for donkeys year. The sport has history, depth, and is a true global game. Women's boxing is a niche event, one which we happen to have the world's best in. Saying Katie Taylor is greater than Sonia would be like saying that Ken Doherty is greater in the hall of Irish sporting greats than Catherina McKiernan or Sean Kelly. After all, he has won more world titles (even if most countries in the world don't play snooker).:rolleyes:

I'll be in the arena in London for the semi and the final, and I hope to God that Katie will be there and will continue to do us proud. I will be cheering her on from the tops of my lungs, and to hear our national anthem would be some experience. But I can't sit by and read such delusion.

walshb

04072511 wrote: »

Because you are not comparing like with like. Katie is immense but women's boxing has a low profile. In an Olympic Games where tickets are like gold dust, the women's boxing tickets have been simple to get hold of. It is not a very popular sport. Watch Katie's fight with Underwood on youtube and you'll see about 70 people in the arena. Compare that to Sonia winning gold in Gothenburg in front of a packed stadium, and live coverage in every country throughout the world. Women have been running in the Olympics for donkeys year. The sport has history, depth, and is a true global game. Women's boxing is a niche event, one which we happen to have the world's best in. Saying Katie Taylor is greater than Sonia would be like saying that Ken Doherty is greater in the hall of Irish sporting greats than Catherina McKiernan or Sean Kelly. After all, he has won more world titles (even if most countries in the world don't play snooker).:rolleyes:

I'll be in the arena in London for the semi and the final, and I hope to God that Katie will be there and will continue to do us proud. I will be cheering her on from the tops of my lungs, and to hear our national anthem would be some experience. But I can't sit by and read such delusion.

One can never truly or accurately compare like with like.

It seems to irk you, alright. You have replied many times to anyone who thinks a 3 time WC and 4-5 time euro champ could be considered our best ever athlete. Anyway, to me she is the GOAT. Doesn't sit well with you, and you keep mentioning niche market, low attendance etc. The sport is global, and is very deep.

BTW, I would rate BOD ahead of Roy Keane every day of the week.

Pisco Sour

walshb wrote: »

One can never truly or accurately compare like with like.

It seems to irk you, alright. You have replied many times to anyone who thinks a 3 time WC and 4-5 time euro champ could be considered our best ever athlete. Anyway, to me she is the GOAT. Doesn't sit well with you, and you keep mentioning niche market, low attendance etc. The sport is global, and is very deep.

BTW, I would rate BOD ahead of Roy Keane every day of the week.

I'll end my involvement in this discussion, as somebody like Martina Hingis, Novak Djokavic or Janet Evans could be Irish and you would still rate KT ahead of them, so it is a pointless discussion which will go nowhere.

On to the more important job at hand. When is the draw being made for the World's?

The seeding system seems a bit flawed. You would think they would use logic with regards seeding these very important championships, rather than basing it on a very dodgey ranking system which seems to be very new by all accounts.

walshb

04072511 wrote: »

I'll end my involvement in this discussion, as somebody like Martina Hingis, Novak Djokavic or Janet Evans could be Irish and you would still rate KT ahead of them, so it is a pointless discussion which will go nowhere.

On to the more important job at hand. When is the draw being made for the World's?

The seeding system seems a bit flawed. You would think they would use logic with regards seeding these very important championships, rather than basing it on a very dodgey ranking system which seems to be very new by all accounts.

No, I would not rate KT ahead of a Novak or Evans if they were Irish.

Funny thing is, had Michelle never been suspended for doping offences I would rank her as the GOAT.

To me we have nobody like a Novak or Evans or Federer et al, ever!

Katie is as dominant as these in her chosen profession. 3 time WC, and the rest too.

As for the draw for the WC, I am not sure. The AIBA website does not list it, or at least I cannot find it. I would imagine the dra takes place on the day. I believe they also weigh in on the day, May 9th.

Pisco Sour

walshb wrote: »

No, I would not rate KT ahead of a Novak or Evans if they were Irish.

Funny thing is, had Michelle never been suspended for doping offences I would rank her as the GOAT.

To me we have nobody like a Novak or Evans or Federer et al, ever!

Katie is as dominant as these in her chosen profession. 3 time WC, and the rest too.

I suggest you do some reading on Sonia's 1993, 1994 and 1995 seasons. The level of dominance she achieved was staggering, in probably the most fiercely competitive of all Olympic sports. Her 8:21 over 3000m has only since been beaten by Szabo (just about) and nobody else in the last 18 years. Only the drugged up Chinese have ever run faster than that before 1993. She holds every single Irish record from 800m up to Half Marathon. Her range of PB's are quite remarkeable. Her championship performances were even better, competing against drugged up Eastern Europeans, and genetically and altitude enhanced East Africans. She was a freak of nature, and we'll never see her like again.

And of course lets not forget 1998 with the World Cross Country double, and European double.

walshb

04072511 wrote: »

I suggest you do some reading on Sonia's 1993, 1994 and 1995 seasons. The level of dominance she achieved was staggering, in probably the most fiercely competitive of all Olympic sports. Her 8:21 over 3000m has only since been beaten by Szabo (just about) and nobody else in the last 18 years. Only the drugged up Chinese have ever run faster than that before 1993. She holds every single Irish record from 800m up to Half Marathon. Her range of PB's are quite remarkeable. Her championship performances were even better, competing against drugged up Eastern Europeans, and genetically and altitude enhanced East Africans. She was a freak of nature, and we'll never see her like again.

And of course lets not forget 1998 with the World Cross Country double, and European double.

I rank Sonia the second best female athlete ever in Ireland. Also, I rate the sport of boxing as far more versatile and fluid and it requires so much more from the body in terms of mechanics. Running is running. We all can do it, some just for longer and faster than others.

makl

04072511 wrote: »

Because you are not comparing like with like. Katie is immense but women's boxing has a low profile. In an Olympic Games where tickets are like gold dust, the women's boxing tickets have been simple to get hold of. It is not a very popular sport. Watch Katie's fight with Underwood on youtube and you'll see about 70 people in the arena. Compare that to Sonia winning gold in Gothenburg in front of a packed stadium, and live coverage in every country throughout the world. Women have been running in the Olympics for donkeys year. The sport has history, depth, and is a true global game. Women's boxing is a niche event, one which we happen to have the world's best in. Saying Katie Taylor is greater than Sonia would be like saying that Ken Doherty is greater in the hall of Irish sporting greats than Catherina McKiernan or Sean Kelly. After all, he has won more world titles (even if most countries in the world don't play snooker).:rolleyes:

I'll be in the arena in London for the semi and the final, and I hope to God that Katie will be there and will continue to do us proud. I will be cheering her on from the tops of my lungs, and to hear our national anthem would be some experience. But I can't sit by and read such delusion.

I might as well get my feet wet.

Barbados. The home of world boxing. You could have Mike Tyson there and you wouldn't fill the arena. How many people would come to watch Padraig Harrington? Good example. And in the IAAF 1998 Champs in Edinburgh there were about a 1000 people out of 60m in Britiain. There's ony 300k people in Barbados.

Athletics is the business, fair enough. That, along with tennis, prob gymnastics, maybe one or two, other sports is where there is huge depth in the women's game. (That said, only in a few events in athletics competition i.e how many women competed in the national championships for walking? (3)).

Katie's is boxing, and just because there isn't the depth that you see in 5 or 6 athletics events doesn't mean her talent isn't up there with the best. Take your example Sonia. Was she pish when 18 and competing in national champs? There was no one close to her in terms of standard.

Golf is played by a few people in fewer countries. Rugby is played in less than 10 countries. And then you have American football, played in 1 yet the standard is high. Same for hurling and football. So what do you mean by depth? How does this determine quality? Good support structures and youth training programmes help achieve results, and boxing in Ireland is far ahead of any sport in this country terms of this (except maybe GAA but incomparable fields).

What about women's soccer? Has that not got profile? KT was on the national team too but decided to focus 100% on boxing. She is a proven athlete. She is up there with the best and has faced and will face all that there is to face. Basically your argument stripped down is that if it's not tennis or athletics or gymnastics, women are not elite athletes.

Draw is on 11th Competition on 12th.
http://www.iaba.ie/7th-aiba-world-womens-champions/

Pisco Sour

walshb wrote: »

Running is running. We all can do it, some just for longer and faster than others.

Oh how little you know. I compete in sprinting, and while I'm not at a great level at the moment, I can assure you that there is a lot more to it than "running". The technical side to it is huge. Without proper technique then you are going nowhere in the sport. Add to that the strength work, endurance work, plyometrics etc. Yes anybody can run, but to be good you need to look far beyond that.

walshb

04072511 wrote: »

Oh how little you know. I compete in sprinting, and while I'm not at a great level at the moment, I can assure you that there is a lot more to it than "running". The technical side to it is huge. Without proper technique then you are going nowhere in the sport. Add to that the strength work, endurance work, plyometrics etc. Yes anybody can run, but to be good you need to look far beyond that.

I am well aware that technique and training is important, but take Bolt for example. That guy could lounge around all day doing jack **** and he'd still beat the vast majority out there.

I love the sport. Really do, but I do not for one second believe that a runner like Sonia is a better athlete than KT. She's a better runner, end of. I would bet in an all star tourny that KT most likely kicks her butt.

So, when assessing the GOAT, I take more than just depth pool, achievements etc. I also look at the sport itself. Taylor is also a competent soccer player. She to me is a far more rounded and versatile athlete than Sonia.

Pisco Sour

makl wrote: »

Basically your argument stripped down is that if it's not tennis or athletics or gymnastics, women are not elite athletes.

No, that's not what I am saying. But when comparing across sports, you have to take into account the competition and depth in the field within each chosen sport, so yes women who excel in athletics and tennis for example would rate higher in many people's eyes for this reason.

It is the same reason why I would rate football success higher than rugby success. If Ireland only had to beat 5 countries to be seen as a success in football, Traps army would be getting a lot less stick.

Pisco Sour

walshb wrote: »

I love the sport. Really do, but I do not for one second believe that a runner like Sonia is a better athlete than KT. She's a better runner, end of. I would bet in an all star tourny that KT most likely kicks her butt.

So, when assessing the GOAT, I take more than just depth pool, achievements etc. I also look at the sport itself. Taylor is also a competent soccer player. She to me is a far more rounded and versatile athlete than Sonia.

Sorry but that is all a load of sh1te. So basically what you are saying is that a successful boxer will always be seen as a greater sportsperson than a successful athlete because well, running is just running? :eek:

Comparing the 2 based on aspects of sport that have no importance in athletics is pretty stupid.

makl

04072511 wrote: »

No, that's not what I am saying. But when comparing across sports, you have to take into account the competition and depth in the field within each chosen sport, so yes women who excel in athletics and tennis for example would rate higher in many people's eyes for this reason.

It is the same reason why I would rate football success higher than rugby success. If Ireland only had to beat 5 countries to be seen as a success in football, Traps army would be getting a lot less stick.

It's as close as. You're saying if it ain't tennis or runnin, it's less elite. Then in the men's you mention Padraig Harrington's majors as an example of greatness when hardly anyone plays golf!

Depth in numbers is not half the story.

walshb

04072511 wrote: »

Sorry but that is all a load of sh1te. So basically what you are saying is that a successful boxer will always be seen as a greater sportsperson than a successful athlete because well, running is just running? :eek:

Comparing the 2 based on aspects of sport that have no importance in athletics is pretty stupid.

No, ok, that is wrong. Not saying that a boxer will always be a better athlete. I am saying that as a sport it requires more from its competitors than say a middle distance runner. It does. There is a neat link I posted that puts boxing as overall the worlds toughest sport. Ten categories, and it beats track and field quite comprehensively.

Like I said, I love track and field, but no way are certain disciplines, like running, more difficult and complex than the sport of say boxing, gymnastics, soccer etc. These sports require more form the competitors body's.

Disciplines like 110 m h or javelin or pole vault or hammer do require very skilled technique.

As regards Sonia and KT. Sonia is a runner. KT is a boxer. I rate KT as the better athlete.

Pisco Sour

walshb wrote: »

No, ok, that is wrong. Not saying that a boxer will always be a better athlete. I am saying that as a sport it requires more from its competitors than say a middle distance runner. It does. There is a neat link I posted that puts boxing as overall the worlds toughest sport. Ten categories, and it beats track and field quite comprehensively.

Like I said, I love track and field, but no way are certain disciplines, like running, more difficult and complex than the sport of say boxing, gymnastics, soccer etc. These sports require more form the competitors body's.
Disciplines like 110 m h or javelin or pole vault or hammer do require very skilled tecnique.

You are speaking like somebody who knows little about the nuts and bolts of the sport. Maybe take a trip down to Irishtown or Santry some day and watch the 400 runners puking at the side of the track, or the 1500 guys doing painful 400 repeats off 60 seconds recovery. The top guys really do walk a fine line between being at peak physical excellence and getting injured. Athletes seem to spend most of their time either injured or coming back from an injury. The sport is that tough. It is the greatest sport for physical excellence. Who can run the fastest, jump the highest, throw the furthest.

walshb

04072511 wrote: »

You are speaking like somebody who knows little about the nuts and bolts of the sport. Maybe take a trip down to Irishtown or Santry some day and watch the 400 runners puking at the side of the track, or the 1500 guys doing painful 400 repeats off 60 seconds recovery. The top guys really do walk a fine line between being at peak physical excellence and getting injured. Athletes seem to spend most of their time either injured or coming back from an injury. The sport is that tough. It is the greatest sport for physical excellence. Who can run the fastest, jump the highest, throw the furthest.

To compromise, the greatest athletes on earth are for me the decathletes. They are the best.

For physical excellence T&F is great. I think boxing overall is the ultimate test of a person's physical/athletic talents. Only the decathlete compare here.

MJ, does not, Bolt does not. Seb Coe does not etc etc. They are individual disciplines.

Take a look at the link I posted.

Running and jumping and throwing are only three things that humans do. You make it sound like the be all and end all.

walshb

As regards overall complex/difficult and skill wise, I think it's hard to find more amazing people than gymnasts. What they do is almost unbelieveable.

Pisco Sour

walshb wrote: »

To compromise, the greatest athletes on earth are for me the decathletes. They are the best.

For physical excellence T&F is great. I think boxing overall is the ultimate test of a person's physical/athletic talents. Only the decathlete compare here.

MJ, does not, Bolt does not. Seb Coe does not etc etc. They are individual disciplines.

Take a look at the link I posted.

Running and jumping and throwing are only three things that humans do. You make it sound like the be all and end all.

The likes of Roman Sebrle are world class athletes, but no more so than Usain Bolt, Bekele, Dwight Phillips. Essentially a decathlete is very average at 9 events and godawful at the 1500m, while the others are excellent at 1 or 2. If you consider the jack of all trades to be more worthy of being called the greatest over the master of a few simply because he does more stuff then fire ahead. It’s a flawed method of determining greatness.

walshb

04072511 wrote: »

The likes of Roman Sebrle are world class athletes, but no more so than Usain Bolt, Bekele, Dwight Phillips. Essentially a decathlete is very average at 9 events and godawful at the 1500m, while the others are excellent at 1 or 2. If you consider the jack of all trades to be more worthy of being called the greatest over the master of a few simply because he does more stuff then fire ahead. It’s a flawed method of determining greatness.

So Daley Thompson, for example, can never be considered a greater athlete than say, Seb Coe, or Michael Johnson? How so? Overall and all round Daley is a much more versatile and complete athlete than Bolt. Sure, he cannot beat him over 100 and 200 and 300, but other than this Daley is better at many other disciplines. And, I know Bolt does not train for other disciplines. I know this. Same applies with Daley TO Carl Lewis, Coe, Cram, Ovett, Bubka, Bekele et al.

I am not saying that one cannot select an individual discipline athlete over a decathlete, remember. You are saying that me selecting a decathlete as a possible GOAT, is flawed. And, ALL are world class athletes. I juts think that a decathlete is a better athlete.

Anyway, what's the big deal? It's like it really bothers you. Get over it. KT to me is a better athlete than anyone we have ever produced. Better than Sonia, Kelly, Keane et al. You think otherwise, and I respect that, and can see your side and your choice(s).

Anytime anyone discusses who is the GOAT in sport you will have many different views and opinions. Nothing flawed or illogical or delusional (as you say), about most of it. You talk about respecting other athletes and sports, yet you cannot accept other views that differ from yours. You retort with words like flawed, delusional, get serious.

Personally the GOAT all time for me is Muhammad Ali. But, yes, a top class decathlete is a better all around athlete.

Close seconds are Daley Thompson, Carl Lewis, Michael Jordan, Vitali Scherbo, Nadia Coamaneci, Lance Armstrong, Joe Montana, Jerry Rice, Bekele, Gebreselaise, Ed Moses, Michael Phelps, Eddy Mercyx, El Gerrouj, Zidane, Federer, Graf, Navratilova, Sampras.

Pisco Sour

walshb wrote: »

So Daley Thompson, for example, can never be considered a greater athlete than say, Seb Coe, or Michael Johnson? How so? Overall and all round Daley is a much more versatile and complete athlete than Bolt. Sure, he cannot beat him over 100 and 200 and 300, but other than this Daley is better at many other disciplines. And, I know Bolt does not train for other disciplines. I know this. Same applies with Daley TO Carl Lewis, Coe, Cram, Ovett, Bubka, Bekele et al.

I'm not bothered argueing the rest at this stage as it is time to move on and discuss this very important week in Irish sport.

But a word on the above. The decathlon is ONE event, made up of 10 different disciplines. There is just one gold medal available for it, like there is for the 100m or the high jump. I'm not saying that Daley can't be considered one of the greatest. He can, but NOT because he is a decathlete, but because of his success in comparison to other athletes in different events. The idea that a successful decathlete (Daley) trumps a successful high jumper (Vlasic) or a successful sprinter (Bolt) based on the fact that he is more of an all rounder is mad. He's an all-rounder all right, he is all round average at 9 events, and very slow at the last one. Very few, if any, decathletes would rank anywhere in any individual events. They run 47-49 second 400m for example. This would get you into an Irish National 400m final, that's it. They are top decathletes, not top 100, 400, Long Jumpers etc. They are average at 9 disciplines, but world class at ONE event, the decathlon.

I adore the decathlon by the way. I did one recently and it is tough going and I have immense respect for the guys who excel in it. But it is one event. It doesn't matter how many disciplines are in it, it doesn't change the fact that Daley competed in ONE event, just like Blanca Vlasic competes in one event.

Now should we see a decathlete who does all of the following then we can agree that he would be undisputedly the greatest athlete of them all, and I would 100% agree with your reasons for a decathlete being the best:

100m: 10:1x
LJ: 8:2x
SP: 20:xx
HJ: 2:3x
400m: 44.9x
110H: 13:4x
DT: 65:xx
PV: 5.6x
JT: 83:xx
1500m: 3:4x

Never in a million years going to happen. So until this amazing versatile athlete appears I'll continue to see the decathlon on par with all of the other track and field events, and compare the athletes based on achievements in their respective T&F events, taking into consideration the strength in depth of the particular events.

walshb

04072511 wrote: »

I'm not bothered argueing the rest at this stage as it is time to move on and discuss this very important week in Irish sport.

But a word on the above. The decathlon is ONE event, made up of 10 different disciplines. There is just one gold medal available for it, like there is for the 100m or the high jump. I'm not saying that Daley can't be considered one of the greatest. He can, but NOT because he is a decathlete, but because of his success in comparison to other athletes in different events. .

Well, there you have it. Daley can be considered. I considered him. Never said you had to, and I respect your list. I didn't say that I considered Daley JUST because he was a decathlete. He was a brilliant one. I said overall the decathletes to me are the worlds best athletes. We must compare best with best. So, Daley against Lewis. I pick Daley as the best athlete.

You are also adding extraneous information. I am well aware one gold medal is awarded for the decathlon. I am well aware that succes in the discipline is important. I factor in a lot when I come to my choices. A lot.

Pisco Sour

walshb wrote: »

Well, there you have it. Daley can be considered. I considered him. Never said you had to, and I respect your list. I didn't say that I considered Daley JUST because he was a decathlete. He was a brilliant one. I said overall the decathletes to me are the worlds best athletes. We must compare best with best. So, Daley against Lewis. I pick Daley as the best athlete.

You are also adding extraneous information. I am well aware one gold medal is awarded for the decathlon. I am well aware that succes in the discipline is important. I factor in a lot when I come to my choices. A lot.

I'd pick Lewis unde normal circumstances because he won gold medals in 4 successive Olympics and in 2 different disciplines (sprinting, and horizontal jumping), while Daley won gold in 2 successive Olympics in one discipline (multi-eventing). However, with the whole US cover up of his 1988 failed drugs tests, I'd have to put Daley ahead.

Surprised you included Pharmstrong in your list I must say.

supersean1999

in nearly every other country in the world katie taylor would not be known or certainly not seen on chat shows etc, fine athlete she is and i respect what she has achieved, us irish have few top world class athletes in many sports ,

makl

supersean1999 wrote: »

in nearly every other country in the world katie taylor would not be known or certainly not seen on chat shows etc, fine athlete she is and i respect what she has achieved, us irish have few top world class athletes in many sports ,

who would your top 5 female gymnasts in the world be? or cyclists? or kayakers? or soccer/rugby/basketball players?

womens sport is the problem. theres hardly any money outside of athletics and tennis so they wont be appearing on a tv near you. doesnt take away from their calibre.

Skid

To compare athletes of different eras in the same event is subjective enough.

To compare athletes across different sports and genders is futile. I would say that Katie Taylor deserves to be listed as one of Ireland's greatest athletes ever, after that it is all personal opinion.

Spazdarn

04072511 wrote: »

You cannot possibly be serious? :eek::eek:

A dose of reality is needed here.

Agreed.

Keane left the Irish team for whatever reasons, we all know them they're well documented. He was a big part of the reason we got to the tournament in the first place, so to forget everything he did in an Irish shirt before that is fairly poor in my opinion.

Keane was one of the best players the premiership has ever seen. You can't equate Katie's achievements to three or four european cups as Keane is in a team, he's only one man in a team. No matter how good he performs as an athlete there are still 10 other fellas on the pitch than can dictate whether they win or lose. Katie is generally the only one who decides her fate.

I'd rate Katie fairly highly, but Sonia O' Sullivan done great things for Irish sport and maintained that level for many years. Roy Keane was top of his trade for well over a decade too.

Is Katie our best athlete of the last few years... I'd say definitely, but ever, is a bit of a stretch.

EDIT: Hadn't seen the other thread that spawned from this...