Greatest of all time ???

thirstywork2

Bekele or Haile

Anytime I watch BBC Brendan Foster calls Bekele the greatest of all time.
When I saw him in the great run I thought he was back to his best but after finishing 7th the other night over 3k and beaten by 10 seconds im starting to think Bekele won't be winning in London.

He said he was not training at the same intensity with the risk of injury at the back of his mind and this can't be good.

Haile has done everything in the sport but his lack of participation in the world crosscountry and with the worldcross country having a short and long course gave Bekele more success here.
I would love to see Bekele tackle the marathon in the next 3-4 years.

Who do you rate higher???

Pisco Sour

thirstywork2 wrote: »

Bekele or Haile

Anytime I watch BBC Brendan Foster calls Bekele the greatest of all time.
When I saw him in the great run I thought he was back to his best but after finishing 7th the other night over 3k and beaten by 10 seconds im starting to think Bekele won't be winning in London.

He said he was not training at the same intensity with the risk of injury at the back of his mind and this can't be good.

Haile has done everything in the sport but his lack of participation in the world crosscountry and with the worldcross country having a short and long course gave Bekele more success here.
I would love to see Bekele tackle the marathon in the next 3-4 years.

Who do you rate higher???

It has to be Bekele. Haile did try Cross Country a few times. He just wasn’t that great at it, for whatever reason.

Cross country aside, Bekele has won more Olympic Gold medals (3 vs 2) and more World outdoor titles (5 vs 4). On the track he has been more successful, and add to that his Cross Country dominance, and the fact he has broken both Haile’s WRs (not quite as important as the other factors) then I don’t see much doubt as to who is the greatest. Once Bekele moves up to the marathon it will erase all doubt.

YFlyer

Brendan Foster says Haile here.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/other-sports/athletics/haile-gebrselassie-hailed-as-greatest-sportsman-248272

Pisco Sour

YFlyer wrote: »

Brendan Foster says Haile here.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/other-sports/athletics/haile-gebrselassie-hailed-as-greatest-sportsman-248272

IMO he’s not even the greatest of all time in his discipline, so I don’t see how he can be the greatest of all sports ever. That’s a pretty biased opinion by Foster. I’m pretty biased myself towards athletics, but even I can’t agree with this. He’s up there yes, but I’m not sure I’d put him ahead of the likes of Pele and Ali.

thirstywork2

That was 2010 and he said it during the great run live on tv along with many other events i have watched.

woodchopper

04072511 wrote: »

IMO he’s not even the greatest of all time in his discipline, so I don’t see how he can be the greatest of all sports ever. That’s a pretty biased opinion by Foster. I’m pretty biased myself towards athletics, but even I can’t agree with this. He’s up there yes, but I’m not sure I’d put him ahead of the likes of Pele and Ali.

Floyd Mayweather is better than Ali so I dont see how Ali gets the nod as the greatest despite his general showmanship. Sure isnt Bolt the greatest anyway!

Clum

thirstywork2 wrote: »

Bekele or Haile

Anytime I watch BBC Brendan Foster calls Bekele the greatest of all time.
When I saw him in the great run I thought he was back to his best but after finishing 7th the other night over 3k and beaten by 10 seconds im starting to think Bekele won't be winning in London.

I wouldn't be too concerned about Bekele being beaten over 3000m by lads who specialise in the shorter distances. He'll be focusing on the 10000m for the Olympics.

04072511 wrote: »

Once Bekele moves up to the marathon it will erase all doubt.

Doubt he ever will.

YFlyer wrote: »

Brendan Foster says Haile here.

Whoever Brendan Foster has lined up as a guest for one of his races is who he says is the greatest. In a couple of years it'll be Kipsang or Mosop or whoever wins the marathon this summer in London.

While we're on about Foster's races (and a little off topic), this Sunday's race in Manchester should be interesting. There are 3 big marathon names running over 10k who'll be looking to scalp each other. Makau (World Record holder), Kebede (Olympic bronze medallist) and Abshero (ran 2.04 in Dubai this year, looking to replace Kebede as Ethiopia's number 1 marathoner). Geb is running too but he's not really in these guys generation of marathon runners, he's just left the scene while they've entered it.

walshb

The GOAT in Athletics? Maybe. I wouldn't put him there. I think Lewis or Thompson could be numero 1. Zatopek too. Bekele too. Hicham too. Over all the running distances, without checking, I think Bekele had the faster times, and was that bit faster than Haile. Has Bekele got a better PB over 1 mile?

As for GOAT sports person. No. He is not! Ali for me.

Jordan deserves a nod here, but overall for GOAT it's Ali. And he has been selected in several polls as such. Jordan has too, and Babe Ruth.

walshb

woodchopper wrote: »

Floyd Mayweather is better than Ali so I dont see how Ali gets the nod as the greatest despite his general showmanship. Sure isnt Bolt the greatest anyway!

How so? Ali was the best fighter on earth at peak. Floyd is the best at WW, which is debateable for many.

Ali beats all comers. Floyd does not. A MW/LHW/CW and HW beat Floyd.

The Klits are the best fighters on earth today. Floyd is not.

walshb

woodchopper wrote: »

The Klits are the best fighters on earth today. Floyd is not.

Are you having a laugh[/QUOTE]

Eh, no.

Pit them togheter and who wins?

You are speaking about the GOAT, and to me, the GOAT I select is the best HW of all times, Ali. No matter how good a SRR or Eder Jofre was, Ali was the KING. Ali beats any man on earth at peak. The Klits do too. Floyd is a super boxer, not the best on earth, because if he stepped in with the Klit's he gest KTFO!

woodchopper

walshb wrote: »

How so? Ali was the best fighter on earth at peak. Floyd is the best at WW, which is debateable for many.

Ali beats all comers. Floyd does not. A MW/LHW/CW and HW beat Floyd.

The Klits are the best fighters on earth today. Floyd is not.

Who has Floyd not fought?

PS: I presume that last point was a joke. The Klits are useless big lumps in a rubbish division, lets be honest. Lenny Lewis would toy with those boys in his prime.

walshb

woodchopper wrote: »

Who has Floyd not fought?

PS: I presume that last point was a joke. The Klits are useless big lumps in a rubbish division, lets be honest. Lenny Lewis would toy with those boys in his prime.

Simple: To be the GOAT in boxing you need to be able to beat all comers. Only the HW greats can do this. So, as great as Floyd is, he is only as great as the men in his division.

It's just my view.

woodchopper

walshb wrote: »

Simple: To be the GOAT in boxing you need to be able to beat all comers. Only the HW greats can do this. So, as great as Floyd is, he is only as great as the men in his division.

It's just my view.

Name a fighter on this planet who is in Floyds league?

PS: Please dont say big bad Joe Ward

walshb

woodchopper wrote: »

Name a fighter on this planet who is in Floyds league?

PS: Please dont say big bad Joe Ward

You aren't reading what I am writing. At WW he is to me the best.

Above this he is not. There are many men who beat him. Now, all time there were many many many men who would have beat him.

mrak

.. back on to running.. The OP asked which of the two Bekele or Haile was the greatest. Running isn't like boxing in that it's fairer - the first man past the finish is the best. No dodgy judges, hometown decisions, excuses or opinions about who should have won. By that measure, you'd have to place Bekele ahead of Haile because his times are quicker over the distances they've both raced.. Maybe it's oversimplifying it..

woodchopper

mrak wrote: »

.. back on to running.. The OP asked which of the two Bekele or Haile was the greatest. Running isn't like boxing in that it's fairer - the first man past the finish is the best. No dodgy judges, hometown decisions, excuses or opinions about who should have won. By that measure, you'd have to place Bekele ahead of Haile because his times are quicker over the distances they've both raced.. Maybe it's oversimplifying it..

All the OAPs will be out jogging 5k in Galway tonight

ecoli

Bekele has more world titles (a staggering 20 golds at global championships compared to Gebs 10 though Geb has more 10,000m golds)

Bekele is faster on times (has held both WRs for the last 8 years) and no one has come within 13 secs of his times since he broke the WRs. The only criticism I can think of here is the shift towards the marathon the depth of quality not there (Think of Geb having to race Koech and Tergat at the height of there careers)

Bekele actually beat Geb as a 21 year old for the World Championships back in 2003 (though Geb was 30 at this stage)

I think it is very close even though Geb had WRs at three distances you have to include Bekeles dominance in XC you can be sure he would have a WR there to if there were records for XC.

Bekele wins it for me but I think it all depends on your perspective of how you define "great".

walshb

Plus, at peak who really would run faster. I take times into account, but really, there is a lot to running a fast time. Pace makers, conditions etc.

If Geb had a Bekele around when Geb was at peak would that have ran Geb faster, and vice versa?

I mean, their 5k times are very very close.

Similar to when one compares Gerrouj to a Coe. Coe had that speed and endurance to run faster times, but faster times require certain conditions.

Both Haile and Kenenisa are GOAT for long distance/track running.

Lasse Viren had he been around today with the diet, technology etc, could have ran faster. Although, didn't he avail of some neat technology back in the 70s?

woodchopper

walshb wrote: »

Plus, at peak who really would run faster. I take times into account, but really, there is a lot to running a fast time. Pace makers, conditions etc.

If Geb had a Bekele around when Geb was at peak would that have ran Geb faster, and vice versa?

I mean, their 5k times are very very close.

Similar to when one compares Gerrouj to a Coe. Coe had that speed and endurance to run faster times, but faster times require certain conditions.

Both Haile and Kenenisa are GOAT for long distance/track running.

Lasse Viren had he been around today with the diet, technology etc, could have ran faster. Although, didn't he avail of some neat technology back in the 70s?

Yes because Geb and Bekele growing up has underwater treadmills, alter g's, and of course compression socks at their disposal. If only Viren had such luck in obtaining these gadgets that are available in Addis Abba

walshb

woodchopper wrote: »

Yes because Geb and Bekele growing up has underwater treadmills, alter g's, and of course compression socks at their disposal. If only Viren had such luck in obtaining these gadgets that are available in Addis Abba

Are you saying African athletes have zero access to technology today? They have to do it the "old fashioned way?" Bekele and Geb are legends, and are machines, well oiled machines. I am sure they have availed of whatever technolgy advancements we have had since the early 70s.

walshb

And, top athletes today and from recent years are full time professionals. That was not the case in the 70s.

ecoli

walshb wrote: »

And, top athletes today and from recent years are full time professionals. That was not the case in the 70s.

http://www.iaaf.org/news/kind=103/newsid=59690.html

Bekele is also heavily involved in business and runs three hotels in Ethiopia and was named Social Entrepreneur of the Year in Ethiopia so they are not exactly sitting around between training sessions

woodchopper

walshb wrote: »

Are you saying African athletes have zero access to technology today? They have to do it the "old fashioned way?" Bekele and Geb are legends, and are machines, well oiled machines. I am sure they have availed of whatever technolgy advancements we have had since the early 70s.

YES Go out to Kenya and watch them train like I have. Kiprop does workouts with a tire tied around his back on a wet muddy track with a cow and a goat watching on. Kiprop is the reigning World and Olympic champion over 1500 by the way.

Viren if running today would get his ass handed to him by the likes of Rupp, Mottram and Solinsky never mind Geb or Bekele. Different level

Wrong as usual Im afraid

walshb

woodchopper wrote: »

YES Go out to Kenya and watch them train like I have. Kiprop does workouts with a tire tied around his back on a wet muddy track with a cow and a goat watching on. Kiprop is the reigning World and Olympic champion over 1500 by the way.

Viren if running today would get his ass handed to him by the likes of Rupp, Mottram and Solinsky never mind Geb or Bekele. Different level

Wrong as usual Im afraid

Well, if you really believe that top African athletes aren't capable of availing of modern technologies and advancements, so be it. Even IF the advancements aren't readily available in parts of the continent, is it not possible for top African athletes to seek them elsewhere?

Lasse Viren competed in the 70s, and had some real good times too. Now, give him access to what athletes have today and the fact that they are full time pros, and are you so sure he gets his ass handed to him?

Cragg wouldn't hand him his ass:)

walshb

woodchopper wrote: »

Wrong as usual Im afraid

BTW, you still think PBF beats the Klit's:)

ecoli

woodchopper wrote: »

YES Go out to Kenya and watch them train like I have. Kiprop does workouts with a tire tied around his back on a wet muddy track with a cow and a goat watching on. Kiprop is the reigning World and Olympic champion over 1500 by the way.
Viren if running today would get his ass handed to him by the likes of Rupp, Mottram and Solinsky never mind Geb or Bekele. Different level

Wrong as usual Im afraid

Saw that video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUMqOEDhLkU&feature=feedu


I dunno whether to believe everything I see though it looks a bit like could be showmanship for the camera

woodchopper

walshb wrote: »

BTW, you still think PBF beats the Klit's:)

Using your logic Katie Taylor must be overrated since she probably wouldnt knock one of the Klits out. Strange since on another thread you said she was better than Sonia.

PS: Floyd knocked out the Big Show at Wrestlemania 24 so he can take down the bigger man.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=srT3FFl7tRw&feature=player_detailpage

scrawnybawny

don't know if its relevant but if it was a tie (and it might well be) i'd give it to bekele on a points decision (to incorporate the boxing parlance) for sheer technical superiority - he's much the classier runner.

walshb

woodchopper wrote: »

Using your logic Katie Taylor must be overrated since she probably wouldnt knock one of the Klits out. Strange since on another thread you said she was better than Sonia.

Floyd isn't overrated. Nor is Katie. And, no she doesn't beat the Klits either. You got that right at least!

ChickenTikka

Its a tough one isn't it. Based on his posts count of 12890, you'd have to say walshb is the greatest of all time. But even though he has only 379 todate, woodchopper's recent performance is very impressive. The young pretender to the crown maybe. But I'd have to go with walshb at the moment for sheer longevity.:D

woodchopper

ChickenTikka wrote: »

Its a tough one isn't it. Based on his posts count of 12890, you'd have to say walshb is the greatest of all time. But even though he has only 379 todate, woodchopper's recent performance is very impressive. The young pretender to the crown maybe. But I'd have to go with walshb at the moment for sheer longevity.:D

Im afraid YOUTH is not on my side.

Pisco Sour

walshb wrote: »

Simple: To be the GOAT in boxing you need to be able to beat all comers. Only the HW greats can do this. So, as great as Floyd is, he is only as great as the men in his division.

It's just my view.

In that case, you can’t lay claim to Katie Taylor being the best female boxer in the world as she is just a lightweight, and would get beaten up by a heavyweight. It’s a flawed argument. But I agree on your point that Ali is the best….at boxing!

Pisco Sour

With regards to Viren, it has to be remembered that the Finnish undertook practices which were not illegal at the time, but in this day and age wouldn’t be tolerated. With that in mind I just don’t see how Viren would be a factor in this day and age at the pointy end of things.

thirstywork2

maurice Green even has a tattoo to show
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maurice_Greene_(athlete)

walshb

04072511 wrote: »

In that case, you can’t lay claim to Katie Taylor being the best female boxer in the world as she is just a lightweight, and would get beaten up by a heavyweight. It’s a flawed argument. But I agree on your point that Ali is the best….at boxing!

Yes she would get beaten. I never said otherwise. As a LW she to me is the best on earth. And P4P she is to me best for best. But, p4p is fantasy!
I also never claimed Katie to be the best athlete ever. I said in Ireland I thought she was.

And, the point was made in reference to professional boxing and professional boxers.
The initial point I made was in repsonse to someone saying Floyd is the GOAT.

My personal view on the sport of boxing is that the HW champ is "the man." No other boxer can claim to be better, unless of course they defeat "the man."

Floyd is one of the best ever below HW, but so are many many many others, incluuding SRR, who many say is p4p the best ever. Thing is, the p4p debate is pure fantasy. As good as SRR was, he never competes with Marciano, Louis or Liston from that era. Yes, they were bigger, so what?

I usually think of the boxers as the best HWs, and then the best below HW. I separtae the lower weights form the big men. The HW champion of the world was always known as the richest prize in sport. They were the top men in the world of sport. Today, the scene is suffereing badly.

walshb

04072511 wrote: »

With regards to Viren, it has to be remembered that the Finnish undertook practices which were not illegal at the time, but in this day and age wouldn’t be tolerated. With that in mind I just don’t see how Viren would be a factor in this day and age at the pointy end of things.

Viren never admitted to any of them practices as far as I know. Not saying they did not happen, but is it conclusive?

And, do you not think that in 40 years some progression has occurred in running? Could he not benefit from the advancements in science and diet and training etc?

Pisco Sour

walshb wrote: »

Yes she would get beaten. I never said otherwise. As a LW she to me is the best on earth. And P4P she is to me best for best. But, p4p is fantasy!
I also never claimed Katie to be the best athlete ever. I said in Ireland I thought she was.

The initial point I made was in repsonse to someone saying Floyd is the GOAT.

My personal view on the sport of boxing is that the HW champ is "the man." No other boxer can claim to be better, unless of course they defeat "the man."

Floyd is one of the best ever below HW, but so are many many many others, incluuding SRR, who many say is p4p the best ever. Thing is, the p4p debate is pure fantasy. As good as SRR was, he never competes with Marciano, Louis or Liston from that era. Yes, they were bigger, so what?

I usually think of the boxers as the best HWs, and then the best below HW. I separtae the lower weights form the big men. The HW champion of the world was always known as the richest prize in sport. They were the top men in the world of sport. Today, the scene is suffereing badly.

I think that's all quite unfair on the lower weight boxers. The competitiveness is just as strong throughout the majority of the weights no?Just because somebody was born "bigger" shouldn't give them an advantage with regards this. Is the heavyweight necessarily the better BOXER and FIGHTER, or is he just the stronger. I see what you are saying of course, but you harp on a bit about boxing being such a dynamic sport with a high skill set so why not look at these attributes when determining who is the greatest, rather than just looking at the best of the heavy lads? Not that I'm an expert or anything, but I'd consider Roberto Duran or Sugar Ray Leonard to be far higher up the all time list than somebody like Frank Bruno.

How on earth did we get onto this, as interesting a discussion as it is.

Pisco Sour

walshb wrote: »

Viren never admitted to any of them practices as far as I know. Not saying they did not happen, but is it conclusive?

And, do you not think that in 40 years some progression has occurred in running? Could he not benefit from the advancements in science and diet and training etc?

The Finns were very advanced for the time. They dominated distance running to an extent. There's reasons for this, which were not illegal at the time, but may not have been very moral either. I don't think they had as much scope for "improvement" as other nationalities. Ask yourself the question, why do they not excel in distance running now? When is the last time you've seen a Finn even qualify for a world or Olympic final?

walshb

04072511 wrote: »

I think that's all quite unfair on the lower weight boxers. The competitiveness is just as strong throughout the majority of the weights no?Just because somebody was born "bigger" shouldn't give them an advantage with regards this. Is the heavyweight necessarily the better BOXER and FIGHTER, or is he just the stronger. I see what you are saying of course, but you harp on a bit about boxing being such a dynamic sport with a high skill set so why not look at these attributes when determining who is the greatest, rather than just looking at the best of the heavy lads? Not that I'm an expert of anything, but I'd consider Roberto Duran or Sugar Ray Leonard to be far higher up the all time list than somebody like Frank Bruno.

How on earth did we get onto this, as interesting a discussion as it is.

Yes, but why should we penalise the big men because nature made them big? That is a point I make. Anyway, I am usually in the minority with this view.

I don't care how good a SRR was, a Duran was, an Armstrong was, a Roy Jones was, a SRL was; they never defeat an Ali, Louis, Foreman, Tyson, Liston or Dempsey, to name a few. That's juts how it is.

BTW, you reference Bruno. I see what you mean. Some HW champs were less than great. I usually stick to elite with elite. So, SRL compared to Joe Louis; or Duran compared to Joe Frazier et al.

It's full of permuations, but I am sure you get the gist of my side of the debate.

Floyd is a hell of a boxer, never will he be the GOAT, ever.

walshb

04072511 wrote: »

The Finns were very advanced for the time. They dominated distance running to an extent. There's reasons for this, which were not illegal at the time, but may not have been very moral either. I don't think they had as much scope for "improvement" as other nationalities. Ask yourself the question, why do they not excel in distance running now? When is the last time you've seen a Finn even qualify for a world or Olympic final?

Yes, but I am asking about Viren, not other Finns. Could Viren have competed today with 40 years of advancements?

I mean, we have produced only a handful of elite 1500 men, doesn't mean that a Coghlan couldn't compete today if he availed of the advancements.

Pisco Sour

walshb wrote: »

Yes, but I am asking about Viren, not other Finns. Could Viren have competed today with 40 years of advancements?

I mean, we have produced only a handful of elite 1500 men, doesn't mean that a Coghlan couldn't compete today if he avialed of the advancements.

What I am saying is Viren was very much advanced for his time, so somebody like him would have less scope for improvement than somebody like Coghlan. You may mention just Viren, but you cant single him out. He just happened to be the best of them, but the simple fact remains, there was a LOT of finns at the very top at Olympic and World level back in the 70s and early 80s. Now they don't even feature at European level distance running. There are reasons for this. If Viren was around now in this day and age, running for Finland, I'm not convinced he would be much more than a bit part player.

walshb

Not just Viren, some other greats from years gone by like Kuts and Zatopek etc. The men today are faster, but the men today have improved due to many factors, and science and techology are big reasons. Just like Valimir Kuts and Zatopek improved on those before them.

Pisco Sour

walshb wrote: »

Not just Viren, some other greats from years gone by like Kuts and Zatopek etc. The men today are faster, but the men today have improved due to many factors, and science and techology are big reasons. Just like Valimir Kuts and Zatopek improved on those before them.

You're not getting me here. The Finns were lightyears ahead of their time. They were in the 90s when everyone else was stuck in the 70s. Hence their potential to improve from advancements are lower than the rest, as they were already well advanced at the time.

walshb

04072511 wrote: »

You're not getting me here. The Finns were lightyears ahead of their time. They were in the 90s when everyone else was stuck in the 70s. Hence their potential to improve from advancements are lower than the rest, as they were already well advanced at the time.

Ok, I guess I need to do research then. They may have been advanced for that time, but you surely cannot say that the techniques and science they were using was "futuristic."

Whatever science and knowledge and training methods they were using, it was still science and knowledge and training methods from that time. Ahead of the others maybe, but still only what was available at the time. I am speaking about the early to mid 70s here by the way. And, Viren was not invincible either. He lost WR to others, so it's not like others weren't as good or competitive. Foster has a few wins against him. Top times over 5 K shows many non Finnish athletes in the 70s with top times ahead of Viren.

That was 40 years ago.

Pisco Sour

walshb wrote: »

Ok, I guess I need to do research then. They may have been advanced for that time, but you surely cannot say that the techniques and science they were using was "futuristic."

Whatever science and knowledge and training methods they were using, it was still science and knowledge and training methods from that time. Ahead of the others maybe, but still only what was available at the time. I am speaking about the early to mid 70s here by the way. And, Viren was not invincible either. He lost WR to others, so it's not like others weren't as good or competitive. Foster has a few wins against him. Top times over 5 K shows many non Finnish athletes in the 70s with top times ahead of Viren.

That was 40 years ago.

I'm afraid that I may cross a line here with regards what is an acceptable thing to say on boards so I've PM'ed you.