v2 G.O.A.T The Last 16 Match 4

Friday’s match was battled out between Jack Nicklaus and Jesse Owen for a spot in the last 8, after taking a very early substantial lead it was Nicklaus that looked set to take poll position and progress. Owen fought back admirably before eventually falling short by 14 votes, the Olympic champion exits the competition after defeating Sachin Tendulkar, Sugar Ray Leonard and Ayrton Senna on route to the last 16.

Today’s match pits Bjorn Borg vs. Steve Redgrave.

Please vote for the participant you believe has achieved the most in sport

Please leave a comment as to why you voted

Bjorn Borg- Tennis- Championed by 88chris05

"“I wish Borg would let someone else have a go at the title for a change"" said tennis legend John McEnroe, after he'd lost the 1980 Wimbledon final to the ice-cool Swede Bjorn Borg. Indeed, of tennis' four major tournaments (now usually referred to as 'Grand Slams' although, as plenty of tennis fans will tell you, that's something of a misnomer), Wimbledon has produced the fewest champions in the open era, which spans from 1968 - the year in which the world's best professionals were allowed to play in the 'big four' - until the present day.

We've grown used to seeing one player make themselves synonamous with the green grass of SW19, and make the trophy their own; Roger Federer in the past decade, Pete Sampras before him, and Boris Becker before the pair of them. Certainly, this happens far more at Wimbledon than at any of the other tennis majors. But there was one man who got there first before all of them in guaranteeing that his name will always be linked with those images of strawberries, all-white kits and, unfortunately, Cliff Richard - and that man was Bjorn Rhune Borg.

It's impossible to do justice to the way in which Borg grabbed tennis by the scruff of its neck and slapped it in to life when he burst on to the scene in the mid seventies. Like Alex Higgins in snooker or Ian Thorpe in swimming, Borg's presence turned what was seen largely as a fuddy-duddy game for upper class Brits and our descendants from Down Under in to a cool, world-wide televised phenomenon. There was tennis before Borg, and tennis after, and no other player in the men's game has ever brought about as much change.

What was the reason for this? Well, there was no single one, but a combination of factors. The good looks, the quiet yet totally absorbing charisma, and the new level of power and athleticism which Borg gave to the game all helped. In 1979, he earned over one million dollars in a single season, a figure which would have been unimaginable just half a decade earlier.

He was also an incredibly young man in what had, until then, a little bit more of a slow-burning sport; Borg was still barely eighteen years old when he won his first of eleven majors, the French Open, in June 1974. When he repeated the trick the following year, as well as leading Sweden to their first Davis Cup victory, the message was clear - no longer could the old timers (such as the wonderful and indefatigable Ken Rosewall who, in 1974, had made the Wimbledon final aged forty, a whole two decades after his first) last the pace - Borg was ushering in a new era of young, athletic superstars such as Jimmy Connors and John McEnroe.

On the European red clay, Borg was close to unbeatable. He triumphed at Roland Garros / the French Open six times; 1974, 1975, 1978, 1979, 1980 and 1981. Though his overall haul has since been surpassed by Rafael Nadal's seven, his mark of four on the spin from 1978 to 1981 is yet to be bettered.

Borg's other five majors were all won at Wimbledon, and all of them in succession; his 1976-1980 achievement has still not been outstripped, and even the phenomenal Roger Federer had to settle for equalling it, with a 'fivetimer' of his own between 2003 and 2007.

However, the pure statistics can't convey the enourmity of Borg's achievements in being so dominant in both Paris and London. First of all, in Borg's peak, there was only one week which separated the end of the French Open and the start of Wimbledon. In more recent times, this has been lengthened to a fortnight and, starting in the near future, will be extended even further to a three week break. For Borg, there was no chance to have a prolonged rest, to quickly ease his way back in to the different and varied rigours of grass court tennis after playing for so long on the clay. As soon as one was finished, the other was knocking on the door.

And even more crucially, the difference between how clay and grass courts played back in the seventies can not be overstated. I remember an interview with the long-time coach of André Agassi (one of the few men to have completed the coveted 'career Slam' by winning all four tennis majors at some stage), Gil Reyes, in which he touched on how difficult and large the shift in training for clay tennis and then quickly moving over to grass was. Reyes said that he and Agassi had to totally change their regime as, ""it's not just like a different kind of tennis - it's like a totally different sport altogether.""

That was true in Agassi's nineties pomp, and it was even more so in Borg's peak. Nowadays, it's common to see fans and players alike bemoaning the fact that grass courts, previously the fastest and most 'specialised' in tennis, have been made too similar to the slower clay and Australian hard ones, and that there is a lack of variation in the game now. A cursory glance at Wimbledon these days, in which you'll nary a see a serve and volley player making any great inroads in to the tournament (previously, these players had been the dominant ones on the surface) is proof enough of this.

However, during Borg's career, clay and grass were the antithesis of each other. The high bounce and slow play of Paris was startling different to the low, skidding grass of SW19; conventional wisdom said that, while baseliners would always be successful on clay, they couldn't hope to beat the more lythe, so-called 'artistic' serve and volley players who prospered on the faster surface at Wimbledon. Borg made a mockery of that theory - between all of his triumphs at both events, there were three years - 1978, 1979 and 1980 - in which he won both the French Open and Wimbledon back to back.

To me, this is one of the most remarkable feats in sport. After 1980, it was another twenty-eight years until Rafael Nadal became the next man to pick up the two tournaments in the same year and, while the Spaniard's form in 2008 was sensational, as far as I'm concerned it just doesn't quite have that same aura around it as Borg's achievement in mastering both the red and green surfaces so effortlessly and so often.
Borg's influence on the game is everywhere, even now. Whenever Roger Federer's ice-cool temperament and clear-headedness under pressure is mentioned, it's inevitably linked back to Borg, who became known appropriately as the 'Ice Man' because of these qualities. When there's talk of how Rafael Nadal has done so much to attract females and children to the game with his looks, youthful energy and star quality, there will always be those quick to point out that, in fact, it was this incredible Swede who was there first.

Although a major on a hard court alluded him (he seldom played the Australian Open which, at the time, was merely a poor relation to the other 'Slams, and McEnroe and Connors conspired to make him a runner up four times at the US Open), it is likely that Borg would have surpassed Roy Emerson's (then) record of twelve career Grand Slams had he not retired aged just 26 in 1982, months after losing to McEnroe in the Flushing Meadows final for a second successive year.

Despite this, Borg, incredibly, won eleven of the twenty-seven Grand Slams he entered in his professional career - a quite frankly ridiculous ration which no other man can get close to. He was six times ranked at the top of the world rankings during his time as a player. To the nearest percent, he won 90% of his matches in majors, and 83% throughout his whole career - and once more, these are records.

But Borg was more than just a record breaker - he was a true original, tennis' first superstar. Seldom can you find a person who has been involved in a sport for such a short amount of time but has done as much, not only in terms of achievement but also in terms of popularising the game and paving the way for a generation of mega stars who followed. The 1980 Wimbledon final, in which Borg edged out his great rival McEnroe in five sets in a classic, is still spoken of in reverent terms all these years later. In 2008, an ESPN poll quizzed a series of tennis analysts, former players and writers to hypothetically build their perfect player - and Borg's name was the only one to be mentioned in all four categories; defence, footwork, intangibles and mental toughness.
""People say I could probably have won more Grand Slams and it's probably true, but the decision was mine and I'm glad I made it"" said Borg in 1983, a year after his retirement had stunned the tennis world. But more tellingly, he finished off by saying, ""My dream is to be remembered as the greatest tennis player of all time - I guess you could say I have come close.""

Steve Redgrave- Rowing- Championed by ChequeredJersey

One of the key features, in my opinion, for the GOAT in all sports is that a candidate must transcend his sport and attain significance and influence in the lives of people beyond the hard-core sporting fan-base. They should also attain dominance within their own sport. Many sportsmen (this term includes women too) are talented, some enough that they stand out above their peers. Far fewer stand out across the eras of a sport. Of these, even fewer are household names, celebrities or national icons especially in the ‘less popular sports’. Other sportsmen garner fame and celebrity status, but few of these can say they achieved unique accomplishments for sporting reasons. Those that fit into both categories and also manage to be uniquely great across a type of sport, not merely their own specialty, are incredibly rare. Sir Steven Geoffrey Redgrave, CBE, deputy lieutenant, is one of these. I will endeavour to show how in this article. Sorry that it’s a bit long, I got carried away…

If you ask a member of the British public to name an Olympian, chances are Redgrave will be near the top of the list. If you ask them to name a rower, I’d be amazed if he weren’t. He remains the only person to win 5 Gold Olympic Medals in 5 consecutive games in an endurance sport (as well as a solitary Bronze) and he adds 9 Gold, 2 Silver and 1 Bronze World Championship Medals from 1986-99 to that tally. He won his first Gold at age 22 and his last at 38, 16 years of Olympic domination in a sport that is based on physical strength and fitness, attributes that for a man peak in one’s mid-twenties. During the majority of that time, Redgrave’s crews were expected to win every race they entered and in a sport that has a number of strong competitive nations and is subject to conditions and how the crew clicks and other variables they nearly did win every race for nearly 20 years.

Non-internationally, he won different categories at Henley Royal Regatta, the premier sprint racing rowing race in the world, 21 times, the last one at age 39. These events ranged from sweep (one bladed) to scull (two oars) and from singles on his own to coxed 4s with a number of partners, as were his Olympic medals. The only constant was Redgrave. He also represented England in the 1986 Commonwealth games where he won 3 Golds in different races. I don’t know how many times he won the premier Head (long distance) racing event in the world, the Head of the River Race on the Thames, but he certainly did win it with Leander VIII and IV several times as well as his sprint victories listed here.

Most rowers specialise at rowing on one side of the boat – Bowside (starboard, or the right side of the boat from the cox’ point of view) or Strokeside (port). As well as sculling with 2 oars, Redgrave rowed both Bow and Strokeside and won Olympic Gold on both sides, testament to his technical proficiency (something very underappreciated by lay people regarding rowing) not just his strength. He was also renowned as a tactician and made the calls in his coxless crews and knew exactly when to wait and when to push another crew.
The only thing missing from his portfolio is a Boat Race victory, due to ineligibility.

He was also World indoor rowing champion (on a ergometric rowing machine) in 1990 and was British bobsleighing Champion and has run several London Marathons for charity. He did all of this with Ulcerative Colitis and Diabetes Mellitus Type 1, both chronic and debilitating diseases with severe health effects, both worse under the stress of severe physical exertion which rowing training entails more than most existent activities.

These are his considerable achievements within sport. Related to these, he has been BBC Sports Personality of the Year, won a Knighthood and a CBE from the Queen, a special pin from the Olympic Committee for winning 5 Golds in consecutive Games, a Thomas Keller Medal from the International Rowing Federation for his Outstanding International Career, has Carried the Olympic Torch in the Olympic Stadium at 2012 London, been the UK’s Olympic Flag bearer in 1992 and ’96, won Celebrity Gladiators, a BBC Sports Lifetime Achievement Award. He has set up rowing academies in India, raised millions of pounds for Charity, is an ambassador for Fairtrade and Founder and President of the Steve Redgrave Trust, and the vice-president of Diabetes UK and involved in many other charities. He is now Sports Legacy Champion and a Member of Sports Relief’s Steering Committee. The President of British Rowing, a Steward of Henley Royal Regatta and Vice President of the British Olympic Association and now a decade after his retirement is still the face of Rowing.

Since his retirement he has done so much for Sport and charity. He is a British legend who represents his country now as an ambassador. He epitomises determination, pushing oneself beyond the limit and the honour of representing one’s country. Inside his sport he has been a master and a mentor and outside of it a Champion for all the qualities we get from playing sport and all the emotion we suffer through spectating it. He is surely the inspiration for so many rowers, so many British sportspeople across every sport. He has touched many lives through the greatest of his achievements, people crying with him and for him. For all this, I propose Sir Steve Redgrave as the GOAT.

Borg - not totally convinced he should still be in this process but his achievements outstrip Redgrave.

for me two of the weaker pitted against each other here. in this its who's weakness is the least apparent in redgraves dominance in a minority sport and us all being slightly biased because his success for britain against a talented borg but very short reign and one which is already being eclipsed by the likes of nadal who's barely half way through his career

difficult one but seeing though we already have a better tennis player through dont see the need for another so will go for redgrave

My heart says Redgrave, my head - Borg.

One lasted for 16 years at the top, the other just a few.

I'm going with my heart on this occasion.

in the greatest of all time think one of the biggest keys is longevity for me, something which definitely goes against borg, he's like a tyson of the tennis world very bright talent while he lasted but far too short a reign

Stella wrote:My heart says Redgrave, my head - Borg.

One lasted for 16 years at the top, the other just a few.

I'm going with my heart on this occasion.

Well there were 7 years between Borgs first and last slam, Ive not really heard seven described as a few before. He pretty much had a 10 year top level career which isnt too shabby.
Sure Redgrave was 16 years, but then again he was sitting down all the time.

Diggers wrote:

Stella wrote:My heart says Redgrave, my head - Borg.

One lasted for 16 years at the top, the other just a few.

I'm going with my heart on this occasion.

Well there were 7 years between Borgs first and last slam, Ive not really heard seven described as a few before. He pretty much had a 10 year top level career which isnt too shabby.
Sure Redgrave was 16 years, but then again he was sitting down all the time.

10 years? Cheers, should have checked before typing.

Sitting down? I expect training as a rower is pretty damn painstaking.

Was being a bit faceitious but if Redgrave makes the last eight of this the world has gone jingoistic mad.

Diggers wrote:Was being a bit faceitious but if Redgrave makes the last eight of this the world has gone jingoistic mad.

All about the draw, diggers.

Its a good draw for Redgrave, its hard to make a case for Borg as the tennis GOAT but everyone thinks Redgrave is the rowing GOAT, but is that down to a lack of knowledge ? How much do most of us actually know about the sport.
Pertti Karppinen won 3 Olympic golds in the single skulls as did Vyacheslav Ivanov.
No team to help these guys, they did it all on their own, surely that should count for more in a sport like rowing where you can never be sure if Redgrave was the best rower in his boat at any time.
By the way Im no rowing expert, but I dont think many on here are we do need to know if Redgrave is actually considered the GOAT within his own sport.

Easily Redgrave. What was it again? 5 consecutive Olympic Golds and 9 World Golds. Longetivity personified.

Not a good pairing at this stage - perhaps would have been better to stick with 2 progressing from a group of 4 at the R32 and R16 stages, as the luck of the draw has seen far more worthy contenders (Merckx, SRR being two off the top of my head that should have been in the final top 8) being eliminated by at least in part a bad draw earlier in the process.

Diggers makes a reasonable point - while Redgrave is justifiably Britain's most famous oarsman, how does he really rate by comparison with the best that the rest of the world has produced? Fantastic longevity at the top end of his sport, but my impression was that for Redgrave's last two Olympics it was really Pinsent who was the outstanding powerhouse in the boat.

I do though also have reservations about Borg as a GOAT candidate, not least of which being that he clearly hasn't the best legacy in male tennis of the Open era. Put his record up against Federer's or even Sampras's and Borg comes out behind. While the FO and Wimbledon double was a fantastic achievement in the playing conditions present at the end of the 70s, the failure to win a USO title (i.e. the hard court slam) and Borg's early retirement (a combination of burn-out and personal issues) are both significant negatives.

On balance, I'm going to vote for Redgrave, but mostly on the grounds that I can't see a justification for having two male tennis players in the top 8.

Borg's early withdrawal from top level competition prevented him from achieving his full potential, so I can't see him as overall GOAT. Redgrave arguably achieved more than perhaps he should have in a career that perhaps should have been shorter.

Perhaps 2 so called lesser lights in the competition but a tough call between them in the head to head.

Interestingly, an article on golfer Michael Campbell (won US Open in 2005 before a catastrophic decline) on the BBC website today recants a tale of how Campbell was in a car with Redgrave after Campbell had achieved his one life goal by winning a major and didn't know what to do next. Redgrave's analogy was to liken his win as conquering Everest with oxygen. He simply said Campbell should now aim to conquer it without oxygen.

Arguments about size and specificity of rowing as a sport aside, that shows the mind of a great.

Gone with Redgrave today.

The randomness of the draw strikes again. Both probably just about merit a place in the last 16 but I doubt many would have either in their top 8 sporting GOATs. Anyway, we are where we are.

All credit to Redgrave for his achievements and longevity but would we really be considering him now if he had been anything other than British? It is a world GOAT we're trying to select.

Did Sweden have much tennis background before Borg? I may be mistaken but I don't think so. To emerge from that sort of backdrop to dominate tennis with such skill for a number of years deserves immense respect. However, some concerns. Did he dominate long enough? Did he walk away too early? Also, others probably have stronger claims to be the GOAT of his sport.

All in all, Borg's success and continued world standing gets my vote today although not a fully committed one.

I totally understand where you guys are coming from in reference to the randomness of the draw, unfortunately seeding was too much of a mine feild therefore random was the only option at the time.

I totally understand where you guys are coming from in reference to the randomness of the draw, unfortunately seeding was too much of a mine feild therefore random was the only option at the time.

Baldy NIne Chins is out, that's all that matters.

Borg for me.

The TME analysts have convened and given the win to Steve Redgrave.

Having achieved it ourselves, longevity is something we have great respect for. Redgrave is the only Brit that we would back at this stage of the competition. His decade of domination starting at the Vienna World Championships in 1991, and culminating in Sydney at the turn of the Millennium earned our respect despite the relatively Mickey Mouse nature of the sport. And he did all this plagued by diabetes and incessant colonoscopies.

Borg is a great with a permanent place at the very peak of his sport: his French-Wimbledon doubles, global appeal, and the rare common sense shown in leaving the stage on his own terms, rather than once ravaged by age (a lesson Ryan Giggs ought to have headed long ago) mark him out as a worthy member of the last-16.

But ultimately at this stage can you vote for any tennis player that isn't Roger Federer? It seems Borg thought as much himself - retiring from the game in the same month as a baby boy from Basel took his first breaths... He will make a similarly dignified exit again today.

where have you collectively been hans?

Borg did a lot for tennis, he really did, with regard top top Swedish tennis players...how many we're there before him?...then how many after? In other words he inspired a generation of Swedes (Wilander, Edberg etc). He dominated Wimbledon and he dominated Roland Garros. Maybe the tennis fans can correct me here but is that not a bit of an unusual combination? Ie would it not be more normal to dominate either the Aussie or US Open in conjunction with Wimbledon. Quite a few greats have won Wimbledon several times but not the French and vice versa. That makes it even more strange howcome Borg never achieved the career slam (something that would blot his score when working out the tennis GOAT. Was it just a case of his star burned brightly but just not long enough? I know he retired quite abruptly.

With regards Redgrave, I seem to remember it was an interesting debate in the last round about a) the fact that rowing isn't considered a mainstream sport and b) is he even considered the rowing GOAT.
My observations would be...1. If Groebbler (the coach) didn't think he merited a place in a boat he WOULDN'T have got one. Never once did that coach EVER come across as sentimental enough to carry a 2nd rater. I remember watching a documentary on the rowing team leading up to one of the Olympics (it might have been when he was going for his 4th Gold). The training looked absolutely brutal. Blokes standing either side of the Concept 2 machine as the team members pushed themselves to exhaustion and beyond (literally until they passed out and fell off semi conscious). Anybody who is prepared to subject themselves to that sort of torture over the time period that Redgrave maintained at the top level deserves HUGE respect. Not withstanding the fact that the bloke also has to manage diabetes and Ulcerative Colitis.
2. Does there really have to be a trigger point in terms of spectator numbers or participation levels for a sport to be considered "mainstream".

I really don't consider myself jingoistic at all (in any case Redgraves English, I'm Scottish) but I DO think he merits a place in the last 8 but I'd concede he'll need a very lucky draw to go further.

super_realist wrote:Baldy NIne Chins is out, that's all that matters.

Your work is done pal...

mystiroakey wrote:

where have you collectively been hans?

Indulging in a spot of ownism It takes a while with so many hans.

Borg is the biggest sport superstar of the two, by some distance.

JAS wrote:

I really don't consider myself jingoistic at all (in any case Redgraves English, I'm Scottish) but I DO think he merits a place in the last 8 but I'd concede he'll need a very lucky draw to go further.

Jas, I think if this poll were to take in every country in the world certain names would crop up each time. Pele, Federer, Ali, Nicklaus probably, Bolt, Phelps, maybe Bradman.
I would feel exceptionally comfortable betting my life that in any country outside the UK Redgrave wouldnt make the top 8, in fact I doubt in most instances he'd trouble the scorers by making the top 64.
Each country would have its own Redgrave equivalent, a legend in a relatively niche sport. If Redgrave happened to be say Italian there would be no way he'd have made this list in the UK.

Very true Diggers. I've voted purely on achievements, but you can't expect everyone else to do the same.

Having said that, what Redgrave achieved was extraordinary, and I doubt we'll ever see a rower do that again.

Azzy Mahmood wrote:
Having said that, what Redgrave achieved was extraordinary, and I doubt we'll ever see a rower do that again.

And even if they did, unless they were British we wouldnt even know who they were anyway (like we dont know who Elisabeta Lipa is although she won 5 golds in a career spanning 20 years and 6 games)

Sir Steve wouldn't even be in the 64 if he was Swedish but votes are based on personal experience.
It may be jingoistic but all countries would be the same.

Stella wrote:Sir Steve wouldn't even be in the 64 if he was Swedish but votes are based on personal experience.
It may be jingoistic but all countries would be the same.

I just think to vote someone to such a lofty position surely you need to have some kind of understanding of the sport, its greats and its place in the world. If for example its not a niche/minority sport as some people say, then why is it you could walk up to pretty much the entire population and they'd struggle to name 3 rowers and I very much doubt that they could name any rower from outside of the UK.

JAS - I saw that documentary. Was a very good watch as I recall, despite my lack of interest in rowing. Utterly, utterly brutal training and none of them can be considered passengers.

It would be the same anywhere though. COnduct this poll in Norway for instance and most GOATs would relate to winter sport.
DO the same in America and it would concentrate around Baseball, Basketball and NFL.

super_realist wrote:It would be the same anywhere though. COnduct this poll in Norway for instance and most GOATs would relate to winter sport.
DO the same in America and it would concentrate around Baseball, Basketball and NFL.

I dont agree, at least those sports are huge in those countries and people actually have a knowledge of them. Over here we just know he got 5 golds, we know nothing of other great rowers from other countries or indeed even if rowing in a crew is seen as less of an achievement than winning 3 golds in single skulls.

At least we haven't championed Bobby Charlton, Ian Botham or Kelly Holmes.

Diggers wrote:

JAS wrote:

I really don't consider myself jingoistic at all (in any case Redgraves English, I'm Scottish) but I DO think he merits a place in the last 8 but I'd concede he'll need a very lucky draw to go further.

Jas, I think if this poll were to take in every country in the world certain names would crop up each time. Pele, Federer, Ali, Nicklaus probably, Bolt, Phelps, maybe Bradman.
I would feel exceptionally comfortable betting my life that in any country outside the UK Redgrave wouldnt make the top 8, in fact I doubt in most instances he'd trouble the scorers by making the top 64.
Each country would have its own Redgrave equivalent, a legend in a relatively niche sport. If Redgrave happened to be say Italian there would be no way he'd have made this list in the UK.

I Understand what you're saying and another example would be if you took this poll in say Hawaii or Australia 11 times world surfing champion Kelly Slater would probably still be in it at this stage. But the majority reading this will probably say "Kelly who?" The fact is we DO know who Redgrave is and what he's done and can't very well say "Well he's done incredible stuff and is a great Olympian but hang on...the vast population of great Outer Mongolia might not know who he is so we better not talk up his achievements any higher. That's just as wrong as being Jingoistic.

JAS wrote:

Diggers wrote:

JAS wrote:

I really don't consider myself jingoistic at all (in any case Redgraves English, I'm Scottish) but I DO think he merits a place in the last 8 but I'd concede he'll need a very lucky draw to go further.

Jas, I think if this poll were to take in every country in the world certain names would crop up each time. Pele, Federer, Ali, Nicklaus probably, Bolt, Phelps, maybe Bradman.
I would feel exceptionally comfortable betting my life that in any country outside the UK Redgrave wouldnt make the top 8, in fact I doubt in most instances he'd trouble the scorers by making the top 64.
Each country would have its own Redgrave equivalent, a legend in a relatively niche sport. If Redgrave happened to be say Italian there would be no way he'd have made this list in the UK.

I Understand what you're saying and another example would be if you took this poll in say Hawaii or Australia 11 times world surfing champion Kelly Slater would probably still be in it at this stage. But the majority reading this will probably say "Kelly who?" The fact is we DO know who Redgrave is and what he's done and can't very well say "Well he's done incredible stuff and is a great Olympian but hang on...the vast population of great Outer Mongolia might not know who he is so we better not talk up his achievements any higher. That's just as wrong as being Jingoistic.

True, but surely that should be leading us to the assertion that its the truly global sports with mass participation, where the top players are iconic and have to beat huge talent fields to dominate....these are the people who should be topping this poll.
We dont have to ignore Redgrave but we should be able to see that he's in a second category of "local heroes", competing with weightlifters and sailors and surfers and skiers who all have their stars who have conquered their sports as Redgrave has.

diggers may be you should consider the draw situation abit more.

redgrave isnt gonna win..!!

its gonna be ali, fed or ..

the odd one gets through in this sort of format..

no prizes for second place..


606 when we award the goat . can i present the trophy. I hope you have contacted the contenders/family of allready to prepare themselves for this highly prestidgious event!

mystiroakey wrote:diggers may be you should consider the draw situation abit more.

redgrave isnt gonna win..!!

Mysti, Im trying to make a case, probably unsuccessfully, for him not going any further today. I thought that was the point of this whole process ?

I think Redgrave will get through today due to the luck of the draw. Borg is not convincing overall top 8 material either, he is not even a definite top 8 tennis player if you counted male and female together (he would be in my top 8, but not everyone's)

Can't think that Redgrave would have got through vs Federer, Bradman, Ali, Pele etc

Sorry yeah. fair enough diggs..

Maybe big up his contender instead,

BTW diggs. I do get yor point. I admit to believing that redgrave was a bit more well known worldwide than he is. You have converted me tbh..

And your right that even us brits dont even know much about rowing to make the best judgement!!

Diggers wrote:

JAS wrote:

Diggers wrote:

JAS wrote:

I really don't consider myself jingoistic at all (in any case Redgraves English, I'm Scottish) but I DO think he merits a place in the last 8 but I'd concede he'll need a very lucky draw to go further.

Jas, I think if this poll were to take in every country in the world certain names would crop up each time. Pele, Federer, Ali, Nicklaus probably, Bolt, Phelps, maybe Bradman.
I would feel exceptionally comfortable betting my life that in any country outside the UK Redgrave wouldnt make the top 8, in fact I doubt in most instances he'd trouble the scorers by making the top 64.
Each country would have its own Redgrave equivalent, a legend in a relatively niche sport. If Redgrave happened to be say Italian there would be no way he'd have made this list in the UK.

I Understand what you're saying and another example would be if you took this poll in say Hawaii or Australia 11 times world surfing champion Kelly Slater would probably still be in it at this stage. But the majority reading this will probably say "Kelly who?" The fact is we DO know who Redgrave is and what he's done and can't very well say "Well he's done incredible stuff and is a great Olympian but hang on...the vast population of great Outer Mongolia might not know who he is so we better not talk up his achievements any higher. That's just as wrong as being Jingoistic.

True, but surely that should be leading us to the assertion that its the truly global sports with mass participation, where the top players are iconic and have to beat huge talent fields to dominate....these are the people who should be topping this poll.
We dont have to ignore Redgrave but we should be able to see that he's in a second category of "local heroes", competing with weightlifters and sailors and surfers and skiers who all have their stars who have conquered their sports as Redgrave has.

True...I think we've arrived at the point where we more or less agree. I don't think Redgrave will go any further than last 8 and has done well to get this far.

We are now getting down to the true icons e.g. Pele. Ali, Fed, Nicklaus, Bradman. I think Mercx has been the only really poor voting result so far (outwith Spagettigate)

Is there any reason for Redgrave not being a Rowing GOAT?

Yes its true most of us know nothing about the sport, but it's a bit trite to say that a 5 times Olympic Gold Medallist, simply because he's British and a National Icon means he can't possibly be a rowing GOAT,kind of the opposite of George Best, if he was Finnish no one would rate him at all.

Aah, George Best.
Is he the most overrated Footballer ever or was he that good? He did win the European Footballer of the year once, but so dis Michael Owen and George Weah and they're not recognised as all time greats.

Pele once said he was the best Footballer in the world but Pele also said an African team would win the world cup by the year 2000.

super_realist wrote:Is there any reason for Redgrave not being a Rowing GOAT?

Yes its true most of us know nothing about the sport, but it's a bit trite to say that a 5 times Olympic Gold Medallist, simply because he's British and a National Icon means he can't possibly be a rowing GOAT,kind of the opposite of George Best, if he was Finnish no one would rate him at all.

Do you move in rowing circles ? Do you know if a single sculler has more kudos than a member of a crew ? We all have opinions in different athletics events, Id put a 100 runner way ahead of a vaulter or 400 hurdler but others would maybe look at Moses record over Bolts.
The facts are we are not informed enough in the sport of rowing in the same way, we dont get the tariff of performance in each event. Clearly you will get help in a team over 5 Olympics in a boat, so isn't three golds achieved on your own more impressive ?

Digs, No I'm not a rowing expert. There are plenty people less worthy than Redgrave though in this poll. We've probably got 40 people too many for any of them to be considered GOATS.

My problem is I genuinely dont believe there are 40 people less worthy than Redgrave, if I was doing a hand on heart list he wouldnt make my 64, he wouldnt be close. Id have Seb Coe way ahead of Redgrave as a Brit GOAT and he didnt make the list.

There's a lot of cricketers and Rugby players in there to me who don't deserve it a mention Redgrave is ahead of them to me.

Make no mistake, British he may be, but Redgrave is the one true master of his 'sport'.

Diggers, wily old dog that he is, brought up the names of Karppinen and Ivanov earlier - as triple gold-medalists in the single skulls. Impressive oarsman though they were, they both have significant black marks against them in comparison to The Herring Wonder, Sir Steve.

Karppinen's second gold will forever have an asterix etched on its side due to the fact that his great rival and regular vanquisher, Peter-Michael Kolbe, didn't compete due to the West German boycott. He was also unable to match Redgrave's longevity - a spent force and also-ran by the time of his fourth and fifth Games. Ivanov is a better shout - but he was a man that raised himself only for the Games, as his less-than-stellar European Championships performances attest. Redgrave's dominance both in and out of Games (broken colon and all) is a rarity worth celebrating.

what about that German girl, Birgitte Fischer I think? didn't she have a similar record to Redgrave (ie Gold medals in a ridiculous number of consecutive Olympics)? For today I'm slightly leaning towards Redgrave, basically because I think it's a bit ridiculous that Borg has made it this far (he's at best 4th in the all-time tennis lists, probably not even that, so he shouldn't be anywhere near a top 16 of all sports).

EDIT: quick bit of research shows that the German girl I had in mind wasn't technically a rower (flatwater kayak apparently). Nonetheless 8 Golds over 6 Olympics, wow!