v2 G.O.A.T Round 2 Group 6

Today's second group will see athletcis, tennis, motor sport and Golf compete for your votes

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

Please leave a comment as to why you voted.

Usain Bolt- Athletics- Championed by ChequeredJersey

In the eternal discussions about the greatest ever in any category, most of the argument is based on subjective opinion backed up by a few selected stats rather than fact. Sport is no exception especially as finding absolute comparisons between different sports is impossible. One man though, we can give specific facts about.

Over the accepted minimum distance, he is the fastest man in the world and in recorded history, running 100m in a ridiculous 9.58 seconds. He also holds the 2nd fastest time, 2 other world records at the distance, the most times a man has broken the 10s barrier and 2 Olympic Gold Medals won with incredible ease and seeming lack of effort. In a 150m run (at which he also holds the World's best time), he ran the last 100m in 8.70 seconds, the fastest recorded 100m run in any context by a human being, at over 40km/hour. If he hits a child, there is a 40% chance they will live

In the 200m, he holds the world record of 19.19. He set the record before that, beating one that many thought could stand for ever when Johnson set it, at the 2008 Olympic games. He won the double gold in the 100m/200m twice in a row. Michael Johnson calls him the GOAT. He can probably run a fantastic 400m, long jump and was offered to play for Manchester United, the most marketable Football brand in the world. He hit Chris Gayle, one of the best allrounder cricketers playing today, for 6 in an exhibition match and clean bowled him! He shares the 4x100m WR with his Jamaican team-mates as well as Gold in that event.

He has , at 26 years of age, 6 Olympic Golds, World Records in every race he competes in, 5 WC golds and 2 silvers, and numerous other medals. Bolt is one of only eight athletes to win world championships at the youth, junior, and senior level of an athletic event.He was the youngest junior gold medallist ever.

Beyond sport itself, he is the face of and the rejuvenation of athletics and the Olympics. Known throughout the world, the most famous man from his Nation. He has inspired millions to try athletics with his youthful approach and joy.He was the main draw and the star of the London 2012 games, the most viewed sporting event in recorded history. Countless times the sporting icon of the year. Fastest man on Earth.

I genuinely dislike Bolt, I find him arrogant and inconsiderate of others in his demeanour before, during an after races. One of the most amazing things about him is that he could clearly run much faster if he tried throughout the race, he could train much harder in his own admission, he could do other events, he slows down towards the finish line if he can get away with it, he ate chicken nuggets before winning Gold on Beijing. Still untouchable. His technique is poor, especially his start. Doesn't matter. He is in a league of his own. Despite my dislike of his attitude, I can still accept that he gas inspired many and is a positive factor for his sport and sport in general. Despite disliking him, I can still say he is probably one of, if not the only, GOAT"

Voted for the GOAT of Golf, Jack Nicklaus.

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.""
"

Voted for Jack N as I think he is the best out of the 4 for me.

He has everything a long career , won everything and a good sportsman.

Has to be the Golden Bear. No matter how much I want to vote Borg, Jack's record speaks for itself.

Im pretty sure Jack will walk this today and deservedly so but ive gone for Bolt. The guy is simply amazing and is the only sportsman that can make me go out of my way for the chance to watch him perform for less than 10 seconds!

Borg was a great player, but retired too soon and has a gaping hole in his record in not having won the US Open (less worried about his lack of an Australian Open title, as not all the top players took part during Borg's era), so falls a bit short in the company of true GOATs.

Senna - probably the most talented driver of the modern era of F1 (where there are strong team structures and where being in the right car matters more than driver ability). His ability to drive a car right on the limit of grip was extraordinary, and on a number of occasions he was clearly performing above the level of his machinery. However, his achievement don't quite stack up - 65 pole positions show that he had phenomenal pace, but this 'only' converted into 41 race wins and 3 world titles, which does not compare particularly well against his main rival of the time Alain Prost (4 titles and 51 wins), and is far short of Michael Schumacher's subsequent achievements (7 titles and 91 wins). Another of those candidates where outstanding talent maybe falls short on results, which in this GOAT discussion is a big failure.

So having discounted those two, it's the freak that is Bolt against the golfing GOAT in Nicklaus.

When I call Bolt a freak, I mean it in the nicest way - someone that tall should not have the cadence he has, and breaking the 100m world record by a distance WHILE SLOWING DOWN shows how staggeringly fast he is. Yet for me, it was breaking Michael Johnson's phenomenal 200m record that was more impressive: unlike the 100m, there was no slowing down or show-boating, just running as fast as he could manage all the way to the line. I'm still not convinced he has quite reached his potential (having been slightly hampered by injuries in the last 2 or 3 seasons), and that if he gets into really top shape both 9.5s for 100m and 19.1s (possibly even 19.0s) could be broken. And then there is the potential for what he could achieve over 400m if he trained for it - given his cruising speed and stride length, I think he has the potential to break 43 seconds.
Indeed, if there is one weakness in Bolt's GOAT candidacy, it is this doubt that he has ever actually fulfilled his talent - and we're saying this about the only man ever to repeat the Olympic 100-200m double and who holds the world record in both.
While he's the same age as Messi, who I discounted yesterday, the difference is that if Bolt gave up tomorrow he would still have achieved enough to be desctibed as an all time great, and there is still the potential for more.

And then Nicklaus - 18 Majors over a 25 year span, and over the spell from the mid 60s to 1980 he was the best golfer in terms of Major placings. While Woods is approaching JNs haul of Major titles and arguably had a more domniant peak (although lasting for less than a decade), he falls short of Jack on high placings and on his inability to win events from behind.

So Nicklaus for me, based on his longevity and consistency, beating out Bolt's excellence (in part because UB can still enhance his legacy).

Well well Nicklaus and BOLT in the same group..

I am sure both will progress..
But I have to go with JAck although Bolt is also in my personal top 5!

(jeas i feel de ja vu!!)

weird Yo

I may have championed Borg, as I felt that everyone deserved a write up, but I have to go with Bolt here. It's almost impossible to convey how much he's redefined the parameters of what we thought was humanly possible in the 100m and 200m.

Before Bolt emerged with his first world record in 2008, the 100m mark had, bit by bit, been lowered by 0.19 of a second over the preceding twenty-five years. Bolt then managed to take it down a further 0.16 of a second in just one single year. Just let that statistic sink in for a while!

Johnson's 19.32 world record over 200m was described as a race 'fifty years ahead of its time.' Many were speculating that we'd all be in our graves before it was beaten. Then along came Bolt.

Borg, much as I love him and acknowledge that he's a legend, has seen his five successive Wimbledon titles equaled by Roger Federer and his six victories at the French Open surpassed by Rafael Nadal. However, Bolt stands alone and separated from the rest of history's sprinters - not just because of his world records, but also by being the only man ever to defend the Olympic 200m title but also by doing the 'double double' over 100m and 200m at two different Games.

Not a fan of golf but I appreciate Nicklaus' huge achievements, however speaking purely as a layman on the subject I'd say that, while he deserves to rank ahead of Tiger as the best his sport has ever had, he's not ahead by as big a margin as Bolt is in his field. By getting to fourteen Majors by the age of thirty-two, Woods demonstrated that Nicklaus' records, while magnificent, are within the scope of possibility. I'm not sure that Bolt's 100m world record on the other hand, and in particular the way in which he's achieved it, is.

Very competitive group, but Bolt wins it for me.

It's fitting that Bolt and Nicklaus both seem likely to go through, but I would say that Bolt is the greater athlete.

For me it was epitomised by the 2012 Olympic 100m final. He came into it with doubts about his form and fitness (and wasn't fully fit), in the shortest and fastest of all the events - and usually the one with the tightest winning margins. And yet - all in the course of 9.6 something seconds, and having deliberately started fairly slowly to avoid his issues with false starts - he clocked the time on the stadium clock, calculated that it wasn't fast enough for a world record, slowed down to reduce the risk of injuring himself and still won by a clear margin.

If that's not dominance, I don't know what is.

I'm going to discount Borg. Not that it wasn't a great write-up Chris, but he's only IMO at best the fourth best tennis player of all time (behind Federer, Graf and Navratilova). Two other candidates - Nickaus and Bolt - rank n°1 in their respective sports for me.

With Bolt I come to my usual problem with rating guys very much still quite early on in their careers. I like to judge them purely on achievements to date (and not what they might achieve later on). Hence why the "at 26 years of age" bit of his write-up shall be ignored, and I'll consider him to have (theoretically) retired yesterday. Now that still gives us an almighty impressive record.

Actually it's a tough call for me between Nicklaus and Bolt, so may have to wait to see how the debating pans out before committing myself.

Nicklaus

Sorry golf board but I have to vote for senna.
/.
Anyone care to explain why he is in last place right now?

Sennas record doenst compare to the others!

some of sennas wins came from un sporting behaviour- the likes of which today would see him banned regulary, have to change his style and possibly be demonised!

he also comes from a sport that is regarded as being more about the equipment

F1, as physically demanding as it no doubt is, is virtually a coin toss between the two drivers from the two most technically adept teams.

Hardly a sport, more an engineering competition.

Does anyone know if Jim Clarke is in the GOAT competition?

Nope he isnt - wasnt in the top 64.

i think its only senna and shcumaker

McLaren wrote:Does anyone know if Jim Clarke is in the GOAT competition?

He was born a few miles from where I grew up Mac. There's a statue of him in the village.

Nicklaus the Bear.

McLaren wrote:Does anyone know if Jim Clarke is in the GOAT competition?

He just missed out on the 64 - as with Senna his early death probably cost him a chance at all-time greatness IMO. For me, the F1 great drivers rank as
Schumacher
Fangio
Senna
Clark
...

If Bolt doesn't win this it's a fix. We'll have to start again.

Nicklaus for me.
Another whose fame transcends his sport, even 20-30 years after the peak of his career.

Hoggy_Bear wrote:Nicklaus for me.
Another whose fame transcends his sport, even 20-30 years after the peak of his career.

Hoggy - Nicklaus is the golfing GOAT for me but did he really transcend his sport? Nowhere near the extent of Ali or Owens, surely?

That quibble aside, Nicklaus for his lengthy and consistent success should still beat the other three today although at least two of those are much better than to be classed also rans.

Bolt is a magnificent athlete as proven in the last two Olympics. However, I find it difficult to warm to him personally (which has some bearing at the closing stages of this tournament as I'm also looking for some form of role model). Furthermore, he loses out to Owens as the athletics GOAT.

I believe Borg deserves more of a shout. Immensely successful for a number of years, no better illustrated than by his five successive Wimbledon victories. He brought skill and beauty to tennis from his homeland of Sweden, a backdrop with - I believe - little association with the sport. That's quite remarkable. Often criticised for quitting too soon. That's understandable although the flip side of the same coin is that too many sporting greats went on too long and didn't realise when their time was up; Ali probably being the most tragic example.

Senna was a world champion but was often heavily criticised for his approach and in a sport which, unfortunately for him and his supporters, I have little interest in.

Skill (over athleticism) of Nicklaus versus Athleticism (over skill) of Bolt for me.

Borg - quit too soon to be GOAT
Senna - supreme talent but arguably reckless.

Gone with Jack

GB
The point with Borg was that he was 26 when he walked away, and it was at least in part because of losing to McEnroe in the USO. There were issues of burn-out and personal problems off the court at the same time, but still... So while it is reasonable to say some sports stars tar their legacy by staying too long (no names, but thinking of at least 2 if not 3 Indian Test cricketers of the moment), Borg had probably only reached his physical peak and should have had at least another 2 or 3 years of top level play (and his near-contemporary Jimmy Connors was still competetive in his late 30s).

Now, don't get me wrong, Borg is certainly in the top 4 men's tennis players ever just on the basis of his FO and Wimbledon titles (clearly behind Federer and then debatable with Laver and Sampras), but in the company of GOATs, he falls a little short of being a serious contender for me.

Dummy - that's probably very fair comment. Am I right though in thinking that his home background (ie Sweden) had little association with tennis? If so, I think that should go into the mix.

I'm not really suggesting Borg deserves to win this thing but that he merits more of a shout. I remember all his Wimbledon victories and he really took this country - and probably some other parts of the world - by storm then.

GB
I'm not as much of a tennis buff as some here, but I'm certainly unaware of any great history of Swedish tennis prior to Borg (noting that he was followed by a handful of really good players, in particular Stefan Edberg).

I suspect the Brits and the French rate Borg more highly than the Americans would - his failure to win the US Open and to really eclipse his American rivals of the time (Connors and McEnroe) would count against his reputation over there whereas his (then) record number of titles at Wimbledon and Roland Garos mean he is firmly in the 'legendary' status here.

Bolt by big margin then Nicklaus comes second, Bolt gets my vote.

I went for the Golden Bear..

Im not convinced that Bolts not chemically assisted, time will tell, and that time hasnt passed yet.

That just sums up the cynicism of modern sport.