1. Come enter in the KCC Pet Photo Contest!

    Dismiss Notice
  2. Welcome to the forums! Take a second to look at our Beginner's Guide. It contains the information necessary for you to have an easier experience here.

    Thanks and have fun. -NF staff
    Dismiss Notice
  3. We are pleased to invite you to participate in the Naruto Battledome Banner Contest.

    Dismiss Notice
  4. Come participate in the KCC Cooking Contest!

    Theme: Breakfast // Deadline: June 9th 1600 EST

    Dismiss Notice

The Value of Titles

Discussion in 'Sports Bar' started by Silnaem, Jan 30, 2019.

  1. Silnaem This Time is not Ours to save

    Messages:
    5,602
    Likes Received:
    653
    Trophy Points:
    808
    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2017
    Can titles be used as a constant value to compare players from different generations or are they only as valuable as the competition?



    For example, consider Tennis:
    Are the Top Three really that good or are they simply up against a weaker generation?

    Modern sportsies aren't exactly reknown for their toughness *COUGH (soccer players)*


    Also, what about Murray and Sharapova?

    Are they really that good but unlucky to be living in this era?
    Are they actually quite poor but aided by a weak generation + gods, thus allowing them some victory in the absence of their rivals which in turn makes them seem comparable to said rivals?



    Or perhaps is it dependant upon the nature of each sport (such as number of players, value of equipment and/or influence of natural conditions)?
     
    Tags:
  2. Mider T Busting in and out of guts

    Messages:
    115,726
    Likes Received:
    2,530
    Trophy Points:
    5,733
    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2006
    Renown* but that isn't really fair. Soccer players have never been tough compared to other athletes.
     
  3. Silnaem This Time is not Ours to save

    Messages:
    5,602
    Likes Received:
    653
    Trophy Points:
    808
    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2017
    I beg to differ

    Pele and co walked through defenses like a warm knife through jelly, well before the advent of yellow/red cards and well before today's 'protect the striker' refereeing movement

    (thanks for the correction)
     
  4. Mider T Busting in and out of guts

    Messages:
    115,726
    Likes Received:
    2,530
    Trophy Points:
    5,733
    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2006
    I mean physically tough. Soccer players are much leaner and less able to handle big blows.

    Also I read the title as "The Value of Titties"
     
  5. Silnaem This Time is not Ours to save

    Messages:
    5,602
    Likes Received:
    653
    Trophy Points:
    808
    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2017
    Likewise

    The tackles that Pele and co faced were career-ending by modern standards of soccer.

    And if you look at old pictures, Ferenc Puskas, Pele and even Maradona were kinda chubby.

    And id say almost all sports (besides rugby etc) have much leaner modern practitioners
     
  6. Nemesis The Sith Lord Moderator

    Messages:
    12,555
    Likes Received:
    786
    Trophy Points:
    1,658
    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2005
    I mean I read that too and was about to edit it, because we all know the value of a good pair right.

    For me the value of titles is hard to state. Like Mider said Association football players are certainly less physically tougher than more hard hitting ones. So going by how "tough" you are isn't something.

    Also with the OP about Murray and Sharapova that's a good question. My personal opinion is that for Murray he's just in the wrong period and too injury prone in comparison to the other 3 to have a fair understanding where talent wise he would be. I'd certainly think he'd dominate the few years between Sampras/Agassi and Federer. But we'll never know about how he'd fair against Sampras and Agassi. If he goes by today's training and sports science he'd dominate. Similar who knows.

    But all in all I always try to stay away from cross generational comparisons and the GOAT argument as well. Going back to association Football the only thing that is basically the same now as Pele's time is that there is 90 minutes and a goal at each end. The training, the travel, the ball, the pitch size, the grounds keeping, diets, health care, etc etc etc It's all changed. A 20 year old Pele in this era if plucked from 50s Brazil could easily dominate the footballing world, or it could just be that today everyone is just better that he'd be lost due to how many changes have happened. Hell it could easily be that the game is so different that swap prime Pele and Messi around and both struggle completely in each other's eras.

    Then there is F1 where the argument seems to be Senna is GOAT. Now I am not going to deny that watching F1 in the late 80s early 90s that Senna out there was well. To put it in no uncertain terms Am fucking mazing. But with so much changing between Senna's last F1 title in 1991 today with Hamilton, Alonso, Vettel and maybe if he keeps improving Verstappen or back further in the past to the Fangio and co era. Things are too different with the sport being the same in name only.

    I guess the TL:DR of it is, values of titles are generally great for the era they are in. But further you go back (or forward) in time from said title the uncertainty about how to rate it becomes just too high to compare due to nature of changes in what we see in the sport and behind the scenes. I'd even state that the limit of comparison might be in some sports as small as 5 years.
     
  7. Schneider Wise Guy

    Messages:
    4,028
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    984
    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2008
    qft

    skill, talent wise, who would win or the greater player in cross generational context is not a simple question to answer because games always evolve with time, from players, techniques to technologies surrounding it. for example in tennis i believe nadal wouldn't have won that many french opens if he played in previous decades, getting progressively worse the further back in time he plays. i firmly believe he's talented enough to win at least 1 clay slam in any era, but we can't deny he owes most of his game to graphite racquets (late 80s), modern balls and polyester strings (both early 2000s). his swing simply won't generate as much pace & spin with a gut/kevlar set up on a heavy wooden racquet. it'd be like cream puffs instead of his monstrous heaviness, but he has it in him to adapt accordingly to situations at hand and go deep, i'd imagine he'd play a borg-ish game in the 70s, with a different swing to his groundstrokes, and some but definitely not 11 rgs.

    what we can definitely say though, is that he dug more dirt in his era compared to anyone else at their own era. and that could be an argument to justify he's the greatest clay court player of all time.
     
  8. Silnaem This Time is not Ours to save

    Messages:
    5,602
    Likes Received:
    653
    Trophy Points:
    808
    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2017
    Well, I think the courts/fields issue is the only stumbling block

    Things like equipment and attire are easily solved by allowing each to choose their best, no?
     
  9. Schneider Wise Guy

    Messages:
    4,028
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    984
    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2008
    to quote the great andre agassi: People talk about the game changing, about players growing more powerful, and rackets getting bigger, but the most dramatic change in recent years is the strings. The advent of a new elastic polyester string, which creates vicious topspin, has turned average players into greats, and greats into legends. Most if not everything about modern tennis tech is engineered to make the game easier to play, from poly strings, graphite material (lightest, yet most powerful), fuzzier/heavier balls (slower), larger head frame (larger sweetspot) etc. all added boatloads of margins for error. a tennis player today would have a harder time playing with a wood/metal racket, but lendl/borg/laver would have a field day playing with current rackets. That said, the tech definitely had shifted the game from finesse and strategy to physicality and athleticism.

    though i'm talking about tennis, a sport i play, love and watch. can't say the same for all sports





     
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • List
  10. StarlightAshley Banned

    Messages:
    994
    Likes Received:
    201
    Trophy Points:
    683
    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2015
    Well I think the trend is actually that as time goes on new generations of athletes get better and better not worse.

    High school track runners for example can now beat past world olypmic reccords.

    Of course this is a gradual process, so it's true that not every generation will surpass the previous, however people have a

    proclivity to glorify the greats of the past because of nostaglia. And so they don't want to beleive the people they looked up

    to as the best growing up could ever be surpassed by a rookie that they don't have nearly the same amount of emotional

    attachment to. :amuse:amuse

    Ex. Believing Bruce Lee was a better fighter than the current top MMA Fighters.
     
    Last edited: Feb 14, 2019
Loading...