There comes an era when a sport is dominated by one individual or team. Does that make a sport boring? Or does it become more interesting to see who can eventually beat the unbeatable
I somehow am inclined towards the first: Nowadays, Formula One is basically dead cuz of Schumacher. In cycling Lance only tolerates Basso to smell his rear wheel. Aussies dominate both forms of cricket. All these sports somehow have lost their appeal due to the overwhelming success of only ONE team/individual. Are we approaching an era in which due to technical/commercial/financial advances a sport is basically dominated by someone becuz s/he has a superior technical/commercial/financial backing than others.
eg: Back in the good days we had Prost, Senna, Mansell, Piquet: 4 drivers challenging each other till the end.
I disagree about cycling, even though Armstrong will win the tour, last year he struggled badly on occasions and only just won. Even though hes making it look easy this year, I wouldnt be surprised if this is his last Tour win. Also in cycling, Armstrong doesnt win every race, theres always different riders, and cause off breakaways, an outsider always has a chance of winning any individual race.
I think it is true for motorracing though, I used to follow it quite closely, but these days have lost all interest. There is no doubting Schumachers class but he couldnt retire fast enough for me.
Nes, you are right when you´re talking about Formula 1 and cricket, which really is pretty much dominated by Schumi and Australia respectively. I´m also not too sure about cycling.
I didn´t really take much interest in Formula 1 in the "pre-Schumi" area as well though and the same goes for cycling.
So my focus really is on cricket and I hope some other team(s) can at least get near Australia´s level very, very soon.
one sport that is completely dominated by a nation is table tennis. the Chinese are almost unbeatable and their reign doesnt seem to end anytime soon. however, the ittf (table tennis' governing body) has been making radical changes to the rules of the game to keep it interesting (such as 11point games, bigger ball size, allowing suspicious equipment etc.). result? the europeans are competing and current world champion is Austria's werner schlager. point being, if the game is losing interest, then the governing bodies should make changes and allow the 'dominated' to compete. yes, it may sound unfair but it is almost always good for the game.
M: if someone wins 4 stages in 5 days (all mountainous) then you can justifiably say that that person is dominating his sport. He could have won 5 hadn't he allowed Basso to win the first mountain stage...
Rainmaker: but such regulations don't have to work out always....look again at Formula 1: this year a LOT of changes were introduced to allow other teams to compete with Schumi: result: Schumi wins 10 out of 11 races so far....
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by NeSCio: *
M: if someone wins 4 stages in 5 days (all mountainous) then you can justifiably say that that person is dominating his sport. He could have won 5 hadn't he allowed Basso to win the first mountain stage...
[/QUOTE]
Yeah but at the end of the whole race he will end up with 4 wins in 20 races. Thats hardly dominating, compared to Schuis 10 out of 11.
Also did you watch last year, he only just won the race, with only one race win, his overall race lead was less that 1 minute.
Armstrong spends the whole year preparing for just Tour de France whilst the other riders go around competing in all the other races.
Undoubtedly he is a great sportsman, but has his domination really had an adverse affect on the race. I doubt it.
good you guys brought this up - when i see in all American major sports(NFL, NBA, NHL, MLB) in past 5 years - no one comes close to what Lance has acheieved - there has been 3 NBA champions, 4 MLB champions, hmm 5 NHL champions and 3 super bowler winners.....
but Lance has been THE ONE who has dominated the Cycling - continues to do so - he is unreal - and has been in a different class.
i didn't give a crap about tour de france before this year. now i some what follow it cuz of lance armstrong and how he's going for a record six straight victory. so i guess it has been a good thing for cycling.
btw, him being a former cancer patient helped too.
Yeah but at the end of the whole race he will end up with 4 wins in 20 races. Thats hardly dominating, compared to Schuis 10 out of 11.**
today it became 5 out of 20 and 5 in the last 6 stages
**Also did you watch last year, he only just won the race, with only one race win, his overall race lead was less that 1 minute. **
well, last year Schumi won the title at the very end as well,…still ppl consider him dominating the sport. In my opinion it doesn’t matter if that person wins sometimes difficulty, in the end Lance has won the last 6 years…
Armstrong spends the whole year preparing for just Tour de France whilst the other riders go around competing in all the other races.
well, that’s his class. He knows that the Tour is THE more prestigious event in cycling. The same goes for Sampras: he won Wimbledon sooo many times as well…(although he won other grand slams as well) he specifically trained on grass to win Wimbledon.
Finally, Iagree with u that Lance winning has increased the interest in cycling all over the world. However, I feel next year Jan has deserved to finally beat Lance
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by NeSCio: *
However, I feel next year Jan has deserved to finally beat Lance :D
[/QUOTE]
Must admit though Lance has been superb this year.
Well Jan has come second 6 times but looks like he will come 4th this year. Even his teammate Kloden (who should be his domestique) has come ahead of him, looks like hes fading. Personally I think someone new will win it next year.
Apparently Lance is giving hints this could be his last tour and he may take more of a part in other races. Should be good for the race then, ending his domination hey :D.
and 5 in the last 6 stages 