It’s a toss up between Tiger and Floyd. I have Bobby Fischer a close second, and Russell third.

Dominating means exactly what it is. They dominated... they won and there was nothing that no one was able to do about it. They made the competition feel inferior. You know when Tiger was showing up for a tournament that he was striking fear in everyone else. When you fought Floyd you know that you weren’t going to land too many significant shots... on top of that you know that he was going to land what he wanted wherever he wanted.

Yes Phelps and Bolt are possibly beneath Serena if were to go a bit deeper with the list.

There is no denying how dominating Phelps and Bolt were.

Blacks choose to play other sports. I do know plenty of black people that can swim very well. So to call it a segregated sport is totally incorrect.

>Blacks choose to play other sports. I do know plenty of
>black people that can swim very well. So to call it a
>segregated sport is totally incorrect.

Those 6”4” Masai warriors would do work

Would you rank her above Lance?

I think she is the top of at least this era.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edwin_Moses

Excellent name to throw in the mix.

that's it, that's the list.

Singlet, Soviet hoodie, furry hat, and a fake silver medal. once i got drunk i was prone to yelling out "RULON GARDINERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR" at the top of my lungs.

Damn shame he's become a stooge for Putin. But not really suprising.

I agree about Moses as well

He also holds the 5K/10 records which have been untouchable for well over a decade. If he didn't rupture his achilles, he would have also set the marathon record (missed it by a mere 3 seconds after the fact).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenenisa_Bekele

For five years in a row, from 2002 through 2006, he took both short (4 k m) and long (12 k m) races at the IAAF World Cross Country Championships, a feat no other runner has accomplished even once.

He also beat PEAK Mo Farah in a road race after rupturing his achilles & basically being left for dead ala Tiger: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efIvTi9bEVs

His 5K/10K records are also as insurmountable as Bolt's 100m/200m records. It's been 15 years & no one has come close to threatening those records especially his 10K.

MJ impact was short lived. He never beat Bird and only beat one all time great team. Mike never won without Pippen nor Phil. He only way Jordan impacted the game was that if you breathed on MJ then it was a foul.

>MJ impact was short lived. He never beat Bird and only beat
>one all time great team. Mike never won without Pippen nor
>Phil. He only way Jordan impacted the game was that if you
>breathed on MJ then it was a foul.

^^^This is just lunacy. Let me show you how disingenuous your post is if you use these asinine things to disqualify Jordan:

Tiger fell waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay off after the stuff with his wife and the injuries. And he's still playing.

Floyd dodged a lot of the better fighters of his generation during their prime and cherry picked wack fights to finish his career.

Russell played in the infancy of the league, probably didn't play against the best players in the world considering bigotry wouldn't allow for a league with the demographic makeup it has now and played for a Celtics team that just stack talent so he never had to fully carry a team.

Jordan dropped 63 on Bird's Celtics, in the playoffs, in Boston, after missing 80% of the season with a broken ankle and Bird called him "God" at 23 yrs of age. And it was Bird he said the league was Jordan's after his first ring. Bird knew...saw it early and late. Bird knew if Jordan existed in the NBA in 1979 and went to a team like LA instead of Chicago, the 80's might have been a looooooooooooot different.

Bird? lmao

>^^^This is just lunacy. Let me show you how disingenuous your
>post is if you use these asinine things to disqualify Jordan:
>
>Tiger fell waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay off after the
>stuff with his wife and the injuries. And he's still playing.
>
Jordan never dominated like Tiger. They weren’t changing the game for Jordan like they did Tiger. They tried to “Tiger proof” Augusta National. Tiger was dominate for a longer period of time than MJ.

>
>Floyd dodged a lot of the better fighters of his generation
>during their prime and cherry picked wack fights to finish his
>career.
>

You do know that Floyd fought at least 20 world champions correct? You do know that he dominated the sports for 20+ years correct? The fighters that you say that he “dodged” he had called those same fighters out and they didn’t want to fight him. He wanted Shane when he was at 135 and Floyd was at 130. He wanted Oscar when he was 154 and Floyd was at 135. He beat everyone that he could beat including Canelo. The only fighter that he didn’t fight that he should’ve was Hamed, and he would’ve beat that ass too.


>Russell played in the infancy of the league, probably didn't
>play against the best players in the world considering bigotry
>wouldn't allow for a league with the demographic makeup it has
>now and played for a Celtics team that just stack talent so he
>never had to fully carry a team.
>

He played against Wilt year in and year out. What in the hell are you talking about? He carried them every year and even won as a player/coach. Wilt was the best individual talent during that span and also in the entire history of the league. It funny how everyone wants to discredit Bill Russell. I don’t care how you try and spin it, but 11 championships period was an amazing feat.


>Jordan dropped 63 on Bird's Celtics, in the playoffs, in
>Boston, after missing 80% of the season with a broken ankle
>and Bird called him "God" at 23 yrs of age. And it was Bird
>he said the league was Jordan's after his first ring. Bird
>knew...saw it early and late. Bird knew if Jordan existed in
>the NBA in 1979 and went to a team like LA instead of Chicago,
>the 80's might have been a looooooooooooot different.
>
>Bird? lmao

And MJ still lost that series. What I stated about MJ were facts. People can’t seems to admit the truth when it comes to MJ. He never won without Pippen or Phil.

Please get out of your mind that MJ was more dominate than Tiger, Floyd, or Russell. He didn’t do it for a longer period of time then them. And there competition was greater than what MJ had to face.

than what MJ had to face

This BS is only recently become popular amongst the anti-MJ GOAT contingent

Tiger got the 97' masters

then slumped in 03'-04', where he didn't win jack

and lost the top spot to Vijay Singh

who was his comp...phil mickelson and sergio...?

and Russel was playing in a still predominantly segregated league BTW

saying Jordan didn't play against anybody

and then saying Russ played against Wilt = 1 guy

FOH

shame you started this post when your opinion on the matter is worthless.

>than what MJ had to face
>
>This BS is only recently become popular amongst the anti-MJ
>GOAT contingent
>
>Tiger got the 97' masters
>
>then slumped in 03'-04', where he didn't win jack
>
>and lost the top spot to Vijay Singh
>
>who was his comp...phil mickelson and sergio...?
>
>and Russel was playing in a still predominantly segregated
>league BTW
>
>saying Jordan didn't play against anybody
>
>and then saying Russ played against Wilt = 1 guy
>
>FOH
>
>shame you started this post when your opinion on the matter is
>worthless.

The more you try to discredit Tiger the dumber you sound. He was the #1 golfer in less than a year of turning pro. 11 times he was the Tour POTY. 10 times he was the leading money earner. He also won 3 amateur titles. His competition was far better than Nicklaus had when he was playing.

Russell was the reason that they won period. Wilt was better than anyone MJ had faced when he won his titles. Plus he had beaten the Lakers teams that had West and Baylor and eventually Wilt.

Shame that you really don’t know shit when you attempt to counter with that BS of yours.

I'm not disagreeing with the greatness of the players listed. I'm pointing out your reasoning for disqualifying Jordan is biased at best dumb at worst.

Russell never won without 4 other HOF's on his team. He was easily one of the top 3 largest guys in that era (when the avg C was like 6'8").

https://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1957.html
^^^Look at those damn rosters dude. It's only 8 so won't take long.
Hell, Wilt was the only 7 footer for a while.

Floyd fought Pac, Cotto about 4 yrs later than it would have made competitive sense. Could have also picked better fights than Berto and Maidana.

Tiger has been pro for 22 yrs and he hasn't been dominant since 2009, which was 9 yrs ago. Do the math there.

^^^My point in all of this is, none of these men had perfect careers (well Floyd so his is the most arguable) and there are reasons to demerit all of their domination to an extent but to say who Jordan's coach was or teammates were or who he didn't beat with a lesser team determines his greatness (when he destroyed all comers individually and dominated the league only second to Russell's C's when he DID get enough talent around him...all while being a guard at that) is just a biased (or stupid) disqualifier.

If you want to disqualify Jordan from this list...pick better reasons.

>I'm not disagreeing with the greatness of the players listed.
>I'm pointing out your reasoning for disqualifying Jordan is
>biased at best dumb at worst.
>

Not biased I am just stating fact. Jordan’s rise to greatness only lasted for a short period.

>Russell never won without 4 other HOF's on his team. He was
>easily one of the top 3 largest guys in that era (when the avg
>C was like 6'8").
>
>https://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1957.html
>^^^Look at those damn rosters dude. It's only 8 so won't take
>long.
>Hell, Wilt was the only 7 footer for a while.
>

Russell was the reason why they were winning though. Teams have had multiple HOF’s, but no teams did what the Celtics have done in the entire history of the NBA. Less teams with a lot less players that don’t belong in the NBA like today. It wasn’t that Wilt was a 7 footer. Wilt was the most imposing player of that time.


>Floyd fought Pac, Cotto about 4 yrs later than it would have
>made competitive sense. Could have also picked better fights
>than Berto and Maidana.
>

Honestly it didn’t matter when Floyd would’ve fought them and you know that but just won’t say it. You know that a younger Floyd would have made those fights worse. Berto and Maidana were still former world champions. Beating Canelo when Floyd was past his prime was better than beating Pac or Cotto.


>Tiger has been pro for 22 yrs and he hasn't been dominant
>since 2009, which was 9 yrs ago. Do the math there.
>

Okay let’s do the math shall we. You are actually inaccurate regarding Tiger. He was PGA Tour POTY in 2013 and the leading money earner that year as well. He has missed a few years due to back injury. So it’s actually been 5 years and not 9 since Tiger has been at the top of the golf world. Even though Tiger is not where he used to be (and I believe that he has a couple of major victories left in the tank), he still generates a buzz that can’t be explained. Based off of rep alone there were people that thought that Tiger was going to win The Masters. He still has an impact on the game 20 years later.

is sheer lunacy.

i mean, only explanation is dude just hates jordan or something along those lines.

>is sheer lunacy.
>
>i mean, only explanation is dude just hates jordan or
>something along those lines.

Once again MJ did not have a longer stretch of championship runs as Russell or even Magic. The fact that MJ could never beat Bird is a blemish. If you noticed the names that I mentioned even ahead of Russell play individual sports. Those athletes can stake a claim over athletes that play team sports because it’s just them. There are other factors that go into team sports such as having the right coach to coach you, and having other star caliber players playing with you, and surrounding the right mix of players around the superstar of the team. If MJ would’ve won in the 80’s when Magic and Bird were in their prime or at least gotten to a NBA Finals or two then the conversation would definitely be different.

>Once again MJ did not have a longer stretch of championship
>runs as Russell or even Magic.

Um, Magic has 5 rings, Jordan has 6. so, what the fuck are you even saying? Because it took magic like 10 years to get 5 and it took Jordan 8 to get 6 (although Jordan was retired for a year and half in the middle) you're saying Magic's RUN was longer?!?!?! i mean, i PRAY that's not what you're saying.

The fact that MJ could never
>beat Bird is a blemish.

yeah, Jordan's early Bulls teams were fucking garbage and he still carried them to playoff appearances. meanwhile Bird was playing with fiddy-leven Hall of Famers. so, again...what the fuck are you saying? People like you (aka idiots) like to knock Jordan's comp in his era but in Jordan's era the West was fairly weak in comparison to the East, so Jordan's challenges were beating the Bad Boy Pistons, which he did, and holding off challenges from GREAT Knicks and Pacer teams. He also constantly sonned the shit outta all-time greats like late-career Larry Bird, Dominique, Sir Charles, etc.


There are other factors that go
>into team sports such as having the right coach to coach you,
>and having other star caliber players playing with you, and
>surrounding the right mix of players around the superstar of
>the team.

You literally just described Russell's and Bird's Celtic teams.


You should not post about sports. I'm not saying some of the players you mentioned are wrong, but to summarily dismiss Jordan as one of the most dominant players ever just makes you look and sound straight dumb.

>Um, Magic has 5 rings, Jordan has 6. so, what the fuck are you
>even saying? Because it took magic like 10 years to get 5 and
>it took Jordan 8 to get 6 (although Jordan was retired for a
>year and half in the middle) you're saying Magic's RUN was
>longer?!?!?! i mean, i PRAY that's not what you're saying.
>

Magic was in the Finals almost every year during his prime. Magic beat Bird with him getting the better of Bird. MJ couldn’t get there in the 80’s because of Bird and Isaiah. MJ won after their prime years.


>yeah, Jordan's early Bulls teams were fucking garbage and he
>still carried them to playoff appearances. meanwhile Bird was
>playing with fiddy-leven Hall of Famers. so, again...what the
>fuck are you saying? People like you (aka idiots) like to
>knock Jordan's comp in his era but in Jordan's era the West
>was fairly weak in comparison to the East, so Jordan's
>challenges were beating the Bad Boy Pistons, which he did, and
>holding off challenges from GREAT Knicks and Pacer teams. He
>also constantly sonned the shit outta all-time greats like
>late-career Larry Bird, Dominique, Sir Charles, etc.
>
>

Wait MJ was great right? So if MJ was that great how come he couldn’t make at least one Finals appearance in the 80’s? It is a fact that MJ didn’t have the best comp. The Blazers never won anything (beaten by the Pistons and Bulls). The Suns never won. The Lakers were past their prime years. The Jazz and Sonics never won anything as well. The Knicks were not a great team... slow your roll on that one. The Pistons were the best team that he faced (having won 2 chips) because their team was pretty much still in tact from their championship runs. Bird was barely playing due to an ailing back. He never beat Bird in a playoff series. Even though the Lakers were past the showtime era he still was able to beat a Magic led squad.


>
>You should not post about sports. I'm not saying some of the
>players you mentioned are wrong, but to summarily dismiss
>Jordan as one of the most dominant players ever just makes you
>look and sound straight dumb.

No idiot you shouldn’t post about sports. Russell won throughout his entire career and ended his career with a chip. Jordan’s dominance came after the Showtime and Celtic years with the Pistons to boot. To say that MJ was more dominant than Russell, Tiger, Floyd, or Fischer is completely asinine. I know you’re the type to defend MJ at all costs, but he doesn’t stand up to the athletes that I named... even Serena was more dominant.

If you really think that MJ was more dominant that Tiger, Floyd, Fischer, and Russell then you are stupid for real.

>If you really think that MJ was more dominant that Tiger,
>Floyd, Fischer, and Russell then you are stupid for real.

That's your problem. You dont stop running your soup coolers long enough to listen.

He had his run no one can deny that, but he didn’t have a dominant career. If you are honest then you would agree that the first half of his career wasn’t all that successful.

>>MJ impact was short lived. He never beat Bird and only
>beat
>>one all time great team. Mike never won without Pippen nor
>>Phil. He only way Jordan impacted the game was that if you
>>breathed on MJ then it was a foul.
>
>^^^This is just lunacy. Let me show you how disingenuous your
>post is if you use these asinine things to disqualify Jordan:
>
>Tiger fell waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay off after the
>stuff with his wife and the injuries. And he's still playing.
>
>
>Floyd dodged a lot of the better fighters of his generation
>during their prime and cherry picked wack fights to finish his
>career.
>
>Russell played in the infancy of the league, probably didn't
>play against the best players in the world considering bigotry
>wouldn't allow for a league with the demographic makeup it has
>now and played for a Celtics team that just stack talent so he
>never had to fully carry a team.
>
>Jordan dropped 63 on Bird's Celtics, in the playoffs, in
>Boston, after missing 80% of the season with a broken ankle
>and Bird called him "God" at 23 yrs of age. And it was Bird
>he said the league was Jordan's after his first ring. Bird
>knew...saw it early and late. Bird knew if Jordan existed in
>the NBA in 1979 and went to a team like LA instead of Chicago,
>the 80's might have been a looooooooooooot different.
>
>Bird? lmao


when he said "short lived" and only impact being how easily fouls were called on his defenders, you shoulda known well reasoned arguments had no place.

but marketing is a hell of a thing

Think about it: They essentially tried to change the game of golf by Tiger-proofing courses. Longer tee shots and fairways just to combat the effect ONE guy was having on the game.

Nobody tried to change the bball court to stop Jordan. Tiger shook golf to its essence.

______________________________________________________________________________

"To Each His Reach"

but.....

Fuck aliens.

Wilt’s changes were a result of him being a dominant scorer. Tiger’s changes were to prevent him from winning.

One of the reasons why he won't catch these young dudes is they don't have the PTSD of playing against prime Tiger

bothered me in the latter stages of his career, but I could see why folks vouch for him.

Jon Jones from Day 1 has been mowing down hall-of-famers without even taking his training camp seriously.

was something to behold.

the stacked lhw division at that time might be the best in history.

i dont think anyone will ever compile a resume like that in such a short period of time.

and he barely broke a sweat doing it.

simply for the fact that the 2nd best player to him was LIGHT YEARS away, he was peerless in his prime.

Edwin Moses....Jonah Lomu (Rugby)...

Carl Lewis in the Long Jump (before he gave that up to concentrate on sprinting)

Lendl, Borg, McEnroe, I dunno, some tennis expert can chime in, that was before my time. I can't speak too much to Tiger or Jack either because golf bores me to death.

I think in a team sport you still look at individual dominance. Were the TEAMS of Ruth or Bonds or Wilt or Brown unbeatable? No. Were they unstoppable? Yes. 99 obviously thought the game at another level, Mario had more physical talent and much of the smarts and Orr just did it all at all times when he was healthy.

Seles would have if not for that knife attack, probably.

Also, both fit the star players I hated to watch category too.

-----------
you think we playing chess, but i'm playing mad-making. Basaglia

If you are talking about dominating a specific surface, Nadal has 11 French open titles & counting to go along with his career Grand Slam.

had an awkward start to his career, winning his first F-1 championship when Ayrton Senna died. repeated as champ the next year and everyone saying his success was all due to his team at Benetton.

he left Benetton to join Ferrari, a team who had fallen from grace and hadn't won anything in twenty years. improved them instantly, then later went on to win five straight championships.

his run from 2000-2004 was the most dominant racing in F-1 history. in 2001 he won nine races, a record. in 2002 he clinched the championship with six races left in the season, broke his own record with 11 victories, and finished on the podium in *every* race. in 2003, he came from behind to win the championship in the final race. in 2004, he won the first 11 races of the season, and broke his own record (again) with 13 total victories.

records:

- F-1 championships (7)
- consecutive championships (5)
- points in one season
- margin of victory in one season
- number of different grand prix won (22)
- consecutive podium finishes (19)
- consecutive top-two finishes (15)
- career wins
- career laps led
- career fastest laps
- career podiums
- career victories
- career 2nd places
- career hat tricks (pole, race, fastest lap)

And I won't hear any nonsense about her not being "challenged" enough. That's the definition of dominance that nobody can touch you (when she's fit and cares). I've chosen to be glass half full watching her continue to batter another batch of eastern European floozies, marking her third or fourth generation of players that she's easily schooled: their game isn't bad, it's that her's is so damn good.

Getting back to a major final...

His competition being the two next greatest tennis players in HISTORY rather ran-of-the-mill Eastern European maids.

WTA rankings are/have been a joke & the equivalent of "Flavors of the Month" (multiple #1 without a major, LMAO). It also has NOTHING to do with Serena "making them look bad", WTA has been watered down for a good decade & hasn't changed with or without her: http://www.espn.com/tennis/story/_/id/26447073/is-wta-parity-depth-lack-dominant-players

BTW, Federer holds the world's highest number of Guinness World Records within one discipline.....sounds to me like DOMINANCE.

She has highest peak AND longest stretch in her
sport BOTH BY MILES.

>
>She has highest peak AND longest stretch in her
>sport BOTH BY MILES.
>
>

>And I won't hear any nonsense about her not being
>"challenged" enough. That's the definition of dominance that
>nobody can touch you (when she's fit and cares). I've chosen
>to be glass half full watching her continue to batter another
>batch of eastern European floozies, marking her third or
>fourth generation of players that she's easily schooled: their
>game isn't bad, it's that her's is so damn good.

Gibson was on of the most dominant players in the history of the game... one of many!!!!

When he took the mound you know that you were more than likely going to win that game.

not sure if counts but damn 11 French Opens and counting is just crazy.

I know he fell off at the end but no one dominated and physically crushed opponents like Tyson before Robin Givens stole his balls

From 63-71...he was dam near untouchable!

Tho hockey isn't a main thing for many including myself, kinda shocked I don't see Wayne's name on here more. His dominance led to some silly ass numbers that may never be touched.

i think he is getting about the number of mentions i expected all things considered. surprised so few track athletes mentioned. bolt, lewis, jjk, moses, et al.

gretzky statistically is insane, maybe not as insane as wilt in terms of his peak but pretty close and in terms of a career, no one touches him. he is the all-time leader in goals yet he would not have needed *one* goal to be the all-time leader in points. he owns just about every conceivable career and single-season scoring record along with tons of playoff records and single-game records.

part of it was a function of era, i suppose, but not that much of it. the crazy thing is that in terms of physical talent, he wasn't all that remarkable. i would almost liken it to greg maddux putting up cy young's numbers

The only sport harder than baseball is golf, so I think the answer is probably Tiger

That shit is crazy.

Are there any advanced metrics for what percentage of strikes he saw?

I don’t have a gauge as to how much longer he’ll play. Let’s say that he’ll play on the tour for 5 more years, that’s 19 more majors he’ll play in providing he stays healthy.

I do not believe he will win more than 2 more, but we will see. He is not going to run out of chances he has earned exemptions into al of them for as long as he wants to play.

Even if we say that he will play until 50 on the Tour, that is still a good enough time to maybe win another major or two given the aforementioned circumstances.

A quick question for you... do you think that the majors record is more prominent than all time tournament wins. I have held the all-time wins a little higher than the majors.

Example:

Tiger won the Tour Championship last year and people not consider that a major. That is sort of ridiculous to me because that only featured the top 30 golfers. So winning that and being just a few points shy of being FedEx champion is a great accomplishment in the sport of golf.

The distance between someone like Tiger or Gretzky and their next closest competitors crushes the distance between Messi and CR.

but even still, CR is significantly closer to Messi than anyone is to Gretzky or Tiger or some other folks mentioned in this thread.

I am not going to pretend to assess the exact size of the gap between CRonaldo and Messi, but I don't think it's a whole lot closer if at all to the gap between 99 and 66. I feel like people overlook how good Mario really was. Wayne 1.92 PPG, Mario 1.88. That's a tiny ass gap. They were both primarily offensive players, assessing defense doesn't widen the gap, if anything it might narrow it a little as Mario used his size and reach on defense.

I also think looking at the offensive numbers, Mario's peak was in a more defensive period of hockey when Gretz's numbers were already in decline. He also put up huge numbers on some pretty shitty teams early in his career, whereas Edmonton was loaded and LA had a lot of weapons, too.

I'm not outright making the case for Mario but if I wanted to I could. Certainly if we were looking at peak for peak, Gretzky has all sorts of gaudy numbers (single season records, fastest to 50 goals, etc) but in terms of who was individually more dangerous it was probably Mario, and his numbers relative to his peers (including a not-so-old Gretzky) were eye-popping in their own right.

In the end I think what we can say definitively is that Gretzky had a better career, largely a function of his health as well as the teams he played on, the era they were dominant, etc. With Mario, the fact that he didn't really play a lot of "waning years" does help his career PPG number, but most of the other circumstantial stuff worked against him and significantly so.

Save for 2015, Messi had been channeling this inner James Harden in the KO stages for the last 7 seasons. Had the tables turned, CR would have been crucified.

messi scores a brace, clinches semifinals for his team.

CR7 loses to Ajax.

-----------
you think we playing chess, but i'm playing mad-making. Basaglia

please never forget that CR7 carried bum ass Portugal to the Euro trophy while Messi cried and quit the Argentina squad when times got rough.

I'll give all you Messi nuthuggers the fact that he's a spritely little dude who is great with the ball at his feet and is ONE OF the greatest players of all time.

but sorry, CR7 is the GOAT. he's got far too many times where he showed up and showed out when it was absolutely necessary compared to Messi to argue otherwise.

and yes, I'm saying that when Messi beat United and CR7's Juve lost to Ajax.

and the only game against legit comp (lol Wales lol) before the finals was croatia. CR7's cheering really made the difference tho! LMFAO. That's all you have and it's a stupid criteria to begin with.

And Messi's quitting has more to do with the AFA than anything else. the AFA has squandered his prime. It's a debacle.

-----------
you think we playing chess, but i'm playing mad-making. Basaglia

Agreed that CR7 does not deserve the star player's typical share of credit for Porto winning the Euros. Absolutely fuckin not. I know the narrative on that is going to get completely out of control (and probably already has), but one must remain vigilant.

That said... they are about as even as it gets, career-wise. I am completely neutral and currently have CR7 ahead based on that ridiculous CL run. Messi is certainly set up well to return serve this year, though.

I'm neutral and have them moving back and forth ahead of one another like every year.

>messi scores a brace, clinches semifinals for his team.
>
>CR7 loses to Ajax.

CR scored in BOTH legs which is something Messi ain't been doing the past couple of years when it came to the KO stages. In any case, how is Madrid doing without CR again?

No message

tx.

>It’s a toss up between Tiger and Floyd. I have Bobby
>Fischer a close second, and Russell third.
>
>Dominating means exactly what it is. They dominated... they
>won and there was nothing that no one was able to do about it.
> They made the competition feel inferior. You know when Tiger
>was showing up for a tournament that he was striking fear in
>everyone else. When you fought Floyd you know that you
>weren’t going to land too many significant shots... on top
>of that you know that he was going to land what he wanted
>wherever he wanted.
>
>

Bill Walton matched his accomplishments at UCLA & his pre-Magic Lakers career was KG in Minnesota status.