The most impressive feat in sports recently?

[johnnybeef]

Teddy Bruschi was named AP Defensive player of the week less than one year after suffering a life threatening stroke. Can you say stones?

[jesusarenque]

http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/7194/393/1600/Lance%20Armstrong%207th1.jpg

[kenberman]

I love TB, but this award had to have been a bit self-fulfilling. In other words, him simply playing made him a favorite to win.

granted, that is impressive, but honestly, nobody but him, his doctors, and his close friens know exactly how impressive.

[Aceshigh7]

Most impressive feat? Tracy McGrady's 13 points in 33 seconds comeback win against the Spurs. I don't see that ever being matched.

[CD56]

Anyone else find it a bit amusing that the OP finishes with a comment about "stones" and then the next post is a picture of Lance Armstrong?

[pokerdirty]

podsednik hit a walkoff HR.

thread over.

Reggie Bush's game in South Bend will stick in my memory for a long time.

[Pudge714]

Unfortunately he didn't deserve it he won it because he came back, not because he was the best defensive player in the AFC.

[jdl22]

That's a good one. I prefer "the look"
http://www.ironclive.com/images/thelook.jpg

[TomHimself]

[ QUOTE ]
Most impressive feat? Tracy McGrady's 13 points in 33 seconds comeback win against the Spurs. I don't see that ever being matched.

[/ QUOTE ]

[valenzuela]

I say Liverpool scoring 3 against Ac Milan on 6 mintues.

[SammyKid11]

[ QUOTE ]
Most impressive feat? Tracy McGrady's 13 points in 33 seconds comeback win against the Spurs. I don't see that ever being matched.

[/ QUOTE ]

Man, you know I'm with you on Houston sports, that's where I grew up. But this feat, while fantastic, has already been matched...by Reggie Miller, in the playoffs against the Knicks. I forget how many points he had in how many seconds...but it was very similar, plus it was in a playoff game, which IMO probably makes it a greater feat.

FWIW, Donovan McNabb's "scramble forever" play against the Cowboys last season is on my list of very impressive feats. Dude scrambled around for like 15 or 16 seconds and then delivered a 50-yard strike...right on the money. That was pretty incredible.

[SammyKid11]

[ QUOTE ]
podsednik hit a walkoff HR.

[/ QUOTE ]

And walkoff HR's are harder than regular HR's?

[ QUOTE ]
thread over.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not for anyone but you.

[El Ishmael]

Reggie had like 8 points in 16 seconds. McGrady's was really incredible, although definitely not the most impressive feat recently, but the context of the Pacers/Knicks rivalry at that time makes Miller's a lot more special IMO.

[SammyKid11]

Okay, 8 points in 16 seconds = 0.5 pts/second
13 pts. in 33 seconds = 0.39 pts/second

PLUS the fact that it was a playoff game with a great rivalry...it all adds up to the fact that though I enjoyed watching McGrady's more because I'm a Houston fan, Reggie's was both a more difficult feat (that combined offense AND defense, with the steal) and a more important feat.

Anyway, that was my original point -- that McGrady would first have to EQUAL Reggie's feat before he could have one that would never be matched.

[Jules22]

[ QUOTE ]
Most impressive feat? Tracy McGrady's 13 points in 33 seconds comeback win against the Spurs. I don't see that ever being matched.

[/ QUOTE ]

also cycling sucks lance armstrong sucks uckfay cycling

[Clarkmeister]

http://www.sapere.it/mm/sport/objects/076.jpg

[MEbenhoe]

[ QUOTE ]


http://www.sapere.it/mm/sport/objects/076.jpg

[/ QUOTE ]

me and clark agree on something? /images/graemlins/shocked.gif

this is even more impressive when you take into consideration that Johnson's 200 record is less than double the 100 record, and by a fair amount at that.

[pokerdirty]

sterrrrrr-oiiiiiiiids

[MEbenhoe]

[ QUOTE ]
sterrrrrr-oiiiiiiiids

[/ QUOTE ]

no

[pokerdirty]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
sterrrrrr-oiiiiiiiids

[/ QUOTE ]

no

[/ QUOTE ]

just like bonds, right?

[MEbenhoe]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
sterrrrrr-oiiiiiiiids

[/ QUOTE ]

no

[/ QUOTE ]

just like bonds, right?

[/ QUOTE ]

i've never commented on bonds, but to say johnson was on steroids is plain and simple retarded. There is absolutely zero proof or even any hint at him ever having taken steroids. What he did something amazing in athletics so he must have been on roids?

[Clarkmeister]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
sterrrrrr-oiiiiiiiids

[/ QUOTE ]

no

[/ QUOTE ]

just like bonds, right?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's never even been *hinted* that he used steroids. In fact, he was at the forefront criticizing Marion Jones relationships prior to her testing positive. This is a classic example of someone just talking out of their ass. Hey, it's the Yankees that keep Sheffield and Giambi on the payroll...........

[pokerdirty]

[ QUOTE ]
What he did something amazing in athletics so he must have been on roids?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes.

[Clarkmeister]

[ QUOTE ]
to say johnson was on steroids is plain and simple retarded. There is absolutely zero proof or even any hint at him ever having taken steroids.

[/ QUOTE ]

[pokerdirty]

yeah yeah, i know. i'm sort of joking. it just seems interesting to me that these records have been around for over 100 years, and they essentially get broken every year as well.

enough out of me, i've had too much to drink and i'm going to sleep.

[wonderwes]

The best in football this year by far was the alabama game (vs Georgia Tech I believe, early this season) where the guy catches the 50+ yd TD pass by catching the ball on the other side of the defender's helmet, where he holds onto the ball and then crashes into the endzone by flipping over.

[BWebb]

[ QUOTE ]


this is even more impressive when you take into consideration that Johnson's 200 record is less than double the 100 record, and by a fair amount at that.

[/ QUOTE ]

The feat was remarkable, but this statement isn't why. Of course it's going to be less than double the 100 time because he is at full speed when he starts the second 100 of the race.

[ethan]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


this is even more impressive when you take into consideration that Johnson's 200 record is less than double the 100 record, and by a fair amount at that.

[/ QUOTE ]

The feat was remarkable, but this statement isn't why. Of course it's going to be less than double the 100 time because he is at full speed when he starts the second 100 of the race.

[/ QUOTE ]
No. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/200m)

9.77 * 2 = 19.54 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/100m)

[Pudge714]

[ QUOTE ]
sterrrrrr-oiiiiiiiids

[/ QUOTE ]
You might consider me cynical, but I think 80% of Olympic athletes are roided up. I have a friend who wants to become a professional pole vaulter, and he has told me that unless he takes roids, he can't compete because everyone else is. While they are obviously different sports it shows how dirty the olympics are. That being said he still beat IMO a bunch of other runners who were roided up. Also don;t forget him losing to Donovan Bailey in the 150m race at Skydome.

[MEbenhoe]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


this is even more impressive when you take into consideration that Johnson's 200 record is less than double the 100 record, and by a fair amount at that.

[/ QUOTE ]

The feat was remarkable, but this statement isn't why. Of course it's going to be less than double the 100 time because he is at full speed when he starts the second 100 of the race.

[/ QUOTE ]

figure out how many people in the sport of track and field can run a 200 faster than double their 100 time, then get back to me.

edit to add: I'll make this easy on you, only 2 people in history have ever run a 200 in a time faster than double the 100 meter world record at the time. The other guy was the former world record holder and his 200 time was faster than double the 100 meter record at the time he ran it by about a tenth of a second. When Johnson did it his time was faster than double by almost 4 tenths.

[MEbenhoe]

[ QUOTE ]

You might consider me cynical, but I think 80% of Olympic athletes are roided up. I have a friend who wants to become a professional pole vaulter, and he has told me that unless he takes roids, he can't compete because everyone else is.

[/ QUOTE ]

I competed in college track and field, including with a pole vaulter who went over 18 feet. Your friend is insane, tell him to stop whining because he's not good enough.

[ QUOTE ]
Also don;t forget him losing to Donovan Bailey in the 150m race at Skydome.

[/ QUOTE ]

he pulled his hamstring in this race...i think had he won that that might have been the most impressive sports feat recently.

[Stickmn24]

[ QUOTE ]
The best in football this year by far was the alabama game (vs Georgia Tech I believe, early this season) where the guy catches the 50+ yd TD pass by catching the ball on the other side of the defender's helmet, where he holds onto the ball and then crashes into the endzone by flipping over.

[/ QUOTE ]

Tyrone Prothro
http://www.tyroneprothro.com/images/2005/091005_bama_somiss_thecatch.jpg

He also broke his leg a few games later... /images/graemlins/frown.gif

[Pudge714]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

You might consider me cynical, but I think 80% of Olympic athletes are roided up. I have a friend who wants to become a professional pole vaulter, and he has told me that unless he takes roids, he can't compete because everyone else is.

[/ QUOTE ]

I competed in college track and field, including with a pole vaulter who went over 18 feet. Your friend is insane, tell him to stop whining because he's not good enough.

[ QUOTE ]
Also don;t forget him losing to Donovan Bailey in the 150m race at Skydome.

[/ QUOTE ]

he "pulled" his hamstring in this race...i think had he won that that might have been the most impressive sports feat recently.

[/ QUOTE ]
FYP

[BWebb]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


this is even more impressive when you take into consideration that Johnson's 200 record is less than double the 100 record, and by a fair amount at that.

[/ QUOTE ]

The feat was remarkable, but this statement isn't why. Of course it's going to be less than double the 100 time because he is at full speed when he starts the second 100 of the race.

[/ QUOTE ]

figure out how many people in the sport of track and field can run a 200 faster than double their 100 time, then get back to me.

edit to add: I'll make this easy on you, only 2 people in history have ever run a 200 in a time faster than double the 100 meter world record at the time. The other guy was the former world record holder and his 200 time was faster than double the 100 meter record at the time he ran it by about a tenth of a second. When Johnson did it his time was faster than double by almost 4 tenths.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't know much about track and field so I'll take your word for it. To me, it just seems like that would be the case. In the 100m, you are going from zero to whatever. The first few meters are going to be slower because of this. So by multipling that by two, you include those slower meters twice, whereas in the 200m there is only one start. Anyway, that was my rationale, but I guess it is wrong.

[Clarkmeister]

[ QUOTE ]
To me, it just seems like that would be the case.

[/ QUOTE ]

If it were the case, then more than one person in history would've accomplished it.

Part of what you are missing is that the first 100m of the 200m occur on a turn, not a straightaway. Also, the pacing is different. A 100m sprinter simply cannot maintain his 100m speed for another 100m. If they could, they'd simply all just win the 200m also, right?

The incredible thing is that in a sport where records are set and broken in .01 increments, he set a record that no one has come withing .36 of! It may well be the most dominant/amazing/incredible feat in the history of sports.

[jdl22]

I'm biased having lived in Eugene and having a thing for the distance guys, but if you're discussing track you have to consider this guy:
http://www.geocities.com/guillen05/hicham.jpg

He's ran the mile in under 3:50 at least 14 times (including once in the Pre Classic in Eugene, fastest mile ever ran in US)
He broke the mile record by over a second running it at an amazing 3:43.13
He holds the 1500 record at 3:26
He holds the 2000 (ok admittedly an obscure race but still) at 4:44
He won both the 1500 and 5000 in Athens
He also won the 1500 at the world championships in 1997,1999,2001,2003

[TheCroShow]

[ QUOTE ]
he pulled his hamstring in this race...i think had he won that that might have been the most impressive sports feat recently.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol @ johnson during that race. he had to fake an injury because bailey humiliated him. fun race to watch though..it's not my intention to take anything away from johnson, he is/was an incredible athlete, but he had his ass handed to him that race.

[TheGame1020]

Red Sox as a team last year. Never say "i quit."

[BWebb]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
To me, it just seems like that would be the case.

[/ QUOTE ]

If it were the case, then more than one person in history would've accomplished it.

Part of what you are missing is that the first 100m of the 200m occur on a turn, not a straightaway. Also, the pacing is different. A 100m sprinter simply cannot maintain his 100m speed for another 100m. If they could, they'd simply all just win the 200m also, right?

The incredible thing is that in a sport where records are set and broken in .01 increments, he set a record that no one has come withing .36 of! It may well be the most dominant/amazing/incredible feat in the history of sports.

[/ QUOTE ]

As I said in my first post, I was never doubting its greatness and I admitted I was wrong. Just explaining my rationale.

[pokerdirty]

[ QUOTE ]
Red Sox as a team last year. Never say "i quit."

[/ QUOTE ]

The team with the 2nd highest payroll in baseball winning the WS doesn't qualify as the most impressive feat in sports recently.

[PokerFink]

[ QUOTE ]
I say Liverpool scoring 3 against Ac Milan on 6 mintues.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this wins easily for team sports played with a ball (thus cancelling out Lance).

Overall, how can it possibly not be Lance?

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]

this is even more impressive when you take into consideration that Johnson's 200 record is less than double the 100 record, and by a fair amount at that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Eh, not so much. You get to come into the second 100 at speed, and that makes up for quite a bit. (EDIT: Reading the rest of the thread, I see this was discussed fairly extensively. His crushing of the old 200m record was pretty amazing in and of itself, relationship to 100m or no.)

Still, I agree with you and Clark. I remember getting home from a cross-country practice that summer just in time for the finals of that event, and seeing Michael Johnson crush that final was easily the coolest thing I've ever seen at the Olympics.

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


http://www.sapere.it/mm/sport/objects/076.jpg

[/ QUOTE ]

me and clark agree on something? /images/graemlins/shocked.gif

this is even more impressive when you take into consideration that Johnson's 200 record is less than double the 100 record, and by a fair amount at that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, the 200m record has almost always been less than 2x the 100 record, due mostly to the fact that it takes about 20-30 yards for a world class runner to get to top speed, and he can sustain it for about 150-200 yards, usually. This is also why 400m relays are MUCH faster than 4x the 100 record, as each runner gets a running start.

Great record any way it goes though.

- for a long time, the record was 19.73 seconds in the 200m, while the 100m record was 9.95

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
yeah yeah, i know. i'm sort of joking. it just seems interesting to me that these records have been around for over 100 years, and they essentially get broken every year as well.

enough out of me, i've had too much to drink and i'm going to sleep.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not true in track. Both the 100m and 200m records have been broken (legally)pretty sporadically since the 1968 Olympics in Mexico City, where the thin air contributed to a slew of records, including Bob beamon's 29'2.5" Long jump( he never before or after had even jumped 28 feet before that)

I believe the progression from mexico city to current was about,(I don't care to look it up);
100m
9.95, 9.92, 9.89, 9.86, 9.83, 9.79, 9.78

200m
19.83, 19.75, 19.73, 19.59(???), 19.32

Edit: Interesting thing i DID find poking around;
100m - 9.95s
Jim Hines - stood for 15 years
200m - 19.83s
Tommie Smith - 11 years
400m - 43.86s
Lee Evans - 29 years
400m hurdles - 48.12s
David Hemery - 4 years
4x100m - 38.19s
USA - 9 years
4x400m - 2:56.16
USA - 24 years
Long jump - 8.90m
Bob Beamon- 23 years
Triple jump - 17.39m
Viktor Sanyeyev - 3 years

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


this is even more impressive when you take into consideration that Johnson's 200 record is less than double the 100 record, and by a fair amount at that.

[/ QUOTE ]

The feat was remarkable, but this statement isn't why. Of course it's going to be less than double the 100 time because he is at full speed when he starts the second 100 of the race.

[/ QUOTE ]
No. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/200m)

9.77 * 2 = 19.54 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/100m)

[/ QUOTE ]

While you found a nice reference there, it doesn't BEGIN to bolster your argument. The initial quoted poster is absolutely right.

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


this is even more impressive when you take into consideration that Johnson's 200 record is less than double the 100 record, and by a fair amount at that.

[/ QUOTE ]

The feat was remarkable, but this statement isn't why. Of course it's going to be less than double the 100 time because he is at full speed when he starts the second 100 of the race.

[/ QUOTE ]

figure out how many people in the sport of track and field can run a 200 faster than double their 100 time, then get back to me.

edit to add: I'll make this easy on you, only 2 people in history have ever run a 200 in a time faster than double the 100 meter world record at the time. The other guy was the former world record holder and his 200 time was faster than double the 100 meter record at the time he ran it by about a tenth of a second. When Johnson did it his time was faster than double by almost 4 tenths.

[/ QUOTE ]


This whole statement is almost completely worng, and I will debunk it using the cool wkipedia entries addended elsewhere in this thread by listing the 100m record, followed by any and all 200m record/times under 2x that.

9.95 Jim Hines USA Mexico City, Mexico October 14, 1968

19.83 Tommie Smith USA 16 October 1968 Mexico City
19.72 Pietro Mennea ITA 12 September 1979 Mexico City
19.75 Carl Lewis USA 19 June 1983 Indianapolis

9.93 Calvin Smith USA Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA July 3, 1983
9.92 Carl Lewis USA Seoul, South Korea September 24, 1988

19.75 Joe DeLoach USA 28 September 1988 Seoul

9.90 Leroy Burrell USA New York, New York, USA June 14, 1991
9.85 Leroy Burrell USA Lausanne, Switzerland July 6, 1994
9.84 Donovan Bailey CAN Atlanta, Georgia, USA July 29, 1996

19.32 Michael Johnson USA 1 August 1996 Atlanta
19.68 Frank Fredericks NAM 1 August 1996 Atlanta


So there are SIX seperate instances since electronic timing came into being that the 200m was run at less than 2x the 100m record, and that is only including the record performances! I am positive Carl Lewis has SEVERAL runs under 19.90 seconds when the record was 9.95-9.92, but I can't find a listing.

If you're going to take such a strong stance, it helps to know wtf you are talking about.

Stick to Duke Basketball...

[Ulysses]

This was Golden Gate Sport & Social Club Competitive division (there's rec/intermed/compet) semifinals, short field, small goal soccer. The other team ties the game 1-1. Kick-off is passed to me. I notice their keeper has lazily come way off his mark. I pop a high-arcing shot right from mid-field all the way over his head. He just sort of turns and looks as it goes over him and POW straight into the back of the mini-goal.

[kenberman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Red Sox as a team last year. Never say "i quit."

[/ QUOTE ]

The team with the 2nd highest payroll in baseball winning the WS doesn't qualify as the most impressive feat in sports recently.

[/ QUOTE ]

I forget, how high was the Yankees payroll that year? was it the biggest in the majors? by over 50%? or was it #17 or something?

if you honestly want to use payroll as a barometer for what "should" happen, then that makes the comback even MORE impressive, not less.

[pokerdirty]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Red Sox as a team last year. Never say "i quit."

[/ QUOTE ]

The team with the 2nd highest payroll in baseball winning the WS doesn't qualify as the most impressive feat in sports recently.

[/ QUOTE ]

I forget, how high was the Yankees payroll that year? was it the biggest in the majors? by over 50%? or was it #17 or something?

if you honestly want to use payroll as a barometer for what "should" happen, then that makes the comback even MORE impressive, not less.

[/ QUOTE ]

if you say so.

[Bulldog]

[ QUOTE ]
Okay, 8 points in 16 seconds = 0.5 pts/second
13 pts. in 33 seconds = 0.39 pts/second

PLUS the fact that it was a playoff game with a great rivalry...it all adds up to the fact that though I enjoyed watching McGrady's more because I'm a Houston fan, Reggie's was both a more difficult feat (that combined offense AND defense, with the steal) and a more important feat.

Anyway, that was my original point -- that McGrady would first have to EQUAL Reggie's feat before he could have one that would never be matched.

[/ QUOTE ]

Reggie had 8 points in 9 seconds.

Reggie's was greater, but it was not recent.

T-Mac didn't get nearly enough love for that finish.