paulw
Eagle Member
It's always the same discussion and the same answer.
Improving technology, more competition, better knowledge of workouts and diet plans and how they influence your performance, mental training etc. With all those tools, people today perform better than people when the sport was invented. If you could make a competition between player X at his peak (which was 20 years ago) and player Y at his peak with all his tools (which is now), player Y would always win.
Same in for example tennis, if Federer at his peak could play against Rod Laver at his peak with his cotton shirt and his wooden racket and his 100 year old running shoes, Laver couldn't even return a ball. The game is so much faster today and the guys are so much sharper today, the comparison is not even fair.
But Laver racked up all his grand slams, so the record for most grand slams will always be his. But performance wise, he would probably not even be in the top 100 today.
Rod Laver in his peak could play against anyone, ever. Rod Laver in his peak with his out-dated racket could compete against Federer with his wooden racket -- he wouldn't win but it would be competitive. Give Laver whatever the latest greatest trampoline racket vs anyone, ever, and Laver's going to win his share, calm down. (Yes, I'm old, I had a Jack Kramer, yes, I remember Rod Laver . . .)
Bill Russell could compete against anyone that's ever played basketball, and if he walked onto any court in the history of time in his prime, he's dominating.
Nicklaus in his prime versus any/all of today's pretty hot shots would win his share.
Climo's legacy matches these.
With the exception of Secretariat, everyone else today can be matched with history -- Secretariat's unique. He's better than the rest . . . by a lot.