Is a dominant athlete good for a sport?

noel · Post by **noel** » July 21, 2004, 11:04 pm

I was listening to sports talk radio the other day on the way home, and they were saying that during Tiger's reign of dominance in golf, there were people who questioned whether or not it was good for the sport. Now that he's no longer dominating majors and winning tournaments, the commentators were saying that it's clear Tiger was good for the sport based on ratings etc.

With this in mind, I have to ask. Is having a dominant athlete such as Michael Jordan, Michael Shumacher, Lance Armstrong, Tiger Woods, Karch Kiraly, Bobby Fisher (:P), etc. good for a sport?

I think the answer is yes. For starters, once you have a winning athlete you stimulate discussion, you generate interest and energy. Lets face it, there were more people watching Jordan later in his career than early in his career. Even the teams he played against benefitted from Jordan's presence on the court. People were always rooting for their team to be up for the challenge, and thus he packed in fans and detractors. There are more people watching cycling now than there were in '99. If Lance hadn't come back from Cancer in '99, his winning the Tour would have been a much smaller story. Tiger's dominance clearly brought interest to golf that didn't exist previously, especially amongst the younger generations.

I'm curious to hear what you guys think.

Shanter · Post by **Shanter** » July 21, 2004, 11:53 pm

I voted yes. A dominate player attracts a broader audience of people, bringing a bigger crowd to a sport that would be otherwise ignored. Take tennis for example (

); all of you know who Pete Sampras is and one time or another saw him play a match. Now take away Sampras from tennis, who would want to sit through a match watching mediocre players? Dominate players bring excitement to a sport, it's fun to watch someone awesome play, no matter tennis or football. Sports would be a lot less entertaining without them.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » July 22, 2004, 12:01 am

I voted no, although I think it depends on the sport. And I think the there is a difference between team and (more or less) solo sports.

In a sport like Formula 1 it is a clear cut no. The dominance of Schumacher has made the sport boring to watch, while in the past it was highly entertaining. Compare that to WRC (World Rally Championship) which is highly competitive and gaining popularity like crazy.

Now take a sport like basketball. Having ONE dominating player does not make the game boring. Good TEAMS can still beat a team with a dominating player. However, having a very dominating team makes the games boring.

Since you clearly want an answer about cycling I will say Team Postal and Lance is good for cycling here in the US but bad for the sport overall. If other teams were at least close to TP it would be fine, but the differences are like comparing a Ferrari to a Scion. I watch sport for the competitiveness, not to see Lance kill all competitors. I have pretty much lost interest in this year's TdF (did that a few days ago), and it is something I have watched for years.

Vetiria · Post by **Vetiria** » July 22, 2004, 1:09 am

Yes, as long as it's not for too long. Look what McGwire and Sosa did for baseball in 1998, what Tiger did for golf, what the Williams sisters did for Women's Tennis.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » July 22, 2004, 1:32 am

Ah but in the case of McGwire and Sosa there were two people racing for a record, and both Tiger Woods and the Williams sisters are important because they are groundbreaking within their sports.

Thess · Post by **Thess** » July 22, 2004, 1:33 am

What exactly did the Williams girls do for Tennis? Yes they are both great players - but no different really then any other tennis player who has become number 1.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » July 22, 2004, 2:02 am

Look what Anna Kournikova did for tennis...and now Maria Sharapova.

You don't need to be dominant to make in impact on ratings although Sharapova is an advertising and nielsen ratings wet dream as she's talented and a hottie.

Vetiria · Post by **Vetiria** » July 22, 2004, 2:20 am

Williams sisters made the sport itself more popular. The last big star in women's tennis was Navritalova(sp?) and that was the last time women's tennis was anything. Kournikova only made herself more popular, not the game because she wasn't any good it.

The people I posted were dominant players that made the sport/game popular. It's obviously not the same for every sport. Nascar, for example, there's no over-dominant driver that brings in attendance. But let's face it, not many Americans, anyway, would care about Toure de France without Lance Armstrong.

Truant · Post by **Truant** » July 22, 2004, 10:48 am

I say yes, because it raises the bar. If athletes never got any better, then we would become bored with the sport. But now and then, someone comes along who knocks everyones' dick in the dirt, and suddenly every athlete in that sport steps up their training and becomes better themselves. It keeps the sport competitive in a longer time frame.

Siji · Post by **Siji** » July 22, 2004, 12:12 pm

If it's a sport based on athletic ability, I'd say yes. If it's a domination due to finances (ala NY Yankees) I'd say no.

In reference to cycling, I don't think there's anything that Lance and his team are doing that given the same dedication, any other rider and their team could do. So he prepares like a madman beyond the norm. He deserves the rewards for doing so. They were talking yesterday about how he'd ridden the last ride 4 times in a single day.. how many other riders in the tour have done that? Repeatedly? Lance has the course memorized and then some.

Dominant athletes are good because it makes for a wonderful spectacle when they're finally beaten.

noel · Post by **noel** » July 22, 2004, 2:30 pm

Thess wrote:What exactly did the Williams girls do for Tennis? Yes they are both great players - but no different really then any other tennis player who has become number 1.

Quick, without googling, name the last female, African-American tennis player to win Wimbeldon! To be ranked #1 in the world!

...

The Williams sisters have given young African-American girls tennis champions that they can identify with. That in itself is doing something for Tennis. It brings more people to the sport.

Cartalas · Post by **Cartalas** » July 22, 2004, 2:43 pm

noel wrote:
Thess wrote:What exactly did the Williams girls do for Tennis? Yes they are both great players - but no different really then any other tennis player who has become number 1.
Quick, without googling, name the last female, African-American tennis player to win Wimbeldon! To be ranked #1 in the world!

...

The Williams sisters have given young African-American girls tennis champions that they can identify with. That in itself is doing something for Tennis. It brings more people to the sport.

Dont know her name but she grew up in harlem

Tenuvil · Post by **Tenuvil** » July 22, 2004, 2:56 pm

Voted yes. Dominant athletes raise the bar for all competitors in a given sport.

noel · Post by **noel** » July 22, 2004, 3:05 pm

Cartalas wrote:
noel wrote:
Thess wrote:What exactly did the Williams girls do for Tennis? Yes they are both great players - but no different really then any other tennis player who has become number 1.
Quick, without googling, name the last female, African-American tennis player to win Wimbeldon! To be ranked #1 in the world!

...

The Williams sisters have given young African-American girls tennis champions that they can identify with. That in itself is doing something for Tennis. It brings more people to the sport.

Dont know her name but she grew up in harlem

The correct answer is Althea Gibson.

That said, it's been a while, and the Williams sisters are bringing Tennis to a whole new generation of fans.

Cartalas · Post by **Cartalas** » July 22, 2004, 3:12 pm

noel wrote:
Cartalas wrote:
noel wrote:
Thess wrote:What exactly did the Williams girls do for Tennis? Yes they are both great players - but no different really then any other tennis player who has become number 1.
Quick, without googling, name the last female, African-American tennis player to win Wimbeldon! To be ranked #1 in the world!

...

The Williams sisters have given young African-American girls tennis champions that they can identify with. That in itself is doing something for Tennis. It brings more people to the sport.

Dont know her name but she grew up in harlem
The correct answer is Althea Gibson.

That said, it's been a while, and the Williams sisters are bringing Tennis to a whole new generation of fans.

Never would of guessed that name all I knew was I read a story on her growing up in Harlem.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » July 22, 2004, 4:06 pm

ask the NBA if they want another Jordan?

their answer is hell fucking yes.

$$$ Baring Baring $$$

Pherr the Dorf · Post by **Pherr the Dorf** » July 22, 2004, 5:44 pm

Team sports and individual sports are apples an oranges. Dominant players have different impacts depending on the type of sport. Individual sports with a dominant athlete provide a couple aspects, first people learn to identify with the sport thru the dominant person, and followers of the sport generally find a reason to root for an underdog. Team sports are different, dominant players are usually chasing a record/milestone or else they are making those around them so much better they become a dominant team. Cases of the former genuinely increase the sports popularity in a short term fix sort of way, people have mentioned sammy/mark but before that, right after the strike that almost killed baseball, the person that saved the game was Cal Ripkin. Not only to pass the iron man mark, but to hit homers on the day he tied it and on the day he broke it was beyond dramatic (tho with his all star finale HR you might say he had a gift for the dramatic), Cal was able to bring enough people back into baseball that it could manage the climb out of the pit it was in, honestly I think baseball owes him more then any sport owes anyone, and yes I mean that historically. The latter of the dominant player creating the dominant team I think is a long term thing, think gretzky in Edmonton and how hockey grew, think Montana to Rice, think Jordan, they have a slower impact but a longer term effect on the sports popularity. Parity is for idiots

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » July 22, 2004, 10:15 pm

its about marketing.

the most powerful way to market is around a singularly transcendent personality. somebody who truly emboldens a brand. It has to do with what resonates with your potential customers.

Spang · Post by **Spang** » July 23, 2004, 7:59 am

you ask if it's good for the sport if someone dominates it. hell yea it's good. when someone dominates it people hear about it and actually watch the sport.

don't lie, how many of you started watching golf because of tiger woods?

i know i did.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » July 23, 2004, 10:23 am

I didn't

I don't watch golf

And I started watching tennis before the Williams sisters (yes there was tennis beforethat! Steffi Graf, Monica Seles etc). I prefere good competition rather than domination.

vn_Tanc · Post by **vn_Tanc** » July 23, 2004, 10:27 am

I voted no. It has some benefit in the short term as listed above but if they dominate too much for too long it becomes boring watching the fight for second place year after year.

Trek · Post by **Trek** » July 23, 2004, 11:45 am

I voted no. More as a personal preference then it not being good for a sport. As fun as it is for some to hope the big dog screws up and doesnt win again....I prefer not to know the outcome before it has started.

Wulfran · Post by **Wulfran** » July 23, 2004, 12:14 pm

I voted yes.

For the general populace, like was pointed out previously, it gives them someone to identify with and connect to the sport. For the fans it gives them someone to love/hate. And a dominant player does not have to mean a "league clincher". Wayne Gretzky only won 4 championships in his career, Mario Lemieux 2... although between the 2, they re-wrote most NHL records and both played 15+ years in the NHL.