Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dude Thinking about what you said Memphis Vol, I wonder when we see the first sub 4 second forty at the NFL combine or sub 20 second 50 meter freestyle in swimming. Its insane how the impossible now could be commonplace in a few decades. |
For me, this is the big question that Phelps has (rightfully) forced us to think and play with.
It's not as good for competitive trampoline, which is only about 50 years old, as it is for older sports... yet only because older sports have a longer tradition of atheletes and improvements in training & equipment.
I don't want to say this topic/ discussion ought to be moved to somewhere else just because you put it in terms of something you noticed in common with other sports (NFL and swimming). At the same time, even when I was a young jock, back when I was doing it rather than just talking about it, I was really interested in the question you're asking-
Basically, we now know that Nature and Nurture are equally necessary.
The greatest potential physical case won't ever be Michael Jordan unless it is developed.
Likewise, no matter great the genius of the coach and the acculturation of the parents, you can't make a Jordan out of a kid who's just really dedicated to hoops.
So- how do we compare past and present heros, given all the improvements in equipment, coaching, and "the social acceptability of being a full-time jock"?
Being a former jock, personally I love this kind've crap- but I don't think we should get as serious about it as we tend to do.
Unless you have a time machine, it's unanswerable.
All I can say for sure is that if I was forced to bet who would produce more, all things being equal, I would go with the ye olde athelete who didn't enjoy all the equipment and training advantages over the modern jock who just barely beat them.
After all, by definition, the ye olde hero never had his or her potential developed as fully as the modern hero; You can't compare their Nature, because they were so unequally Nurtured.