Cael and ISU mentioned on Mike and Mike this morning

**peteypie** · 08-19-2008, 04:56 PM

Please merge if this was already posted. On Mike and Mike this morning, they were talking about the greatest individual sport athlete. They were talking about Federer, Woods and Phelps. An email came from Utah that asked why Cael wasn't on that list. They talked about him for a couple of minutes and how he wrestled for ISU. They didn't have anything too special to say, but that is pretty good company to keep.

**Jeremy** · 08-19-2008, 04:59 PM

I think he would certainly have to be near the top of any list like that - unfortunately, his sport isn't as big as some of the others so his accomplishments are easier forgotten by those outside of Iowa.

**peteypie** · 08-19-2008, 05:03 PM

That is basically what Golic said is that he deserved to be on that list, but they were digging pretty deep in the well to find his name.

**clone52** · 08-19-2008, 05:28 PM

It all depends on how you clasify a list like that. One way to look at it is how would your average person compete with them without serious training. In that case, I would place Phelps first, Cael second, Federer third and Woods a distant 4th. In golf, your typical golfer might be able to outshoot Woods on a given day. There is nothing Woods could do to overpower you. In tennis, you probably couldn't win a match, but you might win a few points here and there. Nobody could touch Phelps or Cael.

If you talk about how they currently dominate their peers, you'd probably have to go Phelps or Cael first, Federer a third and Woods fourth. Phelps and Cael hardly ever lose to anyone, Federer loses a bit more and Woods loses more tournaments than he wins.

If you compare them to historical atheletes, I'd put Woods first, Phelps second, Cael third and Federer fourth. You've got to go back 40 years to compare someone to Tiger. You've got to go back to Spitz to find a comparison. No one has really gotten that close since. In wrestling, there are a decent number of college wrestlers who nearly go undefeated in their career. In tennis, Sampras, Agassi, Borg among others are comparable to Federer.

**Shoop** · 08-19-2008, 06:03 PM

[quote=clone52;587621]

Federer loses a bit more and Woods loses more tournaments than he wins.

quote]

Don't mean to burst your bubble on comparing Woods to his peers, but prior to his injury earlier this I believe he had won 7 of the 8 tournaments he entered, with the only loss being a runner-up at the Master's. That sounds pretty dang dominant, and winning much more than he loses...but I totally agree with Golic's argument, unfortunately wrestling is not a national sport, and had it been when Cael was dominating, it would have been an entirely different (and much more intriguing) achievement.

**ISUAlum2002** · 08-19-2008, 06:10 PM

The problem is golf isn't a sport, and its participants are not athletes.

Sorry.

**neiacy** · 08-19-2008, 06:19 PM

Originally Posted by ISUAlum2002

The problem is golf isn't a sport, and its participants are not athletes.

Sorry.

RIGHT ON!! I COULDN"T AGREE WITH YOU MORE!

**Shoop** · 08-19-2008, 06:28 PM

Although I would agree that most of the people on the PGA tour do not qualify as "athletes" (see Jon Daly), Tiger treats golf with the respect and training and seriousness to justify it as a "sport", but because he is a true athlete he dominates in a sport where he is the only one who treats it as a "sport".

**Kinky F** · 08-19-2008, 06:30 PM

This argument again? If you think golf is not a sport and they are not athletes, you know nothing about it.

**ISUAlum2002** · 08-19-2008, 06:37 PM

Originally Posted by Kinky F

This argument again? If you think golf is not a sport and they are not athletes, you know nothing about it.

So, if I'm a world class chess player, and I happen to be well built with little body fat and I work out.....am I an athlete?

**Erik4Cy** · 08-19-2008, 06:37 PM

golf is a skill, an INCREDIBLY hard skill to master like Tiger has...

**ISUAlum2002** · 08-19-2008, 06:40 PM

Originally Posted by isucyclone4

golf is a skill, an INCREDIBLY hard skill to master like Tiger has...

I agree with this. If I were to classify it, I'd place it in the game category.

**cybsball20** · 08-19-2008, 06:41 PM

Does strength benefit you in Chess? No. Golf? Yes
Does coordination help in chess? No. Golf? Yes
Balance?
Endurance?
Flexibility?
Motor skills?

**gocubs2118** · 08-19-2008, 06:44 PM

Originally Posted by cybsball20

Does strength benefit you in Chess? No. Golf? Yes
Does coordination help in chess? No. Golf? Yes
Balance?
Endurance?
Flexibility?
Motor skills?

Exactly. You have to be tremendously coordinated to be able to play golf. People are just crazy when they say golf is not a sport and that you do not have to be athletic.

Sorry.

**ISUAlum2002** · 08-19-2008, 06:47 PM

Originally Posted by gocubs2118

Exactly. You have to be tremendously coordinated to be able to play golf. People are just crazy when they say golf is not a sport and that you do not have to be athletic.

Sorry.

Needing tremendous coordination to perform the activity deems it as a sport? No.

And there are several PGA golfers who have made quite a living by being about as athletic as Mike Golic is in his current form.