Jump to content

Is pro skiing less interesting when one skier wins all the time. As in Nate or Freddy.


Horton
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Administrators

When I saw that Freddy did not win the Jump event in Columbia I had mixed feelings. Freddy is one of the best skiers in the history of the sport and a really nice guy. I sort of want to cheer for him but until a few years ago he won EVERY event.

 

Dodd who won tonight is a super good guy and I would really like to see him achieve success equal to his efforts.

 

When Smith wins every slalom event it is boring. There is no drama. It was the same when Mapple was killing it. I have to cheer for Asher or CP or Nick.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
More to the point is was so fun back in the early 90s when Sammy, Carl and the Patrice guy were at each others throats for overall at every event. Patrice was the best tricker. Carl was the best slalom skier and Sammy owned jump. There was drama.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller
I think it's really cool to watch Nate do things on a ski that at the moment no one seems to be able to compete with but that's the problem, no one can compete. It's cool to see amazing skiing but it would be cooler if 2+ skiers were a reasonable match in any event to see some good competition instead of the single super star.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
There is a lot of buzz around Fred Winter and I am sure Asher is in the gym right now. Hopefully the boys can break Smith's domination.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

It's great to see someone killing it like Nate and I hope he keeps at it, but I don't think any domination can last for too long (though Nate does have age on his side). Once everyone sees that its possible to perform consistently at such a level, it's only a matter of time until others figure something out or just train like hell and up their game.

 

In the mean time I certainly don't think it's boring to watch. There's no doubt that Nate's really really good, but he's still not a lock-in at every tournament. All it takes is one mistake or for someone else to have a good day. :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller
What can I say... I'm a D3 guy. Been loyal to the Kidder, KD and D3 family since I was 5. Big Roberge fan in the day and now I love watching Nate tear it up. Don't get me wrong though -- I still love watching the other skiers too -- I just like seeing D3 skiers on top of the podium! Smith, Lang and Krueger... BOOM!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller
History remembers those who consistently dominate. It also remembers good rivalries between a couple people. Doesn't matter whether it's skiing, biking, racing, or whatever; I enjoy watching the field but at the end, it's awesome to see 1-2 jaw dropping performances. Would it be better if that last jaw dropping performance was someone else? Maybe... but if it's the same 1-2 people every time, it's kind of nice knowing that when certain athletes come out, that I won't be let down.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller_

I couldn't vote. I'm 50/50 on one and two. I don't think we watch Nate to see who is going to be the "winner". I think the drama and excitement comes from "will he set a new one this time?...." This has not happened in a long time where someone is constantly pushing up against the record as often as he is (speaking mens skiing only here). Not since Andy or Bob anyway. The drama is us wanting to see it first hand when it happens, or see it first hand on a web cast or hear about it first on BOS or plead for the video to be posted or whatever... It is exciting. We know there is only an handful, maybe less, that can set a record. He just seems to be the most likely candidate. I agree that Freddy Winter is the one to watch.

 

But, on the other hand, Andy vs Bob, Andy vs Wade, was fun to watch.

 

There has been NO better drama EVER then 2 minutes into this video. I was lucky enough to be there. Now that would be cool to see happen again.

.

 

http://youtu.be/VxopDkLHQXo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller
I love watching Nate push the envelope, but I know that all domination is fleeting. It also tends to be a game changer; look at what Tiger did to the game of golf. Nate has opened the door to new possibilities. Others will join him, and that will be spectacular.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller_

Train and practice harder if you want to take down #1.

The late 70s NY Islanders were awesome and it was a blast watching them win cups.

Tiger Woods had an amazing run and did a lot for golf as a result.

The Oilers and Gretzky, how great was that?

I never got sick of @Mapple winning Moomba and Masters all the time (14 each). But I dont think that ever slowed Cox or any of the other top skiers at that time.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tough question.

 

I loved watching Edwin moses winning streak, i always looking forward to seeing if he was going to break the world record, much like Nate is doing now.

 

John Wooden UCLA basketball is endeared and revered by just about everyone.

 

The Yankees, Michael Jordan 6 straight.

 

 

All Sports need a dominating figure.

And it doesn't matter if they are polarizing or endearing

It just gives the fans more of a reason to cheer,

 

It also forces everyone else to up there game do things they didn't think possible, it makes the sport better

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller
Yes. Very. Just like it was interesting when Mike Tyson kicked everybody's a$$, or Tiger won his string of Masters jackets, or Jordan scored 63 per game and dunked over half the NBA. Seeing a perceive ably unbeatable competitor raises the competitive bar and makes it that much more interesting when another phenom steps up to challenge that person.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

I love and am amazed by the dominance of those athletes with arguments for G.O.A.T.

 

I do feel a little bad about the guys whose career parallel them, though. How dominant would Cox have been if he hadn't been parallel Andy? He still pushed Andy pretty hard and was always a threat but he would have been crazy dominant without Andy there.

 

Similarly, there is greatness skiing other than Nate...but he's smokin' 'em.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

Poll needs an option for a non-opinion. The video posted by @wish is something else. At about the 2:17 mark, the mega-runoff starts between Andy and Wade. The actual conclusion was when Andy couldn't "answer the bell" for the 5th round, as he had rung his bell in the 4th round with a hard fall. Fortunately, Deena intervened to keep him from attempting to ski again. I was an official at that event, which is certainly one of the landmark events in the sport's history.

 

Yup, back in the back when, a LaPoint was going to win Slalom, Cory was going to win tricks, and Grimditch was going to win jumping. I don't find that any less compelling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...