The whole "this era was better than that era" is a convenient cop out and is used in this type of arguement time and time again. I dont buy it and generally believe such is the competitiveness in every sport that eras will generally average out at the same relative standard
Nigh on impossible for anyone to pick the best sportsman ever and opinion will obviously differ dependant on age and differents sports people follow. Not old enough to have witnessed Pele, Ali, Bradman and the like at all,but from the one's I have seen the list would include.... Zidane Tendulkar Warne Gebrselassie Armstrong
Robin Givens had made a **** out of him and he got lazy. He did have Douglas on the mat for 13 seconds though. I do wonder what could have been
Brazilian Ronaldo was better than Zidane IMO. Would have been the GOAT had his body (notably knees) been able to cope with the rapid movement his skills entailed. and before someone calls him fat, his weight problems were as a result of glandular problems resulting from the side effects of the cocktail of drugs he was taking just to allow him to step out onto the field
I was absolutely gutted because I absolutely loved the way he went for the k.o from the first bell. Had Cus lived longer, then he would've ruled for a long, long time. Kevin(?) Rooney just didn't know how to handle him.
Warne was an absolute genius and is by far and away the best bowler I've ever seen. If Armstrong did indeed take drugs then obviously he wouldn't be on but likewise if not then he'd have to be.
I agree about sw but he did serve a ban for being a drugs cheat. If you have a spare couple of minutes check this out re:armstrong http://nos.nl/video/210777-lance-armstrong-gebruikte-doping.html