Better overall athlete: Jordan

Better specialized athlete: Armstrong

Better story: Armstrong

Lance Armstrong is great, but he rides a bike. Jordan in a no brainer.

Riding a bike at an internationally competitive level takes just as much talent as playing basketball at that level. In addition, it is physically more demanding than basketball.

I would crush both of them.

*Benchpresses Screech*

there is no question that jordan is the better athlete, but lance does have the better story.

To me, a good athlete would be able to compete well in a variety of athletic events... There is no comparison... Armstrong would get crushed in most other athletic competitions.

Gig'em

Sir Ed,
I definitly respect Lance's athleticism and I do realize how gruling the tour de france is. However, I would argue that playing professional basketball is harder on the body. They run up and down the court non-stop and play a game on average every other day. They are also throwing and receiving picks and jumping and all that mess. Again, I am not saying that cycling is not a demanding sport, I just think basketball is more demanding.

If the measure is how many other sports an
athlete could crossover to then Jordan isn't the obvious choice. Armstrong participates regulary in triatholons (Swiming, Biking and Running). And he's competitive in those. If you break it out further then there's Olympic competitions which Armstong has been to more often than Jordan. Jordan attempted major league baseball, but I'm not sure if you count that against him or for him Coordination...definetly Jordan but how much weight should that carry? Just how important is spacial orientation in the mix?

If your talking about physical make-up, Armstrong in an anomolly of the human animal. His ability to process oxygen is amazingly high compared to the average athlete. I don't know what Jordan's is by I wouldn't be suprised to see it high as well, albeit well below Armstrongs.

Terminal illnesses...well everyone should know the story on that one.

Either way I feel fortunate to have witnessed both of them in the prime of their respective careers.

To excel at Armstrong's sport, one has to have great endurance over several weeks.

To excel at Jordan's sport, one has to have great skills.

That is the difference to me. Jordan has the superior skills. I would consider bicycling a lot like a marathon - a test of endurance. Hardly anyone would consider the winner of the Boston Marathon as the World's Greatest Athlete.

I could also make an argument for Jordon. However, I don't think many of you realize just how technically demanding riding the bike at that level is. It requires great skill.

Not just great skill, but great heart, courage, tenacity, and will.

I would have to say Lance.

Best at Cycling goes to Lance
Best at BBall goes to Jordan

Sorry, its a tie and I personally dont see them as comparable. But thats just me.

Cycling is not terribly exciting to watch and Basketball clearly is - and I would bet that all of us have seen Jordan compete in sporting events a lot more than Lance, so clearly everyone's pick is MJ. However, as a earlier post stated Lance does compete in other events like running and swimming that are required in the triathalon where I see Jordan competing in baseball (if you really want to call it competing) and golf. So I would have to say that Jordan is more entertaining to watch but Lance is a better all around athlete - the man is a human machine and I hope he wins his 5th in a row this year!

Anyone who says that Jordan is the better athlete needs to get to know the sport of cycling. At best they are equal.

Seriously, how many of you have ever watched the tour de France? This isn't just pedaling a bike across a parking lot. These guys pedal up mountains that your transmission would go out on. It would be the equvilent of biking over Independence or Loveland passes in Colorado.

If you want a real arguement Tiger or Jordan?

[This message has been edited by jb01 (edited 3/16/2003 12:00p).]

While I have to agree that both Armstrong and Jordan are superior athletes, I would have to lean more in favor of Michael Jordan. True, bicycling is an enduring sport and sure it takes its toll on the body. However, bicycling is a lot like golf in that there are tournaments only once or twice a month. Basketball, on the other hand, is a much more physically demanding sport. Starting in November, a team can play on average two/three games per week (not to mention flying from stadium to stadium and the effects that jet lag take on the body). With all that taken into consideration, I would have to say that Michael is the better athlete. Not only has he been able to play the sport at such a high level for so long, but he's also been able to perform under pressure during the most crucial of times.

Who would win the decathalon? Decathaletes usually tout themselves as the best all-around athelete.

Jordan would win big.

Lance.

Jordan, and it's not even close. see lance try to hit play against MJ in baseball, football, a footrace, or any sport other than riding a bike.

>>Riding a bike at an internationally competitive level takes just as much talent as playing basketball at that level. <<

I disagree. I want to take nothing away from either Lance or bike riding (as Lance is one of my heros and I mountain bike fairly regularly), but there are a lot of people in the world that could ride competitively if they were able to train as often as Lance does. I didn't say they could beat Lance, necessarily, but they could still ride competitively. I know three or four of them. On the other hand, unless you are over 7 foot, it takes an unbelievable set of skills and talents to get into the NBA. There are guys that were at the top of their game forever, until they hit the NBA, and now they either don't play or have gone to Europe. Then, there are guys that were all everything they did, and now they are only average in the NBA. For Jordan's 10 best years, he was the best, and he was never worse than an elite player. Period. He can dunk, dribble, shoot, play defense, all at once, and do them all well.

I think a better comparison is gymnists and basketball players.

To say professional cycling is less demanding physically than professional basketball is to show some ignorance of what cycling at that level entails.

With regards to scheduling, the European season begins in January with races in South America and Australia and culminates in September; quite a long season. And although each rider's schedule varies, there are not just "one or two" events a month in the European cycling scene; more like one or two a week, at least. In addition to the major tours that last 3 weeks (France, Italy and Spain), there are a whole lot of major one day races and small stage races throughout the season; races that don't get much attention here in the states. So, there's racing going on continuously from January through September, not just the Tour de France in July.

Schedule aside, the pure physical demands placed on an average pro cyclist blow away the demands placed on an NBA player. I think most Americans associate cycling with their childhood experience on a bike, ie. riding around the neighborhood isn't so tough. Our concept of time, speed, distance and output with regards to bike riding doesn't translate into understanding cycling at the pro level. Take a look at the average speeds in most pro races, then consider the distance and elevation gains; it's really pretty incredible and amazing. After that, factor in having to recover between those daily 100 mile plus events and it's even more apparent how much tougher cycling is than basketball. Ask yourself what you'd rather do, play 2-3 basketball games or ride a week in the Tour de France?

Then there's the risk/danger factor to consider when comparing playing basketball and racing bicyles. Pro basketball is no doubt physical and injuries occur, but cycling is in a different category. Broken bones, road rash or worse are common occurences. Put it this way: How many NBA players have been killed playing basketball? There's already been one cyclist killed this season, and it's only April.

So, my point is that cycling is without a doubt much harder phsyically and mentally than playing basketball. That said, Michael Jordan is the better athlete; I believe he has the skills to perform a wider range of sports better than Lance Armstrong.

[This message has been edited by QUIETPRO (edited 4/13/2003 6:53p).]

[This message has been edited by QUIETPRO (edited 4/13/2003 6:55p).]

Lawyer, I'm sure we could debate this topic all day too, but I must point out that mountain biking doesn't require nearly the physical endurance as road biking . . . In my humble opinion.

Jordan, easily. He's a better athlete, and he was more dominant in his sport.

I think too many on here are reading things into other's posts that aren't there. I'll say this, and I'm done: If someone had started out cycling at 12, worked hard, got good training and coaching, trained daily, and utilized the best training, eating, and conditioning regimines, his chances of riding in and competing for the Tour de France at the age of 28 are significantly better than the same person --who takes up basketball at the same age, but only grows to 5'10", with the same exact training regimine etc. -- of playing in the NBA at the same age. (Incidentally, I know several 5'10" or less guys with better skills, including dunking and other well known basketball athletic measurements, than half the NBA, and none of them made it out of college ball).

That's how I look at or define athlete or athletic ability. If you define it differently, fine. But we will have to agree on some measure of athleticism before we can truly have a good discussion, otherwise, we will get into silly arguments about which sport is tougher. For example, the danger of cycling has nothing to do with athletic ability, at least not the kind I am talking about. If that's the case, then NASCAR drivers have to be considered at least as good athletes, and some people don't even consider them athletes at all.

See, that's the problem with this discussion. Flame away.

Jordan without a doubt!

However, it's almost an Apples vs. Oranges
arguement. Sports like golf and cycling are
so internal with cycling way more demanding.
Jordan is also a two-pro-sport athlete...
even though it was in the farms.