Legend?

E

EC21

Conditional
Joined
Jul 5, 2022
Messages
669
Location
Derbyshire
Been thinking about this a few days since Denis Law passed, re sporting ones. How do we define one? If you are into one sport or two you may have a few, who people outside those sports won't know, just because you know that sport. My favourite racing jockey heroes are Lester and Steve Cauthen, I bet many people who don't follow racing would not know who Steve is for example, most people know who Lester is.

My definition of a legend in sport, is someone, who even those who are not into that sport, still knows their names.

When I was young and started hearing names I knew nothing about, be early 60s. I remember Stirling Moss and Lester Piggott being the first people who transcended their sport, that I knew about even though I had no interest in sport at all then, that must make them very special no?

Then came Jimmy Greaves, George Best, Bobby Charlton and Denis as I came interested in football. Obviously after 1966 there were a few footy ones Hurst, Moore etc for people who did not follow footy that closely

Trying to think of others from sports I never followed who people knew from a sport they may not have followed, Rod Laver, everyone knew him even if you didn't like tennis? Snooker would be Joe Davis and later Alex Higgins. There are many other sports where people in that sport are household names even if you never followed that sport

Is this what a sporting legend is? His/her name transcends the sport?
 
Last edited:
simmo said:
I'd agree with the sentiment but would argue that those you name may well be unknown to those younger than you.
Click to expand...
Brilliant reply. That puts time passed into it. It doesn't stop said person being a legend though. Every age has legends. So being a legend means time is a factor? Or does it? We only judge legends by our own time to be fair. We really only judge legends by our own life memory? You could be right but to be fair that is all we can do. I have no idea who was a sporting legend in 1920 for instance unless I am told they were, I never lived it
 
Last edited:
reet hard said:
Surprised you didn't include Seve Ballesteros.
Legend of a sportsman,who could make a golf ball talk.
Once took on Tiger Woods in a bunker practice and whupped him - with a 3 iron against TW's wedge.
Click to expand...
I only mentioned those that came to mind, Arnold Palmer would be one from the golf world? I know bugger all about golf but I know who Arnold Palmer was from being a kid.

Simmo brings up about time, so who would be the 1920s golf legend for instance? You can google it, but do we not really judge on our own time scale? We can only add to that list because they were above everyone else in our lifetime. Bit like horse racing really.

To me, a legend is someone in our own lifetime that transcends the sport. We can't judge truly 100 years ago for instance, we did not experience it

I suppose records are part of it but things change in that way of measuring
 
Last edited:
It's an interesting subject - I have a great knowledge of formula 1 for example - Jim Clark is for me the GOAT, but I never witnessed him in the flesh. Younger followers of F1 would point to Lewis Hamilton, but for me he hasn't shown the ability to take vehicles beyond their limits - which I would argue Clark did.
 
simmo said:
It's an interesting subject - I have a great knowledge of formula 1 for example - Jim Clark is for me the GOAT, but I never witnessed him in the flesh. Younger followers of F1 would point to Lewis Hamilton, but for me he hasn't shown the ability to take vehicles beyond their limits - which I would argue Clark did.
Click to expand...
I have no interest in F!, I do know who Jim Clark was, but was he a known name to the public is my point I think? I think I am trying to define a legend by public knowledge who do not follow that sport, maybe that is not the way,
 
simmo said:
It's an interesting subject - I have a great knowledge of formula 1 for example - Jim Clark is for me the GOAT, but I never witnessed him in the flesh. Younger followers of F1 would point to Lewis Hamilton, but for me he hasn't shown the ability to take vehicles beyond their limits - which I would argue Clark did.
Click to expand...
That is my point, you know that game, we know the horse game for instance, but to be a legend maybe you have to be known to people who know nothing about the game. As I said, as a kid I knew who Lester and Stirling were because their names transcended their sport. Do you have to transcend a sport to be a legend I suppose was my initial query?
 
At the risk of being controversial, I would suggest that as many people knew who Jim Clark was as knew who Stirling Moss was, but there was a nationalistic belief in which should be remembered.
 
Is a legend this?

Ask 100 people who is the racehorse they know... Red Rum would be the answer

Then again. going back to Simmo's point about age.. maybe the answer would be Desert Orchid from younger people.

Ask 100 people who is the jockey they know most for being good at what he does.. Lester Piggott .. or for younger people it might be McCoy
 
EC21 said:
Is a legend this?

Ask 100 people who is the racehorse they know... Red Rum would be the answer

Then again. going back to Simmo's point about age.. maybe the answer would be Desert Orchid from younger people.

Ask 100 people who is the jockey they know.. Lester Piggott .. or for younger people it might be McCoy
Click to expand...
I think this really comes back to current knowledge, you could easily go with tiger roll, kauto star and ap McCoy and be just as correct as the older pollsters.
 
By far and away I think the man who transcended from his own sport was Muhammed Ali. There is no doubt that he was a great fighter, but he was an even greater human being. Behind the brash and bold fighter was someone who had wisdom beyond his years. Listening to Muhammed speak and recite his poems the guy was simply mesmerising inside and outside of the ring. An absolute beautiful man. It's such a shame the boxing on too long and the parkinsons took away the opportunity for him to do more. He gave all he'd got to give in the ring but I feel people we're robbed of all the other things he had to give as a man and a leader in later life. I'll leave you with one of my favourite poems from Ali.

 
I remember when I first saw Babe Ruth and Bobby Jones play back in the day and thought will I ever witness such legends again. I have yet to.
 
I think transcending the sport is what makes them legends.

I'm not convinced McCoy would be that well known because even though he won SPOTY I reckon he'd score very low on a show like Pointless.

Piggott and Dettori would score high, Cauthen, the best of the lot, would be low.

Muhammed Ali - just about everybody in the world over the age of 40 would know who he his.

Babe Ruth ditto, maybe not Bobby Jones but definitely Jack Nicklaus.

Bjorn Borg and Pete Sampras recently score quite low on Pointless, which surprised me.

Joe Di Maggio, yes.

Others:

Pele
Messi
Red Rum
Billie Jean King


Simmo, I'd side with Stirling Moss over Jim Clark because Rikki Fulton used the latter in his Scotch'n'Rye supercop sketches!

 
Dimaggio and Babe Ruth are good shouts Dessie. Most have heard of them but non baseball fans over here likely haven't heard of Ted Williams or Ty Cobb (although there was a good biopic of the latter a few years ago with Tommy Lee Jones)

Michael Jordan and Wayne Gretsky maybe? Lance Armstrong (more infamous than famous)
 
Yes, legends transcend sport, not necessarily with achievements but certainly with their personalities, and what they do off the field of play.

Huge difference between being a legend and being well-known in a sport.
 
I thinking it depends if you say “Sporting Legend” or “Legend of the Sport” - sound the same, but I would say that the first transcends the sport (as has been said) whereas the second is internal to the sport.
 
While it's not a necessity or desirable to have gone through a battle or trouble in life, I find myself drawn to the legends who triumphed over adversity.
 
Back
Top