Re: Proof that Merckx wasn't the greatest



R

Ryan Cousineau

Guest
In article <[email protected]>,
MagillaGorilla <[email protected]> wrote:

[reasonable arguments deleted]

>
> But the bottom line that everyone needs to understand is that there is
> no reason to believe cycling is any different than any other sport where
> objective criteria have been used to document performance over the decades.
>
> Not only does everyone have to concede there's not a single athlete -
> male or female in ANY EVENT in track & field, swimming, weightlifting,
> or speed skating - from the 1960's, 1970's or even the 1980's that could
> defeat today's elite athletes in those same sports, you'd also have to
> apply that same logic to the semi-objective sports such as gymnastics
> and figure skating and even tennis.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_jump#Top_10_performers

> So we're basically talking about the ultimate experiment that's already
> been done.


The null hypothesis is not valid.

--
Ryan Cousineau [email protected] http://www.wiredcola.com/
"My scenarios may give the impression I could be an excellent crook.
Not true - I am a talented lawyer." - Sandy in rec.bicycles.racing