Hey, Micheal Jordan was huge outside the U.S when he stared in that looney toons movie… for like a week.
There are international cricketers that are more famous than Jordan, and my guess is you yanks couldn’t name a famous cricketer if you tried. Though I don’t really like the sport that much myself, I’d have to say Shane Warne would be pretty intimidating, sure he may be fat, unfit, so dumb he smokes when being sponsered by an anti-smokeing group, but still I think we are all a little scared he’d come screw our wives.
There are international cricketers that are more famous than Jordan, and my guess is you yanks couldn’t name a famous cricketer if you tried. .[/quote]
First off, what the fuck is your point? Last I knew this wasn’t a “who is the most famous athlete thread”
And they must not be too famous if us yanks couldn’t name one. For sake of argument I am willing to bet that you and other Cricket fans have heard of both Michael Jordan and Tiger woods.
Too many trolls in this thread now. Before you respond to one of these douches look at their post count. If its under 100 posts dont give them the satisfaction of a response.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
adubswils wrote:
Professor X wrote:
RobertPaullson wrote:
Got a little sleepy on page 5, but with regards to Tiger and Tyson:
I’d much rather play golf against Tiger than box with Tyson,
And i’d enjoy boxing with Tiger much more than Golf with Tyson.
I am wondering how much you would rather play golf with Tiger if you two were betting for ownership of your house, your car, and your bank account.
[/quote]
If professional golfers are playing for second place then its because Tiger is very skilled. Recognizing that you are less skilled than another person does not mean you are intimidated by them. Not in a sport where the play of the other person cannot influence your own.
Honestly, in your prized scenario I would be worried about my stuff if I was playing my grandpa. He knows how to play golf and I don’t. So if I’m stuck in a game where, magically, I have to bet all my belongings Id be just as concerned about facing my Grandpa as I am about facing Tiger. This scenario isn’t a ringing endorsement for Tiger Woods being the most intimidating athlete (ill just call him an athlete so you and PGA don’t blow your respective tops).
So given the choice: Play golf with your belongings on the line with Tiger Woods, or fight Tyson for your belongings in the ring. Which do you choose. The answer is obvious if you also count your brain as a prize.
I cant imagine that I’m the only person on this board that thinks naming a GOLFER as the most INTIMIDATING Athlete is absolutely hilarious.
This is one of the funniest threads I have read.
Golf is a sport and golfers are athletes, it takes more then just speed and power to make an athlete. Balance timing and coordination are also big components of many sports and golfers display these traits.
Before you jump down my throat I aint a big fan of golf either, but do appreciate the skill.
Tyson and Tiger are intimidating in their respective sports.
However knowing nothing of the two and having a difference in opinion with either I would feel much more comfortable telling Tiger where to go then Tyson.
Some people just have an intimidating presence and Tyson has it in bucketloads.
[quote]cougarenegade wrote:
Tyson combined speed only seen with lightweights with greater force produced in his punches than ali, frazier, foreman, any of the top boxers of all time.
[/quote]
If professional golfers are playing for second place then its because Tiger is very skilled. Recognizing that you are less skilled than another person does not mean you are intimidated by them. Not in a sport where the play of the other person cannot influence your own.
Honestly, in your prized scenario I would be worried about my stuff if I was playing my grandpa. He knows how to play golf and I don’t. So if I’m stuck in a game where, magically, I have to bet all my belongings Id be just as concerned about facing my Grandpa as I am about facing Tiger.
So given the choice: Play golf with your belongings on the line with Tiger Woods, or fight Tyson for your belongings in the ring. Which do you choose. The answer is obvious if you also count your brain as a prize.
I cant imagine that I’m the only person on this board that thinks naming a GOLFER as the most INTIMIDATING Athlete is absolutely hilarious.[/quote]
the essence of intimidation is a fresh kill and a pack of dogs. they’re all hungry but when the alpha dog appears they step aside. alpha eats first. alpha eats what he wants. alpha smacks down the bitches that annoy him. if that ain’t tiger.[/quote]
Why is this so hard for these people to understand? They are either really dumb or they just want to argue. Or maybe both.
[quote]Donut62 wrote:
cougarenegade wrote:
Tyson combined speed only seen with lightweights with greater force produced in his punches than ali, frazier, foreman, any of the top boxers of all time.
Ummm…let me guess, you don’t follow boxing much.[/quote]
I think that’s pretty clear.
This thread has degenerated into an “I’m stupider than you and I’ll prove it with this post” kind of thread.
and my guess is you yanks couldn’t name a famous cricketer if you tried.
what about jiminy ?
Yeah, even I’ve heard of him and I’m more of a grasshopper fan.
DB[/quote]
Jiminy’s a bitch, I could take him out no problem, I’d love to meet that motherfucker in a dark alley. He in his top-hat and me with my fresh BJJ skills.
I’d completely have him PWN3D in like two seconds easy.
Fuck that Jiminy Cricket motherfucker right in the eye…
[quote]blok wrote:
I played competitive hockey for 13 years, it is not intimidating to go against a really good player, it is more frustrating.
[/quote]
If you played against a 170lb guy hockey player who at any given time could score on a 1 on 4 break or score 5 goals in a game, call your team a “Mickey Mouse” franchise and you wanted to nail him into the boards but couldn’t because he was elusive you would’nt be intimidated?