Jump to content
Housebuye

If Snyder and Burroughs win world gold this year...

Recommended Posts

What does your all time best American freestyler list look like?

 

1. Smith still or Burroughs? Burroughs would be tied for world golds, have more medal but “only” 1 Olympic gold and he didn’t win them all in a row.

 

2. Baumgartner or Snyder? Baumgartner has 13 medals, 4 at the Olympics and 2 Olympic golds. Crazy. Snyder would have 4 world golds in a row, including an Olympic gold, plus a finals win (maybe 2) over a legend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What does your all time best American freestyler list look like?

 

1. Smith still or Burroughs? Burroughs would be tied for world golds, have more medal but “only” 1 Olympic gold and he didn’t win them all in a row.

 

2. Baumgartner or Snyder? Baumgartner has 13 medals, 4 at the Olympics and 2 Olympic golds. Crazy. Snyder would have 4 world golds in a row, including an Olympic gold, plus a finals win (maybe 2) over a legend.

Still, Smith and Bruce are better than present wrestlers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Smith and the 92 Olympics, he had staph that year. Bad. Head swollen, lost hair, fatigue, all that nasty stuff. It was tough to get good training in. His wrestling was off. Dang near didn't make the team. Gutted out some nerve wracking wins in the games and then just decimated the Russian. Might have been his best performance ever. Reynosa was his last match in the pool. He didn't need to win it, just not get tech'd or pinned. He obviously wasn't trying to lose but he knew he pretty much had it locked so after all the drama he probably wasn't as focused as normal and looking to the finals. Poor Asgari, gets Belaglasov then Smith in Olympic finals. That is rough.

Edited by sgallan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Out of curiosity, did he retire with that streak? 

 

As far as I know he did. He was beating Neal pretty handily leading up to the 96 games and his biggest threat was probably Erickson who at some points was probably the 2nd best heavyweight in the world.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Erickson was never a threat to Baumgartner. He lost to Baumgartner 2-3 times a year for a decade or so. It was Dake versus Taylor squared. Not only was Baumgartner better, but Eirckson didn't match up styles wise either. Given Erickson was a world class wrestler in his own right the domination was absurd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the 1988 Olympics there were 10 weights. In the 2016 Olympics there were 6 weights. In 1988 there was 1 Russian in the brackets. In 2016 there were like 6. The answer to this question is Jordan Ernest Burroughs.

Dumb American troll makes a stupid post. Thanks for representing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Up to 1992 we had a pool system and had to wrestle more matches to win the Olympics finalists often wrestled as many as 7 matches sometimes 8 to win the gold. Smith was something special.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dumb American troll makes a stupid post. Thanks for representing.

 

How is it stupid?  Do you deny that it's harder to win world titles now then it was in 1988?  

 

I'm no troll.  I thought you were done with wrestling.  Just can't help yourself can you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How is it stupid?  Do you deny that it's harder to win world titles now then it was in 1988?  

 

I'm no troll.  I thought you were done with wrestling.  Just can't help yourself can you?

Do you deny that winning more and losing less is a good thing?  Do you deny that winning gold in the Olympics twice is better than 1 gold and 1 DNP?  

 

Only with an agenda can you make 6 for 6 gold medals with 2 olympic titles worse than 6 for 8 gold medals with 1 olympic win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No agenda, I just consider the competition a pretty big factor in evaluating who’s the best. 6 weights compared to 10 is a huge deal. As is having multiple Russians in your weight.

If they both went 6 for 6 or if Burroughs got to 6 total golds with 2 Olympic Golds then I'd agree the era he won in would be a clear tie breaker in Burroughs' favor.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they both went 6 for 6 or if Burroughs got to 6 total golds with 2 Olympic Golds then I'd agree the era he won in would be a clear tie breaker in Burroughs' favor.

The point is, had smith had to deal with a much deeper weight with many more Soviets, would he have gone 6 for 6?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×