Jump to content
BobbyGribbs

Logan Stieber retiring

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, TobusRex said:

He won a "World Title" at 61kg, yeah, but it was a very weak weight because all the legit contenders were trying to make the cut at 65kg.  

"Stieber beat Shuptar (world bronze the last year), Chakaev (2x world bronze since then), Ehsanpoor (previous junior world champ) and Lomtadze (quality guy at 61kg). It was a who's who of guys who had never medaled before, and Stieber beat them all, putting up 10, 13, 9, and 8 points in his matches.  When he was on, he was tough to beat (beat Olympic medalists Ramonov and Aliev in his career). "

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Mphillips said:

"Stieber beat Shuptar (world bronze the last year), Chakaev (2x world bronze since then), Ehsanpoor (previous junior world champ) and Lomtadze (quality guy at 61kg). It was a who's who of guys who had never medaled before, and Stieber beat them all, putting up 10, 13, 9, and 8 points in his matches.  When he was on, he was tough to beat (beat Olympic medalists Ramonov and Aliev in his career). "

Yeah, but how good where those guys when Steiber beat them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, treep2000 said:

Wow... you're so right... I don't know what I'd do without your reality check there.  Man... what was I thinking to call out how trashing your sports elite for the most minute things won't help the sport.  I shall forever be indebted to your absoluteness of virtue and ethics.  Praise thee... 

Then call people out for trashing the sports elite on the day they retire because it's a despicable thing to do.  Don't try to make it an issue that affects the sports' popularity, because it absolutely doesn't.  Those two things have zero connection. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, boconnell said:

Then call people out for trashing the sports elite on the day they retire because it's a despicable thing to do.  Don't try to make it an issue that affects the sports' popularity, because it absolutely doesn't.  Those two things have zero connection. 

You're living in a world of speculation and conjecture.  To presume ZERO connection is an absolute.  To presume 100% connection is an absolute.  I, in my own rightful opinion, believe that there is SOME connection.  The members of this forum are probably the most ardent fans of amateur wrestling in the country.  I think we all agree to that.  Then... when together, ~50% of the posts about a legend retiring were filled with content about he is/was less than.  This mindset/viewpoint manifests itself outside of the forum, and it heard/seen by family and friends of those fans, me included.  I'm guilty of hypercriticalism as well, in the past, but have chosen to move beyond it.  

Absolutism is akin to flat-earther syndrome.  It's highly unwise to be so sure of one's self.  It's better to suggest and have opinions that use terms that are strongly supportive of your argument, but not absolute.  Once there's a crack in your argument, if you're an absolutist, you've lost.  My argument has room for discussion and wiggle.  Yours does not. 

Thanks for playing.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, treep2000 said:

You're living in a world of speculation and conjecture.  To presume ZERO connection is an absolute.  To presume 100% connection is an absolute.  I, in my own rightful opinion, believe that there is SOME connection.  The members of this forum are probably the most ardent fans of amateur wrestling in the country.  I think we all agree to that.  Then... when together, ~50% of the posts about a legend retiring were filled with content about he is/was less than.  This mindset/viewpoint manifests itself outside of the forum, and it heard/seen by family and friends of those fans, me included.  I'm guilty of hypercriticalism as well, in the past, but have chosen to move beyond it.  

Absolutism is akin to flat-earther syndrome.  It's highly unwise to be so sure of one's self.  It's better to suggest and have opinions that use terms that are strongly supportive of your argument, but not absolute.  Once there's a crack in your argument, if you're an absolutist, you've lost.  My argument has room for discussion and wiggle.  Yours does not. 

Thanks for playing.  

You were rightly bothered by the despicable attacks on Steiber in a thread that should have celebrated him.  You wrongly used that moment to make a connection that simply doesn't exist. 

The most popular sports have the most arguing over who is the greatest.  This is not a productive or valuable argument, but it drives popularity beyond question.  ESPN doesn't pay 10 guys to defend Lebron James and a different 10 guys to attack him because the argument hurts the popularity of the sport they have a multi-billion dollar vested interest in.  They do it because it draws eyeballs.  It's similar to the pathetic pandering done by MMA fighters who talk trash.  It's absurd and fake, but it drives popularity.  It may drive away one fan while drawing in five, but it increases popularity beyond question.  There is overwhelming evidence about the positive connection between a sports' popularity, and argument over how great an all-time great is.  This is not speculation.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, boconnell said:

You were rightly bothered by the despicable attacks on Steiber in a thread that should have celebrated him.  You wrongly used that moment to make a connection that simply doesn't exist. 

The most popular sports have the most arguing over who is the greatest.  This is not a productive or valuable argument, but it drives popularity beyond question.  ESPN doesn't pay 10 guys to defend Lebron James and a different 10 guys to attack him because the argument hurts the popularity of the sport they have a multi-billion dollar vested interest in.  They do it because it draws eyeballs.  It's similar to the pathetic pandering done by MMA fighters who talk trash.  It's absurd and fake, but it drives popularity.  It may drive away one fan while drawing in five, but it increases popularity beyond question.  There is overwhelming evidence about the positive connection between a sports' popularity, and argument over how great an all-time great is.  This is not speculation.  

This is a fair post.  Thank you.  Let's get a beer... ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the question of the tone of the comments about Stieber's retirement, I think there are two related questions.  First, is it ok to mention as part of the recollection of his career that there was some controversy.  Yes, I think so -- specifically, the Oliver final.  That is one of the best remembered finals of the decade, largely because of the controversial ending.  If that is discussed in a non-meanspirited way as part of the remembrance of this great champion, that is to be expected.  The call was very memorable; I think that many, probably most, thought it was wrong, and it was quite consequential -- if it went the other way, then Oliver and Stieber are both 3x champs.  I don't agree that mentioning the Oliver match and the way it ended -- in an on-line discussion and opinion forum mostly frequented by people who love to think, talk about, and debate the sport -- is inappropriate.  Same goes for a measured analysis of his world champion freestyle career and the state of its prospects when he retired.  

Second, what do we think of some of the posts and should people consider some of the comments in bad taste.  Taking gratuitous or mean-spirited shots at someone who accomplished so much; who was the linchpin of elevating a great wrestling state's flagship school to the national championship and to a status just behind a program on a historically great run and above the two great traditional powers in the sport; and who always comported himself as a ferocious competitor with a humble and gracious demeanor does not demonstrate a love for the sport and/or the respect earned by a great champion at his retirement.  I didn't see very much of that in the comments on this thread, or at least not enough that I viewed this as an example of a disastrous trend in the wrestling community.  Instead, I think that the comments here were generally complimentary and respectful, including when posters analyzed the complexities of his career.  What probably bothered me more was the title of another thread (two controversial titles), both generally because of its negativity (I really don't see the point of centering a discussion around what amounts to an attempt to downgrade this admirable guy's status in the sport) and specifically because its wording, whether intentional or not, implies that the Ramos win was generally viewed as controversial (I think a pretty substantial minority felt that way, for multiple reasons).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, TobusRex said:

Are you implying Stieber set fire to Notre Dame? Not saying you are wrong.......

 

Perspiring minds want to know...

It can't be pure chance that a water hose image is used in a topic like this.

CIA - anyone? After all, Stieber has been traveling internationally for some time now...

 

image.png.e840f5da8cd2c0add528d4d9c3ed9d7a.png

 

Quit picking on the guys questioning his ability, he never beat Karelin... a fact one can't dispute! In fact, he never even entered a competition Karelin was in... surely he was ducking the man.

Edited by WillieBoy
All the asinine crap about his ability - he was excellent!

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

×