Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
rodneydeeeee

Ed Ruth all time

Recommended Posts

Lee Kemp is better than Ed Ruth.

 

Lee Kemp only had four years in wrestling before going into Wisconsin where he went to be a 4x finalist and 3x NCAA champ. He then beat Dan Gable. He went to be 3x world champion. He would have been a Olympic Champion easily if not for that boycott.

 

Think about it. Lee Kemp started to learn about wrestling DURING NINTH GRADE!!

 

Lee Kemp blow everyone out in learning curve.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Mark Schultz did not take up wrestling until his Junior year in High School. Already a State Champion gymnast, he had balance and strength not often seen on a wrestling mat. When he was on, no one hung with him.

 

Think he would have taken Askren and Ruth both and Cael at least 6 of 10. Remember, he went up a weight to meet Banach and kept him from being a 4 time champ. Then on to three World titles.

 

It is a shame he is not coaching somewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mark Schultz did not take up wrestling until his Junior year in High School. Already a State Champion gymnast, he had balance and strength not often seen on a wrestling mat. When he was on, no one hung with him.

 

Think he would have taken Askren and Ruth both and Cael at least 6 of 10. Remember, he went up a weight to meet Banach and kept him from being a 4 time champ. Then on to three World titles.

 

It is a shame he is not coaching somewhere.

 

Mark grew out of the 167 weight class. Remember that Mark beat Banach, but he also lost to Banach. When he beat Banach, Banach was a 2 time champ going for his 3rd title. When Banach moved up his senior year, he lost 3 times to Mike Mann from Iowa State. Banach only went undefeated one year if I remember correctly, which was his sophomore year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mark Schultz is the greatest natural talent we have ever had in wrestling. Starting in the 11th grade and becoming a four time champion at worlds is unmatched by anything I have ever seen. He didnt even relly take it seriously until his 12th grade year-amazing! Could he beat Cael-I dont think so, just my opinion but Ruth or Askren yes. Had he started as a youth he would have been the greatest in our sports history. As far as coaching goes he always struggled with, PR, politics and leadership-those are esstential, thus him not being able to find a job in line with his wrestling legend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mark Schultz is the greatest natural talent we have ever had in wrestling. Starting in the 11th grade and becoming a four time champion at worlds is unmatched by anything I have ever seen. He didnt even relly take it seriously until his 12th grade year-amazing! Could he beat Cael-I dont think so, just my opinion but Ruth or Askren yes. Had he started as a youth he would have been the greatest in our sports history. As far as coaching goes he always struggled with, PR, politics and leadership-those are esstential, thus him not being able to find a job in line with his wrestling legend.

I thought he was a three- time world-level champion?

 

One of the all-time greats! As mentally tough as his physical explosiveness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mark Schultz is the greatest natural talent we have ever had in wrestling. Starting in the 11th grade and becoming a four time champion at worlds is unmatched by anything I have ever seen. He didnt even relly take it seriously until his 12th grade year-amazing! Could he beat Cael-I dont think so, just my opinion but Ruth or Askren yes. Had he started as a youth he would have been the greatest in our sports history. As far as coaching goes he always struggled with, PR, politics and leadership-those are esstential, thus him not being able to find a job in line with his wrestling legend.

 

Kemp is very close, I think it's between him and Schultz. Kemp didn't have an all time great older brother to help him out. I think that could have made a difference.

 

I believe Hodge also had only a few year experience before he made the Olympic team as a teenager. I would have to check that out again though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
superold,

 

So you think victories over Banach, Wright, and Herbert are not worthy of note? Wins over these guys do not impress you, even when guys bump up to defeat them?

 

What do you mean? Yes, wins over Banach or Herbert in the ncaa finals is worthy of note. I'm just not too impressed by a win over Wright post season by a guy of Askren's caliber.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding Wright and Askren, keep in mind Q shut it down for a while after nationals in March. He did not compete in any freestyle tournaments and was not training regularly until after the birth of his first child in July. Now I'm not saying he would of beat Askren if he had been training full time straight though, but I will say that I think it was a factor. I also think once Q. gets through a freestyle cycle (U.S. Open/WTTs/Worlds?) next year, he will be better then Askren, at least at 185 in freestyle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hodge made the 1952 Olympic team right out of high school. He took 5th. So that is two losses. In 1956 he won over a period of 10 days the NCAA championships, and the AAU national Greco-Roman, and freestyle tournaents pinning every opponent. At the 1956 Olympic trials he lost by a touch fall ( he shot a double leg, Bill Smith the 1952 gold medalist at 160 hit him with a whizzer). Hodge rolled thru to be on top, but the match was over. That is his 3rd loss. Hodge had already won the 1956 Olympic Greco-Roman trials. Smith was declared a professional by Avery Brundage head of the IOC. So Hodge wrestles at the Olympics in freestyle giving up the Greco spot.

In the Olympics leading by a large score he was thrown off the mat. The official called a fall. I'm told the official was thrown out of the tournament, but the call was not overturned. Next match the last in the round robin he faced the Soviet who he deliberately tortured awhile. He hooked up a 3/4 nelson and they say you could hear the vertebrae pop. The Soviets got the 3/4 nelson called an inhumane hold and it is still illegal today.

 

Mark Schultz decided he wanted to wrestle after the high school season of his junior year. Dave laid out a program where he wrestled about 50 freestyle matches that spring and summer.

 

I got both Port Robertson's and Bill Smith's version of the Hodge match. Stan Abel said Port Robertson thought Mark Schultz may have been the greatest athlete he ever saw at OU from 1947-1984 including all the football players. Then Stan added Port wasn't sure Hodge could have beaten Mark Schultz.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Started wrestling full time your senior year of high school and go on to win three NCAA titles and three world titles is simply amazing. I think that is our greatest feat in wrestling ever. NO doubt he handles Askren and Ruth. Cael is a toss up with the Edge to Cael. My Lt heavy final of all time is Cael vs Mark. We know that Cael can handle Ruth easily even now. NO reason why this can't be settled with a live match at Agon. Again if Ed wins out he will maybe be 2nd tier and probably third tier with guys like Dake and P Smith, Jake Varner. his weight class is pretty weak is my reasoning for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Started wrestling full time your senior year of high school and go on to win three NCAA titles and three world titles is simply amazing. I think that is our greatest feat in wrestling ever. NO doubt he handles Askren and Ruth. Cael is a toss up with the Edge to Cael. My Lt heavy final of all time is Cael vs Mark. We know that Cael can handle Ruth easily even now. NO reason why this can't be settled with a live match at Agon. Again if Ed wins out he will maybe be 2nd tier and probably third tier with guys like Dake and P Smith, Jake Varner. his weight class is pretty weak is my reasoning for that.

 

Dake and Pat Smith are not 3rd tier. Mark Schultz started wrestling his junior year in HS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe this is the freestyle snob in me coming out but I can't fully get behind Ruth as one of the greats until he starts to do better at the next level. Taylor, Dake, Howe, Stieber, Oliver- all these guys are medal long to the Fs nationals and beating good international wrestlers. Not sure if it's lack of size, struggles with back exposure or what but Ruth just looks awkward at the next level. Not sure if he's beaten anyone who has done well internationally either. I do hope he takes that next step because he sure looks magical in the college style.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree 100%. The next level matters to me when trying to separate what tier our greatest college guys should be put in. It is so close that that matters to me. Dake and P Smith are 3rd tier and maybe 2nd I will concede. I just dont think they were that great or in the greatest conversation, sorry. 4 titles is awesome but no way do they get above Gable who is at the 2nd tier and he only has two titles. Ruth will be third tier with Taylor, Askren, Varner etc. I wanna put M Scultz in the 2nd tier but would probably settle for third tier. It is very difficult to separate these guys. If Ruth loses this year I probably put him the 4th tier, it is that dang close!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree 100%. The next level matters to me when trying to separate what tier our greatest college guys should be put in. It is so close that that matters to me. Dake and P Smith are 3rd tier and maybe 2nd I will concede. I just dont think they were that great or in the greatest conversation, sorry. 4 titles is awesome but no way do they get above Gable who is at the 2nd tier and he only has two titles. Ruth will be third tier with Taylor, Askren, Varner etc. I wanna put M Scultz in the 2nd tier but would probably settle for third tier. It is very difficult to separate these guys. If Ruth loses this year I probably put him the 4th tier, it is that dang close!

 

Are you new to the sport?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Maybe this is the freestyle snob in me coming out but I can't fully get behind Ruth as one of the greats until he starts to do better at the next level. Taylor, Dake, Howe, Stieber, Oliver- all these guys are medal long to the Fs nationals and beating good international wrestlers. Not sure if it's lack of size, struggles with back exposure or what but Ruth just looks awkward at the next level. Not sure if he's beaten anyone who has done well internationally either. I do hope he takes that next step because he sure looks magical in the college style.

 

 

I largely agree with you. I will consider Ruth one of the all time greats if he wins out, but I will always be "iffy" about him because he has not really impressed on the next level. I'm very interested to see how he'll do after college.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of those guys at "the next level" may not have had a chance with 7 (and now 6) weights.

 

Mark Schultz would have been there, though. I think he would have also found a way to beat Cael Sanderson at 184 in their collegiate primes. Maybe 2 or 3 out of 10. Who knows what could have been had he gone directly to Oklahoma and redshirted in '79 (I'm old but I was not in high school yet back then) instead of spending his freshman year at UCLA (although it's hard to fault anyone for going to UCLA - if you've ever spent any time on that campus you'd know why...).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree 100%. The next level matters to me when trying to separate what tier our greatest college guys should be put in. It is so close that that matters to me. Dake and P Smith are 3rd tier and maybe 2nd I will concede. I just dont think they were that great or in the greatest conversation, sorry. 4 titles is awesome but no way do they get above Gable who is at the 2nd tier and he only has two titles. Ruth will be third tier with Taylor, Askren, Varner etc. I wanna put M Scultz in the 2nd tier but would probably settle for third tier. It is very difficult to separate these guys. If Ruth loses this year I probably put him the 4th tier, it is that dang close!

 

Are you new to the sport?

 

Nope. Wrestled from 92-96 at UNC. I guess you don't agree with my post:-) Just an opinion, doesn't mean I am right. Basically was just trying to agree with armspin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree 100%. The next level matters to me when trying to separate what tier our greatest college guys should be put in. It is so close that that matters to me. Dake and P Smith are 3rd tier and maybe 2nd I will concede. I just dont think they were that great or in the greatest conversation, sorry. 4 titles is awesome but no way do they get above Gable who is at the 2nd tier and he only has two titles. Ruth will be third tier with Taylor, Askren, Varner etc. I wanna put M Scultz in the 2nd tier but would probably settle for third tier. It is very difficult to separate these guys. If Ruth loses this year I probably put him the 4th tier, it is that dang close!

 

Are you new to the sport?

 

Nope. Wrestled from 92-96 at UNC. I guess you don't agree with my post:-) Just an opinion, doesn't mean I am right. Basically was just trying to agree with armspin.

 

 

Yes, I disagree. But the reason I asked was because from reading your posts, it seems like you know very little about the history of the sport. Many factual errors in your posts. Have a nice night.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw Dan Gable wrestle live about 10 matches or so. I also know how difficult it was for anyone to finally break the 4 Titles curse. Dan was remarkable, period. What Pat did, was awe-inspiring, and to put Ruth ahead of them is wrong. I think I must be more connected to the past in wrestling than some of you. I know what kind of baaaaaaad men came before me. Hundreds and hundreds of bad mofo's that's for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He's awfully good! In the top 50 list put out for the 80th anniversary team, I have a hard time seeing who he replaces.

 

He should replace about 47 or so. The biggest problem/argument used in the GOAT argument is 4 years wrestling vs. 3. A lot of people bring up 3 year wrestlers when comparing and I think this argument would actually HELP Ruth. He, in all likelihood will finish UNDEFEATED his final 3 years. Since the 3 year wrestlers only wrestled 3 because they couldn't wrestle Varsity as freshman Ruth fits right in. As far as 4 year guys go his career record will be better than EVERYONE not named Sanderson. If he finishes this year undefeated, and more importantly, as dominant as the last 2 years he has a GREAT argument to be a TOP5 guy.

 

Would you place him ahead of this man?

 

• Bill Koll: Some present-day fans may be familiar with Koll's rough, tough image; reportedly the "slam" rule was instituted because of him. While wrestling at what is now Northern Iowa, Koll earned three college titles (1946-47 at 145 lbs; 1948 at 147.5 lbs) and Outstanding Wrestler honors two years in a row (the first to do so). Even more impressive than Koll's perfect 72-0 record: in his entire college career, he was taken down only once, reversed just twice … and pinned all five opponents at the 1948 NCAAs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, there was a relatively short period where freshmen couldn't compete, but that was not the way it always was:)

 

Dick Hutton: Long before Pat Smith and Cael Sanderson were even born, this barrel-chested heavyweight for Oklahoma State came incredibly close to becoming the first four-time NCAA champion. After winning two straight college titles in 1947 and 1948, Hutton lost on a referee's decision to Minnesota's Verne Gagne in the 1949 NCAA finals -- his only loss in his college career. He came back to win his third title in 1950, concluding with a 42-1-1 record with 15 pins.

 

How about him, would you put Ruth ahead of Dick?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My original comment was that I couldn't figure out who to replace out of the 50 member 80th anniversary team.

 

Well, the last two posts I listed two who didn't make the 45 member 75th Anniversary list, so I was just checking to see if you put Ruth ahead of them:) My brash inclusion of those two guys into the top 50 was not approved by the original committee, so if he's "significantly" better than them, I guess you can leap frog him over them, but not me. An awful lot of amazing wrestlers could not be squeezed into the All Time List. Ruth=Great, but there has been a lot of that going around for the last 80 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My original comment was that I couldn't figure out who to replace out of the 50 member 80th anniversary team.

 

Well, the last two posts I listed two who didn't make the 45 member 75th Anniversary list, so I was just checking to see if you put Ruth ahead of them:) My brash inclusion of those two guys into the top 50 was not approved by the original committee, so if he's "significantly" better than them, I guess you can leap frog him over them, but not me. An awful lot of amazing wrestlers could not be squeezed into the All Time List. Ruth=Great, but there has been a lot of that going around for the last 80 years.

 

I would be more tempted to call Taylor/Dake the equivalent of Hutton/Gagne for that matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My original comment was that I couldn't figure out who to replace out of the 50 member 80th anniversary team.

 

Well, the last two posts I listed two who didn't make the 45 member 75th Anniversary list, so I was just checking to see if you put Ruth ahead of them:) My brash inclusion of those two guys into the top 50 was not approved by the original committee, so if he's "significantly" better than them, I guess you can leap frog him over them, but not me. An awful lot of amazing wrestlers could not be squeezed into the All Time List. Ruth=Great, but there has been a lot of that going around for the last 80 years.

 

I would be more tempted to call Taylor/Dake the equivalent of Hutton/Gagne for that matter.

 

Are you saying Taylor should be placed ahead of Ruth?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...