Does Helen pass burroughs and become the GOAT?

[RawDog]

Helen looked super impressive at Worlds with no signs of slowing down.  I think she has 5 gold's now while Burroughs I believe has 7.

Does Helen end up getting more gold's than Burroughs and become the GOAT?

[gromit]

Helen has less gold but now has one more senior world/olympic level medal than Jordan.  Kyle Snyder and Helen are running neck and neck to be Maryland’s GOAT.

JB: 7 gold, 3 bronze

Maroulis: 5 gold, 2 silver, 4 bronze

Snyder: 5 gold, 3 silver, 2 bronze

[boconnell]

Are you talking about a mythical GOAT of men's and women's freestyle wrestling?  If she gets to 8 golds I still don't put her close to Burroughs. It's apples and oranges.  There is zero need for the comparison.  But if one is made it isn't close.  One of the biggest arguments for JB over John Smith is that in JB's era you had multiple Russians and fewer weight classes, meaning more competition.  That is a legitimate argument.  There is no argument for the idea that the competition in women's FS is anywhere close to the men's side.  I'm not talking about levels, I'm talking about depth of competition.  The sport is young and will need decades to catch up.  Winning titles in a still developing sport that only has a few tough nations is simply not the same.  

It should be enough to just celebrate her accomplishments in the field of women's wrestling and his in the field of men's wrestling.  

Edited yesterday at 03:04 AM by boconnell

[TylerDurden]

There really isn't any need to compare Helen with any of her male counterparts. 

[bnwtwg]

1 hour ago, TylerDurden said:

There really isn't any need to compare Helen with any of her male counterparts. 

We aren't comparing male vs female. We are comparing the greatest USA wrestlers of all time.

Edited yesterday at 04:30 AM by bnwtwg

[bnwtwg]

Adeline 6 gold, 10 medals

Burroughs 7 gold, 10 medals

Helen 5 gold, 11 medals and counting 

Snyder 5 gold, 10 medals and counting

Smith 6 consecutive gold (and lost at 2 worlds/olympics but still got a gold)

Baumgartner 5 gold, 13 medals

[TylerDurden]

8 hours ago, bnwtwg said:

We aren't comparing male vs female. We are comparing the greatest USA wrestlers of all time.

You most certainly are. 

[Hilton Head Joe]

10 hours ago, gromit said:

Helen has less gold but now has one more senior world/olympic level medal than Jordan.  Kyle Snyder and Helen are running neck and neck to be Maryland’s GOAT.

JB: 7 gold, 3 bronze

Maroulis: 5 gold, 2 silver, 4 bronze

Snyder: 5 gold, 3 silver, 2 bronze

Dang JB never lost in finals!

[Hilton Head Joe]

I never thought Baum's medal count could be beat!

[jchapman]

1 hour ago, Hilton Head Joe said:

Dang JB never lost in finals!

It's hard to lose in the finals in years you don't make it there.  Smith is 5 for 5! 

I kid, JB is one of the greatest ever.  What he did on a broken ankle is mind blowing.

[RandolphTJones]

Right now i'd still have JB #1 because of the Gold's and never losing in the finals. Appears both Snyder and Helen have a chance to add to their count for a few more years. 

[maligned]

12 hours ago, boconnell said:

 There is no argument for the idea that the competition in women's FS is anywhere close to the men's side.  I'm not talking about levels, I'm talking about depth of competition.  The sport is young and will need decades to catch up.  Winning titles in a still developing sport that only has a few tough nations is simply not the same.  

This argument is losing steam. All of our girls in their prime right now have grown up in the long-established BOYS system: wrestling boys, getting the same training as the boys, lifting and dieting like the boys, working just as hard as the boys. And we're only the 3rd to 5th best nation in the world in a sport that has 10+ nations contending for medals at each weight, with more nations overall than men's freestyle competing for medals at various weights. This is because all of their girls in their prime right now at this moment (not 1990) have grown up in fully developed systems similar to our system's level. 

And in that environment, Helen Maroulis is 33 years old and keeps beating all comers. 

[boconnell]

55 minutes ago, maligned said:

This argument is losing steam. All of our girls in their prime right now have grown up in the long-established BOYS system: wrestling boys, getting the same training as the boys, lifting and dieting like the boys, working just as hard as the boys. And we're only the 3rd to 5th best nation in the world in a sport that has 10+ nations contending for medals at each weight, with more nations overall than men's freestyle competing for medals at various weights. This is because all of their girls in their prime right now at this moment (not 1990) have grown up in fully developed systems similar to our system's level. 

And in that environment, Helen Maroulis is 33 years old and keeps beating all comers. 

You aren't being honest with yourself if you think the world competition in women's FS is close to the men (and again I'm not talking at all about level of wrestling).  John Smith had an easier path to medals and golds than Jordan Burroughs did.  This isn't saying that there weren't a bunch of incredible wrestlers in the 1980s.  Nobody is saying women's FS isn't good.  Nobody is saying that little girls aren't training just as hard as little boys.  But a sport with 1 generation isn't close to as competitive as a sport with many generations.  This isn't a hot take.  It's clear and obvious.  The worldwide participation numbers aren't close.  If people insist on having a GOAT conversation about JB and Maroulis, then this stuff can't be ignored.  Just like it can't be ignored when you talk about John Smith and JB.  

[jchapman]

49 minutes ago, boconnell said:

You aren't being honest with yourself if you think the world competition in women's FS is close to the men (and again I'm not talking at all about level of wrestling).  John Smith had an easier path to medals and golds than Jordan Burroughs did.  This isn't saying that there weren't a bunch of incredible wrestlers in the 1980s.  Nobody is saying women's FS isn't good.  Nobody is saying that little girls aren't training just as hard as little boys.  But a sport with 1 generation isn't close to as competitive as a sport with many generations.  This isn't a hot take.  It's clear and obvious.  The worldwide participation numbers aren't close.  If people insist on having a GOAT conversation about JB and Maroulis, then this stuff can't be ignored.  Just like it can't be ignored when you talk about John Smith and JB.  

John Smith had a pretty tough road just to make the US Olympic Team in 1988, he had to beat the defending Olympic Gold medalist.

[RetiredFromWrestling]

Burroughs has 1 olympic medal. He isn’t the Goat. The olympics are the pinnacle of the sport, 10 olympic-year non-olympic-weight world championships are not worth 1 olympic title. Smith has 2 olympic golds, big bruce has 1.5. 

[MPhillips]

31 minutes ago, RetiredFromWrestling said:

10 olympic-year non-olympic-weight world championships are not worth 1 olympic title.

Five of JB's golds (one Olympic and four WC) were at 74kg. Wasn't 74kg an Olympic weight?

Not debating between JS and JB, just confused regarding the, "non-olympic-weight world championships."

[jchapman]

9 minutes ago, MPhillips said:

Five of JB's golds (one Olympic and four WC) were at 74kg. Wasn't 74kg an Olympic weight?

Not debating between JS and JB, just confused regarding the, "non-olympic-weight world championships."

I'm not quite sure what he meant either.  I don't see too much of a difference between Oly weight and non-Oly weight World Titles, except in the Olympic years when only non-Olympians can enter.

[bnwtwg]

3 hours ago, jchapman said:

John Smith had a pretty tough road just to make the US Olympic Team in 1988, he had to beat the defending Olympic Gold medalist.

 John  Smith  Lost  At  Multiple  World  Tournaments 

Those six golds have asterisks. He changed the game, but let's not act like he ran the table like what has to be done in a normal tournament in present day. He would be treated like Spencer Lee if he took one of those losses early.

[boconnell]

48 minutes ago, bnwtwg said:

 John  Smith  Lost  At  Multiple  World  Tournaments 

Those six golds have asterisks. He changed the game, but let's not act like he ran the table like what has to be done in a normal tournament in present day. He would be treated like Spencer Lee if he took one of those losses early.

There are no asterisks.  He wrestled under the system of his day and won.  Every time.  Every one of those tournaments had a single elimination phase and he never lost in that phase.  It's like saying Jordan's 6 NBA titles have an asterisk because he didn't sweep in the finals.

[Eagle26]

I agree with those that said it’s not fair to compare women vs men. Think of it this way… if Caitlyn Clark smashes every single WNBA record and wins 10+ titles, do you think people will consider her the best basketball player of all time? No, because they know Jordan or LeBron would smash her one on one. So it’s just not fair. So let’s just let Helen be the women’s GOAT and Burroughs be the men’s GOAT (yes I know both are debatable, but you get the point). 

[juniorvarsity]

No she does not. Argue between John Smith and Jordan Burroughs.

Also, Adeline has more gold and as many as JB. She just didn't get it at Olympics. 

Also, I'll probably never mix mens and womens when discussing GOAT. Seems silly. Do we do that with any other sport?

[maligned]

18 hours ago, boconnell said:

You aren't being honest with yourself if you think the world competition in women's FS is close to the men (and again I'm not talking at all about level of wrestling).  John Smith had an easier path to medals and golds than Jordan Burroughs did.  This isn't saying that there weren't a bunch of incredible wrestlers in the 1980s.  Nobody is saying women's FS isn't good.  Nobody is saying that little girls aren't training just as hard as little boys.  But a sport with 1 generation isn't close to as competitive as a sport with many generations.  This isn't a hot take.  It's clear and obvious.  The worldwide participation numbers aren't close.  If people insist on having a GOAT conversation about JB and Maroulis, then this stuff can't be ignored.  Just like it can't be ignored when you talk about John Smith and JB.  

I'll cede the obvious point that there are less female participants. Two counterpoints, because I'm interested in your thoughts:

First: Wrestling is a novel sport. Women's wrestling shouldn't count in any way as a "first generation" sport because of how the athletes were grafted into and competing within an already established system against opponents (boys) in that system and with the established coaches and in the same households of that system. Any girl 25 or younger has been groomed to the same level as her male counterpart for her entire journey, with no missing piece of training, knowledge, or competition level. It's no different from African & Asian track and field athletes from non-traditional nations now winning medals in things like javelin and sprints that they never won before. Those athletes are being sent to academies and training programs in the US and Europe at a young age, where they're grafted into a long-established system. Women's wrestling is completely different from emerging women's soccer opportunities globally, for example, where the generations of time needed to establish competition levels and training frameworks is much higher.

Secondly:  Even if we had only 30% of the current number of boys participating in wrestling in the US; if we had the same coaches, the same number of competition opportunities, the same number of university slots available, and the same level of fan support--the slight reduction in overall athleticism would be almost completely offset by the training and experience built up by those 70% of different athletes who got to inhabit the high-end opportunities from a young age. The level we'd see at NCAAs would see only a mild drop-off. 

Again, I'd say this: even though Helen Maroulis started out at a time that the girls around her wouldn't have had this fully developed system across the full depth of nations, the fact that she keeps winning now against the generation who DID have it from the time they were 6 or 8 years old onward validates all that she's accomplished and should put her in a general discussion as one of our 3 or 4 best wrestlers ever.

 

[maligned]

7 minutes ago, juniorvarsity said:

No she does not. Argue between John Smith and Jordan Burroughs.

Also, Adeline has more gold and as many as JB. She just didn't get it at Olympics. 

Also, I'll probably never mix mens and womens when discussing GOAT. Seems silly. Do we do that with any other sport?

I think it's like tennis or track--not team sports--because of it being individual. If you ask AI, "Who are the greatest American tennis players of all-time?" it will spit out a mixed list of men and women, with Serena Williams rightfully listed first and Pete Sampras rightfully listed before Chris Evert, for example. Then, it further lists the best men and the best women separately. I think this is logical for individual sports. There's one discussion of someone's quality and impact, no matter the gender, and another discussion by gender to compare athletes within their spheres.

[jchapman]

15 hours ago, bnwtwg said:

 John  Smith  Lost  At  Multiple  World  Tournaments 

Those six golds have asterisks. He changed the game, but let's not act like he ran the table like what has to be done in a normal tournament in present day. He would be treated like Spencer Lee if he took one of those losses early.

He took losses in matches when he didn't need to win them in order to win the Gold.  The bad mark/good mark era was like that.

[boconnell]

2 hours ago, maligned said:

I'll cede the obvious point that there are less female participants. Two counterpoints, because I'm interested in your thoughts:

First: Wrestling is a novel sport. Women's wrestling shouldn't count in any way as a "first generation" sport because of how the athletes were grafted into and competing within an already established system against opponents (boys) in that system and with the established coaches and in the same households of that system. Any girl 25 or younger has been groomed to the same level as her male counterpart for her entire journey, with no missing piece of training, knowledge, or competition level. It's no different from African & Asian track and field athletes from non-traditional nations now winning medals in things like javelin and sprints that they never won before. Those athletes are being sent to academies and training programs in the US and Europe at a young age, where they're grafted into a long-established system. Women's wrestling is completely different from emerging women's soccer opportunities globally, for example, where the generations of time needed to establish competition levels and training frameworks is much higher.

Secondly:  Even if we had only 30% of the current number of boys participating in wrestling in the US; if we had the same coaches, the same number of competition opportunities, the same number of university slots available, and the same level of fan support--the slight reduction in overall athleticism would be almost completely offset by the training and experience built up by those 70% of different athletes who got to inhabit the high-end opportunities from a young age. The level we'd see at NCAAs would see only a mild drop-off. 

Again, I'd say this: even though Helen Maroulis started out at a time that the girls around her wouldn't have had this fully developed system across the full depth of nations, the fact that she keeps winning now against the generation who DID have it from the time they were 6 or 8 years old onward validates all that she's accomplished and should put her in a general discussion as one of our 3 or 4 best wrestlers ever.

 

I agree the best women in the country right now are really good.  I agree the training at the top is as elite as it gets and that they function inside of the same elite system as the men. 

But I think you are massively underestimating the impact of numbers in a sport.  The idea that if Helen Maroulis didn't wrestle we would have just created a different Helen Maroulis from the same opportunities is a strange take.  Participation massively matters.  The best wrestlers are outliers far more than they are products of the system.  Far fewer competitors means far fewer outliers.  And outside the USA the numbers are far smaller.  If we insist on having GOAT conversations, the fact that JB was best of a far larger field matters.  The fact that there are 10 men's weight classes across 150 lbs and 10 women's weight classes across 60 lbs matters.  JB has to be the best from 65 KG to 86 KG.  Helen has to be the best from 53 KG to 62 KG.  If the women spread the weights out to 100 KG and kept 10 weight classes then her job would get much harder.  instead of being best from 53-62 she'd have to be best across a far bigger weight range.  More of the best women would be funneled into the same weight class.  I coached a 190 lb state champion HS girl this year and the UWW says she doesn't exist.  Instead they make 10 tiny weight classes for smaller women.  Smaller weight ranges and far fewer participants make a big difference.  Fewer countries committing resources to the sport make a big difference.  If we are going to insist on a GOAT discussion across genders for some reason, these things matter.  Just like nobody is bringing up Rex Peery in the NCAA GOAT debate for winning 3 titles in 3 tries for Oklahoma A&M in the 1930s when there were far fewer schools and competitors.  Helen Maroulis is incredible but I don't put her accomplishments near the 10 most accomplished US wrestlers.  I wouldn't put a men's gymnast with a big medal total near the top of US Gymnasts for the same reason.  They get trained in the same infrastructure as the women, but there are far fewer participants.

Edited 7 hours ago by boconnell