Sporting Dominance Good or Bad


World Champion
I was listening to the steve davis episode of the brilliant at home with colin murray podcast series, which i do believe with certain episodes in prior 3 series there is not a better 1 on 1 interview podcast out there in the uk but anyway i digress, they of course discussed steve davis domination of the sport. with 8 finals in 9 years. winning 6 of them. 6 uk championship finals in 7 yrs & he made 1 table set up at crucible every yr between 80/81 - 90/91 expect 81/82 when he was subject to the crucible curse

they made a good point as the neutral viewer we all want a sport where you go into a race & say anyone could win, but is dominance a necessary evil, I know that at times it can almost kill the sport like we all worried in Ferrari, Red Bull & mercedes Eras. because as they said on the pod, you always need a "villian" someone to shoot at. that victories always mean more when youve beaten that force. because im sure part of that reason that i love jenson button 2012 victory in canada was that he beat vettel the "villian" if he had past sergio perez would it have had the same effect. or why alonso v schumacher imola 06 was so iconic because of the same reason. & like womens tennis at times because outside of serena any of top 20 could beat each other on their day, so achievement doesnt seems as big
Top Bottom