by Craig Miles

Created on: October 03, 2008   Last Updated: October 31, 2008

For those who think dominance in a sport is a bad thing, you've obviously never dominated a sport before.

Try playing a sport, dominating, and then being told that because you are too good, too brilliant, this is a detriment to he rest of the competition.

What drives sport is competition. People compete so they, or their team, can be the best there is. In many sports, using such things as World Records and other various historic statistics, a sportsman can become a legend. Sir Donald Bradman is one of the greatest sporting heroes Australia has ever seen. He didn't play anywhere near as many matches as someone like Steve Waugh, but he has been heralded for his finishing batting average of 99.94, unheard of in test cricket.

Although this benchmark may be unbreakable, people strive to be as good as Bradman. They learnt from him, how he played and went about his daily business. The result of this was an emergence of furture Australian cricket stars, which paved the way for such batting greats as the Waugh brothers and Ricky Ponting. Consider sports without legends and heroes, the drive for competition simply would not be as strong.

Your name is Roger Federer and you dominate every tennis player that sets foot on court against you. You are heralded as one of the greatest tennis players to ever live. The truth of the matter is, this is probably correct in every sense. Tennis has developed immensly over time. From the days of Rod Laver and John McEnroe, the skills of tennis players has changed rapidly. They are hitting the ball harder and faster now, their athleticism (arguably) is superior and these older style players probably would not be able to keep up with the players on the current ATP tour. Pete Sampras and Andre Agassi both dominated the sport for a significant amount of time, but it only paved the way for players such as Lleyton Hewitt and Andy Roddick, and later the champion himself, Roger Federer.

Roger Federer in the early 21st century, seemed unstoppable. He was simply miles above the rest of the pack. How could this possibly be bad for competition? A legend is created, something kids and adults alike can look up to. However more importantly, it has brought about the emergence of players with equally the amount of potential as Federer. Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic both would be winners of grand slams several times over without the current competition there is in the top 4, and you could even go as far as the top 50 and top 100.

Imagine horse racing without

• 1
• 2
• Next Page >>