Surfpolitik Kelly Slater: Speaking for the Affirmative

In: Surfpolitik by Stu Nettle 44 Comments Tue 16th Nov '10

Tags: kelly slater , carpe diem , good will hunting , new york times , lance armstrong , michael jordan

In the course of his career Kelly Slater has taken surfing to new places. Faster, higher, deeper - he's pioneered new ground in wave-riding. Beyond the waves he's pushed surfing into the mainstream but, more recently, he's taken it into wholly unfamiliar territory.

Slater has always inspired others to strive a bit harder and to reach beyond themselves. Testament to that is the recent episode where he's had surfers brushing up on their debating skills.

Following his 10th world title win surfing commentators have been lining up to profess that Slater is not only the greatest surfer of all time, but that he is in fact the greatest athlete of all time.

It's an excellent debate, and for a number of reasons. Firstly, like all good debates it can never be resolved, therefore, there is no endpoint to the debate and everyone can keep chiming in with their thoughts. Secondly, as there is no authority on deciding this stuff the belief is - at least notionally - that the winner is the person who lays out the best argument.

Lastly, it's great because it's a debate on sport that's taking on academic dimensions.

Competitive sport is all about absolutes: the winner, the loser, the goal line, the final hooter. It's black and white with no shades of grey. Even sports with subjective criteria, such as surfing, only whack one name on the winners trophy and into the history books.

Yet this debate is the antithesis of that. There is no clear answer to who is the greatest athlete and hence there will be no unanimity on the decision. The best thing any proponent can do is construct the soundest argument possible. And so we have sports journos and keen punters alike weighing in with their takes on the debate.

'Lance Armstrong may have overcome cancer but he only had seven big titles'

'Cancer is unfortunate but it's got nothing to do with sporting prowess'

'Ali was an icon but he crumbled toward the end'

'Slater has more staying power than Jordan'

Perhaps it should be noted that Slater himself said it was a "pointless argument."  In an article in the New York Times he stated, "People can't even compare Ali and Tyson, and that's the same sport, generations apart. If you can't go head to head in something, you can't prove anything."

It should also be noted that Slater's comments didn't stop anyone from continuing with the argument. So carpe diem you Good Will Hunters, and welcome to the debating team.

Loading Comments