I certainly am. It's not just because she is an American who grew up at the same mountain where I ski -- though that helps. She is also quite likable. She has had some very public struggles -- after her dad died and during some disasters in the Olympics -- but she persevered.

These debates have no real answer. But, some of us enjoy them. So, a few notes.

1. If Shiffrin never raced again, there would be a real question on her vs. Stenmark (putting aside issues of comparing across genders and just going on the stats). If she has a few more good years (which seems likely), then it would be tough to deny her GOAT status.

2. Yes, there are more races now than before. But, Shiffrin is 27 and Stenmark retired at 33. So, he had plenty of opportunities.

3. She has entered something like 245 WC races and Stenmark entered 230 (from what I have read, though there is some imprecision in these numbers). But, before someone says that Stenmark therefore had a higher winning percentage, keep in mind that he only raced his strengths (Slalom and GS). She has entered many Downhills, Super-Gs, and combineds. She is way more versatile than Stenmark. If you limited her stats to just GS and Slalom, I'd bet she has a higher winning percentage than Stenmark.

4. I am not aware that top-level ski racing has suffered a drop in competitive depth from Stenmark's era to today. I would guess that improvements in technology, training, and orthopedics have allowed skiers to extend their careers -- which would broaden the pool. Just a guess.

5. Shiffrin has already won 5 overall WCs, vs 3 for Stenmark. He was totally dominant in Slalom and GS, but his chances at the overall were limited due to getting zero points from downhills. He was second in the overall WC six times.

6. Peak Stenmark may have been better than peak Shiffrin. For 7 years he won the WC title for both slalom and GS. Peak Shiffrin was interrupted by her dad's death, an injury, and (I think) Covid. At her peak, she was utterly dominant in slalom, winning by huge margins in ways that were certainly comparable to Stenmark. But, for the above reasons, her peak years were interrupted and, so, his peak stats look better.

yes ikon is a great deal, unfortunarely the amount of trips I can do per year (max 3?) do not justify the cost

While we are at it, we should give mention to Jessie Diggins winning first US gold individual world championship, she leaves it all on the track...

Edwin Moses won 122 straight 400m hurdle races (spanning nine years, nine months, and nine days). Pretty sure his winning percentage is a bit higher.

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

I don't think most people, maybe even most casual skiers, appreciate just how hard competitive skiing is, how steep and icy those courses are, etc. Those athletes are absolutely insane.

I remember watching a video of a DH course that was opened up to the public after the competition, it was like watching lemmings walking off a cliff one after another. Most barely made it 10m before falling and sliding the entire way down.

---

Long Chile was a silly place.

Right now we are averaging about $40/day for the three of us, hopefully getting that closer to $30/day by the end of the season.

Ikon is great for cost but is also making the slopes much more crowded.

drn92

I once skied across (not down) the course they use at Beaver Creek. I am a decent skier, and raced when I was much younger, and it was still shocking how steep it was.

So to my point I found this.

The American needed 11 years, 11 months, 27 days after her first top-level race on March 11, 2011, to get the record. It took Stenmark 15 years, 2 months, 11 days between his World Cup debut in December 1973 and his last win in February 1989.
By the number of races they competed in, Stenmark was faster — at least according to official statistics, which say the Swede had 230 World Cup starts, compared to Shiffrin’s

Yes because the records didn't record who competed just who scored there is some uncertain around stenmarks 230.

But lets say he did 230 events in 15yrs, she had 245 in 11 yrs (which will play out to about 23 per year but I know she had off time so its probably higher, but that will be another 100 in the next 4 yrs, so when she hits his 15yrs, she will have competed in 355 events vs his 230. Which is my point, there are a lot more opportunities, of course more chance for injury more wear on the body, but better training and equipment, snow conditions safety barriers ect. Its just impossible to say who is really better.

Most people will stick with their generation person.

Oh and someone mentioned winning %.. well Joe Lewis boxed in 69 fights, won 66 (52 by KO) Thats a tad over 95% oh and in 1952 he became the first Black person to play in a PGA (yup golf) tournament https://andscape.com/...a-sponsored-tourney/

And yes before some jumps on it Rocky Marciano 49-0 43 KOs
Trying to compare across sports is just dumb (IMHO) but have fun with that.

---

Just Triing
Triathlete since 9:56:39 AM EST Aug 20, 2006.
Be kind English is my 2nd language. My primary language is Dave it's a unique evolution of English.

Yes, comparing winning percentages across sports is pointless. Some sports are highly variable -- golf being a good example -- so no one wins 20 in a row. There have been tens of thousands of baseball games, but the modern winning streak record is only 22 games. By contrast, some sports are highly repetitive, so even a moderate difference in ability can produce long winning streaks -- maybe the hurdles is a good example. Skiing has a fairly high variability factor -- different mountains, different course setters, different length courses, and weather and snow conditions that vary not only between races but also within a race.

Separately, boxing (like wrestling and Karellin's incredible record) is a 1:1 sport, not 1 vs the field (like golf or skiing).

As for Stenmark vs Shiffrin, your stats basically match what I found: Stenmark likely reached 86 wins in fewer races than Shiffrin, though we can't be sure about that. And, more significantly, he only raced his strengths whereas Shiffrin has entered a wide range of races.

I think it's a bit of stretch to say that nobody is talking about Mikaela Shiffrin. She's a bona fide superstar.

I love watching alpine skiing. I believe it's the sport where the performance difference between the men and women athletes is the smallest. They're all rockstar daredevils. Even the casual fan can appreciate that they're hitting jumps at 70+ mph.

As far as network coverage, it's always going to be fill in coverage in the off season for football. There was recent NBC coverage and I tuned in.

huh! well kinda of a downer on the Ms Shiffrin band wagon. I'll bet you're a lot of fun at parties too?

don't you have to go off and bow some Coreli in C minor?


/r

---

Steve

First time I skied birds of prey I was shocked that they have nets like 20 feet in the air to catch racers. It’s that steep - but in addition to being steep it has a totally off camber fall line. It’s really funky to ski down since it’s meant to just be a sweeping downhill curve with no turns.




Skiing it totally changes your perspective on watching it on TV.

Yup. Unfortunately most Americans only see alpine skiing at the Olympics


This and these two other added facts:

1) Alpine Skiing is a sport activity now that is the almost completely the preserve of those making money beyond upper-middle-class - so starting to get VERY exclusive.

2) Is only popular in geographic select enclaves of that wealth in the U.S., and practiced by similar types of people in a very select group of countries around the world.

Add all that up, while not to take anything away from Shiffrin's accomplishments - which from a sports perspective are significant - it's a VERY small and narrow audience that has ANY interest in this!

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog