Dominance

27 championships, 74 wins, 7 straight victories, 10 time scoring champion... All these
numbers signify one thing: DOMINANCE. The Yankees with 27 world championships,
Lance Armstrong with 7 straight Tour de France victories, Michael Jordan with 10
scoring titles, and Tiger Woods with 74 PGA Tour victories. All of these teams and
athletes have dominated or are still dominating their respective sport. But, what does
it really mean to dominate and really take over a sport? Does the team dominance
depend on the player, or does the player's dominance depend on what team they are a
part of?

In the world of sports, dominance is one of the things that fans and spectators look for
when talking about who is the “best” at that sport. For example, Michael Phelps winning
8 gold medals at the 2008 Olympic Games in swimming or Usain Bolt setting two world
records in the 100 and 200 meter run in the same Olympics. In my opinion, what is
more impressive, is when an individual, such as Tiger Woods, wins 74 PGA Tour events
or when the New York Yankees win 27 world series championships. You could say
they are just as impressive in their respective arenas of competition. . For one athlete
to be considered a dominant figure in their sport means that they would have to be
consistent throughout their career. They are also not primarily depending on anyone
except themselves and their coaches. When talking about a dominant team, such as
the Yankees over their storied franchise history, you have the individuals that make the
entire team great. So are the individuals what make a team great or a team that makes
the individuals great?

One final question on the topic of dominance within the sports realm: which is more
difficult? Being a dominant individual or a dominant team? I believe that being a
dominant individual is probably the hardest thing to do. You are competing and being
compared to thousands of athletes that at one time or another have been called
the “best.”. In team sports, dominance can change from year to year, based on
personnel which can raise the “fight for the best” factor. However, do people jump
all over an individual that is dominant in a sport just because he or she got defeated
once? Most likely, the answer to that question is “No.” The only way you are going
to get better is through defeat, and you can't always judge a person over the type of
performance they have on one single event.

Ultimately, is there such thing as dominance? My answer would be yes, yet the
question of who is more dominant; the individual or the team, will continue be an issue
argued over for years You will always have the Michael Phelps', the Lance Armstrong's
or the any other household names within a sport. Great teams will be also always be
around and sometimes will produce said household names. Will anyone else in our
lifetime get to as many wins on the PGA as Tiger Woods, or more saves in the MLB
than Mariano Rivera? I don't have the answer to that question, but I do know the idea of
dominance will always rule sports no matter how big or how small.