Dear Representative Daniel,

I don't have any problem at all with a strictly objective determination of "best," where it's possible. I just think "greatest" is different.

Sure, I can appreciate that. I think my valuation of Ruth takes some of that into affect as well, though a bit more subliminally. No, Ruth didn't protest Vietnam and get thrown in jail, but he is pretty much the genesis of the adoration and business of professional athletes/sports.

I dunno, I'm sure I've never sat down and really written out specific criteria. But, in my reckoning, what makes Ali special is that he not only had an in-ring career that is basically unrivaled in the history of his sport (in terms of the fighters he fought, the success he had against them, the way his boxing style…

What's your criteria for greatest professional athlete of all time (no snark, curious because everyone has what's important to them)?

Eh, I don't know. To me, "best" and "greatest" are two slightly different discussions. There may have been more technically proficient boxers than Ali; there has never been a greater one. He's the greatest professional athlete of all time.