Harry Heilmann

Bring on the electric shock. They were great players no doubt. They would no doubt hold their own. But in the competitive environment today their numbers would go south.

Comparing players across generations and the evolution of the game is like comparing apples and oranges. If the point of Radagast is to say the numbers of old-time players would be different, that is true, of course. But the best players will do well in any era, though the numbers will reflect the nuances of that time period in the game. The genes for athleticism in humanity are likely constant through human evolution -- what you do with them is another matter, as society changes, things like nutrition and conditioning and training change. The game changes and favors certain outcomes at different times. For old-time players, you can't hold it against them for the variables in the game then.

For contemporary players, they play in a different environment that offers some plusses (better training etc.) and negatives (more competition from a wider pool of players) for performance. That said, over time, systems that receive focus and attention generally improve, as Stephen Jay Gould wrote: http://articles.latimes.com/1996-10-20/ ... -jay-gould