Ok, well then I guess Volodymyr Holubnychy is the world's greatest athlete ever, because he won 2 golds, a silver, and a bronze in Olympic racewalking, and that's the biggest pool of potential competitors in any activity.

Touche!

But seriously, only losers compete at racewalking. If it was actually a legit competitive event, yeah, the big pool of potential competitors would actually be a huge deal. But while everyone walks, virtually nobody competes to see who can walk the fastest. When people want to see who's fastest, they run.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

I agree, that all these Olympians and pro athletes are genetically gifted, and most likely, very hard working. My opinion about sprinting is anchored on the idea that they only race for 10 or 20 seconds. Yes, they train hard, and their is form and technique but on the scale of athletic greatness I don't place them as high as a decathlete who has to learn 10 different disciplines, or a swimmer who has to excel in four different strokes. I think hitting a baseball is probably the single hardest thing to do in all of sports, but I don't consider baseball players as the best athletes in the world. If I had a gun to my head like Lockte and had to chose who the greatest athlete is I think I'd go with NFL QB's. They have go into the play knowing everyone's responsibility on that play drop back, read a defense, and make a throw in 2-5 seconds. On the other hand I'd hate to watch a 100m race between the greatest QB's of all time so I acknowledge that it's all very subjective.

I'd also add that MMA athletes are highly underrated except for 99% of the heavy weights. If you've done any boxing, muy thai, or jiu jitsu you see how technical MMA is, and how physically demanding it is.

This one had me laughing out loud!

It's really interesting. I agree with you about MMA fighters, but that does get back into questions about specialists versus generalists again. MMA fighters aren't generally on the same level as those who specialize in more limited sports, like boxing or Muay Thai. What's more impressive- being well rounded, or truly excelling at one specific thing? Same goes for decathletes- they might be stellar all around athletes, but compared to specialists, they're pretty sad. What's the winning 1500M time in the decathlon was 35 seconds slower than the winning time in the stand alone 1500. Which is more impressive?

I don't think I can get on board with NFL QBs as the best athletes, though. I don't think they're usually even close to being the best athletes on their own team. Yes, they have a lot to process mentally, but the athletic demands can be relatively small.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

I add Apollo Ohno, speed skating, to the list of the greatest athlete's. He has multiple athletic achievements in many sports, one of the best athletes EVER. Can Phelps or Bolt dance?

Yet we have the butterfly, the backstroke, the breaststroke, and the IM? I gather those swimming specialists are all losers, too.

---

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

Because running a 1500m at the end of a decathlon is just like running an open 1500m well-rested. A 4:1x 1500m at the end of a decathlon is really amazing. The WR for the decathlon 1500m is 3:58, by the way.

Start the timer and have those 1500m specialists do five pull-ups and then start running, and see how long it takes them (if they can get through the five pull-ups).

Which is more impressive, the TdF green jersey winner or the yellow jersey winner? The latter typically can't sprint worth crap, compared to the real sprinters. But don't hold your breath waiting for the sprinters at the finish of a mountain stage.

---

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

If I had a gun to my head like Lockte and had to chose who the greatest athlete is I think I'd go with NFL QB's.

I think the winner of the decathlon has to be the top athlete. They combine more technical events like hurdles, high jump and pole vault with speed in the 100, endurance in the 1,500, a combination in the 400 and strength with the throwing events.

Maybe if Eaton wins a 3rd gold in 2020, he can join this conversation.

2 decathlon > 3 sprints

---

_________________________________
I'll be what I am
A solitary man

But it's not all genetics. As you recognized, training plays a big part. Add in circumstances, etc., we have no idea if Bolt being the fastest is comparable to being the tallest. And that's true for Phelps too.

Going back to my post, the fastest kid in 5th grade is unlikely to be running track in high school. If he is talented at other sports too, which is likely, that's where he'll likely be. I'd argue that, in the United States, the fastest kids are playing football. Sure, it's not uncommon for a fast receiver to also run track in college (e.g., Willie Gault), but at some point early on, most will make a decision to train for one of the sports to the detriment of the other.

I'd agree that there are barriers of entry into swimming that don't exist for track. But at the same time, kids that are fast swimmers tend to stay in the sport, which adds to its competitiveness. And while track may be just as if not more competitive, the kids that are really good are also more likely to gravitate to other sports.

Not if you just added 500 random guys to the Olympics, and not even if you took the 500 guys who just missed qualifying for the Olympics. But if instead you built swimming pools in every neighborhood in the world and taught everyone to swim from an early age, you'd have a LOT more swimmers to select from, and you'd find a lot more people who are capable of swimming at the highest level for Phelps to compete against. Maybe Phelps would keep dominating just as he had, maybe he'd have a harder go of it, and maybe some other guy would simply surpass him.

Then why do we see such a concentration of elite level sprinters from Jamaica, and we don't see anything close to that from China or India? f it were as simple as identifying the fastest kids, with the cream always rising to the top, then you'd expect a lot more kids from India competing at that level.

I get that there a barriers of entry to competitive swimming and that if you were to eliminate those barriers, you just might find a few faster than Phelps. But I think you're largely ignoring that there are also significant barriers of entry into competitive sprinting.

Then why do we see such a concentration of elite level sprinters from Jamaica.

The U.S dominated sprinting until Bolt showed up.

But weren't a lot of US and Canadian sprinters born and raise in Jamaica?

---

Long Chile was a silly place.

But weren't a lot of US and Canadian sprinters born and raise in Jamaica?

They were Jamaican only if they tested positive...

---

Not true.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/...aica_at_the_Olympics

 
Because running a 1500m at the end of a decathlon is just like running an open 1500m well-rested. A 4:1x 1500m at the end of a decathlon is really amazing.

Geez, Ken, relax.

I know running a 1500M at the end of a decathlon is not the same thing as running a pure 1500M. More to the point, though, decathletes are generalists, and they wouldn't be running competitive world class times in a straight 1500M, either. That was the point of the question- what's more impressive, someone who can run a truly fast 1500M, or someone who can run a pretty fast 1500M, but can also throw a javelin and a shot put pretty well and can jump pretty high, and can sprint decently, too? It's unanswerable. It's not a slam on decathletes, so you can stand down already, OK?

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

Triple triple for Bolt.

Japanese relay team was awesome.

---

"You can never win or lose if you don't run the race." - Richard Butler

I'm curious why the Japanese team was not disqualified. He clearly stepped on the lane marker and I thought that meant disqualification. Then I heard that both the U.S and Trinidad teams were DQ'd.

The relays always have drama.

this:



bannister was also a remarkable human being off the track, and contributed a lot to sport. something that a lot of the other "greatests" can't say.

---

____________________________________
https://lshtm.academia.edu/MikeCallaghan

http://howtobeswiss.blogspot.ch/

I heard the explanation for the relays.

You are only disqualified if you step on the line when you race a curve as that could mean taking a short cut, no disqualification if you step on the line on the straightway. As for the Americans, Gatlin touched the baton in advance of the pass zone and the passing of the baton starts as soon as it is touched.

For Olympians, I'd put in a vote for Eric Heiden. 5 individual gold medals in one Olympics, at distances from 500m to 10K. The original "all-twitch".

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

No. I'd say everyone who has walked has also run at one point in their life. In fact walking is just slow running. So the pool is the same. Thus 9 gold medals trumps 2.

If it's a choice between Bolt and Phelps it's Bolt for me. But for his one event at Athens, when he was injured, he's won everything he's been in at every Olympics since. He's done the same triple at 3 of the last four WC's also, and 2/3 at the other (don't know what happened with the third event). He hasn't been beat at the Olympics after he arrived as a mature athlete.

Running simply doesn't have the same number of events as swimming, at least insofar as ones where the same body type also works. If they introduced 100m skipping and hopping he'd prob have as many golds as Phelps.

Plus he and his relay team mates have prob not had the same access to cutting edge technology as Phelps and his countrymen. Not for the same career durations anyway.

I can view them both with an unbiased view.

Really? The same body type works for 100, 200, and 400m races, plus 110 and 400m hurdles, and long jump, and triple jump, and the 2 relays. It certainly seems like someone could do all those events.


Uhuh, and everyone else must be biased, huh?

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

I guess Phelps could dominate the 400 and 1500 free too given his body type is identical.

It's far easier to bridge events like free and butterfly than things like hurdles and jumps. By all accounts numerous swimmers through history have been dominant across more than one stroke. No runner in modern times has done hurdles too and only Carl and Jesse have successfully added the LJ. TJ has never been bridged.

There is no realistic equivalent to a medley in track. Not where you can dominate at individual events at the same time (decathletes do not excel at their individual events).

I don't know that any modern era track athlete has excelled at 100 and 400. Bolt is not great at 400 though 300 I believe only one man has gone faster. But of course that's not an event.

Phelps has had more opportunities to collect medals. 12 relays to 3 for starters. He is also not the dominant team member in all of those (4x100 free etc) and he hasn't dominated his opponents as convincingly as Bolt across all his events in the same manner as bolt.. No disputing he is a freak and swimming's GOAT but Bolts dominance for me gives him the edge.

Yes, as your greatest Olympian I'd say your biased towards him. It's a US based forum where people here can relate to what Phelps does far easier than they could to Bolt. But I'm just another asshole with an opinion.

Bolt with Pietro Mennea of Italy few years back.