Usain Bolt is the best track & field athlete since Carl Lewis, who up until now is probably known to the greatest of all time. But is Bolt better?
Both on the gear so who cares. That said Carl could jump.
I think Bolt is “better” since he has never lost. While Carl “won” in Seoul, he failed to defend by the time Barcelona rolled around. Bolt is unbeaten in every event since his first win. The streak alone puts him over the top.
Usain Bolt is the best track & field athlete since Carl Lewis, who up until now is probably known to the greatest of all time. But is Bolt better?
Flip answer: Bolt, because he had better drugs.
They’re different. Bolt was obviously faster, and a much better 200m runner. But Lewis did the long jump, and dominated at it. Something that prima donna sprinters don’t even attempt anymore.
Hard to compare. They both utterly dominated their events for a generation.
Usain Bolt is the best track & field athlete since Carl Lewis, who up until now is probably known to the greatest of all time. But is Bolt better?
Flip answer: Bolt, because he had better drugs.
They’re different. Bolt was obviously faster, and a much better 200m runner. But Lewis did the long jump, and dominated at it. Something that prima donna sprinters don’t even attempt anymore.
Hard to compare. They both utterly dominated their events for a generation.
But did Carl have inferior drugs to Linford Christie and Ben Johnson? I would expect that Carl would have “equal opportunity” in which case he was not the best of the dope brigade of his time. While Bolt, well he a few stride lengths better than the best of his time, assuming “equal opportunity”.
I think Bolt is “better” since he has never lost. While Carl “won” in Seoul, he failed to defend by the time Barcelona rolled around. Bolt is unbeaten in every event since his first win. The streak alone puts him over the top.
Carl never really lost either. He got the silver in 200m in '88 Seoul, but later, it was found that while they never stripped him of his medal, Joe DeLoach, the gold medalist, failed several drug tests but was allowed to compete and keep his medal.
Usain Bolt is the best track & field athlete since Carl Lewis, who up until now is probably known to the greatest of all time. But is Bolt better?
Yes, considerably. He has dominated sprinting - more so that Lewis did - for much longer than Lewis ever did.
The Olympic triple triple is something that may never be matched.
One could argue that Hicham El Guerrouj is the greatest. I’m more impressed with his achievement.
I think you have to look at how long it will be until someone duplicates what Bolt has done. Entering 9 events and winning 9 gold medals, and holding world records in all 3 events may never be done again. Not only does someone have to be on top of an injury prone sport for 12 years, but they also need 3 other world class sprinters for the relays, without any dropping the batons or disqualifications.
I think what Bolt has done will never be matched but you can’t really say that about Lewis.
Lewis is the best track AND field athlete.
Bolt is the best track (sprinter) athelete.
I think you have to look at how long it will be until someone duplicates what Bolt has done. Entering 9 events and winning 9 gold medals, and holding world records in all 3 events may never be done again. Not only does someone have to be on top of an injury prone sport for 12 years, but they also need 3 other world class sprinters for the relays, without any dropping the batons or disqualifications.
I think what Bolt has done will never be matched but you can’t really say that about Lewis.
For me, Bolt managing his injuries appropriately to be “on” for every world championship and every Olympics in this span is remarkable. Perhaps the guy has so much “head room” that he does not really need to push himself quite as hard in training to get to the “next level”. If you are a 9.90 guy, you are on the razor’s edge in training constantly trying to elevate everything to get down to 9.79 which pretty well assures a medal. But if you are 9:58 guy, you’re not pushing your envelope to get to 9:38, so need to take less risk in day in and day out training. I think this partially explains Bolt’s longevity vs most sprinters. He’s at the level everyone needs to get to and they need to blow themselves apart in training to go there. Bolt just has to be at his “own level” once per year. And that’s what he does or he even does not even bother to get up to his own ultimate level. He can be at 99.5% of his level and leave that final bit off the table and still win.
Bolt is faster…but remember, New tech, new training techniques diet modifications and supplements etc…If Lewis was 21 again today I think it is fair to say he would be running faster that he was “way back then”
.
I don’t know if Lewis would be running any faster. There was plenty of sprinting science back in 1984. Ben Johnson ran 9.79 with the “science” at hand in Seoul. Not much diff in the speed of tracks or shoes. FloJo was already wearing a full skin suit like a speed skater for aerodynamics. For the life of me, I have no clue why the 100m sprinters today wear such baggy loose stuff, with gold chains, hair all over the place…they are going at 40 kph…someone send them the memo.
As Carl Lewis admitted, not too long ago that he failed doping tests 3 times in 1988, my vote goes to Bolt. As a person and as an athlete.
And if Bolt were found to be doping at some later date, he still gets my vote as a person.
I think Bolt is “better” since he has never lost. While Carl “won” in Seoul, he failed to defend by the time Barcelona rolled around. Bolt is unbeaten in every event since his first win. The streak alone puts him over the top.
Carl never really lost either. He got the silver in 200m in '88 Seoul, but later, it was found that while they never stripped him of his medal, Joe DeLoach, the gold medalist, failed several drug tests but was allowed to compete and keep his medal.
Hard to talk of others doping unless you also acknowledge Lewis was doping his entire career as well.