Bolt v. Phelps

This is like asking "Who's smarter? Einstein or Leonardo Da Vinci?"

I will attempt to answer, though. Bolt is the better athlete because swimming doesn't have a representative sample of earth's population. Everyone can run. Only rich folks have access to pools. Sorry Phelps, there's probably some poor guy out there who could have owned you, but instead he's working in a factory because he never learned to swim.

Moldy Cheese wrote:

Only rich folks have access to pools. Sorry Phelps, there's probably some poor guy out there who could have owned you, but instead he's working in a factory because he never learned to swim.

I agree. Track is so much more competitive than swimming. There are probably a 100 guys out there that could give Phelps a run for his money, but will never get the chance. I doubt there's anyone out there (other than those on the world scene at the moment) that could challenge Bolt.

you have got to be kidding me.

sorry phelphs baby, it's all about the numbers. more participants in running than swimming.ever wonder what east africans with their oxygen delivery systems could swim if they had access to pools and world class training? they would own everybody just like in running. i wish somebody would go to africa and do this. it would make for some interesting international competitions in the future.

phelps wrote:

you have got to be kidding me.

I agree with this argument for distance running, but isn't sprinting also very dependant on proper facilities? And isn't this why, although we see North Americans of West African descent dominating the sprints, we do not see as many world class sprinters from these West African nations themselves?

You must have missed the NBC short intro about Bolt, Asafa Powell, and Jamaica before the 100m final. Did you see Jamaica's "proper facilities"? Bolt was lifting weights with equipment that Goodwill wouldn't accept as a donation here in the U.S.

Also, proper facilities for sprinting are pretty cheap compared to a nice Olympic sized pool. Those Jamaican kids were running barefoot on grass...

dental surgeon wrote:

I agree with this argument for distance running, but isn't sprinting also very dependant on proper facilities? And isn't this why, although we see North Americans of West African descent dominating the sprints, we do not see as many world class sprinters from these West African nations themselves?

All you need is a track. Frankie Fredericks was from Namibia. Fasuba from Nigeria has run 9.85. The problem is likely with the corruptness of their federation, which is why you'll see a lot of West African sprinters show up in American colleges.

Alan

phelps wrote:

you have got to be kidding me.

Nope, nearly everyone with two functioning legs has access to running. Hypothetically, if 30 year old Joe/Jane down the street wants to go to the Olympics in the Marathon - they have the opportunity to do it. That's not the case in swimming. You have to have access to a swimming pool at least 5 hours a day, 5 or 6 days a week, from the time you're 15. Who has that much access to a swimming pool? Kids with wealthy parents.

I think Phelps had a better Olympics. 8 gold medals, even if they were doing mostly the same thing, is ridiculous.

Who's a better athlete? I think Bolt is for the reason everyone listed. He's the best in the world in the world's most accessible sport. And if he had the opportunity to win 8 gold medals doing something like: 100m from blocks, 100m flying start, 200m from blocks, 200m flying start, 60m from blocks, etc. He'd probably win 8 gold medals himself.

Mark Spitz could make an argument for being best of all as he won 7/7 golds, all of them world records. That's an immaculate performance. Plus he quit at 22. Plus he wasn't technologically doped with the speedos, the pool he swam in probably wasn't technologically doped with wave cancellers and depth cancellers or whatever heck canceller they put in that beijing pool. And last but not least, he swam with un-aerodynamic mustache.

So what you're saying is none of Phelps' competition was swimming in that same pool? And none of his competition was swimming in those same swim suits? And none of the other lanes had the same depth as Phelps? And the W.R.s he was breaking when he went 8/8 with 7 W.R. and 1 O.R. hadn't already been lowered so much because of the technological advances because this was the very first leap in technology since Spitz swam? Good arguments there saying that Spitz's 7/7 was better than Phelps' 8/8.

PEDS wrote:

And last but not least, he swam with un-aerodynamic mustache.

Oh, the mustache is definitely not least. I'd say that's that #1 most important thing to note about Spitz's accomplishment.

Yeah, you're not really making any sense here. It's not like Spitz's competitors were wearing those new Speedos and had the advantages of wave cancellers. We also aren't comparing Phelps' times versus Sptiz's. I agree that the 7 WRs and 7 golds are more impressive than the 8 golds not all with WRs. Especially since there was no 50m freestyle when Spitz competed and he likely would have won that gold with another WR also.

But back to the discussion, I vote for Phelps as better Olympian and Bolt as better athlete.

Cooler Ethan wrote:

Yeah, you're not really making any sense here. It's not like Spitz's competitors were wearing those new Speedos and had the advantages of wave cancellers. We also aren't comparing Phelps' times versus Sptiz's. I agree that the 7 WRs and 7 golds are more impressive than the 8 golds not all with WRs. Especially since there was no 50m freestyle when Spitz competed and he likely would have won that gold with another WR also.

But back to the discussion, I vote for Phelps as better Olympian and Bolt as better athlete.

Agree with whole post.

Who cares if the mustache is aerodynamic? Swimming is contested in water.

"So what you're saying is none of Phelps' competition was swimming in that same pool? And none of his competition was swimming in those same swim suits? And none of the other lanes had the same depth as Phelps? And the W.R.s he was breaking when he went 8/8 with 7 W.R. and 1 O.R. hadn't already been lowered so much because of the technological advances because this was the very first leap in technology since Spitz swam? Good arguments there saying that Spitz's 7/7 was better than Phelps' 8/8."

---------------------------

I don't know how that's suppose to diminish Spitz's accomplishments. He also beat his contemporaries in the same pool (with an extra mustache no less): 7/7 golds all world records, IMMACULATE PERFORMANCE.

Better Olympics: Probably Bolt because he did the best he could have done so far - 2 world records in a sport that world records aren't broken sometimes for years/decades, unlike swimming which is seeing records broke in prelims.

Better Athlete: Bolt by far. Nothing against Phelps, he is a swimmer only. His coach won't let him run as he is likely to hurt himself because he is so uncoordinated. World class sprinters have to be amazing athletes to do what they do. Bolt could probably play several sports professionally if he focused on them. Phelps seems limited to swimming and water polo.

Both have dominated their sports like no others have before.

(I will attempt to answer, though. Bolt is the better athlete because swimming doesn't have a representative sample of earth's population. Everyone can run. Only rich folks have access to pools. Sorry Phelps, there's probably some poor guy out there who could have owned you, but instead he's working in a factory because he never learned to swim.[/quote])

Ah, how dumb, how stupid...Phelps is clean, and Bolt will most likely come back quite dirty... I hope Bolt is clean, but I doubt it, you know what I mean....

You pathetic has-been runners are killing me!!!! Who cares? What really is the issue....YOU are pathetic wanna be's that can't run OR swim....so you have to snipe at two athletes that are about the best that we will see in a long time. Celebrate their achievements or crawl back in your little holes.....get over yourselves....!!!!