Does anyone think Phelps is the best of all time???

He won 6 golds in Athens as well, that's pretty dominant if you ask me.

 

You could argue either way.

I think it's a toss up, but my vote goes to Phelps (but I'm biased since I'm a swimmer).

 

He has 3 more chances to win gold doesn't he?

 

Jesse Owens

 

Also, Lewis 'only' got a medal in 96 in long jump and 92 in long jump and relay. If he would have gotten a medal in the 100 and 200 in those years, I'd say Lewis. But, he only had 2 dominate Olympics (in events other than long jump).

 

First, i think you mean 2004, not 2000.

Second, this could probably go in the existing olympic thread, because:

Third, there isn't much to discuss right now.

1984- 4 medals
1988- 3 medals
1992- 2 medals
1996- 1 medal



2004- 8 medals
2008 - 8 medals
2012- 3 medals and counting


Lewis didnt win more across more olympics. All phelps has to do is compete in 2016 and concentrate in a few races and he'll have won more in just as many games.

As for individual vs team, phelps did win more with teams, but he participated a lot in a few days. That's more tiring than some of the things Lewis did, like the long jump, which almost covers half the medals he won.

 

Phelps was in Sydney too, but he was 15 and did not win a medal

But the answer is still Phelps

 

What, relays? There are 3 relays in swimming (4x100 free, 4x200 free, and 4x100 medley). In track, there are 2. Not that big of difference.

When it comes to swimming, people typically specalize in 1 or 2 events. The reason why Phelps is special is because he's unlike most others... He doesn't just swim the 200 fly, he swims fly, free and IM. That is what makes him great.

 

Would give it to Phelps hands down had he been as dominant in 2012.

 

Even though he may not be the best of all time, he is certainly up there. Very impressive.

 

Most decorated Olympian? That's a fact.

Outside of that it's all subjective.

 

So far, a 4th and a 2nd (by a split second) in individual events and a 1st and 2nd in relay.

If it were anyone else, that's an awesome achievement.

 

Unfortunately Phelps is held to a much higher standard than that.

 

Swimmers and Athletics have far more opportunities to win golds. Some sports people only have the opportunity to win one gold in their sport, yet they could be just as dominant which makes it unfair to use number of medals solely. That being said he should certainly be in the conversation.

 

let's not forget that the "split second" 2nd vs 1st went against him this time...but has gone in his favor twice in the past for golds. That's apparently the difference between being viewed as "dominant" and not

Of course, this is the Olympics, where swimmers 3 through 7 are separated by 1-3 seconds and only 1 of them gets a medal.

Still, just interested how .05 seconds can change perception

 

I'm not sure what this has to do with the subject. Phelps was too young then. Who was Carl Lewis at 15 years of age? Also, no one. If anything, this helps Phelps' side of the argument, since he was an Olympian at a much younger age and could still go to more olympics overall.

He's not only beat Lewis in every medal count, but is on pace to double the numbers. In every sport, the number of "championships" has always put athletes at higher levels than the rest, even in team sports.

Why is it any different now?

 

It's really kind of meaningless to compare across sports. As has been said, swimmers are one group that have more opportunities to win medals than in many other sports where it's only possible to win one or two per olympics. There are also sports where there's an extremely narrow age range (gymnastics much?), and others where age makes little difference (curling, anyone?).