Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
I also have to agree with Jim Thorpe. Phelps is the greatest swimmer of all times though, but I feel that to be the greatest Olympic athlete of all time, one has to be great at more than one thing.
I've noticed this is a common argument, but I would argue that Phelps is great at more than one thing. How?

If I were evaluating a track athlete who ran 400 meters and also ran hurdles, I wouldn't say that those two events are the same thing. Yes, they both involve running from Point A to Point B, but the events require different technique.

Phelps doesn't just swim butterfly or just swim freestyle. He was the only person to appear in both the 200 fly and 200 free finals and he won both in WR time. In addition, two of his gold medals came in the IM which requires competence in four strokes. He may not have learned to throw the javelin, but you can rest assured that he was working hard on improving his breast stroke (something he wouldn't otherwise do).

He won a 100 m event and a 400 m event. He's definitely an all-around swimmer and I think it's unfair to lump all the strokes and lengths together.

So is he the greatest? I don't think it's even possible to answer that question. Thorpe and Phelps are from different eras. Thorpe competed in the Fifth Olympiad and there were only twenty some countries participating (all from North America, Europe and Australia [oh, ok and South Africa too]). Today's games have 7 or 8 times the number of participating countries and the level of competition is that much higher. Apples and Oranges.

Was Thorpe more versatile? Of course! But Phelps is no one trick pony...