A Matter of Perspective

In 2004, Ken Jennings won a virtually unbelievable 74 games of Jeopardy in a row. This unprecedented run of success garnered Jennings pseudo-celebrity status, talk show appearances and even a running segment on SportsCenter. Millions around the country tuned in every day to see if Jennings could continue his streak and people began to float the notion that Jennings was the smartest man in the world.

Nonsense.

Jennings was not the smartest man in the world; he simply knew more inane trivia then any other Jeopardy contestant. Don't get me wrong, if I get to pick a partner for Trivial Pursuit, Jennings is the first man I dial. But if I need to solve a real world problem, I'm picking Bill Gates, Warren Buffet or Stephen Hawking.

This leads me to Michael Phelps.

Michael Phelps is, without a doubt, the most dominant swimmer in the world today, but if I hear one more person say that he's the best athlete in the world, I'm going to set myself on fire. In fact, I'm not willing to say he's the best Olympic athlete of all time (a title I'd reserve for Carl Lewis). I'm not even ready to say that he's the best Olympic swimmer of all time. Mark Spitz won almost as many gold medals as Michael Phelps and won his individual events by a bigger average margin of victory (1.44% vs. 1.07% for Phelps: See WSJ article for more details). I'm not saying I believe Spitz was a better or more dominant swimmer; only that it's up for debate.

Supporters routinely point to Phelps' record 14 gold medals as proof of the claim that he is the world's greatest athlete. While winning more gold medals then any athlete in history is impressive, it does little to prove that Phelps is the greatest athlete of all time. It proves that he is the most decorated Olympic athlete of all time, but greatest? Even if we conveniently put aside the ambiguity of the word "greatest" and the inherent subjectivity of comparing athletes in different sports, using total medals as a baseline for comparison is absurd. Depending on their sport, athletes have anywhere from one to eight chances to win a medal. There's a reason four of the ten most decorated Olympians were swimmers: Swimmers have more opportunities to win medals then any other athletes. Michael Phelps had eight chances to win a medal, whereas Kobe Bryant only had one. Both athletes won 100% of their possible gold medals in dominating fashion. Am I supposed to discount Kobe because the Olympics doesn't recognize 1 on 1, 3 on 3, the dunk contest, the 3-point shooting contest, H-O-R-S-E, P-I-G, and quitting on your teammates in the NBA Finals as Olympic events? (Sorry, I had to go there.)

Don't get me wrong; I am a huge Michael Phelps fan. In fact, watching Phelps compete was, far and away, my favorite non-Alicia Sacramone related part of the Olympics (My God, she is hot.). Furthermore, the Men's Swimming 4 x 100 meter final was one of the most exciting sporting events, of any kind, I have ever witnessed. In fact, I was rooting for Phelps to win the 8 gold medals. Watching Phelps swim is like watching Michael Jordan dunk or Tiger Woods swing. It's not just sports, it's an act of beauty. I don't mean to hate on Michael Phelps, I simply want to put his accomplishments in perspective and quell the unrealistic proclamations of his athletic supremacy.

I mean, Phelps is my boy and all, but winning 8 gold medals isn't going to make me to lose my mind. You want to impress me, Mr. Phelps? Try beating Ken Jennings at Jeopardy.