Should the debate be who is the better athlete or should the debate be whose athletic accomplishment is more worthy of recognition?
The whole discussion of who the "greatest all-around" athlete is has always struck me as ridiculous. Honestly, I could care less how fast Michael Phelps runs or how well Usain Bolt plays tennis. Domination in a single sport qualifies someone as a great athlete, in my opinion. Arguing whether Bolt or Phelps is the "better athlete" seems completely pointless. They both kick ass in their sports of choice.
Should the debate be who is the better athlete or should the debate be whose athletic accomplishment is more worthy of recognition?
The whole discussion of who the "greatest all-around" athlete is has always struck me as ridiculous. Honestly, I could care less how fast Michael Phelps runs or how well Usain Bolt plays tennis. Domination in a single sport qualifies someone as a great athlete, in my opinion. Arguing whether Bolt or Phelps is the "better athlete" seems completely pointless. They both kick ass in their sports of choice.
