|
I agree with pretty much everything you just said, but I just want to clarify something. If there were 24 swimming events, Phelps would have a chance to win all of them if he entered in all of them - but you seem to think that all of Phelps's competition are swimming as many events as him. I haven't personally looked into it, but I'm pretty sure no one else in the Olympics swam close to 8 events, so he indeed was at a disadvantage in terms of fatigue and was still able to get all those golds.
I still agree that breaking the world records don't mean quite as much because of the water cube and the new swimming suits, but the thing I want to clarify here is what he is doing relative to the other best swimmers in the world. You should always judge an athlete by comparing him to his peers - everyone knows athletes today are superior to athletes 20 years ago, so the important thing to look at is how dominant one is against his peers. So yes, I agree the world records have lost some meaning in this Olympics, but you can't ignore the dominance Phelps has shown against his peers.
to put it in perspective, it would be unlikely for you to see this kind of dominance in any single sport more than once in your lifetime.
|
yes he is, well maybe not overrated (because he is winning everything) but I don't like the guy. He's all deformed and stuff and he beat some poor czech guy yesterday in the 100M butterfly by like .01 of a second. Let someone else win, didn't his mother teach him to share?
|
On August 18 2008 03:42 Mynock wrote:
It would, but seeing as how I didn't even attack Phelps I don't see why you jumped in there in defense. I merely said that I didn't like the system that way. That little remark of mine at the end was not even meant too seriously, and if it would make you feel better - I retract it.
The point stands however - if the swimmers had 24 events during the Olympiad, Phelps would have a chance to win all of them, merely because he is a great swimmer. That doesn't deserve a special praise for him, because everybody else would also enter those events and be equally tired, and in a difficult position. The breaking of the world records on itself also isn't enough, because due to the new Speedo suits everybody is breaking those records left and right.
The point is - things aren't objective at the time, so no matter how you look at it - you just can't crown a "top athlete" objectively.
Phelps is a damn good athlete tho, and absolutely no doubt he's the best swimmer ATM. But that's it.
Everybody else is not entering those events on the same level though. Phelps was swimming 3-6x as many races as other people, and his races encompassed what I'd consider the spectrum of the hardest available (400 IM, 200 fly, only missing the mile). And then in each of his races, he's racing people like Ian Crocker or Cavic, who swim 4-6 races over the meet. 3 races a day for an extended period of time is HARD. And the field is absolutely amazing.
It'd be something like if Nadal was playing in 3 different tournaments that all happened to be going on at the same time. He may be better than all the competition when evenly matched up, but he's not going to be able to go into each match at top-level just due to the sheer amount of stuff he's doing while his opponents are going to be much more rested and prepared.
Or, in Starcraft terms, it's like Flash carrying his proleague team and being in 3 leagues. We all knew Flash was better than (almost) everyone else on paper, but he's going to be playing much more rested and prepared players while suffering from overuse and fatigue (and we all know how that turned out)
|
4492 Posts
On August 18 2008 03:59 theonemephisto wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2008 03:42 Mynock wrote:
It would, but seeing as how I didn't even attack Phelps I don't see why you jumped in there in defense. I merely said that I didn't like the system that way. That little remark of mine at the end was not even meant too seriously, and if it would make you feel better - I retract it.
The point stands however - if the swimmers had 24 events during the Olympiad, Phelps would have a chance to win all of them, merely because he is a great swimmer. That doesn't deserve a special praise for him, because everybody else would also enter those events and be equally tired, and in a difficult position. The breaking of the world records on itself also isn't enough, because due to the new Speedo suits everybody is breaking those records left and right.
The point is - things aren't objective at the time, so no matter how you look at it - you just can't crown a "top athlete" objectively.
Phelps is a damn good athlete tho, and absolutely no doubt he's the best swimmer ATM. But that's it. Everybody else is not entering those events on the same level though. Phelps was swimming 3-6x as many races as other people, and his races encompassed what I'd consider the spectrum of the hardest available (400 IM, 200 fly, only missing the mile). And then in each of his races, he's racing people like Ian Crocker or Cavic, who swim 4-6 races over the meet. 3 races a day for an extended period of time is HARD. And the field is absolutely amazing. It'd be something like if Nadal was playing in 3 different tournaments that all happened to be going on at the same time. He may be better than all the competition when evenly matched up, but he's not going to be able to go into each match at top-level just due to the sheer amount of stuff he's doing while his opponents are going to be much more rested and prepared. Or, in Starcraft terms, it's like Flash carrying his proleague team and being in 3 leagues. We all knew Flash was better than (almost) everyone else on paper, but he's going to be playing much more rested and prepared players while suffering from overuse and fatigue (and we all know how that turned out)
Again, I'm not arguing that either. He's a hell of a swimmer, really head and shoulders above the competition in water. It's just when I see people saying he's the best athlete of all times based off his medal count is... misguided I think.
|
Well, I agree that it may be a bit off. I mean, it's a ridiculously subjective idea. It isn't too much of a stretch to say that Phelps is the best swimmer of all time (somewhat debatable), less to say that Phelps is the best all-around swimmer of all time, but best athlete does mean making a lot of comparisons across sports that aren't really comparable.
The medal count is just a result of the nature of the sport. Swimming's a sport that lends itself to a lot of events, due to the different strokes, lengths, and relays, and Phelps really took advantage of that, not only specializing in a stroke + freestyle (which many people do), but also adding in a great IM.
However, I have to say that it isn't that bad, as long as you acknowledge the other contenders. I mean, I think it's fair to say that Phelps is certainly ONE of the best athletes of all time, contending with a relatively small number of people for that spot, and really, once you get there it's all subjective. People saying that he's the best of all time is personal opinion, and as long as they don't forget the other contenders and don't try to make it some sort of unequivocal fact, then whatever.
|
On August 17 2008 19:30 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2008 16:58 MuShu wrote:On August 17 2008 14:07 artofmagic wrote:
he definitely a monster!
his 7th medal win was the most amazing. The speed of his arms are just unbelievable at the last minute.
Also, does swimming in the center of pool give those swimmers an advantage? Most of the time.. the winners are in the middle lanes. For some reason I have a feeling i read that there is less drag in the center. I heard the commentators say that the outter lanes have less drag. I think they put the fastest in the center lanes because it's better for the spectators. btw, yay for 8! GO PHELPS! fastest qualifiers get the center lanes
Well, of course the spectators want to see the faster swimmers. 
|
United States10328 Posts
fastest qualifiers get center lanes because there is less wave disturbance + others can draft off them
but DAMN, PHELPS IS A BEAST
|
Canada5062 Posts
On August 18 2008 03:52 ploy wrote:
I agree with pretty much everything you just said, but I just want to clarify something. If there were 24 swimming events, Phelps would have a chance to win all of them if he entered in all of them - but you seem to think that all of Phelps's competition are swimming as many events as him. I haven't personally looked into it, but I'm pretty sure no one else in the Olympics swam close to 8 events, so he indeed was at a disadvantage in terms of fatigue and was still able to get all those golds.
I still agree that breaking the world records don't mean quite as much because of the water cube and the new swimming suits, but the thing I want to clarify here is what he is doing relative to the other best swimmers in the world. You should always judge an athlete by comparing him to his peers - everyone knows athletes today are superior to athletes 20 years ago, so the important thing to look at is how dominant one is against his peers. So yes, I agree the world records have lost some meaning in this Olympics, but you can't ignore the dominance Phelps has shown against his peers.
to put it in perspective, it would be unlikely for you to see this kind of dominance in any single sport more than once in your lifetime.
Oh, please. Spitz, Biondi, Thorpe, and a host of East German fraulein swimmers I can't remember all showed similar levels of individual dominance in the water. And that's not even close to a "lifetime" - just the past 36 years. The only difference I can see is that Phelps had a stronger supporting cast who took him over the top.
Is Phelps "overrated"? NO. How can he be overrated as a swimmer? He just ran the tables in the water, did he not? He is obviously the best swimmer of his generation. Nothing more, nothing less.
But, all this nauseating hyperbole surrounding Phelps is making me turn the fucking channel every time I see that fucking Pilsbury Dough Boy lookalike of an NBC announcer Bob Costas intoning in the sincerest baritone imaginable about how Phelps deserves to be perhaps the greatest Olympian ever. Hey Costas, get a clue - very few put Spitz in that category and very few outside of a those in the US media would do the same for Phelps in 30 years time. Lewis, Nurmi, Zapotek, Owen were all greater, MUCH greater. The reasons are too obvious to even mention here.
Besides, how many fucking medals deserve to be doled out at the Olympics for a competition like swimming anyway? How many of you Phelps fan boys actually even know how many ridiculous different kinds of race categories the USA has managed to force on Olympic swimming in the past half century? The most ridiculous of all: the 50m dive and dash. What's next? Oh, I know: the 50 freestyle relay. And then the 50m butterfly, then the 50m butterfly relay, and then the 50m medley. I can't believe this shit.
If Starcraft somehow became an Olympic sport and the Koreans managed to lobby all sorts of contrived different categories for the fucking game, how many of you would actually put Boxer or whichever fucking Korean happens to run the tables to be amongst the greatest Olympians ever? How legitimate is the medal count when you have categories like mens and womens singles/doubles/triples/quadruples, mixed doubles/triples/quadruples, team v team, same race v same race (i.e. TvT, ZvZ and PvP) for each of mens and womens singles/doubles/triples/quadruples, same race v same race for each of mixed doubles/triples/quadruples, fastest victories (like a time trial in cycling) versus specially designed "Olympic" AI in each of mens and womens singles/doubles/triples/quadruples and in each of mixed doubles/triples/quadruples, fastest sustained APM (again like a time trial) while playing a game versus "Olympic AI" for each of mens and womens singles/doubles/triples/quadruples and each of mixed doubles/triples/quadruples and each of T, Z and P, etc. etc. etc. etc. ad nauseum.
Just fucking shut up, all of you.
EDIT: Fuck me. Forgot the all important "random" race categories - random mens and womens singles/doubles/triples/quadruples, random mixed doubles/triples/quadruples, random ...
|
On August 18 2008 03:10 Mynock wrote:
I dunno if this has already been brought up before, but does anybody else feel it sucks balls that swimmers can win a shitload of medals, while judokas, fencers, road racers etc can pretty much only get 1, 2 tops. Why does it give the swimmers a "league of their own" to outperform every other athlete in terms of medal count by doing almost the same thing 8 times?
Track is the same way. There's races for 100m, 200m, 400m, 800m, etc. Swimming also has 4 different strokes, and each take a considerable amount of difficulty to master. Phelps and Spitz primarily competed in the freestyle and fly. Of course they are limited by the number of races they can handle within their schedule but also they aren't the best in these other strokes. Some people are faster off the block and good sprinters for the 50m freestyle, others are better closers. Other races require more endurance like the 1500. I doubt Phelps would dominate the breastroke against Kitajima or the backstroke against Peirsol, etc. Of the 13 individual races, 8 different people won gold medals, so it's not exactly like everybody gets a ton of medals.
|
Braavos36400 Posts
i bet mensrea was reading phelps replies and comments for a full week and it slowly built up to the point where he threw his hands up and raged that response out rofl
hey mensrea, i think phelps is not only the greatest athlete of all time, but possibly the greatest human of all time too, narrowly beating out jesus by .01 seconds
|
Austin10833 Posts
I bet Jesus wishes he'd had that wingspan.
|
4492 Posts
Hehe, for further reference, refer to rea's post.
|
4492 Posts
Besides, I never got it why there have to be differentiations by strokes anyway. If you're a swimmer, all you have to do is get from point A to point B in fastest way possible. What stroke you choose to accomplish this is up to you.
For a comparison, imagine running having 4 different steps involved. Jumping on one leg, fast run, crawl on knees, and the - even now present, ridiculous event - walking -_-
It's clearly bullshit. As is baseball, but that's another story.
|
United States37500 Posts
On August 18 2008 15:55 Mynock wrote:
Besides, I never got it why there have to be differentiations by strokes anyway. If you're a swimmer, all you have to do is get from point A to point B in fastest way possible. What stroke you choose to accomplish this is up to you.
For a comparison, imagine running having 4 different steps involved. Jumping on one leg, fast run, crawl on knees, and the - even now present, ridiculous event - walking -_-
It's clearly bullshit. As is baseball, but that's another story.
ahh, swimming ignorance. Why not just have one track event, point A to B and be done with it as well? What's with all this running, hurdling, steeple racing nonsense?!
You're oversimplifying it so much that it makes it sound like swimming and track should be just freestyle and sprints.
|
hard to argue for speed walking lol
|
4492 Posts
On August 18 2008 15:59 NeoIllusions wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2008 15:55 Mynock wrote:
Besides, I never got it why there have to be differentiations by strokes anyway. If you're a swimmer, all you have to do is get from point A to point B in fastest way possible. What stroke you choose to accomplish this is up to you.
For a comparison, imagine running having 4 different steps involved. Jumping on one leg, fast run, crawl on knees, and the - even now present, ridiculous event - walking -_-
It's clearly bullshit. As is baseball, but that's another story. ahh, swimming ignorance. Why not just have one track event, point A to B and be done with it as well? What's with all this running, hurdling, steeple racing nonsense?! You're oversimplifying it so much that it makes it sound like swimming and track should be just freestyle and sprints.
Yeah, what about it? Or are you suggesting there should be obstacles in swimming? Why not indeed. Why not also add swimming-shooting? Swimming relay-obstacle-shooting? Everything men-women of course.
Yeah, track could do with simplifying as well, but no other events need it as much as swimming.
|
4492 Posts
As my friend put it a few days ago:
"WHAT? Every time I turn that damn thing on, they're still in that fucking pool!"
|
why did thorpe quit ? amazing performance by phelps, i dont understand how his body could manage it...would be a shame of he turned out doped like many others who were perhaps too good to be true
|
United States4471 Posts
It does appear to me that swimmers have quite a huge advantage when it comes to the number of medals they can win for their sport. Most Olympians don't have the chance to get more than a few medals, even if they wanted to, and so it's a bit unfair to compare Phelps to the top athletes in other sports. Whether this comparative ease and opportunity is enough to make Phelps "overrated" or "the greatest Olympian ever" is open for debate, but here's some information talking about the differences between swimming and track (the other sport with potential for a lot of medals).
Article about whether Phelps is the "greatest Olympian ever"
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/15/sports/olympics/15longman.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
Excerpts:
It is much easier to win multiple medals in sports like swimming and gymnastics than in track and field, because there are more individual events. And fewer countries produce elite swimmers than runners, making track a more democratic sport.
Runners compete vertically. They pound their bodies harder, and must work their hearts and muscles harder, than swimmers, who compete horizontally.
Swimmers recover quicker and, during major international competitions, generally compete in fewer rounds than runners.
Article about all the world records being broke in swimming:
http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/08/11/sports/olyrecords.php?page=2
Excerpts:
"The nature of swimming also allows athletes to perform in more events than, say, track, providing more opportunities for stars to set world records. Sprinters in swimming tend to train much longer distances than sprinters in track, gaining superior aerobic capacity. They also perform in a horizontal position, which allows easier circulation of oxygen and nutrients through the blood, and they don't pound their muscles, tendons and ligaments, thus gaining quicker recovery. At international competitions, swimmers also generally participate in fewer rounds than track sprinters, which can leave them fresher for event finals."
|
On August 18 2008 15:59 NeoIllusions wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2008 15:55 Mynock wrote:
Besides, I never got it why there have to be differentiations by strokes anyway. If you're a swimmer, all you have to do is get from point A to point B in fastest way possible. What stroke you choose to accomplish this is up to you.
For a comparison, imagine running having 4 different steps involved. Jumping on one leg, fast run, crawl on knees, and the - even now present, ridiculous event - walking -_-
It's clearly bullshit. As is baseball, but that's another story. ahh, swimming ignorance. Why not just have one track event, point A to B and be done with it as well? What's with all this running, hurdling, steeple racing nonsense?! You're oversimplifying it so much that it makes it sound like swimming and track should be just freestyle and sprints.
In the olympics, yes, there shouldn't be hurdling...
The point is that you shouldn't have 30-40 gold medal events in track and swimming and then have 2 or 3 for a whole bunch of other sports. Track and swimming aren't 10x more important.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
