Gymnastics, swimming, and track and field are the poster sports for the Olympics. They toil for 3.9 years in almost total anonymity to the general (American) public and then BAM…they are passionately followed by everyone. As a track nut, this is one of the many reasons why I feel I can relate to and more thoroughly enjoy watching swimming and gymnastics. The human highlight of the swimming progr
I agree that a sport like swimming is easier to be good at by working hard and not necessarily being born ‘with it’. I think the world records are being broken so easily more so because of technology advancements (ie suits) not so much talent unsaturation (Phelps is just THAT good).
Unfortunately, Phelps isn’t just good at one stroke, he’s the very best at 3 of the 4 competitive strokes. The US owns swimming because of the US Olympic training center’s (Colorado Springs) research into swimming with techniques that were advanced almost 20 years ago in a flume. Also, every event under 200m requires 3 rounds in swimming. However, if they added rounds it works in favor of Phelps as his endurance is incredible. So instead of attempting to win 8 golds, he wins 5 or 6 with ease. He still does 20 rounds, Bolt at most will do 9. Michael Johnson did 8.
After watching phelps win another gold tonite, I am amazed at his ability to make it look soooo easy. I agree with many of the points Mike makes and I am unsure if the sport will ever reach the saturation point of track and field. The resources available to other countries in the sport of swimming just are not available. It is doubtful many swimmers are getting great endorsement contracts, if any at all.
sem·i·nal
1. influential
highly origional and influential
2. capable of development
containing an idea or set of ideas that forms the
basis for later developments
Then comes your definition…
Get your mind out of the gutter! Or is that what a Trenton Teachers College degree gives you??? : )
I agree that a sport like swimming is easier to be good at by working hard and not necessarily being born ‘with it’. I think the world records are being broken so easily more so because of technology advancements (ie suits) not so much talent unsaturation (Phelps is just THAT good).
I actually didn’t discount the advancements in suit design, especially this year when it’s no doubt played a huge role in the frequency of WRs. HOWEVER, the technological advancements in suit design are a relatively new thing (over the past decade). The frequent and prodigious reductions in the WR are not. Back in the days when everyone wore tiny weeny speedos 3 sizes too small WRs were still far more prevalent in swimming than track and almost always by much larger margins.
Unfortunately, Phelps isn’t just good at one stroke, he’s the very best at 3 of the 4 competitive strokes. The US owns swimming because of the US Olympic training center’s (Colorado Springs) research into swimming with techniques that were advanced almost 20 years ago in a flume. Also, every event under 200m requires 3 rounds in swimming. However, if they added rounds it works in favor of Phelps as his endurance is incredible. So instead of attempting to win 8 golds, he wins 5 or 6 with ease. He still does 20 rounds, Bolt at most will do 9. Michael Johnson did 8.
The Germans and Soviets had much of this research also and the fact that one man can dominate 3 different strokes and be world class in the fourth only provides more support to my points (at least IMO). That’s like a track guy winning the 100m, 110H, 200m, and 400H all at the same time. Just simply not possible. Too many people who are too good.
sem·i·nal
1. influential
highly origional and influential
2. capable of development
containing an idea or set of ideas that forms the
basis for later developments
Then comes your definition…
Get your mind out of the gutter! Or is that what a Trenton Teachers College degree gives you??? : )
Hell, you have to give him “highly origional” for the eyebrows in the picture alone!!!
Thought-provoking post…I was just discussing this with my wife the other day..
I’ve also heard that the pool used in these Olympics is deeper and was designed with optimized overflow properties, which could contribute to “smoother” sailing for the competitors. I’m not an expert in pool fluid dynamics, but perhaps this is just another potential reason why WR’s are being “shattered” and not broken? How many swimmers have set PR’s in these games?
In any case, there are variables involved even in swimming that could lead one to conclude that overall performance levels of swimming have not reached a plateau…there are environmental factors involved, just like a 4.1-m/s tail wind on the track….
I’ve also heard that the pool used in these Olympics is deeper and was designed with optimized overflow properties, which could contribute to “smoother” sailing for the competitors. I’m not an expert in pool fluid dynamics, but perhaps this is just another potential reason why WR’s are being “shattered” and not broken? How many swimmers have set PR’s in these games?
I’m sure this has got to be the case. It’s actually getting kinda ridiculous. Every single event is a WR. In a couple cases, people who don’t even medal are breaking pre-Olympic WRs.
I think another factor that plays in to swimming is that techniques are still developing at a much faster rate than in track.
Tonight’s coverage of the swimming included a somewhat in depth analysis of all the factors contributing to the large numbers of PR, OR and WR being set in the Water Cube. What surprises me in some cases is the amount by which records are being set, or the number of swimmers very near to what the old WR was (CBC has a line indicating the relative position of the competitors to the current world record).
It may be time to define the competitive conditions in that sport more exactly the way track has the allowable wind, slope of track etc. otherwise it will only be a matter of time before suspicions are raised and relevancy lost. One of the factors is apparently water temperature, so next time, if there are too many records set this time and they want the number of new records reduced all organizers would need to do would be to raise the temperature a couple of degrees. Should sport really depend on the engineering of facilities? Controllable variables, sort of like watering the base paths.
Tonight’s coverage of the swimming included a somewhat in depth analysis of all the factors contributing to the large numbers of PR, OR and WR being set in the Water Cube. What surprises me in some cases is the amount by which records are being set, or the number of swimmers very near to what the old WR was (CBC has a line indicating the relative position of the competitors to the current world record).
It may be time to define the competitive conditions in that sport more exactly the way track has the allowable wind, slope of track etc. otherwise it will only be a matter of time before suspicions are raised and relevancy lost. One of the factors is apparently water temperature, so next time, if there are too many records set this time and they want the number of new records reduced all organizers would need to do would be to raise the temperature a couple of degrees. Should sport really depend on the engineering of facilities? Controllable variables, sort of like watering the base paths.
Dang. I actually missed that segment. I would’ve loved to have seen it.
I swam competitively for 8 years and still follow the sport and I can tell you that the water temp issue is fairly well known and there’s no way it can account for what we’re seeing. It seems to be a convergence of things (new suits which push the boundaries of legality and performance, an Olympic year, an unusually fast pool, etc) that is accounting for these performances.
