Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Yet another Bolt vs. Phelps thread

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • jazzcyclist
    replied
    Originally posted by tandfman
    One guy who apparently is NOT going to equal Phelps's accomplishment of winning eight gold medals in swimming in one OG is Phelps.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/olympic ... 846686.stm
    I think the Olympics are the least of his worries now.
    http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/news/15 ... -pipe.html

    Leave a comment:


  • tandfman
    replied
    One guy who apparently is NOT going to equal Phelps's accomplishment of winning eight gold medals in swimming in one OG is Phelps.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/olympic ... 846686.stm

    Leave a comment:


  • jazzcyclist
    replied
    Originally posted by Run DMC
    There is no discounting the achievement of Phelps. It was incredible. The equivalent in track does not exist. Why? Because in swimming, there are 6 events of 200m length, in track there is one. Track has two 100m events, swimming has 5. Track has 3 possible 400m races, swimming has only 2. In every other track event, there is only one opportunity.

    A major difference is that 100m in the pool is more equivalent to 400m on the track aerobically. The 200m is comparable to 800m on the track and the 400m is close to the 1500m on the track. So you are talking about a guy here who has the aerobic capabilities of a 800/1500m type with very good speed (most equivalent to Alan Webb in US). A difference being that AW could never compete with the best in the world at 400m. Theoretically, if he could he would have 5 possible opportunities to Phelps' 13 opportunities. If a sprinter could run 100, 200, 400 at that level, it is still only 6 opportunities. For that reason, It is an unfair comparison.

    Another reason is that swimming is a sport for the affluent. Know any poor people or 3rd world athletes competing in swimming? Therefore the talent pool is smaller and may not be truly representative of what humans are capable of. Every person on earth knows if they can run well because everyone has tried to run and most have competed with others as children. So running is truly representative of the limits of human performance. For that reason, it is extremely rare for a runner to be able to span more than 2 events at the Olympic level anymore. So the comparison above of the 100, 200, 400m runner drops off a few opportunities at either the 100m or the 400m!

    Technology - Track innovation essentially has not changed since the introduction of the rubber track. Swimming enjoys a technological advance every few years and this year there were two (pool and suits). Therefore, Track records are more stable. In Beijing swimming, there was a WR almost every race including semi finals. So in that way, the track WRs were much more impressive.

    Again, I was amazed by Phelps. However, we are comparing apples and potatoes here. I am as or more amazed by Bolt and Bekele for dominating two track distances because I believe it is more difficult. But Phelps will be remembered by more non track enthusiasts and he certainly deserves it.
    Amen! I couldn't have said it better myself except for the fact that I believe there are six 100m events in swimming, not five (100 free, 100backstroke, 100 fly, 100 breaststroke, 4x100 free, 4x100 medley).

    Leave a comment:


  • eldrick
    replied
    as not unexpectedly, you forget completely the fact that enclosed stadiums prevent buffeting sideways winds which are not recorded by wind gauge as it only records straight-line component

    buffeting sideways winds which disrupt cadence & rhythm & can significantly offset the advantage of a +1.5, to unknown degree

    Leave a comment:


  • sprintblox
    replied
    The location and structure of the stadium may have reduced the variability of the wind, thus increasing the probability of having record-setting conditions.

    But that does not detract anything whatsoever from the merit of Bolt's records. Other record breakers in the FAT era all had better wind behind them that Bolt had, as did the vast majority of performances in both events on the all-time top 50 list.

    Leave a comment:


  • eldrick
    replied
    Originally posted by sprintblox
    Yes, that statement about the stadium and the wind is ridiculous, considering that Bolt's records were done with zero wind in the 100m and into a headwind in the 200m, whereas every other FAT 100m and 200m world record in the past 40 years had a nonzero tailwind.
    another nonsense merchant

    the winds for the mens 200 races upto final were :

    0.1
    0.0
    -0.4
    -1.1
    -0.1
    -0.5
    -0.7
    -0.3

    0.1
    0.2
    0.4
    0.3

    0.1
    0.1

    average of which is -0.13m/s for the 14 races

    if bolt had been desperately unlucky he wouda got maybe a -1.1 ( the worst of the 14 races ) & he was very unlucky to get 2nd worst overall wind of -0.9

    more likely, he might have got the small +ve wind of 0.1 to 0.4 which all the 1/4 & 1/2 were run with ( no -ve winds in 6 races )

    prior to final, it couda been predicted bolt wouda got his little/zero wind ( range of perhaps -0.5 to 0.5 ) & likely a very small +ve based on previous 6 races

    that wind was a blip, but overall with enclosed stadiums a fair amount of predictability is built in & we don't usually have to go running to the wind-calculator to re-define merits of the run & not have to explain to joe public that the 10.00 into a 2m/s is far superior to someone else's 9.90 with a 2m/s

    off note the 95% confidence limits of the winds leading upto the final were

    +0.66 to -0.92

    bolt was very unlucky to get the actual extreme of the confidence limits

    Leave a comment:


  • eldrick
    replied
    Originally posted by Paul Henry
    You need to come out and let everyone know about your suspicions and quit the nonsense about enclosed stadiums being a greater advantage. There are so many other variables with water that also flutuate from pool to pool.
    Just stop being a hypocrite ( I still have not forgotten about your "substrate versus enzyme" line)
    i have no idea what your nonsense means ( i doubt you have a clue what that drivel is supposed to mean either ?! )

    enclosed stadiums means the wind variations will be kept to a minimum & you can pretty much bet they will not run something fantastic into a 3m/s, like mj 20.01 in tokyo or King's 10.06 into a 2.2 back in '84 trials which might have been 1st <9.9 run with slight +/0 wind

    with enclosed stadiums you can pretty much guarantee little/0 wind & that there will be no arguments/extrapolations for the performances intrinsic merits - predictability that 95% of runs beforehand will be with +0.5 to -0.5 wind

    as for pools, you are clueless - championship meets are held indoors ( apart from athens ) with all the benefits of an indoor stadium - air condition controlled ambient temperature, no wind to chop up the water, fixed water temperature & density of water - the variables are minimal compared to an outdoor track meet

    Leave a comment:


  • sprintblox
    replied
    Originally posted by Paul Henry
    You need to come out and let everyone know about your suspicions and quit the nonsense about enclosed stadiums being a greater advantage.
    Yes, that statement about the stadium and the wind is ridiculous, considering that Bolt's records were done with zero wind in the 100m and into a headwind in the 200m, whereas every other FAT 100m and 200m world record in the past 40 years had a nonzero tailwind.

    Leave a comment:


  • Paul Henry
    replied
    Originally posted by eldrick
    Originally posted by sprintblox
    If you're saying Phelps is the greatest swimmer of all time, you'll have zero disagreement from me. But saying he's a greater athlete than Bolt, or the greatest Olympic athlete ever, is a useless comparison, especially when the primary basis for the comparison is "8 golds".
    8 golds has never been done before

    ( spitz had 7 but complains that there was no 50 free back in '72 for him to win - phelps has a legit gripe the timetable with the intro of semis woudn't allow him to do 400 free & 100/200 back - latter 2 where he came within a gnat's-dick of breaking the wrs off virtually no prep a coupla years ago )

    bolt's double has been done in og in '84,'72,'56 & it was almost done in ''88 ( poor bend costing the 200 ) & '76 & less so in '04 ( but gatlin in 200m form of 2y before shouda kicked on to barbecue the zebra )

    bolt excelled by breaking 3 wrs, but that was helped by an enclosed stadium which prevented adverse winds & athletes are bigger & stronger now to have overcome the handicap of the '68/'79 altitude wrs which to an extent prevented wrs in '88, '84 & '72 ( albeit i've come round to belief those mexico sprints were equable to what couda been run at sea-level - they were just fabulous sprinters )

    there is another caveat :

    no swimmer on the planet couda reproduced phelp's 8 golds but...

    off last year's double gold & legit 9.77 in trials ( windy 9.68 in prelim ) with expectation of improving from trials to og & 19.63 last year into a wind with piss-poor weather, musta been worth no worse than 19.5-flat then & 1y to improve upon - it woudn't have been beyond realms of possibility to see tyson running basic low-9.7/19.4 in peking ( i'd expected him to after hearing of the 9.77 ) which woudn't have won on actual times recorded, but close enough to see if bolt wouda "cratered" as he'd done enough times to tyson & wally before when they were close at business end of a race
    You need to come out and let everyone know about your suspicions and quit the nonsense about enclosed stadiums being a greater advantage. There are so many other variables with water that also flutuate from pool to pool.
    Just stop being a hypocrite ( I still have not forgotten about your "substrate versus enzyme" line)

    Leave a comment:


  • Run DMC
    replied
    There is no discounting the achievement of Phelps. It was incredible. The equivalent in track does not exist. Why? Because in swimming, there are 6 events of 200m length, in track there is one. Track has two 100m events, swimming has 5. Track has 3 possible 400m races, swimming has only 2. In every other track event, there is only one opportunity.

    A major difference is that 100m in the pool is more equivalent to 400m on the track aerobically. The 200m is comparable to 800m on the track and the 400m is close to the 1500m on the track. So you are talking about a guy here who has the aerobic capabilities of a 800/1500m type with very good speed (most equivalent to Alan Webb in US). A difference being that AW could never compete with the best in the world at 400m. Theoretically, if he could he would have 5 possible opportunities to Phelps' 13 opportunities. If a sprinter could run 100, 200, 400 at that level, it is still only 6 opportunities. For that reason, It is an unfair comparison.

    Another reason is that swimming is a sport for the affluent. Know any poor people or 3rd world athletes competing in swimming? Therefore the talent pool is smaller and may not be truly representative of what humans are capable of. Every person on earth knows if they can run well because everyone has tried to run and most have competed with others as children. So running is truly representative of the limits of human performance. For that reason, it is extremely rare for a runner to be able to span more than 2 events at the Olympic level anymore. So the comparison above of the 100, 200, 400m runner drops off a few opportunities at either the 100m or the 400m!

    Technology - Track innovation essentially has not changed since the introduction of the rubber track. Swimming enjoys a technological advance every few years and this year there were two (pool and suits). Therefore, Track records are more stable. In Beijing swimming, there was a WR almost every race including semi finals. So in that way, the track WRs were much more impressive.

    Again, I was amazed by Phelps. However, we are comparing apples and potatoes here. I am as or more amazed by Bolt and Bekele for dominating two track distances because I believe it is more difficult. But Phelps will be remembered by more non track enthusiasts and he certainly deserves it.

    Leave a comment:


  • eldrick
    replied
    Originally posted by sprintblox
    If you're saying Phelps is the greatest swimmer of all time, you'll have zero disagreement from me. But saying he's a greater athlete than Bolt, or the greatest Olympic athlete ever, is a useless comparison, especially when the primary basis for the comparison is "8 golds".
    8 golds has never been done before

    ( spitz had 7 but complains that there was no 50 free back in '72 for him to win - phelps has a legit gripe the timetable with the intro of semis woudn't allow him to do 400 free & 100/200 back - latter 2 where he came within a gnat's-dick of breaking the wrs off virtually no prep a coupla years ago )

    bolt's double has been done in og in '84,'72,'56 & it was almost done in ''88 ( poor bend costing the 200 ) & '76 & less so in '04 ( but gatlin in 200m form of 2y before shouda kicked on to barbecue the zebra )

    bolt excelled by breaking 3 wrs, but that was helped by an enclosed stadium which prevented adverse winds & athletes are bigger & stronger now to have overcome the handicap of the '68/'79 altitude wrs which to an extent prevented wrs in '88, '84 & '72 ( albeit i've come round to belief those mexico sprints were equable to what couda been run at sea-level - they were just fabulous sprinters )

    there is another caveat :

    no swimmer on the planet couda reproduced phelp's 8 golds but...

    off last year's double gold & legit 9.77 in trials ( windy 9.68 in prelim ) with expectation of improving from trials to og & 19.63 last year into a wind with piss-poor weather, musta been worth no worse than 19.5-flat then & 1y to improve upon - it woudn't have been beyond realms of possibility to see tyson running basic low-9.7/19.4 in peking ( i'd expected him to after hearing of the 9.77 ) which woudn't have won on actual times recorded, but close enough to see if bolt wouda "cratered" as he'd done enough times to tyson & wally before when they were close at business end of a race

    Leave a comment:


  • steve
    replied
    Originally posted by sprintblox
    Originally posted by steve
    But then none of those are arguments for Bolt being more deserving of the greatest Olympian of 2008 accolades.
    I didn't say they were. Potential in other sports is an irrelevant side-track to this thread.

    Similar arguments were used against Phelps achievement (easier for him to get more medals because swimming has more opportunities).
    However, that is not irrelevant, because then we're talking about medals within the same sport, not potential in other sports. Remember, Phelps got 4 of his golds by swimming the same 200m distance, in different ways. Take away all strokes except the freestyle, take away the 4x200, and how on earth does Phelps get 8 golds? Or even 4 or 5?

    But again, this thread is not for arguing whose achievement is of more merit. The question is whose achievement will be duplicated or exceeded by somebody else. On that point, even I think that Phelps record of 8 golds will remain unequaled for a longer time than Bolt's 3 gold + 3 WRs on the track.
    Originally posted by steve
    I suppose we could go around and around and pick apart each other's arguments
    Turns out I was right

    Leave a comment:


  • sprintblox
    replied
    Originally posted by eldrick
    since '72 when spitz held both 100/200 fly wrs, we have had probably about a dozen guys who have held the 200 fly wr ( which was phelps initial distance ) & also tried 100 fly - out of that dozen, apart from phelps only gross has held both ( & also set 200/400 free wrs ) & most europeans woud consider him the greatest european male swimmer of all-time

    phelps just happened to find that when he tried a different event from his initial one he was wr holder calibre - something 10 out of 12 other guys since spitz time simply were unable to do in 30y+
    If you're saying Phelps is the greatest swimmer of all time, you'll have zero disagreement from me. But saying he's a greater athlete than Bolt, or the greatest Olympic athlete ever, is a useless comparison, especially when the primary basis for the comparison is "8 golds".

    Leave a comment:


  • eldrick
    replied
    Originally posted by steve
    More impressive is that Phelps was voted second by an organization (AIPS) that doesn't have any United States representation.
    digging thru the site there does seem some representation ?

    http://www.aipsmedia.com/index.php?page ... w_smenu=13

    ( albeit it may be a 1 man & his dog outfit with only president fubar )

    Leave a comment:


  • eldrick
    replied
    Originally posted by sprintblox
    Remember, Phelps got 4 of his golds by swimming the same 200m distance, in different ways. Take away all strokes except the freestyle, take away the 4x200, and how on earth does Phelps get 8 golds? Or even 4 or 5?
    since '72 when spitz held both 100/200 fly wrs, we have had probably about a dozen guys who have held the 200 fly wr ( which was phelps initial distance ) & also tried 100 fly - out of that dozen, apart from phelps only gross has held both ( & also set 200/400 free wrs ) & most europeans woud consider him the greatest european male swimmer of all-time

    phelps just happened to find that when he tried a different event from his initial one he was wr holder calibre - something 10 out of 12 other guys since spitz time simply were unable to do in 30y+

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X