Everyone is entitled to an opinion. You’ve repeatedly crossed the line with your comments. I will echo the comments of other people that you should be stripped of moderator status.
No, I just know that you don’t know how to swim. So you’re talking about what a professional can or can’t do and you don’t know. It’s like listening to a virgin talk about sex all day. Swimming 100M is not the same as racing 100M. Many 100M medalists don’t place in 200M events in the same discipline. So take it up with them. End of discussion. Boom.
Agreed.
I am sorry. Didn’t know you were a professional swimmer? Oh wait what’s that? You aren’t?
Alright then Shut up. Stop acting like you know everything about every f**king topic. You aren’t bchad so stop trying
Can we get back to the real issue here? NBC sucks.
He may have crossed the line a little, but he also adds a lot to the conversation. Maybe just a stern warning?
ZB vs BS (grabs popcorn) 
Where is Blake McCalister???
^Yah, it came through fuzzy cause it shrank it.
I actually wondered that a couple times.
All swimming styles are very different. All you have to do is hop into a pool and try them all out to know this. They use different muscles, require different techniques, breathing timing, etc. It makes no sense to claim they are the same- they don’t even look the same on just a basic visual level.
I can gaurantee that freestyle is going to be easier for most than say butterfly, or even breastroke. That’s why they have all the different swimming styles. The reason you have people like Phelps (which doesn’t happen often) is the simple fact he is a swimming prodigy and just happens to have innate talent, as well as practicing his butt off in all types of swim.
As far as distance for running, I know it seems like such a small increment to go from 100m to 200m but actually the higher the professional level, the more difference it makes. You hone skills and practice to fit exactly that 100m sprint. How you approach the 200m will be different. Everyone is the top at the professional level, so the trick is how well you can prepare for that exact distance. You could not expect to run 100m all the time with no training in the 200m and then compete against another Olympian in the 200m. It wouldn’t work out for you.
BS can be a bit abrasive, but at least some of his points are valid. The 100m and 200m are very different races in track because of the turn in the 200m. Bolt and Lewis are the only people I can recall who were dominant in both, and they are both freaks.
I would tend to agree though that there are too many swimming events. The 200m free does seem a bit redundant, but I’m not much of a swimmer. I would think 50m (sprint but never have to turn), 100m (sprint and turn), 400m (middle distance), and 1500M (distance) would suffice. I would also drop the 4x200m relay, as 4x100m is enough. I’m torn on the different strokes. Part of me argues that if someone were swimming away from danger, he would swim freestyle so that should really be the only stroke in competition. The other part of me enjoys the other strokes and can appreciate the different muscles involved. 104 total medals does seem a bit much though.
There needs to be a skydiving competition.
Side note though, some strokes do have a variety of uses in real world applications. I’ve had to drag people to shore lifegaurding, and sidestroke (my favorite anyways) was def the only way that was happening. It also saved my life from flush drowning in a rapid in mid winter once. Backstroke is also pretty useful in some cases.
^ Would watch 100%
I think they’re concerned about the possibility of a telecast olympic fatality. Would def damper the games. Earlier I was thinking about how they need to revamp the slalom kayak because it takes place in class 3 ish whitewater so none of the top contemporary kayakers compete (otherwise Canada and US would be major forces) as they’re all busy pushing class 5-6 boundaries and competing in races on class 5 water. But then I figured the off chance of an olympic fatality just would be too risky, hence why it’s set up the way it is.
I don’t think anyone is saying that the other strokes aren’t useful. But they don’t have olympic events in carrying someone on your back or running backwards.
Yeah, that one wasn’t meant to debate, just pointing out that they do serve a use as he pointed out if you were swimming away from someone you’d use freestyle.
Anyhow, there is some sense of subjectivity to what gets selected. For instance, we do have hurdles, etc, you’d argue if you really were running from someone you’d run around not over the logs (just an illustration, I like watching hurdles, it’s amazing).
But I think the bigger issue is people are unhappy with the large weight assigned to swimming in the final medal count. I think the issue within that arguement is that the olympic committee discourages tracking official medal counts per country as sort of misconstruing the nature of the games and taking the focus off the athletes. However, realistically, national medal counts still occur and this makes people feel kinda ripped off. Personally, I don’t want to see swimming reduced to one or two types of strokes and thus lose some of it’s art / tradition, particularly because many of these events are still very competitive and popular among the competitors. But these things happen over time. I think 50 golds across a population of 3 billion every 4 years is acceptable for swimming and I’d be fine with simply adding a few events. I’m not a fan of gymnastics, never watch it, but I’m kind of against cutting back the events / tradition just to appease national medal counts at the cost of the athletes.
Assuming the national medal count is the issue, I’d rather they either added sports or simply only counted the team events in swimmin and gymnastics towards the final national medal count while letting the individuals have their medals and competition for their own benefit.
Let’s worry about getting rid of crap like dressage before we go eliminating actual athletic events.
Hello everyone,
Coming back to the orignal post of this forum. It was a terrible call by the Olympic Comittee to disqualify those athletes.
Remember those athletes spent their lives for this only to get DQ (some where gold medal candidates!)
The olympic game is the highest level of competition, its cut-throat and anyone smart would use the easiest way to victory:
-
Train hard with the best known technique, the best coach and facilities.
-
Use the best posible strategy to win
-
Using the rules to your advantage
The same is used in various sports today:
F1 and bicycle: Teams riding draft, allowing teammate to pass at strategic points
Hockey: Putting your B-list players in a loosing game to save the best players from injury and rest them for the next big game
Basketball: Waiting for the buzzer to shoot a winning three pointer
Tennis, Sumo: Not using full force on a set or match to save energy for the next important ones
Those are all strategies developped around the existing rules to help win. Those rules can be related to standing or time limits. What happened today is that those teams used the rules to their advantage. The flawed round robin rules are to be blamed, the 3 teams should go on appeal.
It also strikes me that spectators boued the teams for faking, unlike the harlem globe trotters or a professional team with a fan base, those teams are not there to generate attendance, ticket sales or crowd pleasing exchange, they are there to win medals and change their lives.
this is the most exposure badminton has ever got