Michael Phelps - Not the Greatest Olympic Athlete Ever!
No disrespect to Mr. Phelps, certainly he is one of the finest swimmers ever, perhaps the finest, but we must examine this fairly. Mr. Phelps, on winning his tenth gold surpassed several athletes tied for the honor with nine, one of whom was Paavo Nurmi (another was Mark Spitz), but it's Nurmi whom I'll use to argue this point.
Swimming is different from running, most significantly because it is raced in multiple strokes and at a great many distances, whereas there is only one way to run. What would Phelps' medal haul look like if he could only race freestyle? Or what would Nurmi's look like if he raced a run, trot, and canter? Simply put, the yardsticks are VERY different.
Nurmi won his 9 golds across three Olympiads, capturing three golds in Amsterdam (1920), five in Paris (1924) and one in ?? (1928), he also won several silvers. None of his medals were earned at distances less than 1500 meters. I will make the claim that running, because it involves impact loading, presents considerably more abuser to the body, and the ability to absorb that abuse and come back for more is more difficult than in swimming, lacking impact loading AND of generally shorter duration than running. (Time, distance as well, but I think time is the right measure here...swimming paces are inherently slower, so measuring by distance would be unfair.)
I would argue that the double double of Lasse Viren and that Emil Zatopek's 1952 distance running triple, golds in the 5000 meters, 10,000 meters, and marathon exceed what Phelps has done, but simply put, the yardsticks are different. (BTW, when checking details, I stumbled on Britain's James Cracknell saying much the same here.)Swimming has all these variants, and I believe more distances as well, so earning a swimming medal may well be easier than earning a running medal. Also, anyone without access to a reasonable body of water (think much of Africa) lacks the opportunity to hone their skills to an Olympian level.
Swimming is different from running, most significantly because it is raced in multiple strokes and at a great many distances, whereas there is only one way to run. What would Phelps' medal haul look like if he could only race freestyle? Or what would Nurmi's look like if he raced a run, trot, and canter? Simply put, the yardsticks are VERY different.
Nurmi won his 9 golds across three Olympiads, capturing three golds in Amsterdam (1920), five in Paris (1924) and one in ?? (1928), he also won several silvers. None of his medals were earned at distances less than 1500 meters. I will make the claim that running, because it involves impact loading, presents considerably more abuser to the body, and the ability to absorb that abuse and come back for more is more difficult than in swimming, lacking impact loading AND of generally shorter duration than running. (Time, distance as well, but I think time is the right measure here...swimming paces are inherently slower, so measuring by distance would be unfair.)
I would argue that the double double of Lasse Viren and that Emil Zatopek's 1952 distance running triple, golds in the 5000 meters, 10,000 meters, and marathon exceed what Phelps has done, but simply put, the yardsticks are different. (BTW, when checking details, I stumbled on Britain's James Cracknell saying much the same here.)Swimming has all these variants, and I believe more distances as well, so earning a swimming medal may well be easier than earning a running medal. Also, anyone without access to a reasonable body of water (think much of Africa) lacks the opportunity to hone their skills to an Olympian level.
posted by Scooter at 12:58 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home