|
Post by c4ndlelight on Jul 25, 2021 22:54:47 GMT -5
I still can't get over Swimming having 37 different events. Not as many events as Running, I'm pretty sure. False.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Jul 25, 2021 23:00:06 GMT -5
Not as many events as Running, I'm pretty sure. False. Yeah, I just looked it up. It's pretty close, though. 26 running events (including hurdles but not including race-walking). Including race-walking 29 events.
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Jul 26, 2021 2:27:01 GMT -5
I still can't get over Swimming having 37 different events. Not as many events as Running, I'm pretty sure. Maybe this is just me growing up competing in swimming, but it seems more reasonable in swimming, where there are a lot of different disciplines, although I do think there are too many freestyle distances, versus running, which seems mostly the same. I wish both would be spread out over the full period of the Olympics though so more competitors could do more events.
|
|
|
Post by pelican on Jul 26, 2021 9:37:51 GMT -5
Not as many events as Running, I'm pretty sure. Maybe this is just me growing up competing in swimming, but it seems more reasonable in swimming, where there are a lot of different disciplines, although I do think there are too many freestyle distances, versus running, which seems mostly the same. I wish both would be spread out over the full period of the Olympics though so more competitors could do more events. With all due respect, the backstroke is like backwards running and the breaststroke is like bunny-hopping up and down. And swimmers are able to compete across a broader range of distances. You have someone like Ledecky who's good at 200/400/800 (and of course 1500, though that's new this Olympics for women), or someone like Phelps doing various fly/free/IM events at 100/200/400. In running, though, it's extremely rare to see someone run more than 2 individual events. You get the 100/200 sprinters, or the 200/400 sprinters, or 5000/10000 distance runners, or 10000/marathoners. The only person I can think of in recent years who's been really good across three distances at the same time is Sifan Hassan doing 1500/5000/10000. (Sometimes 5000/10000 runners will eventually move up to the marathon.) You also occasionally get a Carl Lewis type who can do 100/200/long jump. Track & field accommodates many more different types of athletes. A marathoner doesn't look anything like a shot putter, who doesn't look anything like a sprinter. But in swimming, every dude is 6'4" with humongous shoulders.
|
|
|
Swimming
Jul 26, 2021 9:52:18 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by tamz on Jul 26, 2021 9:52:18 GMT -5
Not as many events as Running, I'm pretty sure. Maybe this is just me growing up competing in swimming, but it seems more reasonable in swimming, where there are a lot of different disciplines, although I do think there are too many freestyle distances, versus running, which seems mostly the same. I wish both would be spread out over the full period of the Olympics though so more competitors could do more events. I think they’re squeezing in all the swimming events for Week 1 so that Track and Field can be the entire Week 2. I don’t remember how they did it for Rio last time but it certainly seems to be the case this time.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Jul 26, 2021 10:15:20 GMT -5
Maybe this is just me growing up competing in swimming, but it seems more reasonable in swimming, where there are a lot of different disciplines, although I do think there are too many freestyle distances, versus running, which seems mostly the same. I wish both would be spread out over the full period of the Olympics though so more competitors could do more events. I think they’re squeezing in all the swimming events for Week 1 so that Track and Field can be the entire Week 2. I don’t remember how they did it for Rio last time but it certainly seems to be the case this time. Same as always.
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Jul 26, 2021 11:44:10 GMT -5
Maybe this is just me growing up competing in swimming, but it seems more reasonable in swimming, where there are a lot of different disciplines, although I do think there are too many freestyle distances, versus running, which seems mostly the same. I wish both would be spread out over the full period of the Olympics though so more competitors could do more events. I think they’re squeezing in all the swimming events for Week 1 so that Track and Field can be the entire Week 2. I don’t remember how they did it for Rio last time but it certainly seems to be the case this time. Always like that as far back as I can remember
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Jul 26, 2021 12:20:01 GMT -5
Maybe this is just me growing up competing in swimming, but it seems more reasonable in swimming, where there are a lot of different disciplines, although I do think there are too many freestyle distances, versus running, which seems mostly the same. I wish both would be spread out over the full period of the Olympics though so more competitors could do more events. With all due respect, the backstroke is like backwards running and the breaststroke is like bunny-hopping up and down. And swimmers are able to compete across a broader range of distances. You have someone like Ledecky who's good at 200/400/800 (and of course 1500, though that's new this Olympics for women), or someone like Phelps doing various fly/free/IM events at 100/200/400. In running, though, it's extremely rare to see someone run more than 2 individual events. You get the 100/200 sprinters, or the 200/400 sprinters, or 5000/10000 distance runners, or 10000/marathoners. The only person I can think of in recent years who's been really good across three distances at the same time is Sifan Hassan doing 1500/5000/10000. (Sometimes 5000/10000 runners will eventually move up to the marathon.) You also occasionally get a Carl Lewis type who can do 100/200/long jump. Track & field accommodates many more different types of athletes. A marathoner doesn't look anything like a shot putter, who doesn't look anything like a sprinter. But in swimming, every dude is 6'4" with humongous shoulders. And hurdles and steeplechase aren't artificial in the way you imply that back and breaststroke are? Running and jumping over a beam into an artificial puddle? I wasn't referring to the field events at all, just running, although I had forgotten open water swimming was an event now and I wonder if that was included in the count. That should get more attention than the pool distance events, its much more interesting. Isnt one of the reasons that runners aren't in more events the race schedule? Hard to believe Bolt could run 19.30 in the 200, but couldn't medal in the 400, where bronze was just under 45 seconds. Asking from a position of ignorance here.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Jul 26, 2021 12:26:36 GMT -5
With all due respect, the backstroke is like backwards running and the breaststroke is like bunny-hopping up and down. And swimmers are able to compete across a broader range of distances. You have someone like Ledecky who's good at 200/400/800 (and of course 1500, though that's new this Olympics for women), or someone like Phelps doing various fly/free/IM events at 100/200/400. In running, though, it's extremely rare to see someone run more than 2 individual events. You get the 100/200 sprinters, or the 200/400 sprinters, or 5000/10000 distance runners, or 10000/marathoners. The only person I can think of in recent years who's been really good across three distances at the same time is Sifan Hassan doing 1500/5000/10000. (Sometimes 5000/10000 runners will eventually move up to the marathon.) You also occasionally get a Carl Lewis type who can do 100/200/long jump. Track & field accommodates many more different types of athletes. A marathoner doesn't look anything like a shot putter, who doesn't look anything like a sprinter. But in swimming, every dude is 6'4" with humongous shoulders. And hurdles and steeplechase aren't artificial in the way you imply that back and breaststroke are? Running and jumping over a beam into an artificial puddle? I wasn't referring to the field events at all, just running, although I had forgotten open water swimming was an event now and I wonder if that was included in the count. That should get more attention than the pool distance events, its much more interesting. Isnt one of the reasons that runners aren't in more events the race schedule? Hard to believe Bolt could run 19.30 in the 200, but couldn't medal in the 400, where bronze was just under 45 seconds. Asking from a position of ignorance here. I believe this is highly dependent on the proportions of certain types of muscle fibers. Even 100m v. 200m have different optimums. Surely some people can be very fast at both, but the Olympics hunts for optimum, not just "very good".
|
|
|
Post by bbg95 on Jul 26, 2021 12:58:03 GMT -5
With all due respect, the backstroke is like backwards running and the breaststroke is like bunny-hopping up and down. And swimmers are able to compete across a broader range of distances. You have someone like Ledecky who's good at 200/400/800 (and of course 1500, though that's new this Olympics for women), or someone like Phelps doing various fly/free/IM events at 100/200/400. In running, though, it's extremely rare to see someone run more than 2 individual events. You get the 100/200 sprinters, or the 200/400 sprinters, or 5000/10000 distance runners, or 10000/marathoners. The only person I can think of in recent years who's been really good across three distances at the same time is Sifan Hassan doing 1500/5000/10000. (Sometimes 5000/10000 runners will eventually move up to the marathon.) You also occasionally get a Carl Lewis type who can do 100/200/long jump. Track & field accommodates many more different types of athletes. A marathoner doesn't look anything like a shot putter, who doesn't look anything like a sprinter. But in swimming, every dude is 6'4" with humongous shoulders. And hurdles and steeplechase aren't artificial in the way you imply that back and breaststroke are? Running and jumping over a beam into an artificial puddle? I wasn't referring to the field events at all, just running, although I had forgotten open water swimming was an event now and I wonder if that was included in the count. That should get more attention than the pool distance events, its much more interesting. Isnt one of the reasons that runners aren't in more events the race schedule? Hard to believe Bolt could run 19.30 in the 200, but couldn't medal in the 400, where bronze was just under 45 seconds. Asking from a position of ignorance here. Yes and no. A lot of athletes really are capable of only medaling in a single event. That said, the schedule sometimes can make certain doubles practically impossible. This time around, for example, I believe the 200/400 split (e.g. Michael Johnson in Atlanta 1996) is probably not possible.
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Jul 26, 2021 13:02:48 GMT -5
Bolt would be a solid 400m runner but he wouldn't be winning medals - he'd be one of the runners happy to make it to the semis in a major championship. Compare to Phelps who would have medaled in backstroke too (and might have won if he were swimming fresh). Allyson Felix was a 200m all-time great who switched from doing 100/200 to 200/400 to take advantage of the temporary weaker field in the 400, and the training work she put in for that basically made her completely non-competitive in the 100 - you literally have to change physically to optimize for events. Swimmers just do all of them.
Phelps has 28 Olympic medals; 23 gold; Bolt has 8 gold. Phelps is certainly not 3x the Olympic/athletic great is and arguably isn't even that straight up. Swimming has very little differentiating between the events - which is why it's the schedule and not the disciplines limiting things.
I would get rid of everything except the free and maybe the backstroke in swimming - taking out fly, breaststroke (ridiculous!) and the medleys plus the 50 free would get swimming down to 21 events - which is still a ridiculously high number.
In athletics, I'd can race walking (basic equivalent of the breaststroke - let's move inefficiently!), the steeple (if you want an XC race, put XC in), the triple jump, pole vault, and maybe one of the throws (hammer?).
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Jul 26, 2021 13:07:06 GMT -5
And hurdles and steeplechase aren't artificial in the way you imply that back and breaststroke are? Running and jumping over a beam into an artificial puddle? I wasn't referring to the field events at all, just running, although I had forgotten open water swimming was an event now and I wonder if that was included in the count. That should get more attention than the pool distance events, its much more interesting. Isnt one of the reasons that runners aren't in more events the race schedule? Hard to believe Bolt could run 19.30 in the 200, but couldn't medal in the 400, where bronze was just under 45 seconds. Asking from a position of ignorance here. I believe this is highly dependent on the proportions of certain types of muscle fibers. Even 100m v. 200m have different optimums. Surely some people can be very fast at both, but the Olympics hunts for optimum, not just "very good". Sure and I'm not saying the same people would win all the races, but the fact that none of the top 100/200 sprinters that I can think of also competed in the 400 seems strange. (I know there are 200/400 combination guys, but all 3 is what I mean). The 200 winner is going to be between 19-20 seconds. There is almost always someone in the final of the 400 that posts a 45 second or worse time. Hard to believe someone who could do the first 200 in 20, couldn't do the second 200 in 25
|
|
|
Post by bbg95 on Jul 26, 2021 13:08:13 GMT -5
Bolt would be a solid 400m runner but he wouldn't be winning medals - he'd be one of the runners happy to make it to the semis in a major championship. Compare to Phelps who would have medaled in backstroke too (and might have won if he were swimming fresh). Phelps has 28 Olympic medals; 23 gold; Bolt has 8 gold. Phelps is certainly not 3x the Olympic/athletic great is and arguably isn't even that straight up. Swimming has very little differentiating between the events - which is why it's the schedule and not the disciplines limiting things. I would get rid of everything except the free and maybe the backstroke in swimming - taking out fly, breaststroke (ridiculous!) and the medleys plus the 50 free would get swimming down to 21 events - which is still a ridiculously high number. In athletics, I'd can race walking (basic equivalent of the breaststroke - let's move inefficiently!), the steeple (if you want an XC race, put XC in), the triple jump, pole vault, and maybe one of the throws (hammer?). I agree on "race walking." I don't mind the steeple, but I would definitely add cross country in. I recently discovered that cross country is actually part of the modern pentathlon, which makes it even more ridiculous that it hasn't been added back in as both a team and solo event. The organizers at the 1924 Paris Olympics put on one disastrous race, and the sport has been paying for it ever since. I really hope it gets added for 2028 Los Angeles. Swimming and track are two of the big TV sports, so I don't think the organizers want to drop too many events, which is why I'd only cut race walking.
|
|
|
Post by bbg95 on Jul 26, 2021 13:19:25 GMT -5
I believe this is highly dependent on the proportions of certain types of muscle fibers. Even 100m v. 200m have different optimums. Surely some people can be very fast at both, but the Olympics hunts for optimum, not just "very good". Sure and I'm not saying the same people would win all the races, but the fact that none of the top 100/200 sprinters that I can think of also competed in the 400 seems strange. (I know there are 200/400 combination guys, but all 3 is what I mean). The 200 winner is going to be between 19-20 seconds. There is almost always someone in the final of the 400 that posts a 45 second or worse time. Hard to believe someone who could do the first 200 in 20, couldn't do the second 200 in 25 The 100 and 400 are just completely different. I don't think it's possible to be truly competitive at the Olympic level in both. If you haven't run track, you may not realize what a brutal race the 400 is. I think the 800 is worse, but the 400 isn't that far off. Those extra 200 meters make a big difference.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Jul 26, 2021 13:29:22 GMT -5
Bolt would be a solid 400m runner but he wouldn't be winning medals - he'd be one of the runners happy to make it to the semis in a major championship. Compare to Phelps who would have medaled in backstroke too (and might have won if he were swimming fresh). Allyson Felix was a 200m all-time great who switched from doing 100/200 to 200/400 to take advantage of the temporary weaker field in the 400, and the training work she put in for that basically made her completely non-competitive in the 100 - you literally have to change physically to optimize for events. Swimmers just do all of them. Phelps has 28 Olympic medals; 23 gold; Bolt has 8 gold. Phelps is certainly not 3x the Olympic/athletic great is and arguably isn't even that straight up. Swimming has very little differentiating between the events - which is why it's the schedule and not the disciplines limiting things. I would get rid of everything except the free and maybe the backstroke in swimming - taking out fly, breaststroke (ridiculous!) and the medleys plus the 50 free would get swimming down to 21 events - which is still a ridiculously high number. In athletics, I'd can race walking (basic equivalent of the breaststroke - let's move inefficiently!), the steeple (if you want an XC race, put XC in), the triple jump, pole vault, and maybe one of the throws (hammer?). Only the most elite "just do all of them" at this level, though.
|
|