Swimming treated unfairly compared to Track & Field

RE: Swimming treated unfairly compared to Track & Field

Former Member — Mon, 02 Jul 2012 14:40:21 GMT

I am sure we could devise an event requiring floating on noodles and complaining that the pool is too cold...

RE: Swimming treated unfairly compared to Track & Field

Former Member — Mon, 02 Jul 2012 13:51:07 GMT

What is it about swimming that allows the top swimmers to excel in multiple events/strokes? Spitz, Lochte, Phelps, Franklin, etc.. Is it a lack of competition on a grand scale that doesn't neccessitate the need to completely specialize?

RE: Swimming treated unfairly compared to Track & Field

Former Member — Mon, 02 Jul 2012 13:00:16 GMT

Jazz is still just jazzed that the big boys stole his boy-thunder in Greensboro and made his swim so hard that he threw out his arm like a loaf of moldy bread. That is not the exact simile I would have chosen, but yes.

RE: Swimming treated unfairly compared to Track & Field

orca1946 — Mon, 02 Jul 2012 12:54:55 GMT

Ahh Yes ----- Then there is Gymnastics where you can do well & win events and the Queen & her henchwomen go into the back room to figure out who THEY want on the team!!!!

RE: Swimming treated unfairly compared to Track & Field

Former Member — Mon, 02 Jul 2012 12:45:16 GMT

RE: Swimming treated unfairly compared to Track & Field

Former Member — Mon, 02 Jul 2012 12:13:16 GMT

In a reasonable world there would be time standards to make the olympics and if you make it,you make it.If the entire finals of the100m free is Australian,so be it.Let the best compete and get politics out of it. :applaud:

RE: Swimming treated unfairly compared to Track & Field

orca1946 — Mon, 02 Jul 2012 11:34:09 GMT

I'm sure she will get a free ride to swim somewhere!

RE: Swimming treated unfairly compared to Track & Field

BobBruce — Mon, 02 Jul 2012 10:55:25 GMT

Allen is gotten the gist of this argument right. After the US and many other western nations boycotted the 1980 Moscow Games (opinion: for a specious reason), FINA (remember, the 100+ nation body with a one nation, one vote policy) proceeded to penalize the advanced swimming nations--most of whom boycotted those 1980 games--by reducing the number of individual competitors to two per event. This was done under the umbrella of "reducing the number of competitors". The IOC follows what its member federations recommend. Thirty-two years later, this rule is still in effect. Personally, I think that an appropriate number of competitors per nation per event is three--equaling the number of medals--as long as each of the three competitors from one country achieves a high performance standard, much the way 'athletics' does. OK, this would be a compromise between maximum participation and giving smaller nations a chance, but I think that this is a feasible position. Given FINA politics, this is not feasible at all.

RE: Swimming treated unfairly compared to Track & Field

smontanaro — Mon, 02 Jul 2012 10:32:53 GMT

My peeve is with the decathlon (the winner is supposed the worlds greatest athlete because he can run/throw/jump). Let’s make it a dodecathlon and add a couple of swimming events (possibly 100 and 800 freestyle?). Heck, 12? Why not get rid of those needless field events (you could really hurt someone with all those spears, poles and bars - it's way too dangerous, and just screaming for ambulance chasers) and all that sprint-y stuff (everyone knows sprinters other than Leslie are just whiny layabouts), then toss in a nice long bike ride so you can see the sights while you're in Merry Old England? Whittle it down to three events so nobody has to count very high (witness Connor Jaeger's 1600 yesterday - he clearly lost count). They could call it a triathlon... :D

RE: Swimming treated unfairly compared to Track & Field

ande — Mon, 02 Jul 2012 10:09:37 GMT

I wish Olympic Swimming & Diving allowed athletes 3 slots per individual event from each country. It's sad to that very deserving 3rd place finishers miss out. 1. Lochte and Franklin want attention and money, so they do a lot of events, so Rowdy Gaines can scream about how tough they are on national television. Franklin hasn't gone PRO, she's refused a LOT of money. Prize money, National team money, bonuses, and endorsements from many potential sponsors so she can keep her amateur status to swim as an NCAA swimmer. Her choice might be a mistake. I hope not. Who's to say what her situation will be 4 years from now when she's done with her college career, she'll probably still be on top, but we never know. Some rapidly rising young star could come along. If she went pro, she could probably earn 5, 10 or maybe even 20 times more than the most most expensive 4 year college education costs. We'll see.

RE: Swimming treated unfairly compared to Track & Field

Swimosaur — Mon, 02 Jul 2012 09:43:15 GMT

Yes, I know the history of the limitation to 2 in Swimming ... I confess, I don't know the history. I know that through at least 1976 the US was able to send three athletes per event. But then we were somehow restricted to two. Who, what, when, where, why and how the change?

RE: Swimming treated unfairly compared to Track & Field

Former Member — Mon, 02 Jul 2012 07:38:56 GMT

The gymnasts are truly amazing athletes and I have to admire that they perform these death defying feats in a noisy gym --- compared to golfers, where even the tv announcers have to whisper while some guy lines up a four footer.

RE: Swimming treated unfairly compared to Track & Field

aquageek — Mon, 02 Jul 2012 05:53:45 GMT

Jazz is still just jazzed that the big boys stole his boy-thunder in Greensboro and made his swim so hard that he threw out his arm like a loaf of moldy bread.

RE: Swimming treated unfairly compared to Track & Field

Rob Copeland — Mon, 02 Jul 2012 05:10:41 GMT

...anyway, compared to Track, we as a sport, are getting jobbed!But compared to the other 30 Summer Olympic sports, swimming ROCKS! Swimming awards more Olympic medals than any other sport, including athletics (10 sports have only 1 or 2 medal events, swimming has 34). Swimming is only behind athletics in the number of members allowed on a federation’s team. We get up to 2 entrants per individual event, while many sports only get 1. I prefer to look at it that the pool is half full not half empty.:D

RE: Swimming treated unfairly compared to Track & Field

Allen Stark — Mon, 02 Jul 2012 02:12:52 GMT

This is my understanding of what happened.In 1976 the E Germans totally dominated the women's side and the US men were even more dominant so in 1980 it was voted to decrease the number from each country.Since the US was boycotting the Olympics that year(worst decision ever) we had even less influence than normally and it passed.

RE: Swimming treated unfairly compared to Track & Field

sickfish — Mon, 02 Jul 2012 01:23:53 GMT

Then there is Gymnastics where you can do well & win events and the Queen & her henchwomen Like I told my wife today: for gymnastics to compare with swimming, Phelps and Lochte would need to jump out of the pool after every 50 in the IM and do a little "I'm about to switch strokes" dance. And a judge would subtract .1 to .3 from their final time based on this performance. Seriously, though... while those women are obviously amazing athletes - they have abs like bodybuilders and I swear I saw one do a no-foot pushup while balancing on the bars - the drama and theater and makeup, IMO, really undermine the amount of training they do. I can't watch it without going all MST3K on it, and then I feel bad because I know they work harder every day than I do all week. I'll take a straight-up race for time any day. /sidetrack

RE: Swimming treated unfairly compared to Track & Field

Former Member — Sun, 01 Jul 2012 14:27:51 GMT

Track has running,running over hurdles,running over hurdles and a water jump,throwing weights,throwing weights with chains,throwing javelins,throwing discus,high jump,long jump,triple jump,pole vault etc.That is many more esoteric practices than swimming. In a reasonable world there would be time standards to make the olympics and if you make it,you make it.If the entire finals of the100m free is Australian,so be it.Let the best compete and get politics out of it. I pretty much disagree with everything you wrote. Track and field has way fewer multiple event champions. When it comes to the throws, I don't think there is anyone who completes in two. But the political side. Yuck. When it comes to the actual competition, I think it is pretty apolitical. And I really like it the way it is.

RE: Swimming treated unfairly compared to Track & Field

Former Member — Sun, 01 Jul 2012 11:57:36 GMT

Jazzman: I have the answer to your 'swimming backwards' crack...from the Ministry of Silly Walks track gives us race-walking...uh huh... Besides, I'm not talking about adding events, anyway.

RE: Swimming treated unfairly compared to Track & Field

Former Member — Sun, 01 Jul 2012 11:51:21 GMT

RE: Swimming treated unfairly compared to Track & Field

Former Member — Sun, 01 Jul 2012 11:35:32 GMT

And furthermore, I am tired of track moaning about their workloads in a meet; they should watch Lochte and Franklin to learn what a real quick turnaround is, and how to handle it gracefully.

RE: Swimming treated unfairly compared to Track & Field

FindingMyInnerFish — Sun, 01 Jul 2012 11:32:02 GMT

I have to admit--and I'm a huge fan of "athletics" or "track and field"--that I was curious as to why the first three made the team in t and f events, but only two in the swim events. I think in ice skating too it's the first two in each category, but I'm less sure of that. It's not something I'm losing sleep over, just wondering about it.

RE: Swimming treated unfairly compared to Track & Field

smontanaro — Sun, 01 Jul 2012 10:42:28 GMT

But the political side. Yuck. When it comes to the actual competition, I think it is pretty apolitical. And I really like it the way it is. I think the point was that in the Olympics we artificially layer national (political) boundaries onto the competitive aspects of sport. If the eight best 100m sprinters in the world are Jamaican, why shouldn't they all get to compete? I realize that is not going to change, but I can certainly see the logic in eliminating the artificial national boundaries from the qualification process.

RE: Swimming treated unfairly compared to Track & Field

__steve__ — Sun, 01 Jul 2012 08:58:12 GMT

The politically correct term for Track and Field is "Athletics". Hard to find T&F mentioned at the Olympic site where it always referred to as athletics. Of course it's business related, but at least swimming is growing world-wide, and will be even more popular in a month.:) But I have to say some of the sprint track is spectacular to view too.

RE: Swimming treated unfairly compared to Track & Field

Allen Stark — Sun, 01 Jul 2012 08:30:23 GMT

1. Lochte and Franklin want attention and money, so they do a lot of events, so Rowdy Gaines can scream about how tough they are on national television. 2. Swimming has way too many events. For example, there is a swimming-backwards competition at the Olympic level, at two different distances. There is not a running-backwards competition, so they have more slots in the running competition, or as event-overloaded swimmers would call it, "freestyle." Track has running,running over hurdles,running over hurdles and a water jump,throwing weights,throwing weights with chains,throwing javelins,throwing discus,high jump,long jump,triple jump,pole vault etc.That is many more esoteric practices than swimming. In a reasonable world there would be time standards to make the olympics and if you make it,you make it.If the entire finals of the100m free is Australian,so be it.Let the best compete and get politics out of it.