Secondly, it is very interesting to look at his trend lines of winning and average times since 1968 and, in particular what happened from 2008 to 2012. Yes, the times dropped considerably until 2008, but in Michael's marquee events graphed, the times got slower or remained stagnant from 2008 to 2012. That is, the world didn't really grab the bull by the horns when Michael was less than fully in the game at London; they got slower or remained the same.
Seems to me that there was another big change in the men's events from 2008 to 2012...!
I definitely agree with your broad sentiment that (essentially) the author oversimplified his model too much by sticking to a single explanatory variable (age) without considering other significant effects. I do agree with the article that 200 IM is his best bet (if he doesn't do the 200 fly).
Physically I don't think Phelps will be past his peak. I do believe, though, that to have a shot at medaling (much less gold) he'll have to go at least as fast as he went in 2012.
And I am not one of those who thinks that Phelps is shoo-in at all to make the US team particularly if his head isn't fully in the game. Putting aside Jordan's first retirement -- his "baseball sabbatical" -- there is a long list of superstar, can't-miss, once-in-a-lifetime, best-ever athletes who come out of retirement and do significantly less well than before.
If he comes back and gets a medal in any individual event, I think that would be an amazing feat.
Secondly, it is very interesting to look at his trend lines of winning and average times since 1968 and, in particular what happened from 2008 to 2012. Yes, the times dropped considerably until 2008, but in Michael's marquee events graphed, the times got slower or remained stagnant from 2008 to 2012. That is, the world didn't really grab the bull by the horns when Michael was less than fully in the game at London; they got slower or remained the same.
Seems to me that there was another big change in the men's events from 2008 to 2012...!
I definitely agree with your broad sentiment that (essentially) the author oversimplified his model too much by sticking to a single explanatory variable (age) without considering other significant effects. I do agree with the article that 200 IM is his best bet (if he doesn't do the 200 fly).
Physically I don't think Phelps will be past his peak. I do believe, though, that to have a shot at medaling (much less gold) he'll have to go at least as fast as he went in 2012.
And I am not one of those who thinks that Phelps is shoo-in at all to make the US team particularly if his head isn't fully in the game. Putting aside Jordan's first retirement -- his "baseball sabbatical" -- there is a long list of superstar, can't-miss, once-in-a-lifetime, best-ever athletes who come out of retirement and do significantly less well than before.
If he comes back and gets a medal in any individual event, I think that would be an amazing feat.
