We're a few weeks out from the 10th FINA World Championship and the war of the words between US vs Australia has begun. As reported in swiminfo Talbot (former Australian coach and now full-time minister of propaganda) just fired the first salvo in the continung swimming war between the US vs Australia.
Commenting on Phelps recent 200 IM world record, Talbot noted that the US is looking for someone to top their Thorpe for best swimmer in the world and, in a transparent attempt to psyche the young Phelps, noted that in "Phelps had done nothing yet" and has everything to prove and Thorpe is still the best inthe world...blah...blah...blah.
The Aussies have mounted a campaign that their Thorpie will challenge Spitz for four individual golds at Athens. Too bad for them that Thorpes fourth event is the 200 IM and Phelps has just made that task much more difficult.
Meanwhile, as to Talbot's statement that "Phelps has done nothing yet" in international competition. What about his gold medal and world record inthe 200 fly at 9th FINA World Championship weeks after he turned 16? How about his performances in the 400 IM AGAINST the world's best (just happened to be the US Eric Vendt) in the 400 IM last summer? How about swimming head-to-head ALL THE TIME against the best in the world in the 200 fly (just happens to be another American Tom Malchow)? Only one of Phelps world records weren't set against the best in the world and that was his 200 IM last week in Santa Clara.
In fact, I maintain that Phelps is already the better swimmer than Thorpe. He has three world records (200 IM/400 IM/200 FLY) and will soon have his fourth (100FLY) demonstrating a range of male swimming talent not seen since Mark Spitz.
Since turning 16 he has proven unbeatable in his events in head-to-head competition against the best in the world (Thorpe's record is not good in that record especially at the big show). The only thing missing from Phelps resume is a stellar Olympics (does Thorpe really have one?
How about it--who's the best male swimmer in the world RIGHT NOW. Thorpe or Phelps?
I say Phelps no contest. It's Thorpe who's coming into Worlds
with something to prove. Is he healthy-both physically and mentally. How will the change in coaching work out? Does he still
have what it takes to win? WILL HE DUCK PHELPS IN HEAD-TO-HEAD MATCH UP IN THE 200 IM? In this contest, Phelps has the advantage before the gun goes off not Thorpe. How about that Talbot?
What do you guys think?
Parents
Former Member
Fellas,
This is all entertaining, but in terms of "proving" anything, we might as well debate whether Batman could take Mighty Mouse. With two swimmers entering largely dissimilar events, deciding who is "best" is all subjective opinion. Even where their events overlap, any comparison that relies on those events alone is lacking. Is the 200 IM really the measure of Ian Thorpe and the manner in which he has dominated the middle distance freestyle events these past several years? Does the 200 IM fully take into account how good Michael Phelps' butterfly is?
Having dissed these comparisons, let me speak in praise of another swimmer worthy of this discussion: Grant Hackett. If Thorpe had not been overshadowing him in the shorter events that command more attention here in the U.S. (different story in Australia, where the 1500 really matters in the court of public opinion), we would all be marveling at the breadth of his range. Consider, he is not just the Olympic Champion and World Record Holder in the 1500, he made us all rapidly forget two recent giants in the event: Vladimir Salnikov and Kieren Perkins. We in the U.S. fancy ourselves the dominant swimming nation in the world (justifiably, I might add), yet we have not yet produced a 1500 swimmer faster than Salnikov, whose record Perkins substantially lowered, whose record Hackett substantially lowered. Hackett is two breakthroughs ahead of the best swimmers the best swimming nation can offer. AND... he is a hair's breadth away from Thorpe's records in the 800, the 400, and the only swimmer really close to Thorpe and Hoogie in the 200. When Ian Thorpe first had the records in the 200 and 400, and considering what new world's to conquer, he took a long, hard look at the competion in the 1500, and decided to train for the 100 and the 200 IM (!!) instead. Consider how different is the training regimen for the 1500. Grant Hackett is the best 1500 swimmer, ever, by a substantial margin, and the second best in the world at the 800 and 400, and among the best in the 200! Just look at the times and compare them to track and field events. Has there ever been a 5k Olympic champion who could also make the finals in the 800?
I think conversations as to who is "the best" can be demeaning. However, talking about who is among the best can be much more interesting.
Matt
Fellas,
This is all entertaining, but in terms of "proving" anything, we might as well debate whether Batman could take Mighty Mouse. With two swimmers entering largely dissimilar events, deciding who is "best" is all subjective opinion. Even where their events overlap, any comparison that relies on those events alone is lacking. Is the 200 IM really the measure of Ian Thorpe and the manner in which he has dominated the middle distance freestyle events these past several years? Does the 200 IM fully take into account how good Michael Phelps' butterfly is?
Having dissed these comparisons, let me speak in praise of another swimmer worthy of this discussion: Grant Hackett. If Thorpe had not been overshadowing him in the shorter events that command more attention here in the U.S. (different story in Australia, where the 1500 really matters in the court of public opinion), we would all be marveling at the breadth of his range. Consider, he is not just the Olympic Champion and World Record Holder in the 1500, he made us all rapidly forget two recent giants in the event: Vladimir Salnikov and Kieren Perkins. We in the U.S. fancy ourselves the dominant swimming nation in the world (justifiably, I might add), yet we have not yet produced a 1500 swimmer faster than Salnikov, whose record Perkins substantially lowered, whose record Hackett substantially lowered. Hackett is two breakthroughs ahead of the best swimmers the best swimming nation can offer. AND... he is a hair's breadth away from Thorpe's records in the 800, the 400, and the only swimmer really close to Thorpe and Hoogie in the 200. When Ian Thorpe first had the records in the 200 and 400, and considering what new world's to conquer, he took a long, hard look at the competion in the 1500, and decided to train for the 100 and the 200 IM (!!) instead. Consider how different is the training regimen for the 1500. Grant Hackett is the best 1500 swimmer, ever, by a substantial margin, and the second best in the world at the 800 and 400, and among the best in the 200! Just look at the times and compare them to track and field events. Has there ever been a 5k Olympic champion who could also make the finals in the 800?
I think conversations as to who is "the best" can be demeaning. However, talking about who is among the best can be much more interesting.
Matt
