Swimming Finals at the World Championships in Barcelona, Spain
Former Member
The finals of the first day, show:
.) in the men 400 meter free final, Thorpe (Aus.) went 3:42.58 for #1, Hackett (Aus.) went 3:45.17 for #2, and Coman (Rom.) went 3:46.8x for #3;
Coman -who is my fellow countryman, and I was telling you about him for years-, defeated Rossolini (Ita.) of the 2000 Olympics fame, Keller (U.S.) and Carvin (U.S.);
.) in the women 400 meter free final, Simona Paduraru (Rom.) finished #7, with a fast time;
.) in the 4x100 men free relay, Russia won;
the fastest split was by Frenchman Frederic Bousquet at 47.03 -which is the second fastest split in history-, and fast splits (in the 47s) were recorded by Alex. Popov (Rus.) and Jason Lezak (U.S.);
.) in the 4x100 women free relay, U.S. won, anchored by an ace 53.xx from Jenny Thompson (U.S.).
He! he! he! :D ho! ho! ho!
I post this, ahead of www.swiminfo.com and www.swimnews.com who are sandbagging...
Parents
Former Member
The slow learners of my posts (Matt, Mark, Tom, Bert), who show listening more to themselves than to what I post, move the goalposts of what I posted to what they are familiar arguing about, instead.
Like here:
Originally posted by Tom Ellison
Ok, I'll bite....Why would anyone NOT think Matt B was a GREAT SWIMMER? He was one of the finest the world has ever known...both in and out of the pool. NEXT!
and here:
Originally posted by Bert Bergen
Neither Popov and Perkins won gold in 2000. By your own standards, even though they were repeat champions (and tremendous swimmers) in 1992 and 1996, you shouldn't consider them great based upon what they did (or didn't do) in Sydney 2000.
...
and like Mark's 'profoundly' misapplied:
"To each, his own."
I posted yesterday:
Originally posted by Ion Beza
...
what I assert is not whose career is "...greater..." and "...better than...", but the criterion of the 'flash-in-the-pan' winning.
Whose career is "...greater..." and "...better than...", could be done after making an evaluation of such criteria as:
1.) 'better' times,
2.) 'versatile' career (brought up earlier in this thread),
3.) 'flash-in-the-pan' career as a winner in one Olympics,
4.) not a 'flash-in-the-pan' career as a winner in many Olympics,
5.) how many world records one competitor set in one Olympics,
6.) etc..
These criteria bring different angles to analyze a career, each with its supporting data.
It is based on criteria like 1.) thru 6.) that one asserts whose career is "...greater..." and "...better...", Biondi's, Popov's, or somone's else.
I don't do it in this thread.
In another thread, I stated that there is no set of criteria accepted in a standard form establishing whose career is "...greater..." and "...better...".
My comparison of Biondi with Popov, is mainly in the 'flash-in-the-pan' and the not a 'flash-in-the-pan' domain.
Otherwise known as longevity on the top of the world.
That's what I discuss here:
nothing different than what I state in my quote above, to be discussing.
The slow learners of my posts (Matt, Mark, Tom, Bert), who show listening more to themselves than to what I post, move the goalposts of what I posted to what they are familiar arguing about, instead.
Like here:
Originally posted by Tom Ellison
Ok, I'll bite....Why would anyone NOT think Matt B was a GREAT SWIMMER? He was one of the finest the world has ever known...both in and out of the pool. NEXT!
and here:
Originally posted by Bert Bergen
Neither Popov and Perkins won gold in 2000. By your own standards, even though they were repeat champions (and tremendous swimmers) in 1992 and 1996, you shouldn't consider them great based upon what they did (or didn't do) in Sydney 2000.
...
and like Mark's 'profoundly' misapplied:
"To each, his own."
I posted yesterday:
Originally posted by Ion Beza
...
what I assert is not whose career is "...greater..." and "...better than...", but the criterion of the 'flash-in-the-pan' winning.
Whose career is "...greater..." and "...better than...", could be done after making an evaluation of such criteria as:
1.) 'better' times,
2.) 'versatile' career (brought up earlier in this thread),
3.) 'flash-in-the-pan' career as a winner in one Olympics,
4.) not a 'flash-in-the-pan' career as a winner in many Olympics,
5.) how many world records one competitor set in one Olympics,
6.) etc..
These criteria bring different angles to analyze a career, each with its supporting data.
It is based on criteria like 1.) thru 6.) that one asserts whose career is "...greater..." and "...better...", Biondi's, Popov's, or somone's else.
I don't do it in this thread.
In another thread, I stated that there is no set of criteria accepted in a standard form establishing whose career is "...greater..." and "...better...".
My comparison of Biondi with Popov, is mainly in the 'flash-in-the-pan' and the not a 'flash-in-the-pan' domain.
Otherwise known as longevity on the top of the world.
That's what I discuss here:
nothing different than what I state in my quote above, to be discussing.
