Anybody else out there detect out there a petulant tone from Ian Thorpe on the subject of Michael Phelps?
Context:
Back in 2002, Thorpe was toying with the idea of swimming some non-free events in order to achieve a Spitz-lie medal haul in 2004. People pointed to his background in backstroke and possiblity of swimming IM as possible avenues. He wisely ducked out of backstroke when it became apparent that the 100 back is one of strongest events in the world right now.
He then tried to the 200 IM, before Phelps emerged on the scene in late 2002/2003 an event that was dominated by 28 year-old Europeans but then got trounced by Phelps in this event at Worlds.
Phelps performance at Worlds in 2003 overshadowed Thorpe and the great Aussie start shelved his plans to branch out. He's now aiming for 200/400 gold and is a darkhouse candidate for 100 gold.
Recent Snipes from Thorpe:
1) When asked about the probability of Phelps hauling in multiple medals he retorted it's "impossible" (o.k. that's a defensible position) and further more "no one should even try". (sounds like he's jealous to me). Phelps to his credited responded, "Spitz did it once" and "he's talking about himself not me".
2) Recently when asked if he was worried about Phelps in the 200 free, Thorpe's reply ..."we're worrried about the whoe field". He's not giving Phelps any credit for challenging him in an event that the 19 year old is really the underdog but wants to race it for the challenge and experience.
3) Now Thorpe is smearing the reptuation of his unnamed competitors by claiming that "I've raced against competitors that are using drugs" and "the sport is not clean".
What kind of champion is Thorpe? He's not helping our sport with his attitude. Why not welcome the competition and be gracious about it. Why not wish Phelps good luck but tell him that he'll have his hands full beating him in the 200. If he has evidence about illegal drug use why not name names and not hide behind blanket accusations. And let's remind the Thorpedo if Phelps does accomplish his medal haul there is no crying in swimming.
BTW, for the record the US men beat the Australian men in all three relays.
PS: The Aussie women's team is the strongest ever and will likely beat the US women in 2 of the 3 relays.
Former Member
Geek....remember, there is always crying in swimming! You just don't see it for obvious reasons:D :D
. Just saying that you believe that drug use is taking place in your sport isn't necessarily a smear campaign. There were Chinese swimmers sent home for packing banned substances to the Sydney Games weren't there?
USA Today reports today, Sports Section page 8c that FINA "strongly condemns three-time Olympic champion Ian Thorpe's assertion that some of HIS OPPONENTS at the Athens game will have taken performance-enhancing drugs."
OK Thorpe name names or shut up!
But I'd like to add a little different perspective to this. Colleges are struggling to survive financially. Football and Basketball are the two biggest athletic moneymakers in the college world. In most cases, additional $$$ funneled to these two sports come back multiplied in revenue. (Gate revenue, TV, bowl games and tournament payouts, merchandizing.)
According to the paper I cited earlier:
Football and basketball we’re told, over and over again until we no longer question it, are “revenue sports.” Well, yes, at Notre Dame and USC and Penn State. But, according to the NCAA, they are money losers at the vast majority of colleges and universities. Last year, according to the NCAA, well over 80 percent of Div. IA and IAA football teams lost money.
The problem seems to be that the forces that act on college athletic directors tend to encourage them to put every available penny into football and basketball. Title IX prevents them from cutting women's programs without making corresponding cuts to men's programs. We can all come to our own conclusions about whether the problem is that football and basketball are crowding out all other sports or that Title IX prevents women's sports from taking the brunt of the cuts.
The football programs keep the alumni happy, and happy alumni donate money to the university.
I'm not sure what this has to do with crying in swimming. Perhaps if you spilled a scalding hot cup of coffee on yourself after hearing that the swimming program had been cut...
Originally posted by seltzer
USA Today reports today, Sports Section page 8c that FINA "strongly condemns three-time Olympic champion Ian Thorpe's assertion that some of HIS OPPONENTS at the Athens game will have taken performance-enhancing drugs."
OK Thorpe name names or shut up!
Actually quoting Thorpe instead of FINA:
"Of course I've swum against athletes that have been on drugs," he said.
He predicted it was "most likely" he would do so again.
Consider that HGH is currently undetectable, with hopes that tests will be available for Athens or shortly thereafter.
Consider the consequences for a swimmer of naming names, not only are they likely to be attacked by their sport ala Shirley Babashoff, they are likely to be sued by the named, and they have no ability to prove anything, they don't have drug testing facilities.
Strangely, "name names or shut up!" is pretty much a direct quote of the rant by World doping agency head *** Pound to Ms Scott, prior to the two people who beat her in her race testing positive.
I suggest that if you want a better idea of things Thorpe actually says you should look to the Australian media.
Btw, Hackett has also called for improved testing, also in the interest of safeguarding the good name of the sport.
foxsports.news.com.au/.../
Recentcly, I have read (I think) three different studies that have argued that the growing budgetys necessary for football & basketball have directly taken away money from other men's sports. Unfortunatley, I don't have the titles with me. When you look at budgets for athletic departments, you will quickly find that huge gains have been made for football through coaches, training & teaching assistants. The reason most A.D.'s have grown their departments to be huge money suckers is because it takes so much to run them. they have swollowed the available money that use to be for swimming, wrestling, cross country - not women's sports. Now we see the same thing happening with large schools' women's basketball programs. Football no longer generates revenue nor donors for most universities except to the sports.
Originally posted by craiglll@yahoo.com
Recentcly, I have read (I think) three different studies that have argued that the growing budgetys necessary for football & basketball have directly taken away money from other men's sports. ...When you look at budgets for athletic departments, you will quickly find that huge gains have been made for football through coaches, training & teaching assistants. The reason most A.D.'s have grown their departments to be huge money suckers is because it takes so much to run them. they have swollowed the available money that use to be for swimming, wrestling, cross country - not women's sports. Now we see the same thing happening with large schools' women's basketball programs. Football no longer generates revenue nor donors for most universities except to the sports.
Last time I checked, women were people, too, so it's critical to stop whining about Title IX.
That said (and, conceding that I am off-topic as well), I suggest those interested read The Game of Life: College Sports and Educational Values by James L. Shulamn and William G. Bowen. To quote a reviewer - "Makes a compelling case that athletics has utterly warped not only big colleges, but most of education, and in ways that go far beyond the usual allegations of diverting resources and spreading cynicism." (Marc Fisher, Washington Post). Out of print, but available used at your favorite online used book purveyor. EXTREMELY sad and frustrating study.........
Kathy
Originally posted by craiglll@yahoo.com
the real debate seems to me to be why are so many colleges dropping swimming as a sport in the USA.
You can thank Title IX :rolleyes: for that. But that's a whole other thread.
Title IX has very little to do with why colleges are dropping swimming. Most are dropping swimming because they can't admit that football and basketball are sucking the life out of college sports.
there are drugs in swimming. the high school in my town recently sepended two guys for selling a pain killer. they told the people who bouhgt them that the drug was an undetectable steriod. AAboiut 15 boys bought the drug. I really doubt that either Thorpe or Phelps are taking any illegal drugs. First they are to high profile and are frequently tested because they win. Second, it would take a great toll on them financially. I do wonder about some of the older people who are still able to make great tiems. they are doing somehting. Possibly through great coahes & diet, they're making it happen. I boubt it though.
Originally posted by craiglll@yahoo.com
why are so many colleges dropping swimming as a sport in the USA.
If you go to swiminfo.com they have an indepth analysis under News: Saving our sport. They argue that Title IX is not the problem, concluding:
Stated another way, men competing in non-revenue intercollegiate and high
school sports, including the Olympic sports of swimming and water polo, are
losing the opportunity to train and compete because of expanded funding and
roster sizes for men’s football and basketball.
