Sullivan award

Well I don't know if I agree necessarily that Paul Hamm should have given the medal back (and certainly I don't think he stole it).....It wasn't his error that caused the mistake....it was originally the judge's error for miscaclulating the South Korean's Score....but the key issue to me is that the RULE in the RULE book clearly states that it is the responsibility of the South Korean (and his coach) to make an appeal within some specified time frame in order to have a case....bottom line is that the S. Korean and his coach failed to meet that clearly stated criteria.....So why then should Paul Hamm be villainized for the mishap as a result?.....BUT I do agree that Micheal Phelps deserved the Sullivan Award over Paul Hamm....simply b/c he accomplished a lot more at the 2004 Olympics ....and, as you said ,...he showed great sportsmanship by giving up his relay spot to Ian Crocker so that Ian could have another chance at a gold medal.....(of course Micheal received a gold medal for the relay anyway since he swam the fly leg of the relay in the semi-finals). Newmastersswimmer

I have to politely disagree with both of you. I think Hamm deserved it. He did with stand the tourment of having his medal reviewed, a medal that he worked just as hard at earning. It wasn't his fault, it was the judges, and then the South Koreans for not appealing within the alloted time. Wasn't he also the first male ever in American history to win the all-around comp.? Coming from 12th to win the gold is no easy task, and then to have it challenged at the last possible minute. I think he handled the whole situation very professionally. He may have been reclutant to give his medal up, but wouldn't you be too if you knew that you had rightfully won it? Don't get me wrong I love Michael and it's amazing what he did! He was certainly a very strong candidate. He also accomplished an amazing feat in doing what he did. And not to play down what he did by any means, but someone has done it before him..Mark Spitz. Hamm was the first ever. Michael certainly had an amazing year and had tons of good actions to his credit, but I think being the first ever to take a competition somewhat outweighs trying to repeat previous success.

Originally posted by Seagurl51 He may have been reclutant to give his medal up, but wouldn't you be too if you knew that you had rightfully won it? I do not know if rightfully is the right word in his situation.The thing is he knew that he was not the winner, because he was not in reality, I just could not keep that medal knowing someone perfomed better, but was wrongfully misjudged.There were cases in the history of gymnastics where sportsmen realised the mistake and gave the medal to someone who outperformed them but lost due to judges' mistake. I understand why Hamm was fighting for that medal, though, he was the first to do what he did and besides it was an olympic gold medal, holy cow - how can you part with that!I am not exactly blaiming him, I just think that deep in his mind he knows who won that , but the path to that medal was too hard , so... yeah, I do not know what I would have done in that situation, I think I would have given it to the opponent, but I guess you need to experience that exact olympic gold medal glory to really know what you would when you have the medal but you kno=w you are not the winner... I guess it is going to serve South Koreans a big lesson of when to appeal...Can you imagine what the south korean gymnast is going through, though?Must be tough...

Did you pay any attention to what happened during the Olympics? The South Korean did lose .1 points because of an error, but he also did one too many holds during the routine. He did 4 holds, while the rules only allow a maximum of three. That is a .2 deduction. So if you are willing to go back and give him a higher start value, then you must also deduct for his errors. Paul Hamm would have still had a higher score.

Originally posted by LindsayNB Exactly what definition of amateur are they using that Phelps would even qualify as an amateur athlete? thank you!!! i was wondering exactly the same thing. i dig michael, but i can't understand how he possibly qualifies as an amateur... seeing as how he's a millionaire (or i guess multi-millionaire...) with all his endorsement deals. not that i think he shouldn't take them, but i thought as soon as you were paid you were no longer considered an amateur.

Originally posted by BMSC Did you pay any attention to what happened during the Olympics? The South Korean did lose .1 points because of an error, but he also did one too many holds during the routine. He did 4 holds, while the rules only allow a maximum of three. That is a .2 deduction. So if you are willing to go back and give him a higher start value, then you must also deduct for his errors. Paul Hamm would have still had a higher score. You took the words right out of my mouth!! Paul Hamm won the medal fair and square!! :mad:

I have been reading more on this award on various websites. Appears the voting was incredibly close between Phelps and Hamm. Apparently, Phelps lost by .08.

Exactly what definition of amateur are they using that Phelps would even qualify as an amateur athlete?

Ok here is where I get really fired up! The guy that challenged Paul Hamm's gold medal had no reason too. He actually benefited from a judging error. He placed higher than he should have. He had three pauses in his p-bar routine. You are allowed 3, the fourth one should have caused him a .2 deduction (minimum). Paul Hamm also had to really fight back to win that medal. After a disaterous vault it looked like he was totally out of it, but he came back and rocked p-bars and high bar. He did amazing. He absolutely deserved to win his gold medal. Since you are so big on people checking their facts before they make statements about things you would think you would have done the same ... Not to take away anything from Phelps. I am not arguing for or against Hamm, just that you are mistaken in thinking that Hamm didn't deserve that medal.

This is also why I like swimming more than gymnastics. Gymnastics is so darn political. (Not that swimming doesn't have it's political moments *cough Peirsol cough*) However, the Code of Points in gymnastics is difficult to understand even for veteran gymnasts and coaches. The scoring is so subjective. The judge has to see it to deduct it and that creates a whole other set of problems ... basically the best gymnasts aren't always winning. There are multiple judges and the scores are averaged ... I find it hard to believe that NONE of the judges noticed that he had four holds. Also, his coach didn't appeal the score until later. Paul Hamm was the best gymnast on that night and he deserved to win. Going back to the Sullivan award, I do think Phelps is the better athelte, I also agree that I wouldn't describe Phelps as an ammature athlete, Paul Hamm either. He has some endoresment deals, too.