There has been a lot of discussion since Athens about foreign swimmers training in the United States. Most of them attend U.S. Universities, receive athletic scholarships, and compete at NCAA's. Some notable examples include Duje Draganja (Cal), Fred Bousquet and Kirsty Coventry (Auburn), Markus Rogan (Stanford), and the South African sprinters (Arizona). Some train in the U.S., but don't compete for a university (Inge de Bruijn). All of these athletes benefit from U.S. coaching, from training with U.S. swimmers, and in some cases, from financial support provided by U.S. entities (athletic scholarships). They all turn around and then win medals for other countries.
A couple questions: 1) What do you think about this arrangement generally? 2) Is it of benefit or detriment to U.S. swimming to have these foreign athletes training and competing here? 3) Should we be giving athletic scholarships, which are a scarce resource in swimming, to foreign athletes who will represent their own countries internationally instead of U.S.-born swimmers who will represent us internationally?
I'm sure there are other issues, but these come directly to mind.
I'm sorry, I missed your facts on how many of the 10K athletes we trained at the last Olympics to support your statement.
And, what was your comment about the US using foreign born athletes to bolster our medal count? Is that ok?
I suppose also checked the facts that show the US has won about the same number of overall medals at the Olympics for the past few decades. This, despite the fact that participation in the Olympics is up 40-50% AND there are rules implemented specifically designed to thwart our dominance.
For instance, in 1952 there were 69 countries and 5K athletes and the US won 76 medals (1st overall). In 1976 there were 92 countries and 6K althetes and the US won 94 medals (3rd overall). In 2004, there were 202 countries and 11.1K athletes and the US won 103 medals (1st overall). In 1952 the US medaled in 8/11 swimming events (72%). In 2004 the US medaled in 24/32 swimming events (75%). Couldn't find data on 1976. It doesn't look like we medalled in 1896 in swimming, where 4 events were held.
The sky is falling! The sky is falling!
I'm sorry, I missed your facts on how many of the 10K athletes we trained at the last Olympics to support your statement.
And, what was your comment about the US using foreign born athletes to bolster our medal count? Is that ok?
I suppose also checked the facts that show the US has won about the same number of overall medals at the Olympics for the past few decades. This, despite the fact that participation in the Olympics is up 40-50% AND there are rules implemented specifically designed to thwart our dominance.
For instance, in 1952 there were 69 countries and 5K athletes and the US won 76 medals (1st overall). In 1976 there were 92 countries and 6K althetes and the US won 94 medals (3rd overall). In 2004, there were 202 countries and 11.1K athletes and the US won 103 medals (1st overall). In 1952 the US medaled in 8/11 swimming events (72%). In 2004 the US medaled in 24/32 swimming events (75%). Couldn't find data on 1976. It doesn't look like we medalled in 1896 in swimming, where 4 events were held.
The sky is falling! The sky is falling!
