Quote:
Originally posted by foxaylove
Have you ran track or swam competitively? Technique is essential in various swimming races. Not all of the races are free style speed swimming; there are breaststroke, backstroke, butterfly, sidestroke, and front crawl in swimming styles. Not everyone can do every style of swimming. It takes discipline, hard training, and dedication to the sport to master them all. Phelps committed himself to learning and mastering every style needed to become the Olympian he has herald himself to be.
Did Usain Bolt commit to learning the hurdle technique or did he just prefer to settle for straight sprints? Settling and committing to all phases are the difference between both athletes. Track is too much pressure on the body? Ummm, swimming is just as intense and works out nearly every part of your body, from head to toe. Swimmers put immense pressure on their bodies, specifically in their feet, which is essential to any swimmer (just like in track).
He's King Olympian because he has mastered the sport in every phase possible and won at the highest level possible, breaking several WRs along the way.
|
I've done track, but not swimming. Pretty much all sports put some sort of pressure on the body, but swimming is
relatively low impact. I know when I did track, I was always told to swim for cardio when I was sore---it's a fantastic workout, but at the same time it doesn't stress your bones and joints the way running and other land exercises do; there's a reason it's pretty much the #1 recommended sport for people with conditions like arthritis, plantar fasciitis, and other inflammatory diseases. Unless they change the surface to cotton, if a runner tried to do 8 events, they would be a jack of all trades and a master of nothing but icy hots.
Hurdling is an extremely specialized event, and I'm trying to find an example of someone who did both at a high level and can't. Honestly, it's hard to explain, the thought of someone competing in both at a high level is just unfathomable to me. That's why you're seeing a lot of sportswriters who are still reluctant to put Phelps above, say Lewis and Owens, both of whom excelled in both sprints and the totally unrelated long jump.
Phelps's achievements are extraordinary, and he's unquestionably the most decorated Olympian of all time, but I have to look at this achievements in context. And I just used Bolt as a joke. Phelps > Bolt. I don't even expect Bolt to defend his golds with Yohan Blake coming for that ass.
I'm not even sure if I'm disagreeing with you, because I'm not sure I'd put anyone over King Phelps either (though I must say in the case of Owens, he did all he did without the support of his country in the face of Hitler AND he didn't really have a chance to expand his medal count since the 1940/1944 games were canceled), I just don't think it's an open and shut case based purely on medal count.
).
