Swimming being exposed as joke in these Olympic games

Old News.

We've known swimming is a joke for decades.

Men's 100m WR has been broken 18 times in the last 30 years. More times than all but one men's swimming event over the same period.

SmellyDumbBoomerScum wrote:

WRs being set in the heats (not even the semis, the HEATS)

Oldest swimming WR is like 8 years old

Dopers competing with no penalty

40ish events with medals (lol just lol)

Swimming is kind of a joke.

3/10

Swimming Questioner wrote:

This is probably a terrible place to ask this, but I'll ask anyway:

Do the non-freestyle swimming strokes have realistic applications that one might conceivably use them for in a non-racing setting?

For instance, I would think that breast stroke allows one to see where he's going more easily than does freestyle. Possibly less exertion (??), too-maybe better for very long swims? Backstroke clearly allows for easier breathing. Maybe that could be preferable in choppy seas?

So, if I man found himself, say, having to swim from the mainland to an island 1-3 miles offshore, is it reasonable to think that a well-trained swimmer might prefer a non-freestyle stroke in some cases?

Well you wouldn't do a butterfly to swim to shore.....

USA has 17 medals with 12 from Swimming, the other sports got to pick it up, even Track and Field will have a hard time getting more medals than swimming.

Make that 19 medals with 14 from swimming.

Mr. Obvious wrote:

We see these same stupid arguments at every Olympics about swimming. It is a different sport than Track and Field. It has different requirements and parameters than Track and Field. I just get really tired of it.

If you don't like swimming, don't watch it. I'm not telling you that you have to like it.

Honestly I appreciate both swimming and track and field. I recognize that there are different requirements in each and the medals in swimming are different than the medals in track and field. It doesn't mean swimming is a joke. It just means it is different. I just don't see how people can't get that. (Well, mostly they just don't want to get it).

+1

The biggest joke is backstroke. They changed the rules years ago and now it's what a 30% underwater race? Stupid. They should change it so no time allowed underwater and no flipping over to initiate the turn.

Another dumb thing about swimming is the predictability. They don't have to deal with traffic, nobody will trip and fall, they don't get lane DQ's like sprinters. They don't have to deal with wind (as an indoor sport it should be in the winter games along with basketball) and they don't face the risk of a no-mark or fouls like field events.

But the dumbest thing is still the different strokes when one stroke is clearly superior to all the others.

Swimming Questioner wrote:

This is probably a terrible place to ask this, but I'll ask anyway:

Do the non-freestyle swimming strokes have realistic applications that one might conceivably use them for in a non-racing setting?

For instance, I would think that breast stroke allows one to see where he's going more easily than does freestyle. Possibly less exertion (??), too-maybe better for very long swims? Backstroke clearly allows for easier breathing. Maybe that could be preferable in choppy seas?

So, if I man found himself, say, having to swim from the mainland to an island 1-3 miles offshore, is it reasonable to think that a well-trained swimmer might prefer a non-freestyle stroke in some cases?

Breaststroke is supposed to be more relaxing if you can do it right

Bad Wigins wrote:

Another dumb thing about swimming is the predictability. They don't have to deal with traffic, nobody will trip and fall, they don't get lane DQ's like sprinters. They don't have to deal with wind (as an indoor sport it should be in the winter games along with basketball) and they don't face the risk of a no-mark or fouls like field events.

Yeah I'd like to see them swim laps around an oval shaped course

HardLoper wrote:

Swimming Questioner wrote:

This is probably a terrible place to ask this, but I'll ask anyway:

Do the non-freestyle swimming strokes have realistic applications that one might conceivably use them for in a non-racing setting?

For instance, I would think that breast stroke allows one to see where he's going more easily than does freestyle. Possibly less exertion (??), too-maybe better for very long swims? Backstroke clearly allows for easier breathing. Maybe that could be preferable in choppy seas?

So, if I man found himself, say, having to swim from the mainland to an island 1-3 miles offshore, is it reasonable to think that a well-trained swimmer might prefer a non-freestyle stroke in some cases?

Breaststroke is supposed to be more relaxing if you can do it right

The channel swimmers and triathletes in open water all use front crawl. Backstroke in choppy seas would be nerve racking. You have limited forward view. Breaststroke, you'd be swallowing water and is too slow. front crawl is the best stroke.

I think they should add various sport fishing events and how about adding NASCAR and Formula One style events? They are not much different from luge or bobsled.

Breaststroke is supposed to be more relaxing if you can do it right[/quote]

I'm suprised they havent added the side-stroke.

Phelps, King, Ledecky etc

luv2run wrote:

SmellyDumbBoomerScum wrote:

WRs being set in the heats (not even the semis, the HEATS)

Oldest swimming WR is like 8 years old

Dopers competing with no penalty

40ish events with medals (lol just lol)

Swimming is kind of a joke.

Name a swimming doper who served no penalty.

Efimova (RUS) served her suspensions. Now, should they be longer? Perhaps, but you should learn about them as well.

Sun (CHN)? Again learn about them.

Also, not sure track folks should be tossing stones.

Olympic Truth wrote:

Phelps, King, Ledecky etc

luv2run wrote:

[quote]SmellyDumbBoomerScum wrote:

40ish events with medals (lol just lol)

.

Track and Field has I believe 47 Olympic events

I can't wait for the white part of the Olympics to be over so we can watch some REAL athletes.

It also worth adding that those 13 25 guys are being pushed to run 13 25 because of the severe competition ahead of them. Without that competition they would be running slower. In this light I would say that Olympic champion swimmers are more like 14 min or 15 min 5k runners in terms of fitness/athletic achievement. Somone pointed out that the women swimmers today in the middle distance events are at the level of the best men swimmers in the 1970s. In contrast Walter George who was the best male middle distance runner in 1896 would still probably hold his own against the best female middle distance runners today (he may even be a way ahead if you account for improvements in track surfaces since his time).

Running is simply a much more advanced sport than swimming on the human acheivement curve mainly because the global competition in running is much more severe. In some ways this is strange because a lot of distance running coaches are actually terrible with a poor understanding of what is required to train optimally whereas swim coaches do seem to be much more clued up on how to best train to become a swimmer.

So overall I think swimmers should be respected because they train hard and are fit etc, but at the end of the day an Olympic champion in a distance running event is at a completely different level from an Olympic champion in a swimming event.

laughing wrote:

(1.) They already have that hopping race you talked about: It's called hurdles. Imagine that...the same exact race, but we have them do something additional during: jump over stuff. Kind of like having them do different swimming strokes.

So if you think different swimming strokes are a joke, you eliminate the hurdle events, the steeplechase, and arguably the relays. With the relays, you could say, "Hey, we already have a 400m race, but why not let 4 guys do it instead of 1, and force them to pass a baton so that there are an additional layer of rules that increases the likelihood of DQ?" I happen to like the relays and hurdles, but your argument against swimming would be consistent with hating those races.

This is slightly different from what is happening in swimming stokes. In track and field events such as steeple chase or hurdles, you give the athletes a "course" to race over but they can jump the hurdles any way they want to and run between the hurdles any way they want to and they are basically free to chose the way they move their body get to finish line as fast as possible.

Swimming stokes are more comparable to something like race walking except that they are probabaly more ridiculous. A 200m butterfly race is like having an 800m race on the track where the runners are forced to wave their hands around their heads for the entire race and move their legs in a certain way - they are constrained to move using a certain style of body movement. That just seems too contrived for a real athletic competition.

Track and field events that are somewhat contrived in this way are race walking as mentioned, and the triple jump. I would have no problem if these were axed from track and field.