Missy Franklin Wins Olympic Gold 13 Minutes After Her Previous Race - Could This Ever Happen In Running?

The question I want answered is, "Does this prove that swimming is a joke of a sport?"

It's just set up so the best guy or girl can win like 10 events and be famous.

why are you asking about distance running? These were short swim events with different strokes (and one wasn't a final).

test

Usain Bolt can jog and win his heat in the 100 and then win the gold medal in the backwards 100. It would be child's play.

100m and 200m sprint are not comparable to 100m and 200m swimming event.

But it's possible since Missy is not Chinese.

I think Curtis Beach had to jump minutes before his 800 prelim at NCAAs. Didn't turn out too well for him though. Schedules usually try to accomodate common doubles so runners usually get a few hours rest minimum between efforts.

Jesse Owens set 4 world records (technically 6 records) in 45 minutes.

3:15 - 9.4 for 100 yards

3:25 - 26' 8.5" long jump (still pretty good today)

3:34 - 20.3 for 220 y (earned 200m record en route)

4:00 - 22.6 for 220 y low hurdles (200m record en route)

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/more/05/24/owens.record.day/index.html

I could see Coe or Kiprop running a 1:46 800 prelim and coming back 13 minutes later and being competetive in a 1500m final.

Or El G running a controlled 1500m prelim and coming back in a 5000.

Not easy but not a huge stretch.

This.

Not tearing Franklin down at all, because she's a very impressive swimmer, but what she accomplished is much more feasible in swimming for several reasons:

A) Both races were short distances. Not a ton of aerobic work for an Olympic swimmer.

B) She got to cruise her qualifier; nowhere near 100% effort required.

C) She swam different strokes. This is the key. Her legs might be a little tired, but your arms aren't affected too much when you switch strokes/techniques etc. It really would be like Bolt jogging a qualifier in the regular 100 and then coming back to race the "hands on your head" or "arms crossed" 100.

What I find more interesting is could a 17-year old ever win an olympic running event (or 15 y/o, like the female breast-stroker)? I think no- the junior ethiopians and kenyans perhaps, but even there it's a long-shot. Hagos Gebrhiwet is 18, and ran 12:47, but I have no idea what he did as a 17 y/o.

So is swimming that under-developed as a sport that a youngster like that can be the best in the world? Does the pounding of running demand strength that just isn't there at that age? Not sure, but I think we can all agree no 15 year old will ever win an olympic running event. I'd like to know why.

In the 100 and 200, all your CP energy stores would be returned to normal. I think this is very possible, especially for doing a 100 heat and a 100 final. Less likely as the energy stores take longer to replenish. There is the psychological component too, which makes what she did more impressive.

Jesse Owens set three world records and tied a 4th in 45 minutes at the Big Ten conference meet on May 25, 1935.

http://www.bigten.org/genrel/013007aai.html

rojo wrote:

I heard that last night and just don't get how that is physiologically possible. And then I started wondering, "Could this ever happen in running?"

Swimming is more of a technical event than it is a physiological event.

A better comparison to track would be winning multiple field events (since those are skill-based). The general theme of swimming is multiple techniques using the same muscles.

This would be like winning the long jump, triple jump, and maybe high jump.

Or winning the 100m, 100m hurdles, 200m.

Or the discuss, shotput, javelin, and hammer.

The IM might be like the decathlon....maybe.

really?????? wrote:

In the 100 and 200, all your CP energy stores would be returned to normal. I think this is very possible, especially for doing a 100 heat and a 100 final. Less likely as the energy stores take longer to replenish. There is the psychological component too, which makes what she did more impressive.

correct. You are looking at 8-10 minutes recovery and you are ready to roll again. The sprinters could run the semi and come back and run the final. Top high school and collegiate hurdlers double back to run the flat all of the time.

ttyrdyjud wrote:

Swimming is more of a technical event than it is a physiological event.

A better comparison to track would be winning multiple field events (since those are skill-based). The general theme of swimming is multiple techniques using the same muscles.

This would be like winning the long jump, triple jump, and maybe high jump.

Or winning the 100m, 100m hurdles, 200m.

Or the discuss, shotput, javelin, and hammer.

The IM might be like the decathlon....maybe.

The discuss event is my favorite in the Olympics, even though the USA is at a disadvantage for not having sexy accents like the Columbians or Russians.

Paavo Nurmi's 1500/5000 double at the 1924 Olympics is pretty darn impressive. I always thought the two races were 90 minutes apart. But according wikipedia they were just 26 minutes apart. That sounds wrong to me but who knows.

I don't think the competition is as fierce in Swimming as it is in Track. I feel this is the primary reason that a white HS girl could pull this off.

Give the same facilities and training to poor black inner city kids from a young age and the records would be out of reach for white folks. Swimming is a privileged sport that requires an access to a pool and associated fees to use the pool and fees for coaching.

Any individual sport that doesn't have Africans near the top or dominating has something wrong with it. Either too privileged or minorities are deliberately excluded.

I remember in 08 when Angelo Taylor qualified in the 400IH at the Trials and the next event was the 400. His window was short, 10min maybe. He was in the last heat, false started to get that extra 30seconds or minute. He ended up running 200m and was done. Couldnt recover in time.

dd wrote:

What I find more interesting is could a 17-year old ever win an olympic running event (or 15 y/o, like the female breast-stroker)? I think no- the junior ethiopians and kenyans perhaps, but even there it's a long-shot. Hagos Gebrhiwet is 18, and ran 12:47, but I have no idea what he did as a 17 y/o.

So is swimming that under-developed as a sport that a youngster like that can be the best in the world? Does the pounding of running demand strength that just isn't there at that age? Not sure, but I think we can all agree no 15 year old will ever win an olympic running event. I'd like to know why.

A 17 year old could win a running event if they had put in two a days - running 4 hours/day, like a lot of these young swimmers have done since they were 6 or 7 years old. It seems like there is so much ignorance on this site as to just how much work these very young kids have put in for years. Most Americans start running much later and after trying many different sports in their youth.

Also, so much much whining and jealousy from American distance runners that are inferior on the world stage compared to the American swimmers. Sorry, Americans and most of the rest of the world prefer the swimmers/divers - their physiques, personalities, and consequently endorsements follow. Most people prefer a toned muscular body to a bony skelteal distance runner.

I never notice such racist, whiny remarks on swimming forums.

Please, please, PLEASE find me an Olympic track athlete who runs 4 hours a day. Do you not understand that running is an "impact" type of exercise that has negative effects on your bones and joints? It is physiologically impossible to run at a high intensity for four hours every single day.

You have to be older to be a distance runner because you need to build a large aerobic base on limited running time(this takes upwards of 5 years).

IF runners were able to pound mileage for four hours per day, I guarantee you we would start seeing 18-year-old medalists.