Collegiate runs sub 1:40 800m solo?? This just happened at NCAA's in swimming essentially

you ding dong, every swimmers technique is vital to them! technique is important because moving through that heavy medium requires precision. that's what you are arguing when its not an argument being made here. are you aware of the conversation taking place. just curious coz you portay yourself as clueless. great swimmers now are learning the same form as decades ago... biondi, phelps, lochte, gains, evans.. same stroke drills, same challenges. welcome to the pool.

evans and phelps are genetically gifted, and they work hard on technique like all top swimmers. they haven't evolved a new, top secret technique. gains are made because records are meant to be broken, not because swimmers are evolving gills and three feet. the game is constantly being raised in swimming because the structure is so well developed in age group swimming, all the way up. stay on topic.

and runners are breaking times because they are finding new running techniques. (sounds crazy huh! catching on now?)

anything else?

does pool technology have anything to do with it?

the closer runners get to that edge--and it cannot be like swimming training, but it can be much higher in volume and intensity than we tend to do as runners in this country--the more potential for competing with ethiopians and kenyans, but the attrition rate becomes very high, whereas in swimming they crush those intervals all of the time from a startingly early age for many hours a day.

thousands and thousands of age group swimmers grow up and want to be phelps. we have waves of record breaking age group swimmers inspired by phelps coming through the age group ranks, blowing away national age group records in 11 - 12, 13 -14, 15 - 16 age groups. all on a diet of phelps dreams and other top US swimmers. lochte, frankiln, evans, biondi way back when.. its just snowballs exponentially the growth of the sport.

no runners do this for age group running that I know of. how many kids want to be like Bolt in america? or rupp? not many, but it is growing. top american runners are firing up HS runners. NOP, shumakers group, hansen's, Arizona elite, OTC, NYNJRR.. these pro runners are just starting to get younger kids and HS's going.

I really think the onset of LR, runnerspace, Flotrack are bringing running to new levels, and movies like without limits. this wave of inspiration hasn't yet infiltrated running like it has for swimming. swimming has had this head start for years because we have always been the best swimming country. imagine if we had a billy mills champion every 4 years. because that's what we have for swimming.

behind running and swimming in this respect is cycling. Lemond did the same thing for US cycling, inspiring Lance's generation (julich, leiphheimer, vande velde, hincapie, danielson, hamilton, fast freddy R.) then Lance inspired the current generation of dopers. but cycling is behind running in America and both are light years behind swimming as a developed, entrenched sport from youth levels to the Olympics.

So basically what your saying is that swimming is a popular sport. Sow hat? Soccer does the same thing. There are travelling leagues for soccer kids as young as 8 years old all over the damn country, and they take it very seriously. If the US was the only country doing this, they would dominate. But they are not, so instead of saying US soccer has a model that track should follow, we accept the fact that we suck at soccer. US swimmers excel because they are practically competing against themselves. If it wasn't for Australia, that global pillar of athletic talent, the US would come close to winning every medal available. South Africa if I recall has won Olympic medals in the relays. I spent 8 months in South Africa, never came across any serious swimmers, or youth programs, or swimming pools for that matter. It has less than 5 million white people. So managing to beat South Africa means that swimming programs are the models that every sport should follow?

Mermaid wrote:

You need to look at pics of Missy Franklin. Very tall (6'-1"). Extra long arms (6'-4" span). Really big feet (size 13). Muscular (165 lbs.). She is too much woman for a runner boy to handle.

Whoa, she's exactly my size, down to the wingspan and feet!

Also the same size as Solinsky.

Keep team sports and individual endurance sports separate. Not chess and checkers. Our team sports are great. Not soccer of course. OZ is no longer a swimming powerhouse. fyi. We are. But swimming is truly an international sport. That's why there is a limit of 2 swimmers per country, per event. If it was based on times with no entry limit, we would see swimming finals with 3 and 4 Americans with medal sweeps. Imagine a track steeple or 10k. Would be nearly an all Kenyan final.

1) Technique is vital in swimming. You are moving your body through a medium that has far more drag than air, and turns make a huge difference. Of course improvements in technique will result in faster times. Kelsi Worrell broke the 200 Fly record in the same meet, and she wasn't 100% happy with her walls. She can lower the record with better turns. There aren't real opportunities to shave track times with technique, and there haven't for years.

2) There's much more money and thus far better coaching in swimming. Also, Junior Swim competition in the US is much better organized than track. The best competition in swimming is in Club swimming, not High School. Young swimmers are getting the coaching they need to become better. Any yes, it's out of reach of poor kids.

Also, regarding Franklin: she set her first world records while she was still in High school, as did Katie Ledecky.

Missy Franklin is incredibly impressive, and the comparisons to Rudisha overall are valid - she is a truly dominant athlete. However, her world 200yd record is not comparable to Rudisha's 800: NCAA Swimming is a short-course yards event, meaning the length of the pool is 25 yards. Olympic and international competition is long-course meters, done in 50m pools. So, there are "world" records for yards events, but the real world records - the ones that the rest of the world cares about - are the long-course meters world records.

There are basically two elite-level short-course yards championships per year: NCAA championships, and USS short-course championships. Very, very few international athletes swim short-course yards (unless they are competing at NCAAs), and there really aren't any international meets.

So yes, "world" short-course yards records are generally dominated by NCAA / U.S. athletes. The only swimmers ever fully peaked for a yards meet are NCAA athletes. International elites almost never swim yards events, and for American elites the yards season is the equivalent to the indoor season in track: you're probably not fully peaking.

Missy F. swims 1:39 200 free! wrote:

USA running is doing much better now overall but still light years behind our swimming programs and development. USATF needs to meet with USA Swimming to model a legendary program and developmental system.

.

Your comparison is not apt because swimming has greater barriers to entry than running, and that reduces the competition. Swimming requires a high infrastructure cost, which reduces the opportunities for athletes from all parts of the world to get involved. That allows richer, developed countries like the USA to completely dominate the sport. For example, nobody is building a few Olympic quality swimming facility in the Rift Valley anytime soon.

But you can go out and run on the dirt roads for a much lower cost. It's easier for those of lesser means to get involved in track and field, and opens up the sport to a greater pool. Therefore, the competition will not be as diluted as we see in swimming.

Times are definitely dropping because of technique changes and rule changes. Why do you think Phelps at least experimented with a straight arm recovery for awhile? Why do you think they have changed the rules for dolphin kicks off the walls in breast stroke for example?

Also, records are broken often in NCAA because they swim SCY. Most other high level meets are LCM.

vivalarepublica is correct: the pool of competitors, and of recreational athletes, is far smaller for swimming than it is for running. The other sports that use fast swimming are water polo and tri, and if there is another, I don't know it. Many, many high paying sports use running.

Also, 800 yd, essentially a US only distance, is not comparable to 800m, an international distance, as several have pointed out. What are the world and US records for running 800yd?

would have to agree wrote:

USA swimming hauls the most medals at every Olympics. And Swimming is the deepest and the most competitive Olympic sport worldwide. USATF could benefit from such a relationship. There probably already is a working relationship via the OTC.

Swimming is deep in terms of competition, but like everything else it's a game of genetics. The howls of outrage will come, but whites and Asians possess a higher percentage of individuals with swimming talent than do blacks - yeah yeah, the odd black swimmer here and there will win a medal, generally in the 25 meter freestyle. Running is different because those events are dominated by blacks who have a higher percentage of individuals with the makeup to excel at running. You have your Rupps, Wariners, etc. but they are outnumbered so to speak.

If you want to look at other sports, same thing. Weight-lifting at the '12 Olympics was completely dominated by whites and Asians, winning literally every medal. People try to say it's "access", "money", etc. But not true. Different muscle tissue makeup, etc.

Sure, there are other sports that are dominated by groups because they gravitate toward those sports for a variety of reasons. Boxing was dominated by Irish for decades, then Italians, then blacks, now it's swung toward Europeans in general (they hold 17 of 20 belts from 150 lbs on up) and it isn't only "Russians", while Hispanic fighters thoroughly dominate most of the divisions under 150 lbs. This isn't due to black guys in the US not engaging in the sport, that was a myth put up the networks to try and take peoples' attention from the fact that the more white faces there were in boxing, the more the networks chose to ignore the sport. Gee, wonder why? lol

The US is never going to match swimming's level of dominance with the whole world competing in the sport. We CAN do much better in the distance events, as it's likely there are several guys at any given time with the talent (or more talent) of Rupp, Webb, Ryun, Scott, and so on. But it's even more likely they've never given running a second thought.

M. Spitz wrote:

Also, records are broken often in NCAA because they swim SCY. Most other high level meets are LCM.

Correct. This is like someone breaking an 880yd record running record on a 220yd track. The rest of the world doesn't even HAVE 25yd pools.

And "solo" is pretty meaningless in swimming. Racing is a boost for some but PLENTY of WRs are in basically uncontested wins. And pacing isn't a thing the way it is in running.

I never understood why swimmers have to inflate their event count with all their different strokes. Free style is the fastest, right? Why don't they just do that? All the other strokes are essentially akin to race walking. I think track runners should add skipping for every distance. I bet Farah would be really competitive in the 5k and 10k skip at the next Olympics. He might be able to get a couple WRs, too.

Echo wrote:

I never understood why swimmers have to inflate their event count with all their different strokes. .

I'll never understand why runners complain so much about that, as if it affects them in any way. Swim races are shorter, and meet directors manage to get all the events in. What's the problem?

Different swimmers excel at different strokes. Some excel at two, and these people often to swim IMs. What's the problem? If I competed at Judo or Boxing (where I have one event), I might criticize running for having so many events too. Why is there a need for a 100, 200, 4x100 and 4x200? shy not just have one sprint (100M), one middle distance event (800 or 1500M), and one long distance event (10K)? And what's with the running and jumping in hurdles or steeplechase? Isn't it faster to not have those obstacles on the track?

AMEN! They should just compete in the 100m and the 10k at track like in swimming! They just compete in the 50m and 800m... The relay thing is annoying too. Competing two relays at the Olympics is absurd. Didn't swimming have 3 at the last Olympics? Anyways you are preaching to the choir here.

truthinesss wrote:

sadly wiggins,

No, top swimmers haven't changed swimming techniques to get faster. No techniques have been invented or drastically improved upon for years. That was tapped out long ago.

The last jump in performances across the board for swimming was 2009 because of swimsuit technology, not because there was a new way discovered to swim freestyle. Those suits were banned shortly after but the WR's remained from that year.

Remarkably, many of those "textile suit" WR's are being erased now with, slower suits, again, not because of new techniques being invented, but because the evolution of times and the depth of USA swimming from age group swimming through to collegiate and Olympics. It's a proven quantity.

No, it is not "Wiggins". The poster does not know how to spell and he writes it "Wigins".