Quote:
Originally Posted by octothorp
Only four athletes have ever won gold in the 100 and 200 sprints, let alone the roster of events you're suggesting. But winning two golds in swimming isn't only easier, it's downright commonplace. 20 times in Olympic history, swimmers have won multiple golds at a single olympics. Since 1988, the average has been more than three multi-gold-medalist swimmers per games, and just under one 5-gold-medalist per games. And yet the swimming advocates argue that these are all unique disciplines. Yet here's a crazy fact: of all the gold medals won in swimming at these Olympics, only three were won by athletes who did not medal in at least one other sport (and one of those three is a record-holder in another discipline). Yeah, unique disciplines, right.
It's also no coincidence that the number of swimming events has expanded every couple Olympics, and the number of multiple-medalists keeps increasing. Would Spitz have won eight gold and eight world records if he had the benefit of a 50m freestyle? Hard to say, given that the 100m was his closest race; we'll never know, though.
Phelps' record is fairly meaningless when compared against any Olympics prior to 1968, at which time there were only 10 swimming races. If he was swimming 50 years earlier, he would not have had the advantage of the 400 medley, the 4*100 relay, the 200 freestyle, the 200 butterfly, the 100 butterfly, the 200 individual medley, or the 4*100 medley relay. His lone medal would have been the 4*200 freestyle relay. Phelps is one of the top two swimmers of the last 40 years. More than that we can't say about him yet; give it another 40 and see how it stands up. I would expect that it's at the very least a tie for the best, but I'd also predict that swimming continues to produce one 5-gold-medalist almost every games, and about once every 20 years, someone gets 7 or 8.
Compare all this to how difficult it is to be a multi-gold medalist in track. In 100 years of competition, only two athletes have ever won 4 golds at a single Olympics, despite the number of events being relatively unchanged. Only eight athletes have ever won both the 100 and 200, and only one has won the 200 and 400.
To me the best Olympic performance is Jesse Owens, but maybe I'm just anti-american!
|
I largely agree, but it is a little misleading to suggest he would have been quite that poor. For instance, Phelps would surely have won the 200m breast stroke as the butterfly stroke would have qualified (it was separated b/c it was the faster stroke but met the rule of the day for breast stroke). Phelps is also a world class backstroker, but does not enter typically. He would also likely have a great shot in the 100m free - he set something like the 3rd fastest 100m split in the relay and I doubt he trains it all that much.
On the track, the double is also much more common than let on by simply looking at the sprints. The 1500m and 5000m double is relatively common, as is the 5k, 10k double.
Nonetheless, it's pretty clear to me that gymnastics and swimming are set up for multiple medallists in a way that makes direct comparison to most other sports misleading.