How is speed walking an olympic sport?!

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by mykalberta

It fits well with the worlds current view of...

(1) Everyone is a winner, no one loses
(2) Just have fun
(3) We dont want to exclude anyone.

It works perfectly with the astronomic stupidity what Rogge said about bolt.

http://sports.aol.ca/article/rogge-b...espect/320226/

The complete lunacy of some a$$hat Belgium Euro Veggie hotdog bs artist.

Everyone who dominates their sport, everyone brags. And brag they should, they put in more time, more effort, or just simply had more skill than the losers. What Bolt did was pure, not some Saudi we will sell you oil and then stab you in the back tomorrow routine - the IOC and most world bodys make me completely and utterly sick.

What the heck did this rant mean? Where the heck did the Saudi part come from?

I thought MYK had been a little too cheery lately. This had to be comin'

[OilKiller]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

What the heck did this rant mean? Where the heck did the Saudi part come from?

No kidding...

Think I'm going to need a lot more alcohol or perhaps some good drugs to understand what the hell that was all about.

[Traditional_Ale]

Originally Posted by redforever

If you want to be the best, you need the best of everything. You can have all the skill in the world but unless that skill is matched with the best people and facilities , that skill is all for naught in most cases.

Sorry, but I seriously have to call BS on this statement.

I can think of countless examples of people with "all the skill in the world" who didn't have coaches, gear, facilities etc and still became huge successes or even legends.

- Theo Fleury apparantly came from a brutally broken home with no support.

- Nearly every jazz musician up until 1960 come to mind, especially Bird.

- Thomas Edison tried a thousand different ways to build a lightbulb with insanely crude tools and materials.

- Eminem, as much as I dislike his music, is a very inspirational story.

etc etc etc...

-

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by Traditional_Ale

Sorry, but I seriously have to call BS on this statement.

I can think of countless examples of people with "all the skill in the world" who didn't have coaches, gear, facilities etc and still became huge successes or even legends.

- Theo Fleury apparantly came from a brutally broken home with no support.

- Nearly every jazz musician up until 1960 come to mind, especially Bird.

- Thomas Edison tried a thousand different ways to build a lightbulb with insanely crude tools and materials.

- Eminem, as much as I dislike his music, is a very inspirational story.

etc etc etc...

-

I'm not sure Edison is a good example - he bought the initial patent for the electric lightbulb, and then perfected it in he shop which was purposely built for invention (Menlo Park). His methods may have been crude by today's standards, but it was almost state of the art in his day.

[Traditional_Ale]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

I'm not sure Edison is a good example - he bought the initial patent for the electric lightbulb, and then perfected it in he shop which was purposely built for invention (Menlo Park). His methods may have been crude by today's standards, but it was almost state of the art in his day.

Fair enough.

How about the guy who invented the wheel then?

[mmanzz]

Originally Posted by Barnes

Ian Miller vs. David Wells? What year do you live in?

It's being shown on Bold. Speedwalking gets better coverage. Fun thing to do, boring olympic event.

Edit: whoops, late post.

LOL, ok I admit, i'm very up to date with the Flames(too much so) and a few other sports. However I last watched the great American pastime of baseball when Wells was playing. I'm sure there are modern day examples of his un-olympian frame. At the time, i remember a game took 4 hours to play with about 25 seconds of action, or was that football?

[ken0042]

We were talking about this at work- the Equestrian events. One point that somebody brought up; if it's really all about the horse, how is it one man has been in every Olympics since 1972? Obviously he's used different horses, so there is something there.

Maybe not "sport" or athletic ability, but something.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by cyclone3483

Okay, time to get educated, people.

First, it is race walking, not "speed walking".

Second, there is no limit on your speed, provided what you do classifies as a walk (one foot on the ground at all times, straight leg while in contact with the ground).

Third, the sport may be nothing in the Americas, but it is HUGE in Europe and Asia and has more following world wide than many other Olympic sports.

Fourth, race walking is judged to make sure people don't break the rules (like football, hockey, basketball, etc.), not judged for quality of performance (like gymnastics, synchro swimming, diving, etc.).

Fifth, rules for judging state that the person must look legal to the naked eye, so they may look like they are cheating if you look at slow-mo, but they aren't breaking the rules if it still looks (to the naked eye) like they are not lifting or bending the knee.

Finally, race walkers go further (20k and 50k) than most of you have ever gone in your life and probably faster too.

My wife is a race walker, provincial champ, and she enters running races to beat the runners. She just did 27k training today and can get speeds around 5 mins/k. The 50k gold medallist did it in something like 3:45. Any of you run a marathon in that time? Well he went 7.8k further...

You don't have to like the sport, switch the channel, you have choice. It may look funny, but it is more of a sport than at least 50% of the Olympic events (archery, shooting, equestrian, synchro anything, badminton) and has a higher world wide audience than many other sports (see previous list).

There...feel educated?

Wow. That is pretty fast, I do that jogging (not for that distance mind you). However, part of the Olympics is entertainment value, and I'd suggest that a lot of us just dont see it.

Hell, I was in the neighborhood during the tour de France and some people camp out for weekends to get spots to watch bikes go by them in a few seconds. Its kinda like NASCAR in that respect I guess.

At the same time though, not very telegenic for the North American audience, but then I dont get NASCAR either. Are there turns in speed...I mean race walking?

Originally Posted by ken0042

We were talking about this at work- the Equestrian events. One point that somebody brought up; if it's really all about the horse, how is it one man has been in every Olympics since 1972? Obviously he's used different horses, so there is something there.

Maybe not "sport" or athletic ability, but something.

My sister has been big in this her whole life, hell, the barn she works for in Belgium sold Lamaze the horse he won on and I can tell you what that thing is: Money.

It is a rich man's game. You have to finance yourself to get a good horse at the ground level, but once you make it with winning money (which is a pittance compared to sponsor money) you can continue to buy the best horses and thus continue to win once you have a name that sells. Sure, there are certain things riders have to be good/great at, but you're not going to get there any other way.

The equestrian industry is the most crooked sham I've ever witnessed.

[NuclearFart]

Originally Posted by cyclone3483

Okay, time to get educated, people.

First, it is race walking, not "speed walking".

Second, there is no limit on your speed, provided what you do classifies as a walk (one foot on the ground at all times, straight leg while in contact with the ground).

Third, the sport may be nothing in the Americas, but it is HUGE in Europe and Asia and has more following world wide than many other Olympic sports.

Fourth, race walking is judged to make sure people don't break the rules (like football, hockey, basketball, etc.), not judged for quality of performance (like gymnastics, synchro swimming, diving, etc.).

Fifth, rules for judging state that the person must look legal to the naked eye, so they may look like they are cheating if you look at slow-mo, but they aren't breaking the rules if it still looks (to the naked eye) like they are not lifting or bending the knee.

Finally, race walkers go further (20k and 50k) than most of you have ever gone in your life and probably faster too.

My wife is a race walker, provincial champ, and she enters running races to beat the runners. She just did 27k training today and can get speeds around 5 mins/k. The 50k gold medallist did it in something like 3:45. Any of you run a marathon in that time? Well he went 7.8k further...

You don't have to like the sport, switch the channel, you have choice. It may look funny, but it is more of a sport than at least 50% of the Olympic events (archery, shooting, equestrian, synchro anything, badminton) and has a higher world wide audience than many other sports (see previous list).

There...feel educated?

Regardless of the "finer" points you submit praising technique, the fact remains that all these stupid nuances are there to limit your speed. They serve no other purpose, as they certainly arent in place for style or grace.

This is a race and against other people, where the fastest time wins. A race is fundamentally flawed if you are paradoxically penalized for going too fast.

And I never said that people who do it aren't fit. In fact I'd say they are very fit, and thus should be allowed to show the world this without all the useless restrictions.

[flylock shox]

Originally Posted by NuclearFart

Regardless of the "finer" points you submit praising technique, the fact remains that all these stupid nuances are there to limit your speed. They serve no other purpose, as they certainly arent in place for style or grace.

This is a race and against other people, where the fastest time wins. A race is fundamentally flawed if you are paradoxically penalized for going too fast.

And I never said that people who do it aren't fit. In fact I'd say they are very fit, and thus should be allowed to show the world this without all the useless restrictions.

Yup. That's the whole point. It's not that the athletes aren't athletes, it's that the entire event just doesn't make any sense. Why would you walk a race?

Male marathon runners travel 42 km in about 2 hours 10 minutes, and the guy who won the 50 km race-walk did it in about 3 hours 35 minutes. Somehow I suspect the marathon runners would be able to go another 8 km in under 85 minutes. So, pretty clear that walkers lose to runners in a race. Therefore, if you're racing, friggin' well RUN already!

[ken0042]

So, question for you people who don't like the walking events- what do you think about the hurdle events in Track?

I mean, if the point is to run as fast as you can, why put obstacles in the way of the runners?

[PowerPlayoffs06]

Originally Posted by ken0042

We were talking about this at work- the Equestrian events. One point that somebody brought up; if it's really all about the horse, how is it one man has been in every Olympics since 1972? Obviously he's used different horses, so there is something there.

Maybe not "sport" or athletic ability, but something.

You've got two guys on the silver medal winning team who could be the father of any athlete in any of the other events (Ian Miller, 61 and Mac Cone, 56). You have this Lamaze guy who missed two Olympics because he's been banned from the sport THREE TIMES, (two of which were supposed to be lifetime bans for cocaine use, and one of those bans was overturned because he used coke while already under the previous lifetime ban before it was overturned; way to learn your lesson, buddy) and he wins a gold.

It sure doesn't sound to me like it's all about the riders skill. I mean, when they're testing the horse for doping, and overturning lifetime bans because the cocaine use was recreational and not performance enhancing, it's pretty obvious who's really winning the medals.

[flylock shox]

Originally Posted by ken0042

So, question for you people who don't like the walking events- what do you think about the hurdle events in Track?

I mean, if the point is to run as fast as you can, why put obstacles in the way of the runners?

Different gig. The hurdle changes the course, not the athlete's ability to complete the course as fast as possible.

To me, race-walking is to running as mosey-hurdling would be to hurdling.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by flylock shox

To me, race-walking is to running as mosey-hurdling would be to hurdling.

... and backstroke or butterfly would be to freestyle.

The pool is exactly the same, they just limit the athletes by telling them that they can only swim a certain way. How is that different? It's not.

[HOOT]

One thing I have noticed I don't like about the Olympics is how the qualifying works.

For example, Jamaica could only qualify 3 women for the 100 meter race. Veronica Campbell-Brown one girl left out won the gold in 100 meter 2007 World Championships and ran a 10.88 to come in 4th in the qualifying.

So instead of having the 4 fastest women in the world race for the gold, they have someone who is running a 11.51 getting booted in the first round.

Then she comes out out to win a gold in the 200 meter in convincing fashion.

Personally I want to see the best of the best when I see something like this, that's why I am happy about NHL players playing in these types of events.

[flylock shox]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

... and backstroke or butterfly would be to freestyle.

The pool is exactly the same, they just limit the athletes by telling them that they can only swim a certain way. How is that different? It's not.

You're preaching to the choir brother...

[redforever]

Originally Posted by redforever
If you want to be the best, you need the best of everything. You can have all the skill in the world but unless that skill is matched with the best people and facilities , that skill is all for naught in most cases.

Originally Posted by Traditional_Ale

Sorry, but I seriously have to call BS on this statement.

I can think of countless examples of people with "all the skill in the world" who didn't have coaches, gear, facilities etc and still became huge successes or even legends.

- Theo Fleury apparantly came from a brutally broken home with no support.

- Nearly every jazz musician up until 1960 come to mind, especially Bird.

- Thomas Edison tried a thousand different ways to build a lightbulb with insanely crude tools and materials.

- Eminem, as much as I dislike his music, is a very inspirational story.
-

As I said, in most cases. There are always some who rise and shine despite the odds. But that certainly is not the norm in today's world of sports. Special athletes with special skills get weeded out pretty early these days and they get matched with people who will develop those skills to their fullest.

Until you get government completely out of the Olympics and until you get all sports that involve human judging out of the Olympics, you are going to see lots of sports in there that you don't think belong or you question the skill factor or you question the results. Hosting the Olympics these days is a mammoth job, it takes big big money and any host is going to want sports that will bring money in.

Talk is, both baseball and softball are out for the next Olympics in London. And those two sports can't appeal apparently until 2009. But if the Olympics after that are in Chicago, talk already is those two sports are going to be reinstated. Now why would that be? And why do you think table tennis and some of those sports suddenly got included when the Olympics were hosted by Seoul?

[MoneyGuy]

I've race walked. It's difficult and requires a lot of technique to do well. I'll take it as an Oly sport over gymnastics and trampolining.

[Berger_4_]

And miss out on all the female gymnasts? Sorry but I just can't agree with somebody who takes that away from me haha.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Berger_4_

And miss out on all the female gymnasts? Sorry but I just can't agree with somebody who takes that away from me haha.

You like looking at 10 year olds?