Michael Phelps, greatest Olympian ever?

canoner · Post #21 » by **canoner** » Sat Aug 16, 2008 5:26 am

Is the whole wall a huge sensor or just part of it? I mean how exactly is it timed? Electrical, optical, or else?

WEFFPIM · Post #22 » by **WEFFPIM** » Sat Aug 16, 2008 6:22 am

I think just that rectangle at the top of the wall with the black cross on it is the censor. That is where the swimmer would touch both on the turns and at the end.

Point forward · Post #23 » by **Point forward** » Sat Aug 16, 2008 7:38 am

He makes a strong case, but Phelps has it "easy" collecting medals. It is virtually impossible to compare him with e.g. Oerter or Muhammad Ali who have only one competition per Olympics. Al Oerter has 4 consecutive gold medals in discus throw, that is unique, and what Ali did, you all know...

Tom Baker · Post #24 » by **Tom Baker** » Sat Aug 16, 2008 12:15 pm

High 5 wrote:Too me it looked like Phelps won, but the human eye can't tell the difference between .01 seconds.

No, the human eye can't tell the difference between 0.01 seconds. 1/24th is the limit. But this was a slow motion replay, so it's not "the human eye". Plus it was clear. The Serbian had his arms straight forward and reached the wall while Phelps still had his arms out to the side for his final stroke, then Phelps arms swept forward and he touched the wall.

High 5 wrote:The wall doesn't lie.

This I agree with. So, why did Phelps win? That's my original question. Did the Serbian not press the pad hard enough? How does it work? Because he touched the wall before Phelps. Like I said: bizarre.

Rasho Brezec · Post #25 » by **Rasho Brezec** » Sat Aug 16, 2008 12:28 pm

Judging by this, I'd say Phelps did touch the wall before Cavic:

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=ypaT6Q1RKXM&fmt=18

TrueRain · Post #26 » by **TrueRain** » Sat Aug 16, 2008 12:48 pm

Just look at it closely. I don't know how he did it, but Phelps definitely touched the wall first. It's crazy.

Post #27 » by **Cowology** » Sat Aug 16, 2008 1:31 pm

Yeah, it's really hard to just go by medal count since other sports don't have the opportunity to collect as many. T&F, Boxing etc you can only collect so many at a single Olympics.

Still, it's tough dismiss just how thoroughly dominant Phelps has been at 2 separate Olympics. He at least has to be in the conversation, and if he can come back in '12 and win a few more medals then he'd have longevity to go along with his single game dominance.

Post #28 » by **dougthonus** » Sat Aug 16, 2008 1:46 pm

a weight lifter or a basketball player, for example, can only win one medal at a single olympics.
would you say kitajima, the japanese swimmer who has won 2 gold medals in beijing, is a greater olympian than the weight lifter simply because he's won more medals? maybe, maybe not.

I'm not arguing that Phelps is the most impressive athlete in the history of the world, but the greatest Olympian. A guy who participates in a one and done event in the Olympics IS relegated to not being the greatest Olympian because his impact on the Olympics is simply much smaller than watching someone who competes every day. The story of a basketball player or boxer or weight lifter is one day long. Michael Phelps has dominated the Olympics almost every day here and been the lead story every day, much like last year.

I'm not arguing for him as the most impressive athlete in the history of the world, but when it comes to Olympians, I think it's a slightly different kind of question.

Certainly it's difficult to compare across sports but I think it's more fun to discuss it than to throw the question out immediately.

Again, if racking up so many medals in swimming is so easy where are all the other swimmers who've done it? There are none.

Post #29 » by **dougthonus** » Sat Aug 16, 2008 1:48 pm

This I agree with. So, why did Phelps win? That's my original question. Did the Serbian not press the pad hard enough? How does it work? Because he touched the wall before Phelps. Like I said: bizarre.

The Serbians saw the camera that does 1/10000th of a second split, saw that not only did Phelps clearly get there first, but that there wasn't even a question of a tie. They withdrew the protest. I think your view of "the Serbian guy hit the pad first" is only based on the fact that you're watching it on a crappy feed (even 1080i HD is a crappy feed to do a 1/100th split) and the human eye can't tell the distinct difference.

The mega camera can and did have a view where it clearly showed Phelps winning and the Serbs even accepted it.

Rasho Brezec · Post #30 » by **Rasho Brezec** » Sat Aug 16, 2008 2:03 pm

Cavic said he shouldn't have clipped his nails before the game.

Post #31 » by **5DOM** » Sat Aug 16, 2008 2:13 pm

dougthonus wrote:
a weight lifter or a basketball player, for example, can only win one medal at a single olympics.
would you say kitajima, the japanese swimmer who has won 2 gold medals in beijing, is a greater olympian than the weight lifter simply because he's won more medals? maybe, maybe not.

I'm not arguing that Phelps is the most impressive athlete in the history of the world, but the greatest Olympian. A guy who participates in a one and done event in the Olympics IS relegated to not being the greatest Olympian because his impact on the Olympics is simply much smaller than watching someone who competes every day. The story of a basketball player or boxer or weight lifter is one day long. Michael Phelps has dominated the Olympics almost every day here and been the lead story every day, much like last year.

I'm not arguing for him as the most impressive athlete in the history of the world, but when it comes to Olympians, I think it's a slightly different kind of question.

Certainly it's difficult to compare across sports but I think it's more fun to discuss it than to throw the question out immediately.

Again, if racking up so many medals in swimming is so easy where are all the other swimmers who've done it? There are none.

that means the Olympics is the competition for the swimmers?
Again, some athletes dont even get a chance at winning multiple medals. But many swimmers already did win. Also, it really depends on how many medals are available in each sport. If archery had events at different distances (like they used to), the players would probably win more.

And I don't think anyone said that it's "easy" to win so medals in swimming. But at least it's possible and easiER. The world record holder in 200m fly, probably has a good (but not clear) chance at 100m fly and those relays. That's like 3-4 already.

Posey H8er · Post #32 » by **Posey H8er** » Sat Aug 16, 2008 2:18 pm

This is such a broad question that can be interpreted many different ways. Who says the total medal count makes you the greatest? I feel it is more the level at which you dominated your competition and because of that Phelps is up there high on my list.

High 5 · Post #33 » by **High 5** » Sat Aug 16, 2008 3:56 pm

Tom Baker wrote:
High 5 wrote:Too me it looked like Phelps won, but the human eye can't tell the difference between .01 seconds.

No, the human eye can't tell the difference between 0.01 seconds. 1/24th is the limit. But this was a slow motion replay, so it's not "the human eye". Plus it was clear. The Serbian had his arms straight forward and reached the wall while Phelps still had his arms out to the side for his final stroke, then Phelps arms swept forward and he touched the wall.

High 5 wrote:The wall doesn't lie.

This I agree with. So, why did Phelps win? That's my original question. Did the Serbian not press the pad hard enough? How does it work? Because he touched the wall before Phelps. Like I said: bizarre.

You're wrong, dude. Phelps won fair and square. Everyone else inlcuding the Serbian has accepted this.

Cafu · Post #34 » by **Cafu** » Sat Aug 16, 2008 4:23 pm

Could anyone lighten me up about Phelps vs Thorpe?
What kinds of swimmers are they and how often they went against each others?

Post #35 » by **5DOM** » Sat Aug 16, 2008 4:36 pm

I think Thorpe was just as dominant in freestyle.

watch 30-40 secs http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KgZhO1ZfJrE

The second place winner was on steroids or something

02102007 · Post #36 » by **02102007** » Sat Aug 16, 2008 6:57 pm

TrueRain wrote:

Just look at it closely. I don't know how he did it, but Phelps definitely touched the wall first. It's crazy.

that is insane...he just has the little bit of burst of energy at the end to beat him...wow...

Al n' Perk No Layups! · Post #37 » by **Al n' Perk No Layups!** » Sat Aug 16, 2008 7:35 pm

Tom Baker wrote:
High 5 wrote:The wall doesn't lie.

This I agree with. So, why did Phelps win? That's my original question. Did the Serbian not press the pad hard enough? How does it work? Because he touched the wall before Phelps. Like I said: bizarre.

It's not bizarre. Phelps touched first, that's an indisputable fact. If you were to brush your pinky across the pad it would go off. You're just in denial.

Post #38 » by **dougthonus** » Sat Aug 16, 2008 7:38 pm

that means the Olympics is the competition for the swimmers?

Clearly not.

Again, some athletes dont even get a chance at winning multiple medals. But many swimmers already did win. Also, it really depends on how many medals are available in each sport. If archery had events at different distances (like they used to), the players would probably win more.

I don't think an athlete who only participates in 1 event can be the greatest Olympian ever. Maybe that's unfair, but thems the breaks.

And I don't think anyone said that it's "easy" to win so medals in swimming. But at least it's possible and easiER. The world record holder in 200m fly, probably has a good (but not clear) chance at 100m fly and those relays. That's like 3-4 already.

There aren't quite as many T&F variations, but there are certainly a crapload of them as well, yet most people would consider T&F guys among the greatest. There are a crapload of gymnastic events every year as well. Again, there are several things about Phelps that are distinguishable other than total medal count:

1) Medal success % (100%)
2) Gold Medal % (87%)
3) Margin of victory over peers (in the vast majority of events it's been phenomenally huge as if everyone else is the JV).
4) Longevity (he's been the most dominant athlete by far at 2 separate olympic games now)

I do think medal count is important though, and it's important because no one else has ever come close to touching it. There are 2 T&F guys with 9 golds and 1 other swimmer with 9 golds, and there's a gymnast with 9 golds. However, he's got 13 now, and will have 14 soon most likely. Yet people act like he's got this huge advantage over other people due to number of events except historically swimmers have NOT been able to do anything near what he's done. Ever. No one has.

I'll say this, if he comes back in 2012 and is still the most dominant athlete in the Olympics then I don't think it will even be debatable anymore.

Kurtz · Post #39 » by **Kurtz** » Sat Aug 16, 2008 8:08 pm

I'm more impressed with Thorpe. Thorpe destroyed his competition to a bigger degree, carried his relay team to a massive upset, and dominated in freestyle- the most impressive category imo. He's also the only swimmer ever to medal in 100, 200 and 400 in the same olympics. And offcourse Thorpe won when he and Phelps swam head to head.

Phelps is great at what he does, but let's face it, he's had a lot of luck too. The Serb with short nails, and Bernard with the choke job of this Olympics.

Post #40 » by **5DOM** » Sat Aug 16, 2008 8:29 pm

Al n' Perk No Layups! wrote:
Tom Baker wrote:
High 5 wrote:The wall doesn't lie.

This I agree with. So, why did Phelps win? That's my original question. Did the Serbian not press the pad hard enough? How does it work? Because he touched the wall before Phelps. Like I said: bizarre.

It's not bizarre. Phelps touched first, that's an indisputable fact. If you were to brush your pinky across the pad it would go off. You're just in denial.

actually, from what i've heard, you need 400g of weight on the pad.
and obviously, phelps did that first.