• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Anyone watchin the World championship swimming?

O

otispunkmeyer

Lifer
O M F G

Ian Thorpe's 200m freestyle WR of 1:44.06 from 2001 has just been demolished by Michael Phelps.

if there was ever any reason needed to prove that under water work off the turns is vital this swim was it.

he lead from the start, hoogenband had him matched at the 50, phelps put himself half a body ahead from the turn, hoogenband again almost level pegged him at the 100m, again phelps put himself half a body in front off the turn.

at the 150m, hoogenband was tiring after playing catch up from the start, then he and the rest of the field were just obliterated with what was perhaps THE single most impressive piece of underwater butterfly kick i have ever seen. surging 15m + off the wall phelps propelled himself over a full body length ahead of hoogenband and that was that.

he pulled out more distance over the last 50, then finished on 1:43.82 almost 3 seconds clear.

the guy is the pinnacle of swimming right now, what a ****** insane swim that was the guys on fire.

Aaron Piersol smashed the 100 Backstroke WR too, determined to deny brit Liam Tancock (goes to my uni) he smashed his own WR to be the first man ever under 53 seconds for the 100back in 52.98.

in one session america bust 3 WR! and a 4th WR went to a chinese female 200 free swimmer in the the semi's
 
No, I didn't see it. But aren't you exaggerating quite a bit? 103.82 seconds vs 104.06 seconds really isn't "demolishing". That is only 0.2% faster. Take new swimming techniques combined with fast pool technology (evident by 4 world records) and 0.2% faster really isn't that much better.

Sure, all world records are stunningly good. But this case didn't "demolish" the old world record. It just simply slightly surpassed the old record.
 
heh come on you lot are whipping ass in the pool and no one cares?

btw, american 4x100 mens freestyle team simply dominated, phelps lead off, but the last guy in was like a train, he was unstoppable
 
Originally posted by: dullard
No, I didn't see it. But aren't you exaggerating quite a bit? 103.82 seconds vs 104.06 seconds really isn't "demolishing". That is only 0.2% faster. Take new swimming techniques combined with fast pool technology (evident by 4 world records) and 0.2% faster really isn't that much better.

Sure, all world records are stunningly good. But this case didn't "demolish" the old world record. It just simply slightly surpassed the old record.
Click to expand...

think about how many races they've had in 6 years and no one has even gone a hundredth faster, and then today a guy beats it by a quarter of a second. i'd say it was pretty much demolished.
 
Originally posted by: dullard
No, I didn't see it. But aren't you exaggerating quite a bit? 103.82 seconds vs 104.06 seconds really isn't "demolishing". That is only 0.2% faster. Take new swimming techniques combined with fast pool technology (evident by 4 world records) and 0.2% faster really isn't that much better.

Sure, all world records are stunningly good. But this case didn't "demolish" the old world record. It just simply slightly surpassed the old record.
Click to expand...

it is demolishing....the times now are so good, even a microscopic improvement is big. honestly no one thought thorpes 1.44.06 was reachable. 1.43.86 or whatever is a big step.

that record was only 6 years old, thorpe was only 17 i think or maybe 18, he never got close again (he really grew too large IMO, his body just couldnt keep it up) its not really old enough to span different tecniques, training and mentality.

thats the way it is in sport now, the improvements are minute.
 
Originally posted by: dullard
No, I didn't see it. But aren't you exaggerating quite a bit? 103.82 seconds vs 104.06 seconds really isn't "demolishing". That is only 0.2% faster. Take new swimming techniques combined with fast pool technology (evident by 4 world records) and 0.2% faster really isn't that much better.

Sure, all world records are stunningly good. But this case didn't "demolish" the old world record. It just simply slightly surpassed the old record.
Click to expand...

Interesting, I've never heard of a fast pool before.
 
Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer
thats the way it is in sport now, the improvements are minute.
Click to expand...
And a quarter second in any 2 minute race is minute. Half a second would be demolishing, 1 second would be demolishing. 0.24 seconds is damn fast, but not demolishing.

<- Used to be a racer in ~2 minute races. I wasn't really a swimmer, but I was on the swim team. I'm much more of a 800m runner.
 
Originally posted by: kstu
Originally posted by: dullard
No, I didn't see it. But aren't you exaggerating quite a bit? 103.82 seconds vs 104.06 seconds really isn't "demolishing". That is only 0.2% faster. Take new swimming techniques combined with fast pool technology (evident by 4 world records) and 0.2% faster really isn't that much better.

Sure, all world records are stunningly good. But this case didn't "demolish" the old world record. It just simply slightly surpassed the old record.
Click to expand...

think about how many races they've had in 6 years and no one has even gone a hundredth faster, and then today a guy beats it by a quarter of a second. i'd say it was pretty much demolished.
Click to expand...

exactly aaron piersol went 52.98 for 100 back

no one has ever been that fast. hes the first man under 53, even tho its by 200ths, its a big deal. i dont expect anyone to get close for a while. maybe tancock will if he can hold that astonishing pace he has for the first 50.
 
Originally posted by: dullard
Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer
thats the way it is in sport now, the improvements are minute.
Click to expand...
And a quarter second in any 2 mintue race is minute.

<- Used to be a racer in ~2 minute races. I wasn't really a swimmer, but I was on the swim team. I'm much more of a 800m runner.
Click to expand...

im a swimmer, no where near as good as this lot, i only made it to national level. we are just starting to catch back up as a nation in swimming. the US and AUS have been head hunting young guns for along time now, getting them in the right training early

thorpe was singled out when he was 7. he was breaking world records 10 years later. they never had that here, they just waited for good swimmers to appear...which, because it is honestly boring bashing up n down all time, most of them pissed off to do other things.

now they are getting them when theyre young, keeping them interested and training them up. a number of these kids are at my club now and im just amazed at how fast they are.

14 year old girl does 10 x 400m repeating on 4:35 that, in my book, is staggering. thats faster than i ever did a 400 in a race, though i did only ever do 1, not a distance swimmer thats for sho!

my mate, peter thompson, is only 17, but he could of easily been in the 5th heat for the mens 200fly, he's on the verge of going sub 2mins for 200 fly. he's a bit dense, and he's obsessed with his gf, who is a complete slut, long as he doesnt do anything stupid like get her pregnant he will probably be this countries next best hope in that event. currently we have no one.
 
Originally posted by: jjsole
Unbelievable. Way to go Phelps. :thumbsup:
Click to expand...

im glad i recorded it, it was the perfect swim. that last turn...how he can do that after 150m of balls out swimming is beyond me, he just dusted hoogenband who is by no means slow, in one move and that was it...game over.
 
Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer
if there was ever any reason needed to prove that under water work off the turns is vital this swim was it.
Click to expand...
I didn't intend to come back to this thread, but the quoted section above kept bothering me. Lately, I've been seeing more and more good underwater work off the turns and less and less of the actual swimming. The underwater portion is often technically easier and faster than the swimming, thus I can see the pull. But, is there a point where the under water work begins to degrade the swimming?

That is, when the races eventually become almost all under water (Yes, that is an exaggeration), should anything be done about it? Should we switch the name from 200m freestyle to (120m freestyle + 80m under water)?
 
Originally posted by: dullard
Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer
if there was ever any reason needed to prove that under water work off the turns is vital this swim was it.
Click to expand...
I didn't intend to come back to this thread, but the quoted section above kept bothering me. Lately, I've been seeing more and more good underwater work off the turns and less and less of the actual swimming. The underwater portion is often technically easier and faster than the swimming, thus I can see the pull. But, is there a point where the under water work begins to degrade the swimming?

That is, when the races eventually become almost all under water (Yes, that is an exaggeration), should anything be done about it? Should we switch the name from 200m freestyle to (120m freestyle + 80m under water)?
Click to expand...

well, i wouldnt say its that easy.... i should know i try to do the same! but i am just incapable of staying under any more than 5 - 7m at the end of even a 100m. technically its rather quite hard to get an effective fly kick like that... i had such a hard time in training trying to do 6 kicks of each turn, if you do it wrong, you put the emphasis on your quads and all that happens is you start kicking almost from the knee which is inefficient. a good fly kick is hard to master.

infact even on a 50 sprint i dont do more than 3-4 quick kicks, since my fly kick isnt that strong its quicker for me to surface early and just bomb it as fast as i can.

fly kick underwater is definately not easy on the lungs, yeah it saves energy but not much ... your using the biggest muscles in the body to propel you, though you do have reduced resistance because you are not on the surface. plus you have no supply of fresh oxygen down there, its getting on to anaerobic respiration...and that produces the nasty lactic acid that just seems to sap all your power.

for me the underwater work is vital, its just as much a skill as the actual stroke. for me i find actually doing the stroke harder than keeping a streamline and just kicking...i havent got the power nor the lungs to do it.

its only faster if you can do it, and as you can see even at the top level...most cant do it that well, surfacing relatively quickly. michael is one of the very few who seem to be able to do it, and do it well....to the point where its his trump card, or trademark.

i believe there was a point in time where it was getting as you mentioned, im not sure which nation it was, possibly japan, but they were doing huge distances underwater and a rule was devised limiting underwater work to 15m.

now i know recently they changed the rules, but i was only aware of them changing the allowed foot positions on backstroke starts, in the past your toes had to be below the surface...now it doesnt matter where they go. also on breast stroke, they allowed a single fly kick of the starts and turns.

however i am not aware that they changed this 15m rule, phelps went 15+ on that last turn, but since he never got DQ'd i assume that, that rule has also changed.

but however you look at it, its a major part of all the strokes, always has been, the advantage lies with those who can and do take advantage of it. most sports have such scenarios, and the guys at the top can be usually found making use of them. i dont see it as a problem at all. those who are getting beat should either quit, or train harder...thats what its al about....getting the edge.

ill agree with the pool speed though, i think you mentioned earlier. the pool was built in 3 weeks by a spanish firm, its basically a tub, made of interlocking steel plate, sat on the stadium floor. apparently they are really nice, fast pools to swim in.

you do get fast and slow pools, its odd, but the 50m here in leeds is often 0.5 to 1.0 sec slower than the 50m pool at ponds forge in sheffield....whether its to do with depth, water consitency, the type of tiles used (smaller tiles, closer to the surface = greater sensation of speed), temperature or what, i dont know, but it exists.
 
Thanks for the nice post, otis.
Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer
but however you look at it, its a major part of all the strokes, always has been, the advantage lies with those who can and do take advantage of it. most sports have such scenarios, and the guys at the top can be usually found making use of them. i dont see it as a problem at all. those who are getting beat should either quit, or train harder...thats what its al about....getting the edge.
Click to expand...
I'll have to accept that. I really don't feel it is truely right for the sport, but if the rules allow for it, I have to accept it. All sports have things that I'd like to see changed though as a spectator.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top