If we award medals for swimming backstroke why don't we award medals for running backwards?
June 15, 2012 8:18 AM Subscribe
If we award medals for swimming 100m backstroke why don't we award medals for running 100m backwards?
Long, insanely silly argument with a friend last night.
I put forward something I have thought before; the idea that awarding multiple medals for different types of swimming (backstroke, butterfly, etc) is silly and is no different than having multiple medals for running styles in the 100m (freestyle, hop on one foot, running backwards, etc) or high jump (flop, two foot takeoff, scissors) and that it would be more consistent to swim however you want but the first person to touch the wall wins, because that is how every other single person Olympic events in this way.
My opponent was in complete disagreement but couldn't articulate the why of his argument all that well.
Can any mefites help him out, what are the logical points that support his position that it is not inconsistent to award medals for different styles of swimming. Or, what are other Olympic events that fall into the swimming camp, where we award medals based firstly on the method and secondly on the time taken (ie: you are disqualified for breaking form).
The only other one I could think of was race-walking and I think that is just as silly as the swimming style multiple medals.
Long, insanely silly argument with a friend last night.
I put forward something I have thought before; the idea that awarding multiple medals for different types of swimming (backstroke, butterfly, etc) is silly and is no different than having multiple medals for running styles in the 100m (freestyle, hop on one foot, running backwards, etc) or high jump (flop, two foot takeoff, scissors) and that it would be more consistent to swim however you want but the first person to touch the wall wins, because that is how every other single person Olympic events in this way.
My opponent was in complete disagreement but couldn't articulate the why of his argument all that well.
Can any mefites help him out, what are the logical points that support his position that it is not inconsistent to award medals for different styles of swimming. Or, what are other Olympic events that fall into the swimming camp, where we award medals based firstly on the method and secondly on the time taken (ie: you are disqualified for breaking form).
The only other one I could think of was race-walking and I think that is just as silly as the swimming style multiple medals.
Or, rather, you are assuming the events become a part of the Olympics based on logic.
posted by Think_Long at 8:26 AM on June 15, 2012
posted by Think_Long at 8:26 AM on June 15, 2012
What about something like dressage? Not quite the same in terms of method and speed and, well, species, but does dictate that you have to go X distance using Y gait, and then switch to Z gait, etc. Breaking form would get you severely penalised. And swimming is more like a four-legged activity than a two-legged one, in that it gives you different gaits to work in?
posted by Catseye at 8:26 AM on June 15, 2012
posted by Catseye at 8:26 AM on June 15, 2012
The big thing that jumps out at me, is that different styles of racing without the use of water would lead to more injuries. Water helps negate gravity to an extent.. which is why backstrokes are possible. Water makes moving in different ways possible.
Have you ever tried to run backwards? Our bodies don't do it well and most times it's really fast walking or this weird backward hop/skip.
posted by royalsong at 8:27 AM on June 15, 2012
Have you ever tried to run backwards? Our bodies don't do it well and most times it's really fast walking or this weird backward hop/skip.
posted by royalsong at 8:27 AM on June 15, 2012
Because that's not how sports work. If it comes down to it, why differentiate swimming and running at all? Or any of the activities where the objective is to get from point A to point B at all? You can keep doing that until we cancel the Olympics. The whole thing is made up.
This question reminds me of this thread about why cereal isn't soup.
posted by punchtothehead at 8:27 AM on June 15, 2012 [3 favorites]
This question reminds me of this thread about why cereal isn't soup.
posted by punchtothehead at 8:27 AM on June 15, 2012 [3 favorites]
Running backwards would seem to be much more dangerous than swimming backwards. That might have something to do with it. And I might argue that the 100 meter dash and the 100 meter high hurdles (running while jumnping!) are examples of what you are looking for.
posted by COD at 8:27 AM on June 15, 2012 [2 favorites]
posted by COD at 8:27 AM on June 15, 2012 [2 favorites]
We do have different medals for 100m on foot; fast walking and running.
I think the main difference is that the backstroke is a sensible way to travel through water. It's not as fast as other strokes but it's easier, keeps your face out of the water, and works well for long distances. Running (and walking!) are the only sensible ways to travel distances on foot. Hopping and running backwards are just silly.
posted by Nelson at 8:29 AM on June 15, 2012 [7 favorites]
I think the main difference is that the backstroke is a sensible way to travel through water. It's not as fast as other strokes but it's easier, keeps your face out of the water, and works well for long distances. Running (and walking!) are the only sensible ways to travel distances on foot. Hopping and running backwards are just silly.
posted by Nelson at 8:29 AM on June 15, 2012 [7 favorites]
I would argue that it is skill-based. Do you swim backstroke and butterfly? I did in high school of all places (fly in medley) and even then the skills to do so were vastly different. The turns on the wall are different. The way you determine where you are in the pool is different-- and these are simple examples without being too technical. You aren't just propelling yourself through the pool at the fastest rate possible, you are doing it in a certain way under certain conditions.
Why do we have different medals for saber and for epee in fencing? Vastly different skills.Lots of people look at that and think the competitors are just waving swords at one another up and down a strip. There are whole sets of rules, right of way, blah blah blah, etc. with that, too. Not to mention the weapons are different. I think it is the same with strokes.
posted by oflinkey at 8:29 AM on June 15, 2012 [2 favorites]
Why do we have different medals for saber and for epee in fencing? Vastly different skills.Lots of people look at that and think the competitors are just waving swords at one another up and down a strip. There are whole sets of rules, right of way, blah blah blah, etc. with that, too. Not to mention the weapons are different. I think it is the same with strokes.
posted by oflinkey at 8:29 AM on June 15, 2012 [2 favorites]
The Olympics make nonsense out of all of this. BRIDGE—yes, the card game—was to be a demonstration sport at the winter Olympics.
posted by RJ Reynolds at 8:31 AM on June 15, 2012 [1 favorite]
posted by RJ Reynolds at 8:31 AM on June 15, 2012 [1 favorite]
Just a side note - backstroke isn't swimming backwards - you are still propelling your body head-first toward the other end of the pool. Backwards would be feet-first.
With that out of the way...we also do have foot races in different forms. Sometimes it's a straight sprint. Sometimes you have to jump over hurdles. Sometimes you have to walk fast.
As others have said - there are different events because each style of swimming requires different types of training and skill.
posted by trivia genius at 8:40 AM on June 15, 2012 [11 favorites]
With that out of the way...we also do have foot races in different forms. Sometimes it's a straight sprint. Sometimes you have to jump over hurdles. Sometimes you have to walk fast.
As others have said - there are different events because each style of swimming requires different types of training and skill.
posted by trivia genius at 8:40 AM on June 15, 2012 [11 favorites]
no different than having multiple medals for running styles in the 100m
You mean like having different races for a 100 meter sprint versus a 100 meter hurdle? youtube links
You're right, that would be really dumb. Oh, wait. Nevermind.
posted by alms at 8:41 AM on June 15, 2012
You mean like having different races for a 100 meter sprint versus a 100 meter hurdle? youtube links
You're right, that would be really dumb. Oh, wait. Nevermind.
posted by alms at 8:41 AM on June 15, 2012
Running forwards v. running backwards involves a 180 degree rotation on an axis perpendicular to the direction of movement. Swimming freestyle, sidestroke, or backstroke involves a 90 or 180 degree rotation on an axis parallel to the direction of movement.
posted by valkyryn at 8:47 AM on June 15, 2012 [3 favorites]
posted by valkyryn at 8:47 AM on June 15, 2012 [3 favorites]
Sports arise from cultures for a vast number of often complex reasons. If there were a culture out there where running backwards was a big deal, and this passion somehow spread to other cultures such that enough different countries were getting into it, then I'm sure it would be considered as a possible Olympic event.
posted by philip-random at 8:47 AM on June 15, 2012 [1 favorite]
posted by philip-random at 8:47 AM on June 15, 2012 [1 favorite]
Siding with Nelson, I believe most Olympic sports have something to do with the usefullness of having that particular skill. Running backwards is just a stupid human trick, not useful. Jumping, swimming... lots of forms which require skill in, let's say for argument's sake... a way to survive, in the real world, is very much useful. That's my take.
posted by InterestedInKnowing at 8:53 AM on June 15, 2012
posted by InterestedInKnowing at 8:53 AM on June 15, 2012
I agree with those who say that there is not reason beyond the fact that running backwards is not A Thing People Do Competitively. They could have skipping races. They could have a swimming race where you have to swim down to the bottom of the pool and pick up a ring. They could have partner gymnastics. They could have a game that's like tennis, except you use a hockey stick and a volleyball.
This is like asking why archery is an Olympic sport while marshmallow cannon shooting is not. The answer is that archery is an Olympic sport and marshmallow cannon shooting is not.
posted by mskyle at 8:56 AM on June 15, 2012 [4 favorites]
This is like asking why archery is an Olympic sport while marshmallow cannon shooting is not. The answer is that archery is an Olympic sport and marshmallow cannon shooting is not.
posted by mskyle at 8:56 AM on June 15, 2012 [4 favorites]
OK, actually I do want to take some of that back: the history of swimming is actually really interesting, and probably part of the reason that so many different strokes are included in swimming races is that the most efficient swimming stroke, the front crawl, was not in wide use in the Western world until after the beginning of Olympic swimming competition. It's a weird story, full of ideas about the superiority of European swimming methods (especially the breaststroke) to the "savage" crawl.
So the question of why there is no backwards-running competition is kind of silly, but the question of why there is a backstroke (and breaststroke) competition is a good one.
posted by mskyle at 9:08 AM on June 15, 2012 [3 favorites]
So the question of why there is no backwards-running competition is kind of silly, but the question of why there is a backstroke (and breaststroke) competition is a good one.
posted by mskyle at 9:08 AM on June 15, 2012 [3 favorites]
Response by poster: You mean like having different races for a 100 meter sprint versus a 100 meter hurdle? youtube links
You're right, that would be really dumb. Oh, wait. Nevermind.
They are different enough that the same athlete almost never wins both, and anyway the equivalent would be a swimming event where you need to move around some underwater obstacle every 5 meters.
Swimming on the other hand, has 8-9 medal winners because the events are so similar that one guy can dominate. You never seen an 8-9 medal winner in track because the events are better differentiated.
posted by Cosine at 9:10 AM on June 15, 2012
You're right, that would be really dumb. Oh, wait. Nevermind.
They are different enough that the same athlete almost never wins both, and anyway the equivalent would be a swimming event where you need to move around some underwater obstacle every 5 meters.
Swimming on the other hand, has 8-9 medal winners because the events are so similar that one guy can dominate. You never seen an 8-9 medal winner in track because the events are better differentiated.
posted by Cosine at 9:10 AM on June 15, 2012
Response by poster: We do have different medals for 100m on foot; fast walking and running.
Are you sure about that? I think there isn't, which actually supports my argument exactly.
posted by Cosine at 9:14 AM on June 15, 2012
Are you sure about that? I think there isn't, which actually supports my argument exactly.
posted by Cosine at 9:14 AM on June 15, 2012
I think the main difference is that the backstroke is a sensible way to travel through water. It's not as fast as other strokes but it's easier, keeps your face out of the water, and works well for long distances.
Yeah, this. The backstroke, entirely independent of Olympic competition (or competition in general) is a common and useful method of swimming. (As pointed out in mskyle's link to the Wikipedia article: "In 1587, Everard Digby also wrote a swimming book [...] His short treatise, De arte natandi, was written in Latin and contained over 40 woodcut illustrations depicting various methods of swimming, including the breaststroke, backstroke and the crawl.")
Running backwards, by contrast, is not a common or useful method of trying to move fast on land. It has nothing to do with how "illogical" the Olympics may be; it has to do with how illogical running backwards is.
posted by scody at 9:15 AM on June 15, 2012
Yeah, this. The backstroke, entirely independent of Olympic competition (or competition in general) is a common and useful method of swimming. (As pointed out in mskyle's link to the Wikipedia article: "In 1587, Everard Digby also wrote a swimming book [...] His short treatise, De arte natandi, was written in Latin and contained over 40 woodcut illustrations depicting various methods of swimming, including the breaststroke, backstroke and the crawl.")
Running backwards, by contrast, is not a common or useful method of trying to move fast on land. It has nothing to do with how "illogical" the Olympics may be; it has to do with how illogical running backwards is.
posted by scody at 9:15 AM on June 15, 2012
Response by poster: Burhanistan: I wasn't saying they were actually comparable, I was saying more generally that it is inconsistent to have multiple styles for the same distance in swimming but not in running.
posted by Cosine at 9:15 AM on June 15, 2012
posted by Cosine at 9:15 AM on June 15, 2012
I don't think there's a 100m racewalking medal but there are 20km and 50km medal events.
posted by mskyle at 9:18 AM on June 15, 2012 [1 favorite]
posted by mskyle at 9:18 AM on June 15, 2012 [1 favorite]
Perfection of technique is a goal in itself, even if that technique isn't the most efficient for the nominal goal of the activity. For example, in martial arts we can appreciate performance of kata — for the beauty, for the athleticism, for the perfection of the technique — even if the techniques displayed are not practical combat skills.
The nominal goal of the activity and the goal of perfection in technique are in tension, which is resolved in different ways in different sports. In the running and jumping Olympic events, we usually favour the nominal goal of moving faster and further; in gymnastic events there pretty much isn't a nominal goal, and perfection of technique is the entire point; skating events come in both types, racing and figure skating.
Your friend could argue that swimming culture has decided to resolve this tension by having events like the backstroke, where the technique is specified but otherwise the competition is for speed.
In short: Sure, it's not consistent, but that's because there are multiple competing goals being resolved differently in different contexts.
posted by stebulus at 9:19 AM on June 15, 2012
The nominal goal of the activity and the goal of perfection in technique are in tension, which is resolved in different ways in different sports. In the running and jumping Olympic events, we usually favour the nominal goal of moving faster and further; in gymnastic events there pretty much isn't a nominal goal, and perfection of technique is the entire point; skating events come in both types, racing and figure skating.
Your friend could argue that swimming culture has decided to resolve this tension by having events like the backstroke, where the technique is specified but otherwise the competition is for speed.
In short: Sure, it's not consistent, but that's because there are multiple competing goals being resolved differently in different contexts.
posted by stebulus at 9:19 AM on June 15, 2012
Oh, and for another event where disallowed techniques disqualify you, even if more effective: judo.
posted by stebulus at 9:21 AM on June 15, 2012
posted by stebulus at 9:21 AM on June 15, 2012
Because the 100m backstroke is more popular and than the 100m backwards run. If, for some reason, a lot of people started doing the 100m backwards run then it is highly probable that it too would be an olympic event.
posted by bkeene12 at 9:24 AM on June 15, 2012
posted by bkeene12 at 9:24 AM on June 15, 2012
Best answer: I was saying more generally that it is inconsistent to have multiple styles for the same distance in swimming but not in running.
But, again, step out of looking at it from the "what they do in the Olympics" perspective and look at it from the "what humans actually do on land and in the water" perspective. Humans commonly use multiple styles when they swim, whereas when they walk or run, they don't. Having events that reflect this fact seems perfectly consistent to me.
posted by scody at 9:26 AM on June 15, 2012 [2 favorites]
But, again, step out of looking at it from the "what they do in the Olympics" perspective and look at it from the "what humans actually do on land and in the water" perspective. Humans commonly use multiple styles when they swim, whereas when they walk or run, they don't. Having events that reflect this fact seems perfectly consistent to me.
posted by scody at 9:26 AM on June 15, 2012 [2 favorites]
...it would be more consistent to swim however you want but the first person to touch the wall wins...
My competitive swimming days are long behind me, but as I recall, 'freestyle' is exactly that -- you are free to swim in whatever style you want, under the rules. As a practical matter, one particular style has developed under that free style system, which we now call 'freestyle'.
posted by Capt. Renault at 9:27 AM on June 15, 2012 [3 favorites]
My competitive swimming days are long behind me, but as I recall, 'freestyle' is exactly that -- you are free to swim in whatever style you want, under the rules. As a practical matter, one particular style has developed under that free style system, which we now call 'freestyle'.
posted by Capt. Renault at 9:27 AM on June 15, 2012 [3 favorites]
Swimming on the other hand, has 8-9 medal winners because the events are so similar that one guy can dominate. You never seen an 8-9 medal winner in track because the events are better differentiated.
That's not really true. Michael Phelps and Mark Spitz are freaks *because* they can dominate so many events. It is true that you find individual winners in relay awards as well (which is included in that total), but I think the same can be said for track.
But generally, no you do not have the same people in all events commonly. Generally in swimming you have stroke specialists (fly, back, breast) and you have IMers (races that include every stroke) and you have sprint, mid, and distance freestylers. Sometimes these overlap so someone good at breast can also be a good IMer and maybe contest 3 or 4 events. But even that is unusual at the highest levels. Likewise, sometimes distance can be a commonality, so someone can say be a distance girl and swim the 800 and 400 IM (1500 if she was a he). For the freestylers, there can be overlap again, but nothing uncommon to track.
That said, I think the answer to the question is that swimming, as a sport outside the Olympics, values four separate strokes, and so they are contested at the Olympics. Sports don't change their rules for the Olympics and this is how swimming has decided to do it. All swimmers know how different they are and they value that, and just because someone got bent out of shape that one swimmer freak can clean up is not a really good argument for changing it.
posted by dame at 9:29 AM on June 15, 2012 [1 favorite]
That's not really true. Michael Phelps and Mark Spitz are freaks *because* they can dominate so many events. It is true that you find individual winners in relay awards as well (which is included in that total), but I think the same can be said for track.
But generally, no you do not have the same people in all events commonly. Generally in swimming you have stroke specialists (fly, back, breast) and you have IMers (races that include every stroke) and you have sprint, mid, and distance freestylers. Sometimes these overlap so someone good at breast can also be a good IMer and maybe contest 3 or 4 events. But even that is unusual at the highest levels. Likewise, sometimes distance can be a commonality, so someone can say be a distance girl and swim the 800 and 400 IM (1500 if she was a he). For the freestylers, there can be overlap again, but nothing uncommon to track.
That said, I think the answer to the question is that swimming, as a sport outside the Olympics, values four separate strokes, and so they are contested at the Olympics. Sports don't change their rules for the Olympics and this is how swimming has decided to do it. All swimmers know how different they are and they value that, and just because someone got bent out of shape that one swimmer freak can clean up is not a really good argument for changing it.
posted by dame at 9:29 AM on June 15, 2012 [1 favorite]
Response by poster: My competitive swimming days are long behind me, but as I recall, 'freestyle' is exactly that -- you are free to swim in whatever style you want, under the rules. As a practical matter, one particular style has developed under that free style system, which we now call 'freestyle'.
That was kinda my point, let nature take its course and boil it down to just the fastest time, like most other events, because it is simpler, more beautiful and more elegant.
posted by Cosine at 9:30 AM on June 15, 2012
That was kinda my point, let nature take its course and boil it down to just the fastest time, like most other events, because it is simpler, more beautiful and more elegant.
posted by Cosine at 9:30 AM on June 15, 2012
Came to say what Capt. Renault said. I don't know about the olympic rules, but when I was a competitive swimmer in high school, the "freestyle" event meant you could swim however you wanted. It's just that the "front crawl" style happens to be the fastest way we've found to swim, so that's what everybody does when they're given the freedom to choose. I believe there was an olympian a few decades back who swam it with his head out of the water, Tarzan style, which is legal.
posted by vytae at 9:31 AM on June 15, 2012
posted by vytae at 9:31 AM on June 15, 2012
There are people who would argue butterfly is more beautiful than freestyle, even if slightly slower. And others who would say being well-rounded is more important, so IM would be the best race. So maybe thinking of it as a mix of running and gymnastics is important. Swimming isn't just about being 100 percent fastest all the time.
posted by dame at 9:33 AM on June 15, 2012
posted by dame at 9:33 AM on June 15, 2012
what are other Olympic events that fall into the swimming camp, where we award medals based firstly on the method and secondly on the time taken
In running/walking there is the straight run, the race-walk, hurdles, and relays. Then there are events like cross country, steeplechase, trail running, and probably some others I'm forgetting. Not all of these exist at every particular distance (you specifically mention 100 meters), but there is plenty of overlap in distance among all the different types.
In alpine skiing you have the slalom, giant slalom, super giant slalom, and downhill. And that's not to mention the 'similar' sport of nordic skiing, where there are cross country skiing and biathlon, not to mention ski jumping, nordic combined, and telemark. And let's not forget to mention snowboarding, of which there are a half dozen or so competitive events, including several different types of slalom, as in alpine skiing.
In bicycling, you have track racing, time trials, road races, mountain bike races (several different types), BMX, and several types of motor-paced events like Keirin, just to name a few.
Then there are events that combine several different disciplines, like triathlon. Why not just give a set distance and make the rule, "Get from point A to point B using whatever method you like, the faster the better?" The reason is that the form or how you are getting from point A to point B is a big part of the interest for both participants and spectators.
In horse racing, take a look a harness racing--there the horses must maintain either a trot or a pace (different types of gaits) and if they break out into a gallop they are penalized.
Those are just a few off the top of my head--there are lots of other examples in Olympic sports and even more in the sporting world in general.
The only other one I could think of was race-walking and I think that is just as silly as the swimming style multiple medals.
This is a good indication that your mental model of how different sports are created and judged, and why they are interesting to watch and to participate in, is pretty far off from reality. Others above have indicated some of the reasons. The 'form' of these things is often just as interesting as the distance covered, and if it were simply a matter of covering a given distance in the shortest amount of time, all human-powered sporting events would be abolished altogether in favor of 'rocket racing' or some such.
posted by flug at 9:47 AM on June 15, 2012 [5 favorites]
In running/walking there is the straight run, the race-walk, hurdles, and relays. Then there are events like cross country, steeplechase, trail running, and probably some others I'm forgetting. Not all of these exist at every particular distance (you specifically mention 100 meters), but there is plenty of overlap in distance among all the different types.
In alpine skiing you have the slalom, giant slalom, super giant slalom, and downhill. And that's not to mention the 'similar' sport of nordic skiing, where there are cross country skiing and biathlon, not to mention ski jumping, nordic combined, and telemark. And let's not forget to mention snowboarding, of which there are a half dozen or so competitive events, including several different types of slalom, as in alpine skiing.
In bicycling, you have track racing, time trials, road races, mountain bike races (several different types), BMX, and several types of motor-paced events like Keirin, just to name a few.
Then there are events that combine several different disciplines, like triathlon. Why not just give a set distance and make the rule, "Get from point A to point B using whatever method you like, the faster the better?" The reason is that the form or how you are getting from point A to point B is a big part of the interest for both participants and spectators.
In horse racing, take a look a harness racing--there the horses must maintain either a trot or a pace (different types of gaits) and if they break out into a gallop they are penalized.
Those are just a few off the top of my head--there are lots of other examples in Olympic sports and even more in the sporting world in general.
The only other one I could think of was race-walking and I think that is just as silly as the swimming style multiple medals.
This is a good indication that your mental model of how different sports are created and judged, and why they are interesting to watch and to participate in, is pretty far off from reality. Others above have indicated some of the reasons. The 'form' of these things is often just as interesting as the distance covered, and if it were simply a matter of covering a given distance in the shortest amount of time, all human-powered sporting events would be abolished altogether in favor of 'rocket racing' or some such.
posted by flug at 9:47 AM on June 15, 2012 [5 favorites]
Another point is that the classical Olympic sports aren't derived from any logic except that they are the sports common to the European bourgeois a century ago.
posted by no regrets, coyote at 9:55 AM on June 15, 2012
posted by no regrets, coyote at 9:55 AM on June 15, 2012
Response by poster: flug: Most of what you're saying is outside of what I was talking about, hurdles and relay and cross-country are red herrings.
In the examples I gave I am talking about events where the specified goal is to go as fast (or high, etc) as you can yet you are prohibited from using the fastest possible method of doing so.
The hurdles actually fit this perfectly because, if you wanted to, you are free to go under each hurdle, no one cares about form, just get there fastest. cross-country running is fine too, because you are going as fast as you can, regardless of style.
Swimming does not fit this, because, like race walking, you are imposing a handicap, and if someone wanted to beat you to the wall they only have to change to a better form. Does this distinction make sense?
posted by Cosine at 10:00 AM on June 15, 2012
In the examples I gave I am talking about events where the specified goal is to go as fast (or high, etc) as you can yet you are prohibited from using the fastest possible method of doing so.
The hurdles actually fit this perfectly because, if you wanted to, you are free to go under each hurdle, no one cares about form, just get there fastest. cross-country running is fine too, because you are going as fast as you can, regardless of style.
Swimming does not fit this, because, like race walking, you are imposing a handicap, and if someone wanted to beat you to the wall they only have to change to a better form. Does this distinction make sense?
posted by Cosine at 10:00 AM on June 15, 2012
There's (horse) show jumping in the Olympics. They are judged on speed but penalized for bad form (in the specific senses of knocking down rails or balking).
posted by janell at 10:05 AM on June 15, 2012
posted by janell at 10:05 AM on June 15, 2012
"Most of what you're saying is outside of what I was talking about, hurdles and relay and cross-country are red herrings."
No, they're not. They're different versions of the same activity, running.
"In the examples I gave I am talking about events where the specified goal is to go as fast (or high, etc) as you can yet you are prohibited from using the fastest possible method of doing so. "
It is always faster to use four relay runners to run 400 meters than it is to use one 400 meter runner.
Basically, what's happening is that you've seized on some tiny distinction that you this is clever or controlling for some reason, and now you're making an appeal to pedantry.
Why do we have two different weightlifting events, which are dependent on technique (snatch versus clean and jerk)? Why are there two different styles of wrestling (Greco-Roman and freestyle) if the point is to pin someone (to say nothing of Judo)? Why is there a long jump and a triple jump if the goal is to jump the furthest, i.e. why can't people just triple jump every time? For a while, there were multiple javelin and discus events based on form. Why are there events for épeé, foil and sabre? Why wouldn't we just have one event where people used the sword they preferred?
Why can't runners use a scooter? It'd definitely be faster. Why can't swimmers run around the side of the pool? I'd bet they could get to the other side faster if they didn't have to stay in the water. Why can't the shotput throwers use a slingshot?
If your friend seems inarticulate in objecting, that's because your question makes some pretty absurd assumptions to begin with (technique doesn't matter, we wouldn't want to recognize different techniques, running is exactly analogous to swimming, that running and walking aren't significantly similar enough to be a counter example), and then you're doubling down on them.
posted by klangklangston at 10:35 AM on June 15, 2012 [8 favorites]
No, they're not. They're different versions of the same activity, running.
"In the examples I gave I am talking about events where the specified goal is to go as fast (or high, etc) as you can yet you are prohibited from using the fastest possible method of doing so. "
It is always faster to use four relay runners to run 400 meters than it is to use one 400 meter runner.
Basically, what's happening is that you've seized on some tiny distinction that you this is clever or controlling for some reason, and now you're making an appeal to pedantry.
Why do we have two different weightlifting events, which are dependent on technique (snatch versus clean and jerk)? Why are there two different styles of wrestling (Greco-Roman and freestyle) if the point is to pin someone (to say nothing of Judo)? Why is there a long jump and a triple jump if the goal is to jump the furthest, i.e. why can't people just triple jump every time? For a while, there were multiple javelin and discus events based on form. Why are there events for épeé, foil and sabre? Why wouldn't we just have one event where people used the sword they preferred?
Why can't runners use a scooter? It'd definitely be faster. Why can't swimmers run around the side of the pool? I'd bet they could get to the other side faster if they didn't have to stay in the water. Why can't the shotput throwers use a slingshot?
If your friend seems inarticulate in objecting, that's because your question makes some pretty absurd assumptions to begin with (technique doesn't matter, we wouldn't want to recognize different techniques, running is exactly analogous to swimming, that running and walking aren't significantly similar enough to be a counter example), and then you're doubling down on them.
posted by klangklangston at 10:35 AM on June 15, 2012 [8 favorites]
Disclaimer: I coach swimming for a living.
Some points:
A) 8-9 medal winners as mentioned Spitz and Phelps are celebrated as freaks because, well, they are. Even they only won 7 & 8 medals respectively at their 'big' games. Similarly winning back to back titles is also rare and only 2 women (and no men) have ever win an event 3 times.
B) cyclical endurance sports vrs precision sports - swimming is an oddity, most individual sports are with cyclical (running, cycling) and largely has illogically limited or precision (gymnastics, curling, diving) and primarily technique driven. A few have components of both in a semi integrated way (bi-athlon, freestyle moguls). Swimming is an endurance sport with an exceedingly high technical threshold. Efficiency is directly tied to technique and the skill inventory required for mastery is wide and deep. Comparg swimming to running might make more sense if track included events like running-while-juggling and sprints-in-knee-deep-water.
C) backstroke isn't swimming backwards, it's swimming upside down and blindfolded. Well, not exactly, but perhaps with blinders. It also doesn't have the breathing regulation problems of the crawl and has been historically favored, at times, for this trade off. I can't think of an appropriate comparison on the track, maybe a marathon with n water stations? You drink what you carry if you're prepared to carry it?
D) nomenclature: freestyle. During the freestyle events you may, certainly, perform any stroke you like so long as you 1) stay in your lane 2) do not propulsively push off the bottom 3) surface after the start/turn before the 15m mark 4) make contact with the wall during the turn ie swim the full linear distance regardless of verticle deviations. The medley does not have a freestyle portion it has a front crawl leg. While you are free to swim any stroke you like during a freestyle event swimming an otherwise legal 100m backstroke during the 100m free can not and will not result in a time for the 100m back. Ex: it might have otherwise been a legal 100m backstroke but swimming it during the 100m free makes it in eligible for a world record unless it managed, the highly unlikely feat, of also breaking the 100fr world record. In this case the backstroke record is still 'safe'
E) event selection at the games is a tortuous one with influences from history, culture ( both national and sporting) finance and politics. The IOC will deal with only one world governing body per sport and there is some politics at play at that level. Each sport has historical reasons for its events ex: butterfly was introduced as a distinct stroke in the '56 games after it was used to win medals in the '52 games' breaststroke events. Until that point a loophole in the rules didn't prevent and overwater recovery. Today no one wins medals in both. Demonstration sports are often culturally significant activities in the hosting nation and are rarely included as medal sports in later games. The scale of the games is hard to illustrate without firsthand experience. Some sports, and some events within sports, are not contested because no one is going to build a venue fr them that can never be used for anything else or because there simply isn't time or space.
F) if getting from a-b was all there was we would still have the concord.
posted by mce at 10:36 AM on June 15, 2012 [4 favorites]
Some points:
A) 8-9 medal winners as mentioned Spitz and Phelps are celebrated as freaks because, well, they are. Even they only won 7 & 8 medals respectively at their 'big' games. Similarly winning back to back titles is also rare and only 2 women (and no men) have ever win an event 3 times.
B) cyclical endurance sports vrs precision sports - swimming is an oddity, most individual sports are with cyclical (running, cycling) and largely has illogically limited or precision (gymnastics, curling, diving) and primarily technique driven. A few have components of both in a semi integrated way (bi-athlon, freestyle moguls). Swimming is an endurance sport with an exceedingly high technical threshold. Efficiency is directly tied to technique and the skill inventory required for mastery is wide and deep. Comparg swimming to running might make more sense if track included events like running-while-juggling and sprints-in-knee-deep-water.
C) backstroke isn't swimming backwards, it's swimming upside down and blindfolded. Well, not exactly, but perhaps with blinders. It also doesn't have the breathing regulation problems of the crawl and has been historically favored, at times, for this trade off. I can't think of an appropriate comparison on the track, maybe a marathon with n water stations? You drink what you carry if you're prepared to carry it?
D) nomenclature: freestyle. During the freestyle events you may, certainly, perform any stroke you like so long as you 1) stay in your lane 2) do not propulsively push off the bottom 3) surface after the start/turn before the 15m mark 4) make contact with the wall during the turn ie swim the full linear distance regardless of verticle deviations. The medley does not have a freestyle portion it has a front crawl leg. While you are free to swim any stroke you like during a freestyle event swimming an otherwise legal 100m backstroke during the 100m free can not and will not result in a time for the 100m back. Ex: it might have otherwise been a legal 100m backstroke but swimming it during the 100m free makes it in eligible for a world record unless it managed, the highly unlikely feat, of also breaking the 100fr world record. In this case the backstroke record is still 'safe'
E) event selection at the games is a tortuous one with influences from history, culture ( both national and sporting) finance and politics. The IOC will deal with only one world governing body per sport and there is some politics at play at that level. Each sport has historical reasons for its events ex: butterfly was introduced as a distinct stroke in the '56 games after it was used to win medals in the '52 games' breaststroke events. Until that point a loophole in the rules didn't prevent and overwater recovery. Today no one wins medals in both. Demonstration sports are often culturally significant activities in the hosting nation and are rarely included as medal sports in later games. The scale of the games is hard to illustrate without firsthand experience. Some sports, and some events within sports, are not contested because no one is going to build a venue fr them that can never be used for anything else or because there simply isn't time or space.
F) if getting from a-b was all there was we would still have the concord.
posted by mce at 10:36 AM on June 15, 2012 [4 favorites]
Argh. Some things should not be typed on a tablet. I thought I did a better job of proofing on preview. I won't try to correct everything but for the sake of somewhat passable communication I would like to offer:
"swimming is an oddity, most individual sports are cyclical (running, cycling) and largely physiologically limited or precision (gymnastics, curling, diving) and primarily technique driven"
instead of:
"swimming is an oddity, most individual sports are with cyclical (running, cycling) and largely has illogically limited or precision (gymnastics, curling, diving) and primarily technique driven"
posted by mce at 10:44 AM on June 15, 2012
"swimming is an oddity, most individual sports are cyclical (running, cycling) and largely physiologically limited or precision (gymnastics, curling, diving) and primarily technique driven"
instead of:
"swimming is an oddity, most individual sports are with cyclical (running, cycling) and largely has illogically limited or precision (gymnastics, curling, diving) and primarily technique driven"
posted by mce at 10:44 AM on June 15, 2012
Response by poster: Most of what you're saying is outside of what I was talking about, hurdles and relay and cross-country are red herrings."
No, they're not. They're different versions of the same activity, running.
The goal in all of them is to go as fast as you can, with no requirement to use a certain form, as you have to do with swimming (other than freestyle of course).
Why do we have two different weightlifting events, which are dependent on technique (snatch versus clean and jerk)? Why are there two different styles of wrestling (Greco-Roman and freestyle) if the point is to pin someone (to say nothing of Judo)? Why is there a long jump and a triple jump if the goal is to jump the furthest, i.e. why can't people just triple jump every time? For a while, there were multiple javelin and discus events based on form. Why are there events for épeé, foil and sabre? Why wouldn't we just have one event where people used the sword they preferred?
You realize that these examples are exactly what I am talking about, right?
posted by Cosine at 11:00 AM on June 15, 2012
No, they're not. They're different versions of the same activity, running.
The goal in all of them is to go as fast as you can, with no requirement to use a certain form, as you have to do with swimming (other than freestyle of course).
Why do we have two different weightlifting events, which are dependent on technique (snatch versus clean and jerk)? Why are there two different styles of wrestling (Greco-Roman and freestyle) if the point is to pin someone (to say nothing of Judo)? Why is there a long jump and a triple jump if the goal is to jump the furthest, i.e. why can't people just triple jump every time? For a while, there were multiple javelin and discus events based on form. Why are there events for épeé, foil and sabre? Why wouldn't we just have one event where people used the sword they preferred?
You realize that these examples are exactly what I am talking about, right?
posted by Cosine at 11:00 AM on June 15, 2012
Response by poster: mce: Thanks for the input! I don't mean to come down all hard on swimming, it was just the example, I actually really like swimming and appreciate the crazy skill involved.
posted by Cosine at 11:02 AM on June 15, 2012
posted by Cosine at 11:02 AM on June 15, 2012
The hurdles actually fit this perfectly because, if you wanted to, you are free to go under each hurdle, no one cares about form, just get there fastest. cross-country running is fine too, because you are going as fast as you can, regardless of style.
Athletes are not "free to go under each hurdle". As the Olympic rules state, "each athlete shall jump each hurdle. Failure to do so will result in a disqualification."
posted by vorfeed at 11:31 AM on June 15, 2012
Athletes are not "free to go under each hurdle". As the Olympic rules state, "each athlete shall jump each hurdle. Failure to do so will result in a disqualification."
posted by vorfeed at 11:31 AM on June 15, 2012
"You realize that these examples are exactly what I am talking about, right?"
You realize that they're actually not supporting your point, right?
posted by klangklangston at 11:31 AM on June 15, 2012 [1 favorite]
You realize that they're actually not supporting your point, right?
posted by klangklangston at 11:31 AM on June 15, 2012 [1 favorite]
You realize that these examples are exactly what I am talking about, right?
Really? Because then we're done here.
Your original question asks for:
what are other Olympic events that fall into the swimming camp, where we award medals based firstly on the method and secondly on the time taken (ie: you are disqualified for breaking form).
As a means to help counter against your own argument.
posted by dogwalker at 11:32 AM on June 15, 2012
Really? Because then we're done here.
Your original question asks for:
what are other Olympic events that fall into the swimming camp, where we award medals based firstly on the method and secondly on the time taken (ie: you are disqualified for breaking form).
As a means to help counter against your own argument.
posted by dogwalker at 11:32 AM on June 15, 2012
Response by poster: dogwalker: yeah, great examples, the fighting sport ones especially, we never thought of those last night.
posted by Cosine at 11:35 AM on June 15, 2012
posted by Cosine at 11:35 AM on June 15, 2012
Cross-country skiing is exactly the kind of example you are looking for. There are two techniques (skate (slightly faster) and classic) and different races for each (and then multiple distances, sprints, relays, two part races with both techniques). This is a very similar situation as exists in swimming, except with fewer techniques.
The history is that until the 80s, skating was not much done (there are many stories of the invention of skating) and with pre-80s tracksetting and skis, wasn't really any faster. Things changed, skating became more popular and, it soon became apparent, faster. Much politicking was undertaken, some countries wanting to ban skating, others to allow it, and it was decided to add another set of events and restrict technique in those events to the classic diagonal stride. And so now we have two techniques and two races. There is no logical reason for this, it is just how history unfolded. On the other hand, biathlon and nordic combined both are both freestyle/skate, without any classic races.
The two techniques are fairly different, but pretty much everyone competes in both. I think this makes cross-country skiing a better sport.
Also telemark, while not an Olympic sport, is basically just a different (slower) technique for getting down a mountain.
posted by ssg at 11:52 AM on June 15, 2012 [2 favorites]
The history is that until the 80s, skating was not much done (there are many stories of the invention of skating) and with pre-80s tracksetting and skis, wasn't really any faster. Things changed, skating became more popular and, it soon became apparent, faster. Much politicking was undertaken, some countries wanting to ban skating, others to allow it, and it was decided to add another set of events and restrict technique in those events to the classic diagonal stride. And so now we have two techniques and two races. There is no logical reason for this, it is just how history unfolded. On the other hand, biathlon and nordic combined both are both freestyle/skate, without any classic races.
The two techniques are fairly different, but pretty much everyone competes in both. I think this makes cross-country skiing a better sport.
Also telemark, while not an Olympic sport, is basically just a different (slower) technique for getting down a mountain.
posted by ssg at 11:52 AM on June 15, 2012 [2 favorites]
Mod note: OP this thread is not your debate arena on this topic. If you need to add clarifying information, please do so, otherwise please ease up a little on the threadsitting. Thanks.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 12:52 PM on June 15, 2012
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 12:52 PM on June 15, 2012
Just to restate what others have said...
You seem to think of swimming as a means to an end (outracing your competition), but it's just as much about the means itself (different techniques). Not everyone is world class in each form, that's why it's so impressive when someone is. There are different forms of poker, say, and being really good at one makes you more inclined to be good at the others, but it's hard for everyone to be just AS good. If it were all exactly the same, then yeah, there'd be no point in having the various forms.
Also, you seem to think of the various swimming strokes as interchangeable, in terms of difficulty. But your argument would make more sense if the races did consist of only the forward stroke, but everyone had to wear different colored swimsuits each time. That would lend itself to being dominated by the exact same people each time, and would be pointless.
posted by TheSecretDecoderRing at 3:22 PM on June 15, 2012
You seem to think of swimming as a means to an end (outracing your competition), but it's just as much about the means itself (different techniques). Not everyone is world class in each form, that's why it's so impressive when someone is. There are different forms of poker, say, and being really good at one makes you more inclined to be good at the others, but it's hard for everyone to be just AS good. If it were all exactly the same, then yeah, there'd be no point in having the various forms.
Also, you seem to think of the various swimming strokes as interchangeable, in terms of difficulty. But your argument would make more sense if the races did consist of only the forward stroke, but everyone had to wear different colored swimsuits each time. That would lend itself to being dominated by the exact same people each time, and would be pointless.
posted by TheSecretDecoderRing at 3:22 PM on June 15, 2012
This thread is closed to new comments.
Did you know that poetry used to be an Olympic event? How about competitive city planning? It's all true!
posted by Think_Long at 8:25 AM on June 15, 2012 [7 favorites]