# phelps records tops the tour de france?



## bas (Jul 30, 2004)

I don't know that US swimmers name..but..



how can swimming compare to the TdF? let alone Lance's record of 7 wins(straight)?

Their 2 minutes does not EQUAL 4-8 hours in the saddle for 3 weeks.


----------



## jd3 (Oct 8, 2004)

bas said:


> I don't know that US swimmers name..but..
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I heard him say that. No way 8 swims = 7 three week grand tours.


----------



## Mosovich (Feb 3, 2004)

*Phelps=*

THE MAN!! To be so dominant at so many diciplines is what makes him special.. Lance did the Tour, that's it.. No classics, no crits, just focused on the Tour.. Phelps has to focus on all diciplines.. Either way, both are huge accomplishments that will probably never be beat..


----------



## PeanutButterBreath (Dec 4, 2005)

Remind me -- in which tour did Lance win every stage?

I think any comparison between the two is meaningless, FWIW.


----------



## breadandwater (Oct 1, 2007)

phelps achievement is incredible. but i think the two arent comparable.


----------



## Kenacycle (May 28, 2006)

bas said:


> I don't know that US swimmers name..but..



Mark Spitz


----------



## CleavesF (Dec 31, 2007)

Phelps = Merckx of swimming


----------



## Haridic (Jun 9, 2008)

Am i the only person that thinks Phelps' wins might be less than legitimate? I mean, 8 golds, and 8 or so world records in one week, some beaten by well over 3 seconds, doesnt sound right to me. The elite of the elite, doesnt matter which discipline, are often seperated by the skin of their teeth and when someone jumps, runs, rides, or swims like that it just makes me go 'hmm....'


----------



## jorgy (Oct 21, 2005)

Haridic said:


> Am i the only person that thinks Phelps' wins might be less than legitimate? I mean, 8 golds, and 8 or so world records in one week, some beaten by well over 3 seconds, doesnt sound right to me. The elite of the elite, doesnt matter which discipline, are often seperated by the skin of their teeth and when someone jumps, runs, rides, or swims like that it just makes me go 'hmm....'


The race where the WR was bettered by ca. 3 seconds was the 4x100 relay where 5 teams went below the previous WR (that had been set in the prelims). And the winning margin was only 0.08 seconds. Phelps didn't set a WR in the 100m fly. Oly record and he beat Covic by 0.01 seconds. the slimmest margin possible with current timing standards. So you are overdramaticizing things a bit.

Just about any gold-medal winning performance is going to garner scrutiny in this day and age.


----------



## Haridic (Jun 9, 2008)

i guess i am, thanks for showing it to me, but even so every little highlight i see of him is a win by at least 20m, try and say thats legit? and not every gold medal performance is going to be called for doping, but in this case some eyebrows gotta be raised..


----------



## moabbiker (Sep 11, 2002)

Taken from ESPN's article's, without permission, as it's so poorly written anyway:

-
Lance Armstrong's seven straight Tour de France titles probably comes the closest to matching Phelps. But it's impossible to be confident in Armstrong's achievements because he dominated one of the dirtiest professional sports in the world. Even if you believe Armstrong was completely clean, he essentially is doing just one thing. Phelps is proficient in four different strokes, at different distances.

-

Ridiculous. That's like saying Phelps is just one doing thing: Swimming.


----------



## Magsdad (Jun 29, 2005)

Apples to Car Batteries.....and who gives a sh!t.


----------



## Gus Riley (Feb 18, 2004)

Apples and oranges. No comparison between the two great achievements.


----------



## abiciriderback (Jun 8, 2005)

moabbiker said:


> Taken from ESPN's article's, without permission, as it's so poorly written anyway:
> 
> -
> Lance Armstrong's seven straight Tour de France titles probably comes the closest to matching Phelps. But it's impossible to be confident in Armstrong's achievements because he dominated one of the dirtiest professional sports in the world. Even if you believe Armstrong was completely clean, he essentially is doing just one thing. Phelps is proficient in four different strokes, at different distances.
> ...



I thought reporters are suppose to be unbiased?? umm that ESPN reporter sure isn't. (And a great article to gain support for pro cycling here in the states NOT). But I guess you have to figure untill time stops someone will try to shoot Lance down. On comparing Phelps and Armstrong like many said you can't and why even try why can't we just respect them for the great athletes they are.
Just my 2cents worth

Ray Still


----------



## Tschai (Jun 19, 2003)

F all this "apples to oranges" crap. Making comparisons within sports, etc. is part of the fun of it all. Why ask that such fun not be allowed. So what if it is "apples to oranges." 

My opinion:

The Phleps phenom is fairly boring. Swimming is fairly boring. Comparing Phelps to Armstrong is way less boring. 

The greatest Olympic achievment is Carl Lewis.


----------



## mohair_chair (Oct 3, 2002)

I'm not really sure why anyone needs to come up with a comparison like that. It doesn't make sense on any level. It's completely apples to oranges. What Phelps has done stands on its own in sporting history. It doesn't need a ranking against other, totally unrelated accomplishments.


----------



## cydswipe (Mar 7, 2002)

The nice thing about the whole Phelpnomenon is that maybe more folks will swim. Maybe the local swim clubs will get a bit more interest from kids. Lance had that effect, for cycling, in some ways.


----------



## PeanutButterBreath (Dec 4, 2005)

abiciriderback said:


> I thought reporters are suppose to be unbiased??


Its not a report, its an editorial. Editorials are not supposed to be unbiased, they are supposed to generate "interest" and it is much easier to get people's attention by creating a controversy than by coming up with something genuinely insightful.


----------



## PeanutButterBreath (Dec 4, 2005)

Haridic said:


> Am i the only person that thinks Phelps' wins might be less than legitimate? I mean, 8 golds, and 8 or so world records in one week, some beaten by well over 3 seconds, doesnt sound right to me. The elite of the elite, doesnt matter which discipline, are often seperated by the skin of their teeth and when someone jumps, runs, rides, or swims like that it just makes me go 'hmm....'


Phelps is the result of a perfect storm of nature and nurture. A rare example of someone with the unique physical make-up to dominate a sport, the mentality required to realize that potential and the support from the right people at the right time.

You never know for sure if you are cynical enough. Do you also wonder if Yao Ming could legitimately be as tall as he is without a little "help".


----------



## OctaBech (Aug 12, 2008)

Haridic said:


> Am i the only person that thinks Phelps' wins might be less than legitimate? I mean, 8 golds, and 8 or so world records in one week, some beaten by well over 3 seconds, doesnt sound right to me. The elite of the elite, doesnt matter which discipline, are often seperated by the skin of their teeth and when someone jumps, runs, rides, or swims like that it just makes me go 'hmm....'


I honesly can't tell, but it is really hard to pint out where his advantage lies.

Are his strokes more efficient tan those of the competition, is he stronger, is his suit so much better, does he use a better strategy,.. than anyone before him in history :idea: 

All I know is that I'm bored with watching him and 100m runners from Jamaica, then it's more fun to watch Cancellara who can be beat, who takes corners better than other riders and gives all he has in him instead of trotting comfortably past the world record.

Some people want supermen but I prefer nail-biting excitement.


----------



## jsedlak (Jun 17, 2008)

PeanutButterBreath said:


> Phelps is the result of a perfect storm of nature and nurture. A rare example of someone with the unique physical make-up to dominate a sport, the mentality required to realize that potential and the support from the right people at the right time.
> 
> You never know for sure if you are cynical enough. Do you also wonder if Yao Ming could legitimately be as tall as he is without a little "help".


As was Lance. He was the result of so many things. Cancer, the drive, the physical ability, Bruyneel. I like comparing Schumacher and Lance because I find that they did what needed to be done to get the win. They both had some inhuman drive that allowed them to give 110% not only to the physical aspect of their sports but the mental aspect as well. Furthermore, both showed that in order to win consistently you had to develop a team around one person and for one purpose. Ferrari didn't get to the top by catering to both their #1 and #2 drivers; instead they made the #2 driver work for the #1 driver. This in a sport "without team orders" is very tricky to do. It takes two devoted drivers, a devoted team, a good car and a little bit of luck.


----------



## bas (Jul 30, 2004)

Mosovich said:


> THE MAN!! To be so dominant at so many diciplines is what makes him special.. Lance did the Tour, that's it.. No classics, no crits, just focused on the Tour.. Phelps has to focus on all diciplines.. Either way, both are huge accomplishments that will probably never be beat..


tell me - how is swimming in water different than swimming in water?

*NOT
*


----------



## bas (Jul 30, 2004)

kdub said:


> Mark Spitz


no, it was his ignorant teammate in the final medley who never road bike obviously


----------



## bas (Jul 30, 2004)

gradosu said:


> Did you watch the olympics? Men and women were shattering world records. So are all the swimmers juiced?



Come on guys, don't get ANOTHER thread sent to the doping forum.


----------



## bas (Jul 30, 2004)

moabbiker said:


> Taken from ESPN's article's, without permission, as it's so poorly written anyway:
> 
> -
> Lance Armstrong's seven straight Tour de France titles probably comes the closest to matching Phelps. But it's impossible to be confident in Armstrong's achievements because he dominated one of the dirtiest professional sports in the world. Even if you believe Armstrong was completely clean, he essentially is doing just one thing. Phelps is proficient in four different strokes, at different distances.
> ...


Agreed. Armstrong would sprint for mountain finishes, kick butt in ITT's, and kick but in the mountains.

All of which are cycling.


----------



## PeanutButterBreath (Dec 4, 2005)

Only moreso. Phelps is a freak (NTTAWWT). His proportions are all out of wack compared to the standard, but uniquely appropriate for swimming. Torso of a 6'8" person, legs of a 6' person. Massive reach. Double joined knees. IIRC.

Obviously it took a tremendous amount of training and dedication to realize his physiological potential.

Lance will always be under the cloud of suspicion by some people because so much of his talent could be the result of doping. Not so with Phelps, as it would take some sci-fi grade surgery to take a normal person and turn him into a Phelps.

That is not to say that Lance isn't legit. His performance at this years Leadville 100, dominating all but one racer and pushing the winner to break his own record is a pretty strong rebuttal to all the claims that he wasn't racing clean and can only win the TDF and only with an entire team supporting him. Unless you believe that he is still doping this long after retiring.


----------



## velomonkey (Jul 8, 2003)

mohair_chair said:


> I'm not really sure why anyone needs to come up with a comparison like that. It doesn't make sense on any level. It's completely apples to oranges. What Phelps has done stands on its own in sporting history. It doesn't need a ranking against other, totally unrelated accomplishments.


True dat, I saw the guy say that, and he also dissed Tiger Woods, and it was clear someone was really defensive. What an idiot.


----------



## PeanutButterBreath (Dec 4, 2005)

The fact that people like you are still bent enough out of shape about Lance to trash Weins and the field at Leadville proves your fevered conspiracy theories for what they are -- sour grapes, likely based in the sobering reality of your own accomplishments.


----------



## bigmig19 (Jun 27, 2008)

The guy who said that was Brendan Hansen. There have been a lot of Olympians but nobody has done this. He's at least the greatest Olympian ever. I guess the easier comparison is who is more "dominant" in their sport. Michael Phelps has zero weaknesses. Im a big LA fan and he is certainly top 3 (Woods), but, man, its hard to argue when a guy wins every stroke and sets WR's nearly everytime doing it, many times breaking his own! He could swim in at least 2 more olympics if he wants to. This guy could win 30+ medals. Think about that.


----------



## tg3895 (Mar 14, 2006)

Both athletes earned great accomplishments in their respective sport. Let's just be happy they were representing the USA during these events.


----------



## Kawboy8 (Feb 26, 2006)

*What a dumb post!!*

Phelps is great...and yes he mastered many diciplines. Most swimmers are good or great at one stroke...he is at all of them. Most poeple can swim crawl (Free), not many people can swim fly...or breast for that matter. 

Lance is great...and to compare the two is retarded.


----------



## snowman3 (Jul 20, 2002)

Gus Riley said:


> Apples and oranges. No comparison between the two great achievements.


Actually, not as far apart as you may think. Lance did something that hadn't happened in 90+ yrs of TdF races. Phelps did something that hadn't been done by 100,000 other athletes spread across 112yrs of Olympics. So roughly speaking, they both broke a century old record for # of victories. 

I know people that took up biking due to Lance mania. I know kids who are asking to take swim lessons after watching Phelps. Lance/Phelps both increased the popularity of their sport. 

Phelps has to win different types of races, Lance had to win different types of races (mtn, TT). Phelps had to swim 17 stages, Lance had to ride 21 stages each year. 

Pretty easy to make a comparison in my book. No disrespect to Phelps, but I give the nod to Lance.


----------



## btinder (Aug 25, 2007)

Olympic swimming isn't as physically demanding as the Tour de France, period.


----------



## PeanutButterBreath (Dec 4, 2005)

btinder said:


> Olympic swimming isn't as physically demanding as the Tour de France, period.


Please break down the training regimens required to win at both. It would be an obvious fallacy to judge the two based strictly on the events themselves, so I am interested to hear the insight you can share as to how much easier it is to mould oneself into a comprehensively dominant Olympic swimmer vs. winning the TDF.


----------



## btinder (Aug 25, 2007)

PeanutButterBreath said:


> Please break down the training regimens required to win at both. It would be an obvious fallacy to judge the two based strictly on the events themselves, so I am interested to hear the insight you can share as to how much easier it is to mould oneself into a comprehensively dominant Olympic swimmer vs. winning the TDF.


I doubt I know enough to answer your question fully, but swimming allows for greater recovery, allowing swimmers to race back to back races in relatively short intervals. Traditional cardio sports like track and field take a much harder toll on the body than swimming, which is not weight bearing (similar to cycling). Swimming is in a tightly controlled environment allowing athletes to focus solely on their performance, whereas cycling is a team sport and involves unknowns which make it more difficult to consistently succeed.


----------



## physasst (Oct 1, 2005)

*Someone*



btinder said:


> Olympic swimming isn't as physically demanding as the Tour de France, period.



knows very little about the demands and training schedule of Olympic swimmers, many of whom are swimming > than 30k meters per week. These guys live in the pool. I don't think it's a fair comparison, because, TdF requires a different kind of endurance...a slower all day endurance....while the <500 meter events require more of a sprinter's mentality.

But what Phelps is able to do in a multitude of strokes....which btw, he makes look ridiculously easy....nevermind, that it is INCREDIBLY difficult. 

Put it this way.....put Phelps on a bike....I bet he does okay...not as fast as any of the pro's but okay, and not as bad as many of you might think.....he's got the aerobic engine for sure......but here's the big difference, swimming is so technically difficult...not only do you have to have the engine, you have to have incredible technique at those levels.

Put any of the pro's in a pool, the differences will be STAGGERING.

What Phelps did would better be compared to someone winning a Track event, winning a crit the next day, winning a cross country MTN bike race, winning a downhill MTN bike race, winning a time trial, winning a classics race, and then going on to win a Mountain Stage in any of the GT's......

I would put Phelps accomplishments ahead of LA's.....the only cyclist that would be a fair comparison for Phelps would be Merckx who seemingly could win anything......this is the same with Phelps.

I'm swimming close to 10k meters per week now, and I work on technique constantly..still.


----------



## PeanutButterBreath (Dec 4, 2005)

btinder said:


> I doubt I know enough to answer your question fully, but swimming allows for greater recovery, allowing swimmers to race back to back races in relatively short intervals. Traditional cardio sports like track and field take a much harder toll on the body than swimming, which is not weight bearing (similar to cycling). Swimming is in a tightly controlled environment allowing athletes to focus solely on their performance, whereas cycling is a team sport and involves unknowns which make it more difficult to consistently succeed.


Again, it is an obvious fallacy to make the comparison solely on the events themselves. You'd have to compare the rigourousness of the training regimens required to be competitive to even approach making a valid statement about which is more *physically demanding*, which is the criteria that you set.

I think it is pretty dubious to claim that cycling is more *physically demanding* because it is a team sport that relies heavily on situational factors like tactics.


----------



## roadie92 (Jan 21, 2008)

Both Lance and Phelps accomplished a ton, and I know both trained really hard but I just can't see comparing Phelps who does laps around a pool to Lance who basically did laps around France for 7 years.


----------



## PeanutButterBreath (Dec 4, 2005)

roadie92 said:


> Lance who basically did laps around France for 7 years.


You do realize that the TdF is not a year round event, right? Ride a century and then swim _half_ of that and tell me which is tougher.


----------



## StillRiding (Sep 16, 2006)

Phelps is a great swimmer. Armstrong is a great cyclist. That said, and leaving the names out of the discussion, there is no friggin way in hell that swimming for a sum total of maybe 15 minutes spread out over a week can compare to riding the Tour de France.

There is no comparison between the two sports.

I swam for UT in college and afterward was a fairly successful amateur cyclist. Swimming at a national level is child's play compared to cycling at a national level. To my way of thinking Eddie Merckx was/is the greatest athlete of all time.


----------



## steel515 (Sep 6, 2004)

*phelps*



StillRiding said:


> Phelps is a great swimmer. Armstrong is a great cyclist. That said, and leaving the names out of the discussion, there is no friggin way in hell that swimming for a sum total of maybe 15 minutes spread out over a week can compare to riding the Tour de France.
> 
> There is no comparison between the two sports.
> 
> I swam for UT in college and afterward was a fairly successful amateur cyclist. Swimming at a national level is child's play compared to cycling at a national level. To my way of thinking Eddie Merckx was/is the greatest athlete of all time.


you can't compare them. If US cycling team doped their athletes why not US swimming. That being said, Phelps has better technique in some areas ie. out touching opponents, which is perfectly legal. And some swimmers have better entry/ push off abilities.


----------



## Under ACrookedSky (Nov 8, 2005)

The stupid thing about swimming is all the distances and the stroke types. Put in 10K, 20K, 40K, and 80K individual time trials. Do each distance several times, once with regular gearing, once with a fixed gear, once with aerobars, once without. Then watch Cancellara win a buttload of medals. Would that make him the story of the games?

How about swimming gets reduced to a single distance and the swimmers are allowed to use any stroke they want to get from A to B?


----------



## Oxtox (Aug 16, 2006)

Chances are that LA could swim all the events that Phelps did and at least complete them in a quasi-respectable fashion. 

I doubt it would happen the other way round...2,000 miles on a bike in less than a month is a formidable feat.


----------



## ZoSoSwiM (Mar 7, 2008)

Wow.. I'm sick of seeing these discussions pop up. 

I swim.. I bike.. 

I love both sports.

Lance was/is an amazing cyclist.

Phelps is an amazing swimmer.

Both have done things thought impossible and will go down in history as amazing athletes.

Can't we just leave it at that and stop *****ing about the accomplishments of these guys?


----------



## btinder (Aug 25, 2007)

No, we can't just let it be, because everytime I go to msnbc.com or turn on the TV there are people asking, "Is Phelps the greatest athlete ever?" NOOOOOOO

There's no way the act of swimming 8 races, none lasting or more than 5 minutes, is more difficult than cycling up and down mountains for 4hrs. a day for 21 days. No way. So sick of the comparisons.


----------



## btinder (Aug 25, 2007)

steel515 said:


> you can't compare them. If US cycling team doped their athletes why not US swimming. That being said, Phelps has better technique in some areas ie. out touching opponents, which is perfectly legal. And some swimmers have better entry/ push off abilities.


Umm, what evidence do you have that the US cycling team is doped?


----------



## steel515 (Sep 6, 2004)

*cycling team doped*



btinder said:


> Umm, what evidence do you have that the US cycling team is doped?


i'm talking about when they admitted to in the 80s


----------



## steel515 (Sep 6, 2004)

*phelps*



btinder said:


> No, we can't just let it be, because everytime I go to msnbc.com or turn on the TV there are people asking, "Is Phelps the greatest athlete ever?" NOOOOOOO
> 
> There's no way the act of swimming 8 races, none lasting or more than 5 minutes, is more difficult than cycling up and down mountains for 4hrs. a day for 21 days. No way. So sick of the comparisons.


There is no drafting, coasting etc. in swimming. As realgains was saying, its not possible to do this without doping. 
its not so easy. you are confusing swiming itself (only 5 minutes) vs competitive swimming and breaking world records.


----------



## roadie92 (Jan 21, 2008)

PeanutButterBreath said:


> You do realize that the TdF is not a year round event, right? .


I think I know that


----------



## Float (May 27, 2005)

*Swimming V Biking*



steel515 said:


> There is no drafting, coasting etc. in swimming..


Lezak drafted in Bernard's wake and out sprinted him for the win.


----------



## coreyb (Aug 4, 2003)

Under ACrookedSky said:


> The stupid thing about swimming is all the distances and the stroke types. Put in 10K, 20K, 40K, and 80K individual time trials. Do each distance several times, once with regular gearing, once with a fixed gear, once with aerobars, once without. Then watch Cancellara win a buttload of medals. Would that make him the story of the games?
> 
> How about swimming gets reduced to a single distance and the swimmers are allowed to use any stroke they want to get from A to B?


Odd, I seem to recall multiple cycling disciplines in the olympics


----------



## coreyb (Aug 4, 2003)

bigmig19 said:


> The guy who said that was Brendan Hansen. There have been a lot of Olympians but nobody has done this. He's at least the greatest Olympian ever. I guess the easier comparison is who is more "dominant" in their sport. Michael Phelps has zero weaknesses. Im a big LA fan and he is certainly top 3 (Woods), but, man, its hard to argue when a guy wins every stroke and sets WR's nearly everytime doing it, many times breaking his own! He could swim in at least 2 more olympics if he wants to. This guy could win 30+ medals. Think about that.


Zero weaknesses? His breaststroke is sufficient for an IMer, but hardly great(at tha tlevel, anyway). He doesn't swim distance events. By all means he is a great athlete, but he's still human


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

*smashed world records*

the Chinese made a fast pool, it is wider and deeper than most competitive pools
the swimmers get less turbulance from the side and from underneath

Speedo's new suits: note records were the most greatly smashed in events where the suit helps (freestyle and butterfly)
without the suits, the records broken were less monstrous

really fast pool, really fast suits, swimmers peaking for the event of their lifetimes

apples and oranges, LAs racing much longer but he didn't have to win every stage

both had huge pressure on them , both pulled it off

I'll stay away from the dope talk, whole nuther subject

folks, lets not forgetall the qualifying heats as well, it wasn't 8 races, I think it was 17 (5 individal events, 3 heats per) 3 relays, he only swam the finals


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

*what this establishes is*



Exciton said:


> Jan Ullrich and Ivan Basso were never caught in a doping test and their doping was only discovered through the razzia in the Operación Puerto doping case. So these top riders (and a long list of other riders) used doping and hence increased their performance around 15-20%.
> LA beat all these guys with a safe margin including Pantani who was probably the best climber ever and who also had doped himself to a crit around 60%. And still you (and others) maintain that we should believe that Armstrong was clean ... This naivety truly amazes me.
> Basso and Ullrich almost pulled it off being doped. Why shouldn't it have worked for Armstrong?
> 
> When doping adds so much to the performance and can not be detected it is also hard to believe that a guy like Phelps is clean. Even if he is an exceptional swimmer, how can he set new world records every day? -- If you have tried to give it 100% you will know that you are not fully restituted the following day. And yet, Phelps has set new world records every day for a week or so.


you have no reading comprehension

what part of
"I'll stay away from the dope talk, whole nuther subject"

did your thick skull not quite grasp?

I was providing 2 alternate reasonstoexpalinwhysomany WRs were being set in the Beijing Pool. I also showed that WRs inevents that benefit from the Lazer suits were greater than WRs in events where it is not.

where did I mention Lance, Jan or Ivan?>?>?>>>

whenIhave I ever maintained Armstrong was clean?????

all I have ever maintained is attempting to prove he is guilty by the guilt of his former and some times future associates is the realm of the 'way too emotionally attached to the subject to think logically" or just the 'cerebrally challenged"
or both
where do I put you?


----------



## btinder (Aug 25, 2007)

atpjunkie said:


> you have no reading comprehension
> 
> what part of
> "I'll stay away from the dope talk, whole nuther subject"
> ...


Not to broil this up further (I think the second guy has got it right), but doping doesn't add much of a performance boost. Its marginal, at best. But it still makes sense for the top riders because there is such a small difference of performance when you get to that elite level that it can make a real difference in placing (1st, 2nd,3rd, etc...). It does not, however, make a big difference in times (+16, +1:10, etc....). Lance beat those dopers by huge margins, margins that are so great it looks like it wasn't drugs, but his natural ability. Notice how close the recent tours have been? In the Lance days those margins were 4 minutes between him and Ullrich.


----------



## velomonkey (Jul 8, 2003)

btinder said:


> Not to broil this up further (I think the second guy has got it right), but doping doesn't add much of a performance boost. Its marginal, at best. But it still makes sense for the top riders because there is such a small difference of performance when you get to that elite level that it can make a real difference in placing (1st, 2nd,3rd, etc...). It does not, however, make a big difference in times (+16, +1:10, etc....). Lance beat those dopers by huge margins, margins that are so great it looks like it wasn't drugs, but his natural ability. Notice how close the recent tours have been? In the Lance days those margins were 4 minutes between him and Ullrich.


If I read this correctly - you are saying he was the best of the dopers?!?

I agree, however, I think it's a pretty pathetic title.


----------



## btinder (Aug 25, 2007)

velomonkey said:


> If I read this correctly - you are saying he was the best of the dopers?!?
> 
> I agree, however, I think it's a pretty pathetic title.


No, what I'm stating is that Lance's huge margins in victory actually prove the opposite--that he didn't dope. Drugs don't give you that much of an edge. But then again in cycling victory can come in just a couple seconds difference, so doping is nonetheless effective for most riders. Lance was so dominant it actually gives credence to the argument he didn't dope, and that those monster leads he built up were due to natural ability.

After all, Lance's improvement in performance over the years can be explained physiologically. I don't know why people have to always be looking for a grand scheme behind great achievements.


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

*No, here let me clarify*

I implied that winning the Tour does not take winning every stage
Phelps had to finish first in every final to achieve his goal,you can win the TdF without ever finishing first
but was also agreeing to the rigors of 3 weeks of racing

I was illustrating the 'apples and oranges' of each achievment (which was the origin of the OP, again comprehension 101)

what they had in common is both athletes had enormous pressure and media hype to produce and they did.

how they did it, again is a whole nother story

but I do know there is no PED for creating moxy

and as you so eloquently illustrated in your posts
all of LAs rivals were doped
so thus we can assume/imply all of Phelps' were too

ergo: level playing field


----------



## il sogno (Jul 15, 2002)

I think swimming is a lot easier on your body than most other sports. Just about any other Olympic sport- diving, gymnastics, weightlifting, running, cycling, volleyball - will put wear and tear on your body. 

Maybe the reason why so many swimmers are able to win multiple medals is because compared to other sports, it's just easier on their bodies to do so.

When was the last time Phelps crashed and broke his collar bone?


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

*they start young as well*



il sogno said:


> I think swimming is a lot easier on your body than most other sports. Just about any other Olympic sport- diving, gymnastics, weightlifting, running, cycling, volleyball - will put wear and tear on your body.
> 
> Maybe the reason why so many swimmers are able to win multiple medals is because compared to other sports, it's just easier on their bodies to do so.
> 
> When was the last time Phelps crashed and broke his collar bone?


Phelps is 23, he has 3 Olympics under his belt. Took 5th in the 200 fly as a 15 year (sydney 2000) old and broke the WR before his 16th birthday

he says he'll retire after 2012 but if he wished, could compete in selected events til 2020


----------



## mesa rider (Jul 29, 2007)

*hhmmmmm.......*

............nobody seems to have mentioned this, but Phelps never had to deal with the environment, road conditions, or the other competitors. Suppose the water temperature varied by 40 degrees day to day, or they had to deal with whitecaps and strong currents, or there were no lane markers and the swimmers were banging into one another. I think everyone can agree they are both remarkable athletes, but you can't begin to compare the two events.


----------



## btinder (Aug 25, 2007)

mesa rider said:


> ............nobody seems to have mentioned this, but Phelps never had to deal with the environment, road conditions, or the other competitors. Suppose the water temperature varied by 40 degrees day to day, or they had to deal with whitecaps and strong currents, or there were no lane markers and the swimmers were banging into one another. I think everyone can agree they are both remarkable athletes, but you can't begin to compare the two events.


I mentioned that! But yeah, exactly, there are so many more variables at play for cyclists than for swimmers. The pool is a controlled environment, leaving the swimmer to focus solely on his or her performance.


----------



## karatemom (Mar 21, 2008)

Random thoughts:

1). Every triathalete I know says the swimming is the hardest part. 

2). We could compare LA's training with Michael Phelp's training through each week and see who's working harder (I bet they both put in similar amounts of hours)

3). We could have other esoteric, academic discussions like, Is golf really a sport? What about competitive Table Tennis?

I'm in the Who cares? camp. They are both great athletes. Yes, their sports are different.


----------



## magnolialover (Jun 2, 2004)

*My favorite comment...*

My fav comment of this entire thread was the person saying that swimming was boring. Holy hell man. Have you ever watched a bike race? Don't get me wrong. I love the sport of cycling, but what I would do during le Tour this year, and other races I watched, I would turn it on, hear the "pre game" fall asleep for about 2 hours, wake up when things got interesting, watch the last 20-30 minutes of the stage/race, and then call it a good day of viewing. Bike racing is one of the most boring sports to watch ever, even more so than golf I am thinking.

Anyway, back to the topic. I used to date a highly competitive swimmer. I used to try and do some of the workouts that she would do, and couldn't even come close to finishing them She would come out on mountain bike rides with me. Her technique was crap, but if the trail wasn't too rough, she could keep up just fine and dandy. 

Someone else said toss Lance into the pool, and he could probably be somewhat close to Phelps. Hogwash. Simply hogwash. There is a lot more technique in swimming than there is in cycling. A lot more. Sure, it is more efficient for us to turn circles, but if you had someone with the endurance, and lung capacity of Phelps, and gave him a few weeks to figure out cornering and things like that, he'd start smashing local races to bits easily. I knew a guy who lived near me. He was a swimmer only. He decided to take up bike racing, never trained for his first race. Cat 5, he rolls out, and wins it, easily. He upgrades the next week. He wins his first cat 4 race. Upgrades in about 4 more weeks to 3, same result. He was a 2 before he even had been racing for about oh, 3 months. Swimming is the hardest sport that I've ever done, hands down.


----------



## velomonkey (Jul 8, 2003)

magnolialover said:


> Sure, it is more efficient for us to turn circles, but if you had someone with the endurance, and lung capacity of Phelps, and gave him a few weeks to figure out cornering and things like that, he'd start smashing local races to bits easily. I knew a guy who lived near me. He was a swimmer only. He decided to take up bike racing, never trained for his first race. Cat 5, he rolls out, and wins it, easily. He upgrades the next week. He wins his first cat 4 race. Upgrades in about 4 more weeks to 3, same result. He was a 2 before he even had been racing for about oh, 3 months. Swimming is the hardest sport that I've ever done, hands down.


With the caveat that they are different, I will say you're right. Isn't there a guy on the pro circuit who was a college swimmer and then went to road racing and didn't start to his 20s and is in the pro circuit. I swear there is. Put it his way, I know guys who don't ride that many miles a week, but do swim half and hour four times a week and then kill it on the weekend 70 mile group ride. I'd agree, if you can swim well you can ride a bike acceptably, but the converse doesn't hold true.

As for Phelp's team mate who said that about the tour and about golf - he's a total idiot.

I will say this, and Phelp's is cool, if the US always wins the 4x100 and only once got second in the 400 medley - then I think the competition needs to be increased just a little bit. Still 8 medals in all those disciplines, that's pretty impressive.


----------



## magnolialover (Jun 2, 2004)

*There is...*



velomonkey said:


> With the caveat that they are different, I will say you're right. Isn't there a guy on the pro circuit who was a college swimmer and then went to road racing and didn't start to his 20s and is in the pro circuit. I swear there is. Put it his way, I know guys who don't ride that many miles a week, but do swim half and hour four times a week and then kill it on the weekend 70 mile group ride. I'd agree, if you can swim well you can ride a bike acceptably, but the converse doesn't hold true.
> 
> As for Phelp's team mate who said that about the tour and about golf - he's a total idiot.
> 
> I will say this, and Phelp's is cool, if the US always wins the 4x100 and only once got second in the 400 medley - then I think the competition needs to be increased just a little bit. Still 8 medals in all those disciplines, that's pretty impressive.


There is also Mara Abbot, I think that is her name. She is still a college swimmer, took up riding in the off season last year, and then turned around and won the US Championship first time out, or maybe it was her second time out. I don't remember exactly.

That being said, Armstrong VS Phelps on a bike, of course Armstrong is going to win. Some folks on here seem to be making the same argument a lot of folks make about cycling. It's "only" swimming. I've been swimming since I was 4 years old, competitive swimming can't be that hard. I've heard that same sort of argument made about competitive cycling, and then I took a guy I used to work with on our "easy" Sunday ride one week, because he was talking smack to me, and granted that I was out of shape, and he fancied himself to be in great shape he still got dusted.

What does this all mean? I still think Phelps could probably be a pro bike racer in the span of about 1 year if he put his mind to it. I heard that he does train somewhere in the 4-6 hour per day range, which even compared to pro cyclists, is probably more than what a cyclist will do on an average week, especially a pro from the US, since our domestic races tend to be a lot shorter, or crits, so in essence, they don't have to train as much as their euro brethren to be fast on the US pro circuit. Are they faster than me? Oh, definitely, but a lot of times, you place some of the best US domestic racers in Europe, and it does take them awhile to get good at it.


----------



## CurbDestroyer (Mar 6, 2008)

I Phelps wins 7 world championships in 7 different years, then we will talk. 

A comparison might be if Lance won 7 stages in the tour de france.


----------

