Dose Michael Phelps Gold Success Truly Surpass That Of Mark Spitz?7 comments

7 comments

1. zusje17

   Posted on 2009/12/05 at 7:15 pm

   First of all Mark Spitz won 7 golden medalls with 7 world records…Phelps won 8 medalls,but only has 7 world records,he only got an olympic record for one event(lol look at me,saying “only” like it’s an easy thing to do).So technically speaking he only broke half of Spitz’s record.Second,back then they didn’t have all the help athletes get today.Like you said,swimsuit,cap and human strengh and that was all.Now besides all the anabolic substances(which I don’t want to believe Phelps is using) there are vitamins and food supplemments.People know more about strenght training and the gym equipment to help you do that are way better.Also advantages have been made in a lot of sport related sciences(even medicine which helps athletes overcome injuries much faster and with less side effects than in the past).
   But as many noted,back then there were less athletes competing.It was easier to get gold.Also,there were less events,so fatigue didn’t play as much of a role as it did for Phelps,having to compete in 8 different events and for his solo ones 3 times,that’s a lot of races.
   So there really isn’t a way to compare the two.Both were great for their times and they both deserve their success!!
2. LM

   Posted on 2009/12/05 at 8:14 pm

   Yes.
   Mark Spitz completed in a field with much fewer countries attending the olympics.
   Also, he only had to compete and train for 2 different strokes (freestyle and butterfly) to get his medals.
   Phelps had to be profficient in 4 strokes (freestyle, butterfly, back and breast). A significnatly greater accomplishment in my opinion.
   I don’t think you can say that Mark would have won the other categories if they existed. Because he would have had to train for them and therefore have less training in his other categories. So if he had tried to train in all of them, he may have lost all of them. As it was, he only had to focus on two strokes, so he was able to be the best in the world in those.
   To me it sounds like arrogance and sour grapes for Mark to say that he would have won in the categories that didn’t exist. Why would he say that and try to diminish the accomplishment of another?
3. ? wickey wow wow ??

   Posted on 2009/12/05 at 8:54 pm

   Sure there is, competition excels with the times. You can have all the top bathing suits in the world, sports science, and customized workouts, but if you don’t have the skill, stamina, and wherewithall, non of that will even matter.
   Another thing that people have to realize is that Michael Phelps accomplishments do not take away from Mark Spitz’s.
4. Daniel K

   Posted on 2009/12/05 at 9:42 pm

   No, but the same can be said of any record in any sport. There is just no way to know if 2 record holders were contemporaries what the outcome would be. But 8 gold medals is a tremendous accomplishment regardless of the advantages of the modern era. After all, he was competing with athletes who had the same advantages.
5. listener

   Posted on 2009/12/05 at 10:33 pm

   it comes down to raw talent. a swimming cap and fancy suit arent going to win you golds. Spitz was the greatest of his time, and Phelps is the greatest of his time. Each was great, but trying to figure out who is greater just detracts from each of their own successes.
6. imasobor

   Posted on 2009/12/05 at 11:28 pm

   I think Michael Phelps is a tiny bit better. Mark Spitz didn’t have to deal with a lot of the countries that didn’t introduce new, fast athletes. But MIchael had to. I’m not saying Mark Spitz isn’t good, he is, but Michael brought something special to the pool.
7. ms_xian

   Posted on 2009/12/06 at 12:17 am

   I don’t think so. As Mark Spitz said if there were more categories for him to compete in, he would have probably won those events too.