[Nugget McChicken]

It's better to dominate a few sports than to be average in many. Winning many silvers but no golds will put us right near the bottom of the table. I have no problem with Britain putting most effort into the sports we are good at. What do we gain by not supporting our strengths in an attempt to make our weak sports as good as the strong sports for others? A middling mediocrity. By all means fund other sports but not at the expense of the ones we are actually good at.

[Tabris]

(Original post by Indo-Chinese Food)
Not really, like your other posts youve simply managed to write a lot of words whilst saying very little- rowing with 2 guys in a boat, 4 guys, 2 guys with a cox or without one, or a lighter boat, dont consititute a differnet sport to me, barely a different event, nad i have wide ranging experince and involvemnt in sport thanks.
applying the same theory to other sports like i said, playing tennis with a lighter racquet doesnt warrant a new event and its the same principle you espouse. Neither does having tandem cycling racing, or 2 or 3 man cycles. Road and tack cycling - didnt GB feature some of the same entrants for both? Could a 100m sprinter win a 10,000m running medal? Nope, they truly are completly different disciplines

Rowing in different boat classes differs as much as doing different distances. An 8+ is more of a sprint as it moves faster, a single 1x is more of a middle distance endurance event. If you want something analogous to track and field, the 8+ is like 100m, the 4x and 4- are like 200m, the 2x and 2- are like 400m and the 1x is like 800m-1500m. Seeing as it isn't uncommon for an athlete to enter the 100m, 200m and 400m, would you say that each of those aren't different sports and should be removed? On the other hand, you very rarely get a rower who enters more than one event, because of the nature of the sport.

Like I said before with lightweight rowing. A lightweight simply can't put out the same times as a heavyweight (for example, only a few lightweight rowers, ever, can achieve sub 6:00 ergo times on a rowing machine, whereas sub 6:00 is standard for heavyweights). And to widen participation for those who aren't genetically blessed, lightweight rowing has a couple of events.

And no, there were no road cyclists in this years track cycling team. However, Mark Cavendish DID want to take part in the team pursuit, but he was barred by UCI on a technicality and he would not have qualified for the team as he's been training long distance road racing for the last year and not track sprinting. edit: However, a French guy did move across from disciplines, but did mediocre in all of the events he participated in.

The difference between road cycling and track cycling is basically the difference between the 100m and marathon. Sir Chris Hoy would be useless in road cycling, just like Mark Cavendish and Bradley Wiggins, who were former members of the track team, would be useless in track this year because their training isn't tailored towards the discipline.

You say you have some knowledge of sport, apply it, because it sure as hell isn't showing.

[Tabris]

(Original post by Nugget McChicken)
It's better to dominate a few sports than to be average in many. Winning many silvers but no golds will put us right near the bottom of the table. I have no problem with Britain putting most effort into the sports we are good at. What do we gain by not supporting our strengths in an attempt to make our weak sports as good as the strong sports for others? A middling mediocrity. By all means fund other sports but not at the expense of the ones we are actually good at.

This guy gets it.

Golds are what matters and it's better to get gold and be strong in a few events than to be the first loser or mediocre across the board.

[Indo-Chinese Food]

(Original post by Tabris)
Rowing in different boat classes differs as much as doing different distances. An 8+ is more of a sprint as it moves faster, a single 1x is more of a middle distance endurance event. If you want something analogous to track and field, the 8+ is like 100m, the 4x and 4- are like 200m, the 2x and 2- are like 400m and the 1x is like 800m-1500m. Seeing as it isn't uncommon for an athlete to enter the 100m, 200m and 400m, would you say that each of those aren't different sports and should be removed? On the other hand, you very rarely get a rower who enters more than one event, because of the nature of the sport.

Like I said before with lightweight rowing. A lightweight simply can't put out the same times as a heavyweight (for example, only a few lightweight rowers, ever, can achieve sub 6:00 ergo times on a rowing machine, whereas sub 6:00 is standard for heavyweights). And to widen participation for those who aren't genetically blessed, lightweight rowing has a couple of events.

And no, there were no road cyclists in this years track cycling team. However, Mark Cavendish DID want to take part in the team pursuit, but he was barred by UCI on a technicality and he would not have qualified for the team as he's been training long distance road racing for the last year and not track sprinting. edit: However, a French guy did move across from disciplines, but did mediocre in all of the events he participated in.

The difference between road cycling and track cycling is basically the difference between the 100m and marathon. Sir Chris Hoy would be useless in road cycling, just like Mark Cavendish and Bradley Wiggins, who were former members of the track team, would be useless in track this year because their training isn't tailored towards the discipline.

You say you have some knowledge of sport, apply it, because it sure as hell isn't showing.

Lol again a lot of typing for zero points made, apart from your flailing suggesstions about my knowledge of sport - so this is the point where i point out to you bradley wiggins has won olympic medals in both track AND road cycling, so clearly one wouldnt be necessarrily 'useless' at the other
So i again i ask , has any one in history won 100m and 10,000m athletics medals? Or even attempted to at olympic level?
Multiple athletic events are expected and justifed - its a major world sport, an orignal olympic discipline and has been competed in in some form by most olympic countries up to and including the first Games. Cycling (and rowing) by comparison, is a minority sport.

so again, how about ditching your feeble attempts to question my knowledge and try making a salient point that sticks
Inside a paragraph would be nice.

[Drewski]

(Original post by Indo-Chinese Food)
Lol again a lot of typing for zero points made, apart from your flailing suggesstions about my knowledge of sport - so this is the point where i point out to you bradley wiggins has won olympic medals in both track AND road cycling, so clearly one wouldnt be necessarrily 'useless' at the other
So i again i ask , has any one in history won 100m and 10,000m athletics medals? Or even attempted to at olympic level?

If you actually read what he said he clearly indicated that someone couldn't be good at track and road cycling at the same time because of the differing training requirements. A distinction proven by Geraint Jones who removed himself from Team Sky's Tour team so that he could concentrate on training for the Men's Pursuit. People like Wiggins and Cav have been good at both at different times. Few if any are good at both at the same time.

Only person I've ever heard of is Prefontaine, an American runner who held national records at every distance from 1500(?) to 10,000m at the same time back in the 60s. Some of his times still haven't been beaten.
Other than that, no, people don't do a mix.

[Tabris]

(Original post by Indo-Chinese Food)
Lol again a lot of typing for zero points made, apart from your flailing suggesstions about my knowledge of sport - so this is the point where i point out to you bradley wiggins has won olympic medals in both track AND road cycling, so clearly one wouldnt be necessarrily 'useless' at the other

Yes, he won in track 4 and 8 years ago. His training for the last few years has been directed towards road cycling. But like I said, if he entered the track this year, he would not have made the team, simply because his training is not tailored towards it. You obviously don't understand how training cycles work.

So i again i ask , has any one in history won 100m and 10,000m athletics medals? Or even attempted to at olympic level?

I never doubted that. But on the same note, has anyone ever rowed in the 8+ and 1x in the same games. You'll get the same answer.

Multiple athletic events are expected and justifed - its a major world sport, an orignal olympic discipline and has been competed in in some form by most olympic countries up to and including the first Games. Cycling (and rowing) by comparison, is a minority sport.

And they only account for 5% of the Olympic medals, each. As much as wrestling, shooting, judo, sailing, boxing, sprint canoe/kayaking, artist gymnastics, and weightlifting, yet each of those are rewarded multiple medals for effectively the same thing in all but gymnastics. Rowing and cycling, like swimming and athletics, have been part of the Olympic program since 1896, though rowing was cancelled due to adverse weather. They are major parts of the Olympic program.

[Indo-Chinese Food]

(Original post by Drewski)
If you actually read what he said he clearly indicated that someone couldn't be good at track and road cycling at the same time because of the differing training requirements. A distinction proven by Geraint Jones who removed himself from Team Sky's Tour team so that he could concentrate on training for the Men's Pursuit. People like Wiggins and Cav have been good at both at different times. Few if any are good at both at the same time.

Only person I've ever heard of is Prefontaine, an American runner who held national records at every distance from 1500(?) to 10,000m at the same time back in the 60s. Some of his times still haven't been beaten.
Other than that, no, people don't do a mix.

He didnt say that, particularly as given mark cavandish was almost in both track and road teams- check your facts. wiggins switched from track to road cycling in less than the gap between this and the last olympics, winning golds in both. No long distance runner, no matter how good could become a gold medal winner at 100m even within 10 years, and noone hence noone has tried - bcuase they not only require differnt training, they require different technique, differnt skillset and most importantly different body type - they are essentially completly different sports.

[Drewski]

(Original post by Indo-Chinese Food)
He didnt say that, particularly as given mark cavandish was almost in both track and road teams- check your facts. wiggins switched from track to road cycling in less than the gap between this and the last olympics, winning golds in both. No long distance runner, no matter how good could become a gold medal winner at 100m even within 10 years, and noone hence noone has tried - bcuase they not only require differnt training, they require different technique, differnt skillset and most importantly different body type - they are essentially completly different sports.

He did say that, you're just too stubborn to admit it.

His exact words:

(Original post by Tabris)
Sir Chris Hoy would be useless in road cycling, just like Mark Cavendish and Bradley Wiggins, who were former members of the track team, would be useless in track this year because their training isn't tailored towards the discipline.

He's not saying they'd be useless fullstop, just that they'd be useless this year. Certainly Wiggins would be. He's lost about 10kg to trim down to a weight where he could get over the Alps, losing muscle size that would be useful in the team pursuit.

Your argument about body type is the same in cycling though. Cav is the best road sprinter on the planet. Hoy the best on the track. Their physiques couldn't be more different because they too compete in fundamentally different events.

[Tabris]

(Original post by Indo-Chinese Food)
He didnt say that, particularly as given mark cavandish was almost in both track and road teams- check your facts. wiggins switched from track to road cycling in less than the gap between this and the last olympics, winning golds in both.

This is what I said:

However, Mark Cavendish DID want to take part in the team pursuit, but he was barred by UCI on a technicality and he would not have qualified for the team as he's been training long distance road racing for the last year and not track sprinting. edit: However, a French guy did move across from disciplines, but did mediocre in all of the events he participated in.

Strong emphasis on the bold part.

The difference between road cycling and track cycling is basically the difference between the 100m and marathon. Sir Chris Hoy would be useless in road cycling, just like Mark Cavendish and Bradley Wiggins, who were former members of the track team, would be useless in track this year because their training isn't tailored towards the discipline.

Emphasis on the bold parts. Saying "he would not have qualified" and "would be useless in track this year" does not constitute as "almost".


And 4 years is a very long time. It's not like it takes more than 4 years to transfer between cycling disciplines, especially when you have a high base fitness and technique. There isn't a huge difference in technique, but there is a huge difference in training methods.

[Indo-Chinese Food]

(Original post by Tabris)
This is what I said:


Strong emphasis on the bold part.



Emphasis on the bold parts. Saying "he would not have qualified" and "would be useless in track this year" does not constitute as "almost".


And 4 years is a very long time. It's not like it takes more than 4 years to transfer between cycling disciplines, especially when you have a high base fitness and technique. There isn't a huge difference in technique, but there is a huge difference in training methods.

4 years is not a long time, besides which in wiggins case it wasnt even this long - he competed in the World track cycling champs in 2007 and then entered the Tour de France, prior to winning track gold in Bejing 2008 olympics. In 09 he went back to road racing, entering time trial championships and TdF once again. Your lack of knowledge is now showing you up
So again disproving your assertion - if wiggins can yo-yo between formats so frequently, it makes no bones that someone could enter both teams

And again my point remains that whether it be 4 years or 40 years of opportunity, no olympic long distance runner has competed for an olympic 100m sprint medal, becuase they are so vastly different disciplines. this is why athletics is much more varied than cycling.

[Drewski]

(Original post by Indo-Chinese Food)
my point remains that whether it be 4 years or 40 years of opportunity, no olympic long distance runner has competed for an olympic 100m sprint medal, becuase they are so vastly different disciplines. this is why athletics is much more varied than cycling.

You're comparing the wrong parts of the sport though. With Wiggins' career on the track and road the accurate translation to track and field is a runner having done the 5,000 and 10,000metre events on the track and then turning into a marathon runner. A velodrome sprinter like Baugé or Hoy would never be a Tour GC rider. So the depth/variety of each discipline [cycling/running] is on a par.

[Tabris]

(Original post by Indo-Chinese Food)
4 years is not a long time, besides which in wiggins case it wasnt even this long - he competed in the World track cycling champs in 2007 and then entered the Tour de France, prior to winning track gold in Bejing 2008 olympics. In 09 he went back to road racing, entering time trial championships and TdF once again. Your lack of knowledge is now showing you up

You can recomp your body in a year, quite easily. 4 years is a very long time, especially when you're training 6+ hours a day, every day. As an elite athlete, you have a good foundation and fitness to switch between disciplines, but unless you specialise the focus of your training, you will not be world class in either.

Did Wiggins win the Tour in any of those years? I think not. He wasn't dominating road cycling like he is now, because his training was specialised towards track, which he was world class at. Now that he's specialised in road, he's won the Tour de France; he wouldn't be as dominant in track if he had competed this year.

So again disproving your assertion - if wiggins can yo-yo between formats so frequently, it makes no bones that someone could enter both teams

Mark Cavendish admitted this year that he would not have made the track team because of his focus on events like the tour. Similarly, Sir Chris Hoy has admitted in the past that he would not be able to do well in road cycling and wouldn't even keep up with the a peleton in a road race.

Sure, you could enter both the road and track teams in a mediocre team like France did. But they're hardly Team GB, are they?

And again my point remains that whether it be 4 years or 40 years of opportunity, no olympic long distance runner has competed for an olympic 100m sprint medal, becuase they are so vastly different disciplines. this is why athletics is much more varied than cycling.

I never said that athletics wasn't more varied or denied that, nobody has. I've been pointing out to you that within cycling and rowing, they're not all the same events and disciplines. Something you don't seem to understand. I made an analogy using track events, in the hope you'd understand how they differ, but it seems to have fallen on deaf ears.

[StarsAreFixed]

(Original post by SirMasterKey)
Gymnastics have 18 I think?

30/56 USA's medals in swimming. 16/26 golds. The US would be very poor without considering their size when it comes to the medals if it were not for the swimming so far.

Artistic gymnastics has 8 for men and 6 for women. It's really varied though- team competition, individal all-around on each apparatus, and then the event finals for each apparatus. Loads of gymnasts compete only on one event and don't have a team. It's also very common to have two types of gymnasts: one who is really good at everything but not great and one who is spectacular on one or two events but crap at the others. It would be a travesty to screw over one type and dump the all-around or event finals or something.

Rythmic and trampolining are their own sport entirely so don't come under the same umbrella.

[Indo-Chinese Food]

(Original post by Tabris)
You can recomp your body in a year, quite easily. 4 years is a very long time, especially when you're training 6+ hours a day, every day. As an elite athlete, you have a good foundation and fitness to switch between disciplines, but unless you specialise the focus of your training, you will not be world class in either.

Did Wiggins win the Tour in any of those years? I think not. He wasn't dominating road cycling like he is now, because his training was specialised towards track, which he was world class at. Now that he's specialised in road, he's won the Tour de France; he wouldn't be as dominant in track if he had competed this year.


Mark Cavendish admitted this year that he would not have made the track team because of his focus on events like the tour. Similarly, Sir Chris Hoy has admitted in the past that he would not be able to do well in road cycling and wouldn't even keep up with the a peleton in a road race.

Sure, you could enter both the road and track teams in a mediocre team like France did. But they're hardly Team GB, are they?


I never said that athletics wasn't more varied or denied that, nobody has. I've been pointing out to you that within cycling and rowing, they're not all the same events and disciplines. Something you don't seem to understand. I made an analogy using track events, in the hope you'd understand how they differ, but it seems to have fallen on deaf ears.

"Did Wiggins win the Tour in any of those years? I think not. He wasn't dominating road cycling like he is now"
He won both the world champs pursuits in 07 before switching to track in 2008 - seems someone whose trying to educate me about cycling would have known that

seems strange that youd pick an analagy involving athletics, then admit after actually track athletics is more varied than cycling - which what i already said. You could have saved us all a few hours of our lves had you figured that out at the beginining. For the record, its not just track and field that is more varied - gymnastics to, as i think someone else is jsut pointing out but as i said, both rowing and cycling have mystifyingly expanded in the olympic schedule without relevant jutisfication

[Tabris]

(Original post by Indo-Chinese Food)
"Did Wiggins win the Tour in any of those years? I think not. He wasn't dominating road cycling like he is now"
He won both the world champs pursuits in 07 before switching to rack in 2008 - seems someone whose trying to educate me about cycling would have known that

Pursuit is a track discipline. The point still stands, he wasn't dominating road cycling.

seems strange that youd pick an analagy invovleing athletics, then admit after actually track is more varied than cycling - which what i already said. You cold have saved us all a few hours of our lves had you figured that out at the beginining. For the record, its not just track and field that is more varied - gymnastics to, as i think someone else is jsut pointing out but as i said, both rowing and cycling have mystifyingly expanded in the olympic schedule without relevant jutisfication

The analogy was just that, an analogy. It was to give you a point of reference to understand how different track cycling and rowing events are, when you've said that, with rowing at least "rowing with 2 guys in a boat, 4 guys, 2 guys with a cox or without one, or a lighter boat, dont consititute a differnet sport to me, barely a different event".

I never said that track and field wasn't more varied than rowing or cycling. I was pointing out to you that rowing and cycling are not as similar as you've been making them out to be. Something you still don't get. That was what the analogy was for. It really isn't that hard to get.

I also made exception to gymnastics, that's why I said "yet each of those are rewarded multiple medals for effectively the same thing in all but gymnastics. "