Originally posted by: sciencewhiz
Originally posted by: MaxDepth
Okay, this is probably a moot point since baseball will not be a sport in the 2012 games.
If we wanted to win the gold medal in baseball, why didn't we have MLB field a USA team? Granted the sport is in full swing towards the last stretch of the season, but we also could have had the All Star Break during the Olympics and have the best of both travel to China.
Just having MLB players doesn't guarantee the US a gold medal, as many of the best MLB players do not come from the US. Look at the World Baseball Classic (which used MLB players), the US didn't make it out of the quarterfinals.
Originally posted by: dbk
Originally posted by: sciencewhiz
Originally posted by: MaxDepth
Okay, this is probably a moot point since baseball will not be a sport in the 2012 games.
If we wanted to win the gold medal in baseball, why didn't we have MLB field a USA team? Granted the sport is in full swing towards the last stretch of the season, but we also could have had the All Star Break during the Olympics and have the best of both travel to China.
Just having MLB players doesn't guarantee the US a gold medal, as many of the best MLB players do not come from the US. Look at the World Baseball Classic (which used MLB players), the US didn't make it out of the quarterfinals.
It's all about the Dominicans and the Venezuelans (sp?).
Originally posted by: dbk
Originally posted by: sciencewhiz
Originally posted by: MaxDepth
Okay, this is probably a moot point since baseball will not be a sport in the 2012 games.
If we wanted to win the gold medal in baseball, why didn't we have MLB field a USA team? Granted the sport is in full swing towards the last stretch of the season, but we also could have had the All Star Break during the Olympics and have the best of both travel to China.
Just having MLB players doesn't guarantee the US a gold medal, as many of the best MLB players do not come from the US. Look at the World Baseball Classic (which used MLB players), the US didn't make it out of the quarterfinals.
It's all about the Dominicans and the Venezuelans (sp?).
Originally posted by: Anubis
Originally posted by: dbk
Originally posted by: sciencewhiz
Originally posted by: MaxDepth
Okay, this is probably a moot point since baseball will not be a sport in the 2012 games.
If we wanted to win the gold medal in baseball, why didn't we have MLB field a USA team? Granted the sport is in full swing towards the last stretch of the season, but we also could have had the All Star Break during the Olympics and have the best of both travel to China.
Just having MLB players doesn't guarantee the US a gold medal, as many of the best MLB players do not come from the US. Look at the World Baseball Classic (which used MLB players), the US didn't make it out of the quarterfinals.
It's all about the Dominicans and the Venezuelans (sp?).
didnt Japan win the last World Baseball Classic?
Originally posted by: mugs
Originally posted by: sdifox
Originally posted by: mugs
Originally posted by: sdifox
Originally posted by: MH2007
Originally posted by: Leon
Grats to team USA
36 38 36 110 Beijing
36 39 27 102 Athens
36 24 31 91 Sydney
Some upsets, sure, but also some surprising performance (v-ball and water polo, soccer, redeem team, and, of course, the mighty Phelps ). Looking forward to London 2012.
Bizarre that they won the exact same number of gold medals at each of the last three games.
And their total count goes up each time, although their silver count took a dip.
I say they suck more now (especially in the traditionally strong tracks). Phelps got almost a quarter of all the gold medal US got this time around.
3 of those events were relays.
you mean the swimming? yeah, those went according to plan, I was talking about the T&F flop.
Yeah, what I'm saying is that Phelps contributed to 8 of the US's medals, but he was only solely responsible for 5 of them.
But yeah, we had some disappointments on the track. Also some great performances (including a couple of sweeps). And hopefully we don't lose any of those medals because of doping.
Originally posted by: sdifox
I saw the 4x200 and Phelps gave his teammates a huge lead. I am pretty sure if Phelps was not on the team, Australians would have given the US team a good run.
Originally posted by: mugs
Originally posted by: sdifox
I saw the 4x200 and Phelps gave his teammates a huge lead. I am pretty sure if Phelps was not on the team, Australians would have given the US team a good run.
They won by 5 seconds.
The team that qualified for the event, which included only one guy from the team that swam the final, set an olympic record. If that qualifying team swam the exact same race in the final, they would have only lost by a little under a second. And that's with three guys who weren't in the final. With just one of those three guys replacing Phelps, they likely would have still won and set a world record.
Originally posted by: sciencewhiz
Originally posted by: mugs
Originally posted by: sdifox
I saw the 4x200 and Phelps gave his teammates a huge lead. I am pretty sure if Phelps was not on the team, Australians would have given the US team a good run.
They won by 5 seconds.
The team that qualified for the event, which included only one guy from the team that swam the final, set an olympic record. If that qualifying team swam the exact same race in the final, they would have only lost by a little under a second. And that's with three guys who weren't in the final. With just one of those three guys replacing Phelps, they likely would have still won and set a world record.
I think the only relay that Phelps made a difference in was the 4x100 free. He was the 3rd best swimmer on the relay. He was definitely .08 seconds faster then the 5th best, Matt Grevers.
In the 4x100 medley relay, you would have replaced Phelps with Crocker, who was 4th in the 100 fly final, 0.55 behind Phelps. The margin of victory was 0.70.
In the 4x200 free relay, you would have replaced Phelps with Klete Keller, who was 2.2 seconds slower then Phelps, still easily winning since the margin of victory was 5.14.
Those facts do not in any means diminish Phelp's accomplishment, however.
Originally posted by: lupi
Originally posted by: sciencewhiz
Originally posted by: mugs
Originally posted by: sdifox
I saw the 4x200 and Phelps gave his teammates a huge lead. I am pretty sure if Phelps was not on the team, Australians would have given the US team a good run.
They won by 5 seconds.
The team that qualified for the event, which included only one guy from the team that swam the final, set an olympic record. If that qualifying team swam the exact same race in the final, they would have only lost by a little under a second. And that's with three guys who weren't in the final. With just one of those three guys replacing Phelps, they likely would have still won and set a world record.
I think the only relay that Phelps made a difference in was the 4x100 free. He was the 3rd best swimmer on the relay. He was definitely .08 seconds faster then the 5th best, Matt Grevers.
In the 4x100 medley relay, you would have replaced Phelps with Crocker, who was 4th in the 100 fly final, 0.55 behind Phelps. The margin of victory was 0.70.
In the 4x200 free relay, you would have replaced Phelps with Klete Keller, who was 2.2 seconds slower then Phelps, still easily winning since the margin of victory was 5.14.
Those facts do not in any means diminish Phelp's accomplishment, however.
4*100
Phelps 50.15
Lauterstien 51.03
Fuiji 50.89
Korotyshkin 51.62
Swanepoel 51.78
Rock 52.02
Ferns 51.39
Nalesso 52.26
4*200
Phelps 1.43.31
Lobintsev 1.46.64
Murphy 1.45.95
Belotti 1.47.37
Russell 1.46.89
Carry 1.46.78
Okumura 1.46.61
Basson 1.46.67
Man that phelps guy sucked in those relays.