OT - Olympics Day 9 (Live/Spoilers)

Submitted by Yeoman on August 5th, 2012 at 10:00 AM

Och, but Angus, ye ken full well that Scots folk dinna know how to play the tennis to save their lives!

Comments

LSAClassOf2000

August 5th, 2012 at 10:57 AM ^

Upvote for the reference to "The Science Fiction Sketch". 

The only problem is that the blancmanges have apparently failed to leave England empty during Wimbledon fortnight, or indeed, the Olympics. Which medal finalist is from Skyron, I wonder....

ADDENDUM: Murray-Federer is becoming more unreal with each serve.

Clarence Beeks

August 5th, 2012 at 11:00 AM ^

The women's marathon was quite the race, considering the difficultly of the course and the weather. I'm kind of surprised that this thread hasn't touched on this event, considering that NBC devoted almost three and half hours of live coverage to it.

Clarence Beeks

August 6th, 2012 at 12:38 AM ^

I agree.  I just don't get why people make comments like this.  The tactical skill that goes into the long distance running races is just amazing to watch (of course, you also have to know what you're watching for, though).  I suspect virtually anyone could say the same thing about one sport or another.  For example, I'd far rather watch any of the long distance running events than basketball or beach volleyball (which is a sentiment that I bet a substantial number of people here agree with and a substantial number of people here disagree with, but isn't exactly popular to say).

Yeoman

August 6th, 2012 at 10:29 AM ^

The comment was really about Zatopek, not the marathon. I think he was bored because he liked chatting up his competitors during races and he got so far ahead in the marathon he didn't have anyone to talk to for the last hour or so.

For what it's worth, I love watching Olympic distance races, especially the 5k and 10k. It's about the only set of events post-college where they haven't hired rabbits and it's left to the runners themselves to sort things out tactically.

bronxblue

August 5th, 2012 at 5:09 PM ^

It was a great race to watch.  Full of drama, and as someone who has run a handful myself, it was impressive to see those kicks at the end.  The Russian woman in particular showed quite a bit to catch back up to the pack after letting them get away earlier on in the race.

Clarence Beeks

August 6th, 2012 at 12:28 AM ^

I agree.  It was an excellent race.  I'm actually not sure whether I'm more surprised at how well Petrova Arkhipova did (as you mentioned, that charge she put forth was awesome to watch) or how much Kiplagat fell off at the end (going from the lead pack of five to finishing 20th and over five minutes back, all in the course of a couple of miles).  I fully anticipate that the men's race will be just as good.

stephenrjking

August 5th, 2012 at 5:31 PM ^

I agree that the top runners are all almost certainly juiced. Last Olympic cycle I read an article (don't remember where, maybe ESPN Mag?) talking about decreasing 100 times and records. Tellingly, the article breezed over the doping issue by explaining that to track insiders, "it doesn't matter" whether the runners are doping or not. They're just excited to see what human limits they can break.

So I think it's all juiced. Still a blast to watch, though, and that slight benefit of the doubt is enough to keep me from being disgusted by it. Of course, I enjoy cycling, too.

One counterpoint to this: improved training techniques and whatever else have lowered 100 times, but the 200 record has been much harder to beat, even by someone as naturally gifted for it as Bolt.

jcorqian

August 5th, 2012 at 6:13 PM ^

Don't forget the evolutions in technology.  Much better track surfaces, evolution of track spikes, deeper understanding of training techniques, etc.  Times will always decrease as technology increases.  I'd be curious to see what a Michael Johnson or Carl Lewis could have done in today's environment.

stephenrjking

August 5th, 2012 at 11:26 PM ^

With all due respect, that's exactly the same argument cycling made in the 90s as wattage outputs and climbing performances improved markedly. "It's the new, ultra-light ultra-stiff bikes" they said (and they are!). "It's the improved aerodynamics in the uniforms and frames." "It's the improved pedaling systems." "It's harder work and better training methods."

All of those improvements were true... But when cycling moved to a better, aggressive bio-passport program, climbing performances dropped right back to the old "mortal" levels.

There has been a lot of development since the days of Owens, but as technology improves the rate of gain should flatten out as peak efficiency is approached; there just hasn't been that much change since 1996, but the record has been steadily cut away at an astounding rate.

Again, I still enjoy the event and don't hate the participants, but in today's high-tech doping age with such amazing sprint times being produced, it's hard to believe that juice isn't involved.

jmblue

August 6th, 2012 at 1:02 AM ^

Somehow, it seems like the pace of improvement is growing, which doesn't make sense at all.      Instead of shaving off the occasional .01 second off the record, which was the case for awhile,  we're seeing guys periodically rip off .04 or .05 at a time.  It's eyebrow-raising.

 

 

 

M-Wolverine

August 5th, 2012 at 6:35 PM ^

It all equals out because almost all countries do it. But it sucks for the athletes that are doing it straight (I have pretty good faith Porter isn't juicing). But it's worse that even when they catch them they don't do anything, really. The women's 100 winner was suspended for doping in 2010. And here she's winning. Make it a lifetime ban and you'll cut down on it big time.

Don

August 5th, 2012 at 5:06 PM ^

Instead of covering the men's 100m final live—one of the signature events of any Olympics—NBC instead gives us horse jumping and beach volleyball. What a colossal cock-up.

Don

August 5th, 2012 at 5:18 PM ^

I have absolutely no interest in making a point of tuning into NBC this evening to watch the stale re-run. I can watch it any time in the future since there will be plenty of youtubes available before too long. In other words, I'm not watching anything on NBC. What a bunch of nitwits.

Don

August 5th, 2012 at 5:22 PM ^

I don't give a crap about volleyball, and if I want to look at attractive women, I can do that anytime at a billion websites.

I do care about track & field, but if NBC doesn't care about broadcasting it live I'm doing something else with my time, like finishing the kitchen paint job I'm in the middle of.