4 ms·

Swimming’s not really analogous to the NBA because the peak comes so early (for example, Phelps was an Olympian as a high school sophomore); women’s gymnastics

Swimming’s not really analogous to the NBA because the peak comes so early (for example, Phelps was an Olympian as a high school sophomore); women’s gymnastics is the same. Swimming is also a low joint-impact no-contact sport with no sudden unpredicted movements. The point from the NBA’s perspective is not that the US players who are not specializing are better prospects, but that the guys who eventually do develop the running and jumping ability good enough for the NBA would have been better off not specializing until a much later age. In this case, the NBA’s interests in rookie health and long careers for stars are well aligned with those of the players but not aligned with those of AAU coaches and/or parents trying to get a college scholarship.

sandworm101 7y ago
>> because the peak comes so early (for example, Phelps was an Olympian as a high school sophomore); The youth trend in swimming is an aberration. New training methodologies developed recently that focus on technique/stoke rather than athletic ability. These techniques work well enough that they have become a commodity. Parents can buy a good coach for their kid, turning them into an olympian in a handful of years. That will change with time. As these techniques become more widespread, as the kids with the new stroke grow up, the ages will rise. It isn't like gymnastics where body movements and dimensions are so vital. Swimming is literally the slowest sport. The kids don't have that much of an advantage.
- jessaustin 7y ago
  Are they only going to teach "the new stroke" to one cohort of kids? Why wouldn't old new-strokers lose to young new-strokers? How much money have you spent on swimming instruction?
  - watwut 7y ago
    > Why wouldn't old new-strokers lose to young new-strokers? Possibly because old are still stronger. The old are not 40 years old, they are like 20 something years old.
  - sandworm101 7y ago
    Because habits are hard to break. The kids who grow up with correct (new) strokes dont have to unlearn the old strokes. I still do oldschool breaststroke, not the new vertical kick. The new kids hoping for the olympics dont even recognize what i do. Soon it will become the new norm.

sandworm101 7y ago

>> because the peak comes so early (for example, Phelps was an Olympian as a high school sophomore); The youth trend in swimming is an aberration. New training methodologies developed recently that focus on technique/stoke rather than athletic ability. These techniques work well enough that they have become a commodity. Parents can buy a good coach for their kid, turning them into an olympian in a handful of years. That will change with time. As these techniques become more widespread, as the kids with the new stroke grow up, the ages will rise. It isn't like gymnastics where body movements and dimensions are so vital. Swimming is literally the slowest sport. The kids don't have that much of an advantage.

jessaustin 7y ago
Are they only going to teach "the new stroke" to one cohort of kids? Why wouldn't old new-strokers lose to young new-strokers? How much money have you spent on swimming instruction?
- watwut 7y ago
  > Why wouldn't old new-strokers lose to young new-strokers? Possibly because old are still stronger. The old are not 40 years old, they are like 20 something years old.
- sandworm101 7y ago
  Because habits are hard to break. The kids who grow up with correct (new) strokes dont have to unlearn the old strokes. I still do oldschool breaststroke, not the new vertical kick. The new kids hoping for the olympics dont even recognize what i do. Soon it will become the new norm.