• Mailbag

Swimming, pure sport, money and more

by Charles Pelkey

• November 25, 2009
• Comments

It won’t be swimming that goes
Editors,
I believe that Mr. Thimsen’s wish to slim down the swim program of the summer Olympics in order to increase/save track cycling events is a pipe dream. (see Monday’s Mailbag )

Swimming is a marquee sport in the summer Olympics. Even removing certain events in the swim program would limit the possibility of a repeat of what we saw last summer when Michael Phelps won all of those golds.

While I can’t swim very well at all and am a cyclist, I believe that would be robbing people of the possibility to see magic happen again. In the end, the people suffering would be the general public which is the intended viewing audience for the Olympics, not cyclists. The IOC would get more exposure and networks more bang for their buck with swimming, not the 500 or kilo which are two events that most people care very little about.
James E. Wolverton

Pure competition
Dear Editors,
I’d like to offer an explanation as to the number of swimming events in the Olympics. Swimming, track and field, boxing, and wrestling are the three pure (or natural) competitive events which require no technology, and with the exception of field events require no equipment.

True these events currently involve technological advances, but each can be contested without. As I understand it, the original Olympics included all these except swimming (also included equestrian events). Swimming can be grouped with these other events because it is competition of man vs. man and nothing else. Therefore it is pure competition. Swimming, running, and wrestling were originally for survival and the creation of the Olympics elevated the survival of the fittest to simply who is the fittest. This doesn’t explain why there are so many individual events in swimming but it may explain why swimming is so important to the Olympics.
Ben Faulk
Winston-Salem, North Carolina

How much money?
Editor:
With the media releases regarding who has left one team, signed to another, or stuck around, I am reminded of a nagging question as to the salary that professional cyclists make? How come there is not more disclosure by teams or mention of salaries in the articles about who ends up on what team (e.g., how much Contador makes for sticking with Astana)? Seems like something us nosy cycling buffs deserve to know.

Sincerely,
James Pettengill
Washington, D.C.

We have noticed the absence of definitive numbers, too. Cycling, it seems, is not quite as open with contract details as are Major League Baseball and the NFL – which seem to report salary details right along with the Dow Jones Industrial Average. In cycling, the media tends to do more speculating about contract figures than they do actual reporting. In Contador’s case, we’ve seen the speculation vary widely – to the tune of 8 million Euros a year, either way. One thing we can probably say with certainty, though, is that Alberto won’t spend 2010 wondering if he can pay his mortgage every month. – Editor

A Forum fan feels lost
Editors,
I haven’t got a real opinion about the new format yet, however I can’t find the Forum anywhere, and that is one of my favourite sections.
Bruce Dowell
Calgary, Alberta

Bruce, we agree. The Forum is an ideal venue for fans to get together to chat, toss out ideas or pose questions. For the next few days, the link to the Forum (located at the top of the page on the right side of the banner) will direct you to the old Forum. Our crack technical crew will soon finish up work on the new and improved Forum and we’ll be relying on you to help us work out the kinks. Once it’s all up and running, you will probably have to re-register, but the old posts will be archived and you can search through for past nuggets of wisdom and insight. – Editor