Misty Hyman - BUTTERFLY???

Misty Hyman - BUTTERFLY???

Post by do.. » Sat, 25 May 1996 04:00:00


I'm sorry but I can't agree with a stroke modification that harms other swimmers,
and Misty Hyman and her sideward dolphin stroke does just that.

At Trials, in the finals, Misty ended up in a lane next to the number one "true"
butterflyer in this nation, Jenny Thompson.  It was clear to all watching that
because of Misty's kick, Jenny had to pull through turbulant water caused by Misty's
side kicking into Jenny's lane.  Jenny, the nations best chance at a medal in the
butterfly, placed fourth thanks to rules that allow someone like Misty and her
coaches to bend the rules spoiling Jenny's efforts and anyone else who has to swim
next to her.  Why not create a special event for under water kicking for which we
can all agree, Misty is the winner.  Just keep her out of the water in real races so
she can't hurt anyone elses chances.

Innovation is fine but not at the cost of others who have worked hard at perfecting
legal strokes.   And now we have all paid a great price by not having Jenny in that
event in Atlanta for the US.

My vote says, just like in the backstroke so goes the fly.  Limit the distance.

 
 
 

Misty Hyman - BUTTERFLY???

Post by Ryan Pa » Sun, 26 May 1996 04:00:00

If she was truly the number one butterflyer why didn't she win?

I don't think it should be limited like backstroke. The dolphin kick is part
of butterfly.

 
 
 

Misty Hyman - BUTTERFLY???

Post by Don Overto » Sun, 26 May 1996 04:00:00

Quote:

> If she was truly the number one butterflyer why didn't she win?

> I don't think it should be limited like backstroke. The dolphin kick is part
> of butterfly.

Ryan, you just asked a question which the previous poster had spent
several paragraphs answering.  If you disagree with the previous post,
why not try to make your case?  But you did nothing to make any case at
all other than to say you think the kick shouldn't be limited.  Fine,
you get your vote, but you didn't tell us anything.

Also, yes the dolphin kick is part of the fly, but swimming on the side
is not.  Do we need another stroke which allows swimming on the side
underwater?  I don't see why, because we already have one, it's called
freestyle.  The beauty of the other strokes is based on swimming within
rules of the respective stroke.

Since I am on a roll here.  A previous poster made what is, to me, an
absurd statement to the effect that "great athletes are always
innovators."  Huh?  So, Pablo Morales was not a great athlete?  Mary T.?
 Great athletes MIGHT be innovators, but the world is replete with great
ones who did no innovation, but developed perfection within the rules of
their sport.

For me, I want to see the strokes swam to perfection.  I am not really
interested in seeing who can come up with some Mickey Mouse way of
cheating, excuse me, innovating.  But, to each his own, I suppose.

 
 
 

Misty Hyman - BUTTERFLY???

Post by Grant Shul » Mon, 27 May 1996 04:00:00

I am looking for a Swim Club in Orlando.  I have looked on the WWW for
information, but I can't find anything.  My daughters are currently
swimming with the Shaker Sharks in Shaker Heights, OH.  Our family is
contemplating a move to Orlando and we want to make sure that there is
a club for young swimmers (6 and 9 yrs.) to join.  Any help would be
much appreciated.

 
 
 

Misty Hyman - BUTTERFLY???

Post by b.. » Mon, 27 May 1996 04:00:00

Quote:

>I'm sorry but I can't agree with a stroke modification that harms other swimmers,
>and Misty Hyman and her sideward dolphin stroke does just that.

>At Trials, in the finals, Misty ended up in a lane next to the number one "true"
>butterflyer in this nation, Jenny Thompson.  It was clear to all watching that
>because of Misty's kick, Jenny had to pull through turbulant water caused by Misty's
>side kicking into Jenny's lane.  Jenny, the nations best chance at a medal in the
>butterfly, placed fourth thanks to rules that allow someone like Misty and her
>coaches to bend the rules spoiling Jenny's efforts and anyone else who has to swim
>next to her.  Why not create a special event for under water kicking for which we
>can all agree, Misty is the winner.  Just keep her out of the water in real races so
>she can't hurt anyone elses chances.

>Innovation is fine but not at the cost of others who have worked hard at perfecting
>legal strokes.   And now we have all paid a great price by not having Jenny in that
>event in Atlanta for the US.

>My vote says, just like in the backstroke so goes the fly.  Limit the distance.

Good point.  Jenny easily could have been affected by the wake.  But
who was on the other side of Misty?  Weren't they affected?  Also I
think Angel and Amy have just as good as a chance as Jenny does.  I
don't think either of them could medal at the games--at least with
China cheating.

--Brian

 
 
 

Misty Hyman - BUTTERFLY???

Post by Edward M. Powe » Mon, 27 May 1996 04:00:00


writes:

Quote:


>> If she was truly the number one butterflyer why didn't she win?

>> I don't think it should be limited like backstroke. The dolphin kick
is part
>> of butterfly.

>Ryan, you just asked a question which the previous poster had spent
>several paragraphs answering.  If you disagree with the previous post,
>why not try to make your case?  But you did nothing to make any case
at
>all other than to say you think the kick shouldn't be limited.  Fine,
>you get your vote, but you didn't tell us anything.

>Also, yes the dolphin kick is part of the fly, but swimming on the
side
>is not.  Do we need another stroke which allows swimming on the side
>underwater?  I don't see why, because we already have one, it's called
>freestyle.  The beauty of the other strokes is based on swimming
within
>rules of the respective stroke.

>Since I am on a roll here.  A previous poster made what is, to me, an
>absurd statement to the effect that "great athletes are always
>innovators."  Huh?  So, Pablo Morales was not a great athlete?  Mary
T.?
> Great athletes MIGHT be innovators, but the world is replete with
great
>ones who did no innovation, but developed perfection within the rules
of
>their sport.

>For me, I want to see the strokes swam to perfection.  I am not really
>interested in seeing who can come up with some Mickey Mouse way of
>cheating, excuse me, innovating.  But, to each his own, I suppose.

Hear! Hear!  I couldn't agree more!  Isn't anyone else tired of
"innovations" that are just a loophole in the rules that get a swimmer
from A to B quicker (and maybe set a new WR in the process), but we all
know that a swimmer from another era would have kicked their butts on a
level playing field (swimming, not "innovating").  It diminishes the
efforts of past swimmers without *really* raising the standard in a
meaningful way.

Ed

 
 
 

Misty Hyman - BUTTERFLY???

Post by OrcaVid » Thu, 30 May 1996 04:00:00

Butterfly is an outcome of innovating, oops I meant cheating I guess since
this particular subject seems to invite thinkers with boxed in parameters.
Before fly was a stroke it was ***roke. Then someone cheated and
realized that the above water arm recovery was faster. Then they (being
the cheaters of the world) realized that an undulating kick would provide
a better balance and power platform fro the new recovery. But alas, it was
harder to do so we had an option in butterfly to kick *** or fly until
about 1970.
My opinion is that I am glad most of our gene pool chose to look for
success within the defined framework, or otherwise my genes would have
been food for those cheaters who chose to fight with rocks and sticks
intead of with their paws!
Repectfully an innovator (and respectful of those who are not)
Mike Sharadin

 
 
 

Misty Hyman - BUTTERFLY???

Post by Don Overto » Thu, 30 May 1996 04:00:00

Quote:

> Butterfly is an outcome of innovating, oops I meant cheating I guess since
> this particular subject seems to invite thinkers with boxed in parameters.
> Before fly was a stroke it was ***roke. Then someone cheated and
> realized that the above water arm recovery was faster. Then they (being
> the cheaters of the world) realized that an undulating kick would provide
> a better balance and power platform fro the new recovery. But alas, it was
> harder to do so we had an option in butterfly to kick *** or fly until
> about 1970.
> My opinion is that I am glad most of our gene pool chose to look for
> success within the defined framework, or otherwise my genes would have
> been food for those cheaters who chose to fight with rocks and sticks
> intead of with their paws!
> Repectfully an innovator (and respectful of those who are not)
> Mike Sharadin

Certainly, we are both entitled to our opinion.  I think your point
applies well to rocks vs. paws, but not so well in a sport.  You and I
are just different in our points of view.  I take a position more akin
to golf, where innovation is rather severely restricted.  This allows
some continuity from generation to generation.  Tennis is that way.  So,
are a lot of other sports.  I like to compare Amy Van***n to Mary T.,
or to Misty, or whoever.  But, if all Misty does is do a sideways
dolphin for most of 50 meters, touch, breathe, and do another near 50 meters
underwater, I can't compare them.  They are doing two different things.
  So, maybe we need another stroke, where all swimming is underwater and
only dolphin kicks are allowed.  I don't think so, but some people
probably do.

Your viewpoint is more akin to motor racing, where continuous innovation
is valued by most people, me included, although I admit it scares me
silly when they are going 240 around that old brickyard, which wasn't
designed for such speeds (but that's another story).

Don

 
 
 

Misty Hyman - BUTTERFLY???

Post by fly.. » Fri, 31 May 1996 04:00:00

Exactly!
When people changed the essence of the stroke it became a new and
separate stroke.  If you want to have a race where swimmers swim
butterfly them they should swim butterfly.  If they want to swim
underwater the whole time, create an event for them.
No one in their right mind would argue that the innovators who brought us
butterfly were the best ***rokers of their time and so it is now.
Simple!

 
 
 

Misty Hyman - BUTTERFLY???

Post by Fasl » Sun, 02 Jun 1996 04:00:00

OK, so some people think that Misty's kick disturbed Jenny Thompson in the
100 fly.
Isn't the secret to Misty's kick the fact that it's underwater?  How can
Jenny, who swims on top of the water, be disturbed by her waves under the
water?
In response to someone who suggested that the distance of the kick be
limited like the backstroke:
The backstroke underwater kick was limited because it was not part of the
stroke.  Butterfly kick is part of the stroke, isn't it.
The only way that individuals and teams progress in this sport is if they
push the limits and innovate.  Butterfly evolved from ***roke.  There
was a "cheating" controversy.  But the underwater kick isn't seperate from
butterfly.  It may or may not be a natural extension of the swimming
communities emphasis on streamlines.
If you want to stifle innovation and stop  World swimming dead in its
tracks, don't allow anyone to even slightly manipulate their strokes.  Not
to say that you allow cheating and unfair advantages, but if the only
reason to ban the Misty kick is because of her wake, then I guess we'll
all be mandated to swim time trials with identical stroke techniques so no
one even bothers anyone else.

Drew

 
 
 

Misty Hyman - BUTTERFLY???

Post by Michael W. Moo » Mon, 03 Jun 1996 04:00:00

Quote:

> OK, so some people think that Misty's kick disturbed Jenny Thompson in the
> 100 fly.
> Isn't the secret to Misty's kick the fact that it's underwater?  How can
> Jenny, who swims on top of the water, be disturbed by her waves under the
> water?

There can be underwater currents- could have pushed her sideways. only a
possibility

Quote:
> In response to someone who suggested that the distance of the kick be
> limited like the backstroke:
> The backstroke underwater kick was limited because it was not part of the
> stroke.  Butterfly kick is part of the stroke, isn't it.
> The only way that individuals and teams progress in this sport is if they
> push the limits and innovate.  Butterfly evolved from ***roke.  There
> was a "cheating" controversy.  But the underwater kick isn't seperate from
> butterfly.  It may or may not be a natural extension of the swimming
> communities emphasis on streamlines.
> If you want to stifle innovation and stop  World swimming dead in its
> tracks, don't allow anyone to even slightly manipulate their strokes.

World swimmers want to be the first one at the finish line. This is not
going to stop it in its tracks.

  Not

Quote:
> to say that you allow cheating and unfair advantages, but if the only
> reason to ban the Misty kick is because of her wake, then I guess we'll
> all be mandated to swim time trials with identical stroke techniques so no
> one even bothers anyone else.

At one time you could swim ***stroke underwater (so I have heard). Same
stroke only no breathing, it was changed, for safety reasons. Dont want to
have young kicks going hypoxic. (or however it is spelled).  Thank would
be the reason for changing the rule here (most likely.