GOING FOR THE GOLD: Michael Phelps, a swimmer from Baltimore has now won more gold medals than anybody else in Olympic history. How does he do it?
Image: AP
-
The Best Science Writing Online 2012
Showcasing more than fifty of the most provocative, original, and significant online essays from 2011, The Best Science Writing Online 2012 will change the way...
Read More »
Now that Michael Phelps has won an unmatched eight gold medals in this year's Olympic Games, lots of journalists are asking what gives Phelps such a leg up on the competition (legally, of course, though allegations of doping have tainted other Beijing Olympians). Beyond Phelps’ drive to succeed, as reported by the Australian Broadcasting Company, and his undoubtedly good training, could it be that a good bit of his (as well as many athletes’) talent just boils down to simple anatomy?
There's his proportionally longer “wingspan,” as described by the Toronto Sun newspaper. Phelps’s arms extend 80 inches (203 centimeters) tip to tip, and his body measures in at 76 inches (193 centimeters) in height. Most of the time, a person’s height normally corresponds closely to the distance between his outstretched hands. (Recall Leonardo da Vinci’s Vitruvian Man, that famous sketch of a naked male showing his arm-leg-torso ratios.) Maybe this extra reach gave Phelps that narrowest of victories against Serbia’s Milo Cavic in the 100-meter butterfly final on Saturday, August 16, when the American won by just one one-hundredth of a second.
Phelps is also said to be double-jointed, according to a Detroit News blog. His size-14 feet reportedly bend 15 degrees farther at the ankle than most other swimmers, turning his feet into virtual flippers. This flexibility also extends to his knees and elbows, possibly allowing him to get more out of each stroke.
Do any of these alleged anatomical advantages matter? To find out, ScientificAmerican.com spoke to H. Richard Weiner, an internist and former team physician who has practiced sports medicine at the University of Wisconsin--Milwaukee —and who also happens to be a former acclaimed All-American swimmer.
An edited transcript of the interview follows.
What do you think about the notions about Phelps’s built-in, anatomical advantages?
When someone does something statistically impressive, like winning eight gold medals like Phelps, we try to come up with some far-fetched reason for it, like he or she has to have some bizarre physiological adaptation or freaky anatomy. But most things that you measure in human beings fall within predictable ranges.
What do you think about the "wingspan" argument—that Phelps’s long arms give him an edge?
All things being equal, a taller person [with longer arms than a shorter person] will swim faster. A lot of the thrust in swimming comes from arm propulsion and not the kick. But then again, the person who won [the men’s 100- and 200-meter] breaststroke is a five-foot, eight- [1.78-meter-] tall Japanese man [named Kosuke Kitajima]. Matt Grevers, a U.S. swimmer from Northwestern University [in Illinois], is six foot, eight [2.03 meters]. I stood next to him and his arms are, heaven knows, more proportional to a guy who is seven feet [2.13 meters] tall. When he does [the] backstroke and you’re standing on deck, it looks like a tree is coming out of the water. And [Grevers] has done well, but not as well as Phelps. So height in and of itself does not intrinsically confer success.
See what we're tweeting about
12 Comments
Add CommentI am disappointed to see this interview in Sci Am.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTo answer these questions you needed a person with the right expertise and background. Comments like "this 5'8 guy won this" are anecdotal evidence which goes against all the other trends, like that most of the guys in the 100m final were about 6'4. The fact that one taller guy didn't beat Phelps just shows the glaringly obvious fact that there's more to swimming than being tall.
This is actually a very complex question of fluid mechanics and physiology, and there are people who could give intelligent and data-based answers. But you can't expect a random scientist who just happens to be an ex-swimmer to have studied this in detail.
The truth is: there is a very strong rationale, both based on fluid mechanics and based on empirical data, which says that physiological differences are vital advantages in swimming - making differences of a few seconds in races that are decided by hundredths of seconds. Already all the top swimmers have most of the right physiological edges (otherwise they wouldn't be there).
Then of course you add in factors like stroke efficiency, training, attitude, ... and these factors become less important. But when you get to the very very top, often the best athletes all train as hard as they believe they should, they all study technique, their coaches follow similar manuals, they're all dedicated, ... and so the physiological differences become critical.
very interesting
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMarfan's Syndrome.....look it up if interested...it may apply
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMarfan's Syndrome....look it up.... it might apply here
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMarfan's Syndrome.....look it up....it might apply
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhen all is said and done, the complainers are just jealous. Phelps is great, get over it! We seem to have reached the point in humanity's history, where nothing can be true, honest or real. The complainers try to find any reason for negativity. At least with Phelps, we know he wasn't taken away at 3 and put somewhere away from parents to train for some Olympic sport decades later. Bask in the glory of our country having produced not one but many, many excellent sportpeople.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thissum of that stuff may have to do with him winning 8 gold medals but the real truth is that he is the best at swimmingnd those 8 gold medals prove it! so all the scientists around the world can kill themselves trying to firgure out how but the only answer is that he is GREAT!!!!!!!!!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt seems that a lot of comments miss the point of Dr. Weiner's analysis. It's a vast oversimplification to say that the reason Phelps won is his build, or his shoe size, or his joint flexibility. He had these same attributes in Athens in 2004, and he didn't win 8 gold medals. What I took Dr. Weiner's remarks to mean is that physical attributes may make it possible for an athlete to reach an elite level, but what makes a champion is a something beyond what can be measured empirically. That was the point in the example of the 5'8" Japanese swimmer. An equally compelling example, not mentioned in the interview, is former American speed skater Bonnie Blair. She's only 5'4" and by the "tale of the tape" should have been an underdog in every race she skated. Instead she was not only unbeatable but dominant. The difference between being good -- even very good -- and being a champion is something that will never show up on a chart, graph or any physiological monitoring equipment, because it isn't measurable. Here's to Michael Phelps for having the heart of a champion.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisgreat n outstanding
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this178cm = 5ft 10 , not 5ft 8 as stated in the article
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWell, I think it would have been interesting to see some sort of statistical data/study on the subject. Just some guy who knows how to do calculus and also swim says a bunch of his opinions without any scientific back up. Kind of disappointing from SA.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI am Aussie and have large feet and arm span and it truly does work. I don't get tired as easily because I don't need as much effort. To verify I have size 12 in male but 14 female. (Standard sizing) Michael phelps is amazing and who can blame him he is a tall. I am 179cm. So if you say that this article is wrong look at the facts. Also it is probably because he trains hard?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this