London 2012: Why Dropping an Event Is the Right Move for Michael Phelps
As much fun as it would have been to watch Michael Phelps try to tie his record of eight gold medals in a single Olympic Games, we won't get the chance to see it this summer in London.
Don't fret though; this is the right move for Phelps.
Saving himself two or three races only makes the Baltimore native even more of a threat in his other seven events.
His coach Bob Bowman tweeted on Monday that Phelps has decided to drop the 200-meter freestyle from his event.
Phelps is still scheduled to compete in the 100- and 200-meter butterfly, 200-meter and 400-meter individual medley, along with a trio of relay events.
With no more than two events on any given day, seven golds isn't out of the question.
Often times, nothing is for the world's greatest swimmer and the soon-to-be most decorated Olympic athlete of all time.
If he hadn't dropped the 200 free from his repertoire, Phelps would have swimming four races on July 29th, three more on the 30th and to top it all off, three more on the 31st.
I'm sorry, but last time I checked the Olympics isn't a triathlon. It makes absolutely perfect sense for Phelps to have dropped the event.
From a fan's perspective, I would have loved to see a third duel between Phelps and Ryan Lochte, but it just means that the 200 and 400 IM races have potential to be two of the greatest races in recent Olympic history.
How many golds will Michael Phelps win in London?
He wasn't quite as dominant at the U.S. trials as he has been in past years, and dropping the 200 free allows him to focus on his other events, some of which he will need to improve his time on if he plans to bring home gold.
Now that the pressure of trying to put on a repeat performance of eight golds is off the table, it is time to kick back and enjoy what will be Phelps' final Olympic Games.
Hit me up on Twitter, @JoeFitz1014. Let me know your thoughts!
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?