Michael Phelps Denies Reports of Swimming Comeback
U.S. Olympic swimming legend Michael Phelps may not be done writing his legacy.
UPDATE: Friday, May 17, at 9:18 p.m. ET by Ian Hanford
Michael Phelps tweeted out denying his reported comeback:
Why do I keep getting texts about coming back? Do ppl really believe everything they hear or read? There are ... m.tmi.me/VVJFR— Michael Phelps (@MichaelPhelps) May 18, 2013
However, NBC reporter Peter Busch claims that he's confident in his information:
Phelps just sent tweet insinuating that he's not coming back, but I feel very confident with my info. Guess we'll see.— Peter Busch (@peterbuschTV) May 18, 2013
---End of update---
According to NBC reporter Peter Busch, the most decorated Olympic athlete of all time has decided to resume his swimming career and has his sights set on competing in the 2016 Olympic games in Rio. The 2013 FINA World Championships are set to take place July 19-August 4 in Barcelona, although there has been no indication that he will compete there.
Phelps told CNN in March that he had retired from competitive swimming and was looking forward to taking up golf. Now it appears that the links have been put on hold. And the Olympic competition has been put on notice.
At 27 years old, Phelps' return to swimming makes him a legitimate contender. He already holds the record for most gold medals won by an athlete with 18 and has 22 medals in total.
The 2012 games saw the 6-foot-4 Phelps claim four gold medals and two silvers, with two of those golds coming in individual events. The friendly competition between he and fellow American swimmer Ryan Lochte, who won five medals himself at the 2012 games, was one of the bigger storylines of the last Olympics. Now it appears Phelps will be back in the spotlight once again.
The 2016 games just became much more intriguing with Phelps trying to once again make his mark as the greatest Olympian of all-time.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?