graciousness in being second

At this point, it would be hard to not know who Michael Phelps is. Even for those not watching any bit of the Olympics, his quest and successes are plastered all over the news.

Having already won 6 gold medals at the Beijing Olympics, Phelps was getting ready for the race that could potentially win him his 7th - but this was going to be the most hard-fought race for him to date at these Olympics. He had two main competitors, Serbian Milorad Cavic and fellow American Ian Crocker, who would be challenging his attempt at that seventh gold.

I happened to be listening to the race on the radio shortly after 7pm when it happened, and Phelps was trailing for most of the race - 100 meter butterfly - which is one full round-trip lap in the pool. Cavic was first after half a lap, with Phelps trailing way behind in seventh place. But true to form, Phelps poured it on during that last half-lap. He was gaining ground on leader Cavic, but it didn't sound like he'd have enough to catch him. And then the race was over. And impossibly, Phelps had indeed won - by a mere one-hundredth of a second.

Last night just after 10pm, I remembered that NBC's Olympic coverage was starting at 10pm, so I quickly turned on the TV. They were covering the women's swimming race that I'd heard right before Phelps' race, so I knew I wasn't too late. I then had the opportunity to watch the race myself, and as they were nearing the end of the race, it did indeed look like Phelps wasn't going to be able to catch Cavic. But then it was declared that Phelps was the winner. And then came the repeated replays. When I'd heard the radio account a few hours previously, they had said that Phelps had probably won the race at the very end, that Cavic had taken his last stroke and was gliding to touch the wall, whereas Phelps took another half-stroke and slammed himself into the wall. The analysts were attributing his win to the last push that came with the last stroke, which is what gave Phelps that one-hundredth of a second edge over Cavic.

Cavic's disappointment at not winning the gold is understandable. To be that close, to lose the gold by a mere one-hundredth of a second, has to be disturbing. The Serbians actually filed a protest over the end of the race, so an investigation had to be conducted to make sure the right person would be declared the actual winner. Given how close the end was, it's not surprising that they'd want it looked at carefully. The tape was reviewed, and while the results could not be seen on a regular-speed replay, they were able to slow the tape down to one frame every 10-thousandth of a second, which showed that Phelps actually touched first.

From the article mentioned above:

Cavic still wasn't sure he actually lost, but said he would accept FINA's ruling.

"I'm stoked with what happened," Cavic said. "I don't want to fight this. People will be bringing this up for years and saying you won that race. If we got to do this again, I would win it."

Cavic watched the replay himself.

"It's kind of hard to see," he said. "I know I had a long finish and Michael Phelps had a short finish."

I can understand that Cavic felt that he won, and from the regular-speed replays, you can't really tell, especially since Cavic's hands were under the water while Phelps' were out of the water. He admits that he couldn't tell from the replay, but in that case, it would seem that the touch-pad would be the ultimate decider in who touched first, and the touch-pad registered Phelps.

The comment that I really object to, though, came from someone in the Serbian delegation.

"We filed the protest but it is already over," said Branislav Jevtic, Serbia's chief of mission for all sports. "They examined the video and I think the case is closed. The video says (Phelps) finished first.

"In my opinion, it's not right, but we must follow the rules. Everybody saw what happened."

The video says Phelps won, but somehow, that's not right, but they're going to graciously agree to follow the rules? What the hell does that mean? If the video and the touch-pad indicate that Phelps won, how is that not right? Both of them were wrong, but the eye-ball view was better? And it's no gracious move to accept the facts, no matter how heartbreaking it might be for your country. He seems to be implying that there's a taint to this win, that somehow, the win was improperly conceded to Phelps. I think that the Serbian delegation's challenge actually made Phelps' win even more solid. Without it, it was just the regular replays over and over again. But since the super-slow-mo version has been looked at, and from that, it was clear that Phelps was the winner, there's now no question.

Being relegated to a silver medal by one-hundredth of a second is not an enviable place to be in. But if you've been beaten fair and square, with evidence beyond question, you have to accept second place graciously.