I can understand freestyle. “Go as fast as you can, prove you’re the fastest, etc”. I can understand that other strokes may provide other advantages, like the breast stroke uses less energy, so you can go longer distances with it. What I don’t get is why you have Olympic events that force you to use a stroke that isn’t the best stroke for a situation.
Like a race that makes you swim a 100 meter breaststroke…the energy a swimmer puts into a 100 meter breaststroke is way more than the energy that they’d put into it if the distance was great enough where they’d have to do that stroke. So the result doesn’t tell you who the best breaststroker is (because that’s the person who can do an endurance race with an endurance stroke), the result doesn’t tell you who the fastest 100 meter swimmer is (because that’s the guy who wins the 100 meter freestyle), the result is just who happens to be able to sprint the fastest using a non-sprinting stroke. But if you make the breaststrokers go a long enough distance that freestyle wouldn’t be a possibility to use, and then you find out who really has the best form.
I mean yes, they have olympic walking events, but it’s not like they have the 100 meter walk, its a distance event.
So, the question is, I guess, is what are the advantages of the other strokes, and why aren’t competitve events in those strokes geared toward measuring the performers results in situations where the stroke has advantages?