Suspicious Chinese Swimmer

Lochte's relay leg tonight in 47.74s, certainly not outrageous, but not "crap" as you put it in your post. At most, Lochte is 2% off the world record, Shiwen is on it. That 3% swing can't account for a ±10% differential in the typical structure of the race.

The only point of going through that process is because there is a confounder in the debate about Shiwen vs Lochte in that you might be looking at one swimmer who is just outrageously good at a stroke,and another who is rubbish. That's clearly not the case her, though I never tried to argue that lochte was as good, only that they are not different enough to preclude a direct comparison between their 100m legs. You may have missed that, not sure.

I appreciate that she may not swim the distance often, but if she's genuinely a sub-54 s 100m swimmer, they'll know about it and they'll pick her in their relays (these are the Chinese we're talking about, they'll find the best people for the various distances - the system is too comprehensive not to).

As for the reserve, again, I don't think you're following the argument, I'm not saying it was done as a tactic. I'm saying that physiologically, there is a reserve. Slightly different thing.

I do agree that Shiwen would make a serious 400m freestyle swimmer though. Which kind of adds to the argument started initially.

In any event, the way she swam that race asks a lot of questions - her 400m speed is one of them, but so is the potential for the future, which I think is pretty enormous.

And 53.6 SCM in 2011 (33rd in world) and 55.4 LCM in 2010.

Everything Ross said is right on the mark, so much so that I have copied it into this comment.Hey Ross, WTF is a swimmer doing on this board?

Sprintgeezer - I'm sure you've read Science of Sport - the brojos link to it often. Ross is a PhD and is one of the two(?) guys who do the work there.

http://www.sportsscientists.com/

Brilliant work on the TDF, predicting Contador's dq based on his unlikely performance, if I remember correctly.

someone had to do it wrote:

looks like someone was thinking the same thing as me

i have always thought that the "smart" way to cheat is to take someone who isn't on out of competition testing lists. have them train for a few years while taking every PED imaginable, get super fit and then jump in a race and destroy everyone.

The interesting thing about this kind of doping setup is that it ONLY makes sense in the context of a state-run athletic system, which is exactly what China has. They choose these kids young, hide them away in obscure training camps for 4-5 years, apply "science", and boom, they've got some world beating swimmers, weight lifters, gymnasts, etc. It's way too expensive a program for a disorganized system like the US to develop; consider how many kids are probably trained up at these camps and then go on to do nothing.

Was there such scrutiny of Phelps on letrsun vis a vis PEDs when he won 8 golds and broke 7 WRs in Beijing?

When you're raised running Miles per Week that scare most high school coaches and American runners for the first 12-18 years of your life is much different. Now duplicate that for generation after generation after generation, Since the 1950s.

Drugs or isolation of talents forcing evolution, either way, Africa seems to be here to stay.

shadyyy wrote:

Also, it's not that she is Chinese. It's that she is 16 yo. For someone her age to smash the world record is ridiculous. As she matures, she should get down to like 4:25. Im not buying it.

You must not follow swimming much. It's not unprecedented for a 16-year old to break a WR. Janet Evans was 16 when she broke the 400m, 800m, 1500m freestyle world records. The next year at age 17 she won 3 gold medals in Seoul. Her records lasted until 2007-2008.

You clearly know nothing about (sport) i you think that (prevoius claim). Everyone who follows (sport) knows that (disputed claim). Furthermore, just the fact that (anecdotal evidence) proves that (generalization).

Swimmers are tested at least as much as other athletes. If your suspicions have substance it means that pharmacological science has once again thwarted the testing regime. Since China sport rests on one technology base, and if your suspicions have substance, I would expect to see some unexpectedly great performances from the Chinese track and field team.

no

it is crap

phelps swam 47.15

that is kinda split expected from anchor, not 47.74 crap

idiot

mere %ages offer nothing in this debate

2.01 - 2.99% is 2% & that brings huge range of 0.46s for textile 47.10wr

& lochte is more like 3.6% off the textile 100wr based on pb

likely

moron

you are back to nonsense statistics

if she is as i believe a low/mid-53/1'53/3'57 or 3'58 gal currently, your 10% offering is drivel

eh ??

the chinese is damn good at freestle upto 400m as she coud put in a 58+ in a 4'28 i m wr

lochte has a completely crap 3'55.50pb for 400m

that was coupla years ago & probably untapered & i'm sure that he's maybe good for 3'47/3'48 currently, but that is still crap compared to 3'40.1 textile wr & this chinese who coud go 3'57/3'58

lochte & the chinese gal are not in same universe as far as 400 free is concerned

he isn't

they are

3'55pb is rubbish

no

nonsense

you saw the schedule posted earlier

not feasible to do both

as for the individual 100, she may just be faster than the 53.58 national leader, but she isn't going to threaten kromojojo & probably not missy/sjostrom/halsall in the final, at best finishing creditable 5th or even 4th

chinese are lot smarter than drivel you offer

better to win a guaranteed gold in lesser event than 4th/5th in blue riband

eh ??

drivel

she was ~ level with a 4'07 gal at 300m, & took 3s outta here in 100m

beisel is much better technician on the 3 strokes, having gold capabibility at 200 back without missy

the chinese gal musta been working her butt off to stay close to the acknowledged best all-round stroker in the pool & she has stated some of her strokes need refining

she worked as hard as beisel to 300m but blew her away in last 100

no reserve rubbish

she simply has something like 3'57/3'58 abilty in free & even maxed out at 300 in i m with poor strokes, her endurance kept her level & showed it self in the last 100, but without any significant effort increase put into previous 3 strokes

she didn't put any less effort in 3 other strokes than the free - just that her 3 other strokes are crap compared to free

learn to watch & understand sports kid

not just a serious 400 free, but blow the wr away

why state obvious ?!

Where did you get the 0.3 - 0.5 seconds figure?

According to research at the University of Sydney, the kick start block has been shown to be 0.04 seconds faster than the track start commonly used in Beijing.

Also, if the kick start block allowed swimmers to get out 0.3 - 0.5 seconds faster than previously, you would have seen an immediate 0.3 - 0.5 second improvement in times post-Beijing. This did not happen.

There really is no difference in swim caps since Beijing.

As for the London Aquatic Centre, technologically it is really not different than the Water Cube (or other top international facilities). The media and pool designers like to tout the differences every four years. They will be faster than your average multi-use pool in your locality, but when compared to other international competition pools, the difference is quite minor or non-existent since the technology is essentially the same.

Later i'll touch on the shiny suit era records and such...but just wanted to clear up some items.

Actually, the Chinese system focuses on specialization according to a Chinese National Team member I competed against.

Wu Peng is swimming the 200 Fly and 200IM at the Olympics, but he trains with CW. I believe Li Xuanxu is swimming the 400IM and 400FR - not sure where she trains, but pretty sure she is in the Chinese system.

Thats a birty ditch!

How did you calculate the effect of the suits at 2%? Did you just use the average difference in World Record time or something a little more in depth? Thanks.

enquiringminds wrote:

Was there such scrutiny of Phelps on letrsun vis a vis PEDs when he won 8 golds and broke 7 WRs in Beijing?

no. phelps was a part of project believe, which basically removes 99.99% of doubt that he was doped. remind me again what the name of the independent drug testing program the chinese swimmer is a part of.

thanks to ross tucker for his comments. ross tucker meet ventolin3.

A posted article here said that the Chinese have a serious scientific training program. That's precisely what worries us. In years past, their swim team has dominated and subsequently dropped out or been caught by authorities en masse, and the same was true for the women's distance runners. In both cases, officials subsequently admitted massive drug use. Her performance, a WR, wouldn't be that special but she has improved massively in a short time and was clearly holding a great deal of energy in reserve. She may not be maximized at the other strokes but to go as fast as Lochte the last 100m?? Put it this way: El G averaged about 55 in his 3:26 WR and closed in 53, roughly 2 seconds better than the average. The Chinese girl averaged 1:07/100m and closed the freestyle in 58, 9 seconds faster than her overall average and 12 seconds faster than the average for the first three laps. Granted that the freestyle is the fastest stroke, she obviously wasn't getting the advantage of the start on the fourth 100m, so this was ludicrous and she is clearly doped up. Sun may be as well (his celebration looked pretty steroidal) but he has a track record at least.

Ventolin, you are out of line.

Im pretty sure Liliya Shobukhova has closed the final 2.2k of major marathons as fast as or faster than the male winners a couple times, while being closer, percentage-wise, than Ye was to Lochte.