Suspicious Chinese Swimmer

get back to us when a woman runs the last 25% (not the last 2.2 miles) of a marathon as fast as the male winner.

buffet rule not wrote: get back to us when a woman runs the last 25% (not the last 2.2 miles) of a marathon as fast as the male winner.

Dumbest post of all time. Pure failure of understanding how races are run. Comparing 30 secs to more than 30 minutes. Complete and total failure.

gotten back two ewe wrote:

buffet rule not wrote: get back to us when a woman runs the last 25% (not the last 2.2 miles) of a marathon as fast as the male winner.

Dumbest post of all time. Pure failure of understanding how races are run. Comparing 30 secs to more than 30 minutes. Complete and total failure.

pot meet kettle. since when is 58 seconds 30 seconds? i'm sure it happens all the time that the first woman runs the last 400 meters of a marathon faster than the male winner (especially if he is on cruise control and high fiving). same thing with the last 800 meters and last mile. those are all such tiny portions of a full marathon. even 2.2 miles is a tiny portion of the race (<10%). 100 meters of a 400 meter swim race is an enormous portion of that swimming race so saying that x woman ran the last mile of a marathon faster than y man is in no way similar to saying that x woman swam the last 100 meters of a 400IM as faster than the male winner. i know that this is complicated but you clearly haven't grasped this rather basic point.

Vent, you DO know that I have entirely stopped responding to your posts in any kind of substantive way, right?

If it were ANYBODY other than you posting, it wouldn't be a problem.

Why don't you try posting under another moniker? You've exhausted any goodwill for the Ventolin^3 moniker, those posts might as well not exist.

buffet rule not wrote: since when is 58 seconds 30 seconds?

Since when is 200m the same as 42,200m? Fool....

please post where i said 200 meters = 42.2K. i know that these concepts are flying over your head but you aren't doing yourself any favors by posting nonsense and then calling other people fools. take a deep breath. i'll try and hold your hand 1 more time before giving up on your remedial lesson:

100m is to 400m as 10.55k is to 42.2k

you should be sure to note that 10.55k > 2.2 miles. i know this all should be very obvious but you clearly aren't getting it. this is your last shot.

EWE WROTE: get back to us when a woman runs the last 25% (not the last 2.2 miles) of a marathon as fast as the male winner.

swimming 50m takes less than 30sec

running 1/4th of a 'thon takes more than 30min

Ok this article will help those who question the Chinese girls' improvement.

'Adrian Moorhouse, the British swimmer who took gold in the 100m breaststroke at the 1988 Olympics in Seoul, makes the same point.When he was 17, he bettered his personal best by four seconds, explaining it was a "natural growth spurt".

He says Ye's "small and light" frame is a great physique for her event.'

A lot of young swimmers have bettered their personal margins by huge chunks in their teens.

She is awesome, lets get over it.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-19061026

Explainer to the Morons wrote:

Ok this article will help those who question the Chinese girls' improvement.

'Adrian Moorhouse, the British swimmer who took gold in the 100m breaststroke at the 1988 Olympics in Seoul, makes the same point.When he was 17, he bettered his personal best by four seconds, explaining it was a "natural growth spurt".

He says Ye's "small and light" frame is a great physique for her event.'

A lot of young swimmers have bettered their personal margins by huge chunks in their teens.

She is awesome, lets get over it.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-19061026

did moorhouse crush the WR by over a second after his improvement? Did he,say, swim his last 50, say, as fast as the gold medal winner in the 50? Did he crush by over a second a WR set by speedsuits?

It's not just being fast, it's not just improvement, it's not just being faster than the men in the last minute, it's not just being from a country with a drug problem - it's all these things added up to literally an unbelievable performance.

agip wrote: ... it's not just being faster than the men in the last minute, it's not just being from a country with a drug problem - it's all these things added up to literally an unbelievable performance.

The USA is the number 1 user of illegal drugs on the planet.

Did you read the entire article?

she was 25 secs slower overall that Lochte, she was 12 Secs off the mens 50m record. People are trying to spin the story as if she swam in a time equaling the men's record. Plus you have seen Lochte fade on occasions at these games so, he is no a benchmark.

She is a tiny girl not a muscle bound freak that could be on steroids. WADA has said she is clean, and until contradicted, it is just sour grapes in my view.

China is rising and if we want to compete with them, we should adopt their work culture and dedication to whatever they do

And American's should beware that a country with 5 times the population should have about 5 times as many stellar athletes as the US of A.

Explainer to the Morons wrote:

Did you read the entire article?

she was 25 secs slower overall that Lochte, she was 12 Secs off the mens 50m record. People are trying to spin the story as if she swam in a time equaling the men's record. Plus you have seen Lochte fade on occasions at these games so, he is no a benchmark.

She is a tiny girl not a muscle bound freak that could be on steroids. WADA has said she is clean, and until contradicted, it is just sour grapes in my view.

China is rising and if we want to compete with them, we should adopt their work culture and dedication to whatever they do

I used to give athletes the benefit of the doubt too. I sort of wish I still could. But after all these cheats being found out(including the beijing athletics m 1500 gold medal winner and w 1500 silver medalist)...I have become cynical.

So go ahead and believe - I can only say that her performance does not pass the giggle test.

agip wrote:

did moorhouse crush the WR by over a second after his improvement? Did he,say, swim his last 50, say, as fast as the gold medal winner in the 50? Did he crush by over a second a WR set by speedsuits?

It's not just being fast, it's not just improvement, it's not just being faster than the men in the last minute, it's not just being from a country with a drug problem - it's all these things added up to literally an unbelievable performance.

I refrain from saying it. But you're an idiot.

Why do you keep comparing her performance to Lochte's time? And just that one time? After a couple of days of competition, It has shown Lochte is not as good as thought to be and he might well have faded quite badly for the part of time you used to compare to Ye's.

You need to have a credible standard that shows Ye's performance or improvement was beyond female human limit. Otherwise, you shouldn't accuse someone of doping w/o positive drug test result(s) or evidence of drug use.

Lochte is the best swimmer. His recent performances are indicators of lack of preparation. Not before the games, but at the games. Too much temptation. The Athlete's village is a party town. One of the craziest if the stories are true.

_____

I would say that, to the contrary, there is a place on anonymous message boards for educated guesses and remembering history.

if you want more quantitative discussion, try

I defer to Ross on the science.

That Ross guy's discussion is interesting. And admittedly, the Chinese do have a history of doping in swimming. However, I believe he pulled all that on the fly. The standards/benchmarks he used for the comparison are not really standard(s). You'll have to ask how far the current women IM WR is near the human limit. If you can't answer the question, the comparison is void. Meaningless. (Worse yet, Radcliffe's marathon women WR is much more an outlier than Ye's. What do you say about Radcliffe's performance/achievement? The West has a far longer record of doping history than the Chinese's.)

2ndly, as Ross said early in the thread, swimming is a very different sport than running (and other sports). It's about fluid dynamics(hydrodynamics) and the technique that gets the swimmer around it, not just the power/energy system. In that case, pacing strategy may not play as big a part in swimming as in running or other sports that rely less on technique for performance.

If it were to compared to running, maybe, if there's an event called 800m huddles that you can talk about pacing and technique at the same time the you may have the case. Ohhh, don't forget it's the MEDLEY event we're talking about that the freestyle is in the last part (they probably have to use different kind of huddles ine the race for a comparison).

how are any human limits defined? That isn't possible, so you are basically saying there is no place for educated guessing.

http://www.sportsscientists.com/2009/07/tour-2009-contador-climb.html

The above post shows how hard it is to define human limits - it is a discussion of Contador's climb in the 2009 TDF that many felt was beyond human capability. The veterans - lemond etc - saw it as proof that Contador was doping. The Science of Sport guys basically said 'well it's suspicious, and it is the best climb ever, but we can't prove anything because of all the variables.'

Of course Contador tested positive and the veterans, who had used their judgment, were proved right.

All you can do is consider what has been done before and decide whether what you are seeing is reasonable. I think this swim fails that test.

I'm not sure what to think of Radcliffe - I wasnt' following the sport when she ran the wr , so I don't have much context. No view.