Sports technology

[davieddy]

At what point does a full-body swimsuit become
more aptly described as a boat?

[Uncwilly]

when the following formula is met:

vol_s=swimmer's body volume
vol_b=volume enclosed by suit

(vol_b-vol_s)/vol_s>0.22

[ewmayer]

"Boat" to me implies buoyancy enhancer, whereas a skinsuit of the kind used in contemporary swimming is strictly a friction reducer. While it makes comparison of past and present speed records meaningless, the powers that be in the sport have apparently decided that the neverending quest for world records is worth it.

It's not just swimming, either - in track & field the high-tech track surfaces and shoes have knocked off a few % of all the times, high-tech poles have boosted the pole vaulters, and so forth. The potential speed gain may be larger in swimming [because water friction plays a proportionally larger role than wind resistance in running], but that is a difference of degree, not kind.

So it simply means that the person who wins the race is still the best in that race, but historic comparisons based on absolute times are bogus. [Which of course doesn't prevent the TV networks from making them out to be meaningful.] It's about as silly to say "Michael Phelps is better than Mark Spitz because his times are much better" as it would be to say "Roger Federer is a better tennis player than Don Budge because he serves much faster" or "Lance Armstrong was a better cyclist than Eddy Merckx because his time trial speeds were higher."

[Re. the last analogy, At least in bicycling, the famous traditional "hour record" takes explicit note of whether the record was technology-enhanced or not. If you want to break Eddy's famous 1972 hour record you are free to try, but have to use a bike like Eddy's to do so.]

[EDIT: Today's NY Times has a small op-ed expressing much the same view.]

[davieddy]

As a diversion, Tironesh Dibaba never fails to bring tears to my eyes,
even though you know from previous experience she will run 60s on the last
lap of a fast run 10,000m in adverse conditions.

PS is Usain Bolt human?

[davieddy]

Originally Posted by davieddy

PS is Usain Bolt human?

Before anyone answers, note that I posted this
with two rounds yet to go.

[davieddy]

These became immediately ubiquitous after their first introduction.
I had anticipated them (in my mind) around 1970: the actual blade
parallel to the water rather than the oar always struck me as painfully
obvious as a technological improvement.

We always used to regard bowside and strokeside blades as
non-exchangable (for reasons I don't understand - I think they
were identical). Now they obviously have a "handedness".

David

[cheesehead]

Originally Posted by davieddy

PS is Usain Bolt human?

Is there something in the Jamaican water?

http://www.nbcolympics.com/trackandf...100/index.html

[davieddy]

Apparently Usain puts it down to the bananas

[ewmayer]

Originally Posted by davieddy

PS is Usain Bolt human?

I had my doubts about that after I watched him run a 9.92 in prelims at what looked like a jogging pace - but after watching the final I believe we officially have a new humanoid species which I shall provisionally dub Homo Celeris Boltensis.

Seriously, I think the lad is capable of a 9.50 in the 100m - he probably cost himself a full 0.10 in the Olympic final by slowing up at the end. Can't wait to see what he does in the 200, because that longer distance should be even better-suited to his lanky build. I didn't think Michael Johnson's Atlanta-Olympics WR in the 200 would be broken in my lifetime, but given that the 200 WR time is historically a tad faster than 2x the 100 WR time, a 9.50 lifetime best in the 100 would point to a sub-19.00 time in the 200. Shocking numbers, to be sure.

Now, where can I buy some of those bananas?

[cheesehead]

Originally Posted by ewmayer

Now, where can I buy some of those bananas?

Better hurry.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/18/op...r=1&oref=login (requires free registration at www.nytimes.com)

[R. Gerbicz]

If you think that *walking* a world record on 100m's without doping is possible then you are an idiot. He lead by 5 metres at the 80 metres when he started celebrated himself, this means if he only keep that distance would result him 9.39 sec, because the second's time was 9.89 sec (and to run 5 metres is about 10*5/100=0.5 sec). So beating the world record by 0.33 sec. that would be very suspect, because that is an improvement by 3 percentage, and Usain Bolt knows this.

Have you read the interview by the great doping dealer Angel Heredia in Der Spiegel: http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/0,1518,571031,00.html
It appeared on many Hungarian sites (probably it appeared also in English). It starts with:
"Will you see the Beijing's 100m's final?
Sure. But we won't see clean winner. There won't be clean competitor.
Among the 8 runner?
Yes, all of them will using drugs."