Slashdot Mirror


The US Swim Team's Secret Weapon, Science

Hugh Pickens writes "When American Swimmer Margaret Hoelzer goes for the gold tonight in the 200-meter backstroke, part of her success will be due to a new system developed by Tim Wei, a mechanical and aerospace engineer at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, that uses fluid dynamics to study human movement allowing scientists and coaches to study how fast and hard a swimmer pushes the water as he moves through it. 'Wei uses a tracking technique called digital particle image velocimetry, commonly used to measure the flow of small particles around an airplane or small fish or crustaceans in water.' Wei filtered compressed air in a scuba tank through a porous hose to create bubbles about a tenth of a millimeter in diameter. When an athlete swims through a sheet of bubbles that rises from the pool floor, a camera captures their flow around the swimmer's body and the images show the direction and speed of the bubbles, which Wei then translates into the swimmer's thrust using software that he wrote."

180 comments

  1. Sexism by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 5, Funny
    From TFS:

    "When American Swimmer Margaret Hoelzer goes for the gold tonight in the 200-meter backstroke..."
    "...to study how fast and hard a swimmer pushes the water as he moves through it."

    I'm Margaret Hoelzer, you insensitive sexist swimsuit-designing clods!

    1. Re:Sexism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      the 'he' is referring to 'a swimmer' just a few words before

    2. Re:Sexism by DeadDecoy · · Score: 5, Funny

      Can you really fault them, most slashdotters have never seen a woman before.

    3. Re:Sexism by halsver · · Score: 2, Funny

      I'm allergic to /. memes you insensitive, cliche clod!

      *AHH-CHOO*

      --
      Roughly half my comments are never submitted. You may be reading the better half...
    4. Re:Sexism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's especially difficult to fault them when you're talking about female Olympic swimmers.

      Have you seen those women?

    5. Re:Sexism by rehtonAesoohC · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What you've referred to is called a misplaced modifier, and it occurs when the wrong noun or pronoun is referred to as the precursor to a verb.

      For instance, note the following sentence: "I walked down the street, saw a boy and a bike, and he was walking quickly." In this example, the sentence attempts to reference the boy, but actually references the bike. The original statement is grammatically correct.

      I'm an English teacher you insensitive clod!

    6. Re:Sexism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      As an RPI graduate, I can ASSURE you this researcher has never seen a woman before, either.

    7. Re:Sexism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'll ambiguously define your antecedent!

    8. Re:Sexism by tenco · · Score: 3, Funny

      English bikes are male?

    9. Re:Sexism by guaigean · · Score: 1, Funny

      In Spain they certainly aren't.

      --
      Microsoft Sucks, F/OSS Rocks. I get mod points now right?
    10. Re:Sexism by ozbird · · Score: 1

      How do you sex a bike?

    11. Re:Sexism by camperdave · · Score: 3, Informative

      How do you sex a bike?

      By examining the top bar of the frame. A top bar that is horizontal from steering stem to the top of the seat tube is the opposite sex from one where the top bar slants downward from steering stem to about half way up the seat tube.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    12. Re:Sexism by mortonda · · Score: 1

      And why oh why, I have to ask... WHY is the one with the higher bar the typical design for guys? Might as well call that bar a nutcracker.

      On a related note, if you like to tinker with your bicycle, *always* be sure the seat is properly tightened. Tipping forward is bad enough; tipping back and landing on the tire.... that's a whole new level of pain coming to meet you.

    13. Re:Sexism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm an English teacher you insensitive clod!

      I seriously hope that you are kidding.

    14. Re:Sexism by zippthorne · · Score: 3, Informative

      Because women used to wear skirts to do *everything* and you can't ride a *bicycle* side-saddle.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    15. Re:Sexism by modecx · · Score: 1

      I've always thought the nutcracker was a great incentive.

      --
      Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.
    16. Re:Sexism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What? A male pronoun obviously doesn't refer to a bike in English, unless we've made great strides in bike building since I bought mine.

    17. Re:Sexism by Lord+Flipper · · Score: 1

      that's a whole new level of pain coming to meet you.

      I'll bet, but on the other hand, it's probably a case of bye bye dingleberries, forever.

    18. Re:Sexism by RDW · · Score: 1

      'How do you sex a bike?'

      http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1569272/Man-who-had-sex-with-bicycle-sentenced.html

      Sheriff Colin Miller added: "In almost four decades in the law I thought I had come across every perversion known to mankind, but this is a new one on me. I have never heard of a 'cycle-sexualist'. "

    19. Re:Sexism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fucking linguistic prescriptivist.

      Would you know what people mean? Yes, absolutely; there'd be no doubt whatsoever. That's all that really matters.

    20. Re:Sexism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll ambiguously define your antecedent!

      You leave my mother out of this!!!

  2. The secret science is wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The other swimmers already explained it... Michael Phelps actually invented a time machine, and he's traveled back to our time to win races at the normal speed of people from his time.

    1. Re:The secret science is wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, I heard that instead of balls he has a three bladed propeller that he whips out once he's underwater.

    2. Re:The secret science is wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, I heard that instead of balls he has a three bladed propeller that he whips out once he's underwater.

      On what is the propeller mounted?

    3. Re:The secret science is wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      On a shaft, naturally.

    4. Re:The secret science is wrong by RDW · · Score: 3, Funny

      According to the BBC, Phelps's armoury of secret weapons includes ... Hot Grits! (no, really):

      http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/7562840.stm

      Oh, and eggs. Lots of eggs. But don't try this at home:

      http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2008/aug/15/foodanddrink.michaelphelps

    5. Re:The secret science is wrong by icegreentea · · Score: 5, Interesting

      And his body. He's like a dolphin. His proportions are perfect for swimming. And then he's double jointed in his ankles, elbows, shoulders AND chest. His armspan is 10cm greater than his height. All he needs now are gills.

    6. Re:The secret science is wrong by DeadDecoy · · Score: 1

      That and he has incredibly large lungs that were acquired from being trained like a thoroughbred. Though I find the most amusing part of this post is that it has switched away from the main topic of Margaret Hoelzer. :)

    7. Re:The secret science is wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The chest has a joint?

    8. Re:The secret science is wrong by Abreu · · Score: 1

      I knew it! He's a mutant!

      --
      No sig for the moment.
    9. Re:The secret science is wrong by nokiator · · Score: 1

      [...] All he needs now are gills.

      And teflon skin...

    10. Re:The secret science is wrong by ToastBusters · · Score: 5, Funny

      And his body. He's like a dolphin. His proportions are perfect for swimming. And then he's double jointed in his ankles, elbows, shoulders AND chest. His armspan is 10cm greater than his height. All he needs now are gills.

      Dolphins have gills?

    11. Re:The secret science is wrong by LeafOnTheWind · · Score: 1

      I like this quote:

      Anita Bean, sports nutritionist and author of Food for Fitness, finds it slightly hard to believe even Phelps can be expending quite as many calories as that. "Say he's doing about four miles a session, and a couple of sessions a day," she says, "plus his land training - I'd say he's burning maybe 5,000 calories in training, and maybe 2,500 simply to sustain himself. Something like 8,000 a day in all? Mind you, he is a very big bloke. I haven't looked at his schedules, but 12,000 seems a lot."

      It doesn't take a nutritionist to work the First Law of Thermodynamics - if he were taking in more calories than he burned in one day than his weight (internal energy of the system) would have to increase proportionately to the unused Calories. As that obviously isn't happening, the work done by the system must approximately equal the energy introduced. As a trained nutritionist, she should probably know this... I wonder who she thinks is lying to her...

    12. Re:The secret science is wrong by The+Dancing+Panda · · Score: 3, Informative

      Our digestive system isn't 100% efficient. He could be taking in 12,000 calories, using 8,000, and shitting 4,000. No one ever talks about how much he shits between swims.

    13. Re:The secret science is wrong by elgatozorbas · · Score: 2, Funny

      Don't we all need girls? Oh, gills you mean....

    14. Re:The secret science is wrong by tepples · · Score: 1

      Dolphins have gills?

      No, but they have their nose on top, which (for surface activity) is at least as good as gills.

    15. Re:The secret science is wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dolphins have gills?

      Well, mine do. They also have lasers and are ill-tempered. And come to think of it, they're actually sea bass. I would have used sharks, but they're illegal.

    16. Re:The secret science is wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I, for one, welcome our silent shit overlords.

    17. Re:The secret science is wrong by ivan256 · · Score: 1

      You should read the story again. I'm pretty sure the main topic was Tim Wei, and his research.

    18. Re:The secret science is wrong by korean.ian · · Score: 1

      I have serious doubts about that diet report. Professional bodybuilders like Ronnie Coleman (8 times Mr. Olympia) and Jay Cutler eat around 10,000 calories per day. They weigh up around 270-300lbs during competition, and Michael Phelps weighs 187lbs according to the first article. Phelps also eats a lot more carbohydrates, which don't burn fat as efficiently as protein. So I'd have to say that IMO the report is exaggerated. I will agree with one thing though, which is that people who aren't training for olympic events should not be trying to eat that much food!

  3. Will be using science... by Recovering+Hater · · Score: 1

    and the science of drugs. I kid, I kid.

    --
    My humor is probably your flamebait
  4. The secret weapon is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The science of drugs.

    You can read: http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,571891,00.html

    If you read german, you might want to read an interview with Angel Heredia, the drugdealer of american athletes (well, not only the americans')

    http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/0,1518,571031,00.html

    1. Re:The secret weapon is by Tx · · Score: 2, Informative

      I struggled with the Google translation of that article, here is an article on the same guy that covers the same ground for English speakers.

      --
      Oh no... it's the future.
  5. Problems with slashdot...is it just me? by Joce640k · · Score: 1

    Is it just me or do other people never see the first post?

    I can see this reply, but what's it replying to? No idea....

    --
    No sig today...
    1. Re:Problems with slashdot...is it just me? by DeadDecoy · · Score: 2, Informative

      First port got modded troll. I think, if the first few posts get modded down, they disappear from view. The purpose of this is to remove first-spammers. And ya, my reply seems kinda dumb outa context :P.
      O well, this will get modded off topic and we can move on with our lives.

    2. Re:Problems with slashdot...is it just me? by eln · · Score: 1

      Maybe you have your comment threshold set too high? If you browse at +2, that might explain it. I browse at -1, and see everything (for better or worse).

    3. Re:Problems with slashdot...is it just me? by rehtonAesoohC · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Maybe your threshold is set too low?

    4. Re:Problems with slashdot...is it just me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      No, it's not just you.

      The original slashdot page layout and comment threading system was junk. It was obviously "designed" at 3:00 in the morning after a mushroom and hash party in Taco's dorm room. They would fix it, but nobody at slashdot understands how it works.

      The recent v2.0 slashdot page layout and comment threading system is also junk. It was obviously "designed" at 3:00 in the afternoon after a martini and coke lunch at an expensive steak house. They would fix it, but nobody at slashdot understands that it sucks.

    5. Re:Problems with slashdot...is it just me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Allow me to introduce you to the "Parent" button. It's what I use in order to bring up the post that someone replied to.

    6. Re:Problems with slashdot...is it just me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I modded you informative out of spite.

      Take that!

    7. Re:Problems with slashdot...is it just me? by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      If you don't log in, the default is so high that it it likely the equivalent of +2.

      The entire system sucks like that now. If you have adjusted how it shows posts, it doesn't hid as much of them. When you surf logged out then attempt to log in so make a post, it is a bitch finding your spot and the post you wanted to reply to again. There will be tons of posts in the way mosts times. But hey, screwing up more then the old system is progress right?

  6. Changing is easier said then done. by BitterOldGUy · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Swim coach Sean Hutchison, who put two athletes on the Olympic swim team, says that he used Wei's insights as the basis for every technical change he made with swimmers leading up to the Olympic trials and games this year.

    After doing something for years and years, changing the way you do something, whether it's a swimming stroke or tennis or golf swing, isn't done instantly. It takes quite a bit of concerted effort and attention to change it. I'd be really interested in how and what the coach does to get the swimmers to change.

    I've witnessed swimmers in college that have bad habits that they gained as youth and they can't seam to shake them.

    1. Re:Changing is easier said then done. by jaymzter · · Score: 1

      Football (American) coaches at the University of Florida did something similar last year. Working with the university's Biomechanics and Motion Analysis Laboratory to analyze quarterback Tim Tebow's throwing motion. After adjustments were made to his throwing motion based on that work, he went on to be the first sophomore Heisman award winner, given to the nation's top/favorite/hyped player.

      --
      If thou see a fair woman pay court to her, for thus thou wilt obtain love
    2. Re:Changing is easier said then done. by Crispy+Critters · · Score: 5, Interesting
      That depends. I remember reading about Natalie Coughlin four years ago, and one of the coaches was describing how Natalie could take a suggestion and instantly integrate it into her swim style, even in a competition. I believe that ability was seen as unique.

      It is plausible that adaptability is one trait that helped the Olympic swimmers become Olympic swimmers in the first place. Certainly it would be interesting to hear more about it.

    3. Re:Changing is easier said then done. by ckthorp · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Have you watched the Olympic athletes who have competed in Dancing with the Stars? When it comes to taking direction and altering their physical performance in a short period of time, they're absolutely awe-inspiring. If you're an Olympic athlete, you better be able to quickly make major changes based on either computerized or human coaching instructions. It's like watching a professional actor rapidly portray a half dozen different personae.

    4. Re:Changing is easier said then done. by BitterOldGUy · · Score: 1

      How many drills, videos, or coach's critiques did it take him throw without thinking? If he's in a game and has to think about throwing, he would have blown it. I was like that in my tennis days. If I though about my stroke, the ball went wild - I thought too much.

    5. Re:Changing is easier said then done. by maxume · · Score: 1

      This is essentially what I was thinking when I read the parent comment, but you stated it better than I would have.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    6. Re:Changing is easier said then done. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      If you've met Tebow...you'd understand that thinking isn't really a problem. And this is coming from a fan, not a hater.

    7. Re:Changing is easier said then done. by Original+Replica · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I have to wonder if Olympic swimmers know their sport so well, as to be able to be consciously aware of all the tiny little adjustments that help make the difference. I know that the more cycling I do the more aware I am of my pedal cadence and how smooth (or not) my pedal stroke is. An Olympics swimmer spends so much time thinking about their swimming I should hope that they can consciously add finesse where novices like me have trouble not swallowing pool water every fourth stroke.

      --
      We are all just people.
    8. Re:Changing is easier said then done. by Alomex · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I've witnessed swimmers in college that have bad habits that they gained as youth and they can't seam to shake them.

      About twenty years ago, famous golf swing coach Butch Harmon saw Tiger at a day camp for kids. At the end of the day he knew Tiger would be famous one day but not because of the way he hit the ball. It was because of the way he took direction and coaching advice. Butch said that over the years he had seen quite a few kids hit the ball better than Tiger, but none so eagerly seek advice and apply it on the field as Tiger did.

    9. Re:Changing is easier said then done. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or not even that, I'm not racking your fucking head against the wall when your trying to haul ass and turn. It's always amazed me how they know, and can manage to quickly adjust what there doing. Where as I'm usual notice.. think to myself oh fuck.. *SMACK*

      Which is usually quickly followed by swallowing pool water and couhing like a idiot for the next 5 mins.

    10. Re:Changing is easier said then done. by stephanruby · · Score: 2, Interesting

      After doing something for years and years, changing the way you do something, whether it's a swimming stroke or tennis or golf swing, isn't done instantly. It takes quite a bit of concerted effort and attention to change it. I'd be really interested in how and what the coach does to get the swimmers to change.

      In golf, you optimize the golf clubs, in tennis -- it's the rackets, and in swimming -- it's the swimsuits/body-suits. That's how you create the illusion of athletic progress and inject a little bit of excitement at the same time, you don't depend on the athletes for changing/improving their own behaviors -- that's just too hard -- you simply give them better equipment instead.

    11. Re:Changing is easier said then done. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've taught martial arts and some people are very capable of changing up their habits when their attention is brought to a bad habit. Other people it takes a lot of work to correct them. In general, not the rule but in general the more skilled people are able to adjust their habits to perform better. I believe a lot of this is psycological, they want to be the best and mentally they take in anything that will help them get there and try harder to integrate it.

  7. Interpretation? by Duncan+Blackthorne · · Score: 2, Interesting

    So if I'm reading this correctly, they essentially created a measuring system for how much power a swimmer is generating in the water, serving the equivalent purpose of the power meter that is commonly used by cyclists?

    1. Re:Interpretation? by BitterOldGUy · · Score: 5, Informative
      Hydrodynamics comes into also. So it's not just power but also how well they move through the water. Efficiency.

      I have much more power than any of the girls, well most of them, on the US Team, but in the water, they'll blow my doors off because of better technique - the ability to apply their power in the water. That's the best I can do. It's been a while since I read my swim coaching stuff.

    2. Re:Interpretation? by davester666 · · Score: 0

      It's not technique! It's the webbing between their fingers that is grafted on that makes all the difference.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
  8. So what's next? by anomnomnomymous · · Score: 1

    So besides the swimwear, we're also manipulating the playing ground now?

    We might as well freeze the swimming pool, give the swimmers some iceskates and let them set an even higher record!

    --
    When you shoot a mime, do you use a silencer?
    1. Re:So what's next? by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      So besides the swimwear, we're also manipulating the playing ground now?

      Nope, we manipulate the training ground, to better coach the athletes. Akin to using image recognition and tapes to aid in, say, prepping for a football game. Only the automation works much better.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    2. Re:So what's next? by avandesande · · Score: 1

      I know your kidding around, but it gives the swimmers in the middle an advantage over the ones on sides if they have to deal with turbulance.
      Really the empty side lanes were added in the spirit of fairness.

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
  9. It's not just technique by Solandri · · Score: 5, Informative

    It's not just better technique and the new suit. The pool is also designed to reduce waves to help lower times. A lot of the wave dissipation features described in the article have been used in tow tanks (where we tow model ships to measure their drag) for decades.

    1. Re:It's not just technique by Anpheus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Don't buy into journalists and others grasping at straws here. They couldn't find anything different about the pool, so they start reaching for things that would be obvious to anyone who watched swimming four years ago or has ever seen a swimming event. Extra lanes? Common. Wave-dissipating buoy lines? Common. Extra depth? Eh, not so much, but I know my school's pool is more than 2 meters in depth and it's considered OK.

      I think what you're seeing is natural, both the sportsmen and women are better than ever, and the swimsuits are better than ever. Result: world records falling left and right.

      I'd like to see the NBC and other groups congratulate Phelps rather than talk about fluff stories like how it's such a fast pool. If it's so fast, and it's not that Phelps is simply the fastest swimmer, then, well, all the other swimmers should be racing for first rather than second.

    2. Re:It's not just technique by garcia · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Everyone has known about this for years and I'm not quite sure why it's suddenly news now. There are plenty of pools out there that have 10+ lanes (in college we had 10+ lanes and we swam in the deep end of the pool for SCY races). It really seems like most of the discussions about the reasons for the WRs falling are more or less just to fill the time that the announcers have between events.

      I realize that the general public doesn't understand how pools, suits, and training methods have evolved over the last 15 years but it's seriously not news worthy IMO. US Swimming is just trying to get people to pay attention to how cool swimming is so that they get the most out of the "Olympic Cycle". The "Olympic Cycle" is the phenomenon that occurs following every Olympic year where swim teams see a upswing in the number of youngsters trying out for swim teams because of all the coverage ("ohh, Mommy, I want to be Michael Phelps/Natalie Coughlin/Hall Jr/Krazelburg/Dolan/etc too!")

      Another flash in the pan caused by mass media dumbing everything down to a mostly unaware public. Move along.

    3. Re:It's not just technique by codemachine · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yeah, the 10 lane thing isn't new, but this is the first Olympics in a 3m deep pool. The depth would definitely help reduce turbulence.

    4. Re:It's not just technique by MtViewGuy · · Score: 1

      There was also one change that lowered times: nobody races in the lanes next to the pool walls. As such, this means lower turbulence in water for all those swimmers in the other lanes, resulting in much faster performances.

    5. Re:It's not just technique by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's probably easier to think about track and field instead of a pool. Can you run faster on concrete or sand? While the differences in technology and environment they make are not as significant as the switch from running on sand vs concrete, they do have some effect. At this level of competency 1-2% is a lot of difference. It's the difference between a gold medal and a world record in a lot of cases. Anything you can do to reduce turbulence in the water is going to make the swimmers faster.

    6. Re:It's not just technique by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd like to see the NBC and other groups congratulate Phelps rather than talk about fluff stories like how it's such a fast pool.

      You and I must be watching different NBCs. All they do is congratulate and hype Phelps, the Greatest Olympian Ever.

    7. Re:It's not just technique by zippthorne · · Score: 3, Funny

      Anything you can do to reduce turbulence in the water is going to make the swimmers faster.

      Increasing the viscosity would reduce turbulence...

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    8. Re:It's not just technique by searlea · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure that flippant remark's as obvious as you think.

      Increased viscosity may be bad at the ends of the pool (diving in and pushing off after turns), but may help with strokes.

      Or do you think reducing the viscosity would make swimmers faster?

      It's a trade-off between the ability to propel yourself, and the resistance to movement. I doubt (by pure chance) that water's the fastest fluid to swim in.

    9. Re:It's not just technique by foniksonik · · Score: 1

      SO you're saying that the pool being 3 meters deep instead of 2 meters doesn't make a difference?

      Phelps is still the faster swimmer... it's the world record times that MULTIPLE swimmers in a race are breaking (not just US swimmers and not just Phelps) that is at question.

      You can't break a world record in a non-regulation / non-approved pool. This pool in China is by nature of being the Olympic pool... is official - at 3 meters depth. Past pools were less deep.

      Not having waves bouncing off the bottom creating additional density and turbulence to swim through would seem to be an advantage to swimming faster.

      Again Phelps is still the fastest but if you watched any of the races you'll have seen the other swimmers also beating their own fastest times substantially and many getting close to prior world records (excepting the fact that Phelps was re-setting them even faster).

      The only advantage Phelps may have had is if he trained in a similar pool and had learned that certain techniques when used in a deeper pool were more effective than when used in the more shallow pools... such as diving deeper on turn arounds or off the start, so as to go further under water which is known to be faster when you push off rather than heading up earlier to begin swimming again.

      --
      A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
  10. Related research on the dolphin kick Phelps uses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative
  11. Reminds me of this... by loocas · · Score: 1

    http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/humannature/default.aspx

    Inflation was essential for swimming when I was 3.

  12. Olympic research by Strange+Ranger · · Score: 1

    The new shark skin suit is pretty impressive too...
    http://www.nhm.ac.uk/about-us/news/2008/august/news_15012.html

    Now all we need is an Olympic event that uses internal combustion engines and we'd be set. :)

    --

    Operator, give me the number for 911!
    1. Re:Olympic research by Born2bwire · · Score: 4, Funny

      I think you mean lasers.

  13. oh please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    oh please, are you implying she will win becuase they traced bubbles over her.

  14. Hmm... I have a correction to the title by rehtonAesoohC · · Score: 5, Funny

    The US Swim Team's Secret Weapon: Michael Phelps.

    Though that's not very secret. Sort of like Victoria's.

    1. Re:Hmm... I have a correction to the title by Xoltri · · Score: 5, Funny

      OK we get it, he's good at swimming. Does there really need to be so many swimming events? Why don't they have 10 different softball events? You could have ones where everyone gets one arm tied behind their backs. Or one where they all have to run backwards. Another where they hop around the field with potato sacs on their legs. Or have a runner at each base and they have to do it relay style. It doesn't make any sense!

      It's event pollution. See: http://www.realmansolympics.com/

      --
      -Xoltri
    2. Re:Hmm... I have a correction to the title by hondo77 · · Score: 0, Troll

      You'd have to leave your parents' basement for it to make sense.

      --
      I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
    3. Re:Hmm... I have a correction to the title by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 1

      See: http://www.realmansolympics.com/ [realmansolympics.com]

      The author of that website doesn't know what he's talking about. Cycling is one of the toughest sports out there, lycra or no lycra. It's very much a sport for real men.

      --
      Drill baby drill - on Mars
    4. Re:Hmm... I have a correction to the title by pcolaman · · Score: 1

      Real Mans Olympics, aka, Olympics to prop up the countries that suck at sports.

    5. Re:Hmm... I have a correction to the title by ThomasFlip · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Agreed. People need to stop gawking at how many medals he's winning. They represent winning events that vary little in terms of training and skill. Now if somebody won a gold in cycling and long distance running, THAT would be a real accomplishment.

      --
      If the dollar is an "I owe you nothing", then the Euro is a "Who owes you nothing." - Doug Casey
    6. Re:Hmm... I have a correction to the title by maxume · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm pretty sure that coming in fourth place in a single Olympic event is a real accomplishment.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    7. Re:Hmm... I have a correction to the title by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They have different swimming events just like they have different running events. That happens because in swimming and running there are two metrics: speed and endurance. The different events put weight on the speed and endurance differently.

    8. Re:Hmm... I have a correction to the title by HybridJeff · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Hell, just qualifying for the Olympics is a huge accomplishment.

    9. Re:Hmm... I have a correction to the title by Hektor_Troy · · Score: 1

      Actually ... not so much. Wether or not it is an accomplishment depends on how you qualified.

      In some events, it's the individual countries that set the bar for it, sometimes you give countries wildcards. Just look at Eric "The Eal" Moussambani who managed to swim the 100 meter freestyle in 1 minute 52.72 seconds. A time that I myself is able to match (I do it in about 1 minute 50 in a 25 meter pool).

      In some of the other events I've seen, I've heard the Danish commentators lament the fact that the Danish Olympic Committee set their bar for olympic qualifying so high, that we can't send an athlete, despite our best athlete being better than the median in that event.

      --
      We do not live in the 21st century. We live in the 20 second century.
    10. Re:Hmm... I have a correction to the title by h2_plus_O · · Score: 1

      People need to stop gawking at how many medals he's winning. They represent winning events that vary little in terms of training and skill.

      Spoken like someone with neither the training, experience, or skill. The truth is that swimming is full of specialists now- and the training and skills from event to event are significantly different. There's a reason we haven't seen someone cross over so many events like this since Mark Spitz (36 years ago)- it's because that's how often someone comes along who can really compete across disciplines and beat the specialists at their own games.

      I started swimming at age 6 and made it to the national level in college. I was a sprint freestyle specialist, and the training I did differed quite a bit from, say, what the backstrokers or IMers or the Flyers or the distance swimmers did.
      For example, we would train for higher peak heart rate capacity than the longer-distance folk; we would hit heart rates of > 260bpm while most of the distance folks didn't have the ability to get there- they'd hit v02 max (muscle failure) before they could tax their hearts that much. This called for a lot more power training than the distance folks. Meanwhile, their aerobic-oriented training rendered them much stronger at distance than anybody in the sprinters' lanes.

      Yes, it's all swimming, but to excel at different disciplines calls for significantly different training and approaches, which typically cost a swimmer the ability to train optimally for others. For someone to perform like Phelps has in these games is special indeed.

      --
      If there's one thing I won't stand for, it's intolerance.
    11. Re:Hmm... I have a correction to the title by XanC · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The difference between sprinting and distance is certainly respected in the default settings. It's treated like running, where the shortest and longest distances get the most points.

      Where swimming gives in to useless medal inflation is in the different strokes. We don't have track events where everybody has to run sideways, or backwards, or upside-down. A runner is welcome to do that, if he can, and if it's faster he'll win.

      That's how swimming should be: they should be able to use any stroke they like. We just want to see who's fastest. What's the point of forcing the use of a slow stroke and then measuring speed?

    12. Re:Hmm... I have a correction to the title by !coward · · Score: 1

      So true.

      I've often thought that half of the athletes in the Olympics simply shouldn't be there.. Getting your ass thoroughly kicked in the qualifying rounds of the single event you participate in, doesn't seem to justify the country's investment. For most, it's just an "experience"; or, if you prefer, a government-sponsored vacation.

      A close friend of mine used to be our national champ for a couple of events in swimming.. He was a really good swimmer, very hard-working and dedicated in his training.. and even though he had pretty good times, certainly enough to qualify for the Sydney Olympics, he simply refused to go. His reasoning was that the bar was set too low, and that though a good swimmer, he wouldn't be a match for the world's top swimmers -- hence, he refused to be "cannon fodder" (as he put it), as most athletes competing in the Olympics are.

      I'm all for sports and pushing yourself to achieve more, but when an athlete hasn't got a snowball's chance in hell to even place in the top 10, then he shouldn't be there, period.

      With that in mind, what your (Danish) Olympic Committee does, when it sets the bar at that level, is ensuring that the athletes who do represent your country in the Olympics, actually stand a chance at achieving something that will make them, and your country, proud. Hell, if the bar is set high enough, then simply qualifying is reason enough to be proud. As it stands, I'm finding it hard to be the least bit proud about my own country's representatives, even though we really had no expectations for them.

      All this notwithstanding, the fact that the bar is set low is what makes it possible for so many countries to be present at the Olympics -- for many of the smaller countries, it's the only chance to be seen by the world, and that's probably something worth preserving.

    13. Re:Hmm... I have a correction to the title by h2_plus_O · · Score: 1
      They do have an event where they can use any stroke they like. It's called "freestyle". And there are 3 other strokes recognized in competition.

      What's the point of forcing the use of a slow stroke and then measuring speed?

      All sports are made-up games. These things aren't particularly useful in any other context, they exist for the sake of competition. There is no point. As well to ask why cyclists have time trials separate from peloton races, or why all track events don't have hurdles in them, or why there are 3 different weapons in the fencing disciplines. Why? Because it makes it harder, because it's a bigger obstacle, because it pulls greater things out of those who take the challenge on.

      --
      If there's one thing I won't stand for, it's intolerance.
    14. Re:Hmm... I have a correction to the title by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 1

      All sports are made-up games.

      The original Olympic events were all military skills. Running (sometimes in full armour and weapons load!), javelin, wrestling, boxing, pankration (unarmed fight-to-win) discus. All direct military skills.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    15. Re:Hmm... I have a correction to the title by h2_plus_O · · Score: 1

      All sports are made-up games.

      The original Olympic events were all military skills. Running (sometimes in full armour and weapons load!), javelin, wrestling, boxing, pankration (unarmed fight-to-win) discus. All direct military skills.

      Yes, they measure military skills- but they're still made-up games. For example, to win the javelin, shot put, or discuss event, you throw for distance (which is only a small part of their military applications- for example, hitting a target isn't part of the game, but it is definitely the point of the skill). Wrestling is a game with rules to keep combatants safe, and is not something you'd see in actual real-life military application. Same with boxing, fencing, etc- they allow one to develop and practice skills transferrable to other (in this case, military) applications, but there's no inherent value or point to the actual game itself.

      --
      If there's one thing I won't stand for, it's intolerance.
  15. Swimmer gender issues by spineboy · · Score: 5, Funny

    I dunno - if you've seen some of the female swimmers, then it's not hard to make that mistake.

    --
    ..........FULL STOP.
    1. Re:Swimmer gender issues by Abreu · · Score: 2

      Exactly, you need only look at their muscles and hear their voices and you'll come to the conclusion that they are inyecting them with something, even if they pass the doping tests.

      Same with this american guy Phelps... He is either on some new drug or he's a bloody mutant! Gold medals and olympic records falling like flies!

      --
      No sig for the moment.
    2. Re:Swimmer gender issues by rpj1288 · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Dude's a freaking mutant. Double jointed in the elbows and knees, body parts out of proportion, and he produces half as much lactic acid as most athletes. Bloody mutant....

      --
      Marvin knew: "Think of a number, any number..."
    3. Re:Swimmer gender issues by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Take a look at Phelps body and you can see he is perfectly suited to swimming. On land, he looks freakish with a long torso, long arms, short legs, giant hands and feet.

      It's not drugs, it's simply that his genetic combination gives him an advantage.

    4. Re:Swimmer gender issues by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      maybe you guys never saw the video of his mom and that dolphin?

  16. Ha!! by IcyHando'Death · · Score: 3, Funny

    Screw science. Their weapon is Intelligent Design!

    1. Re:Ha!! by Brad1138 · · Score: 1

      Intelligent Design

      I would like to point out that People who understand the real meaning of the Universe are very good swimmers as they are commonly swimming away from Pirates.

      --
      If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people
    2. Re:Ha!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So Intelligent Deesihn is just another name for chemistry?!

  17. Re:Related research on the dolphin kick Phelps use by gslavik · · Score: 1, Interesting

    swimming backstroke in high school, I always noticed that my underwater dolphin was faster than my on surface backstroke ...

    I could go longer and faster underwater in backstroke than a team mate who would literally wipe the floor with me in backstroke, because his surface speed was much faster.

    That and the coach would tell us "do butterfly kick underwater near the surface until you feel that you are slowing down, then come up and do crawl." when training for the front crawl (freestyle) events.

    I've also seen Lenny Krayzelburg swim underwater in a 25 yard pool. The lung capacity on the olympic swimmers is something extraordinary.

  18. I knew female athletes had bulging muscles,but ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    When American Swimmer Margaret Hoelzer goes for the gold tonight in the 200-meter backstroke..."
    "...to study how fast and hard a swimmer pushes the water as he moves through it.

    I caught that too, and wondered if they had just inadvertently disclosed a cheating scandal at the Olympics.

  19. It's not just American athletes that are faster by iamghetto · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Everyone is faster in the pool. I watched a race where even the 5th place finisher came in above the old world record time.

    Just read this: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/12/sports/olympics/12records.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

    Over above whatever the swimmers are using, the pool itself is engineered to create faster times. Everything from the lane dividers, to the wall of the pool, to the extra meter of depth are meant to dissipate turbulence in the water and increase times.

    1. Re:It's not just American athletes that are faster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      i'm starting to hear reports, admittedly unconfirmed, that several in the USA team have been found consuming DHMO prior to competing - this substance is well known for temporarily improving athletic performance, though admittedly is difficult to detect using the current dope-tests.
      i wouldn't be surprised if this scandal hits the papers over the next few days.

    2. Re:It's not just American athletes that are faster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually, it's mostly due to the swimsuits they're wearing. All of the winners are wearing special suits that decrease drag as much as possible and also have rigid areas that reinforce the swimmer's form so that it doesn't degrade as the swimmer tires.

      Yeah, the spirit of the games is pretty much gone.

    3. Re:It's not just American athletes that are faster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Umm, don't you mean decrease times?

    4. Re:It's not just American athletes that are faster by MtViewGuy · · Score: 1

      Essentially, we're borrowing a lot of formerly classified research into lowering the resistance of things moving through water (the basic physics involved came from research done to make ships go faster and to reduce the resistance of a submarine running underwater; I'm almost guessing that they borrowed the research done by the revolutionary USS Albacore, a submarine that resulted in a quantum leap forward in underwater speed).

    5. Re:It's not just American athletes that are faster by ksd1337 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Worse yet, DMHO can be found in the pool itself! This is an outrage.

    6. Re:It's not just American athletes that are faster by Pseudonym · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Perhaps more to the point, it's not just US that uses science.

      (And yes, I speak from experience. I can't tell you exactly what I do for a living, but let's just say that next Olympics, Australia's rowers are going to have a distinct advantage.)

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
    7. Re:It's not just American athletes that are faster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Worse yet, DMHO can be found in the pool itself! This is an outrage.

      Nice, so the damn Americans are obviously peeing in the pool now too. How typical.

    8. Re:It's not just American athletes that are faster by sendai2ci · · Score: 1

      Definitely. Every nation that takes sports seriously spends a ridiculous amount of money on improving the performance of their athletes, a fair bit of that is on sports-science. In Australia, the funds come from the AIS (Australian Institute of Sport,) they receive around AU$200M/y of government funding.

      Oh'n, America is not the only country to use CFD. Australia also uses it: http://www.sciencealert.com.au/features/20082805-17396.html

    9. Re:It's not just American athletes that are faster by Hektor_Troy · · Score: 1

      Hrmm ... do you work in bionics? Or maybe you specialize in miniturization of outboard engines?

      --
      We do not live in the 21st century. We live in the 20 second century.
    10. Re:It's not just American athletes that are faster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Albacore design wasn't a quantum leap. It was more like an obvious logical addition to a new type of ship. Older submarines were designed to operate normally on the surface and then attack underwater. Thus, their hulls were designed primarily for surface operations (V-hull). The Albacore design was made for the use of advanced snorkeling technology which enabled continuous underwater operations. Thus, its hull was round. But this design wasn't surprising and it certainly isn't a "quantum leap." The Albacore design could have been implemented on pre-snorkeling submarines, but it would have been stupid to do so, because that design is not as stable on the surface as a V-hull design (i.e. in stormy weather even modern submarines can't operate on the surface as well as ships designed over a century ago--with no real keel the submarine will bob around). The real quantum leap was snorkeling and nuclear propulsion. Even without an Albacore hull, a nuclear submarine will make a pre-snorkeling submarine look like a destroyer compared to a Man-of-War.

    11. Re:It's not just American athletes that are faster by Pseudonym · · Score: 1

      As with the swimmers, it's instrumentation.

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
    12. Re:It's not just American athletes that are faster by Pseudonym · · Score: 1

      Every nation that takes sports seriously spends a ridiculous amount of money on improving the performance of their athletes [...]

      Perhaps a bit of perspective would help to make this seem not quite as ridiculous.

      First off, you learn a lot about the human body by studying what it does under extreme conditions.

      Secondly, most new technologies are multiple-use. The same device could be used to monitor athletes or intensive care patients. Or the same material could be used to make racing bikes or defence aircraft.

      Developing a new technology for, say, health, is very expensive and requires a mountain of paperwork and ethics committees. Developing the identical technology for elite sport is very cheap.

      So developing your technology for sport first gives you an advantage. You prove it quickly and cheaply, so that when it comes time to do the medical trials, you're much more confident that it's going to work before you start.

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
    13. Re:It's not just American athletes that are faster by a_n_d_e_r_s · · Score: 1

      Probably just 'contamination' from the swimmers.

      --
      Just saying it like it are.
    14. Re:It's not just American athletes that are faster by tepples · · Score: 1

      i'm starting to hear reports, admittedly unconfirmed, that several in the USA team have been found consuming DHMO prior to competing - this substance is well known for temporarily improving athletic performance

      Consuming? Hell, they're swimming in it! No wonder they're breaking records.

    15. Re:It's not just American athletes that are faster by MtViewGuy · · Score: 1

      Remember, the USS Nautilus--while revolutionary in its use of a nuclear reactor--was not really that fast a submarine--I've read the top speed was only around 22 knots due to its older hull design. The USS Albacore with its highly streamlined hull could do 33+ knots underwater easily just on battery power! Is it small wonder why when the USS Skipjack--the first nuclear submarine to incorporate both a nuclear reactor with a hull design inspired by the Albacore--was such a revolution in submarine technology? I've read that Skipjack could maintain well above 33 knots speed underwater for very long periods of time, thanks to its nuclear powerplant.

    16. Re:It's not just American athletes that are faster by RockWolf · · Score: 1

      You must be pretty happy with the way the aussie rowers have gone, mate. Congratulations, if it's appropriate. :)

      --
      February 9th, 2009 8:55pm: Slashdot becomes self-aware.
  20. China is using science too by clragon · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I went to China for a visit this summer and there was this interesting Chinese Olympic history series playing on the TV.

    Apparently after the Atlanta Olympics in 1996, the Chinese considered it to be a disappointing showing because many Chinese favorites did not get a Gold medal. So the Chinese government got some experts together and they came up with a new plan for how the athletes are trained in China. They first listed several sports the Chinese were good at traditionally, like table tennis, badminton, gymnastics, etc. They then established two research facilities for each sport. The purpose of these research facilities were to find more effective methods to train an athlete.

    For example, the rowing team was sent to go train in Tibet because there it is at a high altitude. At high altitudes there is less oxygen so it trains the athletes' body to use oxygen more effectively.

    While us nerds can't exactly participate in sports competitively we definitely have the skills to improve training and playing methods of a sport =D

    1. Re:China is using science too by garcia · · Score: 4, Informative

      For example, the rowing team was sent to go train in Tibet because there it is at a high altitude. At high altitudes there is less oxygen so it trains the athletes' body to use oxygen more effectively.

      Yet another item that's been known forever. That's nothing more than fluff. US Swimming's Olympic Training Center for swimming is located isn't located in Colorado Springs because it's an exciting town you know. I swam there for a few days before HS Nationals in 1997 before the meet which took place at the Air Force Academy. They were trying to get us prepped for swimming at altitude because, as the words placed in tiles on the wall said something like, "7,258 feet -- the air is rare"

      I learned many of the underwater techniques used by the current greats which were developed while I was at the peak of my performance in HS. It wasn't Michael Phelps or this new scientist suddenly creating the underwater dolphin work you see now. In the mid 1990s (into the late 1990s when it was limited to 15m) you could go as far as you wanted underwater for every event (backstroke fell first to 15m and then the rest soon followed). Misty Hyman was one of the pioneers along with Denis Pankratov and they turned on their sides (much like Coughlin still does) to take the best advantage of the swirls of water that are created as you move through it.

      As I posted above, this is all not new technology and it's not worth even talking about now 10-15 years after it was developed.

    2. Re:China is using science too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      swimmers and athletes train in colorado for the same reason... but it's not training your body to use oxygen more effectively- you're actually getting more red blood cells at altitude. your body says- gee we're running a bit low on oxygen here, need to carry more.

    3. Re:China is using science too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      For example, the rowing team was sent to go train in Tibet because there it is at a high altitude. At high altitudes there is less oxygen so it trains the athletes' body to use oxygen more effectively.

      So THAT'S WHY CHINA invaded Tibet and refuses to leave!

    4. Re:China is using science too by Jherek+Carnelian · · Score: 1

      While us nerds can't exactly participate in sports competitively we definitely have the skills to improve training and playing methods of a sport =D

      Or misread the results in order to come up with new and creative ways to get back those jocks from high school.

      "Yeah, the computer says that you will improve your times if you learn to breath better - practice saying "eye am ay jackass/"

    5. Re:China is using science too by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      And not only that, but the research showed that it's actually better to train at sea level and sleep at high altitude. (or.. maybe the other way around, I forget. The point was that it's better to split the time)

      The problem? Arbitrary rules restricting the use of hyperbaric (and/or hypobaric) chambers.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    6. Re:China is using science too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also works wonders for drinking... When you come from high altitude, and have a drinking contest at sea level, it's what I like to call the "altitude advantage."

  21. science? by Tumbleweed · · Score: 4, Funny

    I thought our *three* weapons were fear, surprise, and ruthless efficiency...and an almost fanatical devotion to the Pope.... Our *four*...no... *Amongst* our weapons.... Amongst our weaponry...are such elements as fear, surprise.... I'll post again.

  22. Re:Related research on the dolphin kick Phelps use by hkgroove · · Score: 5, Interesting

    That's why you can only dolphin kick for 15 meters now.

    In 25 yard pools during backstroke it was easier to dolphin kick and swim 8 yards with the last 2 dedicated to the turn.

    As for swimming underwater: Most sprinters in the 50m freestyle don't take a breath during the race. In short course (25m pool) 50m races I maybe took one breath on the way back - depends how much air I released during my turn. If I swam at the right speed I could get about 75m before needing to come up and take another breath. But this was far from racing speed.

  23. Let me get this right... by aztektum · · Score: 2, Insightful

    By doping, which is "bad", the athlete is increasing his ability to overcome the environment.

    By using technology we're mitigating the effects of the environment on their performance. That's good?

    The spirit of the Olympics is long gone.

    --
    :: aztek ::
    No sig for you!!
    1. Re:Let me get this right... by Chyeld · · Score: 1

      Doping = Dangerously modifying YOURSELF to beat everyone else. This rapidly becomes an arms race which only leads to dead athletes and wasted potential.

      Finding better ways of doing things to beat everyone else by applying thought isn't the same.

      Nor are all 'better ways' allowed. I've yet to see someone use a jet ski or a powered scuba sled in any of these contests.

    2. Re:Let me get this right... by dangitman · · Score: 1

      Finding better ways of doing things to beat everyone else by applying thought isn't the same.

      Why not? Using drugs is often finding a better way to do something. And plenty of the allowed techniques that athletes practice are dangerous to the athlete.

      It just seems that you think drugs=bad, and can't offer a rational reason why one form of enhancement is OK, but another is not.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    3. Re:Let me get this right... by Chyeld · · Score: 1

      And plenty of the allowed techniques that athletes practice are dangerous to the athlete.

      Which? Care to describe them and what makes them dangerous?

    4. Re:Let me get this right... by dangitman · · Score: 1

      Even basic things like routine physical training carry high risks of injury and other harms. I thought that would be pretty obvious. In contrast, some proscribed drugs have less risk of harm than ordinary physical training.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    5. Re:Let me get this right... by Chyeld · · Score: 1

      *eye roll* Yes, living is dangerous and someone could get hurt doing it. There is a difference, however, in the physical injury when something goes wrong during routine training, and the large likelihood of reducing your lifespan when using performance enhancing drugs correctly.

    6. Re:Let me get this right... by dangitman · · Score: 1

      and the large likelihood of reducing your lifespan when using performance enhancing drugs correctly.

      Huh? Not all performance-enhancing drugs reduce one's lifespan. Some could be argued to extend it. So why should those be considered any different to regular training?

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
  24. Their secret weapon: science! by Kingrames · · Score: 1

    And they used that secret weapon to blind all the opposition.

    --
    If you can read this, I forgot to post anonymously.
  25. the simplest answer is the right answer by heroine · · Score: 1

    New steroids & injection methods which can pass the drug tests are the biggest factor. Everything else is gravy. You think Natalie Coughlin looks like a colliflower by pushing around bubbles all day?

    1. Re:the simplest answer is the right answer by chunk08 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Go climb into a pool yourself and swim a few. And don't ask me to haul you out when you're drowning and can't make it to the side. Swimming is one of the most demanding sports there is. Besides, they do other things, like lift weights and sprint on dry land.

      --
      Do away with our corrupt tax code. Support the Fair Tax
    2. Re:the simplest answer is the right answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Swimming is one of the most demanding sports there is.

      Of course, that is hard to measure - it's very subjective. One thing you can measure is lactic acid buildup (which causes pain when you ask your body to use up all the oxygen coming in).

      The two sports with the highest levels of lactic acid buildup are rowing and cross-country skiing.

  26. Lets hope that republicans do not hear this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They will destroy the science and force everybody to declare that god is on our side, so we do not have to do anything.
    Of course, if you are not American, I am sure that you hope for it.

  27. There's nothing that special about the pool by snowwrestler · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It is engineered to reduce turbulence but no more than other top-level pools around the world. Pools with 10 lanes, slop gutters to eat waves, and greater then 2m depth are not unheard of. Besides, while plenty of world records are being beaten at these Olympics, plenty were also beaten before the Olympics...in the last year or two many world records have gone down at other events. Before each race NBC puts up a listing of the current world record for that event. Take a look--many are dated 2006 or 2007; some date back a few more years, but none are very old.

    We happen to be in a period of dramatic change in swimming right now, and there are probably a number of reasons. If you want to point to just one, it is probably that there is a lot more money in the sport now. So Michael Phelps could afford, through endorsements and grants, to train at a full-time professional level since he was an early teen. This has huge implications for his technique, fitness, health, and mental toughness for competition.

    --
    Build a man a fire, he's warm for one night. Set him on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.
  28. Maybe they're just more adaptive by jesterzog · · Score: 2, Interesting

    After doing something for years and years, changing the way you do something, whether it's a swimming stroke or tennis or golf swing, isn't done instantly. It takes quite a bit of concerted effort and attention to change it. I'd be really interested in how and what the coach does to get the swimmers to change.

    Perhaps there's a coaching aspect to it but I think if someone stays at the top of their field for a long time, it says a lot about that person's abilities. I wonder if it's simply that the best swimmers or the best golfers or the best athletes do change, and are simply very good at shaking old habits and adapting to improved techniques when they become apparent. If they don't, they're not the best any more, and are often quickly forgotten as someone else comes through and pushes them out of the way.

    1. Re:Maybe they're just more adaptive by dbcad7 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Pro golfers often take lessons almost as if they were beginners.. It's easy for a golfer to develop bad habits and relearning the proper techniques is what makes them good.. Most amateur golfers perhaps take lessons when first learning the game, and that's it.. If you learned the game, and played every day without any further instruction you would play fairly well, but if you retake lessons occasionally and play every day you will get so much better.

      --
      waiting for ad.doubleclick.net
  29. Is this for sale? by rumblin'rabbit · · Score: 3, Interesting

    And how much would this technology cost in Canadian dollars?

    Cause we're in the market right now.

  30. Or you could just be a hairy Mark Spitz by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And win 8 medals in a row because you are the only guy who refuses to shave and have a different swimming style.

  31. Faster lap times due to ... by PPH · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...being chased. By sharks. With lasers.

    The high diving competitions are the result of releasing the shark and playing the video of the swimmer leaping out of the pool backwards.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  32. Slow news day? by Cyko_01 · · Score: 1

    wow, you know it's a slow news day when you see an article about sports (swimming of all things!) on the front page of slashdot :p

  33. Further information by jebuonag · · Score: 0

    I recently saw a similar article in ANSYS Advantage, an industry publication on FEA and CFD. It's geared towards their FLUENT platform and the Speedo brand, but there's still a decent amount of technical detail aside from the marketing language. PDF is here: http://www.ansys.com/magazine/issues/06-12-2008-ansys-advantage/01-sports.pdf

  34. Obligatory Offtopic Pride by ibanezist00 · · Score: 0

    Sorry, but I figured I'd show pride for my school. Student of Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute right here :-)

    I can tell you guys from personal knowledge that this research is pretty damn cool.

    --
    There are mountains to cross for those that are willing.
  35. Chinese Quality control by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 4, Funny

    Everyone is faster in the pool.

    Yes, they probably didn't level it right and they are all getting a downhill advantage.

    1. Re:Chinese Quality control by OneSmartFellow · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Maybe, just maybe, the pool is slightly too short ?

    2. Re:Chinese Quality control by EdgeyEdgey · · Score: 1

      This happened in the Manchester commonwealth games. The rumour was that they built the pool to the correct length, but forgot to take into account the depth of the tiles. Unfortunately I can't find any on-line evidence to back this story up.

      --
      [Intentionally left blank]
    3. Re:Chinese Quality control by TempeTerra · · Score: 1

      Don't be a fool. You think they can get a downhill advantage going both ways? Come back when you know something about physics.

      --
      .evom ton seod gis eht
    4. Re:Chinese Quality control by RockWolf · · Score: 1

      Don't be a fool. You think they can get a downhill advantage going both ways? Come back when you know something about physics.

      My grandfather must have been more talented than I thought, then...

      --
      February 9th, 2009 8:55pm: Slashdot becomes self-aware.
  36. this story brought to by the letter S by denttford · · Score: 3, Funny

    Science.
    It works, bitches.

    --

    Leben Sie jetzt die Fragen.
  37. American strategy by SupremoMan · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I watched way more swimming than I should probably admit this Olympics. But I noted that all Americans performing used same tactic. Basically they swam not as fast as they could until their last pool length, where they really pushed their foot on the gas sort of. I think they do this because going fast like that works up oxygen deficit and you end up out of breath. If they swam this fast in the beginning they wouldn't keep it up, and they would even slow down. But by doing it on their last stretch they end up out of breath when they no longer need to swim since the race is over. It's a tactic that seems to have paid off very well, race after race.

    1. Re:American strategy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But I noted that all Americans performing used same tactic. Basically they swam not as fast as they could until their last pool length, where they really pushed their foot on the gas sort of. I think they do this because going fast like that works up oxygen deficit and you end up out of breath. If they swam this fast in the beginning they wouldn't keep it up, and they would even slow down.

      Umm, no. While that does happen, if you look at many races (not just in swimming), often the eventual winner leads off the start and continues to lead throughout the race.

      If you look at the lap times, the last lap is often not the fastest. This was the case for many of Phelps' races.

  38. Well it doesn't seem to have helped. by slimjim8094 · · Score: 1

    She just came in a full second under Coventry, for the silver.

    Now those Speedo swimsuits that shape the body... those have some obvious impact. Still, this is some cool work in fluid dynamics

    --
    I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
  39. Secret?? by dangitman · · Score: 1

    How exactly is it a "secret weapon" when everybody knows that science is used in sports? If it were secret, why are we reading it here, wouldn't it be classified or something?

    --
    ... and then they built the supercollider.
  40. Oblig XKCD ref by Jorkapp · · Score: 1

    Science.

    It works, Bitches.

    --
    Frink: Nice try floyd, but you were designed for scrubbing, and scrubbing is what you shall do.
  41. Deuterium by electrostatic · · Score: 1

    A swimmer achieves thrust by "pushing against" the water in a way that changes its momentum. Thrust (force) equals delta momentum and momentum equals mass times velocity. To increase the thrust, grab more water (mass) in a given increment of time, or move it faster or both. One way to increase the mass is to use fins: not allowed. Another way is to increase the density (mass/volume) of water: use heavy water.

    Definitely expensive, probably illegal, and would help all competitors equally. But if a particular host country wanted to see a lot of records set, well that country could dope the pool with lots of D2O.

    Not saying anything. Just a thought.

  42. Shocking: US relies in Science - Crusade!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Put out the call -

    Christian Soldiers, you have a new mission:
          Find out which school still has a science department and close it!
          Discredit this person! Worshiping Gold Medals - the Devil is among us!
          Donate! God needs your money now to fight this imminent threat!

  43. "part of her success will be due to a... by Lord+Flipper · · Score: 1

    new anally-mounted turbo-prop with the latest beta of what's been referred to as a 'cloaking device.' In related news this morning, Haliburton announced that they had been awarded a no-bid contract to supply the US Olympics Aquatics canteen with 100 kilos, each, of refried beans and extremely cheap tamales. Jalapenos, originally part of the same contract, were struck from the deal after what were termed, 'surprises', disrupted the ladies afternoon practice heats."

  44. Funny no one speaks about doping... by csubi · · Score: 1

    The Tour de France is widely considered as being stricken by generalized doping(it is true) and we had Angel Heredia tell the fine details of how Marion Jones did it."" It is know that you have some very nice stuff that is impossible to detect from urine/blood, like IGF. Injected under the skin where needed, it is practically a growth hormone. Side effects: those similar to acromeglay ("Pronounced brow protrusion, often with ocular distension; Pronounced lower jaw protrusion with attendant macroglossia and teeth gapping" from Wikipedia). Saying that the US Swim team manages producing the spectacular results because they have optimized their movements and have fancy "shark suits" sounds like trying to make us look at a tree in order to conceal a forest.

  45. Another blow to the original Olympic spirit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Olympics should be for "non professional athletes" as it is supposed to be, but commercialization has affected every thing. How can one claim equal opportunities with all the pressure and money at hand. i.e professional athletes should go play somewhere else. I am even in favor of "Athletic Nudity" :) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gymnasium_(ancient_Greece)

  46. One word: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Doping

  47. America and Science? What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    America and Science? Of course, this wasn't the product of science - just god fearing Americans in prayer to beat the heathen countries of the world!