Is Bolt on Drugs?

[ArizState03]

i have to say I think people should be caught before we label them drug cheats.... it's simply the "innocent till proven guilty" presumption.

They freeze samples now, so if he's a user it WILL come out someday.
Bolt may well be the most talented sprinter to ever walk the face of the earth, but if not let's wait and see.

Meanwhile he can entertain us by breaking records and making most of his competitors look like schoolboy athletes.

I agree. I've always thought guys waxing poetic about who's using what, and declaring people dirty without one stitch of evidence other than their running faster than everyone else was more sour grapes than anything else.I don't need to believe every else ischeating simply to prop up my favoritesprinters.

There were 3 seasons back in the 20's that Babe Ruth hit more home runs than every otherteam in the league, wiuth Lou Gehrig coming in a close second.It's possible that if someone found their one calling in life, they can be that much better than everyone else.

Bolt/Gay may very well be the Ruth/Gehrig of our era.

 

[albinosprint]

I disagree. I've been around enough clean athletes that I can pick the drug cheats out like fake tits at the strip club. take Marion Jones for example, large man like shoulder, deformed jaw growth and unbelievable times and you don't need her admission to know she is abusing. who might I add never tested positive for drugs. and as much as it is amazing to watch someone almost break 19 sec in the 200, it's also wreaking the sport. if I was Pickering the only reason I would still be running is in the hope that they will be exposed for what they. and the saved blood samples is great in the fact that it will deter people, but let's face it, who knows how they will use those samples. it would be too costly for when a new drug is discovered to go back and test every sample. then there is the cover ups to save the sport. ultimately I think they will use the samples for someone who gets caught and then they will go back to see for how long they were using. and really does anyone think Bolt is clean? there is no doubt in my mind that this guy off the Juice would be running great times, but with the drugs he is a freak of nature. let's look at Jamaica, Long Island New York has more of a population then Jamaica, but their they are killing the USA overall in the elite sprint numbers? the USA which is a melting pot about 100x the size, and is also a great abuser of the drugs. and there is little old Jamaica the sprint power. something stinks in tuna town! I wish I could look at a guy like Harry Aikines-Aryeetey and think he is not on drugs, but like Ben Johnson, it's just obvious. have you had a look at Yohan Blake? the kid is jacked up for a 19 year old. Kerron Stewart looks like a man. its out of control! and let's face it, its destroying the sport.Edited by: albinosprint

 

[ArizState03]

I have to disagree with that. In America, football is King, followed by the other sports. Track is very low on the totem pole. Only the top handful of athletes make 7 figures. There's very little glory in track, so a lot of the fastest guysare picked off by other sports. Long Island kids play baseball, football, soccer, tennis, lacrosse, etc. I don't think that's a very good example.You know how many burners there are in this country who don't even run track because they rather play football or basketball?Jamaica doesn't have that issue. Every kid on the island sprints for several years in school.It's their national pasttime, and the cream can't not rise to the top.If the talent is there, a King will emerge. When Usain Boltran that sub-20 at 17, hefound his calling.

Justin Gatlin ran a 4.42 and a 4.45 forty at the Tennessee Titans Pro-Day. Chris Johnson, who doesn't even run track, ran anelectronic 4.24 at the NFL combine. How much time could he take off that 4.24 if he actually trained for several years? How do we know he wouldn't be faster than Bolt?How do we know that track wasn't his true calling, but he opted for thefootball money instead?

Also, simply being built doesn't mean you're on the juice. I see clean liftersin the gym every day who are bigger than Yohan Blake.. and they're not paid to lift and train. Aikines-Aryeetey is obviously a bodybuilder like Leonard Scott in the U.S. You can't get that jacked without being passionate about lifting.After Great Britian followed through on banning Dwain Chambers from the Olympics for life, I doubt any British athletes would have the cajones to cheat.Edited by: ArizState03

 

[StarWars]

Williamson went to train in Jamaica and is very inconsistent in his times...

 

[ArizState03]

Williamson went to train in Jamaica and is very inconsistent in his times...

10.78 -May 17
10.10 -May 29
10.26 - May 29
10.09 -Jun 01
10.18-Jun 01
10.13 -Jun 14
10.19 -Jun 20
10.13 -Jul 03

With the exception of that first race, every other 100 this year was within .17 hundreth of a second of each other. How could that possibly be considered inconsistent? 6 of his 8 races were within .10 of each other. I don't kow how anyone could possibly be MORE consistent.

Also, he's Jamaican. Why not train on awarm, tropical island, as opposed to cold, dreary, overcast GB.Edited by: ArizState03

 

[albinosprint]

ArizState03 you make a excellent point about track participation. but the being jacked and not on juice doesn't apply to sprinters. it's hard enough to train for you event on top of serious body building. that is unless you're taking a needle in the ass. sprinters are not supposed to be thick and jacked. that look is the side effect of PEDS.

 

[ToughJ.Riggins]

Bolt improved from 10.03 to 9.69 (it would have been a 9.55 if he doesn't let up) from just before his 21st birthday to just before his 22nd birthday. So lets see here- that's a 0.34 improvement or you could say a 0.48 improvement in one year- which is a bigger improvement than a 0.6 improvement in 200 meters when you are only 19. I realize he didn't run a lot of 100 meter races before 2007, but come on a 0.48 improvement? Something like improving your start wouldn't take off 0.48.

Bolt had been training his body for years and shouldn't have been able to get that much faster. He could have ANNIHILATED Powell's record if he doesn't let up at the finish in Beijing.

It seems to me that Bolt may be the most gifted 100 meter sprinter of all time anyway, but lets face it Jamaica is doing basically nothing to stop PED use. The IAAF is going to have to up the ante on testing the Jamaicans because they aren't doing enough yet. Come on people- no one runs a 9.55. Every person who has gone sub 9.8 is either Jamaican, has been caught for roids- (Gatlin, Montgomery) or is highly suspect (Maurice Greene- the Heredia link) other than Gay. My educated guess is that Bolt wouldn't run faster than 9.75-9.8 without PEDs despite likely being the most talented of all time.

And if you are talking about Justin Gatlin "only" running a 4.42/ 4.45 40, I would say his 10 yard burst wasn't as good as a guy like Chris Johnson. Stan Zwinggi ran a 4.26 at a Texas A+M camp while still in H.S, but there's no way he beats Gatlin over 100 meters. Zwinggi has the 10-20 yard burst which is more important for football- McGuffie, Weddle, Wegher and Woodhead all run the 10 yard dash in the 1.4 second range. All these guys are already close to Chris Johnson's 1.4 flat NFL Combine record for 10 yard split. Weddle ran a 1.43. He formerly held the record for 10 yard split and now has the 3rd fastest time recorded (tied for 4th fastest man since 1999). Woodhead ran a 1.44 10 yard dash. And Sam McGuffie has the fastest first few steps I've ever seen.

The last thing I will say is that I think the British and American sprinters would be less inclined to use steroids with the extremely tough testing methods. We'll see if the times continue to slow up a bit- like they have been for the British or Americans not named Tyson Gay.

 

[ArizState03]

Bolt improved from 10.03 to 9.69 (it would have been a 9.55 if he doesn't let up) from just before his 21st birthday to just before his 22nd birthday. So lets see here- that's a 0.34 improvement or you could say a 0.48 improvement in one year- which is a bigger improvement than a 0.6 improvement in 200 meters when you are only 19. I realize he didn't run a lot of 100 meter races before 2007, but come on a 0.48 improvement? Something like improving your start wouldn't take off 0.48.

Gotta disagree. Just because he ran a 10.03 in his only (ever?) 100m race, doesn't necessarily mean he was a 10.03 guy. How do we know he didn't have a bad race? How do we know he didn't ease up at the end? How do we know he was 100% healthy?Did you know he crushed WallySpearmon (10.20) in that same race?And that Spearmon ran a legal 9.96 that season? If he spanked Spearmon by .17 in his only ever 100m,and Spearmon was a sub-10 guy, wouldn't it be reasonable to assume that 10.03 might not bereflective of his all-out speed?
If he had five 10.03's, or ten 10.00-10.10's, then dropped a 9.7, you'd have a point.. but one single solitary 10.03 doesn't really prove anything. How do we know we wouldn't havedropped a9.93 or 9.83 if he had actually ran it again withmore 100m-specific training?

I see so much Bolt in Guliyev. Being a 200m specialist for years helped him buildup so much endurance and stamina, that by the time he dropped down to 100m, it was a walk in the park. He was so strong, he was able to maintain his speed down the stretch and throwdown a 10.08 out of the blue.

It seems to me that Bolt may be the most gifted 100 meter sprinter of all time anyway, but lets face it Jamaica is doing basically nothing to stop PED use. The IAAF is going to have to up the ante on testing the Jamaicans because they aren't doing enough yet.

Gotta disagree again. That's pure mythology. WADA (The World Anti-Doping Agency) and the IAAF haveALREADY adopted that same testing regimen for Jamaica'smost elite sprinters (22 of them in 2008) that the US Anti-Doping Pilot Program has for our elite. Jamaican's not being rigorously tested is a falsehood cooked up by the jealous Carl Lewis types, and Jamaica's competitors.

Powell and Boltare BY FAR, THE MOST TESTED sprinters on the planet..bar none. Powell was tested at least 13 times in 2008. Bolt was tested at least 11 times. Winners get tested far more frequently than those who don't place. Since they win almost every time they run, they get tested almost every time they run as well.

WADA/IAAF JamaicaDrug Testinghttp://voices.washingtonpost.com/olympics/2008/08/iaaf_bolt_tested_at_least_11_t.html


In Tyson Gay's case, he promptlyvolunteered for the US Pilot Program without even knowing what the testing procedures entailed. You don't do that if there's even a hint that you might be dirty. The fact that he still runs 9.75's, 9.77's, and 19.58'sunder the scrutiny of the most stringentdrug testing policy in the world,proves that it can be done cleanly. And, if he can do it,why can't Bolt?

And if you are talking about Justin Gatlin "only" running a 4.42/ 4.45 40, I would say his 10 yard burst wasn't as good as a guy like Chris Johnson. Stan Zwinggi ran a 4.26 at a Texas A+M camp while still in H.S, but there's no way he beats Gatlin over 100 meters. Zwinggi has the 10-20 yard burst which is more important for football- McGuffie, Weddle, Wegher and Woodhead all run the 10 yard dash in the 1.4 second range.

Zwinggi's hand-times have always been all over the place. He had plenty of buzz leading up to his Pro Day, and could really haveput his name on the map with one of his alleged"4.18", "4.21", "4.25", "4.26" times. He ran a 4.47 with a "stiff wind at his back". His teammate ran a 4.49 with the same stiff wind. Unless the teammate is a "4.18"/"4.26" guy also, I don't buy it. But that's all besides the point.

White short sprint specialists aren't competitive against the elite 100m black specialists. That goes from Morne Nagel on down. To inferthat a white sprinter's (Zwinggi) not beingable tooutrun Gatlin in the 100m is proof that a specific black sprinter (Johnson), with years of sprint-specific training, would never be able to outrun Gatlin, with historical times as a precedent, logically doesn't hold water.. reason being since a white sprinter has neverrun a sub-10, while several dozen black sprinters have done it, and have beaten Gatlin in the past.

The last thing I will say is that I think the British and American sprinters would be less inclined to use steroids with the extremely tough testing methods. We'll see if the times continue to slow up a bit- like they have been for the British or Americans not named Tyson Gay.

Again, I just don't know where you're getting this stuff, but that's patently false.Times aren't slowing down at all.In the 5 years leading up to 2008:

2003 - 4 U.S. guys went sub-10
2004 - 5
2005 - 3
2006 - 3
2007 - 3

2008 - *7*.. Five of whomwere new to the sub-10 club.


On the female side:

2003 - 3 U.S. womenwent sub-11.05
2004 - 2
2005 - 2
2006 - 3
2007 - 7

2008 - *10*

Edited by: ArizState03

 

[white lightning]

I know your trying to be objective ArizState03 but you are walking a fine line. Most of your posts have been going against the vast opinions of the track guys on this board including myself. We are not here to defend Bolt, Powell or Gay. We are also not on this site to talk about them or promote them. All of the other sites do a great job with that. We are here to talk about white sprinters. I disagee with almost everything in your post as do most here. Again, make sure you are here for the right reasons. We support white athletes period and are the only site on the internet to do so.

You forget how many times everyone from Marion Jones to Maurice Greene were tested. The testing is a joke. The cheats are so far ahead of the game. For you or anyone to think that Bolt can run in the mid 19 second range against the wind with pouring rain clean, needs a serious reality check. There is another big article with Carl Lewis from today and he repeats what he has said over and over. The Jamaicana are dirty. Wake up and smell the coffee. Or else keep your thoughts to your self. We are not here to promote them. Either contribute or find another forum. We have had far too many trolls here. We know when someone constantly defends the cheats and quietly talks down about white sprinters. I hope you decide to stay but it is up to you. Edited by: white lightning

 

[white lightning]

Here is the article from today with Carl Lewis talking about Bolt.

http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/sport/401819/Carl-Lewis-on-Usain-Bolt-Track-king-talks-frankly-on-sprinter.htmlEdited by: white lightning

 

[Jimmy Chitwood]

Zwinggi's hand-times have always been all over the place. He had plenty of buzz leading up to his Pro Day, and could really haveput his name on the map with one of his alleged"4.18", "4.21", "4.25", "4.26" times. He ran a 4.47 with a "stiff wind at his back". His teammate ran a 4.49 with the same stiff wind. Unless the teammate is a "4.18"/"4.26" guy also, I don't buy it. But that's all besides the point.

could you provide a quote with these "facts," please? according to the news sources cited by DraftDaddy and previously linked, the Texas State runners ran in cold, very gusty, rainy, miserableconditions. nothing was ever reported saying his two unusually poor times had the wind at his back. additionally, he's been noted as a phenomenal speedster all the way back to his high school days, where he was timed at various Nike and other football Combines, producing eye-popping numbers at each one. how does that coincide with your claim that his numbers have "always been all over the place?"

it doesn't. interesting indeed, if somehow "that is beside the point" as you claim.

furthermore, the Texas State track coach and the conditioning coach (who has worked with multiple Olympic athletes) state plainly that Zwinggi would've been the fastest sprinter to ever run for the school if he had gone out for track. and the head football coach states that Zwinggi is the fastest football player he's every coached, if i may para-phrase him.

so please, enlighten us as to where your "facts" come from, sir. because these men have all gone on record to say you and your above post arefull of crap.

 

[albinosprint]

MARION JONES, that all I have to say.

 

[ArizState03]

I got most of it from NFL.com. Gil Brandt, whom DraftDaddy called a respected analyst, reported "light drizzling", "stiff wind", and that he ran "with the wind". What possible reason would I have to lie? I wasn't even the one who brought him up.

Some light drizzling and a stiff wind was what hampered Texas State's pro day on March 24. Despite the weather, seven players worked out outdoors on FieldTurf in front of six NFL team representatives. RB Stan Zwinggi (5-9 3/4, 201 pounds) and S Jamal Williams (5-9 3/8, 198 pounds) were the prospects of note.


Zwinggi ran 4.47 seconds with the wind</font> and 4.54 seconds against the wind in the 40, and he had a 35 1/2-inch vertical jump, a 10-foot, 4-inch broad jump, a 4.40 short shuttle, a 6.94 three-cone drill and 18 bench-press reps. Williams, meanwhile, ran 4.49 seconds with the wind</font> and 4.62 against the wind in the 40, and he had a 38-inch vertical jump, a 10-foot, 3-inch broad jump, a 4.46 short shuttle, a 7.43 three-cone drill and 10 bench-press reps.

http://blogs.nfl.com/category/pro-days/?campaign=ec0005

 

[white lightning]

Again though, I have also read the coach talking about him being the fastest he has ever seen. I question why you go out of your way to cut down white athletes. Did you read my post from page 2? It's about support here. I await your response.

 

[ArizState03]

MARION JONES, that all I have to say.

Are youaware of how radicallyathletic drugtesting has evolvedin the10 years since Balco? Back thenthey were testing for specific known drugs. THG,The Clear,The Cream, etc., were unknown drugs and went undetected.

Now, they don't only test for drugs. They also test for actual changes in your chemical balance from test to random test torandom test to test.. changes a cheater would WANT ped's to effectively alter.Everyone on THG and the Balco wienertails had radical transformations in their physiology, and they would have been busted whether WADA knew about the drugs or not. U.S. Anti-Doping built a new testing program around this methodology, and WADA has independently adopted it, and apply it in smallcountries who can't afford it.

If you have foreign PED juices coursing through your system, it'll change your testosterone to epitestosterone balances. If yourt/epi ratios skew from point to point,you're done. Between 60 and 70 athletes were busted before, during, and after Beijing because of the more strict testing regimen.

 

[ArizState03]

Again though, I have also read the coach talking about him being the fastest he has ever seen. I question why you go out of your way to cut down white athletes. Did you read my post from page 2? It's about support here. I await your response.

Dude, I wasn't the one who brought him up.

I enjoy intelligent dialogue. When I read something that's wrong, I can't help but respond. If youhave no problem with inaccuracies on the board, then fine.. I'll leave.Edited by: ArizState03

 

[white is right]

I know they have been doing this test for 20 years. Now I don't know if these new designer roid routines can fool these tests. I do know that they did in the early 2000' era. The "Green Machine" was busted due to his ratio being out whack. He blamed it on beer and sex.Edited by: white is right

 

[white lightning]

First off blacks have higher testosterone levels naturally. So it is harder to prove with them as they claim genetics. HGH still is light years from having accurate testing. Gene doping is also going on now. How can you stop that? I just find it almost impossible to belive that a little nation can all of a sudden dominate the world in the mens and womens sprints. Just like E.Germany, think about it. Bolt is making people take an interst in sprinting. He will be protected as he is the biggest star in all of track. The whole country has rampant doping. From kids smoking weed to the athletes juiced to the gills. They live for track there. They will do anything to get to the top and stay at the top. Similar to how the US has acted and many other countries around the world. To be fair, Russia has had many cheats as well.

Look at Bolt. It is obvious to me. Look at Powell. Simpson and others. I can't belive how naive the fans can be. Oh he has to be clean. So is Asafa. Give me a break. Yeah right. It will catch up with them eventually if WADA can get better testing.

I will say this. I like Lance Armstrong but I belive he is as guilty as Bolt. It's hard to knock a Cancer Survivor though who trains as hard as a kid. I do belive he has been on stuff for years.

Kim Collins is a clean sprinter. Look at him and then look at Bolt or Powell.

 

[albinosprint]

the first thing they look at is the testosterone to estrogen ratio, which can be masked with another drugs. then when it comes to specific drugs, they can only test for what they know about. that is why Marion Jones never got caught. these sprinters aren't taking one drug, they are taking multiple drugs and at different times. look what happened when Gatlins coach sent in the Balco needle, all of a sudden people are getting caught. simply put, if they don't know what they are looking for, they can't find it. obviously Jamaica has a state sponsored doping program like the E. Germans had and they got their hands on some nice new undetectable sh*t. I believe there is a limit to the human body and I believe that limit is 9.8x when you start stepping into the 9.7 world your on something.

 

[albinosprint]

now I know some of you think we shouldn't say people are on drugs without a positive test result, but as Marion Jones has proved, test can be beat. here are some statistic that might change your mind about Bolt, Powell and the rest of the Jamaicans.

Jamaica has 19 of the top 200 male 100m sprinters of all time. here is list of number of athletes per decade

1970-1979 - 1

1980-1989 - 0

1990-1999 - 6

2000-2009 - 12

6 of the top 120 male 200m sprinters of all time.

1970-1979 - 1

1980-1989 - 0

1990-1991 - 0

2000-2009 - 5

as for the women

100m - 10 of the top 80

1970-1979 - 0

1980-1989 - 0

1990-1991 - 4

2000-2009 - 6

200m - 12 of the top 90

1970-1979 - 0

1980-1989 - 1

1990-1991 - 4

2000-2009 - 7

notice a pattern? most of the athletes from the 90's set their times around 1995-97 when HGH was rampant and undetectable. and 89% of the fast times from this decade have happened in the past 2 years. for the size of the country, you might be looking at the worst doping offenders since the E. Germans.
Edited by: albinosprint

 

[ArizState03]

albinosprint, I don't mean to come across as a smart ass, but I'm assumingstatistics wasn't exactly yourstrongest subject in school.

Are you familiar with "clustering"? Example:


Swimming - 100 Meter Freestyle World Records

1972 - 51.22 - Mark Spitz
1976 - 49.99 -Jim Montgomery
1985 - 48.95 - Matt Biondi
1994 - 48.21 - Alexander Popov

2008 Olympic 100 Meter FreestyleFinal:

47.21 - Alain Bernard -France
47.32 - Eamon Sullivan -Australia
47.67 - Jason Lezak -United States
47.67 - César Cielo Filho -Brazil
47.75 - Pieter van den Hoogenband -Netherlands
48.04 - Lyndon Ferns -South Africa
48.20 - Matt Targett - Australia


As the decades progress, athletic records systematically fall. Improved sneakers and speedos, improved mondo tracks and deeper pools,improved training equipment,improved training regimen, improved nutrition and diet, and the natural evolution of bigger, strongerbodies from generation to generation result in faster times.

All 7 of those guys from ONE RACEin 2008 are ranked higher than the previous world record holders from earlierdecades. Rank clustering happens in most every track &amp; field sport, and almost always skews towards 2000-2009. Almost every elite runner/swimmer in 2000-2009 is faster than the elites of 1990-1999. Almost every elite runner/swimmer in 1990-1999 wasfaster than the elites of 1980-1989. Almost every elite runner/swimmer in 1980-1989 wasfaster than the elites of 1970-1979.

The same thing pyramiding rankings would happen for every country,regardless of the gender, or the sport.Edited by: ArizState03

 

[white is right]

I don't think it's generational improvement as much as the freakier outliers are higher due to the worlds population rapidly expanding and world nutrition(especially in industrial countries) has improved. For nature to do anything evolutionary wise it would take 1000's of years. Edited by: white is right

 

[Maple Leaf]

ArizState03:

Not so smart to compare swimming times to track. Not very clever or bright either. Swimming has changed immensely since the '70s, and most of the changes have come from analysis of streamlining, technique, training, and equipment. In many respects, swimming is nothing like it was 25-30 years ago. It is factual to say that many of the techniques have been revolutionized and changed. It is still changing. To compare swimming today with the swimming in the '70s, '80s and even the '90s is like comparing track today with track in the '40s.

What is with "deeper pools"? That is bull and has nothing to do with swim times and we are using the same pools that were built in the '50s and '60s! And "evolution"? In 20-30 years? I can see how you came up with that nonesense -you used your brain.


Track technique hasn't changed much since the '80s. Times haven't changed much since then either. Carl Lewis broke the 10 many times in the '80s. Ben Johnstunned ran a 9.79 in the Korean Olympics. Times even slowed a bit after that and into the '90s. Equipment has changed since the '50s and '60s, training methods have changed, but not much else except for the drugs. The clean sprinters today are no better than the sprinters of '70s! Other than the biological science, the sport has changed much for decades. Its the drugs stupid.
Edited by: Maple Leaf

 

[albinosprint]

ArizState,

I don't won't to come across as a wise ass, but how about you cluster my balls in your mouth.

all you points are stupid. track technologies peaked in the early 90's. same goes for shoes, singlets and training products. training technique hasn't changed either! so what has come along in the past twenty years that is so ground breaking? BALCO comes to mind! you don't think it's strange that the "sprint capitol of the world" didn't start putting out world class sprinters till the mid 90's?
I'm I really supposed to think they are not on Drugs? every sprinter in the past that has broken 9.8 has been caught on drugs or linked to drug scandals. why should I think any different of Bolt, Powell or even Gay.
Edited by: albinosprint

 

[ArizState03]

What is with "deeper pools"? That is bull and has nothing to do with swim times

Are yousure about that? Deeper pools don't allow for lower disspiation of waves, leading to less disturbance on top?

Deeper pools usually mean faster times.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/print?id=3472011&amp;type=story

There's no arguing that point. Swimming's world-record progression had been aided in recent years by pool technology (On Monday morning German head coach Orjan Madsen engaged two U.S. writers in a fascinating -- if semi-impenetrable -- explanation of why deeper pools, and wider ones, produce faster times).

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/olympics/2008/writers/tim_layden/08/11/world.records/index.html

Fiberglass poles that make vaulting easier, synthetic tracks that mitigate the effects of bad weather, and deeper pools and lane lines that calm waves

http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20040825/news_1c25athletes.html

Deep pools decrease friction withswimmer and bottom

http://74.6.239.67/search/cache?ei=UTF-8&amp;p=%2B%22deeper+pools%22+%2B%22faster+times%22&amp;y=Search&amp;fr=yfp-t-501&amp;u=www.vcaa.vic.edu.au/vce/studies/physicaledu/assessreports/2002/pe_02.pdf&amp;w=%22deeper+pools%22+%22faster+times%22&amp;d=JpjckBlMSzp0&amp;icp=1&amp;.intl=us

Deeper pools are generally considered to be faster, as are those that are the same depth from end to end.

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-11936667.html

"It's physics and it's not sports, but it makes sense," says Christine Brennan, a veteran of 13 Olympics and an Olympics columnist for USA Today. "You make a deeper and a wider pool, and you ... give all of those waves and all of that splashing and all of that moving water a chance to move away from the swimmers and get out of their way, which makes them go faster. It's as simple as that."


The Water Cube pool is close to 10 feet deep. That's 3 feet deeper than the pools of the past. The lane lines that separate swimmers are called wave eaters because they dissipate turbulent water. The goal is to make the water as flat and clear as possible, despite the churning that swimmers create.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=93478073

Many people believe Water Cube to be the fastest Olympic pool in the world. It is 1 meter deeper than most Olympic pools. Up to a certain limit, beyond which swimmers will lose their sense of vision, deeper pools allow the waves to dissipate down to the bottom, leading to less water disturbance to the swimmers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beijing_National_Aquatics_Center



Dude, that's common sense.I thought everyone knew the newer pools being built, and those being remodified are being made deeper for faster times.