Autant xiao hai devient convaincant en comparant des choses qui sont comparables, autant toi ganachon, tu ne l'étais pas en comparant le temps d'une fille sur 400m (oui les 50 derniers mètres) et ceux d'un garçon sur 100m (tu parlais bien de 4x100m). Mtn que tu évoques Lochte je comprends que tu aies pu faire une erreur entre le 4x100m (dans lequel les nageurs ne nage que 100m) et le 400m 4 nages (dans lequel le nageur nage 400m). Relis, réfléchis et tu verras que pour celui qui te lis ça fait une grande différence !
En complément des arguments de xiao hai, moi ce qui m'avait carrément soufflé c'est les championnat du monde 2010, lorsque la britannique Ardlington, avait nagé son dernier 50m en 28.91, MAIS sur un 800m, pas un 400... dopage ? système opaque ? anomalie statistique ? stratégie de course ?... c'est en tout cas encore plus rapide que le dernier 50m de Ye (28.93) et de Lochte (29.10) !!
De plus, à part pour les infos économiques etc.. je ne vois pas en quoi l'express fait figure de reférence absolue pour des questions sportives voir même de physiologie ! d'ailleurs la revue Nature (Impact Factor = environ 35), c'est récemment excuser auprès de ses lecteur de de Ye pour les soupçons à son égard. Voir ici:
http://www.nature.com/news/why-great-olympic-feats-raise-suspicions-1.11109
je copie-colle l'article, la réponse et les commentaires de l'éditeur car je ne sais pas si le lien sera accessible pour les bonjourchinois de chine:
SVP les modos, effacez si je n'ai pas le droit !
Why great Olympic feats raise suspicions
'Performance profiling' could help to dispel doubts.
01 August 2012 Corrected:
Chinese swimmer Ye Shiwen broke the world record for the women's 400-metre individual medley event at the Olympic Games on 28 July.
L. Neal /AFP / Getty Images
Article tools
See also Editors’ note | Letter from Lai Jiang | Editors’ note (continued)
At the Olympics, how fast is too fast? That question has dogged Chinese swimmer Ye Shiwen after the 16-year-old shattered the world record in the women's 400-metre individual medley (400 IM) on Saturday. In the wake of that race, some swimming experts wondered whether Ye’s win was aided by performance-enhancing drugs. She has never tested positive for a banned substance and the International Olympic Committee on Tuesday declared that her post-race test was clean. The resulting debate has been tinged with racial and political undertones, but little science.
Nature examines whether and how an athlete's performance history and the limits of human physiology could be used to catch dopers.
Was Ye’s performance anomalous?
Yes. Her time in the 400 IM was more than 7 seconds faster than her time in the same event at a major meet in July 2011. But what really raised eyebrows was her showing in the last 50 metres, which she swam faster than US swimmer Ryan Lochte did when he won gold in the men’s 400 IM on Saturday, with the second-fastest time ever for that event.
Doesn't a clean drug test during competition rule out the possibility of doping?
No, says Ross Tucker, an exercise physiologist at the University of Cape Town in South Africa. Athletes are much more likely to dope while in training, when drug testing tends to be less rigorous. “Everyone will pass at the Olympic games. Hardly anyone fails in competition testing,” Tucker says.
Related stories
More related stories
Out-of-competition tests are more likely to catch dopers, he says, but it is not feasible to test every elite athlete regularly year-round. Tracking an athlete over time and flagging anomalous performances would help anti-doping authorities to make better use of resources, says Yorck Olaf Schumacher, an exercise physiologist at the Medical University of Freiburg in Germany, who co-authored a 2009 paper proposing that performance profiling be used as an anti-doping tool[SUP]
1[/SUP]. “I think it’s a good way and a cheap way to narrow down a large group of athletes to suspicious ones, because after all, the result of any doping is higher performance,” Schumacher says.
The ‘biological passport’, which measures characteristics of an athlete’s blood to look for physiological evidence of doping, works in a similar way to performance profiling (see '
Racing just to keep up'). After it was introduced in 2008, cycling authorities flagged irregularities in the blood characteristics of Antonio Colom, a Spanish cyclist, and targeted drug tests turned up evidence of the banned blood-boosting hormone erythropoietin (EPO) in 2009.
How would performance be used to nab dopers?
Anti-doping authorities need a better way of flagging anomalous performances or patterns of results, says Schumacher. To do this, sports scientists need to create databases that — sport by sport and event by event — record how athletes improve with age and experience. Longitudinal records of athletes’ performances would then be fed into statistical models to determine the likelihood that they ran or swam too fast, given their past results and the limits of human physiology.
The Olympic biathlon, a winter sport that combines cross-country skiing and target shooting, has dabbled in performance profiling. In a pilot project, scientists at the International Biathlon Union in Salzburg, Austria, and the University of Ferrara in Italy, developed a software program that retroactively analysed blood and performance data from 180 biathletes over six years to identify those most likely to have doped[SUP]
2[/SUP]. The biathlon federation now uses the software to target its athletes for drug testing.
Could an athlete then be disciplined simply for performing too well?
“That would be unfair,” says Tucker. “The final verdict is only ever going to be reached by testing. It has to be.” In recent years, cycling authorities have successfully prosecuted athletes for having anomalous blood profiles, even when banned substances such as EPO could not be found. But performance is too far removed from taking a banned substance and influenced by too many outside factors to convict someone of doping, Tucker says. “When we look at this young swimmer from China who breaks a world record, that’s not proof of anything. It asks a question or two.”
EDITORS’ NOTE (updated 6 August 2012)
This article has drawn an extraordinary level of outraged response. The volume of comments has been so great that our online commenting system is unable to cope: it deletes earlier posts as new ones arrive. We much regret this ongoing problem. The disappearance of some cogent responses to the story has fuelled suspicions that Nature
is deliberately censoring the strongest criticisms. This is absolutely not the case: Nature
welcomes critically minded discussion of our content. (We intentionally removed only a few comments that violated our Community Guidelines by being abusive or defamatory, including several that offensively stereotyped the many Chinese readers who commented on the story.)
[UPDATE 8 August 2012: The technical problem has now been resolved and all of the posts that were inadvertently hidden have now been restored. In order to keep this problem from recurring, we have closed the story to further comments.]
Many of the commenters have questioned why we changed the original subtitle of the story from “‘Performance profiling’ could help catch sports cheats” to “‘Performance profiling’ could help dispel doubts”. The original version of the title was unfair to the swimmer Ye Shiwen and did not reflect the substance of the story. We regret that the original appeared in the first place. We also regret that the original story included an error about the improvement in Ye’s time for the 400-metre individual medley: she improved by 7 seconds since July 2011, not July 2012. We have corrected the error.
We apologize to our readers for these errors, and for the unintended removal of comments because of technical issues with our commenting system. Below we reproduce one of the most thorough and thoughtful of the hundreds of responses we received. Beneath it, we continue with our response.
