P****e
发帖数: 385 | 1 【 以下文字转载自 Olympics 讨论区 】
发信人: Pierce (PEC), 信区: Olympics
标 题: 叶诗文回顾-英文版
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Wed Aug 1 11:54:13 2012, 美东)
写了个英文版，内容和中文版的不完全一样。格式在这里太难看了，感兴趣的可以看这
个google docs的Word版，建议下载看，google的rendering做得极难看。
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B9G0r2y_0GdARUZWRUxXOUI4SVk
原来的中文版在这儿：
http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t0/WaterWorld/1523183.html
有几篇我觉得写得比较中肯的报道，也推荐一下：
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/olympics/swimming/9442966/Lond
http://2012.qq.com/a/20120731/001196.htm
The media’s uproar around Ye Shiwen’s performance in the 200 meter
individual medley may have quieted down to a certain degree after the IOC,
FINA, WADA and BOC all came out to defend her and presented the clean drug
test result. But the debate and suspicion around Ye’s performance is far
from over. “Astounded”, “Unbelievable”, “faster than man” have been
branded to this 16 year old Chinese girl, and unfortunately the they may not
be completely vindicated by the clean drug test and end up as part of the
memory of this 2012 London Olympics.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, either it is John Leonard the
Executive Director of WSCA who has been pioneering the charge against Ye
Shiwen, or Ian Thorpe who came out in defence of the Chinese athlete. What
has been extraordinary is the journalism employed in the coverage of the
suspicion is clumsy at best, if not biased. Some of the suspicions such as
“woman faster than man”, under scrutiny, appear to be nothing more than
eyeball-catching headliners, instead of hard facts. Particularly the
coverage of the suspicion has almost turned into a media’s own lynching on
the young athlete, with no evidence of doping whatsoever. Innocent until
proven otherwise? Not in this case.
Before digging any deeper into the psyche behind the media’s coverage, let
’s take a look at the facts and the suspicion claims laid down in the past
3 days.
Ye Shiwen, the 16 year old, 5ft8, 140lbs Chinese athletes won the Olympic
gold medal in 200m individual medley at 4min 28.43sec, breaking the world
record by more than 1 second, and besting her own personal best by more than
5 seconds. BBC commentator Clare Balding voiced the first suspicion by
asking this question to guest Mark Foster: “How many questions will there
be, Mark, about somebody who can suddenly swim so much faster than she has
ever swum before?” A firm response from Mark to the loaded question: “
Bearing in mind she is 16 years of age, and when you are young you do some
big best times. It can be done”.
While Clare’s question went relatively unnoticed by the media, what
constituted the main charge of suspicion started from an interview of John
Leonard, by Guardian, a British newspaper. John is a veteran American
veteran coach serving as Executive Director of a Florida based organization
calling itself World Swimming Coach Association, which has no connection
with IOC or FINA, and later on also distanced by the US Olympic team as not
in anyway connected.
Let’s take a look at the claims of suspicion and the facts behind them:
1. Ye is the first athlete to break any female swimming world record
since the ban of “Supersuit” early 2010.
Weird logic, speculation and circumvential evidence at best. It has been
more than 2 years since the ban of Supersuit and maybe it’s about time.
2. Ye bested her personal best by 5 seconds, an unprecedented feat.
It is not unprecedented, it has happened to Ian Thorpe and others:
a) Performance improvement of 5 seconds over 1 year happened to top-
flight athletes in the past, especially for someone at her age, 16,
supported by scientists and top athletes including Ian Thorpe. The
Australian athlete Ian Thorpe came out in defence of Ye, citing his personal
history of more than 5-second improvement comparing his performance at 16
and 15. In this very same London Olympics, the Lithuanian athlete Ruta
Meilutyte bested her own personal best by 2.5 seconds in the 100m
Breaststroke, a mere quarter of distance of Ye’s 400m medley. Earlier
before London Olympics started, Katie Ledecky, an American 15-year old, also
hacked 5 seconds off her best time at the US trials to qualify for the 800m
. The British world champion Adrian Moorhouse joins the rank to recall
improving by more than 4 seconds when he turned 17.
b) A BBC report “why teen athletes can make big improvements” on July
31st interviewed Professor John Brewer, director of sport at Bedfordshire
University and member of the BOA says there is scientific evidence that the
teenage body goes through physical and mental changes to allow big
improvements.
c) When asked why another Chinese gold medalist Yang Sun was not
suspected of doping, John Leonard replied because he had a gradual curve of
improvement which is normal. With Ian Thorpe, Ruta Meilutyte, Adrian
Moorhouse all had similar improvements, can we really trust John when he
said this is an anomaly and so unprecedented?
3. Ye’s final 50 meters split is faster than Lochte, the athlete who won
Gold medal at the men’s 400 medley, “how could woman be faster than man?”
Four men beat Lochte in the last 50 meters and beat Ye as well, woman IS
slower than man:
a) Ye was faster than Lochte in the last 50 meters, but SLOWER than FOUR
other male athletes competing in the same final as Lochte. Lochte won the
400m, but only ranked FIFTH in the last 50 meters. He established such a
large margin of lead in the first 350 meters, and still won the gold medal
while beaten by FOUR other men in the last 50 meters. Lochte either
b) Ye clocked 28s93 in the final 50m leg, which is indeed faster than
Lochte’s 29s10. But a closer look would reveal FOUR other athletes in the
same final with Lochte were faster than Ye and faster than Lochte in the
final 50 meters: the mighty Michael Phelps with 28s44, Japanese Hagino with
28s52, again Japanese Horihata with 27.87, and Australian Fraser-Holmes with
28s35. So now you can see where the “fact” of “woman faster than man”
doesn’t hold water at all. Individual medley puts 4 swimming styles into
one race, and each athlete has his own strength in some of the styles.
Lochte won because he established such a large lead in the first 350 meters,
and still won the gold medal even when he was slower than FOUR other
athletes in the same pool. So the fastest man in the last 50 meters of
Lochte’s final is actually the Japanese Horihata with 27s87, which is a
whopping 1s06 faster than Ye. And in the world of swimming, 1s06 is a
formidable distance.
c) Also not mentioned was the fact that Ye’s final was her only race
that night, while Lochte competed in a relay race right before his medley
final.
4. Ye’s performance reminded John of Michelle Smith
Ye is 16, Michele was 26. Ye won champion before Olympics, Michele did not.
a) Who is Michelle Smith? Michelle is an Irish player who won 3 gold
medals and 1 bronze medal in the 1996 Atlanta Olympics. Her best performance
before that Olympics was 5th place in 1994 World Championships. Her
performance attracted widespread suspicion and public accusation including
some prominent US athletes like Janet Evans. Her drug test during the
Olympics was clean. Two years later in January 1998, FINA found excessive
amount of alcohol in her urine sample during a out-of-competition random
drug test, and accused her of hiding traces of doping in her urine sample.
Subsequently she was banned for 4 years and she retired from professional
swimming in 1999. To this day, there is still no evidence of doping during
Michele’s 1996 Olympics, but her later ban casted doubt on whether her
earlier doping was simply not caught.
b) What is the similarity that John is insinuating? ONE is both Ye and
Michele had significant improvement over short period of time, TWO is even
if Olympic drug test is clean, it doesn’t mean one is not doping.
c) Let’s look at the difference here: ONE Michele was 26 in 1996, at an
age where large improvement is unlikely. Ye is 16, at an age when this has
happened to other top flight athletes in the past, including Ian Thorpe and
Adrian Woodhouse. TWO Ye has NEVER failed any drug test in her life, and she
won gold medal in the 2011 world championship already. (If we suspect
everyone who passes drug test as doping, then that would be a debate about a
different topic like BALCO.)
5. Ye’s performance reminded John of East Germany
Today’s global random drug test means East Germany style doping will not
happen again.
a) In those days in 60s and 70s, no drug test was carried out outside of
major competitions. Athletes train in their own country, and doping went
unknown to the outside world. They typically stop a few weeks before the
major competition, and technology in those days are not advanced enough to
catch this type of doping.
b) Since 2004, FINA has deployed mandatory global random drug tests,
particularly targeting any gold medallist. Athletes have to provide detailed
itinerary on their whereabouts down to every hour. FINA global officials (
not official from the athlete’s own country) would fly in without any
advanced notification, and would expect to find the athletes on where they
say they will be, and carry out drug test within 2 hours. Any failure of
complying this would land an immediate ban. Excuses such as changed travel
plans or being sick are no longer accepted. Athletes like Liu Xiang would
get dozens of such random drug tests every year, meaning on average twice or
three times a month.
c) With Ye winning the 2011 world champion, she has been under the same
strict and mandatory random drug tests. It’s not like back in the old days
when you can hide in your own country.
d) Furthermore, Ye spent most of her time training outside of her home
country China. She has been training in Australia, under Australian coach
Ken Wood, who immediately stood behind Ye’s performance.
So now that we’ve taken a closer scrutiny of the real facts, Ye’s
performance, while still outstanding, is not unprecedented. Many talented
athletes improved their performance by 4 to 5 seconds when they turn 16 or
17; the genuinely fastest man Horihata in that last 50 meters beat Ye by
more than 1 second (out of 30 seconds); Lochte’s total 400m IM is 26
seconds faster than Ye; Ye did not come from no where, she already proved
herself in winning world champion a year ago, clean.
We won’t speculate on John’s intention behind these accusations and
remarks. But now we know his claims and accusations are based on half facts
and dated ideology. Yet his accusations are very effective as they touch on
the nerves of Western public: communist systematic doping, woman faster than
man, athlete doping in their own country went unnoticed, government funded
sports, etc. etc. All of these rip open the mental scars left behind from
the “Iron Curtain” and the East Germany scandal.
There are certainly some valid reasons why the media picked up these remarks
without much cautious scrutiny and started blowing this out of proportions.
China did have a troubled doping history in the 90s, with athletes tested
positive in 94 Hiroshima Asia Games, 98 Australia Perth Swimming
Championship, even with one athlete caught in Sydney airport carrying 13
viles of human growth in her luggage. China sweeping 12 gold medals out of
16 in the 94 Rome World Championship, with virtually no success in world
swimming in the past, also caused wide outcry of foulplay. All the Chinese
medalists passed drug tests in Rome, causing suspicion of doping when there
was no mandatory worldwide random drug test yet.
Ever since 2000, China did not manage to repeat its swimming “glory” of
the 90s. In the 2008 Beijing Olympics, China only landed 1 gold medal in
swimming. There have been a couple of doping positives in a decade, not
raising any eyebrows on the world stage.
Many top athletes quickly came out to rebut the suspicions. Among them, Ian
Thorpe who not only cited his own personal history of improving by 5 seconds
when he turned 16, but also said “we have to take the nationality out of
this”. British world champion Adrian Moorhouse stuck up for Ye and said the
rumours appeared to be a case of sour grapes. “The Chinese might have just
found this really talented kid, who can work really hard, has the perfect
shape and can cope with all the pressure thrown at her”. BBC Guest
commentator Mark Foster, retired world champion, even wrote a newspaper
article and said “There's no evidence at all and I've always believed in a
simple principle, innocent until proven guilty. And when Phelps won eight
golds in Beijing, the Chinese and the rest of the world didn't start asking
what the US were doing. We all just agreed he was amazing. ...I want to
believe what I see, unless I discover otherwise.” Also joining the rank of
supporters include the great Lord Sebastian Coe, Olympic legend, and Lord
Moynihan, chairman of British Olympic Association. Many have also remarked
on her perfectly shaped body that she looked more like a natural swimming
talent with no signs of drug induced massive build.
The coalition wave of support from English lords, former champions,
validation of clean drug test from IOC, FINA, WADA did not silence the
British media. Times branded it “Ye’s amazing time for freesytle scarcely
credible”, Daily Telegraph defending legitimacy of cynicism: “Chinese
swimming has such a shameful history of doping that any remarkable
achievement by one of its athletes is inevitably met with cynicism, while
Daily Mail shouting “a whiff of turtle blood in the water”, while BBC’s 2
-page criticism of Ye included one bland sentence right in the middle “
There is no hard evidence of doping so far”. In contrast, most US media’s
coverage made a commendable effort in pulling in a balanced view of
arguments and support from both sides.
The outcry of foul play and suspicion has given public the impression that
the suspicion is shared in the world swimming profession, just like what
John Leonard claimed:” It’s my opinion, shared by most who know the sport
well.” While clearly it cannot be further from the truth.
So why in the UK was John Leonard given a megaphone, while those voices of
supporting Ye attracted less media attention? Is this a matter of “anti-
China agenda”? Is this a matter of rebuilding trust and reparing the damage
of China’s 90s troubled history takes a bit of time? Is suspicion and
cynicism really legitimate while the 16-year old Ye has to take the blunt
for her countrymen’s doping history? Should the media keep it’s cautious
objectiveness before pouring destructive remarks on what maybe a once in a
generation talent?
Sadly doping has been deeply rooted in the back of our mind. With the
glorious Tour De France tumbling down with mass doping and shame, the BALCO
scandal puts serious doubt over who is the winner between advanced doping
technology and drug test technology, few believe clean drug test result can
effectively prove an athlete’s innocence. We aim to look beyond authority
stamps from IOC, FINA, WADA, and tend to trust maverick voices such as John
Leonard, a swimming coach from a Florida-based coach association. A maverick
voice may represent courageous whistle-blowers who dares breaking the
institution of political correctness and diplomacy that we are all tired of,
OR it can represent one individual’s very biased and emotional reaction to
an extraordinary talent of the likes of Phelps and Bolt.
We are living in a time filled with cynicism, yet at the same time
extraordinary talents pushing the boundary of human race that inspires each
and one of us. We all prefer black and white, yet the unfortunate reality is
that we have live and cope with a lot of gray in our lives. We all would
like to believe in talent and inspirations, and I sincerely hope this 16
year old girl from China will have a long and prosperous athlete life,
instead of a victim of deceit and cynicism. |
|
