Night 3 of the 2024 Paris Olympics still continues to show that the times at this Olympics have been slower overall than in Tokyo. Depth has already been discussed as a factor but this isn’t just the depth as an independent factor. There seems to be a lot more going on here.
One reader, under the name “Wow” proposed that the fact that the Australian Olympic Trials pool depth was even shallower than the competition pool this week in Paris. The depth in the indoor 50 meter pool at the Brisbane Aquatic Center is 2 meters deep, shallower than the depth of 2.15 meters in Paris.
Despite the pool depth in Brisbane being shallower, the meet at least featured a World Record in the women’s 200 freestyle, an event that was contested tonight on night 3 where Mollie O’Callaghan was about a second off of her time from last month’s swim in Brisbane.
Replies to “Wow”‘s comment also give examples of other factors to consider here. Another factor is the field that the athletes are swimming in as the competition is faster here, causing more waves. One could give a counter argument to this and argue that the faster competition is fuel to the fire.
As far as the pool goes, temporary pools built for meets like these (another example being US Olympic Trials) cavitate much more than permanent pools do. According to the Indianapolis Star, the US Trials pool was 8.2 feet deep, about a foot deeper than the 7.05 feet deep pool in Paris. Two World Records were broken at US Trials with the women’s 100 fly and women’s 100 back.
Now, let’s look at the data. The chart below compares all events contested and all sessions of those events. The winning time was compared, the 3rd place was compared to show a difference in the podium (although this is not as important in prelims), and 8th was compared to show the slowest time it took to advance to the final and the slowest time in the final.
Which Place Was Faster Through 3 Days In Paris- All Sessions, All Events
| Tokyo | Paris | |
| 1st Place | 20 | 12 |
| 3rd Place | 21 | 12 |
| 8th Place | 21 | 12 |
*The women’s 100 butterfly is committed from the above tally as Maggie MacNeil‘s time from Tokyo tied Torri Huske‘s winning time from Day 2 in Paris. This explains the number being one less for 1st place.
These numbers were collected from Day 1, Day 2, and Day 3 analysis.
It seems like the ones suffering most from this pool are the ones counting on deep underwater phases or deep dives. For example, Gretchen Walsh nearly touched the bottom of the pool at the start of the 100-Free. I wonder if that’s where most speed is lost or not.
The end walls seem to have terrible turbulence. You can see the breaststrokes get shorter in the last 3-4m of each length. Also, double taper – I know trials are exciting but asking for two full on tapers in a month is difficult.
An Olympic Games pool should offer the very best facilities, a 3m depth being one of those best options.
It is the pinnacle of the sport of swimming.
The fact they’re swimming in a subpar pool is a disgrace.
Calm down and enjoy the competition 🍿 We’ll have plenty of other meets to break the records.
drug-free
So you’re saying Summer McIntosh, Tatjana Smith, Thomas Ceccon, Adam Peaty, Katie Ledecky, Ariarne Titmus, Mollie O’Callaghan, David Popovici, Lukas Martens, Leon Marchand, Gretchen Walsh etc were using PED prior to Paris?
yes
Fair enough
Ok
Not only is “santa banana” saying that, but also that every one of these swimmers simultaneously *stopped* taking PEDs leading up to Paris, despite the fact that they had apparently gotten away with it up to that point. And it’s not just the gold medalists. Apparently, every other swimmer was also taking PEDs and also decided to stop at the same time. (Unfortunately for them, seemingly, since some have best times that would have won gold.)
Furthermore, the few weeks since the various trials meets was enough time for the effects of all the drugs these swimmers were apparently taking to completely wear off, even the PEDs which are supposed to allow for “harder training” rather than in-competition benefits.
All… Read more »
No evidence for any of that.
Ask Santa Banana.
Chillax. Cheer for the swimmers without making assumptions first. And let WADA do their jobs.
Olympics is for sportsmanship and not for jumping to whatever nationalistic rhetoric that WADA doesn’t even support.
At this point, anyone who denies the pool is SLOW is delusional.
After THREE days, and still NO WORLD RECORD!
when was the last time it happened, if ever?
Then consider these winners time:
Summer McIntosh 4:27.71 (three seconds slower than her PB)
David Popovici 1:44.72 (two seconds slower than his PB)
Thomas Ceccon 52.0 (0.4 second slower than his PB)
Tatjana Smith 1:05.28 (0.46 slower than her PB)
Mollie O’Callaghan 1:53.27 (0.79s slower than her PB), Ariarne Titmus 1:53.81 (1.44s slower than her PB)
Even when they don’t break World Record or Textile Record, I would have expected these swimmers to swim AT LEAST:
Summer 4:25
Popovici 1:43
Ceccon 51.8
Tatjana 1:04.8
Mollie and Titmus 1:52.7
And none of them did it.
Could just be all mental because the pool is essentially the same and the water is the same too.
Tho then again, maybe Paris Olympics with its food and stingy beds and accommodation, could be the reason why.
But agree there’s definitely something there as virtually every top contenders are slower than before.
“Could just be all mental because the pool is essentially the same and the water is the same too.”
Huh?
Paris pool is not the same as the ones in Fukuoka, Budapest, Tokyo, Rio, etc. For one, it’s more shallow
Also what do you mean by all mental?
The fact and reality that every medalist is nowhere close to their PB is just imagination and real?
Bruh….
Slow pool. Hoe pool. No pool. USA ON TOP
I know the reason: Nobody is tapered.
I heard Grimes isn’t tapering until Brisbane 2032
She should never taper, because her untapared time was faster.