The drainage of sports fields, highways, farm lands, and covers for wastes corresponds to the drainage of a shallow unconfined aquifer resting on a horizontal or sloping impervious substratum. The seepage, partly saturated and partly unsaturated, is thus described by nonlinear equations that are not easy to solve. A few analytical solutions exist; they were obtained after several simplifying assumptions. Are they realistic? In this paper, comparisons are made between predictions from analytical solutions and those from numerical resolutions (for saturated and unsaturated seepage) under steady and transient states. The analytical solutions predict a water table and flow rates that differ significantly from those of the numerical resolutions, and are sometimes unrealistic. Corrections to the analytical solutions have already been proposed to account for the vadose zone. Despite such corrections, the published solutions to drainage problems may be inaccurate. In engineering projects where the duration of drainage may be critical for the construction schedule, it is recommended to avoid the analytical equations and to use numerical codes that solve the complete differential equations by taking into account the complete soil characteristic curves for hydraulic conductivity and capillary retention, which can be obtained using permeability tests and capillary-retention tests.