For further clarity, the prioritization in the selection process looks like this… 1) top 4 swimmers in the 100 & 200 freestyle & the top finishers (first place) in events offered at the Olympics 2) second best (second place finishers) in events offered at the Olympics 3) 5th fastest swimmers in the 100 & 200 freestyle 4) 6th fastest swimmers in the 100 & 200 freestyle 5) basically, Michael Andrew (50 stroke swimmers not qualified in any other events)
you also forgot to mention the maximum of 26 roster spots for either Gender, so if it would stand at 23 different swimmers chosen as it is for the women, he probably could have been selected
ex swimmer, masters now and officiating age group and it confuses me. your vid was great because I highlights two things 1- selection worldwide is at the discretion of each countries criteria which varies and 2 - we need to simplify it and/or allow a winner their moment. all the fuss over prelim relay swimmers is important I know but somewhat lost on me.
It's just crazy that a medal contender at worlds has his spot taken by the 6th or 5th swimmer at the 100 or 200 free. It makes no sense. If swimming wants to break into the mainstream media bubble, swimming needs Stars like Andrew and exciting events like the 50s. Nobody is going to sit through 15 minutes of freestyle to watch Ledeky win the 1500 by half a pool.
Really unbelievable. The time he went was 12th fastest in the world (season best is 3rd). In my opinion, the 50s are the most watchable events for new fans who don’t have a broad base of swim knowledge. Sorta similar to how everyone knows a dunk is cool. Being good at a 50 is a spectacle that swimming needs.
Agree that they’re the most watchable, but think the addition of them needs to come with an expanded roster limit. Qualification meets currently provide the second most “drama” in the sport, behind the actual Olympics/World Champs, but have started to lean away from drama and towards confusion with selection being as muddy as it is now. Would love to be able to have both the 50s and a clear cut path to qualification that fans can easily digest and understand at home.
@@Sockwell agree, they need to expand the roster AND include them in all competitions including the Olympic games. I was a sprinter in high school in the 90s and college in 2000s and always wanted stroke 50s!
I absolutely agree, because, let's face it, they're prioritizing an athlete's rest (meaning one of the top 4 not swimming the relay prelims) over a National Champion. That's not even close to being fair; make it make sense.
Stop letting deeper countries get away with swimming different people in prelims versus finals? Idk like I get the strategy but it seems unfair in some ways
@@ExitSiign It totally is, it benefits big teams, like the US or Australia. Besides it feels wrong to get a medal for 1 swim (either prelims or final) like it takes away the value or an olympic medal, imo. If you want to medal at the ind. 100m free you have to be super fast 3 times, to medal at the 4x100m free you kinda need to "not suck" just once, I don't think that deserves a medal.
Michael has a ton of potential, he has the potential to be the fastest in the world in like four different Olympic events… But I just don’t think his current training plan is working out for him, I think the days of his dad being able to train him and him only doing USRPT are over if he wants to have Olympic success. He’s only going to get so far swimming only 50s, especially if he’s not even the fastest in the world in them. He needs to get back into it with the one breast 2 IM and one fly and I think the only way to do that would be to go train somewhere like an Arizona state under a Bob Bowman or somewhere else where he’s really gonna be able to thrive under a coach with Olympic success. Michael showed what he’s capable of in 2021 at trials but was unable to replicate that at the Olympic stage, leaving him with very little Olympic success. If he wants to be remembered as one of the greats, and have them fix success, like a dressel, or a Lochte, which I think is very possible, he needs to change his training plan.
I can't agree more. My thoughts exactly. He could be an icon in breast, IM, and fly, but he keeps doing these 50s. He was literally beating the world record in 2 IM until the last 50. He has a WR in him. Sadly, I think that because his dad got him to the world stage, he doesn't want to give up his dad as a coach. He might fear that it would be disrespectful, but it's not.
Exactly. Its time for Andrew to face the music, push on from his dad and take on the burden of longer yards like the rest of the world. His age group phenom days are way over and its sad to see him fade over and over again in races. So much talent, so much speed, so much potential but being blocked now by family dynamics. The USRPT was interesting, now its time to move on. Otherwise the talent is going to be wasted.
His 200 IM potential is off the charts. But his problem is this strict religious/isolate the family/Little House On The Prarie type thing that keeps him from training with an actual team, rather than just doing 50’s. Now, if the Olympics ever adopts the 50’s of each stroke as events, then maybe the isolate the family from the world mindset can work for him in terms of getting him an Olympic individual gold medal. But his real chance for greatness is obviously the 200 IM. If he could just get SOME decent aerobic conditioning in his training , he could do the 200 IM with cratering in the final 50. His first 150 meters of the 200 IM is dominant, but his freestyle leg is one where, despite being one of the fastest 50 free swimmers in the world, suddenly he can barely break 30 seconds . Just craters . Oh well, to each their own
The only thing thats confusing is why Michael Andrew, and everyone else for that matter still thinks he's 12 years old!?! Just like the USRPT training fad, turn 13, man up and train like one.
I think the priority selection everyone wants is 1) winners of an event that meet the A cut 2) top 4 in 100 free and 200 free to fill relays so that they can qualify for the Olympics 3) 2nd place in every event 4) 5th place for the 100 and 200 free 5) 6th place for the 100 and 200 free 6) 7th place for the 100 and 200 free
And then maybe 3rd place finishers for events where one of the top 2 is swimming 5+ events so then we aren’t left a person short in multiple events if they have to leave the meet or scratch multiple events
Remember, there are no relay "alternates." If you put somebody on the roster as a relay-only swimmer, they have to swim a relay unless you don't make the finals or there's a medical reason they can't. So going 7 deep in the 100 and 200 puts you at greater risk of failing to get out of the prelims in the 400 and 800 free relays, as you have to use that 7th place swimmer in place of one of the top 4.....or you have to use them in the finals, if you don't use them to get there.
As a Non American, US football is even more confusing, a lot more than throwing a ball into a hoop or kicking a ball into a net. Yet it is still one of the most watched (here). Sometimes complexity can be good for a sport. I actually thought this bit of MA drama was pretty interesting, and kept me engaged for a few days about how we should prioritize events. Personally I agree with prioritizing the olympic events as it garners much more national and international attention. MA made his choice and has to deal with its consequences.
Thanks for the clarification, personally I think if you want to swim at world champs you should be able to do more than a 50 fast. Anyone can swim a fast 50, yes these are elite level swimmers and races come down to hundredths of a second, and there’s a big difference between a 50 and a 100 but I think any good world class swimming should be more than capable of qualifying in (I hesitate with using this word) distance events like the 100 and maybe 200. (200 strokes can be completely different) Michael Andrew has shown several times that he is capable of doing this. If you only train to swim a 50 before a meet where 100s are prioritized then you’re just not training right.
one problem with this logic however is that you could win the 50 free, swim nothing else and be guaranteed a spot on the team according to the selection criteria above.
@@moimeme6533yes, but there is a difference between the 50 freestyle and 50 stroke events. For starters the 50 freestyle is an Olympic event but also is the fastest of all the strokes. The potential of a world record being broken for the 50 meter free is more entertaining for non-swimming fans especially in a non Olympic year. I love the 50 fly, but on the world stage it pales in comparison to the 50 free.
@@Jake-oi9qm A matter of opinion at best, the 50 Fly is a spectacular event regardless of whether the OC decides to add it. FYI, the 50 Free was likewise not an Olympic event until 1988.
I think adding a bigger roster limit would allow it so that this wouldn’t be a problem. Another thing, I think all 50’s should get added to the Olympics so that they don’t have only Olympic events take priority because the 50’s are so up in the air on who’s going to win which makes them so exciting.
Hold on, why wouldn’t they just add stroke 50s on an international level? Like outside of Phillips 66’ I feel like it gives the opportunity for older swimmers to swim longer and also young talent to shine. What’s stopping the international Olympic committee from adding them?
Thank you for talking about this. Rediculous Qualifying standards have only made swimming harder to watch, less monetizable and worse for the next generations of athletes. The olympic medal or bust model will be the downfall for the sport.
Swimming, for some reason, is the stupidest sport in the world when it comes to attempting to figure out how to score a meet and have team placement. High school is scored differently than college. Some meets have 16 finalists, some have 8, some have up to 32, and the points are different based on how many finals heats there are. And, of course, swimming is one of the only NCAA sports with roster limits and designated scorers. If I'm on my college's lacrosse team, we can be ejected, injured, and defeated down to the last guy on the bench, and that guy can score 12 goals that count. But, in swimming, every coach goes into a season knowing that only 17 of their swimmers will be able to score, and they can add an 18th if they either don't want to take any divers or they don't have enough money in the budget for a diving program. Once you're at a championship meet, you can't do anything if one of the guys you designated an exhibition swimmer goes a lifetime best and makes finals; he's EXB, so he's SOL. No points, no chance to even swim again. Why on earth WADA is allowing for this HORRENDOUS system is simply beyond me. I've seen teammates quit because they knew that they weren't top two or three on the team in their discipline, which means they wouldn't be scoring at conference. It's obviously a bit different at the professional level (where this is your income and you have a much higher drive to compete for yourself as opposed to a team) but the point still stands: disallowing high level swimmers from participating in high level meets simply because you don't want teams to be bigger than need be is a terribly flawed system and it needs to go. It's boiled my blood for years watching people that I trained with get told that they couldn't contribute to the team, and it's even worse when they would actually have been able to contribute if not for the NCAA making this arguably the most non-inclusive sport that they offer. I'm surprised I kept that rant clean. Great explanation of the state of things and always love hearing your opinions on these matters.
I do have to say that some conferences don’t follow the 17 rule. For example the conference I swim in (Middle Atlantic) allows anyone in that can make a time standard (the standards aren’t too hard) to swim at the meet sometimes up to 20 swimmers are scoring. The only downside is that the bigger the team the more likely that team is to win the conference title.
Oh c'mon. One cannot compare Swimming rules to Lacrosse etc. I'm a past swimmer and my son is a lacrosse player. Lacrosse has some of the most confusing rules. I know parents who have watched 100s of lax games and still dont understand lax rules. And to your example, high school lax rules are different than college lax which is different than pro lax which are different than World Championships. Same goes for Soccer, Field Hockey, and dont even try to understand Rugby.
I really wish Fina or whoever controls this team size crap could change it to something as simple as this- 2 per event, if there’s overlap, prioritize sprint, because sprint equals relays
I think making relays timed finals would help. No more taking fifth and sixth place finishers in 100 and 200 free. It's not really fair that swimmers from powerhouse countries get to skip prelims anyway. We got rid of prelim relays at NCAAs and the result was faster swimming.
Can we talk about how Michael was the top 200 IM at trials last year? I really think he has it in him to be a world champ at it, but he seems to shy away from that event.
The easy fix is add spots to rosters so this issue doesn’t occur. On top of that we need to heavily consider having more spots added for American swimmers in individual events. We were given a golden oppurtunity in 2016 and 2020/21 trials with David Nolan, Phelps and lochte all competitive in the 200 IM and 400 IM. Nolan finishes 3rd and couldn’t go to Paris or London, and had he been able to go, we’d have seen him be the third fastest in the world and get bronze at both Olympics.
I love that we FINALLY added the 800 and 1500 for both genders. The mixed relays are silly im my opinion. It's a strategic way of seeing where both genders can meet in the middle. It's not as fast as the men's swimming and faster than the women's, maybe for the "non swimmer" fans it can be entertaining but I'd rather see the 50s of stroke over the mixed relay. My opinion is just an opinion. Luckily the sport is always evolving, so there is hope like the change of the backstroke for resummersion rule. We had those "prayers" answers so I think as long as the sport evolves, there's hope. It's just a rough patch. 🤷🏼♀️
Whether or not you agree with the selection criteria, it was announced significantly in advance of the meet and was not a secret. If Michael Andrew wanted to attend Worlds, then perhaps he should have performed in the event for which he is the American Record holder, rather than finishing 17th
Olympic trials have just finished with the selections and the one thing that ends all discussions is the “ Clock”. Changing of the guards, the young guns coming to the show with fresher muscle twitch/ wiser coaching and it’s insanely tough/demanding to be a player within 2 Olympic trials format. What’s the “ Plan B” when the sponsorships end? Dressel has a son/king is engaged/Fink will soon be a Dad/ Murph is having fun-gotta create some type of happiness/ gotta be ok when the sun sets.
I remember watching the Australian Trials and I cant remember which event it was but you had yo set a new Australian Record to beat the qualifying standards that Swim Aus set
I like the part where Andrew explains that the relative weight assigned to 50 vs 100m races is not simply an arbitrary decision by a disinterested trio of managers at USA Swimming, but actually part of a grand plan made by the omnipotent and divine creator of the universe.
I think the logic (if you can call it that) is that the top 3 relay winners in each relay event at the 2023 World Championships get automatic spots at the 2024 Olympics. If you’re not in the top 3, then the selection process gets weird(er). So relays at the 2023 World Champs get prioritized so that we can lock in one of those 3 spots for each relay. (This assuming I’m reading the rules correctly.)
It’s not about the place that someone swims - it’s the time. Every country sets qualifying times for individual events that swimmers must do at their nominated qualifying event (either National Championships or Selection Trials). If the time is not swum, even by the winner, then they cannot be selected for that event (unless the swimmer qualified through another event and they can be selected to swim). So those swimmers that finished fifth or sixth would still have been required to swim the qualifying time to make the team. It’s simple as long as you remember it’s about the time and not the place. And it’s the same for every country.
Why are there roster limits anyway? Do they keep score at World Champs, Pan Pacs/Ams, and/or the Olympics??? I’ve spent over 30 years around competitive swimming, and I honestly don’t know…
If people are confused, what he is saying is that more events means people go to worlds. The problem though is that some events have 2 people going, other events have 3. It just comes down to who has made it so far and how many more people can go. Micheal Andrew got a little unlucky in the 50 Free and didn't make it. Questions? I'm still very confused
No events have 3 swimmers entered, the only events with over 2 people going are the 100 and 200 freestyle for relay purposes. USA swimming prioritized relays over the stroke 50s. Specifically they prioritized taking relay only swimmers over the winners of the stroke 50s because of the stroke 50s being non-olympic events. That's it
Great new take. I've watched a few discussions regarding this topic, and youre the 1st to point out that FINA added 800 Men and 1500 women without adding more spots. I am not a MA fan and am not a fan of 50s in general, but feel MA was screwed here. The 5th and 6th relay spots should not have priority over champs in 50s. The US could use other swimmers who do not have packed schedules to swim in relay prelims even swimmers who werent top 6 in 200free. This would be more interesting. Btw, MA should be able to swim 100m - he is American record holder in 1Breast.
Hi Kyle! Bottom line is you're right about confusion -- and you didn't even mention how confused coaches and swimmers are about crossover turns, etc. not seeing some of the best I.M.ers in the world race because they were trying to chop a quarter of a second with a crossover thety used to get pulled from the meet or from the finals. That and Lily King can dolphin the whole way across the pool in the 50 breast and not get DQed, Marchand can flutter the first 100 fly of the 400 I.M. a number of times and have it ignored, yet others are getting nailed for the same things! Oh and how custom are those custom suits for sponsored swimmers as compared to MOST swimmers even at Trials and World Champs?? As a biomechanist I can tell you just a little higher lifting here or there can make a difference of like a quarter (more or less) inch on every stroke and no two swimmers have exactly the same center of buoyancy, etc. . That all said, one thing I'll say about Andrew is that, though I too am a Christian, I too have sprinters genes, he CHOOSES not to train to successfully swim the 200 I.M., and the pain of training for lactate races like any of the other 200's or 100's, telling many swimmers and coaches they go "garbage" yardage. Now, of course that's his right and he COULD even be right. In fact, I's starting to help Mark Schubert find five of the fastest milers in the world some more speed to go with his amazing ability to train them for the 1500 starting Tuesday morning. That all said, Michael kind of gets what he deserves since the rules really did not change -- only fit enough to win the 50 and with that God-given talent you can't finish the 100? Well, you are CHOOSING to give it to the Chalmers, Stockwells, Cielos, Dressels's, Popovici's and the MAJORITY of sprinters of the world who have trained and are WILLING to train for those events if our rules do't just take the taller more gifted 50 people. His theory is interesting and his ideas have some merit. But when they don't work, well, they don't work. There are meets where he can set the world record in those 50's, of course. When he does that and then can't go the second lap at the norm for those about his speed, it's reasonable to theorize if not assume with the "n" is large enough, that his training leaves something to be desired. Think of it this way maybe -- there is no record in swimming for vertical jump. We all know who might win that -- the same guy willing to train with 200 I.M.ers day in day our for years and represent us not only in the 50, but in 100 fly, 100 free, and at NCAA level 200 I.M. 100 breast, etc. This is all to say I agree with your saying this might be confusing; but I feel little sorrow for the most genetically gifted and perhaps the most relatively undertrained swimmer on the planet. He saved some time and some pain, but that doesn't mean we send less relay people to make it more likely our top swimmers can perform at their peaks, by only swim relays once. And one more thing -- USA Swimming sent Michael's dad instead of some very qualified coaches to the last Olympics. There's another confusing choice -- so back to backing your point. If you ever want to join me for a Zoom, I think we'd have some fun! Competitive Swimmer magazine is almost as controversial and aims to be half as intelligent as you are :) Thanks for all you are and do!
In Speedskating we deal with this situation of a quota at the olympics every quad. People get cut from the games because there’s too many people who made the team for how many we are allowed in the village. Super sad but normally NGB’s have a half decent system fr what events are “medal events”. If the top 3 people in the world are from the US, the 3rd place finisher should have priority over somebody in a different event that maybe won but is ranked 40th
Confusing for sure. Everyone seems to be at fault. I wish MA would swim longer events again, and take any guesswork out of it. It can also be confusing with Katy L and Carson F trying to get on relays, but not wanting to swim the open 200 free (who gets bumped up to swim the open women 200 free? Never really celebrated). Working in SW Japan, and will get to see one morning of the championships. So excited!
Unrelated to the last comment but could a kind stranger clarify for me? Because I think? I was only able to sort of find the answer for track. Is it 2 people per event per country so long as they both meet the FINA A standard, otherwise 1 person per event if either only one person meets the A standard or the fastest person meets the B standard? Is that FINA’s rules? And if that or something similar is true, some countries aren’t even going to send one person in that event even if their time meets the A standard and there are no roster cap problems?
I would assume all the swimmers knew what the breakdown of what took priority. So, when MA decides to swim the ‘50s’ as his make it the team that’s his own fault/decision he made. Like it or not the rules are rules & he was on the bad end of it. Would this be a big deal if it was anybody else? Too much hype for this guy IMO
When MA said “for me it’s [the mask] pretty hard to breathe in after kind of sacrificing my body to the water, so I feel my health is a little more tied to being able to breathe than protecting what’s coming out of my mouth”, unvaccinated, at the olympics, any respect was gone. It also rubs me the wrong way when people say ‘it’s gods plan’ as it always comes across narcissistic. Some big guy upstairs had a plan for him to swim .01 slower in the 50 free, when people in war torn areas are praying to the same guy? It’s also disrespectful to your opponents (who in this case are also team USA teammates) who won after putting in years of hard work. I truly believe the reason behind a lot of comments I saw over the internet dragging MA for not making it in and arguing for the relay spot were doing this specifically because of this and other stuff like training methods, family etc. 50s are fun to watch. If you make it, I think you should be able to go. I find it so so hard to believe team USA doesn’t have another guy who is swimming only one or two events that can’t swim 200 free one morning, not only to not cut out a guy who got first in the 50 fly, but 2nd in the 50 breast. I think the easiest way to combat the roster stuff/having one off meet/etc is if fina allowed each person who won gold at the last worlds to come back, along with the current world record holder, regardless of what their home nations qualifications were to get on the team (for individual events only). At most that’s adding two more people to prelims heats. In practice a lot of world record holders would have either already qualified or retired, but as a fan those who returned would be fun to see swim again. In only a handful of races it lets someone back in who had an off qualifying meet. Same as with those who got gold at the last worlds.
I just discovered this channel and have enjoyed some of your commentary and insight, but I think (if you'll forgive the expression) you're all wet here. Though he may be one of the best swimmers in the world, he has proven only that he can do it for one length of a 50M pool. His only international individual LC medal was a bronze at the 2017 Junior Worlds 100M Breast. I have nothing against an unorthodox training philosophy per se if the result is that the athlete is fully prepared to perform when it counts, and MA has not. Looking good on paper is great, but only when it gets you on the podium and earns the fame/money and a place in your sport's history instead of controversy. Case in point, Olympic Trials vs the Games (Is the world's fastest 150 IM sort of like being the world's tallest midget?) Making an argument for him based on his PBs, for me, (again, forgive me) doesn't hold water. He might have made the team but for an extra half-stroke in the 50 Free, something you expect from an age-grouper, and not a 9-year pro who should know (after all those 50s) to glide in. I doubt we'd have such an intense debate over the selection priorities if not for another MA bad meet and his wynging on IG while he surfs on a lonely beach. (And if Dressel had pulled one off in the 50 Fly, he wouldn't have been named either, but given his current frame of mind, he wouldn't be complaining.) Phelps was 23 at Beijing. MA is 24, and needs to get on with it and stop blaming the process.
The issue with British standards were some of the AQTs being faster than their national records. On top of multiple countries making their standard faster than the A cuts
While of course because the qualifying times determine the speed of your country not the actual swimmers times😌 kinda like some college professors that brag that no one can pass their class
He put USRPT to the test and it works but not if itss your only way of training. Plus he is all over the map in events instead of focusing one or two events ...he is so good. Still young as shit. So lets hope he picks 2 main events and adds more weights and other styles of training into his program.
Roster limits aren’t even placed by World Aquatics. They were placed by some USA organization in the 80s to reduce costs i think. Having these limits nowadays is stupid
Who actually sets the limits on how many athletes can be in the team? Is it possible to extend the numbers in the roster, or is it outside of the control of the team/US swimming? I would probably select based on medal chances. So if there's some athletes who win or come second but they are in a really tough event with no chance of getting top 3, then they don't get selected. That could open up some spaces for the 50m swimmers. But if International experience in preparation for the Olympics trumps everything else then they have to ignore the 50m events.
Andrew has no one to blame but himself. That said, IMHO, 50's stroke winners should get priority over #6 100 free and #6 200 free finishers. 50's stroke winners ranked in the top 8 in the world (i.e. likely WC finalist) should get priority over #5 100 free and #5 200 free finishers.
Everyone has off meets. You'll have that. Why Michael Andrew took that extra stroke in the 50 instead of gliding in is just fundamental brain farts. He should of easily been in the 50 free
So now, who will represent USA for the 50 fly and 50 Breast? Will there be only 1 person per event? or they will fill it in with other good swimmers inside the roster?
They'll fill the event with two swimmers who we're selected to be on the team, likely some combination of the event winner in the 100 and either the runner up in the 100 or another sprinter who has the A-cut and could medal. We'll have to wait and see who is chosen.
Well weren't the 5th and 6th place finishers in the 100 and 200 freestyle at the trials selected for the roster previously as well? I mean every time the US swims a relay in an international competition they swim in the prelims. Then why are they now a greater priority than Andrew?
Everyone would like the 50s to be added to the Olympics anyways, more races, more medals, more people, I don’t see anything negative about adding 50s. I think that the majority of countries would agree with me too.
More events means more confusion on the qualification side of things. If we boost roster limits, sure, but as it stands adding stroke 50s would make telling the story of qualification at Olympic Trials a nightmare. Just my two cents 🪙
Its just called DEI, which actually has been happening in this world for quite some time. Its how someone that just barely makes a ncaa cut swims for their country in the olympics but 50 other people that are faster do not get to go. We do not get to see the fastest swimmers, as Kyle noted, but we get to see the selected swimmers. Kind of funny that a sport that is supposedly all about time/merit has become a judged sport.
Well, this video is actually a 2-parter--why wasn't Michael Andrew selected, and gosh isn't the selection process confusing. As for Michael Andrew, my (admittedly conspiracy) theory is that USA Swimming didn't want him on the team. While he's really good at 50s in all the various Pro-Tyr-Arena-Speedo meets that only swimmers & coaches but few others care much about, he has very little to show from big meets...the ones people watch on TV that generate revenue. Tokyo was not only a disappointment, it was also something of a PR embarrassment. Katy Ledecky and Caeleb Dressel seemed to do just fine in the post-race interview room wearing their masks, but Michael Andrew complained that he needed oxygen. Well, duh, who doesn't need oxygen. So, in other words, the swimming suits (that's a double entendre, get it?) don't like him, believing him to be a big meet dud and selfish, who can only swim events that aren't in the Olympics. Whether true or not. Like I said, it's my conspiracy theory. As for the selection process being confusing, why yes it is.
But the real issue is that the selection criteria for the US Team was changed between the last Trials and this one. Michael Andrew WOULD have made the team at the LAST trials but did not this time. It's not even clear Michael knew about the change. I follow the sport daily, and I didn't know. The selection was FAIR because it followed the rules, but WHY did they change the rules? IMO they shouldn't have!
i know this is way off topic but when will swimming get a sports-betting aspect of viewership? talking about immediate understanding and sport popularity, and relating to a large reason of why peers of mine watch sports, i feel like this could boost the hype around the sport. However, would betting place unnecessary stress on the swimmer or bring other things that the swimming world doesn’t need? No clue!
It’s dumb because when you qualify for a competition, you should go to the competition. Coleman store should’ve gone to short course world champs because that’s the competition. Michael, Andrew should go to one course world champs because that’s the competition if you want to train for the Olympics great if you’re better at a race that’s not an Olympics but it’s short course world champs, or Longcourse world champs. Great that’s the event we should be watching. We added the 50s of stroke which is awesome. To do that only to say wow you’re only allowed to swim the 50 stroke and get the best people in the meet if we think you’re going to the Olympics one or two years before the Olympics!??!
You are bumping hard into international politics in sport. Like the old man says, “They held a political meeting and a swim meet broke out.” As soon as Fina or whatever it calls itself now gets its nose into the room, all rational thinking flies out the door. Palms are greased, winks and nods are exchanged, and nothing but anger and frustration result. There are old men in smoke-filled rooms who give the favors to those who give them favors, especially the IOC, by all reports. There is a pecking order between sports, between teams and countries, mostly based on how many millions of dollars are gifted in various ways to curry favor. It’s not the pure sporting world we all want it to be. All sports are filled with rules, exceptions to rules, selection processes, and exceptions to those. Every single one. We just happen to love swimming and have made the big mistake of believing it’s a pure and simple thing to go back and forth until the first person touches the wall and stops the clock. Subjective decisions are always in the mix. Sorry friends.
I think the top 3 relay finishes at Fukuoka will qualify for 3/16 spots in Paris. The remaining 13 teams will qualify in Doha 2024. On one hand it would be real nice if they qualify first try. It would also be real bad if they don’t make it to Paris at all. It would not be ideal to race in Doha. Prioritizing the alternates hypothetically technically 😂 gives a team USA relay the best chance to qualify for the Olympics. On the other hand, you could argue that the risk is worth it when you put it up against the value of winning a world championship. I’d assume 2nd alternates race in these situations quite infrequently in the first place. Say there is no 2nd alternate and it’s Joe who qualified in 50 backstroke. There are 20 other world class guys including Joe to pick from. Are they THAT much slower than the 2nd alternate? What are the chances USA would qualify with the 2nd alternate, but not with Joe or others. Maybe small considering how stacked the squad is. Is that chance worth it???
I always assumed the 800 and 1500 gender separation at the Olympics was due to time/tv constraints. Not a “women can’t swim a mile” thing, as you suggested. In that case, why would the men not be swimming the 800 as well.
I just hope they don’t add 50s of stroke to the Olympics and turn that into a circus, also they should allow 2 extra spots for the women’s 1500 and the men’s 800
Would love to have the 50s and the 200 medley / 200 freestyle relay, but not at the expense of our sport turning into a confusing pile of events. I’m with ya 🤝
Gotta say I don’t think he’s one of the best in the world. He’s certainly one of the best sprinters but he has no versatility which bit him in the ass. I absolutely agree though we need immediate results for swimming to grow a mainstream audience. Also if it was anyone but Michael Andrew I’d probably be more upset if they were left off the team so I think at some point FINA needs to throw out all the nonsense and just say 2 per event aside from the 100 and 200 free whether it’s Olympic or Worlds year.
He's the national record holder in 100 breast and has one of the fastest 200IM times ever. Lifetime best of 50.8 in 100 fly is also elite. He just had an off meet.
@@ebelsa He is also incredibly inconsistent in those events and very obviously does not train properly for them seen by his extreme inability to maintain speed or have any kind of race strategy aside from sprinting until he dies. He’s an very gifted swimmer but I don’t believe he’s in the same category as a Michael Phelps, Katie Ledecky, Leon Marchand, or Kate Douglass.
Time to add the 50's to the olympics. Top 2 go top 6 in relays. If they need to add a day to the swimming program for the Olympics so be it. Should not be a huge deal to overlap with Track and field for one day. Problem fixed, confusion gone.
I even think its kinda unfair for a 5th or 6th swimmer at the nationals to most likely be able to win an olympic gold medal. It doesnt feel deserved if we compare it to the Situation with Andrew
Here's the answer: In the Olympics, get rid of the useless semifinals and instead get the extra TV footage by adding stroke 50s. Why in the world make the Olympics an endurance test by making swimmers swim every race 3 times instead of 2 times? 2 times is enough! Especially because crazy qualifying times make for only ~20 swimmers in the prelims of some events, making semifinals mostly redundant with prelims anyway. Remove semifinals and add stroke 50s to the Olympics!!
Team USA is prioritizing the money they will make off each swim and not the overall performer. People lose money and sponsors for not going to these big time meets.
Now this brings me back as to how Michael phelps was able to swim the 4x100 relay every olympics. He didn't swim it at trials, so did someone just scratch to get him on the team? And how was the olympic team okay with a non- freestyler swimming that relay. Obviously it worked out for him, but it is just confusing organization.
@@a.p.w.1aski644 true true. But the 100 free wasn’t his specialty. He obviously did very well in those relays and in everything he swam, I am just confused by the technicalities.
Coaches get final say in relays, therefore they can select any person on the roster to swim. Also he had shown he had a faster time than the relay swimmers at some point (whether at a prior meet or at training camp).
The coaches yanked Gary Hall Jr off the 400 free relay at the Athens Olympics, because they didn’t like him, when he was clearly fast enough, and the resulting squad lost to both the South Africans and the Dutch. Hall’s prelims split was faster then both Ian Crocker and Michael Phelps in the final. That move showed how favoritism and power plays were more important than raw speed for those coaches.
There’s no beef there is none at all. Michael andrews literal workout Is 25s he can swim a good 100 but chooses not too and not even mention the fact that he’s not in contention in the 100s is dumb HES EVEN MADE THE TEAM LAST YEAR IN THE 1 FLY AND 1 BREAST it’s clear that it’s his training and he’s arrogant even my coach has exposed his own workouts only being 25s he’s just dug himself into this no one to blame but himself
Michael was training for 50s for this meet. He didn't achieve season bests at this meet so can assume he didn't taper fully, which is bad luck. In fact it's stupid to have national championships 4 weeks before. USA needs to get like the UK and hold them in April. If you want to be good at 50s, only need 25s at effort, drills and gym. You make a training decision at the beginning of the season, so it is not his fault as that decision was based on the original criteria set out by USA swimming, which USA swimming then changed. USRPT is more effective for most people. You can train less, get the same results and have more fun by sprinting.
@@alexblack2314 ok buddy common knowledge if he knows himself when trials are since he competed last year and the dates come out like months ahead he should know how his taper is even being a pro since the age of 14 he should know how his body reacts to certain conditions. Michael Andrew just needs to stop being incompetent I've seen one of his workouts his workouts aren't certainly showing he can last in 100s considering he should be USA's top men's 100 breastroker and loosing to a 30 year old dude its outrageous. He needs to man up take some initiative towards his racing and train fr
In short, however, MA was out of shape for worlds. His 50's were so-so, only and his 100 fly and 100 breast were WAY OFF HIS BEST TIMES. He did not even swim the 200 IM (I think), and event he should be a natural in. Who else in the world has world class speed in all 4 strokes (other than Leon)? I agree with another commenter that he, like many, need to move training to places like ASU or Longhorn. I would prefer ASU, if I were him. Tempe is nice and the environment is excellent foe mentoring.
I will tell u what stop allowing other countries to train in our university if they intend on representing other or home countries like Leon Marchand that whooped our ass in worlds this past week.
Not taking the fasted swimmer on the PLANET makes perfect sense. Bring the 5th and 6th fastest swimmers to an event so that your top 4 swimmers don't have to swim and can have a break from swimming makes perfect sense. STUPID
Why add more events? It's not really a question of gender. It's simply tradition. Women don't have to prove that they can swim longer distances. How course they can. Do we swim a mile just to prove that we can? No.
For further clarity, the prioritization in the selection process looks like this…
1) top 4 swimmers in the 100 & 200 freestyle & the top finishers (first place) in events offered at the Olympics
2) second best (second place finishers) in events offered at the Olympics
3) 5th fastest swimmers in the 100 & 200 freestyle
4) 6th fastest swimmers in the 100 & 200 freestyle
5) basically, Michael Andrew (50 stroke swimmers not qualified in any other events)
That’s ridiculous
you also forgot to mention the maximum of 26 roster spots for either Gender, so if it would stand at 23 different swimmers chosen as it is for the women, he probably could have been selected
ex swimmer, masters now and officiating age group and it confuses me. your vid was great because I highlights two things 1- selection worldwide is at the discretion of each countries criteria which varies and 2 - we need to simplify it and/or allow a winner their moment. all the fuss over prelim relay swimmers is important I know but somewhat lost on me.
It's just crazy that a medal contender at worlds has his spot taken by the 6th or 5th swimmer at the 100 or 200 free. It makes no sense. If swimming wants to break into the mainstream media bubble, swimming needs Stars like Andrew and exciting events like the 50s. Nobody is going to sit through 15 minutes of freestyle to watch Ledeky win the 1500 by half a pool.
Really unbelievable. The time he went was 12th fastest in the world (season best is 3rd). In my opinion, the 50s are the most watchable events for new fans who don’t have a broad base of swim knowledge. Sorta similar to how everyone knows a dunk is cool. Being good at a 50 is a spectacle that swimming needs.
Agree that they’re the most watchable, but think the addition of them needs to come with an expanded roster limit.
Qualification meets currently provide the second most “drama” in the sport, behind the actual Olympics/World Champs, but have started to lean away from drama and towards confusion with selection being as muddy as it is now. Would love to be able to have both the 50s and a clear cut path to qualification that fans can easily digest and understand at home.
Do you think they should be an olympic event? Just curious, bc that would be a huge game changer.
@@Sockwell agree, they need to expand the roster AND include them in all competitions including the Olympic games. I was a sprinter in high school in the 90s and college in 2000s and always wanted stroke 50s!
Don't question god's plan!
@@stt5v2002 Said every sheep ever. Anything not to be questioned is a cult.
A national champ in a 50 should go to World Champs before a 6th place finisher.End of Discussion
A very succinct, yet fair, assessment of the situation.
I absolutely agree, because, let's face it, they're prioritizing an athlete's rest (meaning one of the top 4 not swimming the relay prelims) over a National Champion. That's not even close to being fair; make it make sense.
Don't forget that he is top 2 in the whole world this year
Stop letting deeper countries get away with swimming different people in prelims versus finals? Idk like I get the strategy but it seems unfair in some ways
@@ExitSiign It totally is, it benefits big teams, like the US or Australia. Besides it feels wrong to get a medal for 1 swim (either prelims or final) like it takes away the value or an olympic medal, imo. If you want to medal at the ind. 100m free you have to be super fast 3 times, to medal at the 4x100m free you kinda need to "not suck" just once, I don't think that deserves a medal.
Michael has a ton of potential, he has the potential to be the fastest in the world in like four different Olympic events… But I just don’t think his current training plan is working out for him, I think the days of his dad being able to train him and him only doing USRPT are over if he wants to have Olympic success. He’s only going to get so far swimming only 50s, especially if he’s not even the fastest in the world in them. He needs to get back into it with the one breast 2 IM and one fly and I think the only way to do that would be to go train somewhere like an Arizona state under a Bob Bowman or somewhere else where he’s really gonna be able to thrive under a coach with Olympic success. Michael showed what he’s capable of in 2021 at trials but was unable to replicate that at the Olympic stage, leaving him with very little Olympic success. If he wants to be remembered as one of the greats, and have them fix success, like a dressel, or a Lochte, which I think is very possible, he needs to change his training plan.
I can't agree more. My thoughts exactly. He could be an icon in breast, IM, and fly, but he keeps doing these 50s. He was literally beating the world record in 2 IM until the last 50. He has a WR in him. Sadly, I think that because his dad got him to the world stage, he doesn't want to give up his dad as a coach. He might fear that it would be disrespectful, but it's not.
Being the fasted in the world isn't working out for him. Interesting point of view. Or maybe he is just being punished.
@@myfarmmyway8500 He's not the fastest in the world though
Exactly. Its time for Andrew to face the music, push on from his dad and take on the burden of longer yards like the rest of the world. His age group phenom days are way over and its sad to see him fade over and over again in races. So much talent, so much speed, so much potential but being blocked now by family dynamics. The USRPT was interesting, now its time to move on. Otherwise the talent is going to be wasted.
His 200 IM potential is off the charts. But his problem is this strict religious/isolate the family/Little House On The Prarie type thing that keeps him from training with an actual team, rather than just doing 50’s. Now, if the Olympics ever adopts the 50’s of each stroke as events, then maybe the isolate the family from the world mindset can work for him in terms of getting him an Olympic individual gold medal. But his real chance for greatness is obviously the 200 IM. If he could just get SOME decent aerobic conditioning in his training , he could do the 200 IM with cratering in the final 50. His first 150 meters of the 200 IM is dominant, but his freestyle leg is one where, despite being one of the fastest 50 free swimmers in the world, suddenly he can barely break 30 seconds . Just craters . Oh well, to each their own
The only thing thats confusing is why Michael Andrew, and everyone else for that matter still thinks he's 12 years old!?!
Just like the USRPT training fad, turn 13, man up and train like one.
I think the priority selection everyone wants is
1) winners of an event that meet the A cut
2) top 4 in 100 free and 200 free to fill relays so that they can qualify for the Olympics
3) 2nd place in every event
4) 5th place for the 100 and 200 free
5) 6th place for the 100 and 200 free
6) 7th place for the 100 and 200 free
I’m on board here
And then maybe 3rd place finishers for events where one of the top 2 is swimming 5+ events so then we aren’t left a person short in multiple events if they have to leave the meet or scratch multiple events
@@sammeiselno cause u can’t have 3 swimmers in one event
Remember, there are no relay "alternates." If you put somebody on the roster as a relay-only swimmer, they have to swim a relay unless you don't make the finals or there's a medical reason they can't. So going 7 deep in the 100 and 200 puts you at greater risk of failing to get out of the prelims in the 400 and 800 free relays, as you have to use that 7th place swimmer in place of one of the top 4.....or you have to use them in the finals, if you don't use them to get there.
As a Non American, US football is even more confusing, a lot more than throwing a ball into a hoop or kicking a ball into a net. Yet it is still one of the most watched (here). Sometimes complexity can be good for a sport. I actually thought this bit of MA drama was pretty interesting, and kept me engaged for a few days about how we should prioritize events. Personally I agree with prioritizing the olympic events as it garners much more national and international attention. MA made his choice and has to deal with its consequences.
This is actually great if you wanna understand what happened and why it happened. You explained this really well.
good explanation... i just realized that situation now
Called it on your swimming poll‼️
Thanks for the clarification, personally I think if you want to swim at world champs you should be able to do more than a 50 fast. Anyone can swim a fast 50, yes these are elite level swimmers and races come down to hundredths of a second, and there’s a big difference between a 50 and a 100 but I think any good world class swimming should be more than capable of qualifying in (I hesitate with using this word) distance events like the 100 and maybe 200. (200 strokes can be completely different) Michael Andrew has shown several times that he is capable of doing this. If you only train to swim a 50 before a meet where 100s are prioritized then you’re just not training right.
one problem with this logic however is that you could win the 50 free, swim nothing else and be guaranteed a spot on the team according to the selection criteria above.
@@moimeme6533yes, but there is a difference between the 50 freestyle and 50 stroke events. For starters the 50 freestyle is an Olympic event but also is the fastest of all the strokes. The potential of a world record being broken for the 50 meter free is more entertaining for non-swimming fans especially in a non Olympic year. I love the 50 fly, but on the world stage it pales in comparison to the 50 free.
@@Jake-oi9qm A matter of opinion at best, the 50 Fly is a spectacular event regardless of whether the OC decides to add it. FYI, the 50 Free was likewise not an Olympic event until 1988.
I think adding a bigger roster limit would allow it so that this wouldn’t be a problem. Another thing, I think all 50’s should get added to the Olympics so that they don’t have only Olympic events take priority because the 50’s are so up in the air on who’s going to win which makes them so exciting.
Hold on, why wouldn’t they just add stroke 50s on an international level? Like outside of Phillips 66’ I feel like it gives the opportunity for older swimmers to swim longer and also young talent to shine. What’s stopping the international Olympic committee from adding them?
The 50s are in the event lineup for World Championships, but not offered at the Olympics currently.
Stroke 50s are at every international event except the Olympics. The Olympics is backwards.
Thank you for talking about this. Rediculous Qualifying standards have only made swimming harder to watch, less monetizable and worse for the next generations of athletes. The olympic medal or bust model will be the downfall for the sport.
Swimming, for some reason, is the stupidest sport in the world when it comes to attempting to figure out how to score a meet and have team placement. High school is scored differently than college. Some meets have 16 finalists, some have 8, some have up to 32, and the points are different based on how many finals heats there are. And, of course, swimming is one of the only NCAA sports with roster limits and designated scorers. If I'm on my college's lacrosse team, we can be ejected, injured, and defeated down to the last guy on the bench, and that guy can score 12 goals that count. But, in swimming, every coach goes into a season knowing that only 17 of their swimmers will be able to score, and they can add an 18th if they either don't want to take any divers or they don't have enough money in the budget for a diving program. Once you're at a championship meet, you can't do anything if one of the guys you designated an exhibition swimmer goes a lifetime best and makes finals; he's EXB, so he's SOL. No points, no chance to even swim again.
Why on earth WADA is allowing for this HORRENDOUS system is simply beyond me. I've seen teammates quit because they knew that they weren't top two or three on the team in their discipline, which means they wouldn't be scoring at conference. It's obviously a bit different at the professional level (where this is your income and you have a much higher drive to compete for yourself as opposed to a team) but the point still stands: disallowing high level swimmers from participating in high level meets simply because you don't want teams to be bigger than need be is a terribly flawed system and it needs to go. It's boiled my blood for years watching people that I trained with get told that they couldn't contribute to the team, and it's even worse when they would actually have been able to contribute if not for the NCAA making this arguably the most non-inclusive sport that they offer.
I'm surprised I kept that rant clean. Great explanation of the state of things and always love hearing your opinions on these matters.
I do have to say that some conferences don’t follow the 17 rule. For example the conference I swim in (Middle Atlantic) allows anyone in that can make a time standard (the standards aren’t too hard) to swim at the meet sometimes up to 20 swimmers are scoring. The only downside is that the bigger the team the more likely that team is to win the conference title.
Well said. Non-die-hard fans almost need a designated explainer for certain meets.
Oh c'mon. One cannot compare Swimming rules to Lacrosse etc. I'm a past swimmer and my son is a lacrosse player. Lacrosse has some of the most confusing rules. I know parents who have watched 100s of lax games and still dont understand lax rules. And to your example, high school lax rules are different than college lax which is different than pro lax which are different than World Championships. Same goes for Soccer, Field Hockey, and dont even try to understand Rugby.
Can that 17 rule be changed meet to meet?
I really wish Fina or whoever controls this team size crap could change it to something as simple as this-
2 per event, if there’s overlap, prioritize sprint, because sprint equals relays
I agree fully other then that there are no 4x50 relays at worlds or Olympics. Makes it more difficult to choose.
I think the sport is getting better. So awesome that they are actually allowing swimmers to compete in 50s for strokes at nationals this is progress!
I think making relays timed finals would help. No more taking fifth and sixth place finishers in 100 and 200 free. It's not really fair that swimmers from powerhouse countries get to skip prelims anyway. We got rid of prelim relays at NCAAs and the result was faster swimming.
Can we talk about how Michael was the top 200 IM at trials last year? I really think he has it in him to be a world champ at it, but he seems to shy away from that event.
marchand
@@alejandrolopez-romero8803he’s not from team USA
The easy fix is add spots to rosters so this issue doesn’t occur. On top of that we need to heavily consider having more spots added for American swimmers in individual events. We were given a golden oppurtunity in 2016 and 2020/21 trials with David Nolan, Phelps and lochte all competitive in the 200 IM and 400 IM. Nolan finishes 3rd and couldn’t go to Paris or London, and had he been able to go, we’d have seen him be the third fastest in the world and get bronze at both Olympics.
I love that we FINALLY added the 800 and 1500 for both genders. The mixed relays are silly im my opinion. It's a strategic way of seeing where both genders can meet in the middle. It's not as fast as the men's swimming and faster than the women's, maybe for the "non swimmer" fans it can be entertaining but I'd rather see the 50s of stroke over the mixed relay. My opinion is just an opinion. Luckily the sport is always evolving, so there is hope like the change of the backstroke for resummersion rule. We had those "prayers" answers so I think as long as the sport evolves, there's hope. It's just a rough patch. 🤷🏼♀️
Whether or not you agree with the selection criteria, it was announced significantly in advance of the meet and was not a secret. If Michael Andrew wanted to attend Worlds, then perhaps he should have performed in the event for which he is the American Record holder, rather than finishing 17th
Olympic trials have just finished with the selections and the one thing that ends all discussions is the “ Clock”. Changing of the guards, the young guns coming to the show with fresher muscle twitch/ wiser coaching and it’s insanely tough/demanding to be a player within 2 Olympic trials format. What’s the “ Plan B” when the sponsorships end? Dressel has a son/king is engaged/Fink will soon be a Dad/ Murph is having fun-gotta create some type of happiness/ gotta be ok when the sun sets.
I remember watching the Australian Trials and I cant remember which event it was but you had yo set a new Australian Record to beat the qualifying standards that Swim Aus set
I like the part where Andrew explains that the relative weight assigned to 50 vs 100m races is not simply an arbitrary decision by a disinterested trio of managers at USA Swimming, but actually part of a grand plan made by the omnipotent and divine creator of the universe.
I think the logic (if you can call it that) is that the top 3 relay winners in each relay event at the 2023 World Championships get automatic spots at the 2024 Olympics. If you’re not in the top 3, then the selection process gets weird(er). So relays at the 2023 World Champs get prioritized so that we can lock in one of those 3 spots for each relay.
(This assuming I’m reading the rules correctly.)
Good points. Yes, swimming has to be much easier to understand by casual fans.
Banning 50's deprives the public of watching wonderful and inspirational stuff like Nicholas Santos.
It’s not about the place that someone swims - it’s the time. Every country sets qualifying times for individual events that swimmers must do at their nominated qualifying event (either National Championships or Selection Trials). If the time is not swum, even by the winner, then they cannot be selected for that event (unless the swimmer qualified through another event and they can be selected to swim). So those swimmers that finished fifth or sixth would still have been required to swim the qualifying time to make the team. It’s simple as long as you remember it’s about the time and not the place. And it’s the same for every country.
Why are there roster limits anyway? Do they keep score at World Champs, Pan Pacs/Ams, and/or the Olympics??? I’ve spent over 30 years around competitive swimming, and I honestly don’t know…
If people are confused, what he is saying is that more events means people go to worlds. The problem though is that some events have 2 people going, other events have 3. It just comes down to who has made it so far and how many more people can go. Micheal Andrew got a little unlucky in the 50 Free and didn't make it. Questions? I'm still very confused
No events have 3 swimmers entered, the only events with over 2 people going are the 100 and 200 freestyle for relay purposes. USA swimming prioritized relays over the stroke 50s. Specifically they prioritized taking relay only swimmers over the winners of the stroke 50s because of the stroke 50s being non-olympic events. That's it
Great new take. I've watched a few discussions regarding this topic, and youre the 1st to point out that FINA added 800 Men and 1500 women without adding more spots. I am not a MA fan and am not a fan of 50s in general, but feel MA was screwed here. The 5th and 6th relay spots should not have priority over champs in 50s. The US could use other swimmers who do not have packed schedules to swim in relay prelims even swimmers who werent top 6 in 200free. This would be more interesting. Btw, MA should be able to swim 100m - he is American record holder in 1Breast.
He didn’t make it in any his marquee events 50 free, 100 breast, 100 fly, or 200 IM. Rules are rules. It’s pretty self explanatory once you read them.
Hi Kyle!
Bottom line is you're right about confusion -- and you didn't even mention how confused coaches and swimmers are about crossover turns, etc. not seeing some of the best I.M.ers in the world race because they were trying to chop a quarter of a second with a crossover thety used to get pulled from the meet or from the finals. That and Lily King can dolphin the whole way across the pool in the 50 breast and not get DQed, Marchand can flutter the first 100 fly of the 400 I.M. a number of times and have it ignored, yet others are getting nailed for the same things! Oh and how custom are those custom suits for sponsored swimmers as compared to MOST swimmers even at Trials and World Champs?? As a biomechanist I can tell you just a little higher lifting here or there can make a difference of like a quarter (more or less) inch on every stroke and no two swimmers have exactly the same center of buoyancy, etc. . That all said, one thing I'll say about Andrew is that, though I too am a Christian, I too have sprinters genes, he CHOOSES not to train to successfully swim the 200 I.M., and the pain of training for lactate races like any of the other 200's or 100's, telling many swimmers and coaches they go "garbage" yardage. Now, of course that's his right and he COULD even be right. In fact, I's starting to help Mark Schubert find five of the fastest milers in the world some more speed to go with his amazing ability to train them for the 1500 starting Tuesday morning. That all said, Michael kind of gets what he deserves since the rules really did not change -- only fit enough to win the 50 and with that God-given talent you can't finish the 100? Well, you are CHOOSING to give it to the Chalmers, Stockwells, Cielos, Dressels's, Popovici's and the MAJORITY of sprinters of the world who have trained and are WILLING to train for those events if our rules do't just take the taller more gifted 50 people. His theory is interesting and his ideas have some merit. But when they don't work, well, they don't work. There are meets where he can set the world record in those 50's, of course. When he does that and then can't go the second lap at the norm for those about his speed, it's reasonable to theorize if not assume with the "n" is large enough, that his training leaves something to be desired. Think of it this way maybe -- there is no record in swimming for vertical jump. We all know who might win that -- the same guy willing to train with 200 I.M.ers day in day our for years and represent us not only in the 50, but in 100 fly, 100 free, and at NCAA level 200 I.M. 100 breast, etc. This is all to say I agree with your saying this might be confusing; but I feel little sorrow for the most genetically gifted and perhaps the most relatively undertrained swimmer on the planet. He saved some time and some pain, but that doesn't mean we send less relay people to make it more likely our top swimmers can perform at their peaks, by only swim relays once. And one more thing -- USA Swimming sent Michael's dad instead of some very qualified coaches to the last Olympics. There's another confusing choice -- so back to backing your point. If you ever want to join me for a Zoom, I think we'd have some fun! Competitive Swimmer magazine is almost as controversial and aims to be half as intelligent as you are :) Thanks for all you are and do!
In Speedskating we deal with this situation of a quota at the olympics every quad. People get cut from the games because there’s too many people who made the team for how many we are allowed in the village. Super sad but normally NGB’s have a half decent system fr what events are “medal events”. If the top 3 people in the world are from the US, the 3rd place finisher should have priority over somebody in a different event that maybe won but is ranked 40th
This could have been explained so much clearer in so many less words
noted
Confusing for sure. Everyone seems to be at fault. I wish MA would swim longer events again, and take any guesswork out of it. It can also be confusing with Katy L and Carson F trying to get on relays, but not wanting to swim the open 200 free (who gets bumped up to swim the open women 200 free? Never really celebrated). Working in SW Japan, and will get to see one morning of the championships. So excited!
Unrelated to the last comment but could a kind stranger clarify for me? Because I think? I was only able to sort of find the answer for track.
Is it 2 people per event per country so long as they both meet the FINA A standard, otherwise 1 person per event if either only one person meets the A standard or the fastest person meets the B standard? Is that FINA’s rules?
And if that or something similar is true, some countries aren’t even going to send one person in that event even if their time meets the A standard and there are no roster cap problems?
I would assume all the swimmers knew what the breakdown of what took priority. So, when MA decides to swim the ‘50s’ as his make it the team that’s his own fault/decision he made. Like it or not the rules are rules & he was on the bad end of it. Would this be a big deal if it was anybody else? Too much hype for this guy IMO
What is the difference between getting the b cut qualifying times or the a cut qualifying times in the world championships?
When MA said “for me it’s [the mask] pretty hard to breathe in after kind of sacrificing my body to the water, so I feel my health is a little more tied to being able to breathe than protecting what’s coming out of my mouth”, unvaccinated, at the olympics, any respect was gone. It also rubs me the wrong way when people say ‘it’s gods plan’ as it always comes across narcissistic. Some big guy upstairs had a plan for him to swim .01 slower in the 50 free, when people in war torn areas are praying to the same guy? It’s also disrespectful to your opponents (who in this case are also team USA teammates) who won after putting in years of hard work.
I truly believe the reason behind a lot of comments I saw over the internet dragging MA for not making it in and arguing for the relay spot were doing this specifically because of this and other stuff like training methods, family etc.
50s are fun to watch. If you make it, I think you should be able to go. I find it so so hard to believe team USA doesn’t have another guy who is swimming only one or two events that can’t swim 200 free one morning, not only to not cut out a guy who got first in the 50 fly, but 2nd in the 50 breast.
I think the easiest way to combat the roster stuff/having one off meet/etc is if fina allowed each person who won gold at the last worlds to come back, along with the current world record holder, regardless of what their home nations qualifications were to get on the team (for individual events only). At most that’s adding two more people to prelims heats. In practice a lot of world record holders would have either already qualified or retired, but as a fan those who returned would be fun to see swim again. In only a handful of races it lets someone back in who had an off qualifying meet. Same as with those who got gold at the last worlds.
It'll fuel Michael Andrew to be even faster for the Olympics.
100%
I just discovered this channel and have enjoyed some of your commentary and insight, but I think (if you'll forgive the expression) you're all wet here. Though he may be one of the best swimmers in the world, he has proven only that he can do it for one length of a 50M pool. His only international individual LC medal was a bronze at the 2017 Junior Worlds 100M Breast.
I have nothing against an unorthodox training philosophy per se if the result is that the athlete is fully prepared to perform when it counts, and MA has not. Looking good on paper is great, but only when it gets you on the podium and earns the fame/money and a place in your sport's history instead of controversy. Case in point, Olympic Trials vs the Games (Is the world's fastest 150 IM sort of like being the world's tallest midget?) Making an argument for him based on his PBs, for me, (again, forgive me) doesn't hold water.
He might have made the team but for an extra half-stroke in the 50 Free, something you expect from an age-grouper, and not a 9-year pro who should know (after all those 50s) to glide in.
I doubt we'd have such an intense debate over the selection priorities if not for another MA bad meet and his wynging on IG while he surfs on a lonely beach. (And if Dressel had pulled one off in the 50 Fly, he wouldn't have been named either, but given his current frame of mind, he wouldn't be complaining.)
Phelps was 23 at Beijing. MA is 24, and needs to get on with it and stop blaming the process.
Thanks for making a "Super Neesh" video!
7:39
8:58
most real thing ive ever heard in my life.
The issue with British standards were some of the AQTs being faster than their national records. On top of multiple countries making their standard faster than the A cuts
why do we do this 😵💫
While of course because the qualifying times determine the speed of your country not the actual swimmers times😌 kinda like some college professors that brag that no one can pass their class
He put USRPT to the test and it works but not if itss your only way of training. Plus he is all over the map in events instead of focusing one or two events ...he is so good. Still young as shit. So lets hope he picks 2 main events and adds more weights and other styles of training into his program.
Roster limits aren’t even placed by World Aquatics. They were placed by some USA organization in the 80s to reduce costs i think. Having these limits nowadays is stupid
You should do a Mr beast style video where you and a few people do a continuous amount of laps and the last person to leave the pool wins
No
i wouldn’t consider swimming in a good spot, more of just a risky spot that could be really great or really bad
Can you do another video on MAs performance at trials, what happened?!?
Who actually sets the limits on how many athletes can be in the team? Is it possible to extend the numbers in the roster, or is it outside of the control of the team/US swimming?
I would probably select based on medal chances. So if there's some athletes who win or come second but they are in a really tough event with no chance of getting top 3, then they don't get selected. That could open up some spaces for the 50m swimmers. But if International experience in preparation for the Olympics trumps everything else then they have to ignore the 50m events.
Andrew has no one to blame but himself. That said, IMHO, 50's stroke winners should get priority over #6 100 free and #6 200 free finishers. 50's stroke winners ranked in the top 8 in the world (i.e. likely WC finalist) should get priority over #5 100 free and #5 200 free finishers.
There's nothing to be confused about. He just wasn't good enough
He won the 50Fly 💀
A 6th place finisher in the 200 that’s not even going to swim in the finals over a 1st place finisher that could potentially win a medal
Everyone has off meets. You'll have that. Why Michael Andrew took that extra stroke in the 50 instead of gliding in is just fundamental brain farts. He should of easily been in the 50 free
Great video 🙌🏽🙌🏽🙌🏽
So now, who will represent USA for the 50 fly and 50 Breast? Will there be only 1 person per event? or they will fill it in with other good swimmers inside the roster?
They'll fill the event with two swimmers who we're selected to be on the team, likely some combination of the event winner in the 100 and either the runner up in the 100 or another sprinter who has the A-cut and could medal. We'll have to wait and see who is chosen.
Well weren't the 5th and 6th place finishers in the 100 and 200 freestyle at the trials selected for the roster previously as well? I mean every time the US swims a relay in an international competition they swim in the prelims. Then why are they now a greater priority than Andrew?
Everyone would like the 50s to be added to the Olympics anyways, more races, more medals, more people, I don’t see anything negative about adding 50s. I think that the majority of countries would agree with me too.
More events means more confusion on the qualification side of things. If we boost roster limits, sure, but as it stands adding stroke 50s would make telling the story of qualification at Olympic Trials a nightmare. Just my two cents 🪙
@@SockwellI agree but I don’t see why they can’t just expand the roster(s)… any insight on that?
@@willparker3705 If I remember correctly, the IOC sets a limit on roster sizes.
What's the 15 second summary?
At 8:38... brilliant. 🤣
Its just called DEI, which actually has been happening in this world for quite some time. Its how someone that just barely makes a ncaa cut swims for their country in the olympics but 50 other people that are faster do not get to go. We do not get to see the fastest swimmers, as Kyle noted, but we get to see the selected swimmers. Kind of funny that a sport that is supposedly all about time/merit has become a judged sport.
Well, this video is actually a 2-parter--why wasn't Michael Andrew selected, and gosh isn't the selection process confusing. As for Michael Andrew, my (admittedly conspiracy) theory is that USA Swimming didn't want him on the team. While he's really good at 50s in all the various Pro-Tyr-Arena-Speedo meets that only swimmers & coaches but few others care much about, he has very little to show from big meets...the ones people watch on TV that generate revenue. Tokyo was not only a disappointment, it was also something of a PR embarrassment. Katy Ledecky and Caeleb Dressel seemed to do just fine in the post-race interview room wearing their masks, but Michael Andrew complained that he needed oxygen. Well, duh, who doesn't need oxygen. So, in other words, the swimming suits (that's a double entendre, get it?) don't like him, believing him to be a big meet dud and selfish, who can only swim events that aren't in the Olympics. Whether true or not. Like I said, it's my conspiracy theory. As for the selection process being confusing, why yes it is.
But the real issue is that the selection criteria for the US Team was changed between the last Trials and this one. Michael Andrew WOULD have made the team at the LAST trials but did not this time. It's not even clear Michael knew about the change. I follow the sport daily, and I didn't know. The selection was FAIR because it followed the rules, but WHY did they change the rules? IMO they shouldn't have!
The Qualifying Standards proposed by federations is all money. In Spain is totally stupid
i know this is way off topic but when will swimming get a sports-betting aspect of viewership? talking about immediate understanding and sport popularity, and relating to a large reason of why peers of mine watch sports, i feel like this could boost the hype around the sport. However, would betting place unnecessary stress on the swimmer or bring other things that the swimming world doesn’t need? No clue!
It’s dumb because when you qualify for a competition, you should go to the competition. Coleman store should’ve gone to short course world champs because that’s the competition. Michael, Andrew should go to one course world champs because that’s the competition if you want to train for the Olympics great if you’re better at a race that’s not an Olympics but it’s short course world champs, or Longcourse world champs. Great that’s the event we should be watching. We added the 50s of stroke which is awesome. To do that only to say wow you’re only allowed to swim the 50 stroke and get the best people in the meet if we think you’re going to the Olympics one or two years before the Olympics!??!
You are bumping hard into international politics in sport. Like the old man says, “They held a political meeting and a swim meet broke out.” As soon as Fina or whatever it calls itself now gets its nose into the room, all rational thinking flies out the door. Palms are greased, winks and nods are exchanged, and nothing but anger and frustration result. There are old men in smoke-filled rooms who give the favors to those who give them favors, especially the IOC, by all reports. There is a pecking order between sports, between teams and countries, mostly based on how many millions of dollars are gifted in various ways to curry favor. It’s not the pure sporting world we all want it to be. All sports are filled with rules, exceptions to rules, selection processes, and exceptions to those. Every single one. We just happen to love swimming and have made the big mistake of believing it’s a pure and simple thing to go back and forth until the first person touches the wall and stops the clock. Subjective decisions are always in the mix. Sorry friends.
I think the top 3 relay finishes at Fukuoka will qualify for 3/16 spots in Paris. The remaining 13 teams will qualify in Doha 2024.
On one hand it would be real nice if they qualify first try. It would also be real bad if they don’t make it to Paris at all. It would not be ideal to race in Doha. Prioritizing the alternates hypothetically technically 😂 gives a team USA relay the best chance to qualify for the Olympics.
On the other hand, you could argue that the risk is worth it when you put it up against the value of winning a world championship. I’d assume 2nd alternates race in these situations quite infrequently in the first place. Say there is no 2nd alternate and it’s Joe who qualified in 50 backstroke. There are 20 other world class guys including Joe to pick from. Are they THAT much slower than the 2nd alternate? What are the chances USA would qualify with the 2nd alternate, but not with Joe or others. Maybe small considering how stacked the squad is. Is that chance worth it???
I always assumed the 800 and 1500 gender separation at the Olympics was due to time/tv constraints. Not a “women can’t swim a mile” thing, as you suggested. In that case, why would the men not be swimming the 800 as well.
why wouldn't the men swim the 800 and the women swim the 1500...? or why wouldn't we just not have the 1500 at all and have both swim the 800?
I just hope they don’t add 50s of stroke to the Olympics and turn that into a circus, also they should allow 2 extra spots for the women’s 1500 and the men’s 800
Would love to have the 50s and the 200 medley / 200 freestyle relay, but not at the expense of our sport turning into a confusing pile of events. I’m with ya 🤝
What is the point of having a roster limit?
Michael Andrew should swim in a 50m meet at the same time as world championships ans go fast af 😂
Gotta say I don’t think he’s one of the best in the world. He’s certainly one of the best sprinters but he has no versatility which bit him in the ass. I absolutely agree though we need immediate results for swimming to grow a mainstream audience. Also if it was anyone but Michael Andrew I’d probably be more upset if they were left off the team so I think at some point FINA needs to throw out all the nonsense and just say 2 per event aside from the 100 and 200 free whether it’s Olympic or Worlds year.
He's the national record holder in 100 breast and has one of the fastest 200IM times ever. Lifetime best of 50.8 in 100 fly is also elite. He just had an off meet.
@@ebelsa He is also incredibly inconsistent in those events and very obviously does not train properly for them seen by his extreme inability to maintain speed or have any kind of race strategy aside from sprinting until he dies. He’s an very gifted swimmer but I don’t believe he’s in the same category as a Michael Phelps, Katie Ledecky, Leon Marchand, or Kate Douglass.
Time to add the 50's to the olympics. Top 2 go top 6 in relays. If they need to add a day to the swimming program for the Olympics so be it. Should not be a huge deal to overlap with Track and field for one day. Problem fixed, confusion gone.
Great video 👍🏼
I even think its kinda unfair for a 5th or 6th swimmer at the nationals to most likely be able to win an olympic gold medal. It doesnt feel deserved if we compare it to the Situation with Andrew
Would be easy to add the 50's at the Olympics...
Do the 200 Free relays not have alternates?
If by 200 you mean 800 freestyle relays then yes, they have the roster allotment but can often have overlap.
IE: Phelps, Lochte, Ledecky, etc
Clear as mud :)
He got screwed - period paragraph and the rules are crazy stupid 🤬
Here's the answer: In the Olympics, get rid of the useless semifinals and instead get the extra TV footage by adding stroke 50s. Why in the world make the Olympics an endurance test by making swimmers swim every race 3 times instead of 2 times? 2 times is enough! Especially because crazy qualifying times make for only ~20 swimmers in the prelims of some events, making semifinals mostly redundant with prelims anyway. Remove semifinals and add stroke 50s to the Olympics!!
Wait so for the 800 and 400 relay of the US wins gold do the swimmers who competed in prelims but not finals also get a gold medal?
They do, prelim swimmers get medals as well.
Not a big deal. Blown out of proportion.
Team USA is prioritizing the money they will make off each swim and not the overall performer. People lose money and sponsors for not going to these big time meets.
Why is there any limit on team size? That's what FINA A standards exist for.
Now this brings me back as to how Michael phelps was able to swim the 4x100 relay every olympics. He didn't swim it at trials, so did someone just scratch to get him on the team? And how was the olympic team okay with a non- freestyler swimming that relay. Obviously it worked out for him, but it is just confusing organization.
Non freestyler? U ever watch dude do the 200 meter free? everyone needed Phelps on their relays
@@a.p.w.1aski644 true true. But the 100 free wasn’t his specialty. He obviously did very well in those relays and in everything he swam, I am just confused by the technicalities.
Coaches get final say in relays, therefore they can select any person on the roster to swim. Also he had shown he had a faster time than the relay swimmers at some point (whether at a prior meet or at training camp).
@@benjamindillon8135 ohhh okay. Thanks for clearing that up!
The coaches yanked Gary Hall Jr off the 400 free relay at the Athens Olympics, because they didn’t like him, when he was clearly fast enough, and the resulting squad lost to both the South Africans and the Dutch. Hall’s prelims split was faster then both Ian Crocker and Michael Phelps in the final. That move showed how favoritism and power plays were more important than raw speed for those coaches.
I feel so sorry for Michael. The selection criterias are insane stupid.
There’s no beef there is none at all. Michael andrews literal workout Is 25s he can swim a good 100 but chooses not too and not even mention the fact that he’s not in contention in the 100s is dumb HES EVEN MADE THE TEAM LAST YEAR IN THE 1 FLY AND 1 BREAST it’s clear that it’s his training and he’s arrogant even my coach has exposed his own workouts only being 25s he’s just dug himself into this no one to blame but himself
Michael was training for 50s for this meet. He didn't achieve season bests at this meet so can assume he didn't taper fully, which is bad luck. In fact it's stupid to have national championships 4 weeks before. USA needs to get like the UK and hold them in April. If you want to be good at 50s, only need 25s at effort, drills and gym. You make a training decision at the beginning of the season, so it is not his fault as that decision was based on the original criteria set out by USA swimming, which USA swimming then changed.
USRPT is more effective for most people. You can train less, get the same results and have more fun by sprinting.
@@alexblack2314 ok buddy common knowledge if he knows himself when trials are since he competed last year and the dates come out like months ahead he should know how his taper is even being a pro since the age of 14 he should know how his body reacts to certain conditions. Michael Andrew just needs to stop being incompetent I've seen one of his workouts his workouts aren't certainly showing he can last in 100s considering he should be USA's top men's 100 breastroker and loosing to a 30 year old dude its outrageous. He needs to man up take some initiative towards his racing and train fr
my brain shut down after the one min mark 😭
same here to be honest
1:50 😂 many club swimmers do the 1500 in long course season, what makes them think pro swimmers cant? like you said, it took way too long. bs
In short, however, MA was out of shape for worlds. His 50's were so-so, only and his 100 fly and 100 breast were WAY OFF HIS BEST TIMES. He did not even swim the 200 IM (I think), and event he should be a natural in. Who else in the world has world class speed in all 4 strokes (other than Leon)? I agree with another commenter that he, like many, need to move training to places like ASU or Longhorn. I would prefer ASU, if I were him. Tempe is nice and the environment is excellent foe mentoring.
out of shape for "worlds trials" that is.
MA should train with UF or ASU tbh….
I will tell u what stop allowing other countries to train in our university if they intend on representing other or home countries like Leon Marchand that whooped our ass in worlds this past week.
Just stop taking 6 guys Into relays. 4 is enough
Kyle are you still trying to make triala
Been dealing with an injury, but am headed to the pool as we speak 🤝
@@Sockwell lfg kyle
he better work on that IM
Rise of the Meritocracy 😊
Kyle. Not such a good comparison...football to swimming. IMO.
Not taking the fasted swimmer on the PLANET makes perfect sense. Bring the 5th and 6th fastest swimmers to an event so that your top 4 swimmers don't have to swim and can have a break from swimming makes perfect sense. STUPID
Why add more events? It's not really a question of gender. It's simply tradition. Women don't have to prove that they can swim longer distances. How course they can. Do we swim a mile just to prove that we can? No.