Master motivator John Bertrand behind Australia's Rio resurgence

Let's look at the current Aussie favourites; W50 Free W100 Free W100 Back W200 Back W4X100 free W4x100 med M100 free M400 free M100 back M200 back Now if we won 6 golds here, we would be very happy & huge improvement on London. I did not even mention the others where we are close but not favourites. As for Sullivan, I remember him & Bernard swapping world records leading to 2008 Olympics so not heavy favourite like Maggie in 2012 or McEvoy in 2016. I also don't see McEvoy coming back to the field like Maggie, someone needs to step up, which at this point no-one showing that ability.

We beg to differ, fair enough so be it, this is an opinion site. For every for argument there is an against argument You stated that up front, however, while you think there is a chance Sjostrom can swim out of her skin to beat the Campbell sisters, you don't see the same opportunity for McKeon against Sjostrom & Ledecky in the 200. You argue about McKeon & others not handling the pressure, but you put hopes on Franklin upsetting Seebohm in the back, when her best was 4 years ago. Franklin could do it, but so could McKeon, this is my point. C2 is fragile, she swam a near PB with injury concerns, now thinking if she was fully fit for Rio, she would be way ahead of Sjostrom.

Re McEvoy and 100free; we said the same about Sullivan then about Magnussen. His name isn't yet engraved on that medal. Re that relay, I'd also add BRA to that list. Abood actually is more reliable than some of the others. Re Roberts, whilst its a great story, the issue in question is his capacity to "do the business" in intl competition. Not buying that the shoulder issues were a significant impediment during 2011-2012. M200free is just a very difficult race to predict. They could be "players" or just as likely one of them could miss the final. M4X200 - whilst McEvoy is stellar in 100 relays, his record over 200 relays is very erratic. Smith DID impress last year & TFH usually reliable. However would not trust McKeonD in the kiddies paddling pool. Hansford - senior team rookie and Chalmers only intl outing in this discipline was 2015 World Juniors where he was less than stellar. He has certainly advanced but this is also a non-optimal distance for him so he carries a certain "risk factor" in this relay that is absent for the 100 relay I see Horton as a clear contender in both 400 & 1500 but these races may be raced very differently to his domestic swims. He is very metronomic but whilst his diesel engine is very powerful and he can maintain that 3rd gear, how does he react to surges ? I still have a degree of caution with him after Kazan. I see the M100back as being very close; Larkin is clearly a major player but I'd prefer the 'each way bet". He was certainly dominant in the 200 in Kazan and he probably deserves favouritism. However his 1.53.9, whilst formidable, isn't exactly shutting the gate on the competition. He'll need to get everything right in Rio to win. Concur re M4XMED; USA as prohibitive favourites in this one as their women in 4X200 and AUS W4X100. In fact, my final comment re Larkin rings true for ALL of AUS gold medal prospects; which most certainly we have. None are stone cold certainties and they WILL need to get everything right when it counts to win. Hopefully some, maybe most can/will but fate isn't always kind.

Response as follows No one's name, not even the likes of Katie Ledecky, is yet engraved on any Rio medals. NO relay medal can ever be seen as a "sure thing". Whilst the AUS W4X100 IS dominant, they very nearly ballsed it up in Kazan with C2 cutting it extraordinarily fine on her changeover. W50free. C1 clearly the favourite but she has to do it on the night. This is her 3rd Olympics and the previous two weren't necessarily kind to her. She IS, most certainly a very different competitor to the 2012 vintage but both she and C2 remain very fragile physically and health wise. To medal, C2 would need to break 24 and as yet, she hasn't done so. W100free: have to dissent re Sjostrom; her PB stacks up very well with C2's. C1's PB is fastest, sure, but it cannot always be taken as read that they will swim it in the big final. There are currently 3 consistent sub53 swimmers, all named above, and unless there is a new player at the table in Rio; I see the medals as being between those three and it could be in any order. W200free: will need to see how the US trials pan out as to whether any other American other than Ledecky looks a major factor. Medal race esp for bronze may be very fluid. McKeon may or may not be at that party. Concur re Ashwood. Wback: If Wilson swims to her 2015 levels then she WILL be a major factor but as yet, she has not been sub59 this year. Leaving aside the Americans, Hosszu & Nielsen are major players. Franklin was on top of her game in 2013 but had problems since. Think 200back her best option, think the 200 a very open affair Wbrs: Bohl has had a great season but Rio will be her senior debut; always a very big 'variable factor". Would take final as a good outcome. Potentially a significant strengthening of the medley relay but again, how will the nerves play out ? They certainly sunk McKeown & McKeon in Kazan Wfly: 100 was a very slow race in Kazan and not really a particularly great guide for this year. We would need to see what comes out of US Trials to see a fuller picture but the race is already looking quicker. McKeon's advance is very positive but would think she's need considerably advance to be in the medals. Groves swam similar times at last year's Trials so no real advance. Concur re IM W4X200: the inescapable fact is that after McKeon & Barratt; it falls right away to 1.58s (OK Groves was a smidge below). Whilst Coutts & Evans were options for this relay in the past, they haven't any recent times on the board in this event. This relay missed the medals in Kazan and doesn't really look any advance in quality. W4XMED: AUS were considered the favourites by many in Kazan but for better or worse, McKeown & McKeon "froze". Bohl & McKeon's advances since then are most definitely major positives but races aren't won "on paper". They're very much "at the party" but they'll all need to put it together on the night.

Much that I can agree with. Whilst the Europeans will not have the cross the board depth of the USA (and to a lesser degree AUS); many have either specific areas of strength and/or 1-2 exceptional performers who will bring them in results (up to and including golds). The international "mover" that you have actually overlooked is JAP whose depth appears to be widening considerably on both male & female sides, away from just having specific areas of strength. Notably AUS & JAP have formed somewhat of an mutual relationship in recent years. Where I will take issue with you is regarding RSA. Whilst it continues to produce some high performers; their women's side has completely falled away (0 Rio qualifiers); the adminisation is a complete mess and most RSA swimmers (with the exception of VDB & LeClos) have to take the US NCAA route. Where I fully agree with you is the frank realisation that the years of plenty that existed Syd-Beijing are over and its a return to normal programming. The public funding $$$ is only going to decrease and corporate $$ will remain transient. AUS will continue to produce some exception talents; some of whom will realise that potential whilst others (for whatever reasons) may not. Medals at the very top of international competition will be be very hard earned and AUS is only one of many significant players.

England, most of Europe especially France, Netherlands and Spain. The Scandy nations, Eastern Europe and Canada are making a resurgence while China although not 'Western' are now up there with the US and Russia. We have assisted China as they have employed Australian coaches as have England and Brazil. I reckon Saffa could also be one to watch over the next decade, as they have always been solid performers in the pool. My point is we should not assume to own swimming together with the US as we once did, despite the sports historically strong DNA here. We will struggle to maintain our status over ensuing years as it has become far more accessible to historically non swimming nations, where its profile has been raised.

That should read Roberts 2 shoulder surgeries & now getting near best. This was one of the best stories of the trials.

Men; McEvoy, barring some freakish swim in the US or Chinese trials, will win the 100 & very competitive in the 50 & 200. If TFH is at his best, his time is faster then James Guy, who is favourite for 200 & TFH has shown better signs then Franklin (200 women back) of late. Horton will break WR & win the 400 in Rio, he has much stiffer competition in the 1500, no-one knows what is happening with Sun Yang, but there are Italians & Americans here, but Horton will be right amongst it. Larkin will be very strong favourite for the 200 back & pending US trials a mild favourite for 100 back. No other male swimmer will win a medal, maybe Chalmers a smookie for medal in the 100. The relays; 4x100 in no particular order US, Australia & France the favourites, with McEvoy, fastest swimmer by a fair margin pending some more trials, Chalmers, finalist in 100, Magnussen, much will depend on his mindset to only be a relay swimmer, Roberts, a great story, 2 shoulder injuries & getting near his best, when he failed at int'l levels due to undiagnosed shoulder issues. 4X200 US favourite, but Aussies not far behind, McEvoy, TFH, McKeon, Smith, Chalmers, Horton, Hansford makes a squad strong both in quality & depth. 4X100 med No butterflyer, would need mark improvements here. But 2 other very strong legs & decent other. US are strong favourites.

Safest gold bet is W4X100 you could put you house on it. Seebohm is favourite in W100back, Wilson probably 2nd favourite. Both Seebohm & Hocking could medal or But for me Seebohm again is favourite to win, if Franklin is back to her best of 2012, she will upset the cattle cart, but has not gone near it in 4 years now. W50free was a slow event in Kazan, will almost certainly need sub24 to medal. Realistically only Cate Campbell breaks 24 regularly & would be strong favourite & C2 is up there for a medal. Either C1 or C2 could win W100free and look likely medallists but Sjostrom would need to swim so far above her best to even compete. W200free. McKeon is in the mix but behind Ledecky & Sjostrom, would need a Sjostrom like swim in the 100 to beat these 2.. W4X200 needs to find another swimmer after McKeon, Barrett & Groves, they have swimmers like Coutts, Evans Cook & even Ashwood to maybe improve their chances.. Ashwood is very much in the scrum for minor medals in 400 & 800 but there are at least a handful in the same catergory. Ledecky is just so far out in front. W breaststroke: if Bohl can continue her progress then she’s a solid medal chance, but more importantly improves the medley relay.. Wfly: If McKeon can continue her progress then she’s a solid medal chance, but more importantly improves the medley relay.. Groves is a big improver here, but needs to improve her int'l competition swims. Wmed: Coutts I think her Gold medal was winning at the trials to compete at the Olympics. Evans likewise, both had serious injuries. W4XMED: The best bookends, Bohl’s & McKeon's (who both had massive breakout campaigns at the trials) has this team up there with China & US (pending trials) as the favourites. I now no longer see huge deficits on brs/fly legs to either of these countries.

Men: McEvoy could be a minor medal chance in 50free but 50s are always a crapshoot. A clear favourite in 100free but so were Sullivan & Magnussen. Chalmers will do well to make final. M4X100 - a medal maybe but nothing more. Roberts intl CV doesn't read very well and how will Magnussen's psyche handle being relegated to supporting cast ? They will need to drop over a second from their TT to medal. M200free: hard to read as it has been slow internationally in the past couple of years. If it drops below 1.45 then both TFH & McEvoy become outsiders; if its a 1.45 race then they may be chances. M4X200 - always reads well on paper but hasn't really fired for some years. Maybe a medal shot but my money is on US to fight back from losing in Kazan. Horton has swum brilliant times in both 400 & 1500 but he did the same last year. For all the "illness", he was still able to nab bronze in the race that didn't count (800). He's clearly a major contender in both and could win ..... but is far from a sure bet. McKeonD = serial "tourist". McLoughlin swam a great 1500 PB at Trials but anything he may produce in Rio would be a bonus. Larkin is probably more likely to win the 200back but will need to swim to at least 1.53 flat. He's clearly well in the medal mix at 100 but its likely to be a very tight race. Packard did well to make 100brs final in Kazan but will most likely have to swim nearly 0.5sec faster in Rio to repeat that achievement Irvine & Morgan unlikely to survive semis over either 100 or 200fly. TFH has a chance of making 400IM final but his poor backstroke precludes anything more M4XMED: like the women, they probably possess the best bookends but whilst Packard may not haemorrhage too much on brs; fly is where they are giving away something like 1.5sec. Even McEvoy heroics have limits.

"I have as much right to gauge your pride and passion as you have to gauge my column" Um, no. For the simple reason that, whereas I can read your column in its completeness, you know nothing about me other than I've critiqued your writing. And let's be honest, I'm hardly on my own on The Roar in that regard. I find it interesting that while I've critiqued your writing, you've attacked me personally (despite not knowing a thing about me). Speaks volumes about your character don't you think... And assuming some Australian swimmers win medals in Rio, I'll be cheering them on. Just like any other Australian sports fan. But you go right ahead and give all the kudos to some administration mates of yours instead. That is your right.

Ok, this is my read. We really need to wait until after US Trials to have a better read of the various events Safest gold bet is W4X100 (if they don't break and they can keep C1 & C2 fit and healthy. Seebohm is a probable favourite in W100back but hardly "owns it". If Wilson can swim to her 2015 level then she could medal. Both Seebohm & Hocking could medal or even win W200back but much will depend on whether Franklin is back to her best or not. W50free was a slow event in Kazan, will almost certainly need sub24 to medal. Realistically only one Campbell can medal and Cate (C1) is probable favourite. 50's are always lotteries and one mistake and you're done. Either C1 or C2 could win W100free and look likely medallists but Sjostrom could just as easily win as them. W200free. McKeon should make final but suspect medals will be decided at least a 2nd faster. Barratt = always erratic performer. W4X200 falls away badly beyond them, no medal certs. Ashwood is very much in the scrum for minor medals in 400 & 800 but there are at least a handful in the same catergory. W breaststroke: if Bohl can continue her progress then she's a solid chance of making the 100final; medal = unlikely. If McKeown can hold it together in Rio (failed to do so in Kazan) then she should make 200final; would need a sub 2.20 to medal and currently a second of two away. Wfly: If McKeon swims to her best then she should make 100final. Throssell was 4th in 200 in Kazan but event likely to be faster in Rio. Regrettably Groves record has been one of stellar domestic times but failing to swim near that level in international competition. Wmed: Coutts could well make 200final but likely to be a second or two outside medals. Evans could make 400final if she can drop to 4.34 or better. W4XMED: Despite having the best bookends, brs & fly imploded in Kazan leaving C2 too much ground to pull back on CHN & SWE. Bohl's progress is very positive from a relay perspective and if McKeon swims well; they are very good chances to win. However CHN is solid across the board and US will be hurting after missing the Kazan podium; the key will be gaining maximum ground on back and keeping any deficits on brs/fly down to below a second going into the anchor leg

I think from the London trials we had 1 individual favourite in Magnussen & 1 relay based on Magnessuen in the 4 x100. For Rio, we have McEvoy (100), Campbell sisters (50 & 100) , Larkin (100 & 200), Seebolm (100 & 200) & Horton (400). Not to mention the W 4x100, 4X100 med, plus the I see a huge differences between London & Rio.

Which western nations?

There are some medal chances even outside chances like Mckeon Emma, Groves, Horton, Men's 4x100 & 4x200 who while not favourites could just as easily end up with gold medals.

I don't reckon Swimming will continue to maintain the medal status it has in the past for Australia. Our expectations in this respect are far too high, including yours David. Many western nations have either caught up or overtaken us and while we will continue to be a solid swimming nation in a sport that evokes traditional, environmental and cultural affinity, this is no longer enough, also evidenced by our world Tennis pedigree decline. Medals at this elite tier, are only going to be get harder to come by, truth be told.

There HAS been a cultural change, for the better, in the AUS swimming team post London but I'm struggling to see how Mr Bertrand deserves any specific credit. The "house cleaning" of problematic individuals in both swimmer and coaching ranks was already under way before he took this (non-executive) role. If anything, his public handling of the most serious issue to face AUS Swimming during his presidency; that of sexual abuse allegations, was rather maladroit. Certainly his initial announcement almost came across as an attempt at deflection. Mr Bertrand WAS an outstanding yachtsman and clearly possessed certain man management skills which aided his acheivements in this field. However, just how much impact DO speeches from talking heads have on the actual performance of the elite sportsman ? Some DO seek the services of sports psychologists but these sessions are tailored to their own specific situations. There performances (or non performances) in Rio will be the result of their own talents; the quality of the preparation which centres on the work done by themselves and the coaches/staff who specifically work with them; their fitness/health at the time ...... and the circumstances of the events themselves. As regarding London; was it really the disaster results-wise that it was painted or just a "return to normal programming" after the years of plenty (and the Sydney/Athens generation passed from the scene ? There was most certainly a toxic atmosphere due to poor management and problematic individuals/conduct but would the hue and cry have been as loud had a couple of those silvers (ie Seebohm, Magnussen, Coutts, Sprenger) been golds ? The 10 swimming medals (with one gold) from London looks paltry compared to the Sydney/Athens/Beijing tallies but when you look back through the Games preceeding; LA, Barcelona & Atlanta had tallies of 12 medals and having to wait until the last day of swimming competition to snare gold. There most certainly WERE negative inputs that impacted London but lets also be clear that the face of world swimming has been changing. The "old firm" of USA & AUS may still remain powerful (esp USA) but the spread of nations with areas of specific strength is far wider and these impact the medal lists. Whilst there is most certainly good reasons for confidence re the AUS swim team in Rio; nobody's name has yet been engraved on any medals. Illness and injury can "take out" anyone from a rank amateur from Burkina Faso to a Katie Ledecky, Michael Phelps or Cameron McEvoy. There is only one event where an Australian or AUS relay is clearly dominant and that is the W4X100 ..... and even they can be brought down by illness/injuries or "breaking". A number of Australian swimmers such as Seebohm, Larkin, McEvoy or either Campbell COULD walk away from Rio with gold medals but none are cold certainties and could just as easily end up with minor coin.

Slane, I think the comment about pride was a dig at me. Apparently DL knows me so well he is able to critique my level of pride and passion. You know, because I criticized his article...

"Pathetic, pitiful, and categorically wrong, but then that’s your track record." Oh dear. Still haven't addressed my point at all DL - the athletes are the ones who perform, not the administrators. Perhaps you could regather some semblance of credibility if you wrote an article about how the next generation of swimmers are performing. But no, you take the opportunity to reminisce about Bertand's achievements in sailing. "In an hour-long interview, Bertrand constantly heaped praise on his teammates, his support crew, and those he competed against – his motivational assets clearly evident." Wow, that's groundbreaking stuff there - praise the people around you. I wonder why nobody else has thought to do that... There's a fairly obvious characteristic in pretty much all your columns of late DL - reminisce about things that happened years (or decades) ago, whine about what's going on today - with the obvious inference that everything was better "back in the day" - and then list some stats that sometimes have some vague link to the point of the article, and sometimes don't. You come across as one of those grumpy old men who shout at clouds. Just like talented athletes often don't know when to retire, you seem to keep punching out articles on the Roar long after you've peaked as a writer. To keep writing is obviously your right of course - but what constant surprises me is The Roar continues to publish them. There are many talented contributors to this site - but unfortunately you're not one of them. It's always sad to see the decline of talent. I wish you well in retirement. May it be a long and healthy one!