At the start of the 2016 Olympics it seemed as if four years was a long time in the Swimming world. In London 2012, the Australian swim team had produced our worst performance at an Olympics in 20 years.
This result led to major ramifications with the Bluestone review indicating a ‘toxic culture’ the major cause of a one gold medal return among ten medals.
Following this review and the installation of the highly regarded Jacco Verhaeren as head coach, it was firmly believed that Australia would improve dramatically in the pool. Many suggested Rio 2016 could be our most successful Olympic swim meet ever.
Following the first day of competition this seemed entirely possible when two gold medals were won. However after eight days of competition, Australia delivered just three gold among ten medals, the same total number of medals won in London.
There is little doubt that at Rio 2016 the attitude of the team had improved dramatically. There were no meltdowns on pool deck and the team appeared united, supporting each other rather than being individuals.
Our athletes were well drilled at handling both victory and defeat with class and dignity. So with an improved team spirit and culture where did our hopes in Rio go wrong? Did the Australian media build up our swimmers to be better than they really were?
In its Rio 2016 preview, International publication ‘Swimming World Magazine’ predicted that Australia would win eight Gold, five Silver and seven Bronze for a total of 20 medals. This indicated that our hopes of a vast improvement were being echoed among the international swimming fraternity and not just within the Australian community. To say that we fell short of such lofty predictions is a massive understatement.
Some of our athletes produced stellar performances that exceeded our wildest expectations. Unfortunately there were just as many, if not more, disappointments and missed opportunities. No one can question our swimmers’ abilities given their times at our Australian trials. Similarly no one can question their efforts, doing their absolute best on the day.
So what went wrong?
I firmly believe the answer lies with Swimming Australia and their continued belief in holding our selection trials early in the year. This usually occurs 3-4 months prior to the year’s major swimming event.
The theory behind this approach, from my understanding, is to allow our selected swimmers enough time to perform another training cycle and full taper between events. By contrast, the US swim team held their selection trials just a few weeks before the Olympics.
As a result the US selected in-form athletes that were ready to perform.
The dominance of the US team is obvious from their final medal tally of 16 Gold among 33 medals. The clear advantage in their selection approach, however, is seen when comparing each individual athletes performance at the Olympics compared to their selection trials.
In 52 individual swims (when counting a swimmers final swim in any event) the US saw an improved performance in 27. There were 15 performances that regressed, while ten swims were equivalent to those done at trials.
By contrast, in the 49 individual swims performed by Australians only eight performances improved. There were seven equivalent efforts while an enormous 34 swims had regressed since our April selection trials.
It is obvious our athletes were in better form four months before the Olympics began.
There will be other reasons given for our failure to meet expectation. An inability to deal with pressure, the late start of the swimming finals session and illness in the team, are a few already mentioned in the immediate aftermath.
However when only 31% of our swims were equivalent or better than trials, compared to 71% for the US swim team it is clear that we need a fundamental change in our selection processes. The US team always peaks at international competition whereas in most instances Australian swimmers fall short.
It is time for Swimming Australia to make a tough decision. The time has come to move to a successful selection system that is equivalent to the US model. Our swimmers have amazing talent and ability; they deserve to perform at their peak when it really matters.
Lee
Guest
Not a word about poor pacing. This will never be acknowledged and will be swept under the carpet. Trials are not the big issue.
Marcus
Guest
Your stat that 31% of our swims were equivalent or better than trials compared to 71% for the US team is flawed - in that you have omitted one very important fact. Australian swimmers taper for trials whilst US swimmers come to trials under load. So the US are far more likely to improve their times from trials once they taper. Leaving that aside, the 31% number in isolation is the most disappointing aspect of Australia's performance. Compare that to our track runners, especially the middle and long distance competitors - who are producing PBs left and right. Very disappointing for our swimmers.
Michele
Guest
The Australian people put in good money for our athletes, especially our swimmers and their attitude stinks.
John W
Guest
Agreed. Baffling.
Alexander Grabkowski
Guest
Agree, 100 per cent. However, an inability to adjust to competitive intensity leading to performance decline is not only evident in swimming but also with the remainder of Australian team sports notably, field hockey and in the specialist sports such as cycling and rowing. More often than not, these sports have been the support acts to swimming when it came to the medals. It is noticeable that there has been a significant decline in both the technical aspects and skills mindset with such these sports and as other competitive nations continue to narrow the gap in performance (and many even exceeding the gap) Australia has struggled step up to the next level. When you send out massive sized teams of Olympians as Australia continued to do over the years; you can not help but think that there are a significant number of athletes that realistically will not be figuring in the medals. Maybe, not even be up to the required international standard. Yes, by all means send athletes by virtue of their youth and obvious potential but let's be more critical in our team and individual selections. There comes a time when you need to be realistic and accept the fact that Australia can not match the heavy weights of the Olympics. If it were a business, the return on investment would be grossly unacceptable and we'd walk away. Otherwise, what are we trying to tell the rest of the world - we're living in a fool's paradise to think otherwise.
Timbo
Guest
'But don’t worry, the tripe called the Commonwealth Games will come around, Australia will win 15 golds by beating up on Canada, and England, and all will be right and we can begin hyping them again for tokyo' Seeing as if it wasn't for Ledeke, Britain would have had as many Golds as Aus in Rio, I wouldn't be quite so dismissive of the Commonwealth Games if I was you. Here's a prediction. Britain are a very young team and will win more Golds at the Tokyo Olympics in SWIMMING than Australia. Seeing as swimming ranks somewhere around Mongolian throat warbling in British sporting priorities that would be the ultimate humiliation.
Brendon
Guest
"This result led to major ramifications with the Bluestone review indicating a ‘toxic culture’ the major cause of a one gold medal return among ten medals." Thats part of the problem. The Bluestone review was completely useless and achieved nothing. Toxic culture was a bad look and against the spirit of the Olympics but it wasnt the cause of poor swimming in 2012. "There is little doubt that at Rio 2016 the attitude of the team had improved dramatically. There were no meltdowns on pool deck and the team appeared united, supporting each other rather than being individuals." Another problem. Swimming is not a team sport. Actually, its an incredibly individualistic sport. The idea that everyone has to be BFF's and love each other to perform in the pool is idiotic. The deep seated problems with Swimming Australia are the problems that lead the Bluestone review to be completely useless. Australia will continue to make the same problems at the Olympics in swimming unless there is a complete overhaul of Swimming Australia and the culture of the swimmers living in a bubble world then thrust in front of the media every four years who then proceed to act like deer caught in the headlights.
JVGO
Guest
Magnussen got hammered for winning silver by 1/100th of a second and you're praising these swimmers for the manner in which they won nothing? Something is wrong here. I agree silver is pretty much as good as gold as far as I'm concerned but no one ever told the Missile that. He was vilified for overhyping himself and taking a legal sleeping pill. No wonder the kids are afraid.
Ian Hogg
Roar Rookie
Thanks for your comment! I definitely agree with respect to McEvoy and Campbell. They performed really well in the relays indicating no issue with form. My concern is the pure volume of our swimmers that performed were worse (69%) and by large margins. To me Seebohm seemed out of form indicated by her 200 m backstroke time - 3 seconds off that at trials. Even Hocking in the same event was 1.5 seconds off her trials time in the final .. a large distance in that event. There are many others I could mention too. I definitely agree with regard to how they handled such disappointments!
Ian Hogg
Roar Rookie
Thanks for your comment! I definitely agree we do not do enough racing. Another issues with the trials being so early is that all the state championships are held prior to the trials. This leaves our swimmers with practically no racing for 4 months before the Olympics - unless they travel to world cup meets around the world.
Ian Hogg
Roar Rookie
Thanks for your comment! I definitely agree that there were some mental issues with some of our performances - Campbell and McEvoy most notably. However a number of our swimmers were full seconds outside their times at trials. This indicates to me they were simply out of form. If we held the trials closer to the Olympics they would've at least had some competitive racing close to the main event. We would have had athletes that were in form and battle hardened. The times required for our swimmers to make the team at trials are highly competitive and if they performed those times at the Olympics our overall performance would've improved dramatically. You do raise a very valid point with regard to last years world championships. Our tally was highly inflated as the U.S did not send a full team. Many of their athletes opted not to compete at the World Championships but instead at the U.S National Championships which were held almost simultaneously.
1st&10
Guest
Trials should be held about three weeks before games . -- Comment from The Roar's iPhone app.
10 cx
Guest
After London they sacked everyone, wrote great long reports about how to fixit, bought in a new leader (sacked him), bought in a second one from sailing to show the way. It would appear that he leadership bought in got it wrong!! What about sacking all the new ones bought in and get some people with some swimming knowledge back into the leadership as well as some coaches that give some tough love instead of all the PC rubbish that seems to put them off their game.
balanced
Guest
Agree totally NOIP. You can hold the trials in April, July, or on Christmas day, and it won't change the fact that the real problem is that Australians don't handle pressure when they are expected to win. They never have, and it is not just a swimming thing. The timing of the trials didn't worry Horton or Chalmers, they just didn't have the pressure of favouritism. Cate Campbell broke the bleeding OR in her heat and again in the semi. Her failures after that were purely mental, and have nothing to do with trial dates. And we always do ok in relays, because they involve a shared responsibility rather than pressure on one person. Greg Norman, Pat Rafter, Deek and Monners, and countless others over the years are examples of Australians crumbling under pressure when they only had to execute. Other nationalities lift when the ultimate challenge arrives, but too many of our athletes freeze. Groves and McKeon (T) were fastest qualifiers into their finals, but instead of being buoyed by that, they got weighed down by expectation and overtaken by others who did lift. The timing of the trials didn't stop them swimming great in the heats and semis, and had nothing to do with them losing the finals. The men's 1500m yesterday was a classic. The two Italians and the American all swam their PBs, one of them shaving 5 seconds off his best time. Our guy was TEN seconds outside his PB. The worst thing about this swim meet was how some consultants no doubt with sociology degrees had persuaded everyone that being really really nice was the answer. If Americans are beaten, they go home and kick the cat. We do team meetings and group hugs and congratulate the winners and all this other touchy feeley nonsense that perpetuates a losing culture. As does having our commentators talking about what a great/brave/gutsy effort our swimmer was putting in as they limped home in 7th place well off their previous best. "Nice guys finish last" is as true today as it always has been. I'm sure that there will be another enquiry, and by Tokyo our swimmers will be told to hold hands and sing Kumbaya, and wait at the end of each lap to help out slower competitors. And they might even change the trial dates. But nothing will change what really matters. America has a culture that fosters winners. We have a culture that fosters doubt, fear and insecurity,
jameswm
Roar Guru
I can see the logic in having the trials 4 months out. It gives the swimmers time to go back and do another couple of blocks of hard work, and taper into the Olympics. With the US system, they have time for maybe 1 week recovery, 2 weeks of hard work, and 2 weeks of sharpening. However, that is in theory. In practice, our swimmers not only have time to improve, they also have time to go off the boil. They could do another 2-3 months of buildup before the trials, then sharpening and fine tune before the Olympics. The one I really don't understand is Cate Campbell. WR 405 weeks ago during hard work or maybe an easy few days, she was on fire. So what happened there? Why was the 50 free poor again (losing from a winning position), when she then backs up and blasts them in the medley relay an hour later? That suggests nothing wrong with the preparation or form - but something else. For me - the Campbells, McEvoy and Seebohm were massive disappointments - but shows fantastic character in defeat. Massively impressed with this aspect - and to those above - this is certainly not the sign of a loser. It is a sign of character, which is more important than winning or losing. I'd rather a grounded silver medallist than a gold medal tosser. One other thing - we only got one more gold after the first day of swimming.
Harvey Wilson
Roar Rookie
Are the Aussies lulled into a false sense of security given that the Comm Games results are so skewed in their favour? They think they are better on the competitive stage than they are? Adding the USA and Europe to the competition makes a difference.
Jockosaurus
Guest
It also seems the Aussies simply don't do enough racing. Seppos beat us off the blocks and on the turns every time.
no one in particular
Roar Guru
It's not the timing of the trials. When Australia wins the trials are not put in question. The issue is mental. You just have to watch their interveiws after the races, they accept defeat too easily. It seems as though the sports psychologist has taught them how to handle defeat, and therefore they become accepted to it. You wouldn't hear Perkins or Thorpe react that way It's also the competition they compete in. In last years world championships, USA, Australia and China won 20 golds between them. In the Olympics, they won 20 again. The difference is what the US put more weight in to. The Australians need to move away from focusing on one meet a year. They need to nead into the US college system - great coaches, great facilities and most importantly frequent world class competition. Katinka Hosszu and Joseph Schooling are two that are in the college system and won gold at Rio. Train with the best But don't worry, the tripe called the Commonwealth Games will come around, Australia will win 15 golds by beating up on Canada, and England, and all will be right and we can begin hyping them again for tokyo
spruce moose
Guest
I agree with the general premise of this article. I've got no problem with Australian's being beaten by the best but only if they were beaten by the best. Sadly, in many, many cases, we weren't beaten by the best, but were beaten by themselves. Hats off to the Americans though. Their best swimming haul since 1984, and that was a boycott games.
spruce moose
Guest
Agreed