Emma McKeon Leads Aussie Rankings Rush In 57.3 As 1st Four Flyers Home Crack 58sec

Emma McKeon - courtesy of Swimming Australia

The second day of Aussie nationals in Sydney produced an upset of veterans, a rush on the 100m butterfly rankings led by Emma McKeon that highlighted the highs and lows of coming from a country that does a fine job at honing swimming excellence and another chance for Grant Hackett to make the cut for world titles seven years beyond his last outing as a Dolphin

Want to read more? Our Basic subscription package allows you to access
to all articles barring specific content for Premium and Business
members. Select which service best suits you. Thank you for your
support of independent journalism and quality coverage of world-class swimming.

Log In Register

The second day of Aussie nationals in Sydney produced an upset of veterans, a rush on the 100m butterfly rankings led by Emma McKeon that highlighted the highs and lows of coming from a country that does a fine job at honing swimming excellence and another chance for Grant Hackett to make the cut for world titles seven years beyond his last outing as a Dolphin



some slow times being swum this evening, shame about Sprenger in the breastwork, but Packard will still get picked coz of the medley relay, unless Australia does not want to qualify a team for it

Viva la Bang

Yes the men!s medley is a good bet for fifth place at the moment, no back, fly or breast stand outs.


Packard will go if the cumulative time for the first place finisher in the 100s of each stroke beats the medley relay qualifying time outlined by Swimming Australia (3:36.41). If the winner of all other strokes are under or close to the individual A qualifying time they will all definitely go. Fly and Back will be near the time at the least, and the Free will likely be enough under to provide a buffer for the other strokes. Seems unlikely the time won’t be achieved albeit still possible.

Unfortunately Christian looks to have run out of time to get the work in after his injury. It’s not ideal in the run to Rio but better this year than next.


Actually on perusal of the selection policy for Swimming Australia the door is left ajar for Sprenger…

Medley Relay
i) The highest ranked available athlete in the 100m Freestyle, Backstroke, Breaststroke and Butterfly, provided their combined time meet the qualifying time listed in Appendix 1;
ii) A fifth swimmer, who is the highest ranked athlete not already qualified for the team in the 100m Freestyle, Backstroke, Breaststroke and Butterfly, provided the combined time of this swimmer with the highest ranked athlete in the other three strokes meet the qualifying time listed in Appendix 1.
iii) A sixth swimmer, who is the next highest ranked athlete not already qualified for the team in the 100m Freestyle, Backstroke, Breaststroke and Butterfly, provided the combined time of this swimmer, with the athlete selected under 2a ii, and the highest ranked athlete in the other two strokes meets the qualifying time listed in Appendix 1.


what was the time swum in the womens 100m back by Madi Wilson?

the report above is a bit too “fluffy” for my liking…

the live results and streaming aint working tonight either 🙁

Craig Lord

Verram – a live report is a work in progress – you will find the times there. Yes, the live timing is atrocious. Maddy was faster in heats, on 59.38, as reported.

Viva la Bang

=== Semi-Finals ===

1 WILSON, MADISON 20 STPET 59.38 59.59F 927
r:+0.64 29.16 59.59 (30.43)
2 SEEBOHM, EMILY 22 BROTH 1:00.28 59.87F 914
r:+0.64 28.59 59.87 (31.28)
3 BAKER, HAYLEY 19 MVC 1:01.36 1:00.78 874
r:+0.52 29.81 1:00.78 (30.97)
4 ATHERTON, MINNA 14 BGRAM 1:01.77 1:01.36 849
r:+0.64 29.62 1:01.36 (31.74)
5 SHERIDAN, MIKKA 20 BROTH 1:02.09 1:01.80 831
r:+0.67 30.43 1:01.80 (31.37)
6 BARRATT, HOLLY 27 ROC 1:02.90 1:02.18 816
r:+0.60 30.17 1:02.18 (32.01)
7 ABOOD, HAYLEY 25 SYDU 1:01.85 1:02.20 815
r:+0.65 29.96 1:02.20 (32.24)
8 WHITTAKER, SIAN 17 MVC 1:03.09 1:02.74 794
r:+0.68 30.93 1:02.74 (31.81)



It does leave the door ajar for Sprenger, as he has already FINA A time 58.87 last year, and Packard already has FINA A as well, so no problem if Australia wants to send two breaststrokers to Kazan.

My question is: What is this “FINA F” times on http://liveresults.swimming.org.au/sal/2015OPEN/

It looks like the time required to final in 2013 Barcelona. Is that one of those silly additional “tough qualifying times” by Australia?
Do swimmers need to go under that FINA F times?

Viva la Bang

Yes and the mens FINA 100m breast time was 59.92 so how can they send them??

Craig Lord

Viva – you are right… aswimfan, Australia always has its own selection times, so no 100mbr qualifier… the ‘fina’ time on the live results is the Australian cut,… official fina cuts are irrelevant in many leading swim nations – and stretch to A and B times, the B time achievable by vast shoals of swimmers in US, AUS, Europe, etc etc who never get to race in international waters but there to set a target for the development swimmers who do get to swim at world championships even though they are far from being elite swimmers, such is the way swimming is structured.


I’ve just read the selection criteria


2015 World Championships Qualifying Times
50m Freestyle 00:21.74 00:24.91
100m Freestyle 00:48.46 00:54.09
200m Freestyle 01:47.31 01:56.76
400m Freestyle 03:47.86 04:06.02
800m Freestyle 08:27.41
1500m Freestyle 15:00.48
100m Backstroke 00:53.81 01:00.24
200m Backstroke 01:57.37 02:09.84
100m Breaststroke 00:59.92 01:07.12
200m Breaststroke 02:10.01 02:24.68
100m Butterfly 00:51.78 00:58.44
200m Butterfly 01:56.10 02:07.86
200 IM 01:58.17 02:11.21
400 IM 04:15.81 04:37.77
4 x 100m Freestyle Relay 3:16.96 3:40.74
4 x 200m Freestyle Relay 7:14.87 7:58.91
4 x 100m Medley Relay 3:36.41 4:02.80

Crazy Aussies!

Viva la Bang

Its the way it is, Am sure Jake at just 20, will continue to get faster, and Christian at 29, could at least go 59.5 with a better prep!


Leah Neale went 4:06 yesterday, and she would not even go, despite swimming way under FINA A?
That is completely bonkers, don’t SAL want to give young swimmers like Neale a world championships experience before Olympics next year?

I understand that some leading nations have their own criteria, but never USA. USA send any two swimmers per event as long as they go under FINA A.

I feel Australia is damaging its long term prospects. FINA A times are tough enough, or if they want to make it a bit tougher go with Barcelona’s semis times like what the Canadians are doing, but Barcelona’s finals times?????


Yes, the times quoted as “Fina” on Swimming Australia results pages differ from those stated on Fina’s site under Kazan 2015 – Swimming Qualification Procedure

If the A&B times stated on this page are to be “taken as read”, then it would appear that Swimming Australia has gone their own way and set more stringent times ….. as now seeing it come back and bite them on the gluteus maximus.

Going off the Fina time, Packard made the A time but Sprenger missed. Both Seebohm & Ngawati made Fina A but not the AUS time. The same scenario is likely to arise tomorrow night in the W100BRS with no one likely to make the stated 1.07.12 qualifying time.

Whilst I can understand, and in many cases fully support, setting qualifying times inside the stated Fina A time; I feel this needs to be assessed event by event as there are some clear ‘gaps’ in both programs.

Will be curious as to how the selectors/powers that be address the number of “no qualifier” events ? Will they fall back on the stated Fina A times or are they going to stand firm …… and send a much smaller team ?


Viva La Bang,

FINA A time for men 100 breast is 1:00.44

Packard has 1:00.27 and Sprenger has 58.87 from last year’s championships (which is a FINA qualifying event http://www.fina.org/H2O/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4385&Itemid=1620


No wonder most aussies have their top times of the year during their trials and then flop during THE MEET THAT COUNTS.

with the exception of Campbells or Magnussen, other swimmers will have to fully peak and fully target the stupid qualifying times at the trials instead of preparing for worlds/olympics.


Kotuku Ngawati went a big personal PB and in my prediction would easily make it to semis in Kazan (her time of 2:11.96 would have finished 8th in Barcelona’s prelims) , and she would benefit from more international experience for next year, and she is not even going now?

This is beyond stupid. I think it’s insanity from the SAL part.


And I doubt Seebohm will even swim 200 IM in Kazan (she withdrew from final in Barcelona)


Anyway, I kept underestimating Hackett.


Hey, they’ve been having $$$$ problems so maybe a reduced team is a directive from the “bean-counters” at SAL Head Office ?? (snark).

Will agree with ASF that Seebohm would probably be glad to ditch the 200IM, at least on the international stage.

Does AUS need to re-assess the timing of their trials and competition season; perhaps easier said than done given our ‘reversed seasons’ compared to most major competitors ?

Did SAL, and certain swimming pundits, get carried away with the “years of plenty” that continued post Sydney and are setting some unrealistic targets ? London appeared a disaster when in many ways it was merely a return to “usual programming”. It’s 1 gold and 11 medal total was essentially in line with LA, Barcelona & Atlanta which saw 12 medals apiece and waiting to the last day of competition for Gold.

Personal Best

Racing experience against top swimmers, especially at big international meets, is crucial and it would be a shame if swimmers like Neale and Packard missed out.
I get what they’re trying to achieve, but understand where it may fail.

Anyway… Packard should go, and 4 more months of training, Sprenger may be able to go mid 59. Oh well.

Personal Best

What do you make of Seebohm’s slow last 50s in the 200IM?

Given her 200 back endurance, and her 100 free speed, I would have expected her to close faster. Is she coasting deliberately or simply exhausted by the end of the 200?

Her 200 back has only been getting stronger.

Brilliant job by Madison Wilson.

Viva la Bang

On the results page, it clearly states the FINA Qualifying times for all the events, I am assuming relay swimmers will be added at the end of the competition.

Craig Lord

Viva, those are not “FINA’s QTs, they are Aus targets for the ‘FINA’ event… might have been better use ‘QT:’

Michael Roberts

Australiam commenters Long time reader, first time poster.. Unlike you I will post my real name. Born Randwick women’s in 81!!

You are the breed to quicky jump on performances, selection criteria for aus swimming… For whenever it suits,YOU, but because you are too gutless to reveal who you are, it’s hard to figure out motive.

Aus swimming gets held to incredibly high standards, when they dont perform they get crucified, forums case in point. So they establish criteria, and from what I can tell its been consistent and reported since the London debacle… Now, all of the sudden people aren’t qualifying and people are screaming “give them experienc.. Yet, people were previously wanting the heads of those who couldn’t perform, it’s a waste of tax payers $

It seems like an ill be dammed approach, a loose loose from people who are typical negative, tall poppy Australians. Bask in the glory, critical in defeat.

The qualifying standards, top 8 from looks of things, are tough… What’s tougher are the gutless, faceless experts here hiding behind the keyboards.

As someone involved in a other Australian Okympic sport, I’m jealous our athletes don’t have what swimming does, but grateful we don’t have these kinds of commenters… Hope the swimmers dont see this!!

Craig Lord

I hope they do see it Michael, agree or disagree 🙂 In my experience, they know their own minds…

Bad Anon

If Coutts had swum the 2IM she was most likely going to make the team, Seebohm had a great 2IM in 2010 but is struggling with how to correctly pace herself, 2.11 will barely make the final if at all


Wow… Those are very tough words, Michael Roberts..
As for real person, My name is Ian Agung, and I live in Jakarta, Indonesia.

Tall poppy syndrome? I understand the concept, but as far as I know, at least in this article thread, NO ONE has tried to cut down any tall poppy Australian swimmers, in fact some praises towards swimmers such as Grant Hackett and I don’t see any comment that is critical in any way towards Aussie swimmers. All I see is posts praising Aussie swimmers, but very critical of the selection qualifying times.
There was the first post recognising the general slow times and a question about Seebohm, but I don’t think they are out of line.

FYI, these swimming forums are VERY TAME compared to tennis, gymnastics, football/soccer, track&field forums.


The Aussie selection criteria is well known in advance of the competition and sets the qualifying standards equal to the time taken to final at the previous world event. This prevents swimmers going along on a contiki tour when they are unlikely to be competitive. As a tax payer funded sport I have no issue with this. Send the best, while the rest work their butts off to improve.

As for Sprenger and Packard, word is both will go as they both have the Fina A, and while they missed the Aussie qualifying time the selection policy states that 6 swimmers can be selected for the medley relay provided their combination meet the relay qualifier…which they will. As events beyond 100m in form strokes do not have relays they do not have this same stipulation and therefore missing the aussie qualifying time will mean they stay home.


…same goes for distance freestyle (400-1500)


Didn’t the Aussies leave Mack Horton of the 2013 WC senior squad despite him having an A cut? And wouldn’t it have been nice for him to have a senior World Championships already under his belt when it looks like he’ll be heading into this year’s big boy meet as one of the favorites?

A home soil Pan Pacs and a Commonwealth Games with limited competition in 2014 just isn’t the same as a higher level of competition (WC 2013) where prelim swims have to be more carefully considered in order to make it to finals with something left in the distance swimmer’s tank.


Seebohm had 10 minutes between her 100bk & 200im, she did enough for the win

Viva la Bang

Yes and she has a 2.09 PB, She only swims the event for fun, Interested to see her go head to head with Wilson tonight, Could push her close to her 58.2 PB!


I think someone finally nailed why Australians seem to peak at their trials, rather than the Olympics/ Worlds later in the year- the qualifying standards are set so arbitrarily high at the trials, that they actually seem like the big event to peak for.
Think about it, once you have qualified at the ‘tough’ trials there is actually no standard set for you to achieve at the Worlds/ Olympics- you just turn up. You can actually switch off after the tough trials standards.

Personal Best

Well, Seebohm sure tried her hand at many events… and did well at many. She’s quite the hard worker.

Her 100 free and 100 fly PBs are impressive… though she no longer competes in them at Nationals.

I think she does take the 200 IM a little bit seriously because she has to integrate training for all strokes rather than just backstroke.
She’s very talented at it and could progress further if she chose. It coinciding with her best event does not help at all, and has forced her to opt out of the 200IM previously.


The standards certainly were well known ahead of trials and, as a general rule, I am in favour of setting a challenging standard to be attained for selection.

The other side of the coin is that the gaps in both men’s and women’s programmes, and they are numerous and sometimes sizeable ones, have also been patently clear for at least 12 months …. and in some cases since London.

As a result, we are having some events where it’s been patently clear that no-one is going to reach the SAL QT. In some of these events, the Fina A is challenging in itself whereas in others it’s clearly attainable. Perhaps SAL needs to get over the mindset of having one being a “super-power” and readjust to the reality of merely being a strong “middle power”. Maybe they need to take a more event by event approach.

I acknowledge the point of an earlier poster who decried “tourists”. However, the issue with these “tourists” has been that they’ve met the SAL set times (not just Fina standards) at Trials but have not produced in intl competition. The only way you eradicate those is by altering selection policies and “mark the cards” of the perennial non-performers as “never to be selected again”. Tricky in practice and potentially a legal minefield.

Personal Best

The more productive approach, although difficult would be to find out why these ‘non performers’ didn’t perform.

Was it their coaching/training, programs, difficulty backing up from trials, other outside factors (London 2012 for example).

The US mostly gets it right… and right, often.
They may not have necessarily more depth in the top tiers across all events, but their swimmers step up.

Maybe you’re right, maybe there is too much pride among the officials.


For the Olympics, imho the Australian team leaders and planners got it wrong.

They sent a large team to the Olympics Park TOO early, creating much spare time for the team members to do all kinds of shenanigans and non-productive or conducive behavior which took so much energy out of them. (the need for stilnox, pranking etc).

I didn’t understand why did they arrive in a London 4 days before the opening ceremony when they knew they’d be competing for practice lanes with thousand other swimmers anyway.
The Americans ALWAYS arrived at the venue city later than the aussies.


My take on SA own qual. times is. On the one hand it is a good thing. In that it inspires the good swimmer to reach greater heights than they otherwise would have done. On the other hand it could have the affect of turning off up and comers from taking the higher step. The could see the extra tough times to qualify for major meets as a bridge too far and quit the sport altogether.


Has Australian swimming always had this setting own QT policy? It must be working. For a country with such a small population we have always punched above our weight in sport. Swimming is no exception. There are world superpowers with huge populations yet little old Aussie (24ml pop.) continues to push world number one USA in every major swimming meet and has done for as long as I have been watching swimming. Long may it continue.

Leave a comment

Post a comment with your SwimVortex Account. Don't have a SwimVortex Account, Sign Up?

(*) Fields are required!