Texas Claims Record 12th Team Title As NCAA Champs Close With Record Flurry

Will Licon celebrates his victory - Photo courtesy of Patrick Meredith, UT Athletics Photography

Will Licon (200 breaststroke) and Joseph Schooling (200 butterfly) added individual NCAA titles to propel Texas to the 12th NCAA championship in program history, equaling Michigan’s record.

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

Will Licon (200 breaststroke) and Joseph Schooling (200 butterfly) added individual NCAA titles to propel Texas to the 12th NCAA championship in program history, equaling Michigan’s record.



Amazing times, waiting for the real pool now, and have to say, it is refreshing that on Craig site people do not start with the crazy conversions..

Dave Nicholson

To all non-American swimming fans who aren’t familiar with the 200 furlong freestyle or the 457.8 rod backstroke, let me translate the results of this meet:
1. Ryan Murphy, Caeleb Dressel, Townley Hass, Joseph Schooling, Jack Conger, Simonas Bilis and Will Licon are all very fast swimmers. Very fast indeed.
2. Very few even here in the US had heard of Townley Hass before this meet. Now he’s likely on the 4×200 team for the US.
3. Clark Smith, a very promising American distance swimmer, had a shockingly terrible meet.
4. Eddie Reese knows what he’s doing. As does Sergio Lopez.
5. The 4×50 relay should be in the Olympics.
6. American sprint breaststroke sucks.


I agree on no. 5. I would trade it for the 4×200 free relay.


@Rafael. You won’t argue I think that short course races do provide us with some useful information that can be used when estimating LCM results. It all depends on how people use it – smart way or crazy way. Observing Gkolomeev’s specifics of racing at scy ThereaLuigi predicted fast time for this swimmer at LCM and that is what exactly happened next day when several swimmers made a qualifying time at LCM. They did it to use advantage of being tapered for NCAA Championships.


I think scy times can be useful when you have points of referente for the same swimmer in LCM. But only up to a point.

My good vibrations re: Gkolomeev don’t come from his scy times as much as from the fact that he is among the worst divers and has average underwaters. Most of his speed is over the water. And he has great, great technique. I am intrigued by his potential in the 50 free but also the 100.


Rafael, please disregard my reference to the existence of smart conversion of scy times into lcm times. The usage of Luigi’s analysis of Gkolomeev’s scy races as a good example of prediction of swimmer’s fast time in lcm was a mistake. Luigi doesn’t take any credits. 😀


there is nothing to take credits for at the moment. if the guy performs well in Rio I shall brag a little bit 🙂

I will elaborate on my thoughts. SCY times per se can’t be converted. Every one tells you the contrary is talking BS. But they can be of some use considered together with other circumstances. If for example swimmer X has already good times in LCM and his SCY times have a significant drop, it’s not unreasonable to expect some improvement in LCM (not proportional), unless the improvement in SCY is based entirely on turns. If swimmer Y is a bad diver and a bad turner and he still kicks ass in the bathtub pool, you might think that the same guys who beat him thanks to their dive and turns perhaps will have a harder time beating him in the long pool. Of course there is a number of other variables that enter the equation, so it’s a game of guessing. The fact that they swim different distances makes all the difference in the world. Some people for example shut down as if they had been hit by a lightning strike at the 90 meters of a 100 meters race. If the race was in yards they would be olympic gold medalists. But I am sure I am not telling you anything you dont already know.


Luigi, even though I am well familiar with your logic and arguments it is always nice to hear them from the person who’s opinion and expertize is well respected at this site. We had already a detailed discussion about SCY (M) vs LCM and there is no reason to repeat it again. I’d like to add only that following that discussion I had private email exchange with Aswimfan where I repeated word to word what you have said above. That is – the progress at SCY can be used as very good quantitative predicator of the progress at LCM. There is some statistics that supports this statement.
I am jealous of how nicely you can deliver same ideas wrapping them into easy to digest thrilling horror stories about swimmer’s ass being struck in the bathtub by lighting 🙂
If to recommend swimvortex’s postings as case study for those who is learning English I wouldn’t recommend rich in vocabulary CW’s language. Too powerful and too heavy (unless one is preparing for SAT exam). I wouldn’t recommend Craig’s writing’s neither– too professional, people don’t talk this way in real life. But I would strongly suggest to learn from your postings – very colorful, brief in delivering the essence of the idea and very warm. Practically never offensive. The language that can be immediately used in day-to-day life. Have I complemented you enough? :D


One other thing about NCAAs is that scy seems to bunch up swimmers more than a bigger pool does, and, given the talent pool is quite deep, you have to learn how to swim hard in morning heats and then even harder if you get a night swim.

It’s a good lesson before an Olympics or WCs if a swimmer is used to competing in a less competitive big meet environment.


I would love to see a swim team build and train in a 100 meter pool for a 4year period. Obviously not the entire time, still throwing in the shorter pools for some speed.

Many people feel that by practising yards, the piano does drop around 90 meters. Can you imagine how a world class swimmer could finish if they were used to only turning after 100 m.


Yozhik, if you are trying to learn a language there is no worst mistake than learning it from a non-native speaker: you will take in all his mistakes not even knowing they are mistakes. I would rather choose CL or some of the other English native speakers on this site.

Now about “SCY can be used as very good quantitative predicator of the progress at LCM”. I would never be so bold as to use that word, “quantitative”. I am not denying it is possible. I am just saying I have no idea how one would do it. So, I challenge you to a game: compute Dressel’s progress in the 50 free long course based on his progress in the 50 free SCY. Give me a figure and let’s see if you can hit the mark with a, say, 3 hundredths margin (that’s 3 on each “side”, so 6 overall). Our point of reference will be US trials where he will be tapered. I shall now smile so you know this is in good spirit 🙂


You want to play games then come to my sandbox, bring you toys and we will have a joyful time. 🙂 I don’t follow male freestyle competition as you do to have some understanding or feelings of what is going on there. I also don’t have Dressel’s results in SCY (50&100) for the 2014-2016 period to learn the history of his progress in short pool. Therefore I am not in the position now to play games of exact numbers. But I do have time of his LCM races that can be used for some predictions.
1. Dressel was already #2 US sprinter last year and OT will not be the race of ambition, but a pure business of getting on the Olympic team. I wouldn’t expect Dressel to swim at full capacity there. So OT is not the best point of reference to come up with exact numbers.
2. Dressel is very comfortable with 22 low times at 50LCM. The territory where he is being since 2013. The jump in August 2015 and his recent records in SCY let me suggest that he is a swimmer of big meets. Either he is mentally ready or his training team knows how to make him best at the most important moment. Therefore again the OT trial won’t probably be a meet where we should expect personal best. He has to outrace his competitors and 21.8 can happen to be enough.
3. The significant 2015 progress at 50m distance hasn’t found any reflection on his 100m times. So the 10% difference in distance (or even more if to count turn and following underwater part) between SCY and LCM is a big number to expect automatically the progress in LCM given his recent success in SCY. But again I don’t have SCY times to judge on the level of his progress in short pool.
4. And the last thing. How should we look at his 22.06 LCM time in Orlando in March and what was the reason to swim this race. It is not his 21.53 shown last August at Nationals, but it is his third ever time. He probably was rested but didn’t go all the way and was checking where he is standing at this point at 50 LCM. Should we consider this time as indication that he is on the rise now. I would say so. Will this improvement materialized in improvement of PB as he did in SCY?
Not having information of how significant his improvement at SCY was I will say that his time this season will not be faster 21.5 in long pool


Yozhik, I must strongly disagree with you on one point: the notion that the US Olympic trials can be a matter of business for anyone.
This is untrue in general and it is even more untrue for the 50 free.
The USA OT are called the Meet of Tears. Just to make the team is an incredible achievement and many who were hot favorites have failed over the years, ending up with their heart broken … all american former swimmers concur that US Trials is far more stressful than the Olympics.
In the 50 free, where the slightest error can cost you everything, this is even more true. Remember, there are only 2 spots. 2 spots!!!

Example in point, US Trials 2012. Nathan Adrian who was the hottest sprinter on paper swims 21.68 and does not make it, he is third. The two qualifiers are Cullen Jones, 21.59, and Anthony Ervin, 21.68. In the London final, Jones swims only 5 hundredths faster than at Trials and gets silver Olympic medal. Ervin swims slower than at Trials! (21.78).

So, please forget about Dressel being there “on business”. He will swim lights out and so will everyone else. And only two people will smile, everyone else will see a 4 year dream shattered.

Now with that in mind I give you two other data: last year Dressel swam 18.67 in SCY and soon after 21.53 in LCM. Is that enough for you to have an idea of what it will take to qualify at US Trials and how fast will Dressel swim? (forget the 100, not relevant here)


Luigi, you engaged me in the conversation where I prefer to be a listener rather than speaker. If you tell that at OT swimmers show their bests getting maximum prepared, rested, tapered , whatever then I have nothing to say but trust your knowledge and experience.
Does the progress in SCY correlate with the progress in LCM? Yes it does and you can trust to me on that. Is it possible to build the quantitative model that reflects these dependencies. Yes, it is possible. Are those models hundred percent accurate. No, but as any probabilistic models they provide the way to estimate the level of inaccuracy. Was I involved in such projects. Yes I was. If you want me to run such kind of research for Dressel, I can do it. If you know the free source of information about Dressel’s results in SCY in 50 and 100, please make a reference. If to run such project seriously some additional information is needed to understand when the swimmer tried to his best or was just practicing, when he was tapered or under heavy training, when he was healthy or sick. The ideal situation is when scy meet and lcm meet happens next to each other. Races at 100 (scy and lcm) are relevent. They help to understand where the improvement comes from.


I was incorrect. The two swims did not happen close to each other. The 18.67 was swum in March 2015 at last year NCAA championships


The 21.53 was swum in August 2015:


I am taking it he was rested and tapered in both occasions. But I can’t back this up with reliable sources, just my common experience notions.

I will give you my gut predictions for Trials: it will take under 21.6 to qualify, and he will be 21.4. Note I did not say he’ll qualify.



Luigi the human mind does amazing things sometimes and performs better than formal models. It happens because it is capable to incorporate associative factors that are hard to formalized. I am almost sure that based on current performance at NCAA finals one way or another Dressel’s coaches can give a very accurate estimate of what can be expected from Dressel at trials. The prediction you made is not a pure guessing as well and your analysis involved the data from long and short course races and most likely some subconscious short-long complicated conversion that considered dive, turn, underwater parts of the race. Similar to what you did in Gkolomeev’s situation
You questioned the possibility of quantitative prediction and challenged me of doing that. Well believe me if you can that that is very doable. The major difficulties in projects like this is not the complexity of models but cleaning and filtering relative data that is used to determine model’s parameters.


Then just go with your guts and tell me your predictions Yozhik. You wont be beheaded if you fail I promise, nor will you be tarred and feathered.

p.s. I said under 21.6, I meant 21.5

Leave a comment

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

(*) Fields are required!