Canadian trials on CBC

I think you need to compare the populations of SWIMMERS in each of the countries rather than the total populations. Otherwise you're really comparing the effectiveness of each nation's swimming recruiting programs, rather than comparing the quality of their swimming training programs and athletes. Now, I have no clue about the size of each country's competitive swimming population. It is entirely possible those numbers come out close in proportion to overall population - but maybe not. But if each of those countries has, say, roughly 1/4 million swimmers, then I'd say we are comparing swimming apples to swimming apples. I'd wager that the US hosts a greater variety of sports (some of which are given FAR more media attention and glitter than swimming) that attract kids than do these other countries.

Originally posted by LindsayNB Swimming Canada has about 50,000 competitive swimmers, roughly the same proportion of swimmers as in the USA. I caught the CBC coverage this afternoon, thanks Kirk for posting the notice. If I recall, Canada had one medal in Sydney (silver? I know it wasn't gold). Britain pulled a goosegg (though I suspect they'll be stronger this time around). So, if we are looking at medals per swimmer-in-their-country results, Canada and Britain come up short of the US. It would also be interesting to break it down based on where the athlete trains. There have been a fair number of Olympic Swimming medals over the years going to athletes that train in the US but swim under other colors. And same for Australia.

Originally posted by emmett I'd wager that the US hosts a greater variety of sports (some of which are given FAR more media attention and glitter than swimming) that attract kids than do these other countries. I wouldn't wager. Swimming gets high ratings, provided our swimmers are doing well but there are many other sports that compete against each other. Cricket, soccer, rugby league, rugby union, AFL, tennis, basketball and netball, softball and probably more that I've forgotten. Cricket, rugby league and AFL in particular are huge here, not just in ratings but in participation. Soccer and netball are also very popular weekend sports for our kids to participate in. Swimming clubs don't garner anywhere as much attention as a soccer club (to use an example). Our local soccer clubs for instance, are advertised all over the community, everyone knows about it whether they join their kids up or not. There are some swimming clubs in my general area but they aren't well known at all and don't have anywhere near as many members as soccer or netball clubs have. Australians love to watch swimming but they are more likely to participate in other sports. And if you do make it as swimmer, unless you're something really special like Ian Thorpe, you won't necessarily make a lot of money out of it. There's far more money in football and cricket if you make it to the elite level.

knelson, I agree with you. In the 200 IM, the qualifications meant leaving Joanne Malar and Marianne Limpert off the team (Although Limpert has other chances). The leadership and experience that these two women could have provided would have been extremely important.

Regardless of what competing interests might exist, the operative question still remains - what are the SWIMMING populations in these countries? I beleive that USA Swimming is somewhere in the 300-500K. I have no clue what they are in other countries.

Well, the new higher standards set by the Canadian OC have certainly decimated the women's swim team. Of the 26 individual event slots we'll have 1 in the 800, 2 in the 100 ***, and 1 in the 400 IM. I have to question whether this is good for development of the sport in this country. I feel particularly sorry for Matt Rose whose 22.42 in the 50 free was a Canadian record but fell 0.01s short of the standard. I wish we knew the Aussie secret, with a population roughly two thirds of ours, they have twice as many competitive swimmers (95,000) and clearly perform far far better. Heck, I'd "settle" for one Michael Phelps, who will almost certainly outmedal all but a very few nations all on his own! :)

The 50 Free standard was faster than the national record? Uhh... okay. :confused: Originally posted by LindsayNB I wish we knew the Aussie secret, with a population roughly two thirds of ours, they have twice as many competitive swimmers (95,000) and clearly perform far far better. I'm guessing one part is: Australia -> Deserts -> Refreshing swims Canada -> Arctic Tundra -> In danger of the ice hole freezing over :cool: (How good is the Australian hockey team?)

Lindsay- we have too many people in training for the 'bureaucracy' events. Check out the crowd of Canadian 'support personnel' who always show up at the Games on the public purse (& I mean beyond coaches, medical staff). Oh, & the CBC will have hundreds of staff there to show the paucity of Canadian swimmers...

Originally posted by mattson I'm guessing one part is: Australia -> Deserts -> Refreshing swims Canada -> Arctic Tundra -> In danger of the ice hole freezing over :cool: (How good is the Australian hockey team?) I happen to be visiting Canada this weekend -- I notice they have indoor pools here.:D

As i see it the nations we are discussing each have unique problems. USA Most pools are 25 YARD, a distance that no other country uses for competitive swimming. Meets tend to promote shorter distances, long distance suffers. You can add to that, Titile XI problems in the colleges and how much talent and money is sucked into the Glamour professional sports. An advantage is that a lot of clubs also run the learn to swim programs, allowing coaches to be paid a decent income and stay in the sport. CANADA Has some great pools and facilities. Vancouver ( pop 1 million approx ) has seven 50 m pools, even Nanaimo ( pop 20,000 ? ) has a 50 m pool. Vancouver has tons of good 25m pools as well. However the government puts almost no money into sports and if you couple that with just how expensive it is to run a National team in Canada due to a small population spread out over vast distances. The cities are thousands of miles apart and just getting teams together uses up most of the available budget. BRITAIN Now has a great culture at the top and Ernest Maglischo when he was shown the swim development plan for UK swimming at last years British Coaches conference was very impressed. He said that the States has nothing near as good a system for talent id and perfromance structure. The UK's problem is a lack of decent pools, Wales ( population 3 million )has ONE 50m pool, where Vancouver has SEVEN. Most of the 25m pools are very old and worn out. Building new pools is very expensive, the Wales 50m National pool cost £11, million to build ( US $ 17 million ). In addition most pools are owned by the local authorities, their mandate is to serve the needs of the majority. Hence we get little or no lane swimming, lack of pool time for clubs, and pools dominated by litle old ladies swimming head up breaststroke. A small masters club in Bournemouth was shut down because others in the pool complained at the splashing caused by the fast swimmers. The pool operators did reinstate them, but reduced them from 3 lanes to 1, and allowed them only 45 mins to train. That attitude would nevr happen in Australia ! Also, the authorities run the lucrative learn to swim programs and employ the teachers. This means that clubs cannot afford to pay their staff, my club runs totally on Volunteers. It is hard to make a career of swim coaching here. We are also 10 years behind on the importance of technique. One of the great benefits of Total immersion is that it has made a lot of people very aware of the importance of good technique. AUSTRALIA I am not sure what the problems are, but they have a culture of excellence in sport which helps so much. Lots of pools, especially 50m pools, outdoor pools are cheap to build. Swim in an Aussi pool and most swimmers there are good, fast swimmers.