By SwimSwam Contributors on SwimSwam
Courtesy: Doug Cornish, the founder of Swimpler. Follow Swimpler on Substack here.
This is Volume 4 of How the Elite Race the 200 FR:
Click HERE for Volume 1 Click HERE for Volume 2 Click HERE for Volume 3 Click HERE to access the 2015-2025 NCAA ‘A’ Final 200 free Data SetNew tab now available in the data set:
Breakthrough ImaginedDATA TRENDS
It’s difficult to rectify the contradictory nature of the next two lines.
Women’s swimming has never been faster, more competitive, or more fun.
Women’s NCAA 200 free is in a slump.
Missy Franklin had just sent the swimming world into a tizzy, throwing down a 1:39.10 in the NCAA 200 free finals. It was 2015. A portal to a new dimension had just been ripped open – or so it seemed.
A decade later, only two additional swimmers has come through to the sub-1:40 world, leaving it relatively unexplored. Meanwhile, the average ‘A’ final Women’s 200 free time has only improved from 1:42.77 to 1:42.12 with an average above 1:43 in three separate years (‘16, ‘21, ‘23).
Over the same span, the average ‘A’ final men’s 200 free time improved from 1:33.17 to 1:30.30, an improvement of 3.1 percent. In 2015, the winning men’s time was 1:32.03. The men were in the midst of their own slump, with Simon Burnett winning a decade earlier in 1:31.20.
Who could have predicted that the men were going to break 1:30 a total of 15 times over the next 10 years, while progress on the women’s side would come to a screeching halt?
The women’s slump is puzzling.
The 50 free and 100 free have each improved 2% since 2015, while the 200 FR has improved .6%.
50 FR ‘A’ Final Average
2015: 21.77 2025: 21.39 2% Improvement100 FR ‘A’ Final Average
2015: 47.33 2025: 46.57 2% ImprovementGretchen Walsh is an outlier, but please note:
Places 2-7 are significantly faster in 2025 than in 2015 The 2015 data set includes Simone Manuel, an outlier in 2015200 FR ‘A’ Final Average
2015: 1:42.77 2025: 1:42.12 .6% Improvement500 FR ‘A’ Final Average
2015: 4:35.86 2025: 4:34.82 .4% ImprovementEach year, the 200 free ‘A’ Final is composed of sprinters ranging up, distance swimmers ranging down, and mid-distance swimmers right at home.
Out of the 2025 women’s 200 free class of ‘A’ finalists at NCAAs:
7 competed in NCAA Champs in the 100 FR 3 competed in the 500 2 competed in the 50 0 competed in the 1650 4 competed in the 200 FR-RThis list clearly trends toward sprint-dominant.
So, why isn’t the 200 free improving at a rate comparable to the women’s 50 and 100 FR?
When you consider that the 500 free is also stagnant, more questions arise.
Strong opinions are held.
I think the speed is there. How the races are being swum could be the key that unlocks the next level.
GENDER DIFFERENCES
In the data set, you can see ebbs and flows, but much of the race data is individual to the specific race and its swimmers. No race is really the same.
What I find curious and significant, however, is the occurrences in which a swimmer posts a split faster than the previous split – highlighted in yellow in the data set. Though it’s uncommon, occurring 68 times out of 319 splits (21%), women are twice as likely as the men to post a 50 that is faster than the previous 50.
Women posted 10 total 3rd-50s faster than second-50s and 35 total 4th-50s faster than 3rd-50s=45 splits faster than a previous split out of 159 data points=28% Men posted six total 3rd-50s faster than second-50s and 17 total 4th-50s faster than 3rd-50s=23 splits faster than a previous split out of 160 data points=14%This stands out to me as the most notable gender difference in the dataset. It strongly suggests that women are handling the fade better than the men.
One Potential Explanation – Hydrodynamics
As speed increases, wave drag and form drag both rise at a disproportionately greater rate than speed. While each swimmer’s interaction with these forces is unique, faster swimmers encounter significantly greater resistance.
If men are experiencing higher drag due to higher racing speeds, it is plausible that achieving and maintaining early velocity in the 200 free requires more energy output than it does for women, exacerbating the bonk.
One of the key contributors to this resistance is form drag, which is heavily influenced by body shape and surface area. On average, male swimmers have broader shoulders and larger builds, creating more surface area for drag to act upon. That added exposure increases resistance, especially as velocity rises.
And then there’s the tech suit. While both men’s and women’s suits aim to reduce drag and improve body position, the coverage differs significantly. Men wear suits from the knees to the waist. Women wear suits from the knees to the shoulders. More compression. More drag-reducing surface.
As a result, while men face higher drag and greater surface area exposure, they benefit less from performance-enhancing fabric, making it more difficult to maintain velocity throughout the race.
This topic would make for a fascinating round-table discussion among experienced coaches. I’d love to hear other interpretations and insights.
THE PENDING WOMEN’S SURGE
The women’s surge in the 200 free is on the horizon. In this next section, I’m imagining ways, based on data, that the women could conquer the 1:40 mark once and for all.
To get started, I am going to:
Pick three 2025 ‘A’ final women who competed in the 50 or led off a 200 free relay during the 2025 Champs Season Assign the three swimmers their exact 1st 50 from their 2025 NCAA swim Apply Luke Hobson’s 2nd- and 3rd-50 split differentials to their 2nd and 3rd 50 Use the gender differences noted above in addition to their ability to post a split faster than the previous split as a basis to assume that the swimmers have the ability to duplicate their 3rd-50 split on their 4th 50Flowers for Mallory
In all of the 200 free swims listed in the database, two stand out for what appears to be super-human race design and execution.
Luke Hobson’s 2025 800 Free Relay Lead-0ff
20.88 – 22.67 – 22.68 – 22.67 Worst-First=1.92
Lesson learned from the 2024 relay lead-off. An absolute work of art with splits 2-4 separated by only .01. It’s hard to make a case against that not being the most spectacularly well-swum race on the board, but the next one is my favorite.
Mallory Comerford 2018 NCAA ‘A’ final
23.90 – 25.52 – 25.13 – 25.25 Worst-First=1.62
Comerford’s best 50 of the 2018 season came in the November IU Invitational, where she clocked 21.88. I’m assuming she was suited/rested. If we take her 21.88 to represent her top speed, we get the following differentials from her 2018 NCAA ‘A’ final swim:
Best-First 50: 2.02 First-Second 50: 1.62 Second-Third 50: -.39 Third-Fourth 50: .16 Worst-First: 1.62This swim stands at #2 all-time in women’s NCAA history, the only other sub-1:40 swim. The 1.62 worst-first is insane! Her slowest 50 was her second 50, but it was only 1.62 seconds off her first 50. THEN she lays down a 4 tenth drop on the third 50 AND holds on with only a .16 fade on the last 50.
Swimmers and swims are a by-product of their collective experiences.
Comerford NCAA Swims
Freshman: 2nd-place: 1:42.54 Sophomore: 1st-place: 1:40.36 Junior: 1st-place: 1:40 200 FR – 1:39.80 Senior: 1st-place: 1:40.26 (1st split .37 faster than 1:39.80 1st 50)I could be wrong, but here’s my take:
Sub-1:40 was clearly on her radar, the pressure and excitement building each passing season. I imagine countless conversations around race strategy: constant re-evaluation and subtle tinkering in pursuit of something that just might be out of reach.
Everything comes together, though, for this swim. The control on the first 50. The steady build on the second. The attack on the third. And finally, with the crowd roaring and the realization dawning, adrenaline kicks in as she races for the wall.
The joy. The triumph. A master class in race design and execution, equally jaw-dropping as it is inspiring.
Let’s re-project the 200 free for the three swimmers from above using Comerford’s split differentials. The only change from above is we swapped in Comerford’s differentials in place of Luke Hobson’s and in place of our assumption for the 4th 50.
Let’s acknowledge individual differences.
None of these projections are guarantees, and I’m not suggesting anyone change their training or strategy.
I’m saying this event is overdue.
The data says it’s possible.
History says it’s coming.
WHAT’S NEXT
This likely wraps up the 200 free series — for now.
I’m content having injected fresh data and perspective into the conversation. That’s what this is about: sparking dialogue, sharing ideas, and pushing the sport forward.
Several of you have already reached out about applying these ideas with age-group and developmental swimmers. That is my wheelhouse, and it’s what I do with my customizable swim clinics. I’ve enjoyed the conversations.
There’s a long list of content in the queue. One piece I’m excited about explores a framework for race strategy progressions — novice, intermediate, proficient — for every event. It’s designed to help coaches and teams streamline how they teach race modeling at every level.
More to come soon. Let’s keep challenging assumptions and keep racing smarter.
Read the full story on SwimSwam: How The Elite Race The SCY 200 Free Volume 4: Data Trends, Gender Differences, Pending W Surge
Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( How The Elite Race The SCY 200 Free Volume 4: Data Trends, Gender Differences, Pending W Surge )
Also on site :