When Missy Franklin was swimming in high school, she did swim different events in different meets. Swimmers were limited to 3 (I think 3) individual events and 2 relays in a meet or in the state finals. There were many more than that that she could win, but she just swam where they told her to swim. Sometimes the coaches knew another swimmer could beat the other team(s) in a particular race to moved Missy to where she was needed the most.
Not sure what the limit is in NCAA meets.
One stroke, one distance. That’s all she won.
So, if Lia didn’t train those other strokes, then technique and coaching matter?
Forget the other strokes, with her alleged wingspan, “mass” and height advantages, why not win at more than just that one race? She’s bigger, faster, stronger and taller than the other competitors, right?
Many posters in this thread seem to be underestimating Ms. Thomas’s abilities before transition, and overestimating her dominance after transition. One poster even predicted that the outcome of her events was “already known” and that “records would be set that will never again be matched or broken.” That obviously didn’t happened.
While your post doesn’t take it that far, I nonetheless think that your representation is also somewhat exaggerated, and that looking at the actual facts might add some of the “nuance” that you desire.
Before her transition she was hardly “mediocre.”
After her transition, she won a single event at the collegiate championships, but she isn’t exactly dominating women’s swimming.
Yes, I do consider her previous performance to be mediocre, she cracked the top 500 NCAA for men in only 1 event. You do not get to stand on a national podium for being #462.
So, am I understanding that your hypothesis is that she went from #462 to #1 based on differences in training and coaching that she experienced in the last 2 years?
Once again, your information is somewhat misleading.
The 462nd ranking that you and others keep brining up was for the 200 free, but prior to transitioning Ms. Thomas was primarily a distance swimmer who did not regularly compete in the 200 free. Her primary events were the 500, 1000, and 1650. While only a sophomore, she swam NCAA Championship qualifying times in two of those three events, and was ranked 32nd in the 1650 freestyle. Not first, but not 462nd either.
I’d say qualifying for the NCAA division championship in two events as a sophomore is a pretty good indication that she wasn’t “mediocre,” but opinions may vary on that, I guess. What is clear, though, is that misleading information about Ms. Thomas is commonplace in these discussions.
ETA: According to the WSJ, Ms. Thomas had the 32 fastest time for all men in the nation in the 1650 free, and was ranked 18th in the 1000.
For comparison, this year she ranked 11th among women in the 1650 free.
Really, not everything is determined by how well Thomas performed. I dont think drugged Russian ice skaters should be allowed to compete either, even if they promise not to come in the top 3 results. It has to do with the integrity of the competition.
Before the championship you others were claiming that the outcome of her races is predetermined and her records will never be matched or broken. What has changed?
PED’s are against the skating rules. Ms. Thomas swam within the rules.
All this “excitement” over one college win, not even a US National or an Olympic win.
Both bother me. Winning, and even competing. And I do realize Thomas was legally permitted to compete this year. I just do not find this year’s rules equitable, but they are what they are, for now, and thus Thomas was within her rights this year. Just like the young Russian ice skater was allowed legally to compete by the skating officials despite problematic drug tests earlier. Apparently the rules permitted it, so whether the girl won or not, she could appropriately compete this year. I happen to think that rule, too, should be changed for the future.
Yes, she was allowed to compete, but no final determination would have been made at the time of the competition, if she had actually medaled. The medal ceremony wouldn’t have taken place, if she had finished in the top 3. As far as I know, her case is still unresolved.
Lia’s finishes are not unresolved.
I don’t get the comparison at all. Doping to improve performance is not comparable to suppressing testosterone levels.
And I don’t understand how your claim that the results don’t matter fits with your claim that the goal is truly a more level playing field. If transgender athletes, after testosterone suppression, don’t reap the kind of benefit you previously claimed (total domination, unbreakable records, etc.) then perhaps the playing field is much more level than you and others have been representing.
For example before transition, Lia Thomas swam the 32nd fastest 1650 time for men (18th rank for the 1000.) This year, after transition, she swam the 11th fastest 1650 time for women. The playing field may not be perfectly level, and maybe tweaks to the rules might make it more level, but we aren’t that far off.
The complaints about Ms. Thomas seem to extend far beyond the demand for a level playing field.
Obviously Lia’s “physical advantage” didn’t extend to the 100-yard free either:
I don’t think the field overall was weaker and in fact, several records were broken. Maybe not in the events in which Lia was swimming, but nonetheless the spotlight was drawn to her.
While I’m disappointed how Penn and the NCAA handled the situation, I am grateful it’s highlighted the issues and hopeful that sports governing organizations and state legislatures are paying (and will continue to pay) closer attention and craft appropriate policies. Leading from behind helps no one.
I am ecstatic about how Penn did!
The last memorable national victory I can remember for Penn was making it to the Final Four in 1979 with Tony Price et al. What a great time (until the Quakers got destroyed by Michigan State and a soon-to-be superstar who was “Magic” in every way). How Tony Price took Penn men’s basketball to the Final Four in 1979 | The Daily Pennsylvanian
I am sure others will have several different examples about Penn. More power to you if you do, but making it to the Final Four with teams with players like Magic Johnson and Larry Bird is about as good as it gets for the Ivies.
Congrats, Lia! You played by the rules and won. Perhaps the rules will change going forward, but that’s a completely different issue.
Period. End of discussion…at least for me.
MNIW out.
It’s important to consider your information in context. The 1000 is not a standard NCAA race distance. Thus it is raced less often and it is easier to happen to obtain one of the better marks. It terms of Lia’s performance at various distances compared to other women (and compared to men) it is important to remember that there is a greater relative advantage for males at sprint distances compared to long distances. Height and muscle mass are especially important the shorter the race is. Comparing record NCAA times, I calculate that females are 17% slower at the 100 free, 11% slower at the 200 free, but only 6% slower in the 1650. Therefore the biological advantage conferred to Lia by testosterone-dominant puberty (an extra 5 inches of height, extra muscle mass etc) became much more salient at shorter distances, so it made sense for her to move into those shorter events.
why isn’t she competing in those same events? Clearly she and/or the coaches saw an advantage and switched her to shorter distances.
She made it to the National finals in the 100, something she never did on the men’s team. But it seems your argument is that she would have needed to win in order to demonstrate a physical advantage from her previous testosterone puberty? That she was competitive at all in this race, to me, demonstrates a physical advantage. Sprint races are heavily reliant on 1) height 2) muscle mass and 3) multiple hours overs years time practicing starts (to be competitive, swimmers need to be right on the edge of false start, but NOT false start, and ride that edge even under immense pressure.) For someone to be a distance swimmer, but then show up as a competitive sprinter, demonstrates to me that the physical advantages overcame all else.
College finals, the NCAA Championships, NOT the U.S. National Championships.
And she certainly had enough of a physical advantage over her COLLEGE competitors to win one race and place in the Top 10 of two other races. She’s a good swimmer, a 5th Year senior, but she’s no Missy Franklin or Katie Ladecky.
I’ll hold off on getting my “pitchforks and torches” from the garage. 