SwimSwam’s 2016 Swammy Award winner for Canadian Swimmer of the Year and Breakout Swimmer of the Year, Penny Oleksiak, looked like a seasoned Olympian in Rio when she raced away with 4 medals. At just 16 years of age, Oleksiak scored two bronze medals as a critical member of her nation’s 4x100m freestyle relay and 4x200m freestyle relay.
Oleksiak also wowed the world when she stole silver only behind Swedish World Record Holder Sarah Sjostrom in the 100m butterfly individual event, then capped off her campaign with the coveted women’s 100m freestyle gold medal, tying American Simone Manuel. As the Rio audience and swim enthusiasts around the globe asked themselves where this teen phenom came from, Iain McDonald, Senior High Performance Manager at Swimming Canada, was feeling validated.
Two years ago, when Oleksiak was just 14, the Toronto swimmer was identified by Swimming Canada as a medal potential for the next 5-8 years. As such, she received funding to help develop the talent her performances were displaying. But, at a time when her highest world ranking was 319th, many would ask what made the Canadian powers that be take a special interest?
It’s all about the data. McDonald explained recently to The Star that Swimming Canada uses a sophisticated, statistics-based system that helps identify emerging athletes. Their ‘on-track times’ system uses ‘decades of data from global competitions and the progression rates of the world’s best swimmers to predict race times that a swimmer needs to meet, at a particular age, in a specific event, to be on the path for an Olympic medal at the 2020 and 2014 Games.’ (The Star)
The data began being collected domestically in 2014, then grew to an internationally based database shortly thereafter, courtesy of Canadian Tires’ data analytics division. “It better defines what it takes to be a world-class athlete, not just the best athlete in Canada, and that’s our task,” says McDonald.
However, as with any method of progression, there are trip-ups along the way where things don’t go according to plan. As for Oleksiak, the now internationally famous young face outperformed even the data’s expectations. She was originally targeted for the 2020 Games, when her performances just months before Rio started exponentially improving that the stats changed course to identify her as a potential medalist in 2016.
“They’re humans, it’s not point A to point B in a nice curve, they trip along the curve and it’ll be bumpy but the idea is that over time, hopefully, this information will help us . . . identify the pool of athletes that could actually have international success,” McDonald said.
Prior to the implementation of this statistics-based system, athletes had been eligible for Swimming Canada‘s development level support once a world ranking with the top 150 was achieved. This was regardless of the swimmers’ ages or where they were at in their careers. In essence, new and old swimmers alike were held to the same standards for funding.
This has changed drastically with the new system, as McDonald says, a swimmer “could go year on year hovering (in the top 150), and it’s a bit cutthroat but you’re investing in somebody who is never going to get there.
“We have to try and be better at identifying the athletes and supporting them because we have that limited pool.”
Oleksiak reminds me of a young Sjostrom. Tall, Powerful, slow of the blocks and behind in the first 50, but so fast over the water she comes back making others look like shes moving backwards. Sjostrom disappered for a little bit, but I think thats because the suit era screwed up her progress. Budapest 2017 is really going to be fun watching all the rising stars get their chance to shine.
Look for Canada to win the womens 4×200 in Budapest. Smith, Ruck, Oleksiak…. all 1:52 this month, all 16.
Don’t forget they also have Sydney Pickrem, who was knocking on the door of greatness until she left for the NCAA, and emerging age group phenom Marie-Sophie Harvey who is rising fast. They are only going to get better. Canada will have one hell of a women’s team in 2020.
It would really very interesting to know what model of swimmer Penny Oleksiak fits in. Her performances in Rio raised more questions than gave answers. Her back to back 52.7 made an impression of a very confident swimmer. Her one of the strongest second half at 100 makes us to believe that she had plenty of unrealized resources and with the improvement of her sprinting qualities we can easily expect 52.5.
On the other hand the excitement of relays served her badly. Her second half at 400 relay was one of the slowest. Her last 100 at 4×200 relay was slower than of any four Americans in this race. What is that? Lack of racing experience or it shows… Read more »
Bizarre post..
To evaluate a relay performance we should consider that as a whole.
Without checking the data, I remember that 4×200 free final, and Oleksiak pushed hard in the first 100 to close the gap with the two front-runners.
And obviously in the second 100 she suffered a little bit, but anyway she swam a 1.54.9, a huge time for her and a great time for..everybody but Ledecky and Sjostrom ????
Oleksiak (and Ruck) are the two most promising 200 freer towards Tokyo2020; two very young Canadians trying to catch Ledecky..
Edit: and a great time for ..everybody but Ledecky and Sjostrom ????
Ok, no emoticons and no ????
Penny Olecksiak improved significantly her personal bests this season. That helped her to join the club of elite swimmers.
Her great times weren’t strongly contested. That resulted in silver and gold medals. That boosted her popularity regardless times shown.
Is she already of same caliber as such giants like Cate Campbell or Sarah Sjostrom or Katie Ledecky? Still long way to go. But she is 16 and that makes it interesting to watch which way it will go with her getting mature. That’s why the details of her races are important in attempt to understand what kind of swimmer she is. Her relays splits were confusing. I incline to think that that is the consequence of her being… Read more »
I bet no one needed statistical analysis to tell that Peggy Oleksiak was going to be great. Just a guess on my part. Logical progression can be part of the equation but there are a lot of intangibles, and no one can predict how someone will develop, especially distance athletes. There are distance runners who don’t hit their stride until their 30’s. The fact that swimmers usually make it (or don’t) by the age of 21 may be a product of our determination to hurry the process, and get swimmers in international competition, whether the swimmer is ready for that or not. Just a theory on my part.
My guess would be the $ available to many runners that can support them or keep them in the sport. If you look at the swimmers sticking around until their 30s they are all making $.
Penny
… not Peggy…. guess you missed all the Penny/Rio memes
I read somewhere that Australia does a similar thing.
They take your event times when you are 14 years, and then calculate a ratio of how close you are to records or cutoffs.
If you are within a certain percentage (like 80% of the cutoff time), then you can be part of their Development Program.
“past performance is no guarantee of future results” – mutual fund disclaimer. The long term predictions in sport, especially in swimming, is even less reliable than VERY SOPHISTICATED models of predictions of stock market behavior.
Its pretty much the same thing. We’re all human and so any organization of any kind is human and fallable at its roots.
Would be curious, without having to name names, how successful this was for 2016. Was there any other athlete that fit this predictive model?