2023 U.S. NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS
- June 27 – July 1, 2023
- Indianapolis, IN
- Indiana University Natatorium
- LCM (50m)
- Meet Central
- Psych Sheet (updated version, 6/26)
- Live Results
- SwimSwam Preview Index
- How To Watch
- Day 1 Prelims Live Recap | Day 1 Finals Live Recap
- Day 2 Prelims Live Recap
Mark Wild contributed to this report.
This week’s U.S. National Championships also serves as a selection meet for four different international teams: the World Aquatics Championships, World Junior Aquatic Championships, the Pan American Games, and the LEN U-23 Championships.
With so many spots on international teams on the line, we’re doing our best this week to to provide daily updates of how those rosters appear to be shaping up. You can read more about the selection procedures at the bottom of the article.
Here’s how the potential Worlds roster look after three days. Swimmers who are not yet guaranteed a roster spot appear in italics. Tonight’s new qualifiers are noted in bold.
Men
- Carson Foster – 200 fly, 400 IM
- Jack Alexy – 100 free
- Chris Guiliano – 100 free
- Matt King – 4×100 free
- Destin Lasco – 4×100 free, 200 back
- Bobby Finke – 1500 free
- Luke Hobson – 200 free
- Kieran Smith – 200 free
- Drew Kibler – 4×200 free
- Jake Mitchell – 4×200 free
- Matt Fallon – 200 breast
- Ryan Murphy – 200 back
- Dare Rose – 100 fly
- Thomas Heilman – 200 fly, 100 fly
- Charlie Clark – 1500 free
- Josh Matheny – 200 breast
- Chase Kalisz – 400 IM
- Ryan Held – 4×100 free
- Justin Ress – 4×100 free, 50 back
- Baylor Nelson – 4×200 free
- Henry McFadden – 4×200 free
- Michael Andrew – 50 fly
- Nic Fink – 50 breast
Women
- Regan Smith – 200 fly, 200 back
- Kate Douglass – 100 free, 200 breast
- Abbey Weitzeil – 100 free
- Gretchen Walsh – 4×100 free, 50 fly, 100 fly
- Olivia Smoliga – 4×100 free
- Katie Ledecky – 800 free, 200 free
- Claire Weinstein – 200 free
- Bella Sims – 4×200 free
- Erin Gemmell – 4×200 free
- Lilly King – 200 breast, 50 breast
- Katie Grimes – 400 IM
- Torri Huske – 100 Fly, 4×100 free
- Rhyan White – 200 back
- Lindsay Looney – 200 fly
- Jillian Cox – 800 free
- Alex Walsh – 400 IM
- Alex Shackell – 4×200 free
- Maxine Parker – 4×100 free
- Leah Smith – 4×200 free
- Katharine Berkoff – 50 back
Doubles
Here’s an overly-simplified version of the U.S. World Championships selection process: the team can have a maximum of 26 men and 26 women. Swimmers are added to the roster in these priorities until the roster cap is hit:
- Top 4 in 100/200 frees, Winner of all other events
- 2nd-place finisher in all events (besides 100/200 free)
- 5th-place finisher in 100/200 free
- 6th-place finisher in 100/200 free
- 1st-place finisher in the stroke 50s
We track ‘doubles’ as a way of knowing when the next priority of swimmers can be officially added to the team. A ‘double’ is effectively a swimmer qualifying in more than one event. One swimmer qualifying in three events counts as two ‘doubles’ for our purposes.
Note: after publishing, we realized that despite our best efforts, we may have had the doubles math incorrect. Thanks to our commenters for helpfully pointing that out, and we’ll triple check the math tomorrow after a good night’s rest and provide an update.
The US women are now up to 7 doubles, meaning that they should be able to take all priority 2 athletes. 2nd-place finishers Lindsay Looney (200 fly), Jillian Cox (800 free), Rhyan White (200 back), and Alex Walsh (400 IM) are all essentially assured spots on the team, if at least a couple of the women expected to qualify in the remaining events do so.
Meanwhile, the men only have 3 doubles, and have 23 men who have potentially qualified in one of the five priorities. In other words, if more than 3 different men qualify over the remaining 6 events, the US will be forced to leave some potential qualifiers at home, most likely relay-only swimmers and stroke 50 championships (priorities 3-5).
While the US may not be able to take all potential relay-only swimmers due to overall roster space, several doubles tonight means that they won’t encounter the same issue that kept Ryan Held off of the Olympics roster in 2021: a FINA-mandated limit of 12 relay-only swimmers.
Tonight, Torri Huske (4×100 free) qualified individually by touching first in the 100 fly, and Justin Ress (4×100) won the 50 back. That leaves 12 remaining relay-only swimmers, meaning that if the US is able to take all the swimmers in priorities 3 and 4 based on the overall roster math, they won’t have to drop any relay-only swimmers due to the 12 relay-only swimmer cap.
The Other Rosters
The rosters for the other three meets are in a constant state of flux, since they are somewhat dependent on who qualifies for the World Championships team. The US is filling rosters in this order:
- 2023 World Aquatics Championships
- 2023 World Aquatics Junior Championships
- 2023 Pan American Games
- 2023 LEN European U23 Championships
With one exception, swimmers do not have the ability to decline a roster spot in one meet in order to swim in another. For instance, a relay-only swimmers on the senior World Championships team cannot decline their spot in order to swim multiple individual events at Junior Worlds. The lone exception is that swimmers who are eligible for the LEN U23 Championships and the Pan American Games may decline their Pan Ams spot. This means that the LEN U23 roster is incredibly tentative (and it follows an unusual selection process), so we’re only listing the top eligible swimmers at the moment.
Again, these rosters are constantly in flux, so if we’ve missed or misplaced a swimmer somewhere, please let us know in the comments.
Men’s Projected Rosters
Note: while we’ve made every effort to ensure these projected rosters are accurate as possible, there’s a lot of moving pieces, and there’s also the possibility we’ve made a mistake somewhere. Please don’t buy plane tickets to see your favorite swimmer based solely on the info below.
Women’s Projected Rosters
Here’s a summary of the relevant priorities by team, courtesy of the various USA Swimming selection documents:
World Championships – max of 26
- Priority #1. The first priority will include both (i) the four best finishing Available Swimmers based on finish order from the Finals the Qualifying Competition in each of the 100-meter and 200-meter Freestyles, and (ii) the best finishing Available Swimmer based on finish order from the Finals of the Qualifying Competition in each of the Individual Olympic Events other than the 100-meter and 200-meter Freestyle.
- Priority #2. The second priority will include the second best finishing Available Swimmer based on finish order from the Finals of the Qualifying Competition in each of the Individual Olympic Events other than the 100-meter and 200-meter Freestyle.
- Priority #3. The third priority will include the fifth best finishing Available Swimmer based on finish order from the Finals of the Qualifying Competition in each of the 100-meter and 200-meter Freestyles.
- Priority #4. The fourth priority will include the sixth best finishing Available Swimmer based on finish order from the Finals of the Qualifying Competition in each of the 100-meter and 200-meter Freestyles.
- Priority #5. The fifth priority will include the best finishing Available Swimmer based on finish order from the Finals at the Qualifying Competition in the Individual Non-Olympic Events. No more than one Available Swimmer may be selected in each Individual Non-Olympic Event. If the Available Swimmer with the fastest time at the Finals in an Individual Non-Olympic Event declines the invitation to be Selected to the Team when that invitation is offered by USA Swimming and/or declines to swim in the Event for which he/she qualifies in the Championships, USA Swimming will not Select an Available Swimmer in that Individual Non-Olympic Event via Priority #5.
World Junior Championships – max of 26
- Priority #1. The first priority will include both (i) the four best finishing Available Swimmers from the Finals at the Qualifying Competition in each of the 100-meter and 200-meter Freestyles, and (ii) the best finishing Available Swimmer from the Finals of the Qualifying Competition in each of the Individual Olympic Events other than the 100-meter and 200-meter Freestyle.
- Priority #2. The second priority will include the second best finishing Available Swimmer from the Finals at the Qualifying Competition in each of the Individual Olympic Events, other than the 100-meter and 200-meter Freestyles.
- Priority #3. The third priority will include the fifth best finishing Available Swimmer from the Finals at the Qualifying Competition in the 100-meter Freestyle.
- Limitation. Before applying these Priorities, and before any Available Swimmer accepts or declines an invitation to be Selected to the Team, USA Swimming will identify the 8 best finishing Available Swimmers in the 100-meter Freestyle and 200-meter Freestyle, and the 6 best finishing Available Swimmers in all other Individual Olympic Events, at the Qualifying Competition (the “Best Finishing Swimmers”). Only those Available Swimmers who are among the Best Finishing Swimmers will be considered for Selection to the Team in that Event, and those who are not among the Best Finishing Swimmers will not be considered for Selection to the Team in that Event.
Pan American Games – max of 18
- Priority #1 – The top two best-finishing Available Swimmers from Nationals in the 100 and 200-meter freestyles, plus the one best-finishing Available Swimmer in the rest of the individual events.
- Priority #2 – Second-best finishing Available Swimmer in events other than the 100 and 200-meter freestyles. If this results in more than 18 for either gender, swimmers will be ranked based on percentage of “A” Time Standards, with the swimmers closest to those Time Standards being chosen.
- Priority #3 – Third-best finishing Available Swimmer in the 100 and 200-meter freestyles from the qualifying competition. If not all of these swimmers are selected, they will be ranked based on their percentage of the “A” Time Standard in the event for which they qualify under this priority. Only two relay-only swimmers per gender will be nominated under this priority.
LEN U23 Championships – max of 7
- Priority #1 – The two best available swimmers based on the finish order from Trials in the 50, 100, and 200 freestyle events will be ranked based on proximity to the “A” time standard. The two swimmers per gender whose times are best relative to the “A” time standard will be chosen.
- Priority #2 – The one best available swimmer based on the finish order from Trials in the 400, 800, and 1500 freestyle events will be ranked based on proximity to the “A” time standard. The one swimmer per gender whose times are best relative to the “A” time standard will be chosen.
- Priority #3 – The one best available swimmer based on the finish order in the 100 and 200 butterfly will be ranked. The one swimmer per gender whose times are best relative to the “A” time standard will be chosen.
- Priority #4 – The one best available swimmer based on the finish order in the 100 and 200 backstroke will be ranked. The one swimmer per gender whose times are best relative to the “A” time standard will be chosen.
- Priority #5 – The one best available swimmer based on the finish order in the 100 and 200 breaststroke will be ranked. The one swimmer per gender whose times are best relative to the “A” time standard will be chosen.
- Priority #6 – The one best available swimmer based on the finish order in the 200 and 400 IM will be ranked. The one swimmer per gender whose times are best relative to the “A” time standard will be chosen.
- Priority #7 – If the team is not full, which would only happen if there was an overlap between swimmers chosen in the above priorities or they ran out of Available Swimmers, then all available swimmers in all individual Olympic events will be ranked based on percentage of “A” time standard, and they will be added (by gender) until the roster cap is hit.
The coaching decisions should be interesting. DeSorbo has 5 qualified (4 women), Bowman 5 (3 women), Durden 5 (4 men), Nesty 4 (3 men), Aitken 3 (all women), Reese 3 (all men). Plumb has one on each roster, Looze has one on each roster, Holloway has two women qualified, and assuming Jacoby takes the second 100 breast spot you’ll have Capitani with two women qualified.
I’d assume DeSorbo leads the women & Durden the men, but the assistant coach slots are definitely interesting decisions to make.
I’m pretty sure head coaches have already been decided (Bowman, Capitani) but yeah, for assistant coaches, it’ll be interesting to see who gets those spots
This is confusing. Based on Priority #5 for Worlds, does this mean a second-place finisher in non-Olympic 50 can’t swim it even if he/she qualifies under Priority #1 as a first-place finisher (or top-4 relay swimmer) in an Olympic event? The language of Priority #5 implies that teams can’t have more than one representative for each non-Olympic event (i.e., stroke 50s). This certainly wasn’t the case last year.
The winner of the stroke 50’s is priority 5. The second spot goes to the winner of respective 100 (assuming they meet the qualifying standard).
If those are the same person, then the second spot is filled by somebody already on the team with the qualifying standard.
TLDR: second place in a stroke 50 means absolutely nothing for qualification purposes.
Thanks. Doesn’t seem fair, though, at least if all 26 spots haven’t been filled. It kept Dobler off the team in favor of Lazor, who was the only Worlds team member not to come home with a medal.
to be fair, one of the reasons Lazor didn’t get a medal was because the US coaches kept her off prelims of the 4medley despite her being the #2 100 breaststroker. (as a refresher, she had gotten DQ’d in one of her individual races.)
Question for you Robert— since it was starting to look like different swimmers could qualify 1-2 across almost every event for the men, I was starting to wonder what would happen if there was a scenario where some 2nd place swimmers would not make it on the roster. (i.e. if there were eight unique swimmers who finished 1-4 across the 100/200 and a unique swimmer finishing 1 or 2 across every Olympic event…that would equal 32 swimmers and of course there are only 26 slots). Would they have to leave 2nd place swimmers off the roster based on lowest world ranking…or some other criteria? (experience, junior/senior status, etc)
I’m not saying this will ever happen bc there are almost always… Read more »
Yes, they would rank swimmers based on how their finals swim compares to the FINA ‘A’ standard, percent-wise.
Thanks!
Hmm… this is slightly confusing.
I find it somewhat odd that the top two place getters in Olympic events are not automatically qualified (providing they are under WA A times or designated QT) as Priority 1.
I get that the chance of a second place getter not making the team is slim, but why out policies in place to limit the possibility?
For some countries in some events (particularly the US with their depth, and to some extent Australia) the second place getters are strong medal prospects as is often realised.
And going further still… I am somewhat in favour of allowing three swimmers per event per country if three swimmers meet the QTs. At least for some events.… Read more »
There’s simply not enough space; that would put it at 32 athletes with a maximum of 26, unless you’re saying that FINA should increase the cap to 32
Potentially, but thinking of already qualified swimmers (so perhaps in the freestyles/relay swimmers).
But really… I’d rather see top 3 from a strong swimming nation than a 1:02 in the women’s 100 free.
Based on IOC actions it is more like that they will cut the number of swimmers on the rosters from a Max of 26 to 24 than that it would be increased to 32.
What they have done at some European championships is to allow 4 swimmers/country in the prelims but only 2/country for the semifinals and finals.
IOC cutting number of swimmers would be terrible for the sport at the highest level… if that should ever happen.
Swimming has a deep and rich history at the Olympics. Cut some of the new sports with little interest globally for starters (but being introduced to appeal to younger people).
Euro Champs approach is interesting… similar to Pan Pacs, but I guess in both of these champs the field is smaller to begin with.
This 3 swimmers per event thing comes up fairly often but it’s really a non-starter. No country has had the top 3 performers of the year in any single event in recent history. All it would likely do is give even more chances to the strong swimming nations (who also have the most money to spend) and give them more relay heat backups. And of the major swimming nations, USA is the only one who doesn’t have a strict qualification procedure, so it would just end up with USA having double the number of swimmers of any other country and padding out their relay heats.
If someone deserves an international medal, they should have been top 2 at trials.
Won’t be an issue if team sizes are still limited. Not saying 3 in every event is the way to go. This is all hypothetical anyway.
And while no country has had the top 3 in recent history, it would be still be good to see the best of the best race each other.
“If someone deserves an international medal, they should have been top 2 at trials”.
I don’t think “deserves” comes into it. No-one deserves a medal. For me this is about fairness and having a method for the best swimmers to compete at the biggest events. The top 16 in world rankings for all events should be offered a wild card funded by FINA if not picked by their country (this could be trials winner in a country with absurb QTs or a third place finisher in a country with lots of depth). As swimming is so poorly funded and controlled by governing bodies the room for abuse is significant. This would help reduce that. In addition an individual swimmer should… Read more »
I like that approach actually… the top 16. I have seen that floated here before.
And I agree that the top 2 = deserved is not necessarily spot on.
Every federation has their own criteria, and sometimes it’s ridiculous, barring swimmers from competing when they’ve been ranked top 10 year end because they either didn’t hit a too strict QT, or perhaps they might have been sick during a qualifying meet etc.
My initial comment really was about wanting to see some of the best swimmers in an event get a chance to compete at the highest level instead of having to sit out when their season best would have been good enough for a finals berth if not a… Read more »
Hypothetically Michael Andrew hasn’t actually made the team yet. If he wins the 100br or 50fr, is he guaranteed swims in the 50fly and 50br? it all seems a bit uncertain for him based on what he has put in the bank so far.
Does Ress’ win assure him a spot since the 50s of stroke are lower priority than relay spots?
No, but it means that if he does make the team, he can swim the 50
flyback too, and thus, won’t count as a relay-only swimmer.50 back?
Oof, yes. Thanks.
i show 21 guys priority 4 or better. I see possible additions as: 2 guys in 100BR, MA/Curtis/Curry or Alexy(1) 50fr, 400fr/800fr 2nd finisher assuming Smith/Finke win, Armstrong and Casas.
Looks to be definitely 2 new guys in the 100Br, 1 guy in the 50 assuming King gets a spot and Armstrong. Thats 25 guys total. I would assume Clark in the 800 is sorta safe so thats 26 total. If there is another new guy in the 400fr or 200IM then they are over the limit. Note chance that MA doubles up still in 100Br/50fr would free up another spot.
Two new guys in the 100 BR? Fink, Andrew, Matheny are already listed. Fink, Andrew would move up in priority.
It looks like Michael Andrew’s best bet would be to win the M 50 FR. I certainly don’t trust Michael Andrew in the M 100 BR certainly not after the M 100 FL.
Phelps and Lochte were so good for so long with their doubles (and much more) that most people didn’t realize this was a rule. Top 6 in relays automatically locked in.