2022 FINA WORLD AQUATICS CHAMPIONSHIPS
- June 18-25, 2022 (pool swimming)
- Budapest, Hungary
- Duna Arena
- LCM (50-meter format)
- Meet Central
- Preview Index
- Full Aquatics Schedule
- How To Watch
- Psych Sheets
- Live Results
- Day 1 Prelims Live Recap
- Day 1 Finals Heat Sheet
Women’s 4×100 Freestyle Relay
- World Record: 3:29.69, Australia – 2021 Olympic Games
- Championship Record: 3:30.21, Australia – 2019 World Championships
- 2021 Olympic Champion: Australia, 3:29.69
- 2019 World Champion: Australia, 3:30.21
- Australia, 3:30.95
- Canada, 3:32.15
- United States, 3:32.58
- China, 3:35.25
- Great Britain, 3:35.43
- Brazil, 3:38.10
- Netherlands, 3:38.18
- Hungary, 3:38.20
The Aussie women proved that they could still dominate in the absence of Emma McKeon and Cate Campbell, winning the women’s 4×100 free relay by over a second. However, Canada and the United States had many of their swimmers step up big time to make this race much closer than we thought it would be.
Leadoff Splits, Ranked:
| Country | Swimmer | Time |
| Australia | Mollie O’Callaghan | 52.70 |
| United States | Torri Huske | 52.96 |
| Netherlands | Marrit Steenbergen | 53.41 |
| Canada | Kayla Sanchez | 53.45 |
| Great Britain | Anna Hopkin | 53.70 |
| Brazil | Ana Carolina Viera | 54.78 |
| China | Zhang Yufei | 54.81 |
| Hungary | Nikolett Padar | 55.16 |
As the fastest woman in the world this year, most expected Mollie O’Callaghan to have a body-length lead over the rest of the field on her leadoff. She clocked a time of 52.70 that was the fastest leadoff in the field, but was off her best time of 52.49. This could possibly be attributed to the fact that she focused on her front half this time around rather than her stronger back half, splitting 25.67/27.03. When she set her PB, she was 25.92/26.57, being nearly a half a second faster on her second 50 than she was today.
Coming just 0.26 seconds behind O’Callaghan was American Torri Huske, who set a new best time of 52.96. With that time, she becomes the third-fastest U.S. woman of all time in the 100 free behind Simone Manuel (52.04) and Mallory Comerford (52.59), and the fourth U.S. woman under 53 seconds. Huske’s performances slightly assuages the fears of many Americans, who worried about the U.S. women not having any decent sprinters following the absence of Manuel. If Huske continues to improve, she could be the future of American women’s sprinting.
Zhang Yufei led off China’s relay in 54.81, significantly slower than her best time of 52.90. After being well off her fastest in the 100 fly, we could be seeing a very “off” meet for Zhang and many other Chinese swimmers (such as Li Bingjie, who missed the finals of the 400 free after winning Olympic bronze last year). Her underperformance is once again another sign that the training of Chinese swimmers was heavily disrupted by recent COVID-19 restrictions.
Rolling Splits, Ranked:
| Country | Swimmer | Time |
| Canada | Penny Oleksiak | 52.51 |
| Australia | Madi Wilson | 52.60 |
| Australia | Shayna Jack | 52.65 |
| Great Britain | Freya Anderson | 52.70 |
| USA | Claire Curzan | 52.71 |
| China | Yang Junxuan | 52.79 |
| Canada | Taylor Ruck | 52.92 |
| Australia | Meg Harris | 53.00 |
| China | Cheng Yujie | 53.18 |
| Canada | Maggie MacNeil | 53.27 |
| USA | Erika Brown | 53.30 |
| USA | Kate Douglass | 53.61 |
| Brazil | Stephanie Balduccini | 53.97 |
| Great Britain | Lucy Hope | 54.00 |
| Hungary | Dora Molnar | 54.01 |
| Brazil | Giovanna Diamante | 54.09 |
| Hungary | Fanni Gyruinovics | 54.15 |
| China | Zhu Menghui | 54.47 |
| Netherlands | Tessa Giele | 54.49 |
| Netherlands | Valerie van Roon | 54.81 |
| Hungary | Petra Senanszky | 54.88 |
| Great Britain | Abbie Wood | 55.03 |
| Brazil | Giovana Medeiros | 55.26 |
| Netherlands | Kim Busch | 55.47 |
The Aussies had two out of the three fastest rolling splits with Madi Wilson and Shayna Jack being right on their best, but it was Canada’s Penny Oleksiak who went the fastest time. Her 52.51 anchor leg was fast enough to propel her country into the silver medal position behind the Aussies, and bodes well for her individual 100 free.
Aside from the top three, there were many other swimmers who stepped up and went sub-53. One of them was Taylor Ruck, who clocked her fastest split in many years. Her 52.92 was not on the level of her 51.72 from 2018, but it was much faster than the 54.16 she clocked at the Olympics last year. That being said, Ruck spend the past season recovering from an eating disorder that negatively affected her performances in recent years. Her improvements this year are a step forth in her journey of redemption.
Claire Curzan‘s 52.71 anchor leg puts her in the “future of U.S. women’s sprinting” conversation alongside Huske, while Yang Junxuan‘s 52.79 was a minor sign of hope in China’s otherwise underwhelming performance at worlds so far. Great Britain’s Freya Anderson anchored in 52.70, the fourth-fastest out of all the rolling splits, which should be worth nothing as well.
There were no pyrotechnics from the AUS quartet …. but there were none from anyone else. The WR was never threatened but looking at the composition of the various teams, that was never truly realistic
What DID make the difference was that all four members of the quartet were uniformly excellent and either the best performer on their leg or on par with. It was an admirably composed and professional performance
USA’s bookends were excellent as were CAN’s 2nd and anchor legs but both countries clearly remain at least 1 leg short of full title contender status.
Both CHN & GBR disappointed with with both having 2 solid to excellent legs offset by 2 shockers.
Mollie is awesome but only 18 and without a ton of international swimming experience. I do wonder if Huske, who has been going out hard (arguably too hard) and hanging on in everything she swims this meet threw Mollie off her race a little. Having someone right next to you jump out that hard might have made her push a little sooner than she normally does and cost her a few tenths from her ideal pacing.
She still crushed everyone on the 2nd 50 as her 27.03 was still the fastest of any woman by nearly a quarter second. But if her ideal race is a little slower first 50 and even faster 2nd 50 like her PB was… Read more »
That was my observation as well. After her swim at trials she said she meant to go out faster so perhaps she was trying to get it “right” this time but turns out she had it right at trials with her more conservative front half. Jack also strayed from her trials pacing and paid in the back half.
Erika “Downtown” Brown and Kate Douglass are fantastic NCAA sprinters.
Not so much at worlds level.
Bathtub swimming isn’t world-class
I’d love to see a SCY 4×100 Butterfly relay with that team All four have been 49.0 to 49.3
Since when was 52.5 rolling start faster than 52.7 relay lead off?
Well you see Gheko, 7 is a bigger number than 5.
New at swimming?
While the United States women did a good job today, California has more people living in it than either Canada or Australia has in their entire country. Where are the United States female sprinters?
Doing other sports.
Swimming is not that popular in the United States. Swimming is a very popular sport in Australia.
People roll this argument out every time someone mentions population and it’s absolutely incorrect. Swimming wouldn’t crack the top 10 most popular sports in Australia. Last world champs literally could not be watched legally in Australia because there was no interest so no one had the broadcast rights.
There are literally more professional swimmers in Florida than the whole of Australia. There are more swimmers in the NCAA alone than total amount of Aussie swimmers who swim at a state level.
+1 you tell’em Sub13
Apparently other countries don’t have ‘other sports’.
Using this same argument, why doesn’t India dominate swimming? Perhaps factors other than population play a role here?
Notice the US, Canada & Australia are first world nations while India is a 3rd world country, most of their people are spending their time living day to day.
The USA is the largest populated 1st country in the world.
Of course they do. USA is the richest country in the world and outspends every other nation in swimming resources at least 100-1, as well as having the third biggest population, and the NCAA being the biggest university swimming competition in the world by far.
More population plus more interest plus more resources plus more money = success.
Australia’s weights are better then the US weight programs. Maybe for men what the US does is fine but clearly something has to change in the weight room for women sprinters
The US women are very competitive in the 100 fly, back, and breast. I don’t think it’s a weight room issue.
The problem is bathtub swimming. Americans train for shorter distances for the same international race – ie having the gas for only 100y while internationals train for 100m, the same distance that is raced.
Lol
Ledecky, Dressel, Manuel, Kalisz, Foster, Curry, Held, Murphy, etc proved you’re wrong.
They have success because they are talented, not because the bathtub system is ideal. If Americans actually trained for the right distances, they’d be going 46.XX flat start in the men’s 100m LCM and 51.XX flat start in the women’s 100m LCM.
Feels strange for me to see a 400 free relay final with no Kromowidjojo or Heemskerk.
Stranger to me is w400 free relay final without Campbell sisters.
It’s been 7(!) years since Steenbergen swam a PB in the 100 free and today she finally smashes the time she set when se was only 15. Don’t know if it’s going to be enough to final but still very nice to see perseverance pay off.