Olivier Poirier-Leroy is a former national level swimmer based out of Victoria, BC. In feeding his passion for swimming, he has developed YourSwimBook, a powerful log book and goal setting guide made specifically for swimmers. Sign up for the YourSwimBook newsletter (free) and get weekly motivational tips by clicking here.
I woke up this morning with the men’s 400 free relay from the night before still spinning around in my head.
There’d been a lot of build-up and hype revolving around this event in recent months, with the Russians putting in some scary swims at the World University Games, James Magnussen and the Aussies looking to avenge a fourth place finish in London, the French with an Agnel who may or may not be in peak condition, and the Americans packing serious heat in the form of defending Olympic champ in the individual event, Nathan Adrian.
Ultimately, we would see a repeat of London in several respects; the Americans fading into second place after holding the lead for much of the race, the French coming back to win on the anchor leg, and the Australians being shut out of the medals.
Here is how the race broke down for the top-4:
Russia
The Russians had been making some serious noise in this event in recent weeks, with their crushing win in the event at the recent World University Games in Kazan, Russia, as well as placing numerous swimmers in the top 8 in the world for the 100m freestyle.
At WUG all four swimmers had gotten under 48 seconds, including lead off leg Andrey Grechin, who posted the third fastest time of the year with a 47.98. Leading into Barcelona the Russian storm looked about to come crashing down on the French, Americans and Australians.
In the final Grechin swam the lead-off leg, just like he did at WUG, and touched in third behind Adrian and Magnussen. They would pull into second on the strength of Morozov’s strong third leg, but that would be as close as they would get, eventually placing third in a time of 3:11.44. With the exception of Lobintsev, each leg was slower in Barcelona.
Here is what the Russians did at WUG (in a time which would have won at Worlds), compared to what they did in Barcelona:
WUG BARCELONA
Andrey Grechin 47.98 48.09
Nikita Lobintsev 47.92 47.91
Vladimir Morozov 47.14 47.40
Danila Izotov 47.84 48.04
3:10.88 3:11.44
France
The French repeated the performance from London last year, again coming back on the final leg to out-touch the Americans. They were seemingly out of the race for the better part of three legs of the race, until Jeremy Stravius came back on the field with a 47.59.
Agnel led off with an underwhelming 48.76, while the second French swimmer, Florent Manaudou – who is better known for his 50 – split a 47.93. At midway the French were nearly a body length behind the Australians, Americans, and Russians.
A massive second half would change all of that.
Fabien Gilot, swimming third, had what turned out to be easily the quickest split of the race with a smoke-show 46.90 that got the French within striking distance. A marvelous take-over and break-out by anchor Jeremy Stravius suddenly had the French right in the thick of things, with all four teams in a line.
Another solid break-out at the 50 gave France the lead for the first time in the race, which they wouldn’t relinquish it. Stravius’ split was half a second faster than the anchors for the other three teams.
Here is how the French split the race:
Yannick Agnel 23.16 48.76
Florent Manaudou 22.91 47.93
Fabien Gilot 21.99 46.90
Jeremy Stravius 22.66 47.59
Australia
London was not a great meet for the Australian men, with their 4×100 squad favorites to win gold, they placed outside of the medals. James Magnussen would later place second in the 100m free behind Nathan Adrian, an event in which Magnussen had been the heavy favorite to win.
With a disappointing London finish, and a myriad of out-of-the-pool drama for the Aussies since then, the 4 x 100 freestyle relay provided a wonderful opportunity for their mens freestyle program to get back on track.
Magnussen’s opening leg was relatively so-so, given how fast he has been swimming the individual event this year. He split a 48-flat, which is well off the 47.5 he swam at Australian Trials.
Cameron McEvoy had a blistering second leg of 47.44 (4th fastest split of all swimmers) with an impressive 24.84 on the second half of this leg, to put the Australians into first place.
They would fall back with each subsquent swimmer, however, with Tommaso D’Orsogna and James Roberts both swimming 48.0’s to have them touch in 4th place, and just out of the medals again.
Here is how the Australians split the race:
Magnussen 22.78 48.00
McEvoy 22.60 47.44
Tommaso D’Orsogna 22.85 48.05
James Roberts 23.08 48.09
USA
In an interview at Trials, Jimmy Feigen called it – all four Americans would have to be under 47.7 to win gold. (The French averaged 47.79.) The Americans were on the ball in the prelims, with Anthony Ervin crushing a 47.3 to secure himself a spot in the final, and giving them the fastest qualifying time to put them in lane 4 later in the evening.
Nathan Adrian started things off for the Americans in the final, paired off against James Magnussen. Adrian was out like a shot, taking a healf body length lead into the 50. He tightened up in the last 15m or so, with Magnussen and Grechin coming back on him. Similar to London, Adrian got the best of the Aussie, touching first in 47.95 to Magnussen’s 48.00.
Lochte would swim a solid 47.80 to keep the US in the gold medal hunt on the second leg, handing it over to Ervin who would again post the fastest American split in the final, swimming just a shade slower than his morning swim with a 47.44 to get the Americans back into first place.
The third leg had most of the speed in the race, with Gilot’s 46.9, Italy’s Marco Orsi’s 47.25, Ervin’s 47.44, and Morozov’s 47.40 the four fastest splits of the final. Both Ervin and Gilot were out in under 22 seconds, with Gilot turning at a 21.99, and Ervin splitting a ridiculous 21.76.
Here is how the Americans split the race:
Nathan Adrian 22.31 47.95
Ryan Lochte 22.47 47.80
Anthony Ervin 21.76 47.44
Jimmy Feigen 22.73 48.23
I am so unbelievable mad at Universal Sports right now!
My cable provider doesn’t offer universal sports so I can’t get access to the live feeds.
I’d gladly pay for a live feed and I’ve done that in the past (I think I did that for the 2011 world champs), but they aren’t offering to do that this time around. They’re pretty much trying to put pressure on the cable companies to pick up Universal Sports at the cost of people like me missing the live streaming of the event or even PAYING for the live streaming of the event.
Sure I can watch the recaps and highlights of events, but good luck finding any replay that… Read more »
I like the Marco Orsi, Anthony Ervin, and Vlad (at WUGS) strategy. Take it out like its a 50 and hang on for your life. Something interesting I saw was Orsi’s reaction time was .02 which means Vlad and Ervin could have been faster with better reaction time. I also noticed Vlad’s relay start, he bent his legs before he entered the water which is un usual of him
Well, as for Ervin and Orsi they could have not played it differently, as they are primarily 50 freestylers. Actually, Ervin is also so talented – I root for the guy – that he can swim very solid 100 freestyles (he did beat VDH in Fukuoka 2001 after all!). But he is still one of those swimmers who go out fast like hell and then die.
Forget all the drama about the shoddy US lineup and performance, the real question is………what on earth are the Italians doing for their reaction drills, and why aren’t more teams following suit?!
Seriously, those are some amazing reaction times, and if the US team had the same reaction times as the Italians, that would have been enough for them to win!
As an Italian swimming fan, I would gladly give up these amazing reaction times for a single 100 freestyle real contender 🙁
Italy’s reaction times were all way too close to being DQed, although it was good for them in this particular race, you really don’t have much control when you’re that close.
After the morning session, I would have put Adrian, Ervin, Feigen, and Berens on the final relay. Feigen’s 48.3 leading leg should have worked out to about a 47.7 relay start–given that Lochte’s never been faster than 47.7, I’d have kept Feigen on the relay. I would have put Berens in Lochte’s place without a second thought.
It was a monumentally poor decision on the coaches’ part to put Feigen as the anchor. In a top meet like this, you don’t put a “rookie” as the anchor, especially given who the competition is. There’s always that possibility that a rookie will choke as the anchor…which is exactly what happened yesterday.
-I would have kept Adrian as the leadoff: Given that… Read more »
So many people counted the US out on this relay. I think in the long run this was a positive day. All things considered this is the summer after the Olympics in which all these guys participated so it has not been a normal 12 months for any of them as well as Berens. The US also has some up and coming guys who will be in the mix in 2016. Adrian was not spectacular but did his job. Lochte needs to train and stop doing TV shows. Ervin is maybe the unknown with his age. You can say Feigen choked but is faster than last summer, flat start, and gained valuable experience.
I don’t understand why some seem so reluctant to call out Fiegen’s swim. By far the slowest of the Americans and over half a second slower than prelims. Can he only swim fast in smooth water?
I think people are overlooking it because he has swam well this summer and really should have not been in that position. That anchor spot comes down to experience and confidence. Hopefully he learns something from this. What I don’t understand is why anyone needs to be called out. Weird training cycle this year and nobody really expected the US to win this anyways. The US will continue to be a force over the next three years.
I have no problems calling him out for choking…but I think the blame should rest much more on the coaching staff’s shoulders. Why on earth did they think a rookie would be a good choice for the anchor?
Based on his flat start time, he should have been around a 47.7, so I’d have kept him on the final, just as the second leg.
the thing is, he’s not that young any more… he’s more than a year removed from his college career, and if he wanted to prove at all that he’s the future of usa sprinting it was in this race.the reason i think people are calling out lochte more easily is because feigen got the second individual spot in the 100… it would be pretty unprecedented to not have him on the relay at night. not to mention lochte did not have to prove himself in the morning. I know there is some precedent for this, as phelps never had to do the morning swims even though he did not usually swim finals of the individual at trials, but clearly lochte… Read more »
Agreed, Eagleswim.
I call out the coaching staff for placing Feigen as the anchor, and for not moving Berens up to the final, especially since Berens’ 47.5 is a good .2 faster than Lochte has ever swum on the relay. Given that the whole Lochte thing played out the exact same way as it did in London, I don’t see why the coaches are so insistent on placing him in the final without a prelims swim.
Lochte ain’t no Phelps. That’s an ironclad truth, and no matter how much USA Swimming might want it to be so, they’re not gonna fit Lochte into that mold.
Just to play devil’s advocate, here’s the pro-Lochte counter-argument. In London, I think everyone agrees Lochte had an off-meet, and he still split 47-high on the relay when the French dude ran him down. So, assuming he’s NOT having an off-meet this time, one could expect him to do a bit better than 47.8.
Also, Berens got his 47.5 in part by having a nearly perfect relay start. His reaction time was less than a 10th. It’s pretty hard to count on him having a perfect exchange in the final.
Finally, this was Lochte’s first race of the meet, and Berens’ second. So, arguably Lochte should have been fresher. Most swimmers in this race went slightly slower (or in Feigen’s… Read more »
Great swim for team USA. For the doubters out there and the haters Ryan Lochte swam a 47.80 and Ricky Berens swam a 47.5 beating Lochte yes but Lochte was the second fastest on team USA’s relay in finals. Lochte should of stayed and Berens should of replaced Jimmy Feigen 48.23 thats where we lost the relay. you can’t blame Ryan Lochte this time.
Based on Feigen’s prelims swim, I think he should have stayed on the final, with Berens in Lochte’s place.
Without choking, Feigen should have been a 47.7 or so relay start. After prelims, I would have come up with this relay lineup and order:
-Adrian
-Feigen
-Ervin
-Berens
Where was Berens? Not for Lochte necessarily, but for Feigen? Even allowing for the difference in the rolling start, Berens was as fast, if not faster the Feigen in the morning swim.