With our Top 100 For 2023 series wrapping up, it’s time to revisit the rankings as we look ahead to a fast year of swimming.
We’ve already seen some jaw-dropping performances this year, namely from Leon Marchand and Kate Douglass in the NCAA, which should set the tone for some big-time swims throughout the year on the international stage.
Canadian superstar Summer McIntosh claimed the top spot on the women’s side, taking over from 2022’s #1 Katie Ledecky, while the Australian trio of Kaylee McKeown, Ariarne Titmus and Emma McKeon remain in the top five after ranking second through fourth last year.
See the full lists:
SWIMSWAM’S TOP 100 WOMEN FOR 2023
| Ranking | Swimmer | Country | 2022 Ranking | Change |
| 1 | Summer McIntosh | Canada | 24 | ↑23 |
| 2 | Katie Ledecky | USA | 1 | ↓1 |
| 3 | Ariarne Titmus | Australia | 3 | – |
| 4 | Kaylee McKeown | Australia | 2 | ↓2 |
| 5 | Emma McKeon | Australia | 4 | ↓1 |
| 6 | Maggie MacNeil | Canada | 8 | ↑2 |
| 7 | Regan Smith | USA | 11 | ↑4 |
| 8 | Mollie O’Callaghan | Australia | 57 | ↑49 |
| 9 | Torri Huske | USA | 21 | ↑12 |
| 10 | Sarah Sjostrom | Sweden | 10 | – |
| 11 | Lilly King | USA | 12 | ↑1 |
| 12 | Siobhan Haughey | Hong Kong | 9 | ↓3 |
| 13 | Kate Douglass | USA | 19 | ↑6 |
| 14 | Katie Grimes | USA | 39 | ↑25 |
| 15 | Zhang Yufei | China | 5 | ↓10 |
| 16 | Claire Curzan | USA | 26 | ↑10 |
| 17 | Ruta Meilutyte | Lithuania | NR | + |
| 18 | Kylie Masse | Canada | 13 | ↓5 |
| 19 | Alex Walsh | USA | 18 | ↓1 |
| 20 | Hali Flickinger | USA | 14 | ↓6 |
| 21 | Tatjana Schoenmaker | South Africa | 6 | ↓15 |
| 22 | Benedetta Pilato | Italy | 25 | ↑3 |
| 23 | Evgeniia Chikunova | Russia | 22 | ↓1 |
| 24 | Lara van Niekerk | South Africa | NR | + |
| 25 | Lani Pallister | Australia | NR | + |
| 26 | Yang Junxuan | China | 27 | ↑1 |
| 27 | Li Bingjie | China | 23 | ↓4 |
| 28 | Simona Quadarella | Italy | 20 | ↓8 |
| 29 | Shayna Jack | Australia | NR | + |
| 30 | Bella Sims | USA | NR | + |
| 31 | Tang Qianting | China | 79 | ↑48 |
| 32 | Phoebe Bacon | USA | 61 | ↑29 |
| 33 | Kasia Wasick | Poland | NR | + |
| 34 | Penny Oleksiak | Canada | 16 | ↓18 |
| 35 | Madison Wilson | Australia | 48 | ↑13 |
| 36 | Marrit Steenbergen | Netherlands | NR | + |
| 37 | Katharine Berkoff | USA | 74 | ↑37 |
| 38 | Reona Aoki | Japan | NR | + |
| 39 | Tang Muhan | China | 94 | ↑55 |
| 40 | Meg Harris | Australia | 95 | ↑55 |
| 41 | Marie Wattel | France | 59 | ↑18 |
| 42 | Leah Smith | USA | 77 | ↑35 |
| 43 | Mio Narita | Japan | NR | + |
| 44 | Yu Yiting | China | 38 | ↓6 |
| 45 | Anna Elendt | Germany | NR | + |
| 46 | Kiah Melverton | Australia | NR | + |
| 47 | Louise Hansson | Sweden | 33 | ↓14 |
| 48 | Erika Fairweather | New Zealand | 45 | ↓3 |
| 49 | Anastasia Gorbenko | Israel | 44 | ↓5 |
| 50 | Leah Hayes | USA | NR | + |
| 51 | Lana Pudar | Bosnia and Herzegovina | 89 | ↑38 |
| 52 | Tes Schouten | Netherlands | NR | + |
| 53 | Gretchen Walsh | USA | NR | + |
| 54 | Sydney Pickrem | Canada | 17 | ↓37 |
| 55 | Ingrid Wilm | Canada | 55 | – |
| 56 | Elizabeth Dekkers | Australia | 92 | ↑36 |
| 57 | Lydia Jacoby | USA | 15 | ↓42 |
| 58 | Yui Ohashi | Japan | 7 | ↓51 |
| 59 | Jenna Strauch | Australia | NR | + |
| 60 | Anastasiya Kirpichnikova | Russia | 40 | ↓20 |
| 61 | Annie Lazor | USA | 34 | ↑27 |
| 62 | Freya Anderson | Great Britain | 66 | ↑4 |
| 63 | Beata Nelson | USA | 62 | ↓1 |
| 64 | Melanie Henique | France | 78 | ↑14 |
| 65 | Erin Gemmell | USA | NR | + |
| 66 | Abbie Wood | Great Britain | 32 | ↓34 |
| 67 | Emma Weyant | USA | 31 | ↓36 |
| 68 | Claire Weinstein | USA | NR | + |
| 69 | Isabel Gose | Germany | NR | + |
| 70 | Margherita Panziera | Italy | 42 | ↓28 |
| 71 | Analia Pigree | France | NR | + |
| 72 | Rhyan White | USA | 36 | ↓36 |
| 73 | Merve Tuncel | Turkey | 81 | ↑8 |
| 74 | Kira Toussaint | Netherlands | 37 | ↓37 |
| 75 | Anna Hopkin | Great Britain | 72 | ↓3 |
| 76 | Taylor Ruck | Canada | 68 | ↓8 |
| 77 | Eneli Jefimova | Estonia | 90 | ↑13 |
| 78 | Chelsea Hodges | Australia | NR | + |
| 79 | Dakota Luther | USA | NR | + |
| 80 | Erika Brown | USA | 71 | ↓9 |
| 81 | Katinka Hosszu | Hungary | 67 | ↓14 |
| 82 | Lisa Mamie | Switzerland | NR | + |
| 83 | Sara Junevik | Sweden | NR | + |
| 84 | Maaike de Waard | Netherlands | NR | + |
| 85 | Beryl Gastaldello | France | 60 | ↓25 |
| 86 | Leah Neale | Australia | NR | + |
| 87 | Brianna Throssell | Australia | NR | + |
| 88 | Imogen Clark | Great Britain | NR | + |
| 89 | Mary-Ambre Moluh | France | NR | + |
| 90 | Isabelle Stadden | USA | NR | + |
| 91 | Jamie Perkins | Australia | NR | + |
| 92 | Katie Shanahan | Great Britain | 91 | ↓1 |
| 93 | Kelsey Wog | Canada | 97 | ↑4 |
| 94 | Arianna Castiglioni | Italy | 51 | ↓43 |
| 95 | Erica Sullivan | USA | 30 | ↓65 |
| 96 | Kotryna Teterevkova | Lithuania | NR | + |
| 97 | Maria Kameneva | Russia | 73 | ↓24 |
| 98 | Helena Bach | Denmark | NR | + |
| 99 | Mary-Sophie Harvey | Canada | 98 | ↓1 |
| 100 | Ella Jansen | Canada | NR | + |
Dropping out of the Top 100 (2022 ranking):
- #28 Ranomi Kromowidjojo (retired)
- #29 Cate Campbell
- #35 Wang Jianjiahe
- #41 Sarah Wellbrock
- #43 Sophie Hansson
- #46 Kelsi Dahlia (retired)
- #47 Olivia Smoliga
- #49 Anastasiya Shkurdai
- #50 Abbey Weitzeil
- #52 Barbora Seemanova
- #53 Boglarka Kapas
- #54 Simone Manuel
- #56 Minna Atherton
- #58 Kathleen Dawson
- #63 Emily Seebohm
- #64 Paige Madden
- #65 Kayla Sanchez
- #69 Pernille Blume (retired)
- #70 Molly Renshaw (retired)
- #75 Martina Carraro
- #76 Svetlana Chimrova
- #80 Emily Escobedo (retired)
- #82 Rebecca Smith
- #83 Rikako Ikee
- #84 Ajna Kesely
- #85 Yuliya Efimova
- #86 Tessa Cieplucha
- #87 Bailey Andison
- #88 Maddy Gough
- #93 Anna Ntountounaki
- #96 Yu Liyan
- #99 Ellen Walshe
- #100 Arina Surkova
For me Top 10 are
Summer McIntosh
Mollie O’Callaghan
Kaylee McKeown
Katie Ledecky
Ariarne Titmus
Sarah Sjostroem
Shayna Jack
Zhang Yufei
Regan Smith
Ruta Meilutyte
Rūta Meilutyte ranked as 17 AND WON 1ST PLACE.
By country: USA – 27; AUS – 15; CAN – 10; CHN – 6; FRA/GBR – 5; ITA – 4; SWE/RUS/JAP – 3; LIT/RSA/GER- 2; HKG/POL/NZL/ISR/BOS/TUR/HUN/SUI/DEN – 1
By continent: Nth America -37;Europe – 33; Oceania – 16; Asia – 12; Africa – 2
USA figure perhaps appears a little low but perhaps indicative that their usual predominance has been somewhat muted in the past few years. AUS & CAN figures appear about right and also indicative of “The Big Three’s” near total monopolisation of women’s relay podiums.
In many cases, the country numbers are indicative of either particular niche strengths and/or the presence of one particular outstanding individual performers. GBR are certainly “flattered’ with these numbers as most are… Read more »
Netherlands 4 (Steenbergen, Schouten, Toussaint, De waard)
Apologies !! Don’t know how I missed them given I had them on my “pen and paper” list.
I agree ( but not the language) I’d place her 3rd if it was me
Oh wow, you sure got her number with that cool nickname.
Speaking of Cate Campbell, who fell out of the ranks, she was at the Dolphins training camp on the weekend so I wonder if 2023 trials are on her radar? She took a very long break but she could probably make top 6 for a relay even well off her best.
In terms of any further comments on the list:
-Most underrated: Jacoby. Sure, she didn’t have the best year, but even getting close to her Tokyo time would have smashed the field at Worlds last year, and she has the benefit of youth.
-Most overrated: Sims. She has zero chance at an individual medal and likely doesn’t even qualify for an individual event, but is ranked above literally over… Read more »
I’d kind of assumed Bronte was unofficially retired because I hadn’t heard/seen anything about her intentions to be training again unlike Cate but she was also there
Bronte is there? I hadn’t noticed her in any of the posts on IG. Is she training or there in another capacity?
she didn’t post about it but dellyphotoninja posted a couple pictures of her and Cate training
She’s in one their Insta stories right now and tagged
Yep, I saw that one. So I guess she’s not retired. If both Campbells get back in form and some young ones break out the women’s 100 is gonna be ridiculous in 2024.
If we’re talking Paris then I think Bronte’s individual days are behind her but she could make the free relay.
I would have to assume Emma wins the 50 and 100 free (and if she still plans to swim it, the 100 fly).
Cate could worm her way in to the 50 free individually because her PB is still almost 0.4 faster than Jack, who seems like the most obvious next pick. Meg also a possibility.
Emma should win the 100 free and MOC seems like the obvious second, but she did have a little trouble balancing free and back at SCW. After that it’s honestly anyone’s guess, but Cate, Bronte, Madi, Shayna and Meg are all in the… Read more »
We’ll probably see some 53s miss the final at trials.
Yeah that’s crazy.
Top 6 Australian trials aggregate time was 316.79 seconds. The top 6 aggregate time in the Tokyo final was 314.81 seconds.
The top 6 Australian women were less than 2 seconds off the top 6 in the world at the Olympic final. Insane!
And someone commented the other day that Emma’s medals are inflated because it’s so easy to get on Aussie relays lol.
Aussies has 8
MOC, Jack, McKeon, Harris, C1, C2, Wilson, Wunsch even Throssel or Titmus teaming with MOC & Jack will be hard to beat
Would love to see one of those young girls give the 200 free a go, the 4×200 strong, but depth not as strong as 4×100.
Jamie Perkins (17) was a 1:57.34 last year and Casey (16) was a 1:58.49. Pallister was 6th at trials with a 1:56.28, but then Wilson’s lead off at Worlds was only 1:56.7.
We have the talent and have the depth, but just seems like we’re missing the consistency. Neale was the only one of our 200 relay swimmers in Budapest that exceeded expectations, the other 3 were all at least half a second slower than they should have been.
Perkins is training with Boxall’s group now so hopefully training with Mollie and Arnie will only accelerate her development in time for Paris.
To be fair Madi had covid not long before Worlds.
Oh I didn’t realise that. Well fingers crossed she can make some fast improvement. Boxall definitely knows what to do with a 200 swimmer!
Yes true about Madi, but at the same meet her 100 splits were her 3 fastest ever, and by quite a lot.
Sprints can benefit from more taper (like forced rest for covid) while too much taper will cause loss of fitness for longer distances.
Yep, by Paris I believe the US will have 4-5 swimmers at 1.55 low & better, Ledecky, Gremmell, Sims, especially Weinstein (15 & swimming mid 1.56) & Katie Grims (16 with a bullet).
I’m looking at some 1.55 low to go with Titmus & MOC.
Do you mean flat start or split? Only 24 women have ever had a 1:55 low flat start or better and most of them are retired or no longer swim the event.
If Titmus (1:52 high split) and MOC (1:54 low flat start) can both hit their potential in the same race, then we really only need two 1:55 mids to beat the WR by almost 2 seconds. But yes, a third reliable 1:54 or better split would be ideal.
Neale hit a 1:55.27 in Budapest and Melverton hit a 1:55.40 in Birmingham.
MOC said she had a big break after Duel in the pool & did not train for freestyles as not qualified for SCWs for any individual freestyles.
She had short prep training for the backstroke.
When/where did she say that?
Up next O’Callaghan is the 16th FINA World Swimming Championships (25m) in Melbourne, where she will shift her focus to the 50m and 100m backstroke, but will surely be used for the freestyle relays as well. It’ll be her first major international meet in Australia.
O’Callaghan took a lengthy break after the Duel in the Pool in August, as she had surgery on her nose to repair a deviated septum, and recuperated from some bouts of illness.
Her preparation for Melbourne didn’t start until late September but she will be one of the fan favourites amongst the Australian crowd coming to see their Dolphins in a major international meet for the first time since the 2018 Commonwealth Games.
Imagine checking every Instagram post posted by people who aren’t aware of your existence, checking to see if a person who’s not aware of your existence is in any of the pictures taken in a place thousands of miles away from you
The posts are by Swimming Australia and I live in the same city where the camp is happening. I also wasn’t looking for Bronte specifically (or anyone else) until someone said she was there. I think most people assumed she’s retired.
But sims did beat gemmell at knockville (2nd to ledecky in 1:57.9 in heavy training)
Not sure what the relevance of this is. Gemmell also doesn’t have a chance at an individual medal.
Madi wasn’t at the camp due to some recent health scares, thankfully she is fine.
Sophie Hansson is a glaring omission
I guess I didn’t pay attention last year. Quadarella at 20 and Sullivan at 30 were much too high. Female distance swimmers cannot be given that much benefit of a doubt, due to comparatively low level required to reach the podium. I still think Grimes is too high right now at 14 but she has a chance to fulfill that number given youth, the 400 medley, and open water bonus.
It’s sad but proper to see Rikako Ikee fall out. On raw talent alone she would be well within the Top 10 right now. Unfortunately her times have stalled and it seems evident the sickness and layoff were too much to fully overcome.
Why is it so common to say that the women’s distance events are weak? And almost to dismiss the top athletes in those events? I don’t think that’s what you meant, but I’ve seen this attitude all over this site and I seriously don’t get it.
It’s impossible to get a perfect comparison between events because almost by definition, the best swimmers in a particular event are the best in their event, and not the best in others.
But look–let’s take the 5th best performer in history for each long course Olympic event, and compute the percentage difference between men and women. I didn’t adjust for era, but most of these swimmers in most events are post-supersuit.
50 free: 12.36%… Read more »
You seem to be missing a major obvious trend in your own data: Every single stroke and event has a smaller gap between men and women the longer it is. Every single one. That seems like pretty clear evidence that the result is physiological. It’s basically statistically impossible for that to be a coincidence. So the metric of men vs women is not useful data to determine which events are weak and which are strong.
Sorry—think I wasn’t clear enough in my post. You can see a couple of trends from the data I posted. The most apparent one is the decrease in margin as distance goes up, as you said. There also appears to be a slightly smaller gap in freestyle than in other strokes, although this isn’t as strong of a trend.
Given this, it’s hard to directly compare distance freestyle to other events, particularly since there aren’t any other events of the same length. But if you had to pick out events that were weak for women based on this data, you might pick the 100 back or the 400 IM. One could reasonably argue that the women’s 800 is stronger than… Read more »
I compared it to track, which is basically 9.5-12% with distance events favouring men more than sprint events.
Swimming is rather different in regards to physiological demands, women should produce less drag in the water, and considering the balance between aerobic and anaerobic being very different to track. Swimming is usually more lactate restricted while track is aerobic capacity outside of a few lactate events.
I would conject that distance swimming events narrow in favour of women, as their traditional weakness against men are not important in those events, and their lower CdA/friction helps even the playing field even with much lower power output, this should behave similar to cycling. But it doesn’t, the Hour record has men… Read more »
Also, a 1% difference between swimmers in the same event looks far worse in distance races than sprints.
Men’s distance swimming is in a brilliant place right now as there are so many contenders within a tight margin who are reasonably close to the WR. Women’s is what it is, I’d love if more than one woman could do an 8:09/15:29, as that would be within 1% of the WR, but that seems distant.
Regarding stuff like the 100 breast or 200 fly, there are some people who do diminish those, everyone enjoys events with more than 1 contender.
I like your attempt to defend the women long distance events. But when someone is talking about strong/weak event this person is talking most likely about competition in this event and its development in recent years. The women 1500 competition has plateaued in 15:40x area. Only Friis managed to break through 15:40 barrier and it happened 10 years ago. Someone may argue that it maybe because ladies are close to their biological limits. Ledecky says “No”.
The picture is better with 800 distance though. The outstanding world record of Adlington (8:14) that was set 14 years ago is must to swim for leading performers now.
Yeah but I think in 800 trying to get below 8:10 is almost the same as trying to get through 15:40 barrier.
I think there’s a number of reasons:
1. Women’s distance are literally the least swam events, so by definition there is the least competition overall.
2. When looking at the top swimmers, there are very few that realistically have a chance at medals. If you look at the much more popular events like 100 free, there are at least 10-15 swimmers with a realistic chance at a medal and probably 5 with a realistic chance at gold. There’s nowhere near that for women’s distance.
3. Comparing the top performers to the field shows there is way less competition.
100 Free WR
Vs 10th performer 2023: 3.19% slower
Vs 50th performer 2023: 5.36% slower
Vs 150th performer 2023: 7.31% slower … Read more »
Don’t they have fewer competitors because they are more difficult? So many people disparage distance swimmers but their events require me fitness bother metal and physical to excel.
I don’t believe that’s the case. But even if it was, then so what? Something being unpopular because it’s difficult doesn’t make it more competitive. By definition it’s less competitive because there are less people trying to do it.
I would disagree with this and it’s not like there are no competition in long distance cause there are and it doesn’t make the event less important cause it’s less competitive and it’s just that since Ledecky exist ,no one is able to get to her level .
This is some good data. Thanks for dreiging this up!
I’d say that the difference from 1st to nth isn’t quite robust in the case of an outlier top swimmer. Something similar would also hold for the men’s 100 breaststroke; the gaps between Peaty and everyone is very large. In general, if you’re comparing an event to itself, it will be weak in one way and strong in another.
That said, I like the comparisons 10th to nth. That’s much more convincing to me. In all these cases, the gap from 10th to 50th is a bit over 2%, and from 10th to 100th is a bit more than 4%. But you’ll notice that these gaps are smaller for the… Read more »
10th to nth is more convincing to you because it gives you the answer you want. If you’re concerned with Ledecky being an outlier then ignore her not the top 9.
I don’t understand your point about “off events”. You seem to be making the case that because more people swim the 100 free it is less competitive because a lot of those people don’t “seriously” swim it.
An event being more accessible increases its competitiveness because it’s more accessible: by definition there is more competition and it is harder to get a higher rank. The fact that no one outside of distance specialists swims the 1500 is a point against the 1500 being competitive.
If every person in the world owned a gun do you think that shooting would be more or less competitive than if only 0.1% of the world owned a gun?
EDIT: Actually maybe sub in… Read more »
What might be more useful is comparing all time rankings and compared to the 2nd best performer since Ledecky is a pretty clear outlier:
The 10th fastest 100 free is 1.21% slower than the 2nd fastest and the 25th fastest is 1.98% slower than the 2nd fastest.
In the 1500, the 10th fastest is 0.64% slower than the 2nd fastest and the 25th fastest is 1.81% slower than the 2nd fastest.
Comparing the 800 shows even less spread out results, where 10th fastest is 0.55% slower than 2nd, 25th fastest is 1.18% slower than 2nd.
So at least in the historic rankings, there might actually be less spread among the top 25 in the distance events compared… Read more »
This is a good point, there is a dense cluster of swimmers in a tight range around the 8:15/15:40 mark. It is arguably more damning that it took 13 years for the old 800 WR to be broken by more than one person.
The old 1500 WR has still only been broken by Ledecky, it has been #2 for going on 10 years.
So really let’s just forget about Ledecky until a few swimmers can truly leave Adlington/Friis behind. What happened in the 400 will happen in the 800/1500, it is just human nature.
Big timedrops in a short period are very doable in distance events, just look at Wiffen. There is hope, Paris could change the world.