This post will consider recent feedback received by Swimwatch.

I have heard from three sources that Gary Hurring, Donna Bouzaid and Kent Stead are leaving SNZ – either because they have been pushed or have resigned. Is this true? If it is I am distressed that yet again NZ citizens are being sacrificed in favor of foreigners. If it is true I imagine that lack of money is the motive. Well done SNZ. You have just fired the New Zealander best qualified (Gary) to be national coach. As I say, assuming the leaks are real.

And second I heard from two sources that the case to get Kane Radford into the Olympics had to be paid for by his family. SNZ put $30k aside in their accounts to pay their costs. The case was unnecessary and having lost it so comprehensively SNZ should have paid Kane’s costs. It is what decent people would have done. Assuming Kane’s cost were similar to those of SNZ, $30,000 is a huge amount of money for a family to find to get their son onto a New Zealand team. The Radford’s did not deserve that

But the most important feedback I got this week was in response to the post suggesting an alternative SNZ high performance policy. The reply was well thought out, intelligent and a sincere effort to suggest changes that would benefit swimming in New Zealand. I want to consider these ideas both where they contradict and where they support the policy proposed in my earlier post. The correspondent’s comments are shown in italics and my replies follow.

In high performance, sports’ federations need to focus on athletes who have the potential to win medals in 2020. Swimming NZ does not do this. Start focusing more on younger swimmers not just the Lauren Boyles, Matt Stanleys and Glenn Snyders of swimming.

This comment is both very right and very wrong. First – where I disagree. It is not SNZ’s job to pick winners – no matter how old, or young, they are. That responsibility lies with the swimmer’s coach and family. Winners can emerge from anywhere at any age. Snell came from Opunaki, Halberg from Eketahuna, Loader from Dunedin and Davies from Tokoroa. Toni Jeffs did not start full time training until she was 18. Responsibility for identifying champions needs to be devolved down to the home coaches responsible for the swimmer’s progress and not vested in a sporting version of the granny state.   

And second – where I agree. SNZ should be supporting every coaching program in the country and every good swimmer irrespective of age. And SNZ does not do that. They are too busy running around trying to make the Millennium Institute work to develop the national infrastructure that would produce Olympic champions. Goodness knows how many Snells, Halbergs, Loaders and Davies swimming has lost in the past twenty years because SNZ decided to do everything on the North Shore rather than focus on and improve coaching programs everywhere.  

Canada (and Australia) have regional High Performance centres. Soon there will be nearly as many swimmers from NZ there than in its own High Performance Centre. 

If you think about it the policy proposed last week in Swimwatch is effectively promoting the idea of Regional High Performance Centres. There is no reason why Waterhole, United, North Shore, HPK and others can’t be high performance centres in Auckland and Tawa, Capital, Karori and others in Wellington and Aquahawks, Heretanga and others in Hawke Bay. Every coaching program that complies with SNZ coaching standards needs to be treated by SNZ as a high performance centre.    

Initiatives to foster performance should start at Junior (U18) level – Aussie Age Grades, then World Juniors/Jnr Pan Pacs. SNZ currently has no involvement in this at the moment apart from naming the teams and coaches.

Here there is philosophical disagreement. It is not SNZ’s job to foster the performance of any swimmer of any age. Swimming is not a “granny” state run business. Responsibility for fostering a swimmer’s performance belongs to the swimmer and the swimmer’s coaching program and the swimmer’s family. SNZ’s job is to set coaching standards and then monitor and support whatever plan the swimmer’s team believes is best whether that’s World Juniors or the HBPB Summer Champs in Gisborne.    

Aussie state champs – NSW for seniors and Queensland for age graders not near Olympic B times should be utilised.  Currently swimmers go of their own accord. But there is no coordinated strategy between regions that send these teams

This view could very well be right. I enjoy the NSW Open meet and the Queensland Age Group meet. However here again it is not for SNZ or me to tell swimmers where they should swim. If Gary Martin in Gisborne thinks the South Australian Championship in Adelaide is a better event for his swimmers then that’s where they should be. As Arthur Lydiard put it to me, “Trust your coaches.”

There are no swimming standards in NZ apart from FINA A and B times and FINA points for national and development teams. Swimming NZ should have “on-track” times like Swimming Canada does. If swimmers cannot get within 4% of their PB in their best events (up to 400m events) don’t sent them to overseas competitions until they can.

Although the correspondent’s view is close to mine I would expand the “on-track” times thought. SNZ should set a number of content, distance and time standards for local coaching programs and then have a comprehensive monitoring/reporting procedure for evaluating compliance and progress. “On-track” times would be an important part of the reporting and support process.  

I think minimum weekly training distances are being exceed by coaches in NZ – some who are overtraining their swimmers

Very few coaches are overtraining swimmers in terms of distance. Distance on its own never hurt anyone. Phelps is reported to have been swimming 80 kilometres a week at 13. What is overtraining and does hurt swimmers is the balance and type of training being swum. A bad coach can kill a swimmer with speed work sprints whether the distance is 18 or 80 kilometres a week. Overtraining is almost always a product of the type of training, not the distance.

Ensure swimmers peak at pinnacle events, not at their trials.

This is a view that supports the appointment of a National Head Coach with responsibility for coaching coaches. Failure to peak at a planned event is almost always the result of a coaching error. The coach has mistimed the swimmer’s preparation. The new National Head Coach position recommended in the previous Swimwatch post will have the effect of reducing the number of these training errors.       

The correspondent concludes his email with four points regarding the scheduling of swim meets. I currently have very little understanding of New Zealand meet schedules and therefore will not comment apart from reprinting below the changes the correspondent would like to see.   

The meet programme is too random. No point having a top regional meet on the same weekend as Div2. Don’t have NAGs a week before Opens. Have at least one long course open meet in both the first half and the second half of each year.

Ensure each main swimming region has an all-day meet at least three times a year

Ensure NZ Opens is not on the same time as Australian Age Grades/Opens or state champs.

Make zonal competition 15U and 16O – not 13-15 and 16+