I have heard it said that Swimwatch is strong on criticism but never offers a solution. That is not true. Many Swimwatch articles have described an alternative policy to the failed strategy being followed by SNZ. Doing justice to a national swimming policy in a thousand words is not easy; probably impossible. However this post is another attempt to describe a New Zealand alternative to the Miskimmin plan that, for 20 years, has failed to produce an Olympic medal. It is a policy prepared and followed by Arthur Lydiard in Finland and copied in most of the world’s best swimming countries – especially the United States.

I can recall very clearly sitting in Lydiard’s Beachland’s home discussing centralized coaching. Arthur was adamant that elite coaching consolidated onto one site would not produce the best Olympic results. He explained why and how he had followed an alternative policy. I am confident this report encapsulates his views and would receive his support.   

 

• Introduction

 

This Review will consider swimming in NZ in two ways.

First, the Review will consider the current policy and discuss why it has not resulted in competitive success. The Review will make two recommendations for the future.

Second, the Review will discuss possible future policy initiatives aimed at improving the sports’ competitive results. The Review will make four recommendations for the future.

 

• Principles on which the policy is based

 

In order for a corporate policy to be effective it is beneficial for the policy to be based on a set of known and stable principles.

I believe there are several principles that would benefit SNZ’s competitive program.

1. SNZ should move away from imported foreigners brought in on short term contracts to coach high performance swimmers. And where foreign expertise is necessary a requirement must be that the foreign import leaves behind NZ residents capable of continuing their work at the same level.
2. SNZ should focus on controlling and directing an environment conducive to superior performance. SNZ is best placed to create, control and improve the environment in which private independent contractors operate. SNZ should not attempt to be a contractor. For example SNZ controls the High Performance Centre in Auckland. All the best swimming nations have Federations who legislate and promote elite performance by independent operators and stay out of direct contracting.
3. SNZ should ensure all parties involved understand SNZ’s standards as they apply to safety, quality, performance, discipline, rewards and the host of other features characteristic of a well-run swimming business. Detailed and accurate communication is essential.
4. SNZ should promote a coach driven environment. The world’s most successful swimming nations recognise that world class swimmers are identified, nurtured and maintained by coach led programs and publically identify and endorse the importance of coaches accordingly.

 

• Current Policy

 

1. SNZ should abandon the policy of running its own High Performance swim program at the Millennium Institute. SNZ does best promoting and policing swimming programs managed and run by outside private contractors rather than getting involved in managing and running a “state-run” swim school. It is hard to reconcile the perceived conflict of interest that inevitably arises when SNZ tries to be both the governor and the worker. Often I have heard or read comment that the SNZ Millennium swim school is “better” than the independent swim schools. I have also heard independent swim school owners say that it is not fair that SNZ should be competing with independent operators for swimming business – especially when SNZ is so heavily subsidised by the taxpayer. For SNZ to be both a controller and an operator is a recipe for conflict. SNZ would be best to focus on governing the business. Directly running swim schools is not part of the governing role.
2. The current policy of promoting competitive standards by bringing foreign coaches to the NZ to prepare swimmers for international events is never going to work. In fact it has only damaged the confidence and status of domestic coaches and has aggravated the fundamental problems that continue to hurt the performance of NZ swimming. The current policy has undermined and weakened the national coaching infrastructure.  

For the past fifteen years eight foreign coaches from the USA, Germany, the UK and Australia have been used to prepare SNZ teams. In addition some NZ swimmers have been sent to foreign training camps in Europe and the United States. In every case a foreign coach has been brought in, has been paid well and has left and nothing has changed – life goes on as though the foreigner had never been here. Structural change is needed.

Improving the performance of NZ swimmers is a task New Zealand domestic coaches must solve. New Zealand’s best swimmers have all come from domestic programs or American University teams.

And so this policy of an imported coach coaching selected swimmers in the Millennium Institute has not worked and will never work. It is expensive, especially when the funding of swimming has been so seriously reduced.

The table below summarises what I would recommend in relation to the current two policies followed by SNZ.

CURRENT POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

Recommendation One – Abandon SNZ involvement in direct high performance coaching and focus on promoting independent excellent swim schools.

SNZ is best involved in promoting and policing the business of swimming. Independent private contractors can be responsible for day to day operations. By focusing on and lifting the standards of private operators SNZ will be more effective.

Recommendation Two – Abolish foreign coaching and foreign training camps

NZ swimming must be run by NZ people. Bringing in foreigners is not going to do that. The function required is to turn NZ based coaches into international coaches capable of high performance coaching.

 

• Proposed future policy

 

There are four initiatives that will benefit NZ’s future competitive performance. Pursue these recommendations and I am confident NZ can achieve the competitive results shown in the table below.

PREDICTED FOUR YEAR COMPETITIVE RESULTS

Event	Time Scale	Forecast Result
World LC Championships	3 years to 2019	Two swimmers medal three in finals and five in top sixteen
Tokyo Olympic Games	4 years to 2020	Two swimmer medals four in finals and six in top sixteen

Recommendation One – Appoint a National Head Coach with a new role

NZ swimming would benefit from the appointment of a National Head Coach who coaches NZ’s domestic coaches. In other words the role of a National Head Coach would not be to coach swimmers – none at all – but to teach NZ coaches the changes needed to produce world class results.

It is important to understanding what the role of a national Head Coach should be.

A National Head Coach should travel the length and breadth of NZ constantly, finding out what domestic coaches need and stressing the view that in order for NZ to win international swimming events swimmers must be provided with world class properly balanced training. What that means is that the National Head Coach should ensure that coaches from Invercargill to Kaitaia have knowledge of and access to all the information and services in the pool and outside the pool required to produce champion swimmers.   

The reason many NZ swimmers have never swum faster is that for years their training has failed to equip them with the necessary fitness. Their training preparation could be better balanced. The swimmers are technically sound but as long as they graduate from learn to swim into poorly balanced training and conditioning programs they still will not win.

For example in the pool a domestic coach’s job is to provide aerobic, anaerobic and speed training in the correct proportions. And the correct proportions are pretty well known and followed by 99% of the world’s good coaches. Whether the proportions are supplied in monthly periods or weekly or daily periods the proportions are the same. Around the world good coaches supply training in the following proportions.

Aerobic Fitness

40%

Anaerobic Fitness

20%

Speed

40%

That’s the gold standard. Successful coaches provide fast swimmers with a 40/20/40 balanced program.

That is an example of the swimming education challenge faced by a new National Head Coach and NZ competitive swimming. Improve that and the country can win medals in international events easily. Continue providing primarily anaerobic and speed training and the swimmers physiologically simply will never swim fast – they can’t.

By using a combination of penalties and rewards a new National Head Coach whose job is to coach coaches needs to address the problem of insufficient aerobic input by about ten times, too much anaerobic input by about double and 20% too much speed training.

A Head Coach needs to educate and help NZ domestic coaches in all training related matters.

Recommendation Two – Change the amount of work

The amount of training being provided by NZ coaches needs to change. The changes should be enforced by using a combination of penalties and rewards.

The principal penalty available to SNZ is to deny selection to swimmers and coaches who do not comply with SNZ coaching standards. Initially this may cause some pain. Coaches and swimmers are used to being selected irrespective of their training performance. That should stop. The reasons and long term benefit of the required changes need to be fully explained. But once that is done the standards should be enforced irrespective of status, reputation or dissent.

The principal reward available to SNZ is to select swimmers to national teams. By complying with new SNZ training standards and achieving published qualifying times swimmers will be selected for national teams. That is their reward Training and performance are rewarded by selection. Financial rewards should only be part of published, open and outstanding performance. And when financial rewards are earned they should be paid equally to the swimmer and their coach.

And so what new SNZ training standard should be introduced?

The amount of training needs to be increased if NZ swimmers are going to achieve international swimming success. Several years ago the well-known Australian coach, Bill Sweetenham, became the United Kingdom Head Coach. He faced the same “amount-of-training” problem. He solved it by publishing a minimum distance all swimmers wanting to be selected for UK teams had to swim in training. For senior swimmers Sweetenham’s distance was 50 kilometres per week. And it worked. UK swimming is now very successful. In the Rio Olympic Games UK swimmers competed in 20 finals and won five silver medals and one gold medal.  

The table below sets out the minimum distance standards I would recommend SNZ adopt for swimmers wanting to be selected on NZ national teams. Clearly a new National Head Coach is going to have to introduce a comprehensive national reporting procedure in order to control and monitor the new training standards.

Age	Minimum Distance Per Week
18+	50
16-17	40
14-15	30
12-13	20
10-11	10
9 and under	No standard

Recommendation Three – More Competition     

NZ swimmers do not compete in enough international competitive events. No one can win international events if they never go to international events. It sounds ridiculous but that is what SNZ has been trying to do in recent years. Winning requires exposure to the environment and lots of it.

It is pretty well accepted that good swimmers should compete in about 100 races per year. So what needs to be done to address this problem? Here are some proposals:.

1. Make more use of World Cup events in Europe, the Middle East and Asia.
2. Continue to use national and state events in Australia
3. Make more use of the Mare Nostrum Series of three events in Barcelona, Canet and Monaco
4. Make more use of major USA domestic meets such as the Ft Lauderdale International and the Janet Evans Meet.

That is the sort of racing program necessary to achieve international swimming success.

All these events are run by non SNZ organisations. They simply involve SNZ selecting the swimmers and deciding on entries, travel, accommodation and financial arrangements.

Recommendation Six – A coach driven environment  

Every national Federation has to develop an environment in which the country’s coaches work. Some like the United States and Australia have worked hard to create a coach friendly, coach driven environment. Others have created an environment where coaches “need to be kept under control” where “coaches are too big for their boots” where there is an administrator driven environment.

The results are very clear. The coach driven environment works and is successful. The negative environment towards coaches does not work. Those Federations fail to perform.

In NZ we need to address the question of the respect and recognition given to NZ coaches and work to genuinely produce a coach driven environment. In my first book on swimming, “Swim to the Top”, I described the role of the coach as follows:    

It lies, I think, partly in the training of the coach, partly in the definition of the coach’s role. The “old pro” could teach only by repetition of his own skills as a practitioner and by requiring imitation. The new coach is a person trained not only as an expert in the skills and knowledge of the event, but in the skills of communicating that knowledge. This is an academic training, and gives to coaching the academic responsibilities of mastering a discipline and an area of knowledge, and of fostering these and passing them on.

So a coach is someone with whom you travel, who is a means of conveying the student or athlete along a rough road to a difficult destination. If we think of coaching as a means of travel, we may perceive more clearly both the importance and the limits of the coach’s role. The coach has indispensable functions: to instruct, to motivate and to inculcate strategy, especially that long-term strategy which no young competitor can know by instinct. The coach should also observe clearly defined limits: not to intrude into the ultimate aloneness of the competitor nor to diminish the essentially individual satisfaction of sporting achievement. The coach’s achievement and satisfaction are equally real, equally valid, but different. The means of travel is not the traveller.”

NZ has the basics right. There is a good coaches’ organization, an informative coaching newsletter, an interesting annual conference and the like. However that structure could work better. The coaches’ organisation needs to play a far more important and assertive role. For example, recently a major fee was introduced charging coaches to attend the Open Swimming Championships without consulting the coaches. That should never happen.

And SNZ need to encourage the added prominence given to all NZ coaches. NZ should initiate a program of tuition explaining to the Swim Coaches Association the greater scope and importance of the new role of all coaches in the nation’s sport.

And with respect and recognition comes responsibility. NZ coaches must be made acutely aware that with their new and more important role comes a far higher level of responsibility to generate winning performances.

While these recommendations might have the appearance of SNZ relinquishing authority to NZ coaches, the trust shown in such initiatives will be rewarded many times over by improved performance.

FUTURE POLICY RECOMENDATIONS

Recommendation One – Appoint a Head Coach

Appoint a coach with responsibility to coach NZ coaches – to improve the coaching environment and performance and to tutor NZ coaches in the importance of a 40/20/40 aerobic, anaerobic and speed training balance.

Recommendation Two – Change the type and amount of work

Introduce minimum weekly training distances and introduce penalties for non-compliance and rewards for compliance.

Recommendation Three – More competition

Make available a racing program of about 100 international races per annum.

Recommendation Four – A coach driven environment

Undertake initiatives recommended in this Review that promote the importance and responsibilities associated with coaching in the NZ. To produce a coach driven sport.

 

• Conclusion

 

The recommendations that have been made in this Review are honestly held views on how a national swimming program should be coached. I hope they do not sound pompous or self-important. That was never the intention. I can understand the NZ sporting authority’s disappointment in the sport of swimming’s competitive results. They could be improved. I believe the recommendations made in this Review would generate that improvement and would result in the forecast competitive results included in this Review.