Epic Failure

On the women's side, maybe. On the men's side/mixed, much less likely. The Dutch women and the British women in the freestyle relays have an outside shot to nab a bronze if they are at their best and if Canada or China are not at the absolute top of their game in Paris. On the men's side it is far more open. The 4x100m freestyle alone could have 5 reasonable medal shouts - China, Aus, USA, Italy and GB. And you would probably add South Korea in the 4x200m and France in the medley as having respectable shots.

Oh I'm definitely happy that it happened and the precautions were absolutely necessary to enable it to do so. But it just felt 10% less 'special' than some of the others, if that makes sense?

Worth noting that the set up of the Kite is different from some of the other races. There's 20 preliminary races I think, then an 8 series for the SF and a final 6 race series for the final, I think. Not exactly sure of the numbers, but it is more than in the other events I know that.

The only disappointing thing about the Kenny jump was that there wasn't a proper crowd there to see it and roar him on. Obviously due to circumstances beyond anyone's control but that's why at times Tokyo just didn't feel entirely like a 'true' Games for me. Nobody's fault obviously. And it's why I'm even more hyped for this summer to see full crowds again (fingers crossed!!) That and the camerawork for that final. That wasn't great either.

If we're talking about the most remembered, the Dream Team has to be up there, surely? The 4x100m freestyle battle with the French has gone down in history amongst US swimming circles from what I've seen, as a race, although Spitz and Phelps's total hauls obviously outshine it.

Gotta love technicalities... Next you'll be telling me that our 1936 ice hockey gold doesn't really count because the team was basically Canadian.

Home team/higher seed has won every game thus far. Predictable.

The playoffs are no fun when your team isn't in it. *grumbles*

some strong choices. Others I'd consider - The Mens Hockey Gold in 88 - at least partly because of Barry Davies's commentary Derek Redmond in 92 - memorable for the emotion, not the sporting success obviously Redgrave/Pinsent in 96 - an Olympics that was a nadir for British Olympics generally, so this was the sole really bright spot. But it maintained our record of a gold at every Summer Games Kelly Holmes doing the double in Athens Andy Murray in 2012 The entire opening ceremony. Utterly bonkers and utterly brilliant

The draw for the knockouts would set Spain vs GBR and Canada vs RSA for the 2 semi finals, if all others went to form etc. Spain are capable of pulling a shock for me against GBR. Though still think that RSA will have too much for everyone else. GBR are seemingly getting worse year on year, which is pretty damning considering our resource advantage.

Yeah, the more I looked into it, the more likely that seemed. Although it still seemed a bit weird at times to my simple eyes. I assume the UCI have got better brains working on this than me. From a GBR POV, I guess it depends on whether we value having the 2 places for greater participation, or whether we are more focused on medal shots (with all due respect to Orr/Aldridge), in which case all our eggs are in a Pidcock shaped basket, so to speak.

Or is it calculated by the top 3 from each NOC in each event? That would reward stronger countries I guess, by allowing them to pick and choose who goes full effort at each event.

I'm confused about the qualification criteria, and you might be able to help. The qualification doc says that the ranking will be based on the sum of the top 3 riders from each NOC - https://stillmed.olympics.com/media/Documents/Olympic-Games/Paris-2024/Paris2024-QS-UCI-MountainBike.pdf However, if you look at the rankings list on the UCI website, some of the countries totals seem to be the sum of 4 riders. Was the criteria updated at some point to change it from 3 to 4? Or will the actual rankings published in May be the top 3? If it were that later case, GBR would probably be safer than they are now.

Jeriel Quainoo beating both NMB and Efoloko in Florida is potentially interesting. He has the UK lead with 20.34 (+1.9ms) right now. He's only 21 so definitely one to watch going forward.

It also probably doesn't help that it has the most odds on favourite in the entire swimming pool in it this year! The women's 200m fly is at danger again to break its own record, mind. By my rough calculations there's only 16 people who have hit either the OQT or the OCT, once you adjust for 2 per nation.

Rich people want to make more money, and sooner or later someone with enough money or influence will get behind the idea of supporting another Phoenix team. There's too much of a TV market in that area for them not to want to keep trying it. And it is for that reason, but at the other end, why a QC team is less likely, despite the history. It's just not a big enough market. I'm not saying it is a good thing, but if you have Atlanta, Houston and Phoenix all competing, QC has an uphill challenge to get ahead of them.

They also have always seemed very analytical to me, with little regard for the small nuances of sport. Their 1500m prediction is a classic example of that - they are predicting Jakob for gold (presumably), based on a mix of the last Olympics and his fast times on the circuit. But the last 2 WCs have obviously been won by Brits, beating him in essentially the same way. I wouldn't personally be making him favourite for Gold right now. Statistically, sure. But not on nuance. Then there's things like British Cycling's tactics about Olympics - which has been consistent since about 2009! They tend to dip somewhat in non-Olympic years and then bring out their super round wheels for the Games.

My previous comment was somewhat tongue in cheek. I'm certainly not expecting Jimmy to be in Tokyo form, although I do think his history has shown that he has the ability to rise to the occasion - in both 16 and 21, Jimmy was consistently splitting between 1-1.5 seconds quicker in the relays than his flat fly at trials. And obviously we know his prior commitment to the relays in dropping the 100 fly in Tokyo. But add in the fact that Joe has actually not even taken part in the 100 fly at the British trials since he was a junior in 2016, I believe, and there's an argument that he might actually be able to drop further if that is his sole target this summer... So I'm relatively confident that between them they can probably provide a split somewhere around 51. Which is what I would have expected from Jacob anyway. Whilst I would love to have seen Jacob improve to world class level, he had stalled somewhat - his quickest time was still from the British Champs last year and in Fukuoka he was slower than he had been at Champs. Basically, I'm not down on our chances with Jimmy/Joe as some people. Like, I don't think our chances are great but I don't think Jacob would have been a difference maker.

I mean, Jimmy did a 50 flat split in Tokyo. If he was in that form and if Medi/Kathleen could be in 59 mid we would still be in real medal contention! It's worth noting that even if Peters had been at his personal best from last year, he's only 6.8s quicker than MacInnes was at trials, whereas Morgan was 7s quicker than Dawson. It wasn't just that Peters had a bad trials, it's also that all our fly options are relatively weak, male or female. I give Medi about as much of a free pass from trials, much as I do Freya. In the circumstances, I was pleasantly surprised seeing her there at all. The bigger worry is that her backstroke seems to have been on the gradual decline over the last 18 months, as her freestyle has improved.

I mean, Harris if she finds her backstroke form has been the form GBR female backstroker since the last Olympics - she has 6 of the top 7 times, all well under the minute. She's been quicker than either Cox or Dawson have been in that time. She just hasn't been that quick this year. That being said, Dawson possibly only has the 100m and the medley. I wouldn't be sure that we'll go FMMF in the mixed this year. Think a MMFF is as likely. The differential is about the same right now between our back/fly swimmers.

So the only difference from my planned squad I posted after the champs is Whittle for Hanlon. A fair enough swap. With Evans only having one individual event, she shouldn't be taxed with 2 rounds of the women's medley. I'm not worried about not taking Peters. Yes he's been British #1 but if you look at his times over the last 18 months, they are not dissimilar from Guy's. I'd back Guy getting back to his best over Jacob suddenly taking a step forward. And that's assuming that Joe doesn't drop time himself now that he knows he has a spot there.

So I just totted up what I think are the totals for the OQT for USA, AUS, GBR, Japan, Italy, China and France, using the FINA LCM rankings from 1st March 23 to today. Those were the countries I thought might have a chance of being near the top of a list like this. There are other countries which are strong in part (Canadian & Dutch women) but less so collectively. I could be doing them a disservice not including them, but I was already looking at enough to fry my brain anyway Russia would likely be somewhere in there, but with their uncertain status about things, I've not included in these figures. USA - Men 83, Women 98 = 181 total Aus - Men 34, Women 60 = 94 total Japan - Men 38, Women 27 = 65 total China - Men 25, Women 39 = 64 total GBR - Men 34, Women 25 = 59 total Italy - Men 33, Women 14 = 47 total France - Men 25, Women 14 = 39 total These are qualified swims, not swimmers. So Duncan Scott - for example - is in the GBR quota 3 times (100m fr, 200m fr, 200m IM). It would take me a lot longer to work that out, at least for countries that are not GBR. GBR is 37 total swimmers with an OQT - 23 men and 14 women.

I don't think anyone doubted that Amber would have a strong year after her indoor improvements. I fully expect her to go under 50 at some point this year. But keeping spring NCAA form into the summer is not guaranteed. We only have to look at Britton Wilson last year. Even Adeleke - who held her form better than Wilson did - was over half a second slower in Budapest than she was at the NCAA champs. It's great overall to see Amber's progression. It just might not work out this specific summer. Obviously, I hope I'm wrong.

Do you have any actual evidence to back that up, or are you just guessing? Because unless Freya chooses not to go or her illness gets worse again, I would be stunned if GB don't take her. Even if just as relay cover. We saw in London that Freya at 90% (her description) is still good enough to be in the 4x100m free team. With the 4x200m and mixed medley as well, it would be crazy to not take her. It would be utterly self defeating to not select her.

It's tough to get a full read until some of the other countries have their trials. But this is where I would say we are at right now in the pool, in terms of prospective medals in Paris. Not predicting a particular colour for any of them. Very High Chance M 4x200m free M 100m breaststroke - Peaty Good Chance M 4x100m free M 200m free - Richards or Scott M 200m IM - Scott M 50m free - Proud Outside Chance W 400m IM - Colbert M 400IM - Litchfield M 200m IM - Dean M 4x100m medley Mx 4x100m medley Shock Chance W 4x200m free W 4x100m free M 100m free - Richards M 100m back - Morgan M 200m back - Morgan or Greenbank W 200m fly - Stephens or MacInnes W 200m back - Shanahan W 200m IM - Wood or Colbert Obviously, there's always shocks and surprises. The performance of other nations also will be key - you would expect the US and Aus to be strong always. But China are the great unknown. If they have a strong Olympics, our medal chances will be hit hard. If they don't, our chances open up in a bunch of events. Also, fitness is part of it - if Freya Anderson doesn't recover from her woes, our women's relay long shots become non-existant shots.