Cinnamon Bun

I don't really see that as an imbalance but moreso just the nature of swimming, you get a lot of swimmers who are good at multiple strokes and that quality inevitably translates to medals. But with how unpredictable these splash and dash events are I doubt the dominant names would have it completely their own way. Also regarding country participation, Kirsty has also stated that she wants to eliminate the awarding of universality spots to events that don't warrant them and decrease the amount that each country gets - the 50m events are a good way to achieve both as you'd think the vast majority of countries would have a least 1 athlete who could do 1 length of an Olympic size pool.

Tbh if you increased the quotas by 2000, you could very likely have the best of both worlds.

You don't have to take out any events for the 50m's to be in, yes it would mean an increase of the overall athlete quota but it's definitely something that Kirsty would look at doing to include more events and to increase the participation of athletes.

There are a number of reasons why the 50m events would be a good edition: 1. They're good events to use for universality quotas, as opposed to 200 and 400m events which can often hold up events and put those who compete in them in a bad light. 2. There are plenty of splash and dash 50m specialists in fly, back and breast that are best suited to the longer 100m events. 3. The splash and dash nature of the events make it more entertaining for the audience to watch and the edition of 6 more events would give the spectators more value for their money. 4. More countries would have a good chance of winning their first swimming medals with the likes of and being in contention. Swimmers would have to manage their schedules around these events, like they have to do at the World Championships, and you wouldn't need to take out any events as all you need to do is extend the morning session by an hour and the evening by 30 mins.

I hope she's just pulled the wool over Bach's eyes and gained his trust just to get in this position, but only time will tell. Her position on trans athletes is positive, and I'd like to think she's for a 3 week Olympic games and an extension of the current athletes quota with her being a former athletes in recent times. Only time will tell whether she's good for the role, but this first year will likely be crucial to how successful here tenure is going to be with LA events and qualification routes to be decided and Milan-Cortina 26 taking place.

I don't think it'll be as bad as people think, Kirsty has gone against the Bach grain with some things such as the transgender issue so there could be a case here of Coventry using Bach just to get in this position. But the whole situation of almost all the members sucking up to Bach was really quite sickening.

It probably is but having Zimbabwe suspended during your tenure isn't something to be proud of.

If she can get pressing matters sorted like this blanket ban on transgender athletes sorted quickly, like she promised to do in a recent BBC interview, then I can see her reign being quite successful. I can also see her being in favour of more athlete quotas for LA which is always a good sign, and maybe we'll finally get 50m events fully at an Olympics which is something I assume she'll be looking at doing.

Quite surprised by the result, I guess Bach has more influence on every member than anyone expected. I just hope Kirsty's reign is better than her tenure as Secratary of Sport in Zimbabwe.

I'd take either Samaranch or Coe, the others haven't really do enough for me to warrant the role. I think anyone who takes charge will be better than Bach though, who I'm really glad to see the back of.

Maybe it's my youth, but I don't understand the distain for Coe being president. From a political point of view I understand why people, like myself, aren't a fan of him but from a sporting point of view I think he's done a good job as head of World Athletics and would be one of the few candidates who could successfully deal with Trump heading into LA 28.

Surely not, they're the showpiece events of every cycle. I can only think they must've had discussions over increasing the 10,500 quota for LA.

Like Sindo said, post Olympic year is always tough as nothing really happens so there's no real motivation for people to be on the forum so the lack of action should probably be expected. Regarding the prediction contests, if people are OK with it I don't mind stepping up and hosting them in Wumo's absence. I might need some help with the table templates and all that technical stuff but other than that I should be all good.

I think what someone like Coe and Samaranch offers is stability for the next 5 or so years after the controversies that have happened over the last couple of years which has tarnished to an extent the reputation of the Olympics and the IOC, there also needs to be someone who's strong enough to deal with Trump in LA who will undoubtedly try to make it all about himself and try to stop rightfully qualified athletes from entering the country.

Hopefully Pitman is back for LA, she will be key to the Women's success although there is more young promise in the women's side than the men's. Wise will be a big miss for the men, a fairly consistent performer who leaves a big hole to be filled. Hopefully Ella Gibson comes over from compound to do some recurve events, as far as I'm aware there's no plans for a compound to be a late edition for LA or for it even to be included in Brisbane so it would be a shame if she never got to showcase her talent on an Olympic stage. I'm fairly confident both team will be in decent knick and qualify for LA but we can't leave it as late as we did last time again.