Australian female swimmers at the 2024 Olympics are now faster than Mark Spitz

Medal table | Olympic schedule | Olympic news

PARIS — The stunning stat that tells the ongoing story of Olympic swimming’s evolution is, on the surface, a testament to Australian speed. It’s the story of Ariarne Titmus, the “Terminator” of world records; and Mollie O’Callaghan, a 20-year-old who could soon be a breakout star of these Paris Games.

At Aussie Olympic trials last month, they swam the women’s 200-meter freestyle in 1:52.23 and 1:52.48, respectively — the two fastest times in history.

They also blasted through an invisible, somewhat arbitrary barrier.

Titmus and O’Callaghan, on June 12, 2024, became the first women to swim faster than Mark Spitz ever did.

Spitz, an Olympic legend, swam to a then-unprecedented seven golds at the 1972 Games in Munich. He set world records in all seven events, including four individual ones: the 100 and 200 freestyle, and the 100 and 200 butterfly.

Until last month, no woman had ever touched those times. No team of women had ever bettered a 1972 Spitz-led relay. Then along came Titmus and O’Callaghan, and …

“Wow! That’s amazing,” Rowdy Gaines exclaimed when I initially said that the Aussie times were faster than Spitz’s personal-best 1:52.78.

But then, after pondering the stat, Gaines amended his reaction.

“At first, when you told me, I was shocked,” the Olympic champ and longtime voice of swimming told Yahoo Sports. “And then I started thinking about it. … Maybe it’s not so shocking at all. Because that’s the natural progression of the sport.”

In every single swimming event, from the men’s 50-meter free to the women’s 400-meter IM, humans have shaved second after second off world-best times throughout and since the 20th century. The progressions have not been linear, but they have been continuous. Technical improvements, technology, rule changes and resources consistently push the sport to new heights.

So it is, to insiders, somewhat unsurprising that women would surpass Spitz. The comparisons of contemporary women’s times to historical men’s times are a fascinating window into that progression.

Although no Spitz best had ever previously been bettered by a woman, other 1972 world records have been. In fact, by the late 1980s, Janet Evans out-swam the men’s 1972 times in both the 800 and 1,500 free. By 2016, Katie Ledecky was 19 seconds faster in the 800 and 32 seconds better in the 1,500 from the ’72 Games.

At shorter distances, though, the historical times have been harder to chase down. The rest of the 1972 men’s records remained untouched by women until the “supersuit” era. In the mid-2000s, buoyant full-body racing suits helped dozens of swimmers smash and lower world records. From 2006-09, five more 1972 men’s times — in both IMs, both breaststroke events and the 400 free — fell.

The other nine — including the seven that belonged to Spitz — survived 2009, and held strong until 2024.

After the 2009 world championships, the “supersuits” were banned, and the spate of world record-setting swims abruptly paused. In some events, it still hasn’t resumed. Such was the performance-enhancing potency of the polyurethane suits, which remain the foremost example of how engineers, and tech beyond a swimmer’s control, can accelerate the sport. (Another example is starting blocks.)

But all the while, swimmers themselves have been improving.

Quad by quad, early-morning practice by practice, the athletes and their coaches — and, increasingly, high-performance experts and data scientists — have corrected inefficiencies in strokes, or developed innovative training methods, and chopped down times tenth by tenth, hundredth by hundredth.

One particular innovation, the underwater dolphin kick, has likely chopped full seconds off leading times since the 1980s. Other innovations apply to specific strokes. Changes in recommended head position, for example, have refined the freestyle. On the men’s side, 10 years after Spitz’s final swim, Gaines had taken nearly four full seconds off the legend’s record in the 200 free.

And 19 years after that, in 2001, Ian Thorpe was 4.24 seconds faster than Gaines had been.

By 2009, in the supersuit’s last hurrah, the men’s 200 free world record dropped 10.78 seconds lower than the 1972 mark.

In that same span, however — and across the board, not just in the 200 free — women’s times have fallen even further.

Gaines and others chalk this up to the slow march toward gender equity throughout sports.

Money and professional opportunities, in general, have transformed swimming for both genders. Infrastructure around the sport has allowed for sustained careers and full-time commitments, which in turn have lowered times. But the difference between the past and present is especially pronounced on the women’s side. In 1976, Gaines remembers, “men were basically treated like royalty, and women were treated like crap.” Now, as elite swimmers in countries like the U.S. and Australia, they are treated very similarly.

The best of the best, like Spitz in ‘72, are extraordinary in any context. Individuals, of course, are integral to this story. Titmus, who exploded onto the scene in 2021, already beat Katie Ledecky in the 400 free Saturday night. O’Callaghan, a double world champion last summer, is favored in the 100, and already spearheaded a triumphant relay. They’ll go head-to-head in the 200 on Monday (3:41 p.m. ET), and surely no contemporary will touch them.

But they are also part of a broader story. Some swim nerds call it “swimflation.”

The progression of times has begun to flatten, because most major inefficiencies in technique have already, presumably, been identified. Information spreads quicker than ever before. Underwater footage of any record-breaking swim is now available at the click of a laptop or the tap of a smartphone. Prototypes are analyzed. Coaches and swimmers adjust.

But humans, clearly, are still figuring out the best way to slither through water. Women, as a marginalized gender, are still realizing their once-suppressed potential. Spitz’s mark in the 200 free was the first of seven surpassed; it surely won’t be the last.