Even though I received the letter 4 months ago, I am still surprised to be here today. It’s quite humbling. Being an engineer and swimmer are a couple of the defining elements of who I am, so this honor feels like a combination of the two.
Nowhere else can I start than by thanking my parents. Their sacrifices, financially and emotionally, as well as nights, weekends and missed family vacations, are the reason I am standing up here. This honor is theirs more than anyone else. Thank you.
Also, I want to thank Doug Grooms and Mark Mullin. Coach Grooms doggedness in recruiting me was a key factor in landing here. With a limited budget, he maximizes the resources available and maintains a nationally ranked team year after year. During my time at UMR, Mark was head of the NCAA swim committee and kept swimming a priority at the Division 2 level. Student-athletes continue to benefit from his commitment to the sport and NCAA Interscholastic athletics in general.
I did not expect him to be here today, but I feel it also important to thank Keith Bailey. His continued financial support of the university has made this experience possible for countless students, including me. Along with a group of students, I was fortunate to meet him during my time in Rolla. He shared with us a story of accepting new challenges. My takeaway from that encounter is to embrace the new and unknown. In this era, many challenges we tackle are unprecedented, there are no right or wrong answers, we need to try, fail quickly, learn, and keep pushing forward.
I am also grateful for my teammates and those I was fortunate to help coach and recruit while I was here. Reflecting on the other swimmers that have preceded me in Hall of Fame induction, and those I expect are upcoming, it is hard for me to see how I measure up to the heights of their athletic accomplishments. Since finding out about this honor, I have reflected on how I got here and why I may have been selected.
That doesn’t mean that the goals we have don’t count. They do, mostly because they cause us to go through the process, and it’s the process that makes us wise, happy, or whatever. If we do things in the wrong sort of way, it makes use miserable, angry, confused, and things like that. The goal has to be right for us, and it has to be beneficial, in order to ensure a beneficial process. But aside from that, it’s really the process that’s important. Enjoyment of the process is the secret that erases the myths of the Great Reward…Perhaps this can help to explain the everyday significance of…the Way.
During my time in Rolla, whether I was a student, athlete, teammate, researcher or assistant coach, I embraced and enjoyed the process. I hope that embracing the process is the legacy I left. The experience in Rolla and embracing the process has had an immeasurable influence on my life, for which I am forever grateful.
It is a rare occasion to see swimming highlights on Sportscenter, but a few days ago that happened. Caeleb Dressel has been on an absolute tear this week at NCAA Championships, shredding his own 50 Free American and US Open record, lowering it to an unbelievable 17.63. In the post Michael Phelps era, it is great to see swimming highlights transcend the sports landscape. In the context of swimming, how fast are his record-breaking swims? Are they unprecedented?
There are technique and technology advances that have shifted swimming over time. Technology includes water filtration, lanelines, blocks, and air filtration, as well as lower friction materials for suit, goggle and cap design, as well as the availability of video for biomechanic analysis. Considering the last 40 years, there has also been the innovation of the backstroke flip turn, emphasis on underwater kicking, and dolphin kick on breaststroke breakouts. Freestyle has had the least changes in the timeframe noted, so for comparison, I considered the record progression of the 50 Free, 100 Free, and 200 Free. Additionally, the 400 IM was also considered. The starting point for analyzing each of these events is what I considered a monumental record time as the starting point. What was a monumental swim? A record that lasted more than 10 years. Doing this analysis the datapoints for the 200 free were consistent between Matt Biondi and Rowdy Gaines, so I used the old one (1981 instead of 1987). The time when that record was broken was used to trend the future progression of the record, and a +/- 1% projection is shown in the charts, to illustrate a range that would be reasonable for the record swim to land.
The following records were selected for use in the analysis:
400 IM, Tom Dolan, 3:38.18, 1995
200 Free, Rowdy Gaines, 1:33.91, 1981
100 Free, Matt Biondi, 41.80, 1987
50 Free, Tom Jager, 19.05, 1990
I am partial to Tom Dolan’s 400 IM Record swim, for a few reasons. His performances in the 1995 NCAA Season, setting American records in the 400 IM, 500 Free and 1650 Free, all of which stood for roughly a decade, and led the University of Michigan to a National Championship, is unprecedented in the last 30 years for a team that was not sprint focused. Additionally, those swims were a lead-up to back to back 400 IM Olympic Gold Medals in Atlanta and Sydney.
In 2009 Tyler Clary significantly dropped the 400 IM record, by over two seconds, and eight years later Chase Kalisz dropped the record another 2.5 seconds with his swim at NCAA Championships. Looking at that progression over the course of 22 years, the improvement is in an expected range. Interestingly, the time improvements seem to be in a reasonable range, comparing to previous milestones of the 400 IM.
Similarly, looking at Rowdy Gaines 200 Free Record swim in 1981 and the amount it was broken by Matt Biondi 6 years later, there was some incremental improvements to that record, but it was not until Simon Burnett’s swim of 1:31.20 in 2006 that the record was really pushed forward significantly. Even so, considering that time progression, the record by Blake Pieroni and subsequently Townley Haas at the 2018 NCAA Championships, this record seems to be within an expected range. It is cool that the 1:30 barrier was broken, but based on how the record has progressed over the last 40 years, it looks like it was about time for this to happen.
It gets a little more interesting when looking at the 100 Free. Matt Biondi’s 41.80 record swim from 1987 was tied by Anthony Ervin in the early 2001 and broke it in 2002, but the record was not lowered, significantly, until the supersuit year of 2009 by Caesar Cielo. Projecting that record forward, Dressel’s 39.90 is slightly faster than we would anticipate. Admittedly, Caeleb said he was tired in the 100 free swim on the last day of NCAA Championships. Considering what he did in the 50 Free and 100 fly, we can only speculate where he could have taken this record, which may be well outside the expected record progression range.
On the other hand, Dressel’s 50 Free this year, or his swim from each of the last 3 NCAA Champsionships for that matter, is without comparison. Tom Jager’s 19.05 was a historic swim, a record that stood for 15 years, until Fred Bousquet became the first one to break 19 seconds. As an 18-second 50 Free has become more common, the question arises on how fast is possible. Dressel’s 17.63 is half a second faster than his previous best, from 2017 and further separates him from history in this event. On top of winning the event by a full second (1.01 to be exact), in a historical context, his swim is unprecedented.
How is this possible? I point to a couple reasons: anaerobic performance and momentum. In the other events, aerobic performance, and cardiovascular conditioning dominate. The aerobic ability of these swimmers is going to be relatively even, considering they are all elite athletes that train at a high level. Over time, technology combined with these physiological characteristics and physical abilities will drive the incremental improvements in maximum performance, which in this case, our measure is the US Open record in these four events. For that reason, the 100 free and longer events appear relatively consistent from a historical trend.
In the 50 free, on the other hand, the aerobic requirement is minimal, because the majority of the race is anaerobic, dependent on fast twitch muscles, so it introduces a much different physiology. Plus, the start is a significant portion of the race, ie, jumping, a relatively non-swimmer skill. As a result of the start, when the swimmer hits that water is the point of greatest momentum. On top of excellent technique and feel for the water, Caeleb Dressel has an athletic ability to jump, and his entry maintains that momentum to such a greater extent than others. It is not an exaggeration to say that he performs this at a level which we have never seen.
Difference between first and second 25s (seconds)
His split differential from first to second 25 is in the middle of the range of swimmers in that final (0.67 vs a median of 0.69), which is a bit surprising because he had clean water on the second 25 which would put him in better position to be faster than those swimming in the outside lanes. That lends more support to the idea that his aerobic abilities are not exceptional. From his entry in the water, he is at a higher momentum and through his technique he maintains that speed, while having a traditional drop off from the first to second 50.
What do you think? Are there other monumental records that I missed? And how about Caeleb Dressel being down to earth?
Last week, diving deep into the speculative end of the Section 232 Steel tariff pool, and prepping for a trip to China, I neglected to keep tabs on a couple job postings that we have listed. Since the beginning of the year, we have been looking for someone with a technical background to develop a mid-level sales position. Getting back to them now, and looking through all the candidates, it struck me, where are the women in manufacturing?
In the roughly two months of receiving resumes, there have been a wide range of applicants, both qualified and not, but through it all, zero female candidates. No gender diversity, across LinkedIn, alumni job boards, local classifieds and recruiters. Seeing this, I am both perplexed and concerned: is this female candidate void a mirror, reflecting our deficiency, or a window to see the larger issue in the industry?
Or maybe it is both and the fact is that we have a long way to go. It feels like support for STEM is everywhere. For the last several years, coaching high schoolers, there were many girls I worked with who were good students with an interest in math and science and a work ethic I admired. I would hire any of them to work in this role, but besides not being old enough to work in manufacturing, they also have no interest. It seems that all the support of students in STEM is only the beginning. We also have to connect and inspire girls to the opportunities in manufacturing and other technical industries.
Eighteen years ago when I was entering university to study mechanical engineering, it was generally accepted that females studying engineering were rare. At the time, roughly 1/3 of the engineering student population were female and that fraction was generous, I do not recall a class as an undergraduate or a teaching assistant where 1/3 of the students were women.
Fast forward to now, and despite a decade of intense STEM support across the country, alumni relations informed me the rate of female enrollment is unchanged from when I was in college. WHAT?! How is that possible? I realize it is a midsize school, and there may be some big-name programs elsewhere that can tout growth of female enrollment, but this is not an isolated problem. How are there not more females interested in engineering? If the broad topic of engineering is not gaining interest, then the subset of manufacturing does not have a chance!
My view is distorted by my spheres of influence. Working with manufacturing companies every day and participating in a technical advisory at the local community college, I am almost constantly surrounded by like-minded people who support STEM and increasing opportunities in our industry. Plus, I infer the connection between STEM and technical careers, but that may be a leap for others outside of technical industries. As a high school coach, on the other hand, with many student’s parents being doctors, lawyers, business owners, and entrepreneurs, the fact that I worked in manufacturing was overlooked in favor of the more altruistic label as a volunteer youth athletics, so there is certainly some negative bias to overcome.
And even if we succeed in encouraging teenagers to pursue these technical careers, there are several years before they will be in the workforce. What about filling the immediate roles that are available? How do we motivate and attract women to this industry and careers? The point above, regarding my influences and connections, is that I do not have the answers.
A few years ago we hired a sales person that came from selling wholesale beauty products to salons. When she was going to college for fashion, did she think one day she would be helping maintenance workers troubleshoot hydraulic components and selling them replacement parts? Doubtful. And you know what, she is awesome at it! How did we get her? Pure luck. Human resources or I cannot claim any special insight. This is not to pat ourselves on the back. Being lucky is not going to solve the gender imbalance in manufacturing.
So what do we do? To paraphrase Sheryl Sandberg, how do we overcome them not doing something where they do not see themselves? I can think of several great women leaders in manufacturing that I have had an opportunity to work with, but the reality is, on the scale that the industry needs, there are not enough of them that can serve as role models for students. Women in Manufacturing is a great organization and I hope they can build even more momentum to encourage their peers to be a force in this industry.
And how else can we grow manufacturing? Take a chance! Reach across and embrace candidates from other industries. Manufacturing can be taught and if someone has the interest and willingness to learn and apply themselves, there is no doubt the employee and business will benefit. With the impending retail apocalypse, how many experienced store managers and key holders could kick butt given a chance in manufacturing? Probably thousands. Let’s figure out how to attract them, and ambitious individuals from other areas, to the opportunities in manufacturing.
There will be A LOT of articles popping up about recommendations for goals and resolutions for the new year and this is not meant to steer you in a direction goalsetting. These simple tips are ways to create a framework for accomplishing your goals in the new year, whatever they may be.
Quick Summary to Get You Going
1. Planning
How are the goals, tasks or objectives you have going to happen? It may seem obvious, but there is no way of crushing your goals without a plan. Our new year’s resolutions are not the only thing we have going on, so we have to weave them into our lives, the resolutions will not just happen because we want them. Plan your day, week, and month to make sure there is time built in to work on those resolutions.
2. Gratitude
In Dr. Martin E.P. Seligman’s book, Flourish, he expands on his research in the area of positive psychology. One of the big takeaways is making time for gratitude. He suggests taking time each day to write down for what you are grateful. Write down three things that you are grateful for each day. Documenting these positive, reinforcements helps us to frame our mindset each day to the good, which keeps us going. Additionally, looking back on these ‘gratitude points’ can be motivation, a way to keep working towards those resolutions and new goals, even when the finish line may seem far away.
3. Bookending
My professional coach, Claire, gave me this one. Set aside time between activities during your day to recharge. Use that time, a few minutes is enough, to focus on things that give you energy. Whether it is internal (looking at pictures of family and friends) or external (chatting about something topical with a colleague), this time is critical, to mentally recover and segue into the next activity.
It is always a fun going to a new pool, where I have not coached or visited in many years: see what changes have occurred, new starting blocks, different lane lines, and to check out the record board. It is a peak into history at some places and in others, a way to connect with high performing student-athletes perhaps All-Americans or Olympians, who may have competed there in the past.
This evening coaching a high school swim meet, before warm-ups I found myself staring at the record board for longer than I care to realize. I had not been to this pool before and the high school is in an area where there are two Big Three auto plants in the community. What most captured my attention, looking at the pool’s scoreboard, it seems to be an analogy of middle America, particularly here in the Midwest Rust Belt. This place, the pool like the community, was booming and peaked in the mid-60s when the Ford engine plant and the GM plant in the next town over employed more than 10,000 people.
This Scoreboard is Updated as of 12-2016
This town and the school have been in steady decline since 1980, until 2010. The plants that counted employees in the thousands now count in the hundreds. That shrink inevitably caused a declining tax base. To remain economically feasible for the community, this school district was forced to merge with the neighboring town in 2011.
I took a picture of the scoreboard because it is, in a way, an illustration of this decline. I go to a lot of pools and nowhere are the peak performances so centered in the distant past like this place. For those unfamiliar with swimming record boards, the second and fourth columns are the record setter, listed as first initial, last name, high school name, and year the record was set (two digits). There has been a huge increase in swimming technology and performance in the last decade, which has catapulted performances and records everywhere, the full breadth of that topic is a series of posts in its own right. Looking at the dates on the record board (centered in the 1970s) makes me think this community, with its primarily low technology, outmoded jobs, was left behind.
As I look at it I think, is this the type of decline that the populist voter experienced, this left behind feel, whether it is due to insufficient opportunities or their jobs being replaced by automation or exported to some low-cost country? Are these the communities that incited and excited the new presidency. Where the populist idea ‘making things great again’ resonates. The reality is the average American, regardless of sex or race, is better off today than they were in 1965, but the average American white male with only a high school diploma is much worse off. Those are the ones that strived for and passed down the jobs at the Big Three plants, only to have those well paying, low barrier occupations replaced by automation, outsourced to a supplier, or eliminated completely.
I grew up in a community like this, so the experience and this visual illustration really hit me. The experience and visit tonight generated conflicting emotions of interest, nostalgia, and empathy. Like most issues, the real answers here are complex and prone to heated debate.
