Analysis and Comment: 

The close of the World Junior Championships in Lima, Peru, on Sunday evening gave swimming a new list of "ones to watch", youth champions who proved themselves as racers on their way to becoming bigger fish in the big pond of senior waters in seasons to come. The event also raised questions about quality and quantity.

To be clear, no-one is suggesting that what unfolded in Lima was somehow sub-standard, performances not quite what they might be. There were many very fine efforts indeed, while some of those standing on the podium in Lima could also have stood on the podium over in Shenzhen at the Universiade among swimmers longer in tooth and experience. In all, 24 championship records fell in finals to winners, with many more racing inside bygone standards. 

The organisation in Peru, the willingness and friendliness of volunteers all won praise (such reports came as no surprise to me 30 years after I first travelled through Peru and was treated to a warm welcome to match any in the world), while the chance to draw the South American nation deeper into the realms of world swimming will have done good.

In the water, Cameron McEvoy (AUS) claimed the sprint double, Evan Pinion (USA) the deep distance double, Jacob Pebley (USA) the backstroke double, Akihiro Yamaguchi (JPN) medalled in all three breaststroke events and took gold over 200m, Paul Maclin Davis (USA)  emerged the butterfly sprinter of the meet with a 50-100m double, while Kenta Hirai (JPN) was a class apart on 1:57.16 in the 200m butterfly (1:54.86 was the best of Michael Phelps at the same age).  

Among girls, Brittany MacLean (CAN) claimed a middle-distance brace, Daryna Zevina (UKR), already a finalist at senior European and continental levels, won all three backstroke titles and Lisa Fissneider (ITA) took a sprint breaststroke double and silver in the 200m. 

In relays, the USA did not quite have it all their own way, with Canadian boys (4x200m) and Japanese girls (4x100m medley) denying the Americans a clean sweep. There was no denying the meet winner, however: USA with a solid margin over Japan, with Canada third on a medals table that did not much resemble the picture that unfolded at world championships proper in Shanghai last month.

Which takes us back to the opening point. The focus of the quantity vs quality debate is not on those who showed up and excelled. Rather it is on what was missing and what purpose is served when it comes to helping juniors of extraordinary talent make it upstream to the pool where it matters most. 

In the past decade, the world of FINA has grown beyond recognition, the number of championships, short and long, cups, series and grand prix events in what are now five Olympic sports, a world apart from the arena that would have been recognisable to Gross, Biondi, Darnyi and Dolan, Evans and Egerszegi, Sautin and Fu, the ladies of the lake of yore, the generation of Manuel Estiarte & Co and the shoal led by Shelley Taylor Smith and her peers.

Yet some things never change. Swimming history 1973 to 2011 tells us one undeniable truth: there were and remain just two events at which the very best in the world are present, ready, willing and in peak form to pursue the highest honours available in the sport: Olympic Games and the World long-course Championships. 

Does that matter? All depends on what you want. If you want activity and lots of it, then the current model of growth is certainly the way to go.

• It is a model that keeps the show on the road, has athletes competing round the year, short and long, in-season and "off-season", sometimes in good condition, sometimes not. 
• It is a model that keeps 'volunteer' officials and others on the road too for many, many weeks each year, making the round of expenses, justified or not, a living wage well beyond the earning power of some of those folk were they to hold down one of a whole raft of jobs in the mainstream employment market.
• It is a model that means many who serve on committees and commissions cannot be at the meetings where they are supposed to dispense advice to FINA (in Shanghai last month, the coaches commission suffered poor attendance, something that did not go down well with some in FINA who failed to understand that a coach cannot at the same time be at a pre-world title training camp 1,000km and more away and in Shanghai more than 10 days out from the main meet … better then to have scheduled the meeting to suit the purpose not the politics).
• It is a model that lures some into activity that ends up ruining the highpoint of their season, sometimes with long-term consequence for the athlete (what point is there in 'creating stars', as some officials like to call all the added activity, if winning a world s/c title leads to great expectations back home that are simply unrealistic and lead to seriously negative publicity for the 'star' who then misses the world l/c championships when the majority of folk back home, knowing little beyond the headlines, thought he might beat Phelps and Co?)
• It is a model that makes stars of 16-year-olds at the start of a journey in a world where the mature athlete in peak condition and at the height of his or her knowledge, experience and honing of mind and body, may be a man or woman of 30 and more.
• It is a model that runs in the face of what many leading programmes work towards when it comes to success on the very biggest of occasions, with leading coaches from USA to Hungary and Australia, China and many others sticking to the truth of the matter: one big moment a season suffices so please don't ask my kid to show up to seven events a year and expect the race to be meaningful come the form guide for the big one. 
• It is a model that will not bring extra attention to swimming through more broadcast and print media outlets and coverage because no-one beyond the swimming world cares about a meet that does not feature the equivalent of Phelps Vs Lochte Vs Biedermann Vs Agnel, Pellegrini Vs Adlington, Gyurta Vs Kitajima, Alshammar Vs Kromowidjojo, and so on and so forth. The absence that is easy to turn a blind eye to is that caused by injury or illness, while the absence that is impossible to ignore is the choice that nations and individuals make which make a difference to the status of whole events.

In Lima, just three of the nations that finished top 10 in Shanghai ranked in the best 10 nations at Junior World level, while three nations that excelled in Peru got no medals at all in Shanghai. 

A touch of that comes down to development and culture, some programmes bringing their youth through at speedier rates than others. Much of the picture, however, is down to choice. Take China and the following concrete reason why it is impossible to say that results in Lima were a true reflection of the status of world junior swimming standards:

Here is what China left back home (eligible swimmers):

Boys: 

• 50m freestyle: swimmers who would have made the final and won a medal
• 100 freestyle: swimmers who would have made the final and won a medal
• 200 freestyle: swimmers who would have made the final
• 400 freestyle: swimmers who would have made the final and won the title (the best of China in Lima was a swimmer outside the best 10 times in his age-group back home in the post two seasons)
• 800 freestyle: swimmers who would have made the final
• 1500 freestyle - swimmers who would have challenged for medals (the China representative in Lima is fourth best in china in his age-group)
• 50 backstroke - swimmers who would have made the final (and five back home of same age and faster than the China representative)
• 100 backstroke - one back home who could have won gold, another who could have medalled and two others younger with times faster than the representative in Lima
• 200m backstroke - one back home who would have won the crown, four others back home who could have made the final in times much faster than the Chinese athlete in Lima
• 200m breaststroke: one back home who would have won the crown by more than 2sec, plus three others of the same age faster than China's representative in Lima
• 200m butterfly: two back home who could have medalled, eight others of the same age faster than the China representative in Lima
• 200m medley: four back home, all with best times faster than the time it took to win bronze in Lima and two faster than the time in which it took to win silver

I will spare you the same process in the girls' events (even more stark in some cases) but the significance of what was missing when attempting to assess the worth of what was there cannot be denied.

China was not alone among nations that chose not to attach the greatest of importance to the junior event in Lima. Each of those programmes and FINA member federations will have their own reasons for making the choices that they did. 

If there is a common thread then it may well include such questions as: will a world junior event contribute to the long-term development of an athlete? can we afford to send a team, with staff and support, to South America? are our best juniors better not to be placed on a lofty pedestal too soon? 

In Europe, the continental junior championships has long been a birthing place of future champions. It is lower key than anything that includes the word "world" in its title. Perhaps that is one of the reasons why it has succeeded, the regional aspect a step back from "world junior champion", a status that carries with it much greater expectation.

Britain put together a Smart Track squad of 13 12 to 13-year-old girls back in 2004-05, a group that included Fran Halsall, Ellen Gandy, Jemma Lowe, Elizabeth Simmonds, Jaz Carlin and Jess Dickons. In summer 2005, London won the right to host the 2012 Games and in a session with the media on the prospects of the talent singled out for excellence, then performance director Bill Sweetenham was asked about "the London 2012 generation". 

"It is the last thing on our minds right now," he said. "They are talented young people who need nurturing and guiding but there are no guarantees on a long and complex journey from 12 to a mature athlete of twentysomething." 

The key is "complex journey". Most of those who made the podium in Lima, got their names noticed back home, attracted funding perhaps, met with success on the cusp of some of the most difficult years of a swimmer's life, the journey from junior to senior waters. Hard enough without expectation, particularly when the expectation is unreasonable. Looking down the list of podium placers in Lima, few will even make their national teams for London 2012, let alone race for medals. The same may be true in 2013, when Barcelona hosts what for many will be the first chance of racing at world titles as a senior.

The complex journey is easy to spot if we glance back at the results of FINA inaugural event for world juniors in Rio in 2006. Since then, world senior championships have been held in 2007, 2009 and 2011. Out of 37 boys who made the podium in 2006, just one has made it to the podium at world senior l/c championships since, Tyler Clary (USA), while only four have made a world senior final. Among girls, 12 from 30 2006 podium placers have made finals at world senior level since, with four making the podium. Many names featured in 2006 have slipped away, either down the rankings or out of the sport altogether, while the greater number of girls making the senior grade reflects the fact that girls develop to senior level sooner. 

There are plenty of recognisable names on the list of world junior medal winners 2006 to 2011, many of them having made a good transition to senior waters. There are many others who did not race at world juniors but are now enjoying excellent senior careers.

One model does not fit all and it is for nations and individuals to choose their path. It is for FINA to provide the right environment for the right reason. The jury is still out on whether adding another "world" event to the calendar that does not carry the same quality star rating as the big two was the right way to go. 

If events are to be added, more thought needs to be given to quality and coercion-free ways to get the very best there because they want to be there racing for prizes. Only then will the exposure, the greater coverage sought for swimming, follow. Only then will the swimming history book be free of the kind of asterisk and footnote placed there by the very people who lead an aquatic sports federation founded to avoid such things through standardisation of the competitive environment.

On world records, impossible, I am told, to place an asterisk next to standards set in a competitive environment allowed by FINA but no longer relevant, no longer pertinent. Fine to allow the standard to be a time 4sec faster than the holder is now capable of achieving over 400m and 1sec faster over 100m. Impossible, I am told, to draw a line that would no more highlight the mistake made than the existence of a set of records among which are some standards that, regardless of the Lochtes and Suns of the world, will stand for some while yet. And yet those who tell me such things are happy with a competitive environment in which hardly a race beyond the Olympic and world long-course final (and even then, these days, only if we ignore the time on the clock for the foreseeable future) goes by without the need of an asterisk.

An abundance of broadcasters, print journalists and others in Shanghai noted that a sport in which too much qualification and explanation is required is a turn-off to audiences and yet almost all felt obliged to tell it like it is, asterisk and footnote firmly in place. How to cover a near-miss shy of a world record while telling the audience that the swim was the best we've ever seen by some margin?

How to cover a world junior meet without mentioning that four gold medal contenders simply didn't show up because the summer was too busy, the time in between meets too short or the choice of a national federation to send a development team of D-stringers out into the world? You can, of course, take the advice of one federation head bent on assuming more power at LEN and FINA levels who once said to me "your role is to report what happens in the water - full stop". He meant "First - Joe Bloggs (Dream World), 1:01.00", with as little analysis as possible. 

What he didn't want to read was that Joe felt he had no support from his federation, was underfunded while his chief exec rode around in a flash car and took 40 business class flights a year. What he didn't want to read was that young Joe objected to all manner of conditions imposed on him by federations national and international. What he didn't want to read was that the chief exec had been caught with his political pants down... and so on and so forth.  What he didn't want to read was that he called it wrong on suits, on the calendar. He never wanted to be seen as the man who wrote the asterisk into the sport. His image ought only to be that of a man serving his sport, for love not money. But that would be more fiction less fact. 

Back in 2006, I wrote on the inaugural junior event: "…the championships highlighted, once again, the thorny issue of a cluttered calendar and where best to place events. Is it likely that the world’s best juniors, particularly women aged 15 and 16, will want, within five months, to have raced at a Commonwealth Games, a world short-course championships, a European junior championships, a European senior championships, and a world youth championships? All that and school exams too. Highly unlikely."

This year, we had junior and senior world titles within three weeks of each other. Many simply skipped one or the other, while some did both and it remains to be seen what that will mean for them with domestic trials and qualification events for London 2012 just months away. 

There are those who say that swimmers need to be seen more for the sport to "grow". To be seen out of shape is pointless. To be seen in the kind of shape that wins Olympic titles means a dedication that does not allow the swimmer to be the tennis player oft cited as the example of why it should all be possible. The arena is completely different. And that requires deeper and specific understanding - may those in FINA who have ears, hear.

By all means create but do so with quality not quantity in mind. Make it count by making the event do what it says on the tin: find the very best in the world, junior or senior, tell the world "this is the best and swiftest we have ever seen by a man or woman, boy or girl", the asterisk left for the in-house book not the glare of a public that may well choose to look away.