It will be fascinating to monitor the situation to see if Katinka Hosszu’s broadside directed this week towards FINA, the international governing body of swimming, is as ominous as some observers seem to think.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Some background first.
Hosszu is an elite international swimmer with an extraordinary ability to swim often and with success.
Nicknamed the “Iron Lady” she spent her college years in the United States between attendance at the last four Olympic Games, starting out in Athens at just 15 years of age.
Her longevity in the sport has yielded 68 medals in major international competitions, with at least one in every form style except breaststroke.
Her major successes have come at what could be considered as later in her career.
She was crowned by triple Olympic gold in Rio last year, although there was also fertile ground around the 2009 World Championships.
It is this ability to endure and her capacity to compete in more events than just about anyone else in a single swim meet that perhaps explains the basis of her attack.
In essence she wants swimmers to unionise.
To promote a cause about which she is clearly passionate, she has published an open letter to her peers exalting them to do something about the parlous state in which she sees the sport.
“Although the World sees us, swimmers, as one of the most hard working and determined professionals, our leaders seem to think our sport is amateur, therefore we are amateurs, and that is exactly the way they treat us,” she says.
This is followed by what is potentially the most persuasive of her arguments.
“If you are not in the top 5 in the World, you will invest more than you make.”
The catalyst for her outburst has been a raft of changes to the FINA World Cup which restricts the number of events in which a swimmer can take part in each leg.
She says it is not an exaggeration to say swimming is in chaos – and perhaps it is not a bad time to engage in the debate as FINA has elections later this year.
Alas for Hosszu they seem like a foregone conclusion in favour of the incumbents.
Hosszu engages the boycott of Wimbledon in 1973 after Yugoslavian Niki Pilic was banned by his own federation for playing in a prize money event instead of for his country.
The walk-out strengthened the players union to such an extent that within a few years it was governing all the major tournaments on the Tour except the Gland Slams and Olympics.
Prize money grew exponentially to the extraordinary levels at which it now sits.
But even therein lies one of the problems which Hosszu faces in convincing her colleagues to jump into the pool with her.
A life in tennis is very good if you are a top player, but for most others it’s borderline, or as Hosszu currently assesses for swimmers outside the top five.
She is right in some respects for sure.
The International Olympic Committee assess swimming and athletics to be equal in value to the success of each edition of its Summer Games and divvies up the cash rewards accordingly.
Yet at its own world championships in 2015, swimming allocated $60,000 in prize money per event, whereas in athletics that was the prize for first place, equating to three times what a gold medallist in the pool earned.
A comparison between the FINA World Cup and the IAAF Diamond League reveals similar significant disparities.
But as in athletics, the chances of any sort of unionisation are small while two factors are in play.
The first is the comparatively large government or lottery-sourced contracts which a group of the top countries pay to a decent swag of their own swimmers.
The second relates to the private contracts which many among the elite and well-connected have with clothing and equipment companies.
Self-interest looks a way more attractive option than any mantra surrounding a collective greater good.