Virginia emphatically won their 5th straight division 1 women's championship this weekend. Here are the numbers. All of the numbers. Current photo via Jack Spitser/Spitser Photography
The highest scoring class at the meet were the Indiana seniors with 129 individual points. Next best were the Stanford juniors with 121.
The most points any team scored in an event was Stanford’s 53 in the 200 IM. Next best was Virginia’s 50 in the 50 free
The top individual scorer of the meet was Virginia senior Gretchen Walsh with a perfect 60. Next best was her teammate junior Claire Curzan with 57.
Virginia return the most indiviudal points with 215, but Stanford (197) and Texas (182) are within striking distance behind.
Final Scores
Team
Total
Individual Swim Points
Relay Points
Diving Points
Individual Score Count
Relay Score Count
Diving Score Count
1
UVA
544
344
194
6
26
5
1
2
Stanford
417
243
160
14
21
5
1
3
Texas
394
174
128
92
15
5
8
4
Indiana
312
148
117
47
13
5
5
5
Tennessee
298
178
120
0
17
5
0
6
Florida
232
122
110
0
15
4
0
7
Louisville
209.5
79.5
130
0
11
5
0
8
California
202.5
108.5
94
0
12
5
0
9
Michigan
196
81
114
1
9
5
1
10
NC State
164
81
83
0
10
5
0
11
USC
130
50
78
2
6
4
1
12
Wisconsin
126
70
56
0
6
5
0
13
Miami (FL)
75.5
6.5
0
69
2
0
4
14
Ohio State
66
46
20
0
6
3
0
15
Alabama
65
29
36
0
4
4
0
16
Georgia
58
34
24
0
4
3
0
17
UNC
57
4
2
51
3
1
4
18
Purdue
53
0
0
53
0
0
6
19
Arizona State
41.5
5.5
36
0
1
3
0
20
VT
37
25
12
0
2
2
0
21
Duke
33
26
0
7
2
0
1
22
LSU
32
0
4
28
0
1
2
23
BYU
29
29
0
0
2
0
0
24
South Carolina
28
13
0
15
2
0
2
25
Kansas
25
0
0
25
0
0
2
26
Texas A&M
22
1
10
11
1
2
1
27
PITT
21
21
0
0
3
0
0
28
Minnesota
21
3
0
18
1
0
2
29
Arizona
20
0
14
6
0
1
2
30
SIU
17
17
0
0
2
0
0
31
Houston
16
13
0
3
1
0
1
32
Cincinnati
15
15
0
0
1
0
0
33
Washington St.
14
14
0
0
2
0
0
34
Nebraska
13
13
0
0
1
0
0
35
Auburn
10
0
6
4
0
1
1
36
Florida St
8
6
2
0
2
1
0
37
UCLA
7
0
0
7
0
0
1
38
Princeton
6
6
0
0
2
0
0
39
Ohio
6
6
0
0
1
0
0
40
Arkansas
4
0
0
4
0
0
1
41
Akron
2
2
0
0
1
0
0
42
Rutgers
2
0
0
2
0
0
1
43
Fresno State
1
1
0
0
1
0
0
Individual Scores by Year
UVA
Stanford
Texas
Indiana
Tennessee
Florida
Louisville
California
Michigan
NC State
USC
FR
92
21
77
0
52
25
8.5
14.5
0
65
2
SO
34
55
105
51
31
50
1
0
43
0
31
JR
89
121
0
15
5
0
39
11
23
5
12
SR
66
60
21
129
59
30
0
48
16
0
0
5Y
69
0
63
0
31
17
31
35
0
11
7
Returning
215
197
182
66
88
75
48.5
25.5
66
70
45
Wisconsin
Miami (FL)
Ohio State
Alabama
Georgia
UNC
Purdue
Arizona State
VT
Duke
LSU
FR
4
0
36
0
0
16
5
0
0
0
0
SO
0
0
0
18
3
2
0
0
0
0
0
JR
0
0
3
2
0
0
26
0
25
26
0
SR
9
75.5
7
9
31
37
22
0
0
7
28
5Y
57
0
0
0
0
0
0
5.5
0
0
0
Returning
4
0
39
20
3
18
31
0
25
26
0
BYU
South Carolina
Kansas
Texas A&M
PITT
Minnesota
Arizona
SIU
Houston
Cincinnati
Washington St.
FR
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SO
0
0
25
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
JR
29
17
0
0
1
18
0
2
0
15
14
SR
0
11
0
11
0
3
6
15
13
0
0
5Y
0
0
0
1
20
0
0
0
0
0
0
Returning
29
17
25
0
1
18
0
2
3
15
14
Nebraska
Auburn
Florida St
UCLA
Princeton
Ohio
Arkansas
Akron
Rutgers
Fresno State
FR
0
4
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
SO
0
0
0
0
6
6
0
0
0
0
JR
13
0
0
7
0
0
0
0
2
1
SR
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
5Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Returning
13
4
0
7
6
6
4
0
2
1
Score Progression
What the score was after each event
UVA
Stanford
Texas
Indiana
Tennessee
Florida
Louisville
California
Michigan
NC State
USC
Wisconsin
Miami (FL)
Ohio State
Alabama
Georgia
UNC
Purdue
Arizona State
VT
Duke
LSU
BYU
South Carolina
Kansas
Texas A&M
PITT
Minnesota
Arizona
SIU
Houston
Cincinnati
Washington St.
Nebraska
Auburn
Florida St
UCLA
Princeton
Ohio
Arkansas
Akron
Rutgers
Fresno State
200 Medley Relay
40
34
25
14
8
28
32
30
18
25
4
12
0
0
10
0
2
0
22
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
800 Free Relay
74
74
55
36
34
60
42
44
46
27
28
30
0
8
10
12
2
0
22
6
0
4
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
500 Free
103
93
75
64
43
71
42
47
46
27
35
30
0
21
10
28
2
0
22
6
0
4
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
200 IM
129
146
99
64
60
71
42
63
49
27
35
45
0
21
10
28
3
0
22
6
0
4
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
50 Free
179
146
99
71
75
71
72.5
65.5
62
28
35
45
5.5
21
21
28
3
0
27.5
6
0
4
0
0
0
6
14
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1 mtr Diving
185
146
130
74
75
71
72.5
65.5
62
28
35
45
42.5
21
21
28
34
5
27.5
6
7
15
0
9
12
6
14
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
200 Free Relay
225
178
152
102
93
71
106.5
89.5
92
54
35
53
42.5
23
33
38
34
5
31.5
6
7
15
0
9
12
6
14
2
15
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
100 Fly
245
203
181
117
93
82
132.5
93.5
92
70
35
53
43.5
23
33
38
34
5
31.5
6
7
15
0
9
12
6
20
2
15
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
400 IM
274
242
188
117
108
116
132.5
93.5
92
72
35
65
43.5
34
33
38
34
5
31.5
6
7
15
0
9
12
6
20
2
15
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
6
0
0
2
0
0
200 Free
297
261
207
137
119
119
138.5
108.5
108
72
57
65
43.5
34
33
38
34
5
31.5
6
7
15
0
9
12
7
20
2
15
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
6
0
0
2
0
0
100 Breast
323
266
221
137
152
128
138.5
108.5
112
72
64
65
43.5
37
33
38
36
5
31.5
6
18
15
12
9
12
7
20
2
15
0
13
15
1
0
6
0
0
6
0
0
2
0
0
100 Back
343
266
221
160
161
145
138.5
127.5
112
96
64
79
43.5
37
35
38
36
5
31.5
17
18
15
12
9
12
7
21
2
15
15
13
15
1
0
6
0
0
6
0
0
2
0
0
3 mtr Diving
343
266
260
179
161
145
138.5
127.5
113
96
66
79
75.5
37
35
38
50
25
31.5
17
18
15
12
15
25
7
21
2
20
15
13
15
1
0
6
0
0
6
0
4
2
0
0
400 Medley Relay
383
292
288
209
195
177
160.5
139.5
121
114
90
93
75.5
37
41
38
50
25
41.5
17
18
15
12
15
25
11
21
2
20
15
13
15
1
0
6
2
0
6
0
4
2
0
0
1650 Free
392
309
315
225
195
186
160.5
153.5
121
125
90
102
75.5
49
41
53
50
25
41.5
17
18
15
12
15
25
11
21
5
20
15
13
15
1
13
6
2
0
6
0
4
2
0
0
200 Back
418
309
315
234
213
210
160.5
164.5
121
152
90
122
75.5
52
41
53
51
25
41.5
31
18
15
12
17
25
11
21
5
20
15
13
15
1
13
6
2
0
6
0
4
2
0
0
100 Free
455
326
315
248
229
210
176.5
164.5
146
152
104
122
75.5
52
48
56
51
25
41.5
31
18
15
12
17
25
11
21
5
20
15
13
15
1
13
6
2
0
6
6
4
2
0
0
200 Breast
472
346
315
264
250
210
176.5
175.5
152
152
104
122
75.5
56
57
56
51
25
41.5
31
33
15
29
17
25
11
21
5
20
17
13
15
14
13
6
5
0
6
6
4
2
0
1
200 Fly
504
375
349
264
264
214
177.5
188.5
166
152
104
122
75.5
56
57
56
51
25
41.5
31
33
15
29
28
25
11
21
5
20
17
13
15
14
13
6
8
0
6
6
4
2
0
1
Platform Diving
504
389
371
289
264
214
177.5
188.5
166
152
104
122
75.5
56
57
56
57
53
41.5
31
33
32
29
28
25
22
21
21
20
17
16
15
14
13
10
8
7
6
6
4
2
2
1
400 Free Relay
544
417
394
312
298
232
209.5
202.5
196
164
130
126
75.5
66
65
58
57
53
41.5
37
33
32
29
28
25
22
21
21
20
17
16
15
14
13
10
8
7
6
6
4
2
2
1
Points in Each Event
What each team scored in each event
UVA
Stanford
Texas
Indiana
Tennessee
Florida
Louisville
California
Michigan
NC State
USC
Wisconsin
Miami (FL)
Ohio State
Alabama
Georgia
UNC
Purdue
Arizona State
VT
Duke
LSU
BYU
South Carolina
Kansas
Texas A&M
PITT
Minnesota
Arizona
SIU
Houston
Cincinnati
Washington St.
Nebraska
Auburn
Florida St
UCLA
Princeton
Ohio
Arkansas
Akron
Rutgers
Fresno State
200 Medley Relay
40
34
25
14
8
28
32
30
18
25
4
12
0
0
10
0
2
0
22
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
800 Free Relay
34
40
30
22
26
32
10
14
28
2
24
18
0
8
0
12
0
0
0
6
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
500 Free
29
19
20
28
9
11
0
3
0
0
7
0
0
13
0
16
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
200 IM
26
53
24
0
17
0
0
16
3
0
0
15
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
50 Free
50
0
0
7
15
0
30.5
2.5
13
1
0
0
5.5
0
11
0
0
0
5.5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
14
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1 mtr Diving
6
0
31
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
37
0
0
0
31
5
0
0
7
11
0
9
12
0
0
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
200 Free Relay
40
32
22
28
18
0
34
24
30
26
0
8
0
2
12
10
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
14
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
100 Fly
20
25
29
15
0
11
26
4
0
16
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
400 IM
29
39
7
0
15
34
0
0
0
2
0
12
0
11
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
200 Free
23
19
19
20
11
3
6
15
16
0
22
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
100 Breast
26
5
14
0
33
9
0
0
4
0
7
0
0
3
0
0
2
0
0
0
11
0
12
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
13
15
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
100 Back
20
0
0
23
9
17
0
19
0
24
0
14
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
11
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
15
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3 mtr Diving
0
0
39
19
0
0
0
0
1
0
2
0
32
0
0
0
14
20
0
0
0
0
0
6
13
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
400 Medley Relay
40
26
28
30
34
32
22
12
8
18
24
14
0
0
6
0
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1650 Free
9
17
27
16
0
9
0
14
0
11
0
9
0
12
0
15
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
13
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
200 Back
26
0
0
9
18
24
0
11
0
27
0
20
0
3
0
0
1
0
0
14
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
100 Free
37
17
0
14
16
0
16
0
25
0
14
0
0
0
7
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
200 Breast
17
20
0
16
21
0
0
11
6
0
0
0
0
4
9
0
0
0
0
0
15
0
17
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
13
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
200 Fly
32
29
34
0
14
4
1
13
14
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
11
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Platform Diving
0
14
22
25
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
28
0
0
0
17
0
0
0
11
0
16
0
0
3
0
0
0
4
0
7
0
0
0
0
2
0
400 Free Relay
40
28
23
23
34
18
32
14
30
12
26
4
0
10
8
2
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Individual Breakdown
Power are Swimulator power points. Those are a way to quantify time quality independent of what event the time is from. Includes only final times and final dive scores.
333 psych sheet points predicted a 4th place finish. But the Cardinal women were prepared to be at their best when their best was needed! +84 points over the seeds and a 🥈 team finish 👏
Wahooswimfan
1 day ago
By Conferences, the ACC teams scored 44% of available points, SEC teams 31%, BIG10 27%, BIG12 4%, all others 5%. Will be interesting to see how this evolves over time given the impact of NIL and TV revenues by conference. I suspect for most top-level swimmers with Olympic aspirations, however, coaches and programs with reputations for developing swimmers to that level will still predominate in attracting the top prospects.
Her 200 free best was 1:44.92, and none of her other races are anywhere near scoring (though her best 400 IM is from 2021 and her last swim was early 2022, so who knows where she could be in that).
I don’t have a cite, but I can see the reasoning behind just letting her swim the two races where she has a great chance as an NCAA title without just sort of taking a flyer on the 200 free or 400 IM, where the upside might be a mid-B Final.
I wonder if that’s something they’ll try to develop as her Texas career goes on.
Ranger Coach
2 days ago
Does UVA have any room left in their trophy case or on wherever they put the list of All-America winners?
VFL
2 days ago
Appreciate all the work behind these articles!!
IU Swammer
2 days ago
UVA still returning the most points by far. I think Stanford will make it closer next year, but despite the negative comments during the meet (my own included), UVA are still favorites.
215 points returning for UVA v 197 for Stanford and 182 for TX is not a huge gap especially when you consider UVA losing the Walsh sisters makes the relays a lot closer. I don’t know what the incoming classes look like, but a really strong incoming class for Stanford or TX could make a big difference.
All of the classes seem pretty similar between the three. No real game changer that stands out. Mintenko from UVA is the only one I think that has NCAA scoring times already unless I missed a swim.
UVA has Madi Mintenko who could score double digits without dropping any time and Texas is getting Padar from Hungary (1:56 LCM 200 free) whereas Stanford needs all of their current recruits for next year to develop a bit to score double-digit points. UVA and Texas also have the upside of having meets this year where it felt like a decent number of possible points were left on the table whereas Stanford was firing on all cylinders. But Stanford’s losses will have less impact on their relays than losing Sticklen, Arens, Bray, & Cooper for Texas and the Walshes and Parker for UVA.
Plus Texas Diving was great this year and while they have to replace Haley H, they have deep talent on the roster. And, they have announced they are moving to 30 full scholarships over the next few years – that has to help recruiting unless the other teams match them – which won’t be easy from the ACC. The future is bright in Austin!
Fair to say 2 things are true: Lady Hoos are a favorite to make it 6 in a row, but they are not prohibitive favorites to win it next year. It’ll be a competitive meet in 2026. The margin of error for UVa (or Stanford for that matter) to have some seeded swimmers miss a bit is low to zero.
yeah i agree — uva will remain the favorites in the drivers seat but stanford and texas will be dangerous and at their heels. will be pretty exciting to follow — kinda like the mens race this year 🙂
cal, indiana, tennessee will also make it interesting…
Agree with your assessment. Thinking about the returners who might score differently next year, I’d expect Grimes, Gormsen, Moesch to find things a little easier next year. Hayes, Canny and Weber with room for improvement too. For Stanford, not a ton of room for Bricker or Bell to score all that much more. Huske will likely go up from 54 to 60.
LFG Coach Joey & the Cardinal Women!
333 psych sheet points predicted a 4th place finish. But the Cardinal women were prepared to be at their best when their best was needed! +84 points over the seeds and a 🥈 team finish 👏
By Conferences, the ACC teams scored 44% of available points, SEC teams 31%, BIG10 27%, BIG12 4%, all others 5%. Will be interesting to see how this evolves over time given the impact of NIL and TV revenues by conference. I suspect for most top-level swimmers with Olympic aspirations, however, coaches and programs with reputations for developing swimmers to that level will still predominate in attracting the top prospects.
What’s the most any team has ever scored?
746 Texas 1991. http://fs.ncaa.org.s3.amazonaws.com/Docs/stats/swimming_champs_records/D1Women.pdf
i wonder why jillian cox didn’t swim a 3rd event? does anyone have any insight on that?
Her 200 free best was 1:44.92, and none of her other races are anywhere near scoring (though her best 400 IM is from 2021 and her last swim was early 2022, so who knows where she could be in that).
I don’t have a cite, but I can see the reasoning behind just letting her swim the two races where she has a great chance as an NCAA title without just sort of taking a flyer on the 200 free or 400 IM, where the upside might be a mid-B Final.
I wonder if that’s something they’ll try to develop as her Texas career goes on.
Does UVA have any room left in their trophy case or on wherever they put the list of All-America winners?
Appreciate all the work behind these articles!!
UVA still returning the most points by far. I think Stanford will make it closer next year, but despite the negative comments during the meet (my own included), UVA are still favorites.
215 points returning for UVA v 197 for Stanford and 182 for TX is not a huge gap especially when you consider UVA losing the Walsh sisters makes the relays a lot closer. I don’t know what the incoming classes look like, but a really strong incoming class for Stanford or TX could make a big difference.
And the portal.
All of the classes seem pretty similar between the three. No real game changer that stands out. Mintenko from UVA is the only one I think that has NCAA scoring times already unless I missed a swim.
UVA has Madi Mintenko who could score double digits without dropping any time and Texas is getting Padar from Hungary (1:56 LCM 200 free) whereas Stanford needs all of their current recruits for next year to develop a bit to score double-digit points. UVA and Texas also have the upside of having meets this year where it felt like a decent number of possible points were left on the table whereas Stanford was firing on all cylinders. But Stanford’s losses will have less impact on their relays than losing Sticklen, Arens, Bray, & Cooper for Texas and the Walshes and Parker for UVA.
Eva Okaro, world junior record holder in 50Fr SCM, is also slated to join Texas in the fall. Definitely scoring potential as a freshman.
Plus Texas Diving was great this year and while they have to replace Haley H, they have deep talent on the roster. And, they have announced they are moving to 30 full scholarships over the next few years – that has to help recruiting unless the other teams match them – which won’t be easy from the ACC. The future is bright in Austin!
Agreed. It looks like it will be a much closer meet with 3 true contenders. We’ll see how transfers shake that up.
Fair to say 2 things are true: Lady Hoos are a favorite to make it 6 in a row, but they are not prohibitive favorites to win it next year. It’ll be a competitive meet in 2026. The margin of error for UVa (or Stanford for that matter) to have some seeded swimmers miss a bit is low to zero.
yeah i agree — uva will remain the favorites in the drivers seat but stanford and texas will be dangerous and at their heels. will be pretty exciting to follow — kinda like the mens race this year 🙂
cal, indiana, tennessee will also make it interesting…
Agree with your assessment. Thinking about the returners who might score differently next year, I’d expect Grimes, Gormsen, Moesch to find things a little easier next year. Hayes, Canny and Weber with room for improvement too. For Stanford, not a ton of room for Bricker or Bell to score all that much more. Huske will likely go up from 54 to 60.
You’re forgetting their top point vacuum, Claire Curzan, will be back to lead the team.