Why Milliseconds Matter in Swimming Races
In competitive swimming, the difference between first and second place often comes down to a blink — sometimes even less. But what makes ties so surprisingly common in a sport measured by digital timing systems? It boils down to two core factors: how results are recorded, and how precisely we can measure an athlete’s position in a pool built with tolerances. When these collide, precision hits a wall.
The Limits of Timing Precision
Most international swimming competitions use electronic touchpads accurate to one-hundredth of a second (0.01s). That sounds sharp, but it introduces a hard cap on measurement. Even if someone finishes just 0.005 seconds ahead of another swimmer, both get the same official time. The system simply isn’t built to measure anything finer, despite the physics allowing for it.
To put that in context: human reaction time typically falls around 0.15–0.25 seconds. Yet race finishes are logged to within 0.01 seconds. Swimmers can and do finish within a few thousandths of each other — but officially, they didn’t.
The Stopwatch Ceiling
Timing equipment in major competitions like the Olympics or World Championships is standardized. Omega, one of the leading tech providers, builds systems that record down to 1/100th of a second. As of September 04, 2025, there’s no standard push to move to 1/1000th timing. Why?
- Fairness: Not all swimmers race under the exact same environmental or mechanical conditions.
- Consistency: Historical records rely on hundredths. Shifting precision now would distort comparisons.
- Technology: Touchpad sensors aren’t perfect. Athletes hit them with different pressure, angle, and body parts.
The problem isn’t just technological; it’s structural.
Pool Dimensions Aren’t Perfect
Here’s the other issue: swimming pools are not perfectly identical. While they’re built to strict specs, there’s an accepted construction tolerance of ±0.03 meters. That’s nearly 3 centimeters — or over an inch — of variance in pool length between lanes.
| Lane | Possible Length |
|---|---|
| 1 | 49.97 – 50.03 m |
| 2 | 49.97 – 50.03 m |
| 3 | 49.97 – 50.03 m |
Imagine two swimmers finishing side-by-side in lanes with a 2 cm difference. One effectively swam a shorter race. Even if both recorded the same time, their actual speed might differ — but no way to know. This tolerance, though small, is enough to influence outcomes when precision is capped at 0.01 seconds.
The Wall Hit Timing Factor
Another layer: swimmers don’t finish by crossing a line — they physically touch a sensor. That adds variation. One swimmer might glide perfectly into the pad; another might slap it. Two athletes finishing within milliseconds could still register an identical touch time, or even appear to tie if one hit the pad just a bit harder.
That’s a huge deal at the elite level, where medal placements, qualification, and national records are on the line. Without sub-hundredth accuracy, there’s no way to fairly separate such close finishes.
Real Ties Are More Common Than You Think
Competitive swimming has seen high-profile ties in major events:
- At the Rio 2016 Olympics, Simone Manuel and Penny Oleksiak both won gold in the women’s 100m freestyle with a time of 52.70s.
- Michael Phelps shared silver in the 100m butterfly at the same Games with Chad le Clos and László Cseh — all three hit 51.14s.
- On June 21, 2023, two swimmers tied at 24.79s in the women’s 50m freestyle at the US Nationals.
These aren’t one-in-a-million oddities — they’re built into the structure of how swimming is measured and judged. At high levels of performance, athletes are often that close. With rounding and mechanical constraints, ties aren’t just possible — they’re inevitable.
Why Not Just Measure More Precisely?
It’s tempting to ask: why not move to 1/1000th-second timing and break the tie? Technically possible, but practically messy. Here’s why governing bodies like FINA haven’t made that leap:
- Equipment limitations: Pads and sensors can’t consistently detect that level of difference.
- Human variability: No two touches are alike. Adding more decimal places would introduce noise, not clarity.
- Equity concerns: Not every pool, meet, or nation has the tech to support ultra-precise timing.
- Regulatory inertia: Rulebooks are built around 0.01s precision. Changing this would ripple through everything from records to athlete qualifications.
Until the whole system — including pool building standards — evolves, tightening timing precision may just shift controversies instead of resolving them.
The Psychology of Ties
Interestingly, athletes have mixed feelings about tying. Some see it as a shared triumph, especially when national records are at stake. Others find it deeply frustrating, especially in medal races. But from a sportsmanship angle, ties also bring drama. They capture the raw edge of human competition — how perfection is not always measurable.
As of September 04, 2025, no major federation has formally proposed a move beyond 0.01s timing. The threshold still stands, with all its quirks and compromises.
The Reality Check
Swimming, at the elite level, has reached a point where athletes are limited more by the tools of measurement than their own speed. The gap between competitors is often smaller than what our systems can fairly detect. Until pool design tolerances shrink and timing systems sharpen, ties will continue — not as flukes, but as features of the sport.
