Dashboard

The dashboard gives a quick club-wide view of qualification and near-qualification.

Qualified athletes

Unique athletes with at least one valid in-window performance at or faster than the applicable 2027 consideration time.

Confirmed qualifiers

Athlete-event combinations, so one athlete may contribute several qualifying events.

Within threshold

Recorded athlete-event combinations outside the standard but within the selected percentage slider.

Closest confirmed targets

Actual recorded swims, ordered by percentage gap to the standard. These are not predictions.

Qualification funnel

Shows how the club moves from recorded events towards closer targets and confirmed qualifications.

Qualification change log

Used after a future data refresh to show newly qualified events, improved event PBs and newly recorded events. The current published version is the baseline.

Athlete Explorer

Select an athlete to review every championship event against the correct age category at 31 December 2027.

Best in qualification window

The fastest converted short-course performance achieved from 9 February 2026 to 13 January 2027. This is the only performance used for qualification.

Best outside window

The fastest historical result outside the qualification window. It provides context but cannot establish 2027 qualification.

Gap to standard

The difference between the athlete's valid best and the 2027 consideration time. Percentage gaps allow fairer comparison between events of different lengths.

PB progression

Compares the fastest pre-window PB with the fastest eligible in-window result. Dates are shown so the comparison can be checked.

Window progression

Compares the first eligible swim in the window with the best eligible swim. A slower recent race does not remove an earlier PB.

Current form

Uses the latest three eligible swims only. Labels are cautious: improving, plateauing near PB, broadly stable, variable form or limited evidence.

Performance timeline

Plots all matching historical swims. Lower is faster. Use stroke, distance, period and course controls to explore progression.

Performance evidence

The underlying race history, including date, event, source time, converted SC time, meet and whether the swim falls inside the qualification window.

Current priorities Beta

This experimental feature ranks evidence-based guidance rather than replacing coach judgement.

Qualification security

Qualifications within 0.5% are marginal; 0.5–1.5% inside are worth protecting; more than 1.5% inside are treated as secure.

New opportunities

Closer Lancashire opportunities outrank ordinary development suggestions, with the acceptable gap narrowing as the qualification deadline approaches.

Stroke breadth

A genuinely missing or materially under-represented stroke is prioritised above an ordinary untested progression. A heavily raced stroke is never recommended merely to add more races.

Progression ladder

50m evidence supports 100m development; multiple competitive 100m performances support 200m development. Missing results mean unknown, not unsuitable.

Distance freestyle

400m Freestyle requires a 200m time at or within 5% of county standard and an age-appropriate profile. 800m requires established 400m evidence; 1500m requires established 800m evidence.

200m IM

Recommended as a staple development event only when age-appropriate evidence exists across several strokes and distances.

Confidence

Race familiarity, current form and proximity to the standard influence which recommendations appear.

Club Analysis

This page looks beyond a filtered results list and shows where the club has strength, depth and gaps.

Qualification heat maps

Unique qualified athletes by stroke, distance and 2027 age group. A number represents athletes, not qualifying events.

Event depth

For each event, separates unique qualified athletes, athletes within the selected threshold and athletes with a recorded valid time.

Next qualification targets

Actual recorded performances closest to the standard, ranked by percentage gap.

Qualification and target depth

Summarises unique athletes by stroke while showing event totals separately, avoiding claims such as “six athletes qualified” when two athletes qualified across six events.

Age-group pipeline

Shows the number of athletes with recorded evidence, close targets and qualifications in each age group.

Participation coverage

Shows how widely each stroke is being raced, independent of qualification.

Event coverage gaps

Counts athletes without a valid in-window performance in events up to 200m. A gap is a prompt for coaching judgement, not an instruction to enter every athlete.

Detailed results

The underlying athlete-event records used by the analysis and filters.

2027 Lancashire Times Analysis

This section compares the published 2026 and 2027 consideration times.

Faster / harder

The 2027 standard is faster than the 2026 standard. Red indicates that qualification has become more demanding.

Slower / easier

The 2027 standard is slower. Green indicates that the standard has relaxed.

Unchanged

The standard is identical.

Change in seconds and percentage

Seconds show the absolute movement; percentage change gives better context across different race lengths.

Detailed table, matrix and grouped summary

Different ways to inspect the same standards data. Filters should always apply to the figures and rows shown.

A harder standard does not mean an athlete has gone backwards. It means the benchmark has changed.

Shared Development Engine — Beta

Athlete Explorer and Meet Planner use the same underlying development model. Athlete Explorer explains the athlete’s priorities; Meet Planner translates those priorities into a balanced six, eight or ten-event programme.

Protect

Qualifications that are vulnerable enough to remain visible in the racing programme.

Build

Stroke breadth, missing race foundations and areas that need more balanced development.

Progress

The strongest evidence-supported move from 50m to 100m, from 100m to 200m, or into an appropriate IM pathway.

Long-term

The broader direction the athlete is growing towards, such as IM, middle-distance or advanced championship racing.

Why now

The coaching reason the priority is relevant at this point in the athlete’s development.

Evidence

Exploratory, Developing, Established or Strong describes the depth of the supporting race evidence, not whether the recommendation is good or bad.

Next step

A practical action for a future meet or development phase. Numerical recommendation scores remain internal and are used only to rank competing options.

Distinct progression

Progress must identify a different event from Improve. If no separate event is ready, the card explains that more progression evidence is needed rather than repeating the same race.

Meet Planner — Beta

Meet Planner builds a balanced competition programme rather than simply listing the athlete’s closest qualifying times. It is planning guidance only; the final programme should be agreed collaboratively with the athlete’s coach.

Foundation athletes

Less-developed athletes normally establish all four 50m events and build suitable 100m races before moving into demanding 200m events. Stroke breadth is deliberately prioritised because early strengths can change significantly as athletes grow.

Developing all-rounders

Once broad 50m and 100m evidence exists, the planner balances realistic Lancashire opportunities, missing stroke development, suitable 200m events and the IM pathway. A credible 100m IM is strong evidence for considering 200m IM.

Advanced athletes

More advanced athletes may focus on two or three principal strokes, county opportunities and vulnerable qualifications. Secondary strokes still need occasional maintenance, but a recently raced 50m may be omitted for one suitable meet. Near the qualification deadline, a realistic county-time chase may temporarily take priority.

Six, eight and ten entries

Each entry limit creates a newly balanced programme rather than simply cutting down a longer ranked list. Established competitors should normally receive the full six, eight or ten options. Confidence changes the order and strength of the recommendations rather than causing sensible established events to disappear. Foundation athletes may still receive fewer where there is genuinely too little evidence to support more. Larger programmes expand breadth and progression without filling every remaining place with long-distance events.

IM and distance progression

The 200m IM requires both stroke readiness and enough evidence to sustain eight lengths. An existing 200m IM automatically confirms readiness, particularly when it is within 10% of the county standard. For an athlete who has not yet raced the 200m IM, the planner first requires recorded race evidence across all four 50m strokes, with at least three broadly competent and no more than one manageable weakness. It then looks for distance evidence from an established 200m event, regular racing across multiple 100m events, a credible 100m IM, or strong age-appropriate performances close to county standard. It is held back when two or more strokes remain materially underdeveloped or when the athlete has only sprint evidence without sufficient depth. The 400m IM remains an advanced option requiring a strong 200m IM and broader 200m race pace.

Competition schedules, session clashes, technical readiness, injury, confidence and individual circumstances remain outside the model. Coaches retain final judgement.

Time Checker

Enter a category, age, event and time to compare it directly with the 2027 standard.

Improvement needed

The exact time and percentage required to reach the standard.

Monthly and weekly guide

A simple division of the required improvement across the remaining time. It is a planning prompt only; swimming improvement is not linear.

Club context

An approximate position among recorded Fleetwood Mako's athletes in the same category and event. It is not a Lancashire ranking.

Practical target plan

Training and race-skill prompts to discuss with the athlete's coach.

Technique is king. Listen to your coaches and give your absolute best every session. A Lancashire consideration time requires at least four purposeful sessions per week. Development Squad athletes should attend all core sessions: Monday, Wednesday, Friday and the invite-only Saturday morning session. Four sessions is the absolute minimum for Performance Squad athletes, and Saturday morning technique and skills is strongly encouraged.

Race-pace efficiency, planned breathing patterns, starts, turns, underwater speed, nutrition, recovery, stretching and appropriate strength and conditioning all matter. Athletes must own the process: keep a swim log, record splits and stroke counts, ask for feedback and set SMART goals with their coach.

Data, qualification rules and privacy

Qualification window

9 February 2026 to 13 January 2027.

Age

The athlete's age at 31 December 2027 determines the applicable standard.

Course handling

Long-course swims use the converted short-course time supplied in the SportsEngine report.

Missing event

No valid performance is listed for that athlete and event within the qualification window.

Historical swims

Used for context, progression and charts only. They never establish qualification for 2027.

Privacy

Exact dates of birth are used only during preparation to calculate the correct age category. They are not displayed or stored in the shared app. Only age at 31 December 2027 is shown.

All recommendations are aids to conversation. Technical readiness, health, confidence, meet schedules and individual development can only be judged properly by the coaching team.