I’m not sure it is a reason for the strength, I think there is a distinct possibility that they might be able to get away with it because of their strength.
Don’t forget, in the past the qualifier for the US trials has been a B qualifier. This level of depth would be unaffected by the mechanism we are discussing.
The US and Australian swimming have the advantages that they could fill the spots several times over. However this necessitates certain rigidities in the selection process (read bureaucracy) to minimise the possibility of influence. As a small sport nationally, we are not subject to these same constraints, and we would benefit from having a more flexible selection process which ensures that the team that is strongest at the time of the championship is selected. There are very few events in which this could pose problematic (Men’s LJ being one) because of our lack of depth. As depth is improved we would consider looking to other selection mechanisms, but until then we should try to develop that depth.
Keith Connor made a similar comment to yours several years ago purporting that the system used in the US was “elegant”. Unfortunately elegant does not always mean that it is correct. One only has to look at economics to see a counter example.
Optimising the team for a championship is already incorporated into the US system where trials are generally six weeks before the championships, however our southern hemisphere season precludes us from doing the same.
On another note, it was great to see JS get up and achieve selection. I think he will be one of those who will be ready come the CG’s. To do what he did 12 weeks after a back op is up there with Jana making the OG finals, weeks after a knee op. Both gutsy athletes.