How We Measured It

For each of the 34 individual events, we compared the 8th-place seed time — the projected cutoff to make an A-final — across all five sites, and tracked which site has the fastest cutoff. More wins means a deeper, more competitive field going in.

The Projected Ranking

Based on seed times, Madison has the fastest cutoff in more events than any other site — more than a third of the entire program. Sacramento doesn't have the fastest cutoff in a single event.

A Real Example: Men's 100 Fly

Here's the seeded 8th-place time in the men's 100 fly at each site:

Going into the meet, a swimmer seeded at 55.5 projects to make the A-final in Sacramento, Knoxville, or Greensboro — but misses it entirely in Madison.

Not Just Wins — Consistency

Madison isn't seeded to win all 34 events, and no site is. But in the events where Madison doesn't have the fastest cutoff, its seed times are still typically within a fraction of a second of whoever does. Sacramento's gaps are bigger — its seed cutoffs often trail the leader by several seconds, not fractions of one.

That's the real gap between #1 and #5 heading in: Madison projects to win often and stay close everywhere else. Sacramento projects to rarely win and fall well behind when it doesn't.

Field Size Backs It Up

Sacramento's field is roughly 800 swimmers smaller than Knoxville's — nearly 30% — consistent with also projecting as the shallowest field.

Who to Watch at Each Site

Looking at who tops the psych sheets in the marquee individual events (50/100 free, 100 back, 100 breast, 100 fly, 200 IM), a few names stand out at each site:

• Sacramento — Olivia Detter (PASA, 20) is seeded #1 in three events: the 50 free (26.05), 100 free (57.46), and 100 fly (1:01.30).
• Knoxville — Josh Toothman (Blazing Barracudas, 20) tops both sprint frees, seeded 22.65/50.70. Lainy Kruger (Gator Swim Club, 21) leads the women's 100 and 200 free.
• Austin — Carter Wright (Bolles School Sharks, 19) is the top seed in both the men's 100 free and 100 back.
• Greensboro — The clear headliner: Reina Liu (TAC, 16) is seeded #1 in five different events — the 100 free, 100 back, 100 fly, 200 IM, and 50 free.
• Madison — Stuart Seymour (Northwestern University, 21) tops three men's events, while Molly Sweeney (Carmel Swim Club, 18) tops three on the women's side.

The Takeaway

If you're swimming Futures in Madison this summer, you're facing a tougher projected road to the A-final than swimmers at any of the other four sites. If you're swimming in Sacramento, the field — while still a legitimate championship meet — projects as the least competitive of the five.

This isn't a knock on any athlete. Futures assigns swimmers to sites by home region, not competitive balance, so nobody chose their field. But it's a useful reality check when comparing results across sites once the meets wrap: an A-final finish at Madison and an A-final finish at Sacramento won't have required the same time.

Psych Sheets

• Austin
• Greensboro
• Knoxville
• Madison
• Sacramento

Data based on official 2026 Futures Championship psych sheets as of publication, all five sites, meets held July 29–August 1. This is a pre-meet projection based on seed times, not final results — seed times reflect entries at time of export and are subject to change with scratches, add-ons, or updates ahead of competition.