{"id":437299,"date":"2020-06-26T06:27:56","date_gmt":"2020-06-26T13:27:56","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.swimmingworldmagazine.com\/news\/?p=437299"},"modified":"2020-06-26T06:27:56","modified_gmt":"2020-06-26T13:27:56","slug":"2016-trials-throwback-lilly-king-adds-200-breast-to-olympic-lineup-with-molly-hannis","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.swimmingworldmagazine.com\/news\/2016-trials-throwback-lilly-king-adds-200-breast-to-olympic-lineup-with-molly-hannis\/","title":{"rendered":"2016 Trials Throwback: Lilly King Adds 200 Breast to Olympic Lineup With Molly Hannis"},"content":{"rendered":"

Lilly King makes her second event for Rio with a berth in the 200 breaststroke.<\/em><\/p>\n

Each day during the pre-scheduled days of the 2020 US Olympic Trials, Swimming World will take its readers back four years to the 2016 Trials in Omaha to recap each event, and will offer some insight into what the events will look like in 2021.<\/em><\/p>\n

The women’s 200 breaststroke was as wide open as any event heading into the 2016 Trials. All eyes were on Micah Lawrence<\/strong>, who made the final in London in 2012 and carried the title of America’s fastest 200 breaststroker since the retirement of\u00a0Rebecca Soni<\/strong>. Lawrence won the silver medal at the World Championships the year prior and was the top seed by a second and a half. These Trials signaled a changing of the guard in USA Swimming as a number of first-time Olympians had knocked off big-time veteran favorites.\u00a0Jessica Hardy<\/strong>,\u00a0Tyler Clary\u00a0<\/strong>and Natalie Coughlin<\/b> were just some names that didn’t make the team. Would Lawrence be able to avoid that fate and make the 200 breast?<\/p>\n

\"micah-lawrence-\"

Micah Lawrence. Photo Courtesy: Peter H. Bick<\/p><\/div>\n

Quickly making a name for herself was 19-year-old\u00a0Lilly King<\/strong>, who was the CSCAA Swimmer of the Year in 2016 after two American records at the NCAAs three months prior as a freshman. King had seemed to get better and better each time she dove off the blocks and was hard to ignore. She was seeded with a 2:24 for fifth, but there weren’t many people betting against her. King was a racer and she wasn’t afraid of a challenge. But she didn’t have a lot of 200 speed, so how could she fare against a primarily back-half centric field?<\/p>\n

Laura Sogar\u00a0<\/strong>was ranked second on the psych sheet and was our pick to finish second<\/a> behind Lawrence in the final. She was the national champion in 2015 and was seemingly in the right place at the right time in terms of her career. She had not made a major U.S. team to that point, so how would she respond under that pressure?<\/p>\n

Melanie Margalis\u00a0<\/strong>had beaten King head to head a few weeks prior, but with two Olympic qualifications solidified under her belt in the 200 free & 200 IM, what did she have left in the 200 breast?\u00a0Annie Lazor\u00a0<\/strong>had been another swimmer like Sogar that was hitting all the right notes in the lead-up to Trials, but she hadn’t made a major U.S. team either, so she was a bit of an unknown as well.<\/p>\n

Tennessee’s\u00a0Molly Hannis\u00a0<\/strong>had finished third in the 100 three days before this event, and was a popular upset pick leading into the final. If either Lawrence or King would falter, Hannis could slip in.<\/p>\n

Flying under the radar was\u00a0Bethany Galat<\/strong>, who was only fifth at NCAAs that year for Texas A&M. But Galat had placed third in the 400 IM on day one and was having the meet of her life – and not to mention the 200 breast was considered to be her best event.<\/p>\n

The Race<\/h3>\n
\"lilly-king-molly-hannis-\"

Lilly King. Photo Courtesy: Peter H. Bick<\/p><\/div>\n

King had a lot of strength and speed, and she knew she would need to take the race out hard to be able to hold on against primarily 200 breaststrokers Lawrence, Galat and Hannis. At this point, King was already on the team in the 100, so the pressure was off for her. She was able to let it fly on the first 100, bolting to the lead at the start and signaling to the rest of the field they were going to need to play catch up. Would that throw anyone’s game plan off?<\/p>\n

King turned at 1:09.16 with Lawrence 0.71 back and Hannis in third. At this point, Lawrence was looking long and smooth and in control. Perhaps the pace was a little slow for her but she was in the place she needed to be to make the team. Lawrence had tried to make a move on the third length but King held her lead at the 150 with Galat moving up to third.<\/p>\n

\"molly-hannis-\"

Molly Hannis. Photo Courtesy: Peter H. Bick<\/p><\/div>\n

In addition, Hannis, Margalis and Lazor were within striking distance of second place Lawrence and were going to need to shift into another gear to make the team. Lawrence was showing signs of weakness on the final 50 as Hannis and Galat drew even with a 25 to go. King was starting to struggle as well as the four of them threw everything they could towards the wall.<\/p>\n

It looked for a split moment that King and Galat – who had raced each other plenty of times growing up in Indiana, would be off to Rio, but Hannis had one more lunge for the wall and she grabbed the second spot behind King. Galat was third for the second time at Trials while Lawrence was fourth. Margalis faded on the final 50 and finished fifth while Lazor was seventh.<\/p>\n

Results<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Lilly King, 2:24.08<\/li>\n
  2. Molly Hannis, 2:24.39<\/li>\n
  3. Bethany Galat, 2:24.52<\/li>\n
  4. Micah Lawrence, 2:24.93<\/li>\n
  5. Melanie Margalis, 2:26.92<\/li>\n
  6. Emma Schoettmer, 2:27.30<\/li>\n
  7. Annie Lazor, 2:27.48<\/li>\n
  8. Sarah Henry, 2:28.12<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n