[M T]

We don't discuss the aquatic sports much on here, but on the women's side, we're in really good shape.

The Stanford Invitational in water polo was last weekend.  I hear there was some other event that kept fans away on Sunday, but I went for the 3rd & 1st place matches.  Mid-50s, slight occasional drizzle, but lots of seats! 

The final match was #4 Cal vs #1 Stanford.  The first quarter was absolutely impressive by Stanford.  IIRC, they scored on 4 of 5 opportunities after ejections.  We seemed in complete control of the hole at both ends of the pool.  Stanford was getting good shots and Cal had practically nothing, but did get a long shot for a goal at the end of the quarter.

At the start of the second, Cal got a goal after Stanford deflected a shot and it got past the goalie.  But then the Stanford dominance in scoring seemed to drop off.  I remember looking up in the second to see that Cal had suffered 6 ejections to Stanford's 2, and Stanford was doing well with those ejections. It continued that way throughout the game, but Cal crept back in and tied it at 4-4 in the second.  Stanford regained the lead at 6-4 at the half.  In the 2nd, Cal got within one at 6-5 and 7-6, but Stanford pulled away and won 10-7.  Not as easy a win as the first quarter led me to hope for, but still, fairly comfortable.

---------
The Big Swim (#1 Stanford, #2 Cal) was on the PAC-12 channel today.  I have to say the PAC-12 channel did a good job covering it, with some underwater shots & pretty good camera work.  The announcing crew did a good job.  Amy Van Dyken often rubs me the wrong way, but less so today.  8 Olympians amongst the two teams.  (Hmm... no mention of diving that I recall on the telecast, but GoStanford.com indicates Kassidy Cook won the 3M again.)

I have to say I whole-heartedly agree with something Amy said -- if there's only one swim meet you're going to watch this year, watch this one.  Great swimmers, great swims, great races, and, of course, Stanford beat Cal.  I'm sure the meet will come up repeatedly on the PAC-12 channel.  Check it out.

#1 Stanford practically embarrassed #2 Cal in this meet, winning 177-123.   Cal swam well, but they were not where the Stanford swimmers are.  I should mention that dual meets are not an indication how teams will do at the conference championships, which themselves are not indicators of who will win a national championship.  But they allow swimmers to show where they are.  Both of these teams are aiming to peak at the NCAAs.  There's a lot of speed that will be gained in the next few weeks.

Speaking of showing where they are, the second event is the 1000 Free and the third is the 200 Free.  When they said that Katie Ledecky was swimming both, I was surprised.  Would she let up on the 1000 so she could have a respectable 200?  In the 1000, she clearly didn't let up.  Her (Cal) pool record 9:20 was better than anyone else in the country and within 11 seconds of her best (hey, this is a dual meet).  She lapped all but one swimmer, and was probably within a length of lapping her.  Well, she got a minute or so of rest while everyone else finished.

Then it was back up on the blocks for the 200 Free, a sprint in today's swimming.  But she was up against fellow Olympic Gold Medalist Simone Manuel.  It was the accomplished sprinter against the accomplished distance swimmer.  Considering Katie had just finished a 1000 Free, I thought Katie would put up a good show but come up short.

Never underestimate Katie.  Clearly this was her challenge to herself.  She swam that race as hard as I've seen her swim.  It was a race, but Katie swam a 1:43.09, beating Simone by a second.  She set a pool record too, which is no mean feat as this was the pool of Missy Franklin, who was the 200 Free NCAA champion in 2014 & 2015.  (1:43.09 would have been 4th at last year's NCAAs, just behind Stanford's Lia Neal, who didn't even swim it today.)

Simone got a pool record in the 50 free at 21.97.  3rd place in this dual meet would have gotten 13th at NCAAs last year.

In swimming, races are decided solely by the time, down to the hundredths of a second.  In breaststroke, 0.01 second is about 5/8 of an inch or 1.6cm in terms of how far your body travels, But your arms move at least twice as fast as your average speed.  Stanford's Kim Williams & Cal's Marina Garcia tied in the 100 Breaststroke at 1:01.89 and then came back later and tied again in the 200 at 2:12.16.

The good swims & good races don't stop there.

Janet Hu won the 100 Back in 51.61, which would have taken 12th at NCAAs last year.
Janet also won the 100 Fly in 51.93, which would have taken 13th.

Ella Eastin's second place in the 200 Fly at 1:55.41 would have been 13th last year.
Ella won the 200 IM in 1:57.90

Simone & Lia finished first & second in the 100 Free.  3rd place was a teammate of theirs on the Silver Medal 4x100M Free Relay at the Olympics (as was Katie).  Simone was nowhere near her 100 Free American Record, nor was Lia near her time for her NCAA 2nd place finish last year.

Ally Howe won the 200 Back in just under 1:54.

Katie also easily won the 500 Free, but maybe she was running low on energy, as her time would have only been 5th at the NCAAs last year.

Stanford lost the 400 Free Relay by 7 hundredths.  Lia closed very well at the end but couldn't quite make up the 1 second differential between Katie Ledecky and Cal's Amy Bilquist.  Maybe Katie ran out of steam, but more likely that she hasn't done any speed work yet (not surprising).

[M T]

We don't discuss the aquatic sports much on here, but on the women's side, we're in really good shape.

The Stanford Invitational in water polo was last weekend.  I hear there was some other event that kept fans away on Sunday, but I went for the 3rd & 1st place matches.  Mid-50s, slight occasional drizzle, but lots of seats! 

The final match was #4 Cal vs #1 Stanford.  The first quarter was absolutely impressive by Stanford.  IIRC, they scored on 4 of 5 opportunities after ejections.  We seemed in complete control of the hole at both ends of the pool.  Stanford was getting good shots and Cal had practically nothing, but did get a long shot for a goal at the end of the quarter.

At the start of the second, Cal got a goal after Stanford deflected a shot and it got past the goalie.  But then the Stanford dominance in scoring seemed to drop off.  I remember looking up in the second to see that Cal had suffered 6 ejections to Stanford's 2, and Stanford was doing well with those ejections. It continued that way throughout the game, but Cal crept back in and tied it at 4-4 in the second.  Stanford regained the lead at 6-4 at the half.  In the 2nd, Cal got within one at 6-5 and 7-6, but Stanford pulled away and won 10-7.  Not as easy a win as the first quarter led me to hope for, but still, fairly comfortable.

---------
The Big Swim (#1 Stanford, #2 Cal) was on the PAC-12 channel today.  I have to say the PAC-12 channel did a good job covering it, with some underwater shots & pretty good camera work.  The announcing crew did a good job.  Amy Van Dyken often rubs me the wrong way, but less so today.  8 Olympians amongst the two teams.  (Hmm... no mention of diving that I recall on the telecast, but GoStanford.com indicates Kassidy Cook won the 3M again.)

I have to say I whole-heartedly agree with something Amy said -- if there's only one swim meet you're going to watch this year, watch this one.  Great swimmers, great swims, great races, and, of course, Stanford beat Cal.  I'm sure the meet will come up repeatedly on the PAC-12 channel.  Check it out.

#1 Stanford practically embarrassed #2 Cal in this meet, winning 177-123.   Cal swam well, but they were not where the Stanford swimmers are.  I should mention that dual meets are not an indication how teams will do at the conference championships, which themselves are not indicators of who will win a national championship.  But they allow swimmers to show where they are.  Both of these teams are aiming to peak at the NCAAs.  There's a lot of speed that will be gained in the next few weeks.

Speaking of showing where they are, the second event is the 1000 Free and the third is the 200 Free.  When they said that Katie Ledecky was swimming both, I was surprised.  Would she let up on the 1000 so she could have a respectable 200?  In the 1000, she clearly didn't let up.  Her (Cal) pool record 9:20 was better than anyone else in the country and within 11 seconds of her best (hey, this is a dual meet).  She lapped all but one swimmer, and was probably within a length of lapping her.  Well, she got a minute or so of rest while everyone else finished.

Then it was back up on the blocks for the 200 Free, a sprint in today's swimming.  But she was up against fellow Olympic Gold Medalist Simone Manuel.  It was the accomplished sprinter against the accomplished distance swimmer.  Considering Katie had just finished a 1000 Free, I thought Katie would put up a good show but come up short.

Never underestimate Katie.  Clearly this was her challenge to herself.  She swam that race as hard as I've seen her swim.  It was a race, but Katie swam a 1:43.09, beating Simone by a second.  She set a pool record too, which is no mean feat as this was the pool of Missy Franklin, who was the 200 Free NCAA champion in 2014 & 2015.  (1:43.09 would have been 4th at last year's NCAAs, just behind Stanford's Lia Neal, who didn't even swim it today.)

Simone got a pool record in the 50 free at 21.97.  3rd place in this dual meet would have gotten 13th at NCAAs last year.

In swimming, races are decided solely by the time, down to the hundredths of a second.  In breaststroke, 0.01 second is about 5/8 of an inch or 1.6cm in terms of how far your body travels, But your arms move at least twice as fast as your average speed.  Stanford's Kim Williams & Cal's Marina Garcia tied in the 100 Breaststroke at 1:01.89 and then came back later and tied again in the 200 at 2:12.16.

The good swims & good races don't stop there.

Janet Hu won the 100 Back in 51.61, which would have taken 12th at NCAAs last year.
Janet also won the 100 Fly in 51.93, which would have taken 13th.

Ella Eastin's second place in the 200 Fly at 1:55.41 would have been 13th last year.
Ella won the 200 IM in 1:57.90

Simone & Lia finished first & second in the 100 Free.  3rd place was a teammate of theirs on the Silver Medal 4x100M Free Relay at the Olympics (as was Katie).  Simone was nowhere near her 100 Free American Record, nor was Lia near her time for her NCAA 2nd place finish last year.

Ally Howe won the 200 Back in just under 1:54.

Katie also easily won the 500 Free, but maybe she was running low on energy, as her time would have only been 5th at the NCAAs last year.

Stanford lost the 400 Free Relay by 7 hundredths.  Lia closed very well at the end but couldn't quite make up the 1 second differential between Katie Ledecky and Cal's Amy Bilquist.  Maybe Katie ran out of steam, but more likely that she hasn't done any speed work yet (not surprising).

[DenverCard]

MT:

Great summary of the Big Swim Meet.  The comparisons to last year's NCAA were really helpful, and put into perspective how fast the times were at this dual meet.  As Amy Van Dyken said at the outset, the expectation is that the swimmers are very broken down by the heavy training that they are doing at this time in the season, in contrast to being fully rested at NCAAs.  So for those mentioned above to lay down times today that would score at NCAAs is rather amazing.

As well, Stanford's sub-elite (or yet-to-be-elite) swimmers stand to score points at NCAAs.  I think teams can take about 14 swimmers and a couple of divers to NCAAs, and I believe that anyone from Stanford who goes to NCAAs has a chance to finish in the top 16.  In fact, there may be those who qualify for the meet but for whom there is no room on the roster.

In short, the women's swim team is a juggernaut.

[DenverCard]

MT:

Great summary of the Big Swim Meet.  The comparisons to last year's NCAA were really helpful, and put into perspective how fast the times were at this dual meet.  As Amy Van Dyken said at the outset, the expectation is that the swimmers are very broken down by the heavy training that they are doing at this time in the season, in contrast to being fully rested at NCAAs.  So for those mentioned above to lay down times today that would score at NCAAs is rather amazing.

As well, Stanford's sub-elite (or yet-to-be-elite) swimmers stand to score points at NCAAs.  I think teams can take about 14 swimmers and a couple of divers to NCAAs, and I believe that anyone from Stanford who goes to NCAAs has a chance to finish in the top 16.  In fact, there may be those who qualify for the meet but for whom there is no room on the roster.

In short, the women's swim team is a juggernaut.

[TheFarm07]

Thanks for the recap, MT.

I saw that we easily handled #2 C.al, but I know very little about swimming and less about collegiate swimming, besides the fact that we have gold medalist Olympians on our team, so I didn't know whether to interpret the scoreline as indication that we are that dominant or C.al was having an off day.

[TheFarm07]

Thanks for the recap, MT.

I saw that we easily handled #2 C.al, but I know very little about swimming and less about collegiate swimming, besides the fact that we have gold medalist Olympians on our team, so I didn't know whether to interpret the scoreline as indication that we are that dominant or C.al was having an off day.

[M T]

A couple of other articles from swimming sites:
http://www.swimmingworldmagazine.com/news/240725-2/
Nice article on the meet, including

Ledecky is preparing to swim the 1,650 at NCAAs, so the distance of the quick double is not unbelievable, but it was the mental toughness to end a race, quickly breathe, refocus — then go out and beat teammate Simone Manuel, another Olympic gold medalist, in the 200. Manuel is also one of the greatest swimmers in the world, and to beat her and set the 200 pool record after just swimming the 1,000 is beyond remarkable. She went on to win the 500 freestyle in a pool record of 4:35.89, leading Stanford to a 177-123 victory to cap an unbeaten regular season.
...How are these races going to go in the postseason? Who knows? That is the best part about swimming. Everyone tapers differently and everyone of those swimmers can beat the rest of the field, which should make for a spectacular finish in the sprints and the backstroke events at NCAAs.

https://swimswam.com/ledecky-drops-back-...beats-cal/
  Less original material, but has both Stanford & Cal press releases on the meet.

I knew that our winning both the 100 (Hu) and the 200 (Howe) Back was impressive, but I missed that Hu's swim was also a pool record, in the pool where Cal has had so many great backstrokers.  These events added insult to injury to Cal's strength:
Recent Cal backstroke finishes at NCAAs:  2016: 100:1; 2015: 100&200:1; 2014: 100&200:2nd in both; 2013: 100&200: 1; 2012: 100:1; 2011: 100:1
Cal swimmers hold the NCAA & American records (100 49.97 Natalie Coughlin (2002!), 200 1:47.84 Pelton (2013)).  Moreover, Cal women hold 8 of the top 10 swims in history in the 200 Back (short course yards), and 7 of the top 10 in the 100 scy Back.  Impressive!  But they now don't have their own 100 Back pool record.

To have 5 new pool records (50, 200, 500, 1000Fr, 100Bk) with "Stanford" beside them has to smart.  Did Stanford just poke the Be.ar?

The NCAAs will be a very interesting meet with some very strong races.  And this isn't just for PAC-12 pride.  Most of these ladies will be the core of US swimming for the near future.

[M T]

A couple of other articles from swimming sites:
http://www.swimmingworldmagazine.com/news/240725-2/
Nice article on the meet, including

Ledecky is preparing to swim the 1,650 at NCAAs, so the distance of the quick double is not unbelievable, but it was the mental toughness to end a race, quickly breathe, refocus — then go out and beat teammate Simone Manuel, another Olympic gold medalist, in the 200. Manuel is also one of the greatest swimmers in the world, and to beat her and set the 200 pool record after just swimming the 1,000 is beyond remarkable. She went on to win the 500 freestyle in a pool record of 4:35.89, leading Stanford to a 177-123 victory to cap an unbeaten regular season.
...How are these races going to go in the postseason? Who knows? That is the best part about swimming. Everyone tapers differently and everyone of those swimmers can beat the rest of the field, which should make for a spectacular finish in the sprints and the backstroke events at NCAAs.

https://swimswam.com/ledecky-drops-back-...beats-cal/
  Less original material, but has both Stanford & Cal press releases on the meet.

I knew that our winning both the 100 (Hu) and the 200 (Howe) Back was impressive, but I missed that Hu's swim was also a pool record, in the pool where Cal has had so many great backstrokers.  These events added insult to injury to Cal's strength:
Recent Cal backstroke finishes at NCAAs:  2016: 100:1; 2015: 100&200:1; 2014: 100&200:2nd in both; 2013: 100&200: 1; 2012: 100:1; 2011: 100:1
Cal swimmers hold the NCAA & American records (100 49.97 Natalie Coughlin (2002!), 200 1:47.84 Pelton (2013)).  Moreover, Cal women hold 8 of the top 10 swims in history in the 200 Back (short course yards), and 7 of the top 10 in the 100 scy Back.  Impressive!  But they now don't have their own 100 Back pool record.

To have 5 new pool records (50, 200, 500, 1000Fr, 100Bk) with "Stanford" beside them has to smart.  Did Stanford just poke the Be.ar?

The NCAAs will be a very interesting meet with some very strong races.  And this isn't just for PAC-12 pride.  Most of these ladies will be the core of US swimming for the near future.

[Phogge]

A question: I work at times with a former male All American water polo player. We sometimes compare our sports while traveling and I have been fascinated by the extent of aggression and roughness in the mens' game, especially post-college. How rough is the womens' game?

[Phogge]

A question: I work at times with a former male All American water polo player. We sometimes compare our sports while traveling and I have been fascinated by the extent of aggression and roughness in the mens' game, especially post-college. How rough is the womens' game?

[BostonCard]

A question: I work at times with a former male All American water polo player. We sometimes compare our sports while traveling and I have been fascinated by the extent of aggression and roughness in the mens' game, especially post-college. How rough is the womens' game?

I don't know if they have cleaned up on this since the 90's, but I had a friend who was on the WWP team back then and she described having to wear two bathing suits because the outer one would inevitably be ripped to shreds; apparently the women would sharpen their nails so as to be able to scratch and claw beneath the surface of the water.

So, my guess is "very".

BC

[BostonCard]

A question: I work at times with a former male All American water polo player. We sometimes compare our sports while traveling and I have been fascinated by the extent of aggression and roughness in the mens' game, especially post-college. How rough is the womens' game?

I don't know if they have cleaned up on this since the 90's, but I had a friend who was on the WWP team back then and she described having to wear two bathing suits because the outer one would inevitably be ripped to shreds; apparently the women would sharpen their nails so as to be able to scratch and claw beneath the surface of the water.

So, my guess is "very".

BC

[fullmetal]

Concur with the "very."  There's a lot of abuse going on under the water's surface, and I remember a friend coming back from practice once with three long fingernail scratches just under her neck.  And that was just from a teammate...

[fullmetal]

Concur with the "very."  There's a lot of abuse going on under the water's surface, and I remember a friend coming back from practice once with three long fingernail scratches just under her neck.  And that was just from a teammate...

[M T]

I think last year, the PAC-12 showed a few minutes of underwater, but you can understand why they don't show much.  Water polo is so different than basketball.  Officials don't call fouls because it looks like there's a foul.  They pretty much have to see something, so contact above water gets called but not so much under.  Of course grabbing the suit is one way to control your opponent, and it is illegal (major foul & 20-second ejection).  You will see the players lifting out of the water to try to show that the opponent is grabbing the suit.  (But, I've also seen players grabbing their own suit to make it look like it was the opponent.)

I haven't noticed that the women are wearing two suits in games. The suits are very tight on them to minimize the ability to grab and heavier than racing suits.  I noticed that the Hawaii/Michigan teams's suits had a different shape than the Cal/Stanford suits.  Nobody grabs the straps of course, but they do grab anywhere on the body, and the leg holes.

But it is a whole lot rougher than just grabbing suits.  Water is a lot more viscous than air.  The game is more wrestling than boxing.  First, if you watch play in the hole (2-4m in front of the center of the goal), there is a lot of contact that is visible when the ball is not there.  Like BB centers, there is a lot of maneuvering to get position, with the same goal as BB - prevent the player from getting the ball. Like BB, you're constantly trying to either (offense) move toward the goal or (defense) push your player away from the goal, or to flip around to the other side of your opponent. One player's head will be on the other's shoulder (and heavy).  Either player will grab the wrist or elbow or suit of the opponent (underwater) and effectively do wrestling-style moves to try to use the other player's body as a fulcrum to get yourself around them.  In water polo, in the field, you want your hips up as high as you can, so you can lift your body out, and also because your kick (to keep you up in the water) is more effective if your waist is bent.  But your opponent is going to be pushing your hips down.  The offensive player is often laid out on her back, so better to push and to have your arms away from the grabby hands of the defender.

In close quarters, you'll see a player grab one arm and then put a knee or an elbow into the body.  Thanks to the grab, above water the player doesn't move much, but their body gets out of position under water.

As a spectator, the interesting calls are often in the hole when the defender will have both hands out of water (to show they aren't grabbing) and the official will still eject them.  You do wrap you legs around the opponent's waist or legs.

One of the roughest times is on possession changes (or anytime a player makes a quick cut).  Pushing off your opponent is a double-win, but it has to be fast & below water as it is illegal.  That's usually done with feet and a sharp kick.  And, of course, that is when you will try to hang onto your opponent and push their hips down.  Grabbing the leg of a player trying to swim away is a quick way to earn an ejection.

You will often see whichever one is in front swim diagonally in front of their opponent just to make them struggle more.  I know that when I did that, I was not just trying to drag my arms across their body, I was trying to use my elbows to push into their body (their faces are out of the water).

For guys, a rough beard is used as a rasp when playing in the hole.  50 years ago, when I played at a small school  in SoCal (I'm male), I did wear two suits, each tied as tight as I could manage (but you do have hips so there are places to grab, and grab they did).  I remember a freshman that had been All-American in high school was really good at putting his foot sideways on my stomach, rotating his toes down, then push me back, and then pull his foot up, all in a single motion.  Pop goes the string -- I lost two strings in suits that day, as I watched him swim away.

I haven't seen it, but I presume the officials still inspect everyone's fingernails & toenails before the game, and upon request during the game.  Scratching wasn't something you tried to do, but was a side effect.

Don't forget the goalie.  While they almost never have physical contact with other players, the ball will come at them from 1-5m at 40+ mph.  Backhand shots have to be the worst because there is almost no wind up, and there is little way to predict where it is going to go.  The shooter only has a vague idea of where the goalie is.  If the player in the hole does a backhand shot to the goalie's face, there is no way for her to get her hands in the way, or even turn.  I'm surprised there aren't more concussions, broken noses, or eye injuries.  (The water polo cap does a good job of protecting the ears from grabs and bites and burst eardrums due to a ball hitting there.) 

I guess one of the frustrations I have in BB about players flopping by throwing their heads backward is that such fakes are common in water polo and you have to watch the movement of the head to know if the player is being kicked in the chest or just trying to fake that they are.

[From Wikipedia]
Ball weight is 400-450 grams (14-16 ounces) (same as soccer, vs 260-280g for VB) and inflated to 90-97 kPa (kilopascals) gauge pressure (13-14 psi) for men and 83-90 kPa (12-13 psi) for women (vs ~4.5psi for VB, 8.5-16psi for soccer). Water polo balls come in two main sizes: a size 5 (68-71 cm in circumference, same as soccer), intended for use by men, and a size 4 (65-67 cm in circumference, same as VB), intended for women.  I don't know how the rules are stated, but the surface of a water polo ball is such that it isn't slick (do I recall a similar feel on new leather basketballs in the 50s?).  So it is slightly rough like unfinished leather (but retains this feature when wet).  Players want the ball fully inflated as that makes it easier to bounce shots off the water.

While water polo is not particularly popular in the US, it has professional leagues in Europe.  Water polo has been in more Olympics than soccer.

I never played football or rugby or wrestled or boxed.  But when I got into water polo, I experienced this kind of physical combat and felt the emotions of such a visceral sport.  It was definitely an outlet for me.

Conditioning for water polo is a whole lot different than for swimming.  Treading water doesn't drain you, but the constant wind sprints do, not just up & down the pool, but also when playing either offense or defense.  The bigger you are, the more suited you are for the struggle for position, but the more you have to lug up & down the pool.

[M T]

I think last year, the PAC-12 showed a few minutes of underwater, but you can understand why they don't show much.  Water polo is so different than basketball.  Officials don't call fouls because it looks like there's a foul.  They pretty much have to see something, so contact above water gets called but not so much under.  Of course grabbing the suit is one way to control your opponent, and it is illegal (major foul & 20-second ejection).  You will see the players lifting out of the water to try to show that the opponent is grabbing the suit.  (But, I've also seen players grabbing their own suit to make it look like it was the opponent.)

I haven't noticed that the women are wearing two suits in games. The suits are very tight on them to minimize the ability to grab and heavier than racing suits.  I noticed that the Hawaii/Michigan teams's suits had a different shape than the Cal/Stanford suits.  Nobody grabs the straps of course, but they do grab anywhere on the body, and the leg holes.

But it is a whole lot rougher than just grabbing suits.  Water is a lot more viscous than air.  The game is more wrestling than boxing.  First, if you watch play in the hole (2-4m in front of the center of the goal), there is a lot of contact that is visible when the ball is not there.  Like BB centers, there is a lot of maneuvering to get position, with the same goal as BB - prevent the player from getting the ball. Like BB, you're constantly trying to either (offense) move toward the goal or (defense) push your player away from the goal, or to flip around to the other side of your opponent. One player's head will be on the other's shoulder (and heavy).  Either player will grab the wrist or elbow or suit of the opponent (underwater) and effectively do wrestling-style moves to try to use the other player's body as a fulcrum to get yourself around them.  In water polo, in the field, you want your hips up as high as you can, so you can lift your body out, and also because your kick (to keep you up in the water) is more effective if your waist is bent.  But your opponent is going to be pushing your hips down.  The offensive player is often laid out on her back, so better to push and to have your arms away from the grabby hands of the defender.

In close quarters, you'll see a player grab one arm and then put a knee or an elbow into the body.  Thanks to the grab, above water the player doesn't move much, but their body gets out of position under water.

As a spectator, the interesting calls are often in the hole when the defender will have both hands out of water (to show they aren't grabbing) and the official will still eject them.  You do wrap you legs around the opponent's waist or legs.

One of the roughest times is on possession changes (or anytime a player makes a quick cut).  Pushing off your opponent is a double-win, but it has to be fast & below water as it is illegal.  That's usually done with feet and a sharp kick.  And, of course, that is when you will try to hang onto your opponent and push their hips down.  Grabbing the leg of a player trying to swim away is a quick way to earn an ejection.

You will often see whichever one is in front swim diagonally in front of their opponent just to make them struggle more.  I know that when I did that, I was not just trying to drag my arms across their body, I was trying to use my elbows to push into their body (their faces are out of the water).

For guys, a rough beard is used as a rasp when playing in the hole.  50 years ago, when I played at a small school  in SoCal (I'm male), I did wear two suits, each tied as tight as I could manage (but you do have hips so there are places to grab, and grab they did).  I remember a freshman that had been All-American in high school was really good at putting his foot sideways on my stomach, rotating his toes down, then push me back, and then pull his foot up, all in a single motion.  Pop goes the string -- I lost two strings in suits that day, as I watched him swim away.

I haven't seen it, but I presume the officials still inspect everyone's fingernails & toenails before the game, and upon request during the game.  Scratching wasn't something you tried to do, but was a side effect.

Don't forget the goalie.  While they almost never have physical contact with other players, the ball will come at them from 1-5m at 40+ mph.  Backhand shots have to be the worst because there is almost no wind up, and there is little way to predict where it is going to go.  The shooter only has a vague idea of where the goalie is.  If the player in the hole does a backhand shot to the goalie's face, there is no way for her to get her hands in the way, or even turn.  I'm surprised there aren't more concussions, broken noses, or eye injuries.  (The water polo cap does a good job of protecting the ears from grabs and bites and burst eardrums due to a ball hitting there.) 

I guess one of the frustrations I have in BB about players flopping by throwing their heads backward is that such fakes are common in water polo and you have to watch the movement of the head to know if the player is being kicked in the chest or just trying to fake that they are.

[From Wikipedia]
Ball weight is 400-450 grams (14-16 ounces) (same as soccer, vs 260-280g for VB) and inflated to 90-97 kPa (kilopascals) gauge pressure (13-14 psi) for men and 83-90 kPa (12-13 psi) for women (vs ~4.5psi for VB, 8.5-16psi for soccer). Water polo balls come in two main sizes: a size 5 (68-71 cm in circumference, same as soccer), intended for use by men, and a size 4 (65-67 cm in circumference, same as VB), intended for women.  I don't know how the rules are stated, but the surface of a water polo ball is such that it isn't slick (do I recall a similar feel on new leather basketballs in the 50s?).  So it is slightly rough like unfinished leather (but retains this feature when wet).  Players want the ball fully inflated as that makes it easier to bounce shots off the water.

While water polo is not particularly popular in the US, it has professional leagues in Europe.  Water polo has been in more Olympics than soccer.

I never played football or rugby or wrestled or boxed.  But when I got into water polo, I experienced this kind of physical combat and felt the emotions of such a visceral sport.  It was definitely an outlet for me.

Conditioning for water polo is a whole lot different than for swimming.  Treading water doesn't drain you, but the constant wind sprints do, not just up & down the pool, but also when playing either offense or defense.  The bigger you are, the more suited you are for the struggle for position, but the more you have to lug up & down the pool.

[Phogge]

Thanks guys. My friend had his nose broken on tour in Australia. He was told to retaliate early in his next game or he would be pounded at every venue. So he broke a couple of fingers of his attacker early in the first period next time out. He had marked his territory.

[Phogge]

Thanks guys. My friend had his nose broken on tour in Australia. He was told to retaliate early in his next game or he would be pounded at every venue. So he broke a couple of fingers of his attacker early in the first period next time out. He had marked his territory.