It is illogical to try and compare swimming with track and field. Running comes natural to humans. It is an inherent trait for us. On the other hand, There is nothing natural about swimming. My sister told me recently that babies have a natural floating instinct. She then plopped her baby into the water in front of us (we were in a pool) only to have to rush to submerge and extract the poor girl when she started sinking.
In track, distance covered in the least amount of time is the whole point. In swimming, a huge component of the "point" is "style". If it weren't, everyone would swim freestyle (front crawl) and there would be no limit to how far you could kick underwater.
It's fine to criticize the sport for its number of events. I personally have mixed feelings about the stroke 50s being added to the Olympic program. I'm also sympathetic to the argument that the large number of events is confusing to the casuals and lessens the value of each individual medal. However, I think comparing the sport to track and field is a tired and ineffective argument since the historical backdrop of each sport is so different and their aims differ as I pointed out above.
Day 2 finals wrapped up this morning. There was speculation that one of the US' stars, Gretchen Walsh, may have been sick when she was pulled from the relay yesterday. She must have mostly recovered as she ended up winning the 100 fly (my personal favorite event) with the 2nd fastest time ever, only behind her own world record.
The US men have missed the finals in the 400 free, 100 back, 100 breast, and 50 fly so far. That is the most missed finals that I ever recall seeing at the world champs. They also lost the 400 free relay, an event they were considerable favorites in. I'm just going to enjoy the races for what they are from this point on and brace for another 2023 type team performance