Rectification : In the USA...
At least the top coaches (-Joanne Mcload) are keen on edges work and top Canadian skaters have great skating skills. It's our trademark. We can suck at jumps but we sure can skate. And I know what is going in Canada.Don’t kid yourself, this happens a lot in Canada as well.
I think children know the difference, but the point is that they are receiving recognition for achieving nothing. Unless just showing up is now an achievement worthy of a prize? The thing is, losing is real and children need to learn to accept and deal with losing. Trying to soften the blow by giving everyone recognition just for showing up doesn't help in the long run. When you see adults lose for the first time in their lives, it isn't pretty. Not everyone can be a winner, not everyone is beautiful, not everyone is smart, not everyone has special talents, not everyone is popular, and not everyone is going to be a celebrity. But it's what you do in the face of learning those lessons that determines your character and ultimately will determine your ability to achieve future happiness.I don't see what the problem is in the much-aligned universal token of participation. Even small children know the difference between that and the trophy or the medal. If they're happy with the ribbon, they're happy with the ribbon, but that doesn't mean they don't know the difference between the ribbon and the trophy. If they are motivated by the trophy, then they'll work for the trophy.
Participation recognition tokens are hardly a new invention. They don't mean that the recipient has a special talent or that the recipient "just" showed up. They mean that the recipient participated.I think children know the difference, but the point is that they are receiving recognition for achieving nothing. Unless just showing up is now an achievement worthy of a prize? The thing is, losing is real and children need to learn to accept and deal with losing.
"Plenty" of times?? Exactly four, if I am not forgetting something major. 97 Nationals, 96-97 Champion Series final, 97 Worlds, 98 Olympics. Three of those wins were in a time span of about four months during which Kwan was struggling hardcore and Tara was carrying rolling momentum, and in only one of the four wins over Michelle did she manage to win both portions of the competition en route to the title (Champion Series final). She was second to Kwan in the SP at 97 Nationals, second to Kwan in the LP at 97 Worlds, and second to Kwan in the SP at 98 Olys. Meanwhile, in the events during the same time period that Kwan beat Lipinski, she basically trounced
Participation recognition tokens are hardly a new invention. They don't mean that the recipient has a special talent or that the recipient "just" showed up. They mean that the recipient participated.
Did Carolina Kostner "just" show up to the Olympics? (And as a top six finisher at the Olympics, she'll receive a certificate.) Did Loena Hendrickx "just" show up to the Olympics?
Yes, and it's maybe a specificity of the US system that it relies on talent and ability to pay coinciding for success. I somehow can't imagine that Eteri or Mishin select their training groups based on anything but raw talent. If they see the ability is there, they will want the skater in their group.It costs a small fortune to create a skater these days. A lot of families just don't have the financial commitment.
Sadly, there is also no where near the same amount of money to be made doing the sport, too.
First of all, actually showing up is about 50% of life. You'd be surprised how many people haven't mastered it. Secondly, that's not what a participation ribbon/trophy/certificate is about. It's about showing up and doing the work. Third, it's not a prize but a memento. The point of it is to remind you of what you did.I think children know the difference, but the point is that they are receiving recognition for achieving nothing. Unless just showing up is now an achievement worthy of a prize?
After the big three in Canada who is there?Rectification : In the USA...
After the big three in Canada who is there?
Charlie White said this exact thing not long ago. That getting those ribbons encouraged him to keep putting in the work to get better. Even as a child he knew they weren't about winning but about rewarding the effort that could lead to winning some day. Seems like it worked.Secondly, that's not what a participation ribbon/trophy/certificate is about. It's about showing and doing the work.
I think of three....one did not make the team but I think she could be a factor one day.After the big two in Canada who is there?
I think these days, with plenty of interest in Asia and Russia in the ladies discipline, North America should not expect much unless the cost of becoming a world class figure skater is donated and not solely up to mom and dad. Kaetlyn and Gabbie and even Gracie might be the end of an era with few following to take their place.
Alina mentioned she hopes skating helps her family.Yes, and it's maybe a specificity of the US system that it relies on talent and ability to pay coinciding for success. I somehow can't imagine that Eteri or Mishin select their training groups based on anything but raw talent. If they see the ability is there, they will want the skater in their group.
Alina mentioned she hopes skating helps her family.
I think it is also talented kids get help with training costs.I’m trying to remember the exact figure, but I remember that in Sochi each Russian gold medalist was promised a bonus. Yes, the games were in Russia, but I’m pretty sure that they normally do things like this
But we were discussing participation gifts to children, not to athletes who have devoted their entire lives to becoming their countries' best in a sport. Of course Kostner didn't "just" show up to the Olympics, though she certainly could have skated better (and would then be going home with more than a certificate). And I think you are choosing to read into my use of "show up" a negative connotation that I didn't intend. I thought it was obvious that I meant "actually do something that wasn't good enough to win," not literally do nothing except appear.Participation recognition tokens are hardly a new invention. They don't mean that the recipient has a special talent or that the recipient "just" showed up. They mean that the recipient participated.
Did Carolina Kostner "just" show up to the Olympics? (And as a top six finisher at the Olympics, she'll receive a certificate.) Did Loena Hendrickx "just" show up to the Olympics?
I got participation acknowledgements 55+ years ago. Mostly certificates and ribbons. It meant that participating was worth something in itself, even if the trophy wasn't a possibility. Which I think is as important a lesson in life as "If you don't get the trophy, you're a loser."Maybe a better question would be: what is the purpose of the rise of distributing participation awards? This wasn't a thing when I was a child. If the purpose is to more or less to give a party favor or token of appreciation to kids, then fine, thanks for coming and please come back. But if the purpose is to make kids who didn't win feel less bad about not winning (or not doing well enough to place top 3 or whatever the reward structure is), then that I think is not constructive to creating champions - the "you didn't win, but not winning is actually just as good because we're ALL winners" mindset, in particular.
I think it is also talented kids get help with training costs.
This one I disagree with. Sure, you don't get the team life lessons unless you do synchro but there are plenty of life lessons to be learned in any sport even individual ones.No life lessons from playing on a team
After the big two in Canada who is there?
After the big three in Canada who is there?