American Women Used to Dominate in Figure Skating. What Happened?

[ChiquitaBanana]

The problem with a "system" is that not everyone who skates wants an intensive training program. And skaters often have other activities they are involved in so they don't come to the rink each day. There are clubs in my area who have organized weekly power classes and such, buying an hour of ice that is not part of the regular FS/lesson sched, but the club takes on a risk that enough skaters will enroll to offset the cost of the ice and the instructor's fee. (And then there are also political issues with regard to choosing/promoting one coach over the others to teach. And even if you try to come up with a rotating instructor sched, clubs also face tax issues depending on how much they pay an instructor in total.)

My club considered trying to have an off-ice conditioning class at the rink preceding club ice one night. But there were some time conflicts and the board ultimately decided it was too much risk to take on...would enough students attend each week to cover the instructor cost.

Most skaters are in it for recreational purposes. They don't want to train multiple sessions a day, 5 or 6 days a week. Not everyone skates to do freestyle comps...some decide they prefer synchro or Theater on Ice. Those who want to train and compete full-out will start out with their local coaches and if they progress to the point where they need better coaching or more ice time than they can get at their home rink, they will find a training center that meets their needs. It's not realistic or cost-effective for every rink/club to organize as if all their members are training for the Olys.

Group training is used in most ISU countries and there are groups for recreational and competitive skaters fulfilling their own needs.
US skating clubs are like walk-in sessions. I'd rather have my child enrolled in a program where they are taken care from A to Z, not just for the 15-30 minutes of on-ice lessons the parents can pay twice a week. There is so much more that can be done for not so more money.

 

[ChiquitaBanana]

This is how many Canadian clubs operate. It has its pro and cons. If your child is “special” you get great bang for your buck. Lots of attention etc. If your child is not seen as having lots of potential, you end up subsidizing other skaters while your child is ignored. I speak as someone who has been on both side of that situation.

The main business model in Canada is private lessons given by professional coaches. Who supervises your kid when she's not in lessons? Off-ice warm-ups are written on a schedule, supervised and mandatory? Gymnastics does it well. Not skating.

 

[mag]

The main business model in Canada is private lessons given by professional coaches. Who supervises your kid when she's not in lessons? Off-ice warm-ups are written on a schedule, supervised and mandatory? Gymnastics does it well. Not skating.

Some Canadian clubs have off ice attached to the club at the rink. Some do supervised warm ups. Some have small group warm ups that some kids get invited to and not others. Some clubs use group lessons extensively especially for younger kids, some not. Some have bridge programs between CanSkate and the figure skating programs that are fully coached on ice. There really isn’t one Canadian model. The main difference I see between the US and Canada is that in Canada the clubs tend to control all the ice time and the boards are often involved in operational decisions. In the US I believe most of the rinks are privately owned and the coaches contract with the rink who grants the coaching privileges.

 

[ChiquitaBanana]

I agree. This form of training might also be more effective, but it also excludes skaters whose parents can't afford to pay for the extra sessions, or who can't get their skater to the rink that many more times. IMO every club needs to have an option for skaters who might only be able to skate once or twice a week. No, those skaters are likely not going to go to the Olympics or whatever, but they still generate revenue for the club/coaches, and they still love the sport (which can make them more rewarding to work with than overtrained, stressed competitive skaters).

It could be done for these skaters. The problem (another) is that clubs committee /boards are run by volunteered parents that 1) either are not all that familiar with skating, 2) not well-versed into management, 3) are afraid of changes 4) are used to the current way of functioning and do not have a global view on things 5) know nothing about LTAD (long term athlete development - which can apply to your STAR skaters also 6) other multiple silly reasons ...

The best to come out of Canada in the past 10 years come from skating schools and not skating clubs. Skating business run by skating professionals, that makes much more sense to me.

 

[mag]

It could be done for these skaters. The problem (another) is that clubs committee /boards are run by volunteered parents that 1) either are not all that familiar with skating, 2) not well-versed into management, 3) are afraid of changes 4) are used to the current way of functioning and do not have a global view on things 5) know nothing about LTAD (long term athlete development - which can apply to your STAR skaters also 6) other multiple silly reasons ...

The best to come out of Canada in the past 10 years come from skating schools and not skating clubs. Skating business run by skating professionals, that makes much more sense to me.

There are a lot of coaches out there who may be great coaches, but no nothing about scheduling, managing a business, dealing with finances, fundraising, or managing the interpersonal issue that arise when you have many teenage girls together for hours at a time. Many parents have much more experience in these areas.

Strong cooperation between a volunteer board and the coaching staff, recognition that you don’t need to be a skater to have knowledge about sound educational practices, respect for the skills of professional coaches, and respect for the skills of professional managers, finance, and HR professional who may be volunteering on a board are all important. It has been my experience that when people are willing to admit what they don’t know (parents often don’t know Skating, coaches often are terrible managers) and work together you get the healthiest clubs.

 

[ChiquitaBanana]

Some Canadian clubs have off ice attached to the club at the rink. Some do supervised warm ups. Some have small group warm ups that some kids get invited to and not others. Some clubs use group lessons extensively especially for younger kids, some not. Some have bridge programs between CanSkate and the figure skating programs that are fully coached on ice. There really isn’t one Canadian model. The main difference I see between the US and Canada is that in Canada the clubs tend to control all the ice time and the boards are often involved in operational decisions. In the US I believe most of the rinks are privately owned and the coaches contract with the rink who grants the coaching privileges.

I'd be curious to have statistics on these numbers. Not that I don't believe you : you're west, I am east. My feeling is that time management/ressources sharing could be more efficient and cost-effective. Skate Canada is starting to promote that with the new STAR program but there is still resistance, parents united behind their children's coach so you get little cliques in a specific club instead of having all club members working towards each and everyone success and goals.

I have seen the European model, been in it to tell you lower level/recreational skaters developing faster with less ice-time that the ones in Canada (and US I guess). It was an eye-opener.

 

[ChiquitaBanana]

There are a lot of coaches out there who may be great coaches, but no nothing about scheduling, managing a business, dealing with finances, fundraising, or managing the interpersonal issue that arise when you have many teenage girls together for hours at a time. Many parents have much more experience in these areas.

Strong cooperation between a volunteer board and the coaching staff, recognition that you don’t need to be a skater to have knowledge about sound educational practices, respect for the skills of professional coaches, and respect for the skills of professional managers, finance, and HR professional who may be volunteering on a board are all important. It has been my experience that when people are willing to admit what they don’t know (parents often don’t know Skating, coaches often are terrible managers) and work together you get the healthiest clubs.

I agree, but what are the odds? I know some clubs that have attained that "nirvana" of non-profit sports organization, but how many on the whole number? You get all these wonderful professionals if your club USC located in urban area. That is not always the reality of smaller clubs.

Skating schools are private, most non-profit, but the real advantage is decision-wise. Less people involved in the decision process, the owners set their ice-time and management depending on their needs.
Great coaches are great because they are managers, much more than merely technicians. They're used. Even through a club, to manage their lessons schedule, to manage their skaters' training schedule. Don't you think a great coach knows
how these teenage
girls? Don't you think they have sealed with much more teenagers than a single parent will ever have to? A coach is an expert in teenage crisis, I tell you... Fundraising is not usually an issue with skating coach. That is said, parents do get involved in some of the school activities if needed, they just don't vote on decisions to be taken. If you are not satisfied. You get out of the school and ho yo son other .As for the administration part, they can still hire someone. That is said, I know many skating schools and they all manage their business well. It is not that complicated of a business compared to a retail store... Have you had an experience with some of them?

 

[mag]

but there is still resistance, parents united behind their children's coach so you get little cliques in a specific club instead of having all club members working towards each and everyone success and goals.

Well some of that is for good reason. We are long past that level, but I know from other parents with kids in levels where group stuff is still taught that fairness and respect for parent’s investment is not foremost in the minds of most coaches. It is generally clear from the start who the coaches think has the most potential. Those skaters are generally given much more attention and positive reinforcement during group sessions. Shockingly they do tend to progress faster initially although I suspect the progression because of the extra coaching and reinforcement rather than some unquantifiable talent. Really the definition of self fulfilling prophecy.

I know many on this board are fully behind the “professional Skating coaches” should be left to run things and I know SC feels that way as well. I would be all over that except that in my many years as a skating parent I can only think of a handful of truly professional coaches. The BS that goes on in clubs with lesson time, testing, and choreography can be truly shocking.

 

[brennele]

Chiquita, it is possible that the European skaters develop faster because the underlying dynamic is different. If the State is running the show and paying for it, the coach's role is essentially to pick out the most potentially talented individuals and cultivate them to be winners. There are not parents paying for lessons and demanding that their child be given xyz attention. There are not rink owners who need to appease parents so as to stay in business. The goal - meaning the coach's very job - is to produce winners and his or her judgement, in that regard, is all that matters. He/she is not accountable to anyone but the entity paying his salary - this case the State. Parents don't matter. Skaters' preferences don't matter, rink owners don't matter, etc. The man (or woman) has a job to do and he is given full reign to do it. If some of the aforementioned interests do not like the choices the coach makes, well, that's too bad. They don't have much to say about it. Essentially, the coach is unhampered to do the job which is to select the best (and have the proper discernment to do so) and, then, train them to win. When it comes to producing winners, it is a more efficient system.

 

[ChiquitaBanana]

Well some of that is for good reason. We are long past that level, but I know from other parents with kids in levels where group stuff is still taught that fairness and respect for parent’s investment is not foremost in the minds of most coaches. It is generally clear from the start who the coaches think has the most potential. Those skaters are generally given much more attention and positive reinforcement during group sessions. Shockingly they do tend to progress faster initially although I suspect the progression because of the extra coaching and reinforcement rather than some unquantifiable talent. Really the definition of self fulfilling prophecy.

That's why I prone a mixed system. You have a main coach who is in charge of the technical aspect/planning of a specific skater. The coach would give private or semi-private lessons as usual. Then the skater would be under supervised training for the remaining time, with an assistant coach or one assigned by the club, not correcting the skaters but guiding them through training.

Group lessons may lead to unfairness, I agree. There are pros and cons to every system. Why not taking the best of the two?

 

[ChiquitaBanana]

Chiquita, it is possible that the European skaters develop faster because the underlying dynamic is different. If the State is running the show and paying for it, the coach's role is essentially to pick out the most potentially talented individuals and cultivate them to be winners. There are not parents paying for lessons and demanding that their child be given xyz attention. There are not rink owners who need to appease parents so as to stay in business. The goal - meaning the coach's very job - is to produce winners and his or her judgement, in that regard, is all that matters. He/she is not accountable to anyone but the entity paying his salary - this case the State. Parents don't matter. Skaters' preferences don't matter, rink owners don't matter, etc. The man (or woman) has a job to do and he is given full reign to do it. If some of the aforementioned interests do not like the choices the coach makes, well, that's too bad. They don't have much to say about it. Essentially, the coach is unhampered to do the job which is to select the best (and have the proper discernment to do so) and, then, train them to win. When it comes to producing winners, it is a more efficient system.

The North American system develops the skaters who come with money.
European system develops the talented ones.

 

[becca]

The North American system develops the skaters who come with money.
European system develops the talented ones.

Well some of that is for good reason. We are long past that level, but I know from other parents with kids in levels where group stuff is still taught that fairness and respect for parent’s investment is not foremost in the minds of most coaches. It is generally clear from the start who the coaches think has the most potential. Those skaters are generally given much more attention and positive reinforcement during group sessions. Shockingly they do tend to progress faster initially although I suspect the progression because of the extra coaching and reinforcement rather than some unquantifiable talent. Really the definition of self fulfilling prophecy.

Well I don't know Mishin once said that the group lessons worked well with Yags Urmanov Plushenko with all pushing the other to be better and competing for attention.

So I can see a truly talented kid who really wants it saying you know what I am better than so and so and working towards it Harder.

So group competitions can help.

And while the state pays for a lot in Russia I don't think the skaters are made to skate.

It is not a bad thing for the kids to be told you have to maintain a certain level if you want to be in the to group and as mentioned not every North American parent is rich is it good that parents at times can be encouraged to spend money they don't have?

 

[brennele]

Chiquita, well exactly and it all boils down to who is paying for it all. When you are paying for something, you have a bit to say about it. Parents are paying and the system has to cater to them except that they are not qualified to make the decisions in this matter. In system where the parents are not paying, they have nothing to say in the matter. It no longer matters what is "fair." It does not matter whether xyz person is "not being given a chance." It is all irrelevant. The skaters and their parents matter and have about as many rights as does the racehorse. There are people hired by racehorse owners to advise them as to which horses to keep and which horses to sell or buy. That is this individual's job. They are paid for their ability to predict winners and that ability is based in science. They then go on to hire people to train the horses which were picked as the best possible candidates for winners. The horse gets no say in the matter. So with the coaches in the European system. They are trained to pick potential winners and train them. It does not matter whether anybody likes their choices. These "anybodies" get no say in the matter. We can never have that (better) system here because the driving force in our system is the parents who are paying for the services. Worse the people being paid by the parents want to keep working - who doesn't want to keep their job - so they have a vested interest in not being honest with the parent. Little Jimmy or little Suzie has zero chance of being successful as a competitive skater but Mom thinks othewise and is willing to fork over big bucks for the training. The coach knows better should he tell Mom. BUT.............hee needs work or else who will feed his family......etc.

 

[brennele]

Chiquita, well exactly and it all boils down to who is paying for it all. When you are paying for something, you have a bit to say about it. Parents are paying and the system has to cater to them except that they are not qualified to make the decisions in this matter. In system where the parents are not paying, they have nothing to say in the matter. It no longer matters what is "fair." It does not matter whether xyz person is "not being given a chance." It is all irrelevant. The skaters and their parents matter and have about as many rights as does the racehorse. There are people hired by racehorse owners to advise them as to which horses to keep and which horses to sell or buy. That is this individual's job. They are paid for their ability to predict winners and that ability is based in science. They then go on to hire people to train the horses which were picked as the best possible candidates for winners. The horse gets no say in the matter. So with the coaches in the European system. They are trained to pick potential winners and train them. It does not matter whether anybody likes their choices. These "anybodies" get no say in the matter. We can never have that (better) system here because the driving force in our system is the parents who are paying for the services. Worse the people being paid by the parents want to keep working - who doesn't want to keep their job - so they have a vested interest in not being honest with the parent. Little Jimmy or little Suzie has zero chance of being successful as a competitive skater but Mom thinks otherwise and is willing to fork over big bucks for the training. The coach knows better should he tell Mom. BUT.............he needs work or else who will feed his family......etc.

 

[mag]

@becca I think you missed the entire point of my post. Simply giving a young child more attention and praise can move that child ahead of other children. I am talking about young children (under 12) where it is generally impossible to know who will be successful and who won’t (yes, I know there are exceptions, but for the most part those who are successful at 8 or 10 are often not the ones who are successful at 18.)

As a parent, if your child is randomly selected as a child with “talent” who gets more of the coaches time, attention, and praise during group lessons, that is great. If you child is not selected and your child gets very little time, attention, and praise during a group lesson, well, that is not great and you end up subsidizing the “talented” kids lessons. This is why many parents don’t trust group programs. Like I said, I’ve been on both sides of this equation in Skating an do in regular school. Most coaches are not Mishin. Many have no quantifiable way to identify “talent” and it becomes a crap shoot for who is and who isn’t. This is one way figure skating loses kids. Parents and Skaters just get tired of the BS.

 

[mag]

@brennele So with this “better” European system where are all the Women’s World Champions? (other than the last few years with the Russian ladies) It seems to me if they had a

ability to predict winners and that ability is based in science.

there would have been a lot more Women’s World Champions and Medalists coming from Europe.

 

[brennele]

One other comment. The US will continue to produce occasional Olympic winners in FS. It will happen when the sun, the moon and the stars line up. Occasionally, a very wealthy parent will have a kid who is very talented with a strong competitive drive - a Tara Lapinski scenario i.e. very wealthy Dad, very talented child (born with the right body type) and this child (and her mother) also has killer instinct to compete and win. So the sun, the moon and the stars all lined up........voila Olympic gold medalist. It will happen now and again but not nearly as regularly as it will in Europse and Asia.

 

[brennele]

mag, they are competing with Asia which also has State sponsored FS. It is not the continent which matters, it is whether the country has State sponsored skating. I think you missed the point. We are not talking geography; we are talking politics and socioeconomic practices of a country. Also mag, the coaches in these countries don't guess about who to select. It is part of their job to KNOW how to pick winners. If they don't do their job properly, they get fired. The coach knows which of the kids who are 8-10 are also going to be successful at 18. He does not guess. He has training to make these decisions. .....and if he does not make them properly, he is no longer a coach. Next thing you know he is working as a bank teller or some other job. You are absolutely correct. Under our system not every coach is qualified to make these decisions. Under a state-sponsored system, if he is not qualified he does not get the job in the first place and if he does get the job but subsequently demonstrates that he makes poor decisions, he gets fired. Parents are the absolute LEAST objective people to make decisions and run the show. Nobody is truly objective where their own children are concerned.

 

[nimi]

Chiquita, it is possible that the European skaters develop faster because the underlying dynamic is different. If the State is running the show and paying for it, the coach's role is essentially to pick out the most potentially talented individuals and cultivate them to be winners. There are not parents paying for lessons and demanding that their child be given xyz attention. There are not rink owners who need to appease parents so as to stay in business. The goal - meaning the coach's very job - is to produce winners and his or her judgement, in that regard, is all that matters. He/she is not accountable to anyone but the entity paying his salary - this case the State. Parents don't matter. Skaters' preferences don't matter, rink owners don't matter, etc. The man (or woman) has a job to do and he is given full reign to do it. If some of the aforementioned interests do not like the choices the coach makes, well, that's too bad. They don't have much to say about it. Essentially, the coach is unhampered to do the job which is to select the best (and have the proper discernment to do so) and, then, train them to win. When it comes to producing winners, it is a more efficient system.

Uh... Which European countries are you thinking of? Just Russia?

Here's a recent article about how stuff works in my little European country (Finland), maybe Google Translate will help you get the gist of it (basically, parents' role is important, financially and otherwise): https://yle.fi/uutiset/3-10085392

 

[brennele]

nimi, I was referring more to Russia than the rest of Europe. I translated the article and it was very interesting. One part I was not sure of from reading the article is how the financing works. I sort of got the impression - perhaps incorrectly - that the parents are paying a fee for services but they are not financing the whole thing, lock, stock and barrel. I could be wrong. If they are paying a fee but not the whole training process then the dynamics will be similar to what I outlined as it pertains to Russia only possibly not to the same extreme. You would know better than I whether there is a significant element of state sponsorship i.e. covering the fees. If there is, then the same principles apply; it becomes a matter of degree. Of course, parents are probably important everywhere including Russia. I am assuming (note I say assuming) that they have the final veto power over whether the child even participates in the first place. I am sure the Russians do not force participation in their program over and against the parents will.

The bottom line is that whoever is paying calls a lot of the shots meaning entity paying has much input into how the process works. If the parent wants to pay for private lessons, it does not much matter how much talent the child has. The coach and the rink are not going to turn them away. They are going to take the money so long as the parent wishes to purchase lessons for the child. Even if the coach were a very honest person and advises the parents against further training, the parent may have his or her own idea and disregard the coach's advise. In that case, they just may find another coach who tells them what they want to hear and that coach will continue training ......and taking their money. By contrast, if the state is paying for the training, children who are not sufficiently talented are not going to get state-funded lessons. Same with children who are sufficiently talented but refuse to work hard enough. The state is not going to waste money on them, either. The state wants talent and strong work ethic or else it is not going to foot the bill. Parents are very important in any country .............but they are not the most objective persons in the world when it comes to their own children. They do not always make the best decisions

 

[nimi]

^ It's just that 1) Europe is not a country and 2) most European countries are quite unlike Russia in many aspects of how the society and government actually works (not to mention language & culture), so it's very misleading to talk about "European skaters" if you actually mean "Russian skaters".

Also, even if there's some government money involved in an European country X, either funneled through NOCs or through some kind of federal/provincial/municipal sports grants system or both, that doesn't necessarily mean that the sports/training infrastructure and pipeline is anything like the State-run, top-down Russian one, so I wouldn't say that it's basically like in Russia but to a lesser degree. I'm not an expert but I'd say it's more like a qualitatively different system.

Then there's also the fact that there are European countries (like mine) where private schooling is pretty rare and so is home-schooling, and the latter especially may be frowned upon -- i.e. there's a common sentiment that why would you let your kids focus primarily on their short-lived sporting career instead of making sure they take their actual education and grades seriously, that's reckless and "good" parents shouldn't allow that to happen (ETA: I probably should mention that in a country like Finland, the education system is in large part state-funded and even the higher education mostly tuition-free, and you primarily need good grades in high school and/or good performance in college/Uni intake exams to get in). I think that there are many European teen skaters competing at the EC/WC level who attend the (public, government-funded) school & high school the same as everybody else, and "full-time training" à la Russia is pretty rare.

BTW, recently there was an interesting interview with Franca Bianconi about how she's helped Matteo Rizzo, a son of skating coaches, to reach the level he's reached (including that not-very-common private schooling), excerpt:

In our system, in the Western system, you have to pay for everything, you get nothing for free. So we pay for the ice, because it costs a lot to maintain an ice rink. And we pay the coaches. We also pay for the school. For example, Matteo, because of his schedule, was going to a private school. Now, when he goes to the university it will be a different story, but up until now he was going to a private school in order to be able to skate. And we need to pay for competitions except for the big ones. Just top skaters get good funding from the federation, but first you need to get there.

And I think Javi's big sister (who went to Euros & Worlds) gave up her skating career and Javi's father took a second job so that Javi could pursue his skating, and how when he moved to Morozov he didn't at first charge for Javi's training because there was no Fed money or anything at first. And just think how difficult it has been for Jorik & Loena Hendricks and their parents to get the funds to finance their training (think crowdfunding instead of state-funded). Also remember that when Papadakis&Cizeron started out, they were coached by her mother (ex-ice dancer) before they moved to Zazou&co, and then on to Montreal (where they were able to train more hours per week and consequently made a lot of progress in short time). So yeah, while I don't know enough about conditions in various countries to have a clear picture re: how exactly are things done in various parts of Europe, these anecdotal data are not exactly shining examples of European state-funded success stories à la Russia.

 

[clairecloutier]

Getting back to American skating ....

Not all of them are making money. And if they are, not for much longer. Rinks in our area -- and there are seven within a 30-minute drive --are struggling. Not only from figure skating numbers not being what they used to be, but hockey as well. And hockey pays the bills for rinks, not figure skating. Any coach who wants to keep their bread and butter at any fair-to-middling rink will need to rethink how things are done an present a plan to the rink, not just the parents and kids. Those stones are being squeezed dry, at least around here.

Recently, I overheard the director of my skating rink (Rink A) talking to someone, and he was saying the rink has barely been treading water financially the last couple of years. Participation is down for learn-to-skate, public sessions, and freestyle sessions. Part of that is due to another ice rink (Rink B) opening about 5 miles away--it's doubtless stolen some business. Still, a bit worrisome.

Rink B (the new rink) has said it will not host or affiliate with any figure skating club. It does have a learn-to-skate program.

A third rink in the area that recently opened (Rink C) also does not have a figure skating club. They have a "skating school" program, which is affiliated with SC of Boston. It is quite expensive, however, and does not seem to offer anything more than the typical lower-level group lessons, so I haven't pursued it.

The BS that goes on in clubs with lesson time, testing, and choreography can be truly shocking.

As a parent and consumer, I'm not too impressed with how skating clubs are run in the U.S. My impressions are:

1. Small clubs' management is mostly reflective of the individual(s) who are President/Director, etc. If that person is organized, pleasant, competent, then the club's atmosphere sort of reflects that. If that person is disorganized, unfriendly, incompetent, then the entire atmosphere around the club reflects that. It's hit-or-miss. It's also been my experience that clubs advertise support in terms of finding coaches, etc., but don't actually follow through on this in many cases.

2. Larger clubs' management appears to be very bureaucratic, with a huge number of rules, bylaws, requirements, etc., and resultant fees attached to everything. As a parent, I'm reluctant to get involved with that type of club unless my kid were to become very high-level. It's too much to worry about. Although there may be more support there in terms of finding coaches, I don't know.

I do feel that in general, as a sport in the U.S., figure skating has very little structure organizationally. As a parent, it is not particularly easy to find information and get your questions answered. USFSA puts out general brochures about things, but there is no support beyond that. Like, for example, nowhere is there a list of competitions that take place in a geographic area for a given age level. (If there is such a list, I'm unaware of it.) Nor is there centralized information about what is entailed in all the different early levels in skating (I'm talking Basic 6, Basic 8, Pre-Free Skate, whatever). I suppose some of this info exists somewhere in the member area of the USFSA web site, but it's not easy to find. Then you also have weirdness with coaching information. Rinks provide lists of coaches on their web sites, but there is often no info about what sessions they teach on, what their rates are, are they accepting new students, etc.

I find it frustrating. The result is you become dependent on the coach. If the coach tells you about a competition, you go to the competition (not knowing which other ones might be available). If the coach tells you to compete at level X, then you compete at level X (not really knowing if that is best or not). And so on.

Sorry, I guess this sort of random information, but I do think it speaks to some deficiencies in how the sport is organized and set up here.

 

[ChiquitaBanana]

Getting back to American skating ....



Recently, I overheard the director of my skating rink (Rink A) talking to someone, and he was saying the rink has barely been treading water financially the last couple of years. Participation is down for learn-to-skate, public sessions, and freestyle sessions. Part of that is due to another ice rink (Rink B) opening about 5 miles away--it's doubtless stolen some business. Still, a bit worrisome.

Rink B (the new rink) has said it will not host or affiliate with any figure skating club. It does have a learn-to-skate program.

A third rink in the area that recently opened (Rink C) also does not have a figure skating club. They have a "skating school" program, which is affiliated with SC of Boston. It is quite expensive, however, and does not seem to offer anything more than the typical lower-level group lessons, so I haven't pursued it.






As a parent and consumer, I'm not too impressed with how skating clubs are run in the U.S. My impressions are:

1. Small clubs' management is mostly reflective of the individual(s) who are President/Director, etc. If that person is organized, pleasant, competent, then the club's atmosphere sort of reflects that. If that person is disorganized, unfriendly, incompetent, then the entire atmosphere around the club reflects that. It's hit-or-miss. It's also been my experience that clubs advertise support in terms of finding coaches, etc., but don't actually follow through on this in many cases.

2. Larger clubs' management appears to be very bureaucratic, with a huge number of rules, bylaws, requirements, etc., and resultant fees attached to everything. As a parent, I'm reluctant to get involved with that type of club unless my kid were to become very high-level. It's too much to worry about. Although there may be more support there in terms of finding coaches, I don't know.

I do feel that in general, as a sport in the U.S., figure skating has very little structure organizationally. As a parent, it is not particularly easy to find information and get your questions answered. USFSA puts out general brochures about things, but there is no support beyond that. Like, for example, nowhere is there a list of competitions that take place in a geographic area for a given age level. (If there is such a list, I'm unaware of it.) Nor is there centralized information about what is entailed in all the different early levels in skating (I'm talking Basic 6, Basic 8, Pre-Free Skate, whatever). I suppose some of this info exists somewhere in the member area of the USFSA web site, but it's not easy to find. Then you also have weirdness with coaching information. Rinks provide lists of coaches on their web sites, but there is often no info about what sessions they teach on, what their rates are, are they accepting new students, etc.

I find it frustrating. The result is you become dependent on the coach. If the coach tells you about a competition, you go to the competition (not knowing which other ones might be available). If the coach tells you to compete at level X, then you compete at level X (not really knowing if that is best or not). And so on.

Sorry, I guess this sort of random information, but I do think it speaks to some deficiencies in how the sport is organized and set up here.

You have said it better than I. That is why I had weighed in with the way even smaller countries work in Europe (I am not familiar with Asia). The path to success/high aspirations is more clearly defined. It does not mean it gets cheaper in the end, but there is a structure easier to understand for the parents, less improvisation. Are all programs equal, no, but you get into the system as you'd get on a train, following the road.

 

[missing]

Moving the conversation away from American skating...

How are all these issues handled in Japan? What's the rink/club/coaching situation there?

 

[manhn]

For all of this rah rah Japan ladies, they only produced one Worlds silver this past quad. Is the Japan Fed really satisfied with that medal output?

 

[vesperholly]

1. More group classes through higher levels. Jumps, spins, even moves. Keep skating as affordable as possible for as long as possible so that athletically talented kids stick around long enough to become passionate about the sport.

A lot of clubs already do this. USFS has been talking about bridge programs for at least 15 years.

3. More parent education from USFSA. What it takes to be an elite skater as far as time and money and coaching. Prevent more people than necessary from mortgaing their homes. Provide parents with a timeline for what skills should be reasonably expected by what age as an indicator that your kids is truly on the elite track and their training is possibly worthwhile putting more time/money/craziness into.

As I am a skater and not a parent, I have no idea what parents do or do not receive as education from clubs or USFS. Someone posted a PDF from Skate Canada a while back that outlined developmental timelines and competitive levels - that was fascinating.

4. Coach ratings that mean something. Credential coaches to teach double axel or triples and beyond. As the demands of the sport increase and drop into lower levels, kids and parents need to know that their coaches know how to teach good jump technique safely and ethically. No more "just throw yourself in the air 1,000 times and see if you can't land that triple toe some day before your skull gets crushed"...which I think might happen more often than people realize. Yes, not every rink will have a Master Level jump coach...that's life. But, with training requirements for coaches, more rinks are more likely to have at least one coach willing to get the extra training to really teach jump technique correctly. So win-win-maybe.

PSA has a ratings system. USFS has a tiered system for coaches who wish to teach private lessons (CER B) or coach at Regionals (CER A). PSA's ratings are more what you're thinking of with technique. Seminars are often expensive and difficult to attend, though.

I think the problem with a lot of this is that very few people sit down a 5-year-old and plot the course of their elite skating career. Many, many parents take their kids to skating because little Jane just loves it. It's less about identifying talented kids and more about how much the kid enjoys it, because no child will stick with something they hate. Plus there's no telling what could happen in the future - parent gets a job transfer and moves somewhere without rinks, parent becomes ill and can't work so family can't afford skating, child get injured and misses too much, child decides "meh not interested" and drops out, etc. There's no structure or formula for turning out winning athletes that I can see other than simply pouring money into the sport to keep talented kids skating. That's basically all Russia has done in the lead-up to Sochi - fund the F out of their ladies program.

 

[becca]

@becca I think you missed the entire point of my post. Simply giving a young child more attention and praise can move that child ahead of other children. I am talking about young children (under 12) where it is generally impossible to know who will be successful and who won’t (yes, I know there are exceptions, but for the most part those who are successful at 8 or 10 are often not the ones who are successful at 18.)

As a parent, if your child is randomly selected as a child with “talent” who gets more of the coaches time, attention, and praise during group lessons, that is great. If you child is not selected and your child gets very little time, attention, and praise during a group lesson, well, that is not great and you end up subsidizing the “talented” kids lessons. This is why many parents don’t trust group programs. Like I said, I’ve been on both sides of this equation in Skating an do in regular school. Most coaches are not Mishin. Many have no quantifiable way to identify “talent” and it becomes a crap shoot for who is and who isn’t. This is one way figure skating loses kids. Parents and Skaters just get tired of the BS.

I wouldn't assume the coaches don't know. There was a Korean coach who when Yu-na was a young child. Second sometimes kids can work harder to earn more attention I know that is possible in my own life. Obviously a good coach doesn't treat group lessons as subsidizing some.

However I stand by my statement that I do think it is better that kids with potential are getting the high training rather than in the US system parents being encouraged to mortgage futures when kids have no real potential.

At the very least why can't USFS use some of their funding to help some highly talented skaters get training?

 

[brennele]

Nimi: You wrote

"Then there's also the fact that there are European countries (like mine) where private schooling is pretty rare and so is home-schooling, and the latter especially may be frowned upon -- i.e. there's a common sentiment that why would you let your kids focus primarily on their short-lived sporting career instead of making sure they take their actual education and grades seriously, that's reckless and "good" parents shouldn't allow that to happen (ETA: I probably should mention that in a country like Finland, the education system is in large part state-funded and even the higher education mostly tuition-free, and you primarily need good grades in high school and/or good performance in college/Uni intake exams to get in)"

If what you just wrote is how things are done in your country, I do believe I would fit in. Sounds like a very smart and well run country to me. I don't know as I could have expressed such sentiments as well as you did.

 

[ZilphaK]

As I am a skater and not a parent, I have no idea what parents do or do not receive as education from clubs or USFS. Someone posted a PDF from Skate Canada a while back that outlined developmental timelines and competitive levels - that was fascinating.

Here it is. I think this would be a VERY valuable tool for US parents.

It's very clear that the "golden age" for skills is 8-12 years old, and that's with starting LTS by 3-5 years old. Gracie Gold didn't start skating until 8, but she was already an athletic phenom in other sports and had access to $$$$ and solid coaches.

This model says all double jumps should be solid including double axel and double-doubles and starting triples by ages 9-13. By 10-16, mastered three triples and are training all, including triple-triples.

I'd say that's about accurately what kids would need, skewing to the middle ages on those ranges, younger ones being precocious and older ones being "cross your fingers." I think I read that Ashley started double axel at 9 years old, but it took her 4 years to land it. After that, she got all her triples in 6 months.

As a parent, having something like this early on and discussing it with a coach, maybe as part of signing on for privates lessons, wouldn't mean I wouldn't keep my kid in skating, but that I might be more realistic about when and where to put money, how much and how often. Having more kids in synchro and theater on ice isn't a bad thing -- those kids still need MIF and jumps and spins (I'm betting as synchro progresses, there will be more pairs-style lifts and harder jumps) and coaches could spread out their bread and butter, maybe making enough to cut breaks for some truly gifted singles skaters who don't have the $50,000 a year for elite coaching.

And yes, skating needs to be about fun for the kids, with parents supporting and following their lead more than pushing in any one direction. But parents are the crazy ones, so I think any "Come to Jesus" talks need to happen early between coaches and parents. Not all parents can coach hop, but some still will. You can't save every starfish.

https://skatecanada.ca/.../09/Skate-Canada-LTAD-Model-EN.pdf

 

[ZilphaK]

BTW, my sales pitch for Learn To Skate goes like this (shameless plug.)
http://www.centralpennparent.com/2016/9-reasons-kids-should-learn-to-ice-skate/