2018 USFS Governing Council meeting & board initiatives (proposed changes to the current U.S. Nationals qualifying pipeline & more)

[MacMadame]

I am really onboard with removing Juvie and Int from Nationals. It made the whole event completely unwieldy and stressful for coaches, the LOC, and fans who want to "see it all."

The only change that worries me is not having Novice at Nationals. It's true that many fans only go to Junior and Senior events (and maybe a Novice event if there is someone they particularly care about like a hometown skater) but I think going to a Nationals type of competition is an important experience in building an athlete. It seems like Pairs and Dance will get some sort of equivalent but not Singles and I think that's a shame.

ETA I think having top Novices compete as Junior is not as crazy as it sounds, at least in Singles. At least in singles, it seems like the top 1-3 Novices have similar skills to Juniors. They may not get on the podium at Nats but I don't think they will necessarily stand out as not belonging either.

 

[vesperholly]

I am not OK with getting rid of a Nats at Novice level. I think at that stage, it is important for kids to start to compete against a high level pool of skaters, to get used to the pressure of a championship event.

Yes, this exactly. Skaters need to develop competitive nerves sooner, not later. "Big" Nationals is WAY different than any other competition. Even Sectionals is basically run like just another club competition. Nationals has press, TV cameras, arenas, large groups of fans, etc. Not only will that help season them as competitors, but I think it's very inspiring to the younger kids in Novice. They "made it".

I don't see how competing at Junior would help their development; for one, they'd have to go home after Sectionals and rework their programs. Two, in most cases, they'd be way overmatched in Junior. How does that encourage them? I see the potential for Novices to try to throw in jumps they can't really do, and risk injury, in order to compete with those at the next level. Why can't there be both a training camp and a Nats for Novice, and maybe also the top Juniors....USFS has been doing a JW training camp the past couple of years and have invited some skaters beyond the team and official alternates.

Agree with this as well. The Novice skating as Junior is just seriously weird and comes across as apologia for not having Novice at Nationals.

I would treat this as very far from happening. These are huge changes. I was at GC the year that we voted to change regions and sections from 9/3 to 12/4. It was passed after much debate (I was in favor), and promptly rescinded the next year.

 

[overedge]

This is very similar to what Canada does.

And part of the reason Skate Canada went that route was because it didn't want to buy or pay for shipping multiple IJS computers/judging systems to different parts of the country. Which is why there is one Skate Canada Challenge (the Nationals qualifying event) and it's always held not too far from SC headquarters in Ottawa.

It's not a system that was designed with the primary goal of producing better skating at Nationals, or providing fairer geographical representation at Nationals, or providing a better competitive or development experience for the skaters. Maybe saving $$$$ is USFS' real motive too, but I wouldn't cite Canada as an example of how this model is an improvement.

 

[RoseRed]

And part of the reason Skate Canada went that route was because it didn't want to buy or pay for shipping multiple IJS computers/judging systems to different parts of the country. Which is why there is one Skate Canada Challenge (the Nationals qualifying event) and it's always held not too far from SC headquarters in Ottawa.

It's not a system that was designed with the primary goal of producing better skating at Nationals, or providing fairer geographical representation at Nationals, or providing a better competitive or development experience for the skaters. Maybe saving $$$$ is USFS' real motive too, but I wouldn't cite Canada as an example of how this model is an improvement.

But also, Canada still has novices at Nationals, and the pre-novice still have a national champion, they just declare it at Challenge instead.

 

[Debbie S]

The meeting book (with all the proposals) is up on the members section of the USFS website. I skimmed through it....what caught my attention was that starting next season, the entire Junior World team will be chosen at the post-Nats training camp. There were also some notes about next year's Nats, just about location and such, that mentioned tickets went on sale in March.

I also noticed some changes to the adult FS tests...they are aligning them to the FS requirements, similar to the standard track, so there are no specific required jumps and spins but with the jumps, a narrow range of choices. For Bronze and Silver, it just says 2 spins of a different nature, so no more required backspin in Bronze (damn, I miss all the good stuff, lol) and no required camel in Silver. If they did that 10 years ago, I might have just taken it, sigh, lol. And the Pre-Bronze test will now be a program, not elements performed separately.

And "Masters", as an adult test category for those age 50+, will now be called "Adult 50+".

 

[googooeyes]

And part of the reason Skate Canada went that route was because it didn't want to buy or pay for shipping multiple IJS computers/judging systems to different parts of the country. Which is why there is one Skate Canada Challenge (the Nationals qualifying event) and it's always held not too far from SC headquarters in Ottawa.

It's not a system that was designed with the primary goal of producing better skating at Nationals, or providing fairer geographical representation at Nationals, or providing a better competitive or development experience for the skaters. Maybe saving $$$$ is USFS' real motive too, but I wouldn't cite Canada as an example of how this model is an improvement.

There is likely some truth in that, but Challenge will be in Edmonton this year - 3400 Kms from Ottawa.
The changes in Canada are proving to be workable and popular, especially the Summer Series qualifying for sectionals. The right kids are getting success and SC resources. Often the tenth or eleventh kids in one area have higher scores than the top kids in another area. This system addresses that. All the kids get good feedback and can look up their provincial rankings if they wish to.

 

[overedge]

There is likely some truth in that, but Challenge will be in Edmonton this year - 3400 Kms from Ottawa.
The changes in Canada are proving to be workable and popular, especially the Summer Series qualifying for sectionals. The right kids are getting success and SC resources. Often the tenth or eleventh kids in one area have higher scores than the top kids in another area. This system addresses that. All the kids get good feedback and can look up their provincial rankings if they wish to.

I would disagree that the changes in Canada are workable and popular.

Essentially there is one big competition for everyone before another big competition for everyone, i.e. Nationals. In a lot of way this is an unnecessary duplication. The skaters who do well at Challenge tend to do well at Nationals, so Challenge doesn't really serve a purpose other than reducing the large number of competitors in some categories. This could easily be done at Nationals by e.g. letting everyone do the short program and then only letting the top X go through to the long program.

The Challenge system also really disdvantages skaters from smaller provinces and regions, who might have done well at the provincial/regional level but then get crushed at Challenge. They might get crushed at Nationals too, but at least then they would have had the experience of competing at Nationals as the provincial or regional champion. Having to go through that extra hurdle of Challenge rather than qualifying directly from sectionals is an added expense and investment of time/resources that can be a real burden for some skaters and their families.

 

[GarrAargHrumph]

I also noticed some changes to the adult FS tests...they are aligning them to the FS requirements, similar to the standard track, so there are no specific required jumps and spins but with the jumps, a narrow range of choices. For Bronze and Silver, it just says 2 spins of a different nature, so no more required backspin in Bronze (damn, I miss all the good stuff, lol) and no required camel in Silver. If they did that 10 years ago, I might have just taken it, sigh, lol. And the Pre-Bronze test will now be a program, not elements performed separately.

And "Masters", as an adult test category for those age 50+, will now be called "Adult 50+".

Because we haven't mastered...? But that does make more sense. I did like the idea of being a "master" of something, though.

I'm fine with the spins change. I'm much closer to having a sit spin than a back spin. :grins:

Once you're in the members section of the USFS site, where is the document?

 

[Debbie S]

Once you're in the members section of the USFS site, where is the document?

Go to General Info (menu along top left), click on Governing Council (drop-down) and then click on meeting book.

The rationale for changing the Masters term is that it was causing confusion, since Masters also refers to Int and higher FS levels in adult comps, and also a synchro category. What it means for me is I have to revise my club's test app, again.

 

[haribobo]

My read based on 2018 results-

The following would have had byes to Sectionals based on their summer results (some already did for other reasons). I removed the senior GP byes and top 5 from 2017 Nationals byes to find the top 6 summer scores (thanks Sylvia-Unseen Skaters page)

Senior Lades- Angela Wang, Starr Andrews, Ashley Lin, Emmy Ma, Kaitlyn Nguyen, Vivian Le

Senior Men (not that anyone big really gets cut at Regionals anyway)- Tim Dolensky, Sean Rabbitt, Alex Johnson, Jimmy Ma, Tomoki Hiwatashi, Alex Krasnozhon/Andrew Torgashev (maybe they dont count since JGPF bye), then # 6 would be Jordan Moeller

Junior Ladies- Alysa Liu, Audrey Shin, Jenna Shi, Akari Nakahara, Hanna Harrell, Ting Cui (these skaters were spread out quite evenly among the regions this year, but I like the idea of easing some of the tougher regionals in general in the future- like SW and SWP sometimes lose great skaters at Regionals)

Junior Men- Camden Pulkinen (JGPF), Eric Sjoberg, Dinh Tran, Ryan Dunk, Maxim Naumov, Alex Wellman, Paul Yeung (if Camden's JGPF bye taken into account)
--------------
The following Novices would have gone to Nationals in Junior-

Ladies -Maddie Weiler, Violeta Ushakova, Jessica Lin, Beverly Zhu, Ariela Masarsky, Emilea Zingas

Men- Nicholas Hsieh, Eric Prober, Jonathan Yang, Nathan Chapple, Goku Endo, Max Lake
----------
The same senior pairs and dance would have made nationals, minus perhaps 4 teams who would get cut for too low of a minimum score...going by summer and Sectional results rather that Nationals scores...

Assuming min score in Senior Pairs around 140 would cut off Smith/Reiss, Yao/Simon, Deardorff/Settlage in Senior Pairs. The 16th place team at Worlds got 177 points...

If we made 177 the cutoff for Nationals, we would have 3 teams at Nationals- Knierims, Liu/Johnson and Castelli/Tran.

To beef up the field, we could add Stellato/Bartholomay*, Cain/LeDuc*, Denney/Frazier and Pfund/Santillan for top 5 from 2017 byes, and maybe Kayne/O'Shea* for injury bye or something. The starred teams did end up achieving 177+ at 4CC.

Assuming min score in senior dance around 150 would cut off Biechler/Dodge, Reynolds/Reynolds, Klopstock/Schedl, and Bain/Altukhov, maybe Aldridge/Eaton and Manta/Johnson too...150 points would get you 19th place at Worlds.

I do like the idea of no more "phantom teams" floating through, teams who don't show up at summer comps and then bye themselves all the way to Nationals due to small Sectional fields. I find that to be a bit obnoxious. And although its nice for teams to experience Nationals, if a Pair team can only do doubles, can't hold a lift reliably or a dance team is crawling around the rink, I am ok with cutting them out. I don't think it necessarily applies to the above teams, but we have had some doozies over the years...

Assuming min score for senior men would be around 200 points, which would have eliminated Jalovick, Kulenkamp, Savary, Payannet, Dyer, and Shum. 200 points would earn you 23rd place at 2018 worlds.

Assuming min score for senior ladies would be about 160, eliminating Wessenberg, McBeath, Chan, and Chiera. 160 points would get you 17 place at 2018 Worlds.

Sad to lose those skaters, but I kind of get it. 15-16 senior men and ladies is probably enough. Pairs and dance fields would be at about 10 each.

 

[clairecloutier]

@haribobo LOL.

First of all, the USFSA proposal calls for a minimum technical elements score. Not a minimum total score.

Second, minimums for U.S. Nationals should in no case be higher than minimums for 4CCs or Worlds.

You may see this season's 4CCs/Worlds TES minimums on p. 6 of this ISU document: https://www.isu.org/inside-single-p...unications-fs/592-isu-communication-2097/file

Just FYI, I believe every U.S. senior pairs team at Nationals would have met the 4CCs TES minimums with their Nationals scores. Most would have met the Worlds minimums, with just 1 or 2 teams not making it I believe. of course, these are Nationals scores and not internationals, and so not completely comparable. However, a quick look back through the U.S. pairs' scores in their CS events this fall shows that in almost all cases, the U.S. pairs were comfortably above the Worlds TES minimums in both programs. In only a couple cases (Smith/Reiss SP at ON, Liu/Johnson SP at WC) did they appear to fall short of the Worlds TES minimum.

 

[Dobre]

Biechler & Dodge and Manta & Johnson had their World minimums for this season as well, and there's no way Aldridge & Eaton shouldn't have been at Nationals.

 

[wickedwitch]

Minimums worry me; they have to be handled delicately. And I'd use two years to get the minimums like the ISU does (or at least a 12 month period), or we have a situation like Josh Farris not qualifying for 2015 Nats. (Unless a bye takes precedence over the lack of minimum scores.)

I like seeing teams like the Reynolds at Nats, and as I wrote during Nats, I would not be in favor of a minimum that prevented them from competing. I'd be less upset if the bottom two ice dance teams at Nats couldn't compete. And anything that prevented Biechler/Dodge, Manta/Johnson, or Aldridge/Eaton from competing is asinine.

Frankly, if they want to encourage skaters to do dance and pairs, being guaranteed to make Nats as a senior should help.

 

[Frida80]

You all have convinced me that dropping Novice at nationals is a bad idea. I think back to Tessa, who didn’t go to nationals since intermediate until senior. She popped three her jumps in the FS. It could not have been easy for someone who didn’t even go to nationals as a novice or junior to suddenly deal with that pressure. Alyssa got a pewter medal in Novicd nationals and then won juniors the next year. I think there needs to be a huge competition with everything on the line earlier for skaters. I do like the idea of a challenger series, but it’s not a good enough replacement for nationals. Nationals teaches skaters how to control their nerves under high stakes and compete with high level competitors on the same level as you or higher.

At junior level, the expectation is the winner would theoretically go to JW. Meaning someone who hadn’t made nationals the previous years could win just by beginners luck and suddenly fizzle at JW.

 

[haribobo]

Yea I wouldnt want to cut out a/e or m/j either. I can reconfigure my list to world min scores soon...and /or 4cc mins

 

[Dobre]

Yea I wouldnt want to cut out a/e or m/j either. I can reconfigure my list to world min scores soon...and /or 4cc mins

4CC minimums make more sense. The SD World minimums can be very tough for a new team to earn. I can name at least four teams that finished top 20 at this year's Worlds who didn't have the World SD minimums their first season. (Hurtado & Khaliavin, Zagorsky & Guerreiro, Sinitsina & Katsalapov, and Soucisse & Firus). All teams that certainly deserved to attend their Nationals during those debut seasons. Cannuscio & McManus didn't have the SD World minimum last season either.

 

[Bellanca]

The Request for Action from Competitions Committee will limit Nationals to Junior and Senior only; Juvenile, Intermediate, and Novice will qualify from Regionals to Sectionals and their season will end at Sectionals, starting with the 2019-2020 season. (There's a little more to it than that, but that's the outline.)

I’m in the minority here, but I do support this 100%. It is not a popular move, I know, but I can see why USFS would look to make changes and improvements starting w/ novice.

Sad to lose those skaters, but I kind of get it. 15-16 senior men and ladies is probably enough. Pairs and dance fields would be at about 10 each.

USFS does deserve credit for at least kicking around more than a slight change for the new quad with the latest proposals to introduce budget-friendly improvements to the program. $$$, always the bottom line. The program has been falling further behind each season, so it is promising that there is the desire to bring the U.S.A. back into the international competitive conversation with the hope of providing athletes the best opportunities for success. Change must begin somewhere.

 

[jmtfti]

Both Soucisse/Firus and Hurtado/Khaliavin attained the Worlds SD minimum in their first season together (2016-17) -- S/F at Cup of Nice and H/K at Mentor Torun Cup and Euros (and H/K, of course, met the federation's originally stated requirements for Worlds attendance).

In general, though, panels have in the last few years become far more amenable to granting teams 29+ in the short even at bigger events. I agree it would make sense for a US cut-off to be more lenient still than that and follow the 4CC/Euro/Olympic model.

 

[Dobre]

Both Soucisse/Firus and Hurtado/Khaliavin attained the Worlds SD minimum in their first season together (2016-17) -- S/F at Cup of Nice and H/K at Mentor Torun Cup and Euros (and H/K, of course, met the federation's originally stated requirements for Worlds attendance).

In general, though, panels have in the last few years become far more amenable to granting teams 29+ in the short even at bigger events. I agree it would make sense for a US cut-off to be more lenient still than that and follow the 4CC/Euro/Olympic model.

Thank you. I'm but also quite impressed that I somehow managed to miss two whole dance events last season. I'm not sure if panels are more lenient--though the one at the Bavarian Open was--or if it's a matter of higher base values with 2 footwork sequences in the SD rather than 2 patterns. In which case, I think we are back to two patterns for next season? So scores maybe going down again?

 

[Coco]

If they go through with this, it would be nice if there was some kind of 'thing' for sectionals medalists who don't go on to Nationals, like an invitation to a National Developmental Camp or a one time guest spot on SOI.

If I win the lottery....I would like to look into some kind of National Developmental Camp for promising young skaters (Sectionals medalists or top (however many) up through junior division) that would operate like a mini-COI + Champs Camp. They would start on a Friday, getting feedback from specialists and working with special guest coaches, give a show on a Sunday, then travel to the next site, more feedback and training, then an exhibition on Friday, more travel, an exhibition on Sunday, more travel, then more training and feedback with more exhibitions on the 3rd weekend.

Details schmetails, but basically, take a bunch of promising young skaters, put them in a competitive environment with top coaching and facilities, give them opportunities to perform show programs for an audience, maybe throw in a skills competition, too. Get them used to dealing with travel and performing well in a new facility.

It would have to be in the summer because of school. Coaches would be welcome but it would be impractical for most of them to be there the whole time. I doubt the exhibitions would be money makers, I'm envisioning club sized shows. But it would be fun to say you saw so and so way back when.

 

[once_upon]

The other thing to consider - with a greatly reduced field, will the core audience, meaning we FS who buy all-event tickets years in advance, stop finding the event worth the time and cost?

For me, what makes Nats worth the cost, aside from getting to see the very top 3-5 duke it out, is to see the skaters who will never medal. Jonathan Cassar was worth the entire price of my 2010 Nats tickets. Ye Bin Mok was one of my favorites in 2005, and she came in 16th out of a field of 18.

Also: wasn't it the men's Novice men's comp that everyone was raving about in 2010? That's when Nathan Chen made his first splash (along with Emmanuel Savary, who has not matched that success since - but I'm always interested when he makes Nats!).

If the number of competitors is drastically cut and Novice eliminated, I seriously doubt I would invest in all event tickets. If I'm only going to see x number of competitors, I'd probably do the weekend package. But probably not that, limited skaters - watch ice network or NBC and save the $$$$ for other things.
Watching Novice is one of my favorite parts of nationals.

 

[just tuned in]

I am really onboard with removing Juvie and Int from Nationals. It made the whole event completely unwieldy and stressful for coaches, the LOC, and fans who want to "see it all."

I agree. Wasn't it just a couple years ago that USFS combined Juv, Int and Novice championships with the Jr and Sr? And folks complained that the week was too long, the facilities too spread out, the shuttle service too iffy. It took a toll on the Senior athletes, coaches and fans.

So now they are going back to a streamlined nationals, and nothing wrong with that, imo. Adorable juvies will have to do their skating without so much pressure, and nothing wrong with that, either. And perhaps there would be a cost savings to families, also.

Regarding the TES minimums, I think we have all seen entrants at nationals (all disciplines and levels) that were so much weaker than the field that it was kind of an embarrassment.

 

[vesperholly]

I agree. Wasn't it just a couple years ago that USFS combined Juv, Int and Novice championships with the Jr and Sr?

Novice has always been at Nationals with Junior and Senior.

Juvenile and Intermediate had their own Nationals from 1999 to 2012. There was the Junior Olympics before that.

I agree with removing Juvenile and Intermediate. I do NOT agree with removing Novice.

 

[mag]

Regarding the TES minimums, I think we have all seen entrants at nationals (all disciplines and levels) that were so much weaker than the field that it was kind of an embarrassment.

I agree with TES minimums, but I strongly object to referring to any skater’s performance as “an embarrassment.” Skaters who get to Nationals have worked extremely hard for many years, they and their families have sacrificed much, and just getting out on that ice all by themselves is an accomplishment that should not be diminished and no matter what happens, should never be referred to or seen as an embarrassment.

 

[just tuned in]

I agree with TES minimums, but I strongly object to referring to any skater’s performance as “an embarrassment.” Skaters who get to Nationals have worked extremely hard for many years, they and their families have sacrificed much, and just getting out on that ice all by themselves is an accomplishment that should not be diminished and no matter what happens, should never be referred to or seen as an embarrassment.

YMMV. I am not talking about ordinary mistakes or general splatfests. or ice is slippery. I am talking about competitors who are not ready for the level.

 

[mag]

YMMV. I am not talking about ordinary mistakes or general splatfests. or ice is slippery. I am talking about competitors who are not ready for the level.

I would argue that what sometimes looks like not ready, is simply a really bad day. Skating isn’t like many other sports where you can scrape through and hide a bad day. In Skating it is all out there for the world to see. Furthermore, if that “embarrassment” is the best skater a Section has, well they have to build their program from something. It is just like the Skaters from smaller federations who go to 4CC’s or the Olympics or skate on the JGP. You have to start somewhere.

Most importantly, “not ready for the level” is not, IMHO, embarrassing. Just like falling or missing a shot in soccer or a pitch in baseball is not embarrassing. It just means there is more work to be done, more skills to perfect. There should never be anything embarrassing about working hard and trying your best. In every competition someone comes first and someone comes last. That is just the way it works. There is no shame in coming last.

 

[just tuned in]

I would argue that what sometimes looks like not ready, is simply a really bad day. Skating isn’t like many other sports where you can scrape through and hide a bad day. In Skating it is all out there for the world to see. Furthermore, if that “embarrassment” is the best skater a Section has, well they have to build their program from something. It is just like the Skaters from smaller federations who go to 4CC’s or the Olympics or skate on the JGP. You have to start somewhere.

Most importantly, “not ready for the level” is not, IMHO, embarrassing. Just like falling or missing a shot in soccer or a pitch in baseball is not embarrassing. It just means there is more work to be done, more skills to perfect. There should never be anything embarrassing about working hard and trying your best. In every competition someone comes first and someone comes last. That is just the way it works. There is no shame in coming last.

I am not speaking from the perspective of a parent; I am a spectator. We all love our children and are proud of their achievements, whatever they may be, and of course there are always more skills to perfect. But what is the purpose of a national championship?

 

[mag]

But what is the purpose of a national championship?

For the best from all over the country compete to be the National Champion.

I think you have totally missed my point. Whether or not you change the way people qualify for Nationals, whether you are watching a local club competition, a national championship, Worlds, or the Olympics, to call any performance “an embarrassment” is just inconceivable to me. Yes, it would be nice for spectators if everyone competed in a way acceptable to each spectator, but spectators are exactly that. People who are watching a sporting event. They are not part of it. Those participating no matter how well or how badly should have nothing to be embarrassed about unless they are cheating. They got there based on the rules of the sport and are competing.

My point is simply that you, as a spectator, should not be implying that a competitor has anything to be embarrassed about. That is not your place. You are not part of the event nor do you have a voice in the event. You are a spectator.

 

[just tuned in]

For the best from all over the country compete to be the National Champion.

I think you have totally missed my point. Whether or not you change the way people qualify for Nationals, whether you are watching a local club competition, a national championship, Worlds, or the Olympics, to call any performance “an embarrassment” is just inconceivable to me. Yes, it would be nice for spectators if everyone competed in a way acceptable to each spectator, but spectators are exactly that. People who are watching a sporting event. They are not part of it. Those participating no matter how well or how badly should have nothing to be embarrassed about unless they are cheating. They got there based on the rules of the sport and are competing.

My point is simply that you, as a spectator, should not be implying that a competitor has anything to be embarrassed about. That is not your place. You are not part of the event nor do you have a voice in the event. You are a spectator.

In certain instances, I feel embarrassed for certain competitors. Not ones who mess up, just ones who should not have been there in the first place. Sorry to disagree with you, this is just reality.

 

[Dobre]

There are precious few athletes at Nationals who do not look like they belong there at all.

Generally speaking, this sounds like a solution in search of a problem.

The Reynolds have earned great crowd reactions for their FD programs the last two years. Admittedly, Ashley Bain looked like she was in over her head. But she is up again on Ice Partner Search so I guess she survived the experience and still wants to skate. If these athletes can deal with the incredible challenge of going out there in a practice group with the best in the world, then I guess those of us in the audience can find it in ourselves to applaud the effort and root for them to come back stronger the following season. Ponomaryova & Altukhov were a nightmare the first time I saw them; but by the time they split last season, they looked like a dance team.

I really see nothing wrong with 4CC minimums. But Nationals is the one place where athletes that have not already broken through onto the international scene can truly prove themselves.

That can't change, IMO. The path must exist.

If the field is deep enough nationally, then there won't be any "embarrassing" athletes out there. Certainly not in pairs or dance where all the teams appear capable of competing in two to three sectionals. Some serious strategizing must have gone into the Junior Dance sectional assignments this past year because everybody who needed to get in got in. And that field was a good 12 out of 13 teams deep.

I'm quite certain that Yao Bin was once an "embarrassment" at Worlds; but the entire World of pairs skating is richer because he experienced it.