Olympic Qualifications

Coco

Rotating while Russian!
Messages
16,079
yes, and his doubling down on what the USFS is telling him instead of just saying "there appears to be some confusion about how the qualifying document is interpreted" is rather arrogant.

He literally writes something very close to what you just stated you wish he would 'say.'


NOTE: This is unofficial information based on sources who are closer to the matter than I am. The difficulty in the confirmation of the official spots comes from the interpretation of rules D.1 and D.2 in the official qualification documentation.
 
Last edited:

Rukia

A Southern, hot-blooded temperamental individual
Messages
8,808
yes, and his doubling down on what the USFS is telling him instead of just saying "there appears to be some confusion about how the qualifying document is interpreted" is rather arrogant.
He said the exact opposite of this? Look, I get that he's likely wrong in this (and I hope he is honestly), but I can also understand why he would not want to go directly against what USFS is telling him. Also he literally said on his Insta live, "I could be totally wrong about this, but this is what I'm being told by officials."
 

barbk

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,115
Four options:
1. The rule as the way it is written is accurate and will be implemented as it stands.
2. The rule as the way it is written does not match the intent of the folks who made the decision, and there will be an official "interpretation" to drag it into compliance with what was intended.
3. The rule as the way it is written does not match the intent of the folks who made the decision, but they have to stick with it because of Olympic rules/CAS rules.
4. They change the rule. (Least likely - doesn't that require a Congress?)

I've worked with a lot of legislation and have seen every one of these outcomes many times. There are a lot of slips between what a legislator tells the legal writing department to do and what gets done. Then you have the folks who are responsible for execution who make their own decisions.

I'd put my bet on #1.
 

Erin

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,427
Four options:
1. The rule as the way it is written is accurate and will be implemented as it stands.
2. The rule as the way it is written does not match the intent of the folks who made the decision, and there will be an official "interpretation" to drag it into compliance with what was intended.
3. The rule as the way it is written does not match the intent of the folks who made the decision, but they have to stick with it because of Olympic rules/CAS rules.
4. They change the rule. (Least likely - doesn't that require a Congress?)

I've worked with a lot of legislation and have seen every one of these outcomes many times. There are a lot of slips between what a legislator tells the legal writing department to do and what gets done. Then you have the folks who are responsible for execution who make their own decisions.

I'd put my bet on #1.

I’m guessing #1 also. I posted this in the thread in GSD, but I went back to the thread in the ISU Congress where the proposal was originally discussed. On rereading that discussion, it's clear that the intent is that the rule is as written. During the Congress discussion, there was an example given by a former Uzbekistan skater (Artem Knyazev) where under the proposed rule, he would have qualified directly for the 2006 Olympics at 2005 Worlds and been able to get more funding from the federation. Under the Jackie Wong/Mitch Moyer interpretation (and, to be perfectly honest, my original interpretation) of the rules, he still wouldn't have qualified a spot for Uzbekistan directly under these new rules. Therefore, I have to assume that the intent was to change that.
 

Theatregirl1122

Needs a nap
Messages
23,890
I’m guessing #1 also. I posted this in the thread in GSD, but I went back to the thread in the ISU Congress where the proposal was originally discussed. On rereading that discussion, it's clear that the intent is that the rule is as written. During the Congress discussion, there was an example given by a former Uzbekistan skater (Artem Knyazev) where under the proposed rule, he would have qualified directly for the 2006 Olympics at 2005 Worlds and been able to get more funding from the federation. Under the Jackie Wong/Mitch Moyer interpretation (and, to be perfectly honest, my original interpretation) of the rules, he still wouldn't have qualified a spot for Uzbekistan directly under these new rules. Therefore, I have to assume that the intent was to change that.

I'm confused by what Jackie/Mitch's interpretation is? Mitch's interpretation was essentially that there hadn't been a rule change. That seemed to be Phil's. Is Jackie's that spots get added to the Nebelhorn qualification pool for every team that ends up with the right to earn one there? So for the US ladies earning the possibility of getting 3 spots, one spot would move from being available at worlds to available at Nebelhorn?

I think it's pretty clear at this point that the number of spots at Nebelhorn remains static unless the number of spots earned (not including the provisional spots that have to be picked up at Nebelhorn) is less than the number who make the free skate as was the case in men (where only 23 spots were earned so one goes to Nebelhorn).
 

tony

Well-Known Member
Messages
9,746
I'm confused by what Jackie/Mitch's interpretation is? Mitch's interpretation was essentially that there hadn't been a rule change. That seemed to be Phil's. Is Jackie's that spots get added to the Nebelhorn qualification pool for every team that ends up with the right to earn one there? So for the US ladies earning the possibility of getting 3 spots, one spot would move from being available at worlds to available at Nebelhorn?

I think it's pretty clear at this point that the number of spots at Nebelhorn remains static unless the number of spots earned (not including the provisional spots that have to be picked up at Nebelhorn) is less than the number who make the free skate as was the case in men (where only 23 spots were earned so one goes to Nebelhorn).
Jackie's interpretation had been that any countries adding multiple spots here had their spots 'held' and taken away from the bottom finishers. In other words, since 5 countries in the mens event now have the opportunity to go to Nebelhorn and earn their extra spot (USA, RUS, CAN, FRA, KOR), only 19 spots would be given here and suddenly Nebelhorn has 11 spots up for grabs (really 12 if you consider China lost a spot). Then those five countries just have to finish in the top 12 to confirm their entries. That way of thinking is exactly what the ISU wanted to get away from. In singles, all LP qualifiers have a spot now, unless the country had multiple entries but lose one, as China did. Not taking anything away from Jackie specifically , as I'm sure others didn't know either. He just happens to be one of the most visible people. I don't know who his sources were because it sounds like Moyer didn't know any of this, and Hersh absolutely didn't know any of it and suddenly woke up today to try to figure it all out.

I personally asked one of the competitors two days ago what the situation was as he was one on the bubble of these interpretations, and he told me that the ISU had said he had the spot and it would be officially published in a document on Monday, which I believe is standard procedure for the ISU anyways.

But now since I've thrown my name out there of having this alternate view of the rule versus what is getting passed around, I've talked to several skaters in this 'on the bubble' situation since Thursday night, and they all initially were under the impression that they were out of an Olympic spot as well based on what was coming out of Rocker Skating and what journalists had also 'read' online.

The ISU needed to just squash this two nights ago and add a little blurb in their pairs wrap-up stating which countries earned their Olympic tickets outright, and we wouldn't have had any of this mess.
 

allezfred

Lipinski Stole My Catchphrase
Staff member
Messages
58,283
“KEEPSIES” is what those who interpreted the rule like that were thinking.

Anyway Kyodo News (Japanese equivalent to Reuters) has published an article confirming Japan earned an Olympic spot in ice dance.

 

Stephanie

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,120
But now since I've thrown my name out there of having this alternate view of the rule versus what is getting passed around, I've talked to several skaters in this 'on the bubble' situation since Thursday night, and they all initially were under the impression that they were out of an Olympic spot as well based on what was coming out of Rocker Skating and what journalists had also 'read' online.

The ISU needed to just squash this two nights ago and add a little blurb in their pairs wrap-up stating which countries earned their Olympic tickets outright, and we wouldn't have had any of this mess.

This is just cruel to the skaters involved, who have dedicated their whole lives to making it to the Olympics, not to mention the huge sacrifices they and their families have made. I agree that I don't understand why the ISU can't put out a communication or at least communicate directly to the team leaders the correct interpretation of the rules and not leave everyone waiting in agony for another 36 hours or so.
 

MacMadame

Staying at home
Messages
40,896
On the other hand, the ISU have better things to be doing than holding the hands of people who lack the ability to do their own reading comprehension. :shuffle:
Plus they are putting out the communique of who got Worlds and Olympic slots on Monday. People can't wait that long? Or believe it when the ISU tells them they have a slot because someone on Twitter say they don't?
 

missing

Well-Known To Whom She Wonders
Messages
4,028
On the other hand, the ISU have better things to be doing than holding the hands of people who lack the ability to do their own reading comprehension. :shuffle:
That's pretty obnoxious.

These are young people who have been working extremely hard at perfecting their skills and who may well be trusting their coaches or national committees to let them know what is happening.

In addition, the ISU regulations might not be written in a language they are familiar with or even one they are literate in.
 

missing

Well-Known To Whom She Wonders
Messages
4,028
Plus they are putting out the communique of who got Worlds and Olympic slots on Monday. People can't wait that long? Or believe it when the ISU tells them they have a slot because someone on Twitter say they don't?
I've been a freelancer my entire adult life. Waiting is hell. Not knowing who to believe is an additional hell.
 

Theatregirl1122

Needs a nap
Messages
23,890
Jackie's interpretation had been that any countries adding multiple spots here had their spots 'held' and taken away from the bottom finishers. In other words, since 5 countries in the mens event now have the opportunity to go to Nebelhorn and earn their extra spot (USA, RUS, CAN, FRA, KOR), only 19 spots would be given here and suddenly Nebelhorn has 11 spots up for grabs (really 12 if you consider China lost a spot). Then those five countries just have to finish in the top 12 to confirm their entries. That way of thinking is exactly what the ISU wanted to get away from. In singles, all LP qualifiers have a spot now, unless the country had multiple entries but lose one, as China did. Not taking anything away from Jackie specifically , as I'm sure others didn't know either. He just happens to be one of the most visible people. I don't know who his sources were because it sounds like Moyer didn't know any of this, and Hersh absolutely didn't know any of it and suddenly woke up today to try to figure it all out.

Gotcha. That's what I assumed Jackie's interpretation was based on the conversation. It definitely seems like Hersh's interpretation was that the rule change literally never happened. Moyer, who knows. But USFSA was definitely tweeting that they had 3 spots.
 

MacMadame

Staying at home
Messages
40,896
I've been a freelancer my entire adult life. Waiting is hell. Not knowing who to believe is an additional hell.
Okay but they are working on and putting out a communication. It is the weekend after all and if they could announce sooner, they probably would just do that normally.

Jumping on Twitter to issue a communication without going through all the checks they normally do could make things worse.
 

allezfred

Lipinski Stole My Catchphrase
Staff member
Messages
58,283
That's pretty obnoxious.

These are young people who have been working extremely hard at perfecting their skills and who may well be trusting their coaches or national committees to let them know what is happening.

In addition, the ISU regulations might not be written in a language they are familiar with or even one they are literate in.
I’m not talking about the skaters.
 

becca

Well-Known Member
Messages
20,424
So what I am understanding is for ladies 24 spots at Worlds 6 at Nelborn? And since the new rules don’t allow nations to automatically earn a third or second spot if they don’t have a third or second person competing and if they keep two or three people everyone who makes free gets spot technically? So then the limited number is still 6 Nelborn.

The only thing these nations earned is the right to compete for an extra spot. To be quite honest not sure big deal I don’t think it will be hard for the US to get that third spot at Nelborn.

I mean yes less spots will be available at the qualifier but less good skaters will be competing for spots to because they are already qualified
 
Last edited:

Coco

Rotating while Russian!
Messages
16,079
The only confusing thing about D.2 is that on the left, for singles, it says '6' and in the text it says 'remaining.' So the text allows for there being more, or even less, than 6 spots.

But really, the text of the rule is fairly straightforward. The problem is that some people in authority haven't read it closely or gotten up to speed on it. They are contradicting it publicly and that has caused the confusion.

The purpose of the change is to prevent skaters from becoming Olympians if they couldn't make the FS at worlds or can't finish top 6 at Nebelhorn. There is the added plus of allowing more smaller feds to qualify skaters at Worlds, which helps them get funding when they need it.

ETA: As for the US ladies, if USFSA really didn't know about this...smh...they are now going to have to devise a selection process. No word yet on summer comps and how they will be impacted by the crud, but hopefully as more US citizens / residents continue to be vaccinated, hospitalizations will trend down and low budget competitions can safely happen.

Having heard the endless excuses NBC commentators provide for skaters early in the season, I won't be counting that 3rd spot until it is over. On paper they should have no problem, but...
 
Last edited:

kwanfan1818

RIP D-10
Messages
33,671
Plus they are putting out the communique of who got Worlds and Olympic slots on Monday. People can't wait that long? Or believe it when the ISU tells them they have a slot because someone on Twitter say they don't?
If I were a skater, no, I wouldn't want to wait that long and have a very long weekend to mess with my head. Because it's clear different skaters are being told different things by different people, including those in authority, and they're talking and getting hugely stressed out.

Of course, they can wait, because they have no choice but to wait.
 

tony

Well-Known Member
Messages
9,746
The ISU simply should've just added the pairs qualifiers to their wrap-up Thursday night. Not even the Olympic communication type of thing, but just 'These countries have earned...' in a latter paragraph. It solves the problem, it shows that they know what they are talking about.. done. They sure as hell don't need to consider resorting to Twitter to solve it as suggested above.

I read the rules, I had an understanding of how it was going to work, but let's be real. Several posters here who are generally well-spoken about rules didn't want to believe me at first (or flat-out said that I chose not to read correctly) because of what they were hearing elsewhere. I don't know why the skaters or their coaches can't have that happen, either, especially when they are the ones actually on the bubble and directly involved.

I talked to another coach today that has a skater who is on the bubble and went line by line with them to explain how, in no way, are those additional spots held by countries with opportunity to add additional skaters to their rosters. And why did the coach think that? Because of the stuff circulating online, because some skaters were hearing from the ISU that they had spots, because other skaters hadn't heard anything, etc. Either tell everyone equally or don't say anything at all.

Now Jackie is great with what he does and I also have talked with him extensively in these last few days, including referring him to the rule that states Germany absolutely would not have a man qualify here under his method (rule states spots can only be allocated to those in the LP/FD), but I think his doubling down in those first 48 hours, repeatedly saying that it was coming from 'those who are most familiar' or official or whatever he said, was a big part of the problem. The coach I spoke to for a bit today said that journalists had told him that his skater didn't have a spot based on what they had read online. Now where else where people pushing so hard for this alternate method (besides a few lovely FSU posters who didn't bother to read)? ;)

And ETA- again nothing against Jackie, but he's holding on to his initial version as much as he can when a simple re-read of the qualifying document and rule 400 in full make the intent absolutely clear. He has modified his stuff to say 'well in case it's not actually this way....' but it's still throwing out an alternate method that doesn't need to be there and never needed to be in the first place.
 

kwanfan1818

RIP D-10
Messages
33,671
but I think his doubling down in those first 48 hours, repeatedly saying that it was coming from 'those who are most familiar' or official or whatever he said, was a big part of the problem
ITA with this. The source document has been around since 2019, and he's generally up on details of rules. The first news should have been what he was being told officially seems to contradict the ISU rules for qualification. But even if he didn't read and/or remember the document, he's usually good at updating with more info, and he was given ample chance to say that what he was being told by high level officials (who should know) was in contradiction to the document that the ISU submitted to the IOC, and any confusion over it is problematic, regardless of which option @barbk described upthread is applicable.
 

Karen-W

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,127
My issue with Jackie doubling down on what his sources were telling him during those first 48 hours is the appearance that he values his good relationship with his sources over good reporting. He should have, as soon as @tony and others began to question the interpretation of the new qualifying document by Jackie's sources, immediately and clearly stated that confusion existed, especially when some of these skaters in the bubble themselves were saying they'd been told by the ISU that their Olympic spots were confirmed. Even if Jackie did push back privately with his own sources (I'm guessing he did once it became clear that skaters like Martin Bidar were willing to publicly contradict what Jackie's sources were whispering in Jackie's ear), he shouldn't have acted like their PR piece by doubling down on what those people were saying publicly. It shouldn't have taken a "name" skater like Michal Brezina openly challenging him on Twitter for him to publicly admit there was any sort of confusion or differing interpretations of the qualifying document. For me, it makes me question Jackie's impartiality as a skating journalist. Ultimately, Jackie did himself and his brand a disservice by doubling down during those first 48 hours.
 

Aceon6

Isolating from mean people
Messages
22,225
Plus, the document was there for him to read, and, given what he does for a living, he does know how to read a document.
I’m still ok with him as long as he writes a long post tomorrow after the ISU communication comes out. This is his first major screw up. I’ve screwed up in areas that impacted my employer and my teams. His is minor in comparison.
 

thvu

Usova's Apprentice
Messages
5,228
My issue with Jackie doubling down on what his sources were telling him during those first 48 hours is the appearance that he values his good relationship with his sources over good reporting.
THIS. It makes it clear that he’s compromised in terms of honest reporting, and that he’s more interested in protecting his and his source’s egos than in getting it right.
 

jlai

Title-less
Messages
12,893
To be fair, there are times when I'm totally overworked (and tired), and I didn't check on things when my coworkers told me there were some details in my work that have to be fixed. It doesn't happen often, luckily.

Given the long hours of tweeting after a championship, I'm willing to give him a break.
 

tony

Well-Known Member
Messages
9,746
To be fair, there are times when I'm totally overworked (and tired), and I didn't check on things when my coworkers told me there were some details in my work that have to be fixed. It doesn't happen often, luckily.

Given the long hours of tweeting after a championship, I'm willing to give him a break.
Fair, but the thing is that we were already discussing this prior to the pairs final being complete. When I started saying that all 24 ladies were going to get a spot at the Olympics during the short program (as long as no country dropped a spot), it was already out in the open. I know he doesn't read FSU but I know a lot of people do. He already had his mind set and published his own interpretation before and after every event final, he had IG live chats where he kept talking about it, and anyone who went against what he said in his comments, he just didn't reply. Even today, his reply to someone trying to explain things is a little... odd. :lol:

And I agree with the others: it took people telling him he was wrong (even me going directly to one of the athletes and asking what they were told) and then Brezina Tweeting at him what he heard from the ISU for him to finally consider switching his information. If he was so overworked or tired, rather than making the situation confusing for the skaters, he could've just stopped Tweeting the allocations and scenarios. Or, as I mentioned above, he could've just said that was his interpretation rather than saying it's from sources that know best.

I hardly have a horse in the behind the scenes/blogging race in skating anymore, but I've now had several journalists, a coach, and 3 different skaters, two of which I've never interacted with before, coming to me to try to clear the confusion. Me! This is part ISU, big part Jackie.

In the end, it's not going to hurt his reputation at all (remember, most trusted source in figure skating), but it just makes me wonder how he could be fed contradicting info and push forward so hard with it.
 

thvu

Usova's Apprentice
Messages
5,228
In the end, it's not going to hurt his reputation at all (remember, most trusted source in figure skating), but it just makes me wonder how he could be fed contradicting info and push forward so hard with it.
Ultimately, ego and a lack of integrity.
 

jlai

Title-less
Messages
12,893
Ultimately, ego and a lack of integrity.
That's not quite fair.

As I said before, I've similar instances when I am so sure I'm right and the other person is wrong. I am one of the most trusted sources at my job. I've had a colleague where the percentage goes: I'm right 95% of the time, and she 5% of the time, so it makes sense that I go by past patterns and assume I'm right, esp when I don't have time to check.

When that 5% did happen once in a blue moon, and confirmed by others who pointed out similar things, I was quite embarrassed. Luckily I don't have a twitter world out there to ridicule me. It's possible that Jackie's source is one of those 90-95% right reliable sources, who know.

So hopefully Jackie will learn from this, as I had learned from my once in a while booboo. :)
 
Last edited:

Karen-W

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,127
In the end, it's not going to hurt his reputation at all (remember, most trusted source in figure skating), but it just makes me wonder how he could be fed contradicting info and push forward so hard with it.
Maybe the question shouldn't be HOW but WHY he was fed that contradicting info and pushed forward so hard with it...

Could it be as nefarious as some of these feds (USFS, SkateCan) not reading the document until it was too late to do anything about it and thinking they could pull off the classic "possession is 9/10ths of the law" situation with the ISU? Like "well, we've announced this to the world, so... what are you going to do? take the spots away from us?" I'm not sure either of those feds have the cajones to try and make a move like that but... Especially after the Men's SP when Vincent failed to make it out of the SP, maybe some of the bigger feds were in panic mode about having to actually send skaters to Nebelhorn (they shouldn't be but :confused::rolleyes:).
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top
Do Not Sell My Personal Information