U.S. Pairs 2017 - News & Updates, Part VII

[ioana]

I AGREE! This whole country thing is antiquated...

and even more so is the fact that a Ukranian and a Frenchmen compete for a country called Germany. LOL.. Makes no sense anyway.. so just let people be people...

Representing a specific country is not going anywhere when it comes to the Olympics. It's there in every sport and skating's not going to be an exception. Also, not sure Aliona is the best example to use as someone who's just representing Germany, having lived there since 2003, almost half her life.

We saw issues with teams not qualifying spots for themselves back in 2006 when North Korea sent one pair to the qualifying event and then had to field a different, age-eligible partner in Vancouver. And they were about as bad as a team that's been together less than a few months could be. Thankfully that should be avoided now with minimum score requirements.

eta: In case a country's second or third team cannot get the TS requirements (unlikely since Euro and 4CC requirements applied to the Olympics last time around), then that spot would go to the next country in line at the qualifying event.

 

[jiejie]

I'm dismayed but not entirely surprised at the discouraging pairs results at Worlds, and only one spot at Olympics. I had great hopes but also great doubts about Denney/Frazier particularly after 4CC---but sending another team in their place might not have resulted in any different situation. So there's no point in second-guessing.

I do think pairs is the orphan discipline in the USA and has been for a long time--the USFSA seems to treat pairs as an afterthought, like an Island of Misfit Toys for skaters that can't hack it in international top caliber single skating. Unfortunately, so do many (singles) skaters and their parents.

I like the idea of 2 or 3 geographically-distinct official National Pairs Centers for teams that want to make it to the top levels of international skating. But concentrating resources in a very limited number of places is going to upset the status quo that some coaches and centers will fight....since somebody will lose out. And that means it wouldn't happen overnight. I can't figure out a fair way for how the USFSA could use the carrot-and-stick of funding as an incentive since they provide relatively little or no funding in the key formative years of young pair skaters' careers, and even if they had unlimited funds to lavish upon skaters, it still involves gambling that teams will stick together, not outgrow each other, career-ending injury, etc.

It is a tough dilemma, but while better heads than mine try to figure out whether to structurally change US pair development, and how to do it, I think there are 4 key things that can be relatively easily addressed NOW by every team and coach of senior pair skaters (and top junior teams as well). These are IMO recurring problems with US pair teams generally, though there are exceptions:
1) Lousy music selection. Even worse: lousy music selection + a program with major errors.
2) Uninspired choreography. Particularly the parts between the big elements. The rest of the world seems to be lifting their game while US pairs don't. Even worse: uninspired choreography to lousy music selection + a program with major errors.
3) Side by side jumps. Drill til it kills. At this point, don't even worry about syncing them, just have BOTH partners be able to rotate and land consistently. The US is notoriously poor at this, and it seems they just aren't given the importance they deserve in training time. Pairs cannot be looked at as the repository for failed US singles' skaters who couldn't land their triples.
4) Side by side spins. Drill til it kills. I have seen some improvements in this among US senior pairs in the last few years, but still too much throwing away of points in a world where others are improving faster. My gut feel is teams just don't spend enough time on this.

 

[becca]

Yeah Aliona has been in Germany for Decades. They invested in her. Don't get me wrong the German federation certainly won the lottery with her. But she is German now. Sadly Ukraine was never able to produce a man to go with their amazing women. I wonder how her and Tatiana's former coach is doing.

 

[AngieNikodinovLove (ANL)]

like an Island of Misfit Toys

OMG Im a grown adult and I still sing this song when Rudolph comes on. LOL

OK, back to the topic at hand.....

 

[ioana]

Yeah Aliona has been in Germany for Decades. They invested in her. Don't get me wrong the German federation certainly won the lottery with her. But she is German now. Sadly Ukraine was never able to produce a man to go with their amazing women. I wonder how her and Tatiana's former coach is doing.

That they did . There was an interview with Kukhar a few years ago that Tanya translated. I would assume she's still coaching in Ukraine, even if the interview was almost 5 years ago?

https://www.fsuniverse.net/forum/in...h-a-book-how-to-tame-a-partner-one-day.83283/

 

[becca]

That they did . There was an interview with Kukhar a few years ago that Tanya translated. I would assume she's still coaching in Ukraine, even if the interview was almost 5 years ago?

https://www.fsuniverse.net/forum/in...h-a-book-how-to-tame-a-partner-one-day.83283/

I just read an article that she went to the Israeli federation and asked them to take Alexis Bychenko so he would have future sad.

 

[alj5]

I AGREE! This whole country thing is antiquated...

and even more so is the fact that a Ukranian and a Frenchmen compete for a country called Germany. LOL.. Makes no sense anyway.. so just let people be people...

I don't know...I think it has a very pro-EU ring to it.

 

[aftershocks]

Um, aftershocks, I guess you won't be visiting Canada soon, will you?

Lucky Canadians...

Oh well, if I ever do have the fortunate chance to visit Montreal or Toronto, I will have to remember not to introduce myself to anyone as the dreaded and despised 'aftershocks,' eh @Yazmeen.

 

[oleada]

thats pretty good.... and makes sense..

Because say Team Norway secured 2 teams for pairs for the following worlds (12 months from now) say then one team retires and their next best team is out with injuries... no sense them keeping those spots from results that were determined 12 months ago....

The coveted spots should be given to those who performed the best NOW. not from some results from one competition 12 months prior.

LIKE NOW Germany has 2 berths.. do WE REALLY need to see their other team who didnt qualify to the free this year, who wont get GP assignments and wont medal at any B comps? Im only even saying that because of the very limited number of spots for worlds / Olys.

Lets be real..germany doesnt even really have a second team.. AND ALSO..what if their second team never ends up getting the mimimum TECH scores... then what happens to that second berth???

Every sport needs some sort of Olympic qualification event; in fact, IIRC it's a requirement. There's no perfect system but within the current rules of figure skating, using Worlds makes sense. I think using Nebelhorn as a qualifier also gives a chance to those who didn't qualify to try again. As far as the country thing, someone else already explained that.

As far as Germany's 2nd team -
- They do "really" have one and they have the minimums, given that they competed here
- Their 2nd ranked team split halfway through the season
- we should be grateful they were there because if germany had only entered Savchenko/Massot, they'd have 3 Olympic spots outright and the US would be possibly left with is zero, and
- Do we REALLY need to see the 2nd US team? They didn't even qualify for the free this year (to use your own words back at ya....)

Now I'm really backing out since I'm going on vacation...

 

[aftershocks]

As for Denney and Frazier, I know there was injury there, too. But they bombed. Period. And a combination of bad coaching decisions and not enough work on elements afterh her return helped doom them, plus the fact is they will never have either the technique or the plain pizazz as a top team; frankly, IMO, I'd rather watch paint dry. They were frankly the most embarassing US Pairs Champions in history at a World Championship.

Hmmm, I really have to say, I think you are totally overstating what happened. The issue is that D/F could NOT afford to make any errors with the severe cut-off restrictions and the very deep field. They started out well. Both of the falls to me seem more about an excess of effort and energy that caused them to go completely off-balance and take spectacular tumbles, which are out of the ordinary in terms of falls. And then, aside from unison problems on their sbs spins, everything else was done with speed and sharpness. They always have excellent lifts and their throw 3-twist is quite good. There were no problems there.

You make it seem as if they were absolutely horrid on every element! It seems to me that they both and especially Brandon were simply a bit over-excited and trying too hard. The fact that they were out for a year and have had struggles with Haven landing jumps solidly this season, gave them little rep with the judges going in to both 4CCs and Worlds. I happen to think that the fine-tuning work they did with Marina actually showed at Worlds, but as usual D/F were not given much credit on components. You have certainly made clear how much you detest Haven/Brandon.

 

[Spiralgraph]

I'm trying to figure out (someone? anyone? help me?) have there been any US Pairs on the Senior Level that paired up as young ones (say, younger than 10 or 11) stayed together until they were Seniors and were NOT related and whose names were not Tai and Randy?

I'm wondering about McLaughlin and Brubaker, since they skated together as Juniors, but I'm not sure when they paired up.

I’m just relying on my memory but the only pair I can think of now is Jo Jo Starbuck and Ken Shelley who competed in the late 60’s and came in fourth at the 1972 Olympics. I believe they competed as juniors.

 

[olympic]

I'm dismayed but not entirely surprised at the discouraging pairs results at Worlds, and only one spot at Olympics. I had great hopes but also great doubts about Denney/Frazier particularly after 4CC---but sending another team in their place might not have resulted in any different situation. So there's no point in second-guessing.

I do think pairs is the orphan discipline in the USA and has been for a long time--the USFSA seems to treat pairs as an afterthought, like an Island of Misfit Toys for skaters that can't hack it in international top caliber single skating. Unfortunately, so do many (singles) skaters and their parents.

I like the idea of 2 or 3 geographically-distinct official National Pairs Centers for teams that want to make it to the top levels of international skating. But concentrating resources in a very limited number of places is going to upset the status quo that some coaches and centers will fight....since somebody will lose out. And that means it wouldn't happen overnight. I can't figure out a fair way for how the USFSA could use the carrot-and-stick of funding as an incentive since they provide relatively little or no funding in the key formative years of young pair skaters' careers, and even if they had unlimited funds to lavish upon skaters, it still involves gambling that teams will stick together, not outgrow each other, career-ending injury, etc.

It is a tough dilemma, but while better heads than mine try to figure out whether to structurally change US pair development, and how to do it, I think there are 4 key things that can be relatively easily addressed NOW by every team and coach of senior pair skaters (and top junior teams as well). These are IMO recurring problems with US pair teams generally, though there are exceptions:
1) Lousy music selection. Even worse: lousy music selection + a program with major errors.
2) Uninspired choreography. Particularly the parts between the big elements. The rest of the world seems to be lifting their game while US pairs don't. Even worse: uninspired choreography to lousy music selection + a program with major errors.
3) Side by side jumps. Drill til it kills. At this point, don't even worry about syncing them, just have BOTH partners be able to rotate and land consistently. The US is notoriously poor at this, and it seems they just aren't given the importance they deserve in training time. Pairs cannot be looked at as the repository for failed US singles' skaters who couldn't land their triples.
4) Side by side spins. Drill til it kills. I have seen some improvements in this among US senior pairs in the last few years, but still too much throwing away of points in a world where others are improving faster. My gut feel is teams just don't spend enough time on this.

What is interesting to me is that until sometime last decade, Ice Dance was the U.S. orphan but Shpilband / Zoueva built a factory in MI that began to churn out champions during the latter half of the last decade. It took (1) a great coaching duo; (2) two completely invested competitors - Belbin / Agosto and Davis / White to start; and 3) a great facility. Voila! It begat competitiveness and the garden of U.S. Ice Dance blossomed. If you look down to Juniors, the U.S. is on (or at least near) the top there and has been for a while.

I think the U.S. is also at the mercy of spectacular growth from foreign competition in this discipline. We need boys and girls that want to skate pairs (not skate pairs because you can't cut it in singles), can afford it, and go to reputable coaches at a young age that teach good technique, work hard, stay together thru thick and thin, and learn to compete internationally. One thing the USFSA is doing right lately is utilizing most of the Senior B competitions. It's so important to learning to compete!

The U.S. has the resources for a Pairs program. It can be done. How is the million dollar question and it's been debated in many threads for a long time

 

[becca]

Every sport needs some sort of Olympic qualification event; in fact, IIRC it's a requirement. There's no perfect system but within the current rules of figure skating, using Worlds makes sense. I think using Nebelhorn as a qualifier also gives a chance to those who didn't qualify to try again. As far as the country thing, someone else already explained that.

As far as Germany's 2nd team -
- They do "really" have one and they have the minimums, given that they competed here
- Their 2nd ranked team split halfway through the season
- we should be grateful they were there because if germany had only entered Savchenko/Massot, they'd have 3 Olympic spots outright and the US would be possibly left with is zero, and
- Do we REALLY need to see the 2nd US team? They didn't even qualify for the free this year (to use your own words back at ya....)

Now I'm really backing out since I'm going on vacation...

Not to mention that the German team finished ahead of D/F in the short program.

 

[her grace]

The U.S. has the resources for a Pairs program. It can be done. How is the million dollar question and it's been debated in many threads for a long time

If you want to be successful in pairs, you need dedicated pair ice. Most rinks don't have that. The rink makes way more money holding singles freestyle sessions or hockey ice. Pairs is the least cost-effective because you have to have so few skaters on the ice at one time for safety reasons. Don't even get me started about sharing freestyle ice as a kid with a pair team doing overhead lifts while no test singles skaters obliviously got in their path. Then there's the question of coaching; most coaches don't have the skills to teach pairs. So if you're the average skater, you don't have the opportunity to even start pair skating without moving. If the U.S. had dedicated pair centers with USFS subsidizing some of the ice time, maybe that would be an incentive for parents to try out the discipline? You might not get parents to move, but perhaps you could use the local pool to grow a good group of teams like Wheaton has done with dance.

I think it could be helpful to have a Try Pairs clinic after novice nationals where any interested competitors could learn about the discipline and the available coaching. Invite coaches from the successful programs like Sappenfield, Peterson, Zimmerman, and Martin and assess who has pairs potential and tell them that.

 

[becca]

If you want to be successful in pairs, you need dedicated pair ice. Most rinks don't have that. The rink makes way more money holding singles freestyle sessions or hockey ice. Pairs is the least cost-effective because you have to have so few skaters on the ice at one time for safety reasons. Don't even get me started about sharing freestyle ice as a kid with a pair team doing overhead lifts while no test singles skaters obliviously got in their path. Then there's the question of coaching; most coaches don't have the skills to teach pairs. So if you're the average skater, you don't have the opportunity to even start pair skating without moving. If the U.S. had dedicated pair centers with USFS subsidizing some of the ice time, maybe that would be an incentive for parents to try out the discipline? You might not get parents to move, but perhaps you could use the local pool to grow a good group of teams like Wheaton has done with dance.

I think it could be helpful to have a Try Pairs clinic after novice nationals where any interested competitors could learn about the discipline and the available coaching. Invite coaches from the successful programs like Sappenfield, Peterson, Zimmerman, and Martin and assess who has pairs potential and tell them that.

They could also build the centers in areas where there are already a lot of top US skaters.

California, Colorado, New Jersey, Florida, Michigan. Boston And I would insist on more than the coaches that are already there.

 

[her grace]

They could also build the centers in areas where there are already a lot of top US skaters.

California, Colorado, New Jersey, Florida, Michigan. Boston And I would insist on more than the coaches that are already there.

How would you insist on that? Who do you want to join the coaching staffs at these rinks? Is USFS going to pay them?

 

[becca]

How would you insist on that? Who do you want to join the coaching staffs at these rinks? Is USFS going to pay them?

Well we are talking about the USFSA sending it up. so than I would assume USFSA is paying for some things.

 

[gkelly]

The thing about pairs is:

Quality training in pair skills at prejuvenile or juvenile or even intermediate level will help the skaters who have it in their future pair careers, but there is no guarantee that a good juvenile pair skater will ever be able to be a junior/senior level pair skater for several reasons,* and even less that they will be able to stay with the same partner at higher levels.

*Appropriate body type for pairs
*Appropriate temperament to master difficult pair skills (trust, fearlessness, reliability, etc.)
*Physical ability to master difficult pair moves
*Physical ability to master difficult solo jumps (2A and above)

To be successful at an elite level, pairs also need to have really strong program components -- especially Skating Skills -- in addition to the ability perform the tricks.

Sometimes the most successful pair skaters don't begin pair skating until novice or even senior level. When it becomes clear that they do have an appropriate body type and temperament and already have the physical skills, especially jumps and basic skating, as singles skaters.

And then it takes time for teams to develop unison in everything they do, in addition to the tricks.

Encouraging young/lower level skaters to try pairs can help, but what will help even more is finding ways to encourage strong singles skaters to team up at middle levels or above and to encourage well-matched teams to stay together.

Given that most of the training is going to be paid for by the skaters' families in any case -- not to mention relocation costs for one or both partners plus a parent for minors -- what could USFS do to offer that encouragement?

Partner tryout camps? Pair skill development camps for existing and potential teams and their coaches? Pair-focused competitions throughout the spring and summer? International assignments for as many eligible teams as possible? Limited scholarships as rewards for past performance contingent on competing together the following year?

 

[becca]

The thing about pairs is:

Quality training in pair skills at prejuvenile or juvenile or even intermediate level will help the skaters who have it in their future pair careers, but there is no guarantee that a good juvenile pair skater will ever be able to be a junior/senior level pair skater for several reasons,* and even less that they will be able to stay with the same partner at higher levels.

*Appropriate body type for pairs
*Appropriate temperament to master difficult pair skills (trust, fearlessness, reliability, etc.)
*Physical ability to master difficult pair moves
*Physical ability to master difficult solo jumps (2A and above)

To be successful at an elite level, pairs also need to have really strong program components -- especially Skating Skills -- in addition to the ability perform the tricks.

Sometimes the most successful pair skaters don't begin pair skating until novice or even senior level. When it becomes clear that they do have an appropriate body type and temperament and already have the physical skills, especially jumps and basic skating, as singles skaters.

And then it takes time for teams to develop unison in everything they do, in addition to the tricks.

Encouraging young/lower level skaters to try pairs can help, but what will help even more is finding ways to encourage strong singles skaters to team up at middle levels or above and to encourage well-matched teams to stay together.

Given that most of the training is going to be paid for by the skaters' families in any case -- not to mention relocation costs for one or both partners plus a parent for minors -- what could USFS do to offer that encouragement?

Partner tryout camps? Pair skill development camps for existing and potential teams and their coaches? Pair-focused competitions throughout the spring and summer? International assignments for as many eligible teams as possible? Limited scholarships as rewards for past performance contingent on competing together the following year?

Well I frankly think the US skaters in general could use more development on basic skating and jumps. Across the board. And more coaching for coaches. Skating Lesson pointed out once Frank retires the only active US singles coach who coached a World medalist is Rafael-and he cannot coach everyone.

 

[gkelly]

Well we are talking about the USFSA sending it up. so than I would assume USFSA is paying for some things.

They are not paying for much now. And are not likely to take on significant expenses in the future.

Do you want to brainstorm things they actually could do with only a modest increase in pair development costs? Or fantasize what they could do if they had a sudden multi-million-dollar fund of money that doesn't now exist, to be dedicated to pair development?

 

[ChiquitaBanana]

The thing about pairs is:

Quality training in pair skills at prejuvenile or juvenile or even intermediate level will help the skaters who have it in their future pair careers, but there is no guarantee that a good juvenile pair skater will ever be able to be a junior/senior level pair skater for several reasons,* and even less that they will be able to stay with the same partner at higher levels.

*

Given that most of the training is going to be paid for by the skaters' families in any case -- not to mention relocation costs for one or both partners plus a parent for minors -- what could USFS do to offer that encouragement?

Partner tryout camps? Pair skill development camps for existing and potential teams and their coaches? Pair-focused competitions throughout the spring and summer? International assignments for as many eligible teams as possible? Limited scholarships as rewards for past performance contingent on competing together the following year?

I am from a pair skating land, have seen many teams develop, got to Jr. Worlds, Worlds, Olympics...
The best girls didn't come to pair skating at the pre-juvenile/juvenile/intermediate. They came as athlete and good singles skaters. Most of the time, it was the coaches who talked them into pair skating. And your best singles skater are not always your best pair girls as you need no fear to be lifted and tossed around in such a away.

In an ideal world you would like your young couples to do ice dancing together at first till the guy gets strong enough to do overhead lifts and a good singles girl who will be able to jump her triples when needed. IIRC, on the canadian side, Duhamel started in her teenage years, so did KMT and Bilodeau.
Russia liked to get them together earlier on, but these days the young junior girls are not so good at jumping than it used to be. They're all sticking to singles it seems.

 

[wickedwitch]

I used to think the main problem was sticking together. But recent success of new teams from other countries has had me re-evaluating.

Now I think the biggest issue is coaching. The US's ice dance program started having success once Russian coaches came over. Even today, every single one of the top US ice dancers has had extensive training with Russian coaches. Donohue is the only one who wasn't groomed primarily under a Russian coach, and even he was under Krylova/Carmerlengo for ages.

Peterson and Sappenfield are both good, but not great, coaches. Peterson has needed an on-site choreographer and skating skills coach for his teams for years, because they're typically weak in both areas. If Gauthier had room, I'd encourage teams to go to him, because he's excellent. Zimmerman looks promising, and the fact that he learned from Moskvina can't hurt.

 

[Lizziebeth]

I agree about Zimmerman. Looking forward to what he can do in the future. Hope he is working with some young teams.

 

[AngieNikodinovLove (ANL)]

Every sport needs some sort of Olympic qualification event; in fact, IIRC it's a requirement. There's no perfect system but within the current rules of figure skating, using Worlds makes sense. I think using Nebelhorn as a qualifier also gives a chance to those who didn't qualify to try again. As far as the country thing, someone else already explained that.

As far as Germany's 2nd team -
- They do "really" have one and they have the minimums, given that they competed here
- Their 2nd ranked team split halfway through the season
- we should be grateful they were there because if germany had only entered Savchenko/Massot, they'd have 3 Olympic spots outright and the US would be possibly left with is zero, and
- Do we REALLY need to see the 2nd US team? They didn't even qualify for the free this year (to use your own words back at ya....)

Now I'm really backing out since I'm going on vacation...

Morning. First I used germany as

Every sport needs some sort of Olympic qualification event; in fact, IIRC it's a requirement. There's no perfect system but within the current rules of figure skating, using Worlds makes sense. I think using Nebelhorn as a qualifier also gives a chance to those who didn't qualify to try again. As far as the country thing, someone else already explained that.

As far as Germany's 2nd team -
- They do "really" have one and they have the minimums, given that they competed here
- Their 2nd ranked team split halfway through the season
- we should be grateful they were there because if germany had only entered Savchenko/Massot, they'd have 3 Olympic spots outright and the US would be possibly left with is zero, and
- Do we REALLY need to see the 2nd US team? They didn't even qualify for the free this year (to use your own words back at ya....)

Now I'm really backing out since I'm going on vacation...

Morning. I only used Germany as an example. I could have used any country. France, Italy and so on. I also didnt come to the board angry last night. I rarely ever do.

Yes I know about Mari and Ruben. That has nothing to do with what I was saying.

And no, Denney & Frazier dont need to be seen at Olys as I TOO KNOW and UNDERSTAND they didnt qualify for free. But in USA we also have Kayne & Oshea, Cain & LeDuc, Castelli & Tran and others who WILL get GP assignments, who will medal at senior Bs, who could medal at GPs and could fill the SECOND USA spot and do decent enough.

Thats one of the things I was getting at. Germany (AGAIN FOR EXAMPLE) doesnt Have ANY team to showcase for that second spot. Mari and Ruben went "Bye Felicia." Their next team isnt high enough (If you ask me because of their points) to get a second Oly spot if the Olys are going to have quotas and limits. Would I like to see that second German team? YES! But not if the Olys are putting out mandates and limits. The best performing teams should go not necessarily seeing a second team from Croatia just because their only team finished third at last years Worlds....which is what the point is to what I was responding to.

 

[AngieNikodinovLove (ANL)]

Not to mention that the German team finished ahead of D/F in the short program.

Not referring specifically to D&F. USA has more to send for a second spot. Germany doesnt.

 

[oleada]

There are lots of teams - the Wangs, Kavaguti & Smirnov, Moore-Towers/Marinaro, Peng/Jin, to name a few - who are left out of Worlds and/or the Olympics because of the per country limits. Frankly, many of them would deserve to go before any of the US teams you mentioned. Country limits are standard in most sports at the Olympics. That way you get participation from countries around the globe, not the usual powerhouses.

 

[Mayra]

There are lots of teams - the Wangs, Kavaguti & Smirnov, Moore-Towers/Marinaro, Peng/Jin, to name a few - who are left out of Worlds and/or the Olympics because of the per country limits. Frankly, many of them would deserve to go before any of the US teams you mentioned. Country limits are standard in most sports at the Olympics. That way you get participation from countries around the globe, not the usual powerhouses.

It's also how you promote the sport and encourage the growth of the sport in these countries. I mean Australia just won the Jr. Worlds Pairs title and had a respectable showing here at Worlds. How awesome is that? PRK qualified a team to the pairs long program etc...

 

[AngieNikodinovLove (ANL)]

There are lots of teams - the Wangs, Kavaguti & Smirnov, Moore-Towers/Marinaro, Peng/Jin, to name a few - who are left out of Worlds and/or the Olympics because of the per country limits. Frankly, many of them would deserve to go before any of the US teams you mentioned. Country limits are standard in most sports at the Olympics. That way you get participation from countries around the globe, not the usual powerhouses.

I just left coffee and I was thinking about it even more.... For me its weird that say Germany (or USA, or Cuba or New Zealand) gets to send a second team because of how S&M (or their successful pair) placed. Say the next best team in Germany is world ranked number 86. WHy should that team get to go to Olys when only 20 teams will be allowed?

What if they went by the world rankings or seasons best or whatever... and named qualified teams from there? Im still in favor tho of only 3 per country. So, if USA had 5 teams in top 20 only 3 can go. A team could refuse the invite and if so they work down that list instead of how it currently is....

Then you are rewarded/acknowledged as a body of work to get into the Olympics not just how one of your teams or singles did at a Worlds from a year ago...

I kinda like it. but its just my 2 cents.

 

[becca]

They are not paying for much now. And are not likely to take on significant expenses in the future.

Do you want to brainstorm things they actually could do with only a modest increase in pair development costs? Or fantasize what they could do if they had a sudden multi-million-dollar fund of money that doesn't now exist, to be dedicated to pair development?

I frankly think it really could not be a very expensive to maybe every six weeks/ two months have for example the California pairs skaters in the LA area attend a Pairs seminar with Nicks and Goordeva maybe for example. They all live in the area so there would be no lodging.

They could work with the skaters and train coaches.

So a similar specialist in the other areas.

And frankly it might be useful in the other disciplines too. Training not just the skaters but also the coaches.

 

[gkelly]

I frankly think it really could not be a very expensive to maybe every six weeks/ two months have for example the California pairs skaters in the LA area attend a Pairs seminar with Nicks and Goordeva maybe for example. They all live in the area so there would be no lodging.

They could work with the skaters and train coaches.

Something like that could be done.

The biggest expenses would be renting the ice for the day (or part of the day, if some of the training takes place off ice -- or more than one day if there's a lot of on-ice training offered), and paying the coaches for their time and expertise. If any judges or tech specialists are brought in, even locally, their expenses would be paid, and food for the presenters, which might only add a couple hundred to the total expense.

Participants could pay for their own food, and maybe pay an entry fee.

In which case the cost to USFS would be a few thousand dollars per seminar, and the cost to skaters the cost of getting there, plus any entry fee.

For coaches who participate to learn, it would be up to them whether they're willing to lose/spend money for the day to get this educational opportunity, or whether they would charge the participant skaters for "lessons" that day or for their lost income not getting to teach lessons to those and other skaters.

Either way, a significant financial cost to either the coaches or the students if they pass that cost along.

I could see this being done once or twice a year in 3-5 locations around the country.

I can't see it happening 6-9 times a year x 3-5 locations, which would add up to 6-figure costs just to the USFS not to mention the cost to the participants. The teams and/or coaches couldn't afford to go that often -- especially those who don't live in one of the chosen locations.