2018 USFS Olympic team selection thoughts

[Mrs. P]

I think it's disingenuous to say USFS is determining its decision completely by a non-athlete committee because they have a selection criteria.

U.S. Nationals still remains the number 1 determination for the World/Olympic team. In past years, you couldn't even be selected if you weren't within the top 5 at Nationals and I'd imagine that will be the case this year. They can't just choose whoever they want. Yes, yes I know there's an argument that judges will just put favorites in top 5 with scores, but still, the selection committee can't just pick who they want if they don't meet that basic criteria.

Last season out of the 10 World team slots, only 2 (Jason and the Knierims in pairs) was not a direct result of Nationals finish. The other 8 slots were all based on national placements, including all Ladies and Dance. If you want to go back further to 2014 Olympics, there has only been 3 deviations (5 if you want to count the deviation for the 2014 World team slots -- 3rd place finisher Max Aaron went and 3rd place pairs Denney/Coughlin were sent before they WD).

Ladies: 3-3-3-3 (plus 3 at 2014 Olympics)
Men: 2-3-3-2 (2 Olympics)
Pairs: 2-2-2-2 (2 Olympics)
Dances 3-3-3-3 (3 Olympics)

So out of 52 slots, 90.4 percent (or 47 slots) were determined strictly on Nationals placements. And 100 percent of those deviations were only by 1 placement, not more. The committee for the most part agrees on using Nationals results.

 

[ice coverage]

... As to the second point: I will happily concede that USFSA members are the finest and most honorable people who have ever walked the earth.

But you know what they are NOT? They're not athletes on the ice competing.

They are administrative officials. Outsiders to the competitive ring, or at least the current competitive ring. And no matter how honorable they are or how noble their intentions or the criteria they use... at the end, they are picking who THEY believe deserve to go. They pick the winners and losers. They decide whose dreams will be realized, and whose will be crushed.

Meanwhile, the athletes, the gladiators of our sport, are on the outside of that locked conference room door, waiting patiently for their pronouncements.

Truthfully, their are pluses and minuses to both selection scenarios being discussed. But the trials proposal removes the non-athletes from the decision.

FWIW/IIRC, on the rare occasions when I have come across a list of members of the USFS selection committee, it has included recognizable names of skaters who recently have been in the competitive ring.
(I do not have a list at my fingertips.)

Plus it is my understanding that quite a few USFS "administrative officials" are former competitive skaters (at one level or another) from further back ... or were/are parents of skaters, for example. In other words, people who do have a personal sense of the blood/sweat/tears/commitment/sacrifice/time/money/and more that skaters have poured into their dreams.

---

The Gladys and Fifi scenario was artistic rhetoric. Since it was an artistic choice, you have to honor it. I think that rule was established on a different thread. OK, maybe it applied to skating, but whatever. ...

I do not have to honor your so-called "artistic choice," and I do not honor it.

 

[Sam-Skwantch]

I think I'd prefer just the final placements at nationals if I had to choose one method to determine who goes to the Olympics. Maybe even keeping Worlds to a committee decision. If a skater had a good GP and even a few good showings elsewhere they still made a good name for themselves which they can use toward building their future career on the GP and other international stages. The strength and point of my thinking is to build up as many skaters reputations as possible but ultimately I like the thrill of seeing Nationals being a test for all and in theory seeing everyone on equal footing at the start. If there is one thing this sport could benefit from is a little more excitement. Just my opinion though.

The problem is that may open the door and potentially create an incentive for particular judging practices that may be perceived as or even be intended to prop skaters at nationals. Unfortunately judging is always subject to debates and in a sport that doesnt offer absolute scoring via goals or timed trials the results will likley be debatable.

So yes...I have a preferred method but I don't think there is much else I can do except hope my favorites do enough to sway the judges and create a strong case amongst the committee. Go Mariah!!

 

[TontoK]

FWIW/IIRC, on the rare occasions when I have come across a list of members of the USFS selection committee, it has included recognizable names of skaters who recently have been in the competitive ring.
(I do not have a list at my fingertips.)

Plus it is my understanding that quite a few USFS "administration officials" are former competitive skaters (at one level or another) from further back ... or were/are parents of skaters, for example. In other words, people who do have a personal sense of the blood/sweat/tears/commitment/sacrifice/time/money/and more that skaters have poured into their dreams.

---

I do not have to honor your so-called "artistic choice," and I do not honor it.

I guarantee that the committee who selects the US Olympic team will not include a skater who competed during this season. I honor skaters and champions of the past and I certainly respect the parents of past skaters because I'm certain they sacrificed, but I disagree strongly that they should hold the fate of the current crop in their hands.

If they didn't lace up and compete in the current competition, then they are administrative officials.

There are numerous historical incidents of the selection committee overriding the results of US Nationals. Sometimes, it works out in the World/Olympic results. But not always. So I don't see why they should be viewed as some sort of sacred body whose wisdom should never be questioned.

Whether you share a laugh about Gladys and Fifi, it was intended in jest. I won't apologize for using a farcical lighthearted moment to make a point. So, we're probably at an impasse there.

 

[drivingmissdaisy]

I think what we saw in 2014 Ladies is how it should be. One spot may be reserved for a skater who has done exceptionally well in the last year, and the remaining spots awarded strictly on Nationals placement. At this point, I think it is unlikely that we'll see anything other than the US medalists get sent, unless Karen has a great GP season.

 

[ice coverage]

I guarantee that the committee who selects the US Olympic team will not include a skater who competed during this season. I honor skaters and champions of the past and I certainly respect the parents of past skaters because I'm certain they sacrificed, but I disagree strongly that they should hold the fate of the current crop in their hands.

If they didn't lace up and compete in the current competition, then they are administrative officials.

There are numerous historical incidents of the selection committee overriding the results of US Nationals. Sometimes, it works out in the World/Olympic results. But not always. So I don't see why they should be viewed as some sort of sacred body whose wisdom should never be questioned. ...

I would not want a current competitive skater to be on the selection committee. (Anyone who competed at Nationals, for example.)

If one were entitled to serve on the committee (by virtue of some other USFS position), I would expect a current competitive skater to recuse herself or himself.

I did not say that the selection committee is a sacred body whose wisdom should never be questioned.

ETA:

For example, if I were Ashley Wagner, I would not consider it fair to myself or to anyone else to give me the responsibility/burden of voting on the fate of Adam Rippon re the 2018 Olympic team.

And if I were Adam, I would not consider it fair to myself or to anyone else to give me the responsibility/burden of voting on the fate of Ashley.​

---

Whether you share a laugh about Gladys and Fifi, it was intended in jest. I won't apologize for using a farcical lighthearted moment to make a point. So, we're probably at an impasse there.

Whether you apologize or not, your stereotyping ultimately had nothing to do with your point.
Unless your point was that you would tolerate a committee of current skaters -- barring the likes of Mariah Bell (from Tulsa), Madi Chock (with Henry in tow), and Ashley Cain (with Mylo in tow).

 

[karne]

I guarantee that the committee who selects the US Olympic team will not include a skater who competed during this season.

And nor should they be! Good god, what a dreadful idea!

 

[chameleon]

Yeah, I have a hard time imagining putting currently competing athletes on the committee leading to less bias.

The fact is, there is no 100% perfect way. There will always be controversy and "what if?" scenarios no matter what. I feel like the guidelines laid out are reasonable. I think Nationals should be the weightiest factor(and, going by past World teams, it is) but I think allowing some flexibility is good and prevents Federations from digging themselves into a hole.

 

[Moxiejan]

Really, it should not be difficult to use USFS' stated criteria to "rank" skaters' chances for the Olympic team at each point of the season heading into Nationals. Here are the results for U.S. ladies, based on the tiers that were used last season (but dates updated for this season):

Tier 1
- 2018 U.S. Figure Skating Championships (TBD)
- 2017 ISU Grand Prix Final (TBD)
- 2017 ISU World Figure Skating Championships: Karen, Ashley, Mariah

Tier 2
- 2017 Grand Prix Series Competitions: TBD
- 2017 Four Continents Figure Skating Championships: Mirai (3), Mariah, Karen

Tier 3
- 2017 Challenger Series Events and other senior international competitions: TBD
- 2017 U.S. Figure Skating Championships: Karen, Ashley, Mariah, Mirai, Caroline
- 2017 World Junior Figure Skating Championships: Bradie (7), Starr (12)
- 2017 ISU Junior Grand Prix Final: TBD

At this point, I would have it as Karen, Ashley and a tie between Mirai and Mariah.
It's shocking that Gracie isn't in the picture at all; she will need a strong GP season & at least Top 3 at Nationals.

Also note that within tiers, about equal weight is given. So a high finish in the next GPF and previous year's Worlds carries close to the same weight as Nationals.

Looking at this list and remembering the 2013-14 results, it's easy to see why Ashley made the team and Mirai did not. What's more problematic is the choice of Polina over Mirai.

 

[TontoK]

And nor should they be! Good god, what a dreadful idea!

My point, admittedly not clearly stated, was that even if former athletes were included on the selection committee, they are still "outsiders" to the competition currently being conducted on the ice.

You could have a selection panel consisting of former Olympic champions, and they're still the ones deciding. I prefer letting the athletes decide who makes the team, and the way they do that by competing for the spot in a trial and accepting the outcome.

"If I beat the other guy, I get the reward, and he doesn't." It is the essence of competition.

 

[VIETgrlTerifa]

It's hard to say the athletes have full control when the results are determined by the technical panel and judges. That said the judges and tech. panel are much closer to the competition than a selection committee.

I think I see all points here. The idea of only using Nationals is make the field feel as though anyone has a chance to make the team once they qualify to nationals theoretically. By having this selection criteria it seems to say that the team may already be chosen by nationals and skaters ranked lower than 6th from the previous nationals or first time national qualifiers have no chance in making the team before nationals even start. Not every competitor at Nationals has the same opportunities to show how competitive they are internationally and we all know international scores need to be built by familiarity in most cases. But then there's also the converse argument that being put in the international spotlight puts the skater in a position to be more heavily scrutinized. I think what worked in Polina's favor other than the unconscious weighing of her junior GP series and GPF result was that she did not have the track recording of blowing it in the senior events the way Mirai did prior to 2014.

And forgive my generalities but maybe Americans latched on to the idea that Nationals are the Olympic trials (like how other sports have that one competition be the determining factor or at least the perception is that it is) because that narrative was pushed for the longest time. And the idea that one's past should not punish them and how people should be treated equally with a clean slate and the skater you were in the past should not make people prejudge you to be a certain kind of skater you are now or will be in the future. However, I'm sure people promoting the body of work criteria with good results (not just any result) can come up with examples of how that idea bit the USFS in the butt.

Another question, why does body of work matter for the Olympics? I get it for Worlds since spots for the next year's Worlds are determined but the Olympics have no bearing on how many spots a federation has. Why not just go with the highest finishers at Nationals and let the chips fall where they may at the Olympics? I guess the answer is that the USFS wants the best results probable as it is about reputation and image and it is also a promotional tool for the sport to inspire viewers to become participants.

 

[Yatagarasu]

To those that say US Nationals be all end all. What about stupid crap that is beyond the skaters control?

I.e. the airline lost their skates and they had to use a borrowed pair in the SP end got the pewter by a point? Or if they were running a 102 degree (38.8 C) fever, but still managed pewter? Or someone was careless in handling their food and and they suffered anaphylactic shock during/shortly before the comp?

This, so very much.

Lets say Nathan gets sick with the flu before this season's Nationals. He cannot skate because he cannot stand up and he misses them. So does that mean US' biggest hope is out of the Olympics, even though he for example had a very good season otherwise, got to the GPF, won some medals there.

I see the merit of saying the National Champion goes and that's that. Even the second placed, if we're talking 3 spots. But I see no reason that the overall success that season, including any possible success at previous Worlds, shouldn't be considered in terms of the last spot. What's best for USA overall should also be looked at and this opens up the door for situations like above.

 

[Mathman]

^ A "dominant skater" who misses Nationals because of injury or illness can apply for a bye. I guess it is up to the USFSA to decide what constitutes a "dominant skater." Nancy Kerrigan in 1994, Michelle Kwan in 2006 were examples.

 

[drivingmissdaisy]

Really, it should not be difficult to use USFS' stated criteria to "rank" skaters' chances for the Olympic team at each point of the season heading into Nationals. Here are the results for U.S. ladies, based on the tiers that were used last season (but dates updated for this season):

Tier 1
- 2018 U.S. Figure Skating Championships (TBD)
- 2017 ISU Grand Prix Final (TBD)
- 2017 ISU World Figure Skating Championships: Karen, Ashley, Mariah

Tier 2
- 2017 Grand Prix Series Competitions: TBD
- 2017 Four Continents Figure Skating Championships: Mirai (3), Mariah, Karen

Tier 3
- 2017 Challenger Series Events and other senior international competitions: TBD
- 2017 U.S. Figure Skating Championships: Karen, Ashley, Mariah, Mirai, Caroline
- 2017 World Junior Figure Skating Championships: Bradie (7), Starr (12)
- 2017 ISU Junior Grand Prix Final: TBD

At this point, I would have it as Karen, Ashley and a tie between Mirai and Mariah.
It's shocking that Gracie isn't in the picture at all; she will need a strong GP season & at least Top 3 at Nationals.

Also note that within tiers, about equal weight is given. So a high finish in the next GPF and previous year's Worlds carries close to the same weight as Nationals.

Looking at this list and remembering the 2013-14 results, it's easy to see why Ashley made the team and Mirai did not. What's more problematic is the choice of Polina over Mirai.

Mirai's GP results were 3rd and 8th that season. Her best SP that season was 61, and 115 for the LP. Do you think that is good enough to bump a higher finisher at Nationals? Unless you think participation alone in Tier 2 events is enough, I don't find it problematic at all.

 

[mrrice]

Mirai's GP results were 3rd and 8th that season. Her best SP that season was 61, and 115 for the LP. Do you think that is good enough to bump a higher finisher at Nationals? Unless you think participation alone in Tier 2 events is enough, I don't find it problematic at all.

Polina doesn't really belong in the discussion, does she? She beat Mirai and Ashley in both phases of the competition that year.

 

[Moxiejan]

Mirai's GP results were 3rd and 8th that season. Her best SP that season was 61, and 115 for the LP. Do you think that is good enough to bump a higher finisher at Nationals? Unless you think participation alone in Tier 2 events is enough, I don't find it problematic at all.

I meant "problematic" only in comparison to Ashley's season-long results.

 

[bevybean]

My point, admittedly not clearly stated, was that even if former athletes were included on the selection committee, they are still "outsiders" to the competition currently being conducted on the ice.

You could have a selection panel consisting of former Olympic champions, and they're still the ones deciding. I prefer letting the athletes decide who makes the team, and the way they do that by competing for the spot in a trial and accepting the outcome.

"If I beat the other guy, I get the reward, and he doesn't." It is the essence of competition.

So, in a team sport like say basketball, the coach decides who is on the team and who isn't. He/she decides who plays when based on knowledge of their playing style, track record, etc. Do you feel that is wrong too? Because they are often "former" players. In fact, some didn't play basketball past high school. Clearly, they are outsiders and shouldn't be making such decisions.

BTW, one of the Hoosiers greatest coaches never played past high school. I think it was Tom Crean, but I'm not 100% certain.

Though the selection committee for figure skating is clearly made up of humans who are prone to make mistakes, treating them like they can't make intelligent --even strategic-- decisions about which skaters to send to the Olympics and Worlds is just disrespectful and ignorant on your part. (Nothing is funny about your Gladys and fifi example. Nothing.)

Personally, I like the idea of sending the champion of US Nats automatically and then the others based on body of work is the most fair and balanced approach. And limiting the selection pool to the top 4 or 5 skaters at Nats. You incorporate the idea of rewarding the skater who succeeded when it counted at Nats and on the field of play, but as a Fed you have the opportunity to add someone who has proved consistency. When can all talk about who peaks when forever, but that doesn't guarantee that the skater will follow that schedule this year. However, someone who consistently does well no matter when he/she/they compete will always be the safest bet --meaning the one with the highest overall odds of performing well. (Considering how often posters on here criticize US judges for being easier than international ones, it makes sense to send someone who has performed well in front of many different judging panels. If given the chance to send multiple skaters.)

 

[ice coverage]

.... Though the selection committee for figure skating is clearly made up of humans who are prone to make mistakes, treating them like they can't make intelligent --even strategic-- decisions about which skaters to send to the Olympics and Worlds is just disrespectful and ignorant on your part. (Nothing is funny about your Gladys and fifi example. Nothing.) ...

Although I mostly agree with you, I hope/think that your intended meaning is that the committee is made up of humans who are not immune from making mistakes.

(And that you did not really mean that they are prone [i.e., likely] to make mistakes??)

 

[drivingmissdaisy]

^ A "dominant skater" who misses Nationals because of injury or illness can apply for a bye. I guess it is up to the USFSA to decide what constitutes a "dominant skater." Nancy Kerrigan in 1994, Michelle Kwan in 2006 were examples.

It's interesting, because while Nancy and Michelle had far better overall careers, if you look only at events in the previous calendar year before Nationals (including the last Nationals), Ashley's results far exceeded those of Nancy and Michelle. Admittedly, Ashley was not a serious medal contender like the other two, but the new Team event added another dimension because it is important to have consistent athletes participate there.

 

[bevybean]

Although I mostly agree with you, I hope/think that your intended meaning is that the committee is made up of humans who are not immune from making mistakes.

(And that you did not really mean that they are prone [i.e., likely] to make mistakes??)

Yes. That is what I meant. Thanks!