The Question of the Third Event in the GPs

Joesitz (RIP) · Nov 28, 2007

Do you think the ISU is correcr in assigning an additional event for skaters/teams who have already been assigned to two?

I feel very upset about this knocking out Vise/Trent of a medal not to mention the possibility of making the Finals, and now the possibility of McLauglin/ Brubaker, Langois/Hay, and Volosozhar/Morozov

I wrote the following in the GP Final folder:

I do not agree with this type of running a competition. If a skater or team withdraws from an event, the place should be left vacant. In the case of Pairs,.if there is a loss of interest among skaters, then so be it. Anyway, this giving the elite skater such a huge advantage of dumping on 2nd tier skaters is not going to get more young skaters interested in Pairs.

Does anyone know factually what the ISU rationale is for this?

Joe

sillylionlove · Nov 28, 2007

I don't agree with teams being assigned to a third grand prix..especially when there are other skaters that only skated in one grand prix. Let's give someone else a chance.

chuckm · Nov 28, 2007

sillylionlove said:
I don't agree with teams being assigned to a third grand prix..especially when there are other skaters that only skated in one grand prix. Let's give someone else a chance.

The problem was with so many Pairs withdrawing (13, and most with two events), they ran out of "someone elses" very early on.

What has made replacements difficult is the rule that replacements MUST be on the Seasons Best list from the previous year. That rule kept Evora / Ladwig, Trombley / Ibarra and Duhamel / Buntin from being offered second assignments, even though they performed well in their lone event. Meanwhile, low-ranked teams like Kemp / King, Canac / Coia, Sergejeva / Glebov and Magitteri / Hotarek got two assignments.

I think the "Seasons Best" rule needs to be eliminated for Pairs, so that teams who have performed well in early competitions can be considered for second events, and brand-new teams won't be automatically eliminated from consideration.

Joesitz (RIP) · Nov 28, 2007

Thanks for the comments, Chuckum, and to others offering an opinion on this.

I didn't know so many teams withdrew from Pairs. However, I think, so what? Why should they be replaced?

I don't see why the top Pairs were included in this offer to do a 3rd event. There are so many others who would have liked a second event.

And I don't understand why the ISU goes by that strange World List to seek another team which will automatically give it to a top tier team who has the chance for another rehearsal of their next competitions.

A very unfair, imo, of a situation that does not have to exist.

Joe

bekalc · Nov 28, 2007

Joesitz said:
Thanks for the comments, Chuckum, and to others offering an opinion on this.

I didn't know so many teams withdrew from Pairs. However, I think, so what? Why should they be replaced?

I don't see why the top Pairs were included in this offer to do a 3rd event. There are so many others who would have liked a second event.

And I don't understand why the ISU goes by that strange World List to seek another team which will automatically give it to a top tier team who has the chance for another rehearsal of their next competitions.

A very unfair, imo, of a situation that does not have to exist.

Joe

Honestly, I think including the top pairs is the right thing to do...Remember last year when Julia Sebestian made the Grand Prix final because she had notoriously weak events....Well, that's what will happen if you have some events with top pairs and other events with no top pairs.

hockeyfan228 · Nov 28, 2007

I can't find it, but I remember reading something about how a team could qualify for an event if one of the partners was on a split team, and his former partnership made a cut-off. Considering how high Buntin placed at Worlds last year with Marcoux, I would have expected Duhamel/Buntin to be offered a spot somewhere.

Joesitz (RIP) · Nov 28, 2007

bekalc said:
Honestly, I think including the top pairs is the right thing to do...Remember last year when Julia Sebestian made the Grand Prix final because she had notoriously weak events....Well, that's what will happen if you have some events with top pairs and other events with no top pairs.

That is such a rare occasion and, the ISU did do something about that by putting the prior Worlds podium in six different events already, so that group already is ensured of a top tier skater(s). IMO, to give this group yet another GP is a bit much and takes away from the Sport. Why not just have the GPs include only top tier skaters, as you seem to be saying? It would hurt Hungary, among others, and is it real universal sport?

And while the interest is in the top tier skaters, they have so many competitions yet to come aside from the GPFinal, where others may just have their Nats.

Since you may want to see these top tier skaters go through these same routines again, what would you think if in addition to not counting the result to their eligibility, how would you feel if it did not kick someone new off the podium?

Joe

:

chuckm · Nov 29, 2007

hockeyfan228 said:
I can't find it, but I remember reading something about how a team could qualify for an event if one of the partners was on a split team, and his former partnership made a cut-off. Considering how high Buntin placed at Worlds last year with Marcoux, I would have expected Duhamel/Buntin to be offered a spot somewhere.

The Seasons Best requirement prevented Duhamel/Buntin from getting a second event. Maybe the split team rule would apply to ISU World Ranking order, but not to a specific score.

Mathman · Nov 29, 2007

I agree with Joe that it is intrinsically unfair to treat some competitors differently from others.

And I don't think that the ISU's supposed rationale holds up. If the argument is that there aren't enough skaters to go around -- of course there are, just dip a little lower in the qualifying list.

If the argument is, the paying customer (in France, say) will be disappointed if they see a lower ranked team rather than Pang and Tong -- no, I don't think so.

bekalc · Nov 29, 2007

Joesitz said:
That is such a rare occasion and, the ISU did do something about that by putting the prior Worlds podium in six different events already, so that group already is ensured of a top tier skater(s). IMO, to give this group yet another GP is a bit much and takes away from the Sport. Why not just have the GPs include only top tier skaters, as you seem to be saying? It would hurt Hungary, among others, and is it real universal sport?

And while the interest is in the top tier skaters, they have so many competitions yet to come aside from the GPFinal, where others may just have their Nats.

Since you may want to see these top tier skaters go through these same routines again, what would you think if in addition to not counting the result to their eligibility, how would you feel if it did not kick someone new off the podium?

Joe

:

I said nothing about want to see the top people go again, I don't watch pairs that much... But well, the rule has always been the world podium at different events, it's just in the ladies some people on the world podium didn't compete and there was the whole new blood thing.

This year you have a situation where in Pairs, the world champions didn't compete and other top pairs aren't competiting, so you have a situation where events could be unbalanced. That's why I think it's a good thing to have the higher ups compete again.. And while yeah it may take someone "newer" of the podium. It's in reality not going to affect who gets in the GPF, because you will just need less points to qualify.. And yes, I do think that I'd rather see Pang and Tong than let's say a low level pair...Actual attendence is Important. But it certainly isn't fair to the team that has to go against S/S, that some other team got a higher placement becuase they went up against a team that didn't medal last year. That's not fair either.

I think it's more important to see even events, then it is to see a lower team that probably won't even medal get a second GP. You earn your GP spots, and well the top teams, technically earned their 3 spot. It's not like the ISU is just choosing a team because they like them. Teams earn their spot by finishing on top of the podium...

sillylionlove · Nov 29, 2007

I actually like to watch the younger teams. At Skate America I enjoyed watching Meeran and Laureano. They were really nice as well. Same for Vera and Yuri. How many times does one really want to see the same teams over and over again. I feel like when I am watching a younger not well know team and that I have stumbled upon a great discovery!!

laceup · Nov 29, 2007

A problem here in Canada with some of the pair teams I'm sure SC would like to send to events is their ages. We have several great senior teams where the girl is too young to go to sr gp. Then we have some junior teams where the boy is too old to do jr gp. It would be great if teams could be more age appropriate for each other :think:so they can get sent on assignments if they are good enough.

silver.blades · Nov 29, 2007

hockeyfan228 said:
I can't find it, but I remember reading something about how a team could qualify for an event if one of the partners was on a split team, and his former partnership made a cut-off. Considering how high Buntin placed at Worlds last year with Marcoux, I would have expected Duhamel/Buntin to be offered a spot somewhere.

New pairs can qualify for 2 events if one of the partners placed high enough with their previous partner but the new partnership needs to be formed beforeI think May 1st. Duhamel/Buntin paired up after that date so wern't garenteed any GP events because their names couldn't be admitted by Skate Canada. I think that's the case, but not 100%

dutchherder · Nov 29, 2007

I really enjoy seeing the second-tier skaters. It gives us a glimpse of who the future might be, and it relieves us from seeing the same five programs over and over. It also gives some of those second-tier skaters some much-needed senior international experience.

Joesitz (RIP) · Nov 29, 2007

Becalc - We'll have to agree to disagree. I am a figure skating fan first and not just Ladies and not just the top tier, so those blanks in Pairs could be filled up quickly as Mathman pointed out. Those kids would die to be in the GPs which when you think about is a second class championship anyway. Do you remember who placed 4th in 2003 in the GPFinals? I don't and I wouldn't be bothered to look it up since I know who won the 2003 Worlds Ladies Championship. I believe it was Sasha Cohen who placed 4th in that championship. Kwan, Sokolova, Suguri. Now who won the GPF that year?

Joe

The Question of the Third Event in the GPs

Joesitz (RIP)

sillylionlove

chuckm

Joesitz (RIP)

bekalc

hockeyfan228

Joesitz (RIP)

chuckm

Mathman

bekalc

sillylionlove

laceup

silver.blades

dutchherder

Joesitz (RIP)

Similar threads

Connect with us