Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 120

Thread: 2011 Four Continents & World Championship Teams

  1. #31
    she takes the audience on her journey of emotions Layfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Mexico City
    Posts
    3,637
    Quote Originally Posted by wallylutz View Post
    Michelle Kwan in 2006 was another case and even by then, Michelle was no longer as dominant internationally as she once were.
    Yeah, and that didn't go so well either. Although I think Michelle was not nominated to the world team, only the Olympic team.

  2. #32
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    816
    Quote Originally Posted by Layfan View Post
    Like I said, it didn't go so well in 2008. I believe Kimmie finished 8th or something.
    I know that I need to know more examples/data, but I'm not necessarily surprised by the above example. Not having to earn the spot "fair & square" does exert subtle psychological pressure to an athlete. It can show up on the result.
    Like Jason Dangeon mentioned today, "90% of the result is in-between the 6 inches - between ears."

  3. #33
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,819
    Not trying to be funny but if you go back far enough, we can also list Nancy Kerrigan in 1994 as one of those exception cases as well - someone who didn't compete nor medal at the Nationals. And Kerrigan wasn't even a World Medalist in 1993 as she placed only 5th - the exact same ranking that Jeremy Abbott currently holds, which in turned caused the U.S. to have only 2 spots for the Lillehammer Olympics.

  4. #34
    she takes the audience on her journey of emotions Layfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Mexico City
    Posts
    3,637
    Quote Originally Posted by CARA View Post
    I know that I need to know more examples/data, but I'm not necessarily surprised by the above example. Not having to earn the spot "fair & square" does exert subtle psychological pressure to an athlete. It can show up on the result.
    Like Jason Dangeon mentioned today, "90% of the result is in-between the 6 inches - between ears."
    This is what I've been saying

    Although in Kimmie's case she had been struggling for a while and worlds were no different.

    Although, I think she actually had a decent GP series.
    If Mirai and Rachael had been elligible, I bet there would have be a whole lot people saying oh, send Kimmie, Mirai and Rachael have no senior international experience, we'll lose our spots, Kimmie has the best international track record, the U.S. would be so stupid not to send Kimmie, it was an unlucky night for Kimmie, blah blah blah, etc, etc.

  5. #35
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    410
    Quote Originally Posted by ImaginaryPogue View Post
    And her score was lower than Hacker's was at Four Continents. Higher base value, higher TES, lower PCS (For Hacker).
    And someone metioned earlier this fall Hacker declined a World's berth offered to her so Meissner could go - that's class

  6. #36
    she takes the audience on her journey of emotions Layfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Mexico City
    Posts
    3,637
    Quote Originally Posted by wallylutz View Post
    Not trying to be funny but if you go back far enough, we can also list Nancy Kerrigan in 1994 as one of those exception cases as well - someone who didn't compete nor medal at the Nationals. And Kerrigan wasn't even a World Medalist in 1993 as she placed only 5th - the exact same ranking that Jeremy Abbott currently holds, which in turned caused the U.S. to have only 2 spots for the Lillehammer Olympics.
    Again, that was a question of injury. Not a question of Nancy performing badly at nationals. If Tonya and Michelle had outperformed Nancy at nationals, I bet they would have sent Tonya and Michelle. Although I seriously doubt Nancy would have done that badly at nationals. She was so prepared that season.

  7. #37
    Custom Title Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    28,217
    Quote Originally Posted by bigsisjiejie View Post
    And that's my problem with them, they should.
    I am in utter disagreement. We have too many self-annointed big shots pontificating from on high. Let the kids skate for it

    Otherwise why have a Committee?
    To organize a fair competition and to smile benignantly upon the results on the field.

  8. #38
    Custom Title bekalc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    3,083
    I don't know how anyone can really compare Michelle/Nancy's case to Jeremy's. MIchelle and Nancy both had extremely strong international results
    (Nancy was skating extremely well that season to and clearly fixed her long program issues). Both made their case based on injury, not because they bombed Nationals.

    To compare Jeremy to Michelle Kwan and Nancy Kerrigan, to people who had stood on World and Olympic podiums is ridiculous.

    The thing is it not like Jeremy can argue that his skate was some kind of fluke. Can he argue that it was his worst long of the season? I'd argue that his skate at Cup of Russia was worse. Jeremy bombing a major competition is hardly a surprising thing, and so why should others have to to step aside for him. Abbott's best finish at worlds was hardly due to great skating on his part. But a huge part was due to the fact that it was a post Olympic year. Others skated poorly (Kozuka Oda were more than capable of beating that skate from Abbott ) Its not like Abbott has done a whole lot to inspire the USFSAS confidence that he's a skater they could rely on to secure the spots.

    IF we were talking about a skater like Brian Joubert who had a horrible OLympics, but who has a strong record of making world and European podiums, than I could understand the USFSA putting aside one competition. If we are talking about ASada who is a late season skater, I can understand putting one bad skater. But Abbott is consistently inconsistent. And has a reputation of bombing at the most pressure filled moments.
    Last edited by bekalc; 01-30-2011 at 11:58 PM.

  9. #39
    Like subtlety in ice dancing Serious Business's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,452
    Here's my theory on why even though the USFS has an established process for world team selection with US nationals as a qualifier, they don't publish it or make it clear to the general public, and they put up some supposed committee for team selection:

    I know the team selection committee for the Olympics is a really an end run around turning US nationals into an Olympics qualifier (thus putting it and its profits... such as it is... under IOC control). The same isn't true of worlds as far as I know. However, if the USFS outright publishes in detail how nationals is a qualifier for worlds, the IOC could merrily sue the USFS by pointing out that their selection process for worlds and Olympics are identical. And if the USFS admits to using nationals as qualifier for the former then it is also a qualifier for the latter. The USFS sees no reason to risk its money (such as it is) and keeps the process opaque thus frustrating followers of the sport.

    I blame the IOC.

  10. #40
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    410
    Quote Originally Posted by Serious Business View Post

    I blame the IOC.
    Very interesting and insightful. Like a spy novel - there always is one more level of institutional skullduggery!

  11. #41
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    beijing
    Posts
    1,910
    Quote Originally Posted by Mathman View Post
    I am in utter disagreement. We have too many self-annointed big shots pontificating from on high. Let the kids skate for it
    Then we will have to remain in utter disagreement. Either have a real USFS selection Committee that uses judgment, or abolish it entirely. (BTW, I wouldn't characterize all the competitors at US Nationals as "kids.")


    Quote Originally Posted by Serious Business View Post
    Here's my theory on why even though the USFS has an established process for world team selection with US nationals as a qualifier, they don't publish it or make it clear to the general public, and they put up some supposed committee for team selection:

    I know the team selection committee for the Olympics is a really an end run around turning US nationals into an Olympics qualifier (thus putting it and its profits... such as it is... under IOC control). The same isn't true of worlds as far as I know. However, if the USFS outright publishes in detail how nationals is a qualifier for worlds, the IOC could merrily sue the USFS by pointing out that their selection process for worlds and Olympics are identical. And if the USFS admits to using nationals as qualifier for the former then it is also a qualifier for the latter. The USFS sees no reason to risk its money (such as it is) and keeps the process opaque thus frustrating followers of the sport.

    I blame the IOC.
    Actually it's not just your theory, it is true that the USFS dances around cagily to avoid having US Nationals be the "official" Olympic qualifier, as then the USOC would be able to control and that is something USFS wouldn't want. However, this only applies for Olympic selections, not for ISU championships such as Worlds, Jr. Worlds, 4CC, etc. The IOC directly wouldn't be involved, it would be the national federation which is the USOC (US Olympic Committee). The IOC has many warts and is guilty of many things, but not this one.
    Last edited by bigsisjiejie; 01-31-2011 at 12:32 AM.

  12. #42
    Like subtlety in ice dancing Serious Business's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,452
    Quote Originally Posted by bigsisjiejie View Post
    The IOC directly wouldn't be involved, it would be the national federation which is the USOC (US Olympic Committee). The IOC has many warts and is guilty of many things, but not this one.
    Oh my bad. As bad as the IOC is, I don't mean to hang any undeserved accusations on their warty necks.

    Quote Originally Posted by bigsisjiejie View Post
    Actually it's not just your theory, it is true that the USFS dances around cagily to avoid having US Nationals be the "official" Olympic qualifier, as then the USOC would be able to control and that is something USFS wouldn't want. However, this only applies for Olympic selections, not for ISU championships such as Worlds, Jr. Worlds, 4CC, etc.
    I know that the non-Olympic competitions are beyond the USOC's reach regardless. My theory is that the USFS doesn't make clear its guidelines on even non-Olympic team selection to avoid giving the USOC any ammunition in a lawsuit about the Olympics qualifier. I can't tell if you agree or disagree with that part of my theory. Can you clarify?

  13. #43
    Custom Title Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    28,217
    On the question of "one lucky/unlucky performance at Nationals" -- I notice that athletes themselves never talk about luck.

    In basketball there is an expression, "ball don't lie."

    At the NBA level, the attitude of the players is. if I shoot the ball correctly it will go in. If it rims out, that is prima fascia evidence that I did not shoot it correctly.

    In skating, if I state badly on a day when my opponent skates well -- then I skated badly and my opponent skated well. I never hear grumblings of "luck" after a skating contest from the actual competitors.
    Last edited by Mathman; 01-31-2011 at 10:26 AM.

  14. #44
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    5,609
    And English football player (don't remember the name) scored this insane goal at the World Cup (in 1990, I think), and when asked about if it was just luck, he responded: "The harder I train, the luckier I get."

  15. #45
    Custom Title Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    28,217
    Quote Originally Posted by Serious Business View Post
    I know that the non-Olympic competitions are beyond the USOC's reach regardless. My theory is that the USFS doesn't make clear its guidelines on even non-Olympic team selection to avoid giving the USOC any ammunition in a lawsuit about the Olympics qualifier. I can't tell if you agree or disagree with that part of my theory. Can you clarify?
    I don't think so. The only change they made in the official rules is that they took out the line "the U.S. champion must be sent to the Olympics." This was indeed something that they came up with when some lawyer belatedly noticed that, hey, this language might give the USOC a chance to monkey with things.

    Otherwise, I think the policy is what it has always been. Top placements at nationals go to worlds...except that the USFSA reserves the right to make a different selection under unusaual and unforeseen circumstances.

Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •