Has the standard set in junior ladies now overtaken that of the senior ladies?

^^^
This is what figures used to do - weed out the underaged jumping beans. People said with figures you had to "pay your dues" but really, as you matured, your figures really DID improve.

Mathman said:

I am not totally convinced by the "too young." argument. The reason for having a world championship is to see who is the best skater, not who is the best skater who is not [too young, too old, too tall, too skinny, wrong color hair, etc.]

If we think that little girls don't have the artistry that more mature women bring, then a better approach would be to change the rules so that this aspect of skating is more heavily rewarded. That would accomplish the same purpose -- underaged jumping beans would not be competitive with older skaters. They would not be successful on the senior circuit and the problem would be solved by natural selection rather than by arbitrary rules about who was born on what day in July.

Click to expand...

Yes, I think this is a good approach to making sure that "maturity" is rewarded as well as jump content and flexibility. The trick is figuring out how to quantify it and educating the judges to use those numbers responsibly.

Even so, some talented skaters will be better in enough important ways at young ages, including precocious presentation for their age, that they can win important titles in their early teens.

Still, I think we want to encourage those talented skaters to continue developing their all-around skating until they can bring both good technical content (even if slightly past their peak) and mature presentation in the same programs at the same time.

One reason I was disappointed that Lipinski and Kulik won the Olympics in 1998 was because I wanted to see what they could offer in eligible competition with more maturity. Of course injuries also played a part in their decisions. I just don't want to encourage the talented skaters to aim for the top as soon as possible, burn out their bodies, and leave before they can really reach their full potential.

But aside from what kind of skaters and skating reach the highest levels broadcast to worldwide audiences, I think another justification for age limits is that we don't want small federations who are guaranteed one spot at the championships to say "We don't have anyone who can compete with the best, but we do have an 8-year-old who can do a double axel that's less cheated than what our full-grown skaters can do, so let's get the talented one out there with the international field right away for experience."

For senior championships, now that there are minimum technical scores that will prevent federations from sending skaters who really aren't ready technically. I do think that at least the skating skills should be taken into account too as well as the elements, though.

For juniors, though, there are no minimum technical standards, so without age limits there would be nothing to prevent federations from sending a talented small child out to compete with the teenagers. In some cases the kid might use the experience as a good way to learn and develop for many years at the junior level. But in other cases they might be pressured (by parents, federation officials, etc.) to deliver more for their country than a young child should be expected to handle psychologically.

It would be unfair in a way to let in young 14 year olds because they do not bear the same physical and emotional burden that a fully mature athlete/human being does. In that sense they have an unfair advantage. I don't really buy the argument about Asada's unfair treatment in 2006. Why is it fair to crown someone who can do all the jumps and beat the other adults with an immature body and who would later on go on to lose many of those jumps with a mature body the Olympic champion?

I guess I simply don't want the face of figure skating to be dominated and represented by a group of youngsters who are yet "incomplete".

This is why the age limit was adjusted a couple times. Baiul, Lipinski, and SHughes...

Just remember how easy it was for Mao to win everything in the Olympic season, and how much she struggled each year after that as growth and physical maturity made it harder and harder to produce the same technical content. Miki Ando had her tough years as well; she never again could do the 4S and the 3A that brought her fame at 14.

The Russian ladies are 13 and 14. Sotnikova has grown some and that has taken a bit of a toll, but she may have still more growth to come. Tuktamysheva and Lipnitskaia have yet to face the puberty challenge. It's not always height that is the main problem, it's maturity and the change in body shape that can disrupt technique.

The standards set at senior ladies level are those of Yuna Kim's performance at the 2009 worlds and the 2010 Olympics. No. the junior ladies has not overtaken those standards... Not by a long shot.

mskater93 said:

This is why the age limit was adjusted a couple times. Baiul, Lipinski, and SHughes...

Click to expand...

But wasn't the current age limit passed before Tara and Sarah came along, only they were grandfathered in?

Interesting that they both won Olympic gold medals after escaping the age limits earlier, while poor Sasha got caught by the new rules and did not get the same chance to compete at senior worlds at 14.

I don't know -- it seems like we are saying, we need an age limit because otherwise these 14-year-olds will show up their older sisters. "No, you can't be in the contest because you're too good."

Mathman said:

^ But wasn't the current age limit passed before Tara and Sarah came along, only they were grandfathered in?

Click to expand...

It was passed in summer 1996, by which point Lipinski had competed at 1996 Worlds, so she was grandfathered in for 1997. By 1998 she was old enough.

There was an exception that skaters who were not yet old enough but who had already won medals at Junior Worlds could compete as seniors. S. Hughes won silver at 1999 Junior Worlds (which took place in December 1998), so she qualified that way to compete at 1999 and 2000 Worlds even though she wasn't old enough. By 2001 she was.

Interesting that they both won Olympoic gold medals after escaping the age limits earlier, while poor Sasha got caught by the new rules and did not get the same chance to compete at senior worlds at 14.

Click to expand...

2000 was the last year that the Junior Worlds medal exception was in effect. It was also the first year that Junior Worlds was held in February/March instead of December (or January, going back to when it started in the 1970s). This change in schedule was actually good news for Cohen, because she probably wouldn't have been sent to 2000 Junior Worlds based on her 1999 Nationals and JGP results, but after winning silver at 2000 Nationals she was sent to try to earn a medal and with it the age rule exception to let her compete at Worlds. However, the pressure -- compounded by relentless media attention -- was too much and she didn't succeed in earning that junior medal.

As of 2001, that exception was no longer available. (By 2001, Cohen was old enough, but she was injured and withdrew from Nationals that year.)


I think the purposes are to take the pressure off the younger kids and to define the sport as rewarding maturity and not just quick rotation in the air and to encourage skaters to pace themselves for longer careers. You can focus on whatever part of that makes the point you want to make.

I favor age limits generally. However, it seems to me that the truly defensible reason for limits is not the "it's unfair for girls with prepubescent bodies to be able to whirl circles around athletes with mature bodies" (I buy this part of Mathman's argument, and also buy the idea that if the non-jump skills should be highlighted, then they should be given more weight). It's for the protection of the under-age skaters themselves.

There are age limits in many other sports (e.g. tennis, golf, football, you name it). In most (all?) of these, there is very little concern about an army of tweens coming in and dominating the sport. The primary concern, I believe, is the concern that youngsters will be physically and/or emotionally damaged in prematurely pursuing or actually participating in competition at the adult level.

The motives behind this concern can be either idealistic (children shouldn't end up as cripples or basket-cases when they are well before any reasonable age for informed consent), or pragmatic (too many cases like an Andrea Jaeger, burned out and physically broken down by the time they can drive, or sophomore basketball phenoms trying to grab the brass ring who don't make it and end up kicked to the ghetto curb without a GED to their name, will sully the sport's image). Either way, I agree with it.

On the other end of the scale, even gymnastics, which is arguably even more amenable to "prepubescent" abilities than even skating, has gradually raised the age limit to 16, for exactly the reasons I cited.

And as another poster mentioned, it's not that the highest levels of technical performance cannot be achieved by mature skaters, as Yuna proved. In fact, I would argue that the age limits are benign in this regard: they incentivize younger skaters to concentrate on acquiring good technique, in looking forward to the day when they will have to perform at such technical levels at senior competitions with mature bodies.

What Robeye said exactly.

Technical difficulty-wise, juniors have always been ahead of the senior women at least after the last two age rule changes went into effect (15 in 1996 and 16 in 1997)... in fact, if you look at all the most successful skaters of the late 1990s, a large number of them would technically have been ineligible for half of the major senior events that were won (Kwan - 1996 Worlds at 15, Lipinski - 1997 Worlds at 14 and 1998 Olympics at 15). In fact, Kwan's wins in the 1994 Jr Worlds was technically as superior (if not more so) than Yuka Sato and Surya Bonaly's LPs at the 1994 Worlds.

Looking further along, you had a slew of Jr World champions that all lost a chunk of their technique by the time they hit seniors: Yulia Soldatova (1998), Jenny Kirk and Deanna Stellato (2000), Miki Ando (2002), Yukina Ota (2003)... the list goes on. Even Sarah Meier had basically been reduced to really only 3 or 4 triples when she won Europeans last year as compared to the 7 triple LP she did to win bronze at Jr Worlds in 2000. On a contrary note, you did have Sasha Cohen who finished 6th at 2000 Jr Worlds who then went on to be a lot more successful as a senior (albeit, a little overhyped IMHO).

I think the age limit is just fine for the majority of the reasons stated above. My main issue is the physical and mental advantages that a 13 or 14 year old has over someone who is 18 or 19 or older.

Physically jumps are easier for juniors because they are smaller and lighter, thus it's easier to gain the rotation and height needed to complete the jumps. The junior content has nearly always been more technically advanced than the content being done on the senior level for that reason. A smaller body has advantages that a bigger one doesn't and that advantage (in a senior level setting) is completely unfair. Mentally, a younger skater is in a different place as well. That's not to say they aren't under pressure but it's a different kind of pressure. The point is a younger person handles and deals with pressure differently than an older person does...

Personally, I like having the two separate categories. While junior technical content is tougher than senior, senior presentation/artistry/skating skills, etc. is superior to the juniors. I'd hate to see Julia Lipnitskaia go to senior worlds and beat a clean performance from Mao, Carolina, Akiko or Ashley just because she was able to reel off 7 triples and pull her leg over her head...where's the musical connection? Where's the choreography? The artistry? The maturity? The performance? Junior skaters are always lacking in that area. For 13 years old, Julia is ahead of the curve b/c she presents herself well; but in terms of choreography, performance, skating skills, artistry, maturity, etc. she's still very much a junior. Her programs are essentially jumps, skate, jump, skate, spin...with next to nothing in between and IMO that's not good enough to beat out the top senior level ladies right now. Give the junior skaters their due for their jumps, but none of them deserved a PCS over 6.5...

Skaters need those years on the junior level to develop their skills and their style, as well as grow and mature as skaters. That separation is needed b/c the truth of the matter is most of these skaters won't maintain those difficult jumps once their bodies mature. I'm not a fan of junior skaters competing the GP. Why should a junior skater compete at the senior level when they're still juniors? Let them stay in the JGP and jr. worlds and compete there. IMO, senior level events should be reserved for those skaters who survived their junior days/growth spurts/growing pains, etc. and are still able to compete at a high level...and "high level" doesn't necessarily equal 3-3s. So many skaters' careers end at the junior level b/c they don't survive the transition to the senior level. Maybe if the junior events were given more significance/attention/coverage there would be less of a push to rush these girls from the junior level to the senior level...

I don't think just because a skater can do hard jumps means that they should be a senior. If they can maintain that level of technical difficulty once they make that jump to seniors (in addition to improving other areas of their skating) then good for them and, chances are, they'll win quite a bit. But essentially the message is "wait your turn."

Lipnitskaia is only 13 something so...she is kindda like in Mao/Yuna situation in 2006. Wouldn't be eligible for Sochi and who knows what will happen 2 years from now. Only a handful of JW champions or medalist went on to win World title or medals. Last I check the last JW world medalist who moved on to senior and successsfu is Mao and Yuna. None of the ladies from 07-11 move one and find decent success yet (sure some are still not age eligible).

Also in senior FS, they have to skate longers and have more elements. There is no garrentee that these wonder kids will be able to handle the demand of senior skating, plus the added pressure from federation, fans and knowing that medal are one the line mentality.

wonderlen3000 said:

Lipnitskaia.....is kindda like in Mao/Yuna situation in 2006. Wouldn't be eligible for Sochi

Click to expand...

Just to clarify, Julia Lipnitskaya will be eligible to skate at the 2014 Olympics. She beat the cut-off date by just 25 days. Hence, Lipnitskaya is just 112 days older than Mao was at the equivalent stage of the relevant quad cycles (i.e. less than one third of one year). Highlights the sheer arbitrary nature of the cut-off date. Lipnitskaya gets to go, whilst Mao had to miss the Olympics. Very unfair on Mao. Think about it this way, Julia will get 3 good chances of becoming Olympic Champion (at the ages of 15, 19, and 23), whereas Mao will only get 2 chances (at the ages of 19 and 23). In what way is that fair? It isn't - its a purely arbitrary birthday lottery.

Mao88 said:

Just to clarify, Julia Lipnitskaya will be eligible to skate at the 2014 Olympics. She beat the cut-off date by just 25 days. Hence, Lipnitskaya is just 112 days older than Mao was at the equivalent stage of the relevant quad cycles (i.e. less than one third of one year). Highlights the sheer arbitrary nature of the cut-off date. Lipnitskaya gets to go, whilst Mao had to miss the Olympics. Very unfair on Mao.

Click to expand...

^ True. But whatever the rules, one skater will be one day over and another one day short of the cut-off.

Hmm, odd. If you're going to have an "age rule", I feel the date should be fixed- if you're not 16 by the day of the competition, it's a no-go.

Mao88 said:

Just to clarify, Julia Lipnitskaya will be eligible to skate at the 2014 Olympics. She beat the cut-off date by just 25 days. Hence, Lipnitskaya is just 112 days older than Mao was at the equivalent stage of the relevant quad cycles (i.e. less than one third of one year). Highlights the sheer arbitrary nature of the cut-off date. Lipnitskaya gets to go, whilst Mao had to miss the Olympics. Very unfair on Mao. Think about it this way, Julia will get 3 good chances of becoming Olympic Champion (at the ages of 15, 19, and 23), whereas Mao will only get 2 chances (at the ages of 19 and 23). In what way is that fair? It isn't - its a purely arbitrary birthday lottery.

Click to expand...

Julia makes the cut off-she makes the cut off. She'd be at Worlds next year if not this year if the age rules allowed. So its not like she's not paying for the age rules. Her lack of Senior experience may very well cost her the OGM in Sochi. No female has won the OGM without a world medal (before) I believe. If its been done-its been decades... Julia may be the first but it will be uphill. I wouldn't be surprised if the judges might feel like-we don't want to give this you because we don't want you to retire.

I'm not so sure either Mao or Kim (and both could have medaled-Kim could have potentially won too) would have beaten Shizuka-'s five triple skate. She displayed an artistry neither girl had and I think the judges would have been reluctant to see one of the two biggest young talents in the sport be one and done. Not to mention the fact that Shizuka had more left in the tank in Torino 3/3s she didn't use. Her artistry in that long was far above either girls.

bekalc said:

I'm not so sure either Mao or Kim (and both could have medaled-Kim could have potentially won too) would have beaten Shizuka-'s five triple skate. She displayed an artistry neither girl had and I think the judges would have been reluctant to see one of the two biggest young talents in the sport be one and done. Not to mention the fact that Shizuka had more left in the tank in Torino 3/3s she didn't use. Her artistry in that long was far above either girls.

Click to expand...

Exactly. Both Mao and Yu-Na could have competed with the Torino medalists in terms of technical content but they both were one-sided underdeveloped skaters at the time. In 2006 Yu-Na was still awkward and clunky, while Mao was very bouncy and unrefined. I would have hated to see either one of them win the OGM with their level of performance back then, regardless if they'd have out-jumped Shizuka, Sasha or Irina...

Instead over the next four years Yu-Na refined her presentation and became a mature and beautiful skater and Mao blossomed into one of the most graceful and ethereal skaters in the sport. Compare Yu-Na and Mao's level of performance back in 2006 with the programs they put out in Vancouver in 2010. It's little girls versus young women and I'm much more a fan of watching young women skate than little girls...

But if Kim or Mao were clean then Shizuka might have had to do those 3-3's that she didn't do in her LP in Torino. She got a bit lucky with Sasha tanking but Irina could have still beat her if she had skated clean. She left an opening by being conservative.

bekalc said:

I wouldn't be surprised if the judges might feel like-we don't want to give this you because we don't want you to retire

Click to expand...

I would hate for this to be true. The judges give out gold medals according to who they want to see retire or not?

Why not instead give the gold medal to the person who skates the best?

bekalc said:

Not to mention the fact that Shizuka had more left in the tank in Torino 3/3s she didn't use.

Click to expand...

The judges should give the gold medal to the person that has a 3-3 "in the tank" that she didn't use?

bekalc said:

I'm not so sure either Mao or Kim (and both could have medaled-Kim could have potentially won too) would have beaten Shizuka-'s five triple skate.

Click to expand...

I am not sure either. That is why they have competitions, to find out.

bekalc said:

...the judges would have been reluctant to see one of the two biggest young talents in the sport be one and done.

Click to expand...

You have a strange view of what an athletic competition is about. Should we give the Super Bowl crown to the New England Patriots because we think the New York Giants' quarterback might retire before we want him to?[/QUOTE]

kwanatic said:

In 2006 Yu-Na was still awkward and clunky, while Mao was very bouncy and unrefined.

Click to expand...

If Yuna Kim had given an awkward and clunky performance, she would not have won, so what are we afraid of?

If Mao Asada was bouncy and unrefined then she would not have won, so what are we afraid of?

kwanatic said:

I would have hated to see either one of them win the OGM with their level of performance.

Click to expand...

Olympic gold medals should be awarded in competition, not on the basis of what we "hate to see." I hated to see Michelle Kwan lose twice. But she did.