Time for New US World Selection System? | Page 2 | Golden Skate

Time for New US World Selection System?

Bentley

Rinkside
Joined
Mar 5, 2012
Just because your favorite was not selected for Worlds does not mean the Judges got it wrong.
 

noskates

Record Breaker
Joined
Jun 11, 2012
Just because your favorite was not selected for Worlds does not mean the Judges got it wrong.

AMEN!!!!!!

I realize everyone is probably having a good ol' time discussing how poor Gao got left off the team, how Gold didn't deserve it (I guess blowing the roof off the arena didn't count) etc. etc. I could go along with including other competitions with National placement for 2nd and 3rd (when possible) but the point made about the GP assignments would negate that. And I do agree that some GPs are harder than others and you have to consider are you skating against another country's A team or B+ team - so therefore the competition wouldn't be equal. (for example, if I were a skater I'd rather compete against Fumie Suguri than Miki Ando or ___________ fill in the blank from the Japanese team)

And the part that I always stumble over is the intangible factor of skating. The "it" factor, if you will! For example, I think Gracie has it and Christina doesn't. Is it just my preference? Probably. Maybe. But should who goes to Worlds and/or the Olys depend on 2 skates? SP and LP? See I still happen to think Jeremy Abbott is wayyyyyyyyyyy far more rounded than Max Aaron. But......Jeremy blew his long program and Max didn't! Anyway you look at those who are chosen you can come up with an inconsistency, and unfairness, a bias, and maybe more luck than the next guy.

If you wait to discuss second and third placements then you're dealing with politics. I can see where individual skaters could have lobbyists for their fate. That whole thing just smacks of not-so-good.

I say leave it the way it is.
 
Last edited:

ImaginaryPogue

Record Breaker
Joined
Jun 3, 2009
No matter how the US World team is selected, there will always be disgruntled fans who are mad that their favorite skater didn't get the nod.

Most countries use their Nationals as the selection criteria (or did, until the ISU minimums entered the picture). Canada and Russia are some of the only major federations who waffle and add other post-Nationals criteria. I don't see why the US needs to follow their example.

Most? I'd be interested in actually checking it out.
 

karne

in Emergency Backup Mode
Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 1, 2013
Country
Australia
I think a little more flexibility would be useful. For example, had Miner and Abbott finished the other way around (Abbott 2nd and Miner 3rd) I'd like to see some kind of provision to not send Abbott and send Miner instead, because let's face it, Abbott's blown enough chances on the World stage.

But otherwise I'm a huge believer in that your Nationals results stand with very few exceptions. I still think what the Russian Fed did to Menshov was criminal - he earned his spot at Euros to fight for Worlds. The Russians also have another problem this year in that, thanks to Plushenko and Gachinski, they had three spots for their men at Euros, but thanks to Voronov and Gachinski, they only have one at Worlds. There was always going to have to be some kind of awkward faff around but they made a worse mess of it than they should with their stupid political decision to send Kovtun to Euros over the 3rd and 4th placed finishers.

I have a hard time believing a lot of people would have been happy if Dornbush had been chosen to go to Worlds over Abbott or Farris if there was a third place...


Another flaw in your proposed system, btw, is that it doesn't take Junior Grand Prix or other events of that nature into account. Farris and Kovtun blew the JGP apart this year, but according to your new system, would have no credit in selections for post-Nationals championships (except, presumably, Junior Worlds).
 

ivy

On the Ice
Joined
Feb 6, 2005
I like Nat'ls and 4CC being used. Not sure about the GP series.

What I like about using 4CC is that:

-It rewards skaters doing well at the end of the season
-It uses an international panel, more like Worlds
-It makes 4CC more important

Of course any skater can do great at 4CC and tank at Worlds - there are no gaurantees.

To me the bigger problem is tying Worlds to the nationality of the skater. I want to see the top 30 skaters (or 40, or whatever number) at Worlds - regardless of where they are from.
 

willdu

On the Ice
Joined
Nov 13, 2012
Cool!

The biggest question I have is the use of the standard deviation. Consistency by itself is not especially to be valued unless you are consistently good.

Interesting, though, how consistent Wagner's scores have been, considering that she has mixed some really good skates in with some bad ones this season.

I see what you mean because you can score low and still have a high standard deviation thus making the deduction at the end less. Thus let's say someone like Caroline Zhang although she scores relatively low, she wouldn't get as much docked thus she could overtake someone like Gold in this system.

So this doesn't account for events such as Nationals and 4CC? Another thing is that certain GP events are way harder than others. For example, Gao would have easily placed top 3 at Skate America, but it would have been difficult for her to place top 3 at TEB.

At SA: Wagner 188, Gao 174, Sotnikova 169, Marchei 159
At Rostelcom: Korpi 177, Gold 175, Zawadski 166, Murakami 166
At NHK: Asada 185, Suzuki 185, Nagasu 176, Li 174
At TEB: Wagner 190, Tuktamysheva 179, Lipnitskaia 179, Gao 165

Also, does this bear in mind that Gao was actually a replacement for Lipnitskaia who withdrew at the GPF? I technically wouldn't count her 3-point bonus for having made the GPF (where she performed poorly anyways). I also wonder how the results would look if you dropped each woman's poorest showing (so Gracie's SC skate, Gao's TEB skate, and Mirai at CoC). It would certainly benefit Gold, whose SC performance skews her off the World team. Then again, it wouldn't take into consideration Gao beating her at 4CC either.

They really should do the whole - winner goes to Worlds and the 2nd berth is decided at 4CC. Gao deserves to go, but I think if they skated their bests, Gold has more potential to place higher.

It counts Nationals, but in the scheme of the whole equation it really is negligible if you are consistent. I agree that certain GP events are harder than others but there wouldn't be a way to count the difficulty unless we wanted to use rankings for skaters to calculate the "difficulty" in the scheme or world skating ranks. I actually agree that the 2nd berth should be decided at 4CC and it should be a competition between the 2nd,3rd, and 4th place finishers at nationals. However, is it too late in the season to deem a world team?

I agree with everyone's sentiments on politicking and favoritism, it certainly skews the picture. But in a way, those who are being politicked in favor of during the GP stage are more likely to get a favorite boost at world ie wagner and her zero 3-3 or even 2A-3T programs.


Just because your favorite was not selected for Worlds does not mean the Judges got it wrong.

I agree with this statement as well. I just wanted to point out that this issue extends beyond this year though. How did Czisny and Flatt end up splattering their way to worlds their respective years? Is it possible to mitigate these splatfests from US skaters by taking into consideration consistency over a long period?
 

blancanieves

On the Ice
Joined
Mar 3, 2012
I like Nat'ls and 4CC being used. Not sure about the GP series.

What I like about using 4CC is that:

-It rewards skaters doing well at the end of the season
-It uses an international panel, more like Worlds
-It makes 4CC more important

Of course any skater can do great at 4CC and tank at Worlds - there are no gaurantees.

To me the bigger problem is tying Worlds to the nationality of the skater. I want to see the top 30 skaters (or 40, or whatever number) at Worlds - regardless of where they are from.

I don't like the idea of granting 4CC more influence over the selection of the World team. It's too close to Nationals. It works against the athletes in terms of affording them the chance to be in optimal condition. Besides, I think the decisions at Nationals already factor in a lot more than just the skating taking place.
 

Skater Boy

Record Breaker
Joined
Feb 24, 2012
Huh - that is quite a complicated system - just one more thing to turn off more people from the sport. Remember not everyone are die hards or blowhards. I also don't like former olympic medallists guaranteed a spot at nationals. I don't think they deserve that special treatment 4 yrs later.
 

silverlake22

Record Breaker
Joined
Nov 12, 2009
It's interesting to me that for the ladies, they overlooked the steady, consistent skater (Gao) in favor of one that was inconsistent but has higher scoring potential (Gold), however in the men's event, the steady, consistent skater (Miner) is on the team despite popping open a 3a at Nationals, and neither of the guys who are more inconsistent but have higher scoring potential (Abbott and Dornbush) are on the team.

To further mix things up, seeing the scoring of Han Yan makes me wonder if Farris, who is not really inconsistent but rather just unknown/inexperienced on the senior international stage, could have ended up being the top placing American at 4CC, or at least gotten component marks showing he could outscore Miner or Aaron with clean skates. It's too bad Rippon is injured but of that group of 6 his scoring potential is likely the lowest anyways due to his content. Jeremy has always been unreliable and Max showed why he should be on the Worlds team, but in some ways I feel like 4CC made an argument that Dornbush might be the better option for the 2nd spot than Miner, and if Farris had been given a 4CC spot instead, I feel the same argument could maybe have been made.

In some ways I think sending 2 newbies, or a newbie and someone like Dornbush who has the potential to do very, very well due to his content and strong PCS, might have been the smarter option. The international judges in general seem to have responded favorably to young up-and-coming skaters, rewarding them with high PCS even when they make mistakes as we saw with Kovtun and Yan. Miner doesn't really have anything on Farris except being 4 years older and getting presumably higher PCS, quad is about the same consistency wise and 3a and spins arguably not even as good as Farris, but what I'm saying is, had he been sent to 4CC, maybe we would have seen Farris get higher PCS than Miner in which case he might be the smarter one to send to Worlds, or Dornbush who is a star when he delivers, because I think those 2 have the most potential to become medal contenders in the future so they should really be getting out there now.
 
Last edited:

gkelly

Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
It's interesting to me that for the ladies, they overlooked the steady, consistent skater (Gao) in favor of one that was inconsistent but has higher scoring potential (Gold), however in the men's event, the steady, consistent skater (Miner) is on the team despite popping open a 3a at Nationals, and neither of the guys who are more inconsistent but have higher scoring potential (Abbott and Dornbush) are on the team.

But in this case, as in almost all cases, the skaters who are on the world team are the skaters who finished first and second at Nationals. The judges didn't choose the team -- and neither did the technical panel -- they just scored what the skaters did during their two programs. The numbers added up and produced results.

So the judges had zero reason to think about scoring potential or consistency. They didn't know when they assigned scores for the long program who the numbers they had control of and the numbers they didn't have control of would combine to put into second place overall.

And, of course, the panels for the men's and ladies' events were not the same people.

And then the International Committee -- not all of whose members are judges or technical specialists and certainly not on the panels at Nationals -- decided to send the silver medalists to Worlds because that is what they have traditionally done and there was not a compelling reason to break tradition. (The gold medalists were guaranteed assignment to Worlds by rule.)
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Most? I'd be interested in actually checking it out.

That would be interesting. I imagine that for the majority of ISU members there is not much of a choice to be made at all. They have one skater who is the best, and that's the one they send.
 

mskater93

Record Breaker
Joined
Oct 22, 2005
I like Nat'ls and 4CC being used. Not sure about the GP series.

What I like about using 4CC is that:

-It rewards skaters doing well at the end of the season
-It uses an international panel, more like Worlds
-It makes 4CC more important

Of course any skater can do great at 4CC and tank at Worlds - there are no gaurantees.

If you are going to add additional criteria, it needs to be clear to the skaters who are going. For example, after Nationals was over, Gracie Gold was given a 4C's berth and a Worlds' berth. Christina Gao was given a 4C's berth and was told her season would be over unless the unforeseen happens and there's a need for the second (third?) alternate to go to Worlds. This information changes how you train for that 4C event (like it or not, this is true as a skater cannot be at 100% peak for EVERY event) - if it's part of the selection process, it means you have to be full, ready to go for that event. Also, if a skater has to peak for Nationals and then peak for 4C just a week or two later and then peak again for Worlds, the chances for injury increase.
 

silverlake22

Record Breaker
Joined
Nov 12, 2009
But in this case, as in almost all cases, the skaters who are on the world team are the skaters who finished first and second at Nationals. The judges didn't choose the team -- and neither did the technical panel -- they just scored what the skaters did during their two programs. The numbers added up and produced results.

So the judges had zero reason to think about scoring potential or consistency. They didn't know when they assigned scores for the long program who the numbers they had control of and the numbers they didn't have control of would combine to put into second place overall.

And, of course, the panels for the men's and ladies' events were not the same people.

And then the International Committee -- not all of whose members are judges or technical specialists and certainly not on the panels at Nationals -- decided to send the silver medalists to Worlds because that is what they have traditionally done and there was not a compelling reason to break tradition. (The gold medalists were guaranteed assignment to Worlds by rule.)

Fair point, I just more mean, if the Nationals was judged by an international panel, I'm curious if the results would have been different. Yes Miner was 2nd, but I think a case could be made for Farris placing 2nd instead and under an international panel I think it very well could have happened, as Miner had a huge 8 point PCS margin over Farris in the FS and I highly doubt that kind of disparity would show up internationally. Further, I don't think he was penilized enough for the 1a (it would have been different if he had gone for 2 quads or fallen on a fully rotated 3a, IMO) and I'm a bit skeptical how in 2 days, Josh went from getting +2s and even a +3 on his 3f to getting edge calls on both the ones he did in the FS. I mean, after seeing Han Yan beat Nan Song handily despite Song skating a cleaner overall competition makes me wonder if any disparity between Miner and Farris PCS would exist, and if it did, if Farris would have the edge and not Miner. Dornbush didn't skate very well at US Nats so it's a bit irrelevant, but he is held in good stead internationally and at his best would likely outscore both Aaron and Miner. The same idea goes for the ladies. Christina Gao's performances at US Nats under an international panel would have likely relegated her to 3rd place, maybe 2nd, but certainly ahead of Zawadzki and Hicks, but again PCS at nationals were all funky so that she wound up 5th.

BTW, this is not me trying to kick Gracie and Ross off the Worlds team, I just sometimes question the judgement of the judges at Nationals.. Also, I think our odds for 3 spots might be better in both disciplines if Gao and Dornbush/Farris were on the team instead, which would increase everyone's odds of making the team next season anyways. If the current team delivers it will be fine and is unlikely to make much of a difference. I do worry a little with Ross though in the SP, he hasn't skated a clean short all season and with the depth of this field, I'm a little worried he'll wind up out of the top 12 after the SP which will make it a lot harder to pull up because I don't think he'd be getting the PCS he'd get if skating in the penultimate or ultimate warmup groups (we saw that with Kozuka last year who skated in the 2nd warmup and was criminally underscored in PCS for the FS after putting out quite a decent skate). If Ross just focused on doing a clean SP without the quad for Worlds, I'd feel a lot less worried.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 16, 2009
If you are going to add additional criteria, it needs to be clear to the skaters who are going. For example, after Nationals was over, Gracie Gold was given a 4C's berth and a Worlds' berth. Christina Gao was given a 4C's berth and was told her season would be over unless the unforeseen happens and there's a need for the second (third?) alternate to go to Worlds. This information changes how you train for that 4C event (like it or not, this is true as a skater cannot be at 100% peak for EVERY event) - if it's part of the selection process, it means you have to be full, ready to go for that event. Also, if a skater has to peak for Nationals and then peak for 4C just a week or two later and then peak again for Worlds, the chances for injury increase.

Now, that's a point I hadn't considered, and it's very important. A skater might not realistically be able to peak for both Nationals and 4CC and then be expected to peak again for Worlds. (Gee, I hope that explains Daisuke at 4CC.)
 

Pepe Nero

On the Ice
Joined
Dec 11, 2011
What a thought-provoking post, Willdu. Thanks for the thought you put into your model you suggested. It's super interesting. Hard problems demand difficult, sometimes complicated solutions. The thought that "Oh, no; it's too complicated. (I don't understand it; actually, I didn't take the time to read it.)" is the kind of thinking I hope USFS and the ISU would ignore.

But, as long as we're talking hypotheticals and ideals, I'd want to go somewhat further. Qualification for the World Championships should have nothing to do with nationality. All skaters who earn qualifying scores in sanctioned competitions should be invited to Worlds regardless of the country of their citizenship. I'd be fine with allowing all countries' national champions to go, too, regardless of earning qualifying scores. But no one should be prevented from competing at Worlds because they are from a country with a deep field.

In other words, I don't think how countries select who goes to Worlds should even be an issue.

I sincerely think the U.S. would have had 4-5 women in the top 20 at Worlds each year for the past several years if not for nationality restrictions. Japan too. Russia more recently.
 
Last edited:

gkelly

Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
But, as long as we're talking hypotheticals and ideals, I'd want to go somewhat further. Qualification for the World Championships should have nothing to do with nationality. All skaters who earn qualifying scores in sanctioned competitions should be invited to Worlds regardless of the country of their citizenship. I'd be fine with allowing all countries' national champions to go, too, regardless of earning qualifying scores. But no one should be prevented from competing at Worlds because they are from a country with a deep field.

This is very hypothetical, and it has nothing to do with how the US (or any other country) chooses its team, but rather with how the ISU structures its championships to begin with.

How many entries should there be at Worlds (or Junior Worlds, or Euros/4Cs)?

Should there be qualifying rounds as part of the championship itself, or should the cuts to make a reasonable-sized field take place in other locations at other times?

If there are qualifying rounds, does everyone need to participate or do some skaters get direct entry to the main event?

If everyone participates, do the scores or placements from the qualifying round count toward the final results?

What constitutes a reasonable sized field?

Who pays for what? We know for a fact that the ISU and the local organizing committee cannot pay for a week or more worth of ice time and room and board for hundreds of officials, competitors, and coaches. So how much do they ask federations or individuals to pay for their own participation?

Do we want a separate thread to try to come up with a plan that would work in theory (even though we know the ISU isn't going to read a thread on Golden Skate and suddenly decide to adopt it)?
 

drivingmissdaisy

Record Breaker
Joined
Feb 17, 2010
Now, that's a point I hadn't considered, and it's very important. A skater might not realistically be able to peak for both Nationals and 4CC and then be expected to peak again for Worlds. (Gee, I hope that explains Daisuke at 4CC.)

The problem is they are peaking during the GP series, then skating worse at Nationals, then even worse at Worlds.
 

Dragonlady

Final Flight
Joined
Aug 23, 2003
That would be interesting. I imagine that for the majority of ISU members there is not much of a choice to be made at all. They have one skater who is the best, and that's the one they send.

The USA is the only major federation which uses only the results from Nationals to pick their Worlds teams. Canada, Russia, France, China and Japan all use other competitions to finalize decisions (4CC or Euros usually), with Japan guaranteeing a spot to anyone who medals in the GPF. Most countries only have one spot on their national teams so the champion goes. I'm not sure what Germany does, but they're the only other major European skating power.
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Further, I don't think [Ross Minor] was penilized enough for the 1a...

I am curious as to what the penalty should have been, in your view. He got 1.1 base value (instead of 8.5) and 0.09 GOE. Do you think that international judges would have lowered his component scores as well because of this pop?

The USA is the only major federation which uses only the results from Nationals to pick their Worlds teams. Canada, Russia, France, China and Japan all use other competitions to finalize decisions (4CC or Euros usually), with Japan guaranteeing a spot to anyone who medals in the GPF. Most countries only have one spot on their national teams so the champion goes. I'm not sure what Germany does, but they're the only other major European skating power.

In the case of Russia, Canada, and France, they do not seem to have any well-defined and consistent procedure for selecting the world team. To me, it seems like they just play it by ear each season and send the person that, for whatever reason, they think has the best chance to do well.
 

Dragonlady

Final Flight
Joined
Aug 23, 2003
In the case of Russia, Canada, and France, they do not seem to have any well-defined and consistent procedure for selecting the world team. To me, it seems like they just play it by ear each season and send the person that, for whatever reason, they think has the best chance to do well.

Yes and that's where things can get political. I like the Japanese idea of guaranteeing a spot to someone who medals at the GPF, or even the points system proposed here, rather than the committee decisions.

I intensely dislike the notion that it all comes down to one competition. Anyone can have a bad competition, or an injury can end your season at Nationals. If you pick up a cold or the flu on the plane there, that could do it. I have also noted that judging at US Nationals can get very political, with the "right" skaters getting the "right" medals to give the USFSA the team it wants, and that's not right either.
 
Top