Should the pros have been reinstated in 1994? | Page 2 | Golden Skate

Should the pros have been reinstated in 1994?

Should the pros have been reinstated in 1994

  • Yes

    Votes: 37 47.4%
  • No

    Votes: 35 44.9%
  • Yes-but they should have only been allowed to compete at the Olympics, and lost all eligiblity after

    Votes: 5 6.4%
  • My favorite skater (who won) was an eligibile skater-so I could care less about them reinstating the

    Votes: 1 1.3%

  • Total voters
    78

berthes ghost

Final Flight
Joined
Jul 30, 2003
BronzeisGolden said:
Also, the pairs event would not have been very exciting without them. B&E would have gotten Gold, and Shiskova & Naumov the Silver (UGHH!!)....and overall, it would have been a pretty boring event.
In other worlds, 94 pairs event would have been just like 98 pairs event.
:laugh:
 
Joined
Jul 11, 2003
Of course they should have been reinstated.

Do not the eligibles make money? Yes! So the difference is not money.

What it seems to me, is that the misnomer "going Pro" has only to do with being affilitated with a Federation.

I believe it is only the USFSA which prohibits the skater from joining a travelling troupe. Skaters non American can join a troupe and retain their good graces with the Federation and skate ISU competitions.

Am I correct?

Joe
 

temujin

Rinkside
Joined
Jul 15, 2004
Yes, and I think they should allow re-instatement again. If a "pro" skater wants to re-instate, they should be able to prove it by qualifying for their country's team.
 

berthes ghost

Final Flight
Joined
Jul 30, 2003
Ptichka said:
I don't think there is a need to do it again, since today's "eligible" athletes can pretty much do what they want.

To me, the big question is who can provide the best performance. Shishkova & Naumov came 4th; none of the other teams could have done nearly as well as G&G and M&D did. I am a supporter of "market place economics"-skating equivalent. Meaning if you can deliver, you should be able to compete as much as possible. Also, would it have been all right for M&D to compete had they not announced they were going pro after 92? Or should we just force everyone to retire after winning Olympic gold?

The only reason I understand against letting pros in is the name-recognition factor. Hopefully, that will diminish with CoP.
I think the most important thing driving this is if the pros actually want to reinstate. Back in 94 they did, but since the majority of them were unsucessful (Zayak, Boitano, Patrenko, T&D, Midori , Josee vs. G&G and M&D) probably most pro skaters don't want to reinlist. Even people who take a "break" like Eldridge and MK are cautionary tales.

As for 94 pairs, who can remember how B&E did compared to S&N? B&E actually won 3rd with a 5/4 split. Totally unscientific and paranoid I know, but I think that a non-Russian winning the Olys in the late 20th century is about as likely as a woman being elected US president. I could see world champs being held up to bronze rather than a one country sweep of medals, but a Russian pair behind a Canadian pair for gold and silver? B&E may be convinced they were robbed, but I wouldn't be surprised to S&N as Oly champs.
 

Ptichka

Forum translator
Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 28, 2003
I never liked Shishkova & Naumov. To me, they were very similar to today's Petrova & Tikhonov. Brasseur & Eisler, OTOH, while I never really liked them, at least have character. BTW, I recall an interview with S&N's coach Velikova -- she absolutely 100% believes that S&N were robbed at the Olympics, and that the ONLY reason they did not medal was because politically nobody wanted a Russian sweep. Go figure!

But I do agree with your point on pros not being interested in coming back today. In fact, when you say "vs. G&G and M&D" -- I would only list G&G, since I don't think M&D would have gone pro in 1992 had it not been known that pros will get reinstated in '94.

BTW, I've just had another idea. '94 Olympics came only two years afte '92. Could it be that pros were re-instated to ensure better viewership? After all, all of US watching FS because of Tonya/ Nancy thing couldn't exactly be predicted.
 
Last edited:

alina

Rinkside
Joined
Aug 29, 2003
I voted yes.
The best skaters should compete at Olympics. The differentiation between pro and amateur athletes at Olympics is outdated since tennis and basketball players took part.
 

berthes ghost

Final Flight
Joined
Jul 30, 2003
Ptichka said:
I never liked Shishkova & Naumov. To me, they were very similar to today's Petrova & Tikhonov. Brasseur & Eisler, OTOH, while I never really liked them, at least have character. BTW, I recall an interview with S&N's coach Velikova -- she absolutely 100% believes that S&N were robbed at the Olympics, and that the ONLY reason they did not medal was because politically nobody wanted a Russian sweep. Go figure!

But I do agree with your point on pros not being interested in coming back today. In fact, when you say "vs. G&G and M&D" -- I would only list G&G, since I don't think M&D would have gone pro in 1992 had it not been known that pros will get reinstated in '94.

BTW, I've just had another idea. '94 Olympics came only two years afte '92. Could it be that pros were re-instated to ensure better viewership? After all, all of US watching FS because of Tonya/ Nancy thing couldn't exactly be predicted.
Well, I don't remember what happened at 94 worlds, but S&N winning over defending champs B&E supports the coach's argument.

I too wouldn't have been surprised to see M&D and Petrenko stay in thru 93 ala Nancy.

IIRC, the names for ratings idea was always talked about as a major reason why the ISU allowed the reinstatement.
 

RealtorGal

Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 27, 2003
Joesitz said:
Of course they should have been reinstated.

Do not the eligibles make money? Yes! So the difference is not money.

Being a "pro" in '94 was different from being a "pro" today, isn't it?
 
Last edited:

berthes ghost

Final Flight
Joined
Jul 30, 2003
RealtorGal said:
Being a "pro" in '94 was different from being a "pro" today, isn't it?
They started allowing endorsement money in 93, Nancy had a Seiko contract, a Rebok, a Revlon and a big one with Disney while still eligable.
It wasn't until 95-96 with the creation of the GPS and prize money that skaters without endorsement contracts could make money for skating as an eligable.
 

Ladskater

~ Figure Skating Is My Passion ~
Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 28, 2003
I am from the old school of figure skating and feel once skaters have entered the pro ranks then that is where they should stay; no going back to their amateur status. It's not fair to the new crop of skaters and those who have "hung in there" waiting for their turn. So in answer to your question "no, the pros should not have been reinstated in 1994.
 

berthes ghost

Final Flight
Joined
Jul 30, 2003
Ladskater said:
I am from the old school of figure skating and feel once skaters have entered the pro ranks then that is where they should stay; no going back to their amateur status. It's not fair to the new crop of skaters and those who have "hung in there" waiting for their turn. So in answer to your question "no, the pros should not have been reinstated in 1994.
I don't understand.

In "the old school of figure skating" Sonja Henie reighned for 10 straight years and no one could beat her. Do you really feel that she should have stepped down after St. Moritz and given the titles to Burger and Colledge? Sonja certainly kept many a skater from getting "her turn" atop the podium.

How is M&D turning pro for one year any different than R&Z taking one year off to have a baby?

Patrenko and Browning were neck and neck rivals for years. Was it ok for Kurt to deny those "waiting their turn" in 93 just because Viktor won an Oy medal and Kurt didn't in Albertville?

Was it Ok for Todd to comeback in 2001, just becasue he didn't become what "the old school of figure skating" called a pro? He didn't skate in eligable comps and he made a lot of money from skating.
 

Jaana

Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 27, 2003
Country
Finland
berthes ghost said:
I don't understand.

In "the old school of figure skating" Sonja Henie reighned for 10 straight years and no one could beat her. Do you really feel that she should have stepped down after St. Moritz and given the titles to Burger and Colledge? Sonja certainly kept many a skater from getting "her turn" atop the podium.

How is M&D turning pro for one year any different than R&Z taking one year off to have a baby?

Patrenko and Browning were neck and neck rivals for years. Was it ok for Kurt to deny those "waiting their turn" in 93 just because Viktor won an Oy medal and Kurt didn't in Albertville?

Was it Ok for Todd to comeback in 2001, just becasue he didn't become what "the old school of figure skating" called a pro? He didn't skate in eligable comps and he made a lot of money from skating.

Ladskater was speaking of pro skaters. As far as I remember, your examples - Henie, Browning Petrenko and Eldredge - are not pro skaters coming back to eligible skating, are they? Yes, matters have changed in the way that these days eligible skaters can earn money, a lot of money. Personally I think that it is unfortunate for the sport that there is practically no difference between them.
 
Last edited:

berthes ghost

Final Flight
Joined
Jul 30, 2003
Like I said, it makes no sense to me that someone like Irina Rodnia could win two Oly titles and 10 world championships, take a full year off,and then return to win an unprecidented 3rd gold medal, but in Lad's eyes she wasn't preventing anyone who was "waiting their turn" from winning.

M&D, OTOH, only had one Oly title and two world titles, but becasue they took a year off under the title "pro" they were denying others a chance at "their turn" even thought hey didn't skate for a fraction of how long Rodnina dominated the sport.

I hope that this viewpoint doesn't have anything to do with the fact that the pair who were "waiting their turn" in 92 and were denied an Oly title because of reinstated pros were Canadian.
 
Last edited:
Top