The demise of the Qualifying Round

[SkateFan4Life]

I for one, would welcome the end of the qualifying rounds. In my opinion, this aspect of the competition has ruined the podium chances of some of the best skaters. If one of the qualifying rounds contains the top three skaters in the world, while the other qualifying round contains none of the top skaters, the skater who wins the "other" round will have a jump start (no pun intended) on the skaters in the first round.

Certainly, I can understand that it would be difficult to judge a World singles event that contained, say, sixty skaters, and the qualifying round does serve the purpose of weeding down the competition to a more management number of skaters.

However, it just seems obvious to me that a certain standard must be obtained by all skaters who compete at senior worlds. For the women, all competitiors must have a consistent triple toe, flip, and salchow. If a female skater doesn't have those jumps (at least) she isn't a senior World-level competitior, IMHO.
It isn't a mystery that some skaters show up at Worlds with an obviously weak arsenal of jumps, yet they are at Worlds because their country is an ISU member and is entitled to send one representative to Worlds. While it's great to give up and coming skaters the chance to compete internationally, the Worlds is hardly the proper place to send junior-level skaters. The Grand Prix series and other competitions are appropriate vehicles to give these developing skaters the opportunity to compete in front of international judges.

[hockeyfan228]

The Grand Prix series and other competitions are appropriate vehicles to give these developing skaters the opportunity to compete in front of international judges.

The Grand Prix won't work for this, because the host nations choose the skaters who will appear at their events, and it's unlikely they'll choose a woman from Mexico with 1-2 triples and excellent presentation, when limited to a dozen skaters in total. I don't know how skaters are chosen for the next tier championships (Nebelhorn, Finlandia, etc.)

[SusanBeth]

It isn't a mystery that some skaters show up at Worlds with an obviously weak arsenal of jumps, yet they are at Worlds because their country is an ISU member and is entitled to send one representative to Worlds. While it's great to give up and coming skaters the chance to compete internationally, the Worlds is hardly the proper place to send junior-level skaters.

I do understand your point, but wonder if it might not be in the best interests of figure skating in the long run. Having countries with ''weaker'' programs participate with the best in the world introduces more people in that country to the sport. Everyone wants a hometown kid to cheer on.

I remember watching the first Chinese skater at the Olympics in 1976. He had string holding his skate together and an extremely high and slow sitspin. He placed last only because he couldn't finish lower. Yet, he forged the path for other Chinese skaters and the sport is better for it.

In light of figure skating's present condition, we can't afford to lose the opportunity for growth into new countries. The Grand Prix simply doesn't have the status that Worlds has and won't make the same impact.

[gkelly]

However, it just seems obvious to me that a certain standard must be obtained by all skaters who compete at senior worlds. For the women, all competitiors must have a consistent triple toe, flip, and salchow. If a female skater doesn't have those jumps (at least) she isn't a senior World-level competitior, IMHO.

Why triple toe, flip, and salchow specifically? For most skaters, flip is the fourth or fifth triple they learn, not the second or third.

If one were going to set such a standard, it would make more sense to define it as "consistent double axel and three different consistent triples."

And what would it be for the men these days? Five triples? Six? Five plus a triple-triple and/or a triple axel?

The vast majority of skaters who show up at Worlds -- i.e., considerably more than 30 men and 30 ladies, although generally not 40+ -- *are* capable of landing that kind of jump content. They won't all do it when it counts, but you can't predict in advance who will and who won't.

Some skaters are always inconsistent on the jumps they have because of technical weaknesses. Some are fairly consistent in practice or in lesser competitions but succumb to nerves at the big event. Some are reasonably or even extremely consistent when they're healthy and focused, but because of injury, illness, or distractions in their personal lives just happen to be having a bad day or a bad week when they get to Worlds.

Whatever standard you choose for a cutoff, it's going to vary from year to year anyway as older skaters retire or learn new tricks or lose their tricks permanently or temporarily due to injury and newer skaters come along who may have been practicing harder moves from an earlier age or who may not yet be finished learning all the moves they'll master eventually.

And some years there just happens to be a particularly good competition and you get skaters with who land three different triples in their qual round but still get cut; other years everyone's jumps are a mess and otherwise good skaters who land only one triple in the quals and one more in the short can make the cut.

Does anything count besides the jumps? Would you accept a skater who meets your jump requirements even if their basic skating quality is "junior level" or worse? How about if they're incapable of completing all the spins that meet the minimum requirements for senior programs? On the other hand, would you exclude a skater whose basic skating and spins are far above average but who is inconsistent on the jumps or only has two triples (ladies) or four (men) that they can really count on?

How do you define "consistent" anyway?

Leave it up to the federations to vet their skaters before sending them? Many feds already do this and won't send skaters who otherwise qualify in a given year if they don't have certain jumps or if they've otherwise not shown evidence that they have the potential to make it to the final round or top 12 or top 16 or whatever. Therefore some feds are already harsher than your standards. Others would take advantage of their discretion to send a skater by defining "consistent" as "we've seen her land it at least once."

Base admission to Worlds on performance at lesser events? Well, it has been proposed more than once (but voted down each time) to make Europeans and Four Continents qualifiers for Worlds. But even those proposals leave a certain number of open spots available to be filled by a single preliminary/qualifying round at Worlds for countries/skaters who didn't qualify through the continental championships.

Have a test event where the skaters have to skate in front of an international panel to see if they can do it? Gee, that sounds a lot like a qualifying event to me. And it's a lot more efficient to hold it in conjunction with Worlds than to hold it, e.g., at a location thousands of miles away a couple weeks earlier.

You could have the qualifying skate consist of a Top Jump-style contest. Prove to us that you have X number of consistent triples. Go out there and land X jumps for us. You get Y number of attempts. Anyone who succeeds can advance to the SP; anyone who fails misses the cut.

But how is this a better indication of overall skating ability than actually letting them skate their long programs?

And what happens if you get 38 men but only 16 ladies passing the test one year, and the next year the balance is the other way around?

As for the problem of unequal qualifying rounds hurting the chances of some medal contenders, there's a simple solution to that: don't carry over the placements (or scores, under CoP) from the quals to the finals.