2018 USFS Olympic team selection thoughts

noidont said:

USFSA likes medals, and they like marketable blondes. They saw something in Edmunds that fit with their soapy disney marketing needs and went with it. The same situation presents again and they would do the same, even if Polina's 13-14 season had nothing but Nationals. What really bothers me about USFSA is that they like to throw a skater under the bus for not living up to his or her potential, but then you have skaters like Brown or Wagner or Rachel Flatt who had subpar technical ability to begin with and suddenly your 7th place finish is an achievement and a display of hard-working will or whatever.

Click to expand...

I agree that it is naive to think marketability plays no role in the USFSA's treatment of athletes. However, I don't feel that choosing Polina over Mirai, or Jason over Vincent, were influenced by that. In the former situation, neither skater was a medal contender nor a planned participant in the team event, so the USFSA went with the higher finisher. In the latter, the organization went with the more experienced skater in hopes that he would deliver a high enough placement to secure three Olympic spots, and he did.

Yes, people talk about the Knierims spot being almost assured, but they're easily our best pairs team. And I do say almost- if Knierims start struggling and another team rises, well that's a different situation. But the Knierims have consistently proven themselves to be the top and most consistent pairs team. If Stellato/Bartholomay prove themselves capable of executing their ambitious content consistently, or if Cain/Leduc keep showing improvements, or if even Denney/Frazier come back fighting from the disaster at worlds, etc. it's possible for them to challenge for the Olympic spot. However, at this point Knierims have a body of work advantage that I am personally fine with. Alexa came back from a life threatening illness and they were still easily our top team. Whether that says more about the Knierims or about our other pairs is up to you.

People also say the three dance teams are already locks, which I also agree with. Not only does the Fed have to consider individual medal success, we have the Team Event now as well. There's always the possibility for shakeups over the course of the season, of course. But no one here has a crystal ball, we can't foresee sudden rises or declines.

drivingmissdaisy said:

I agree that it is naive to think marketability plays no role in the USFSA's treatment of athletes. However, I don't feel that choosing Polina over Mirai, or Jason over Vincent, were influenced by that. In the former situation, neither skater was a medal contender nor a planned participant in the team event, so the USFSA went with the higher finisher. In the latter, the organization went with the more experienced skater in hopes that he would deliver a high enough placement to secure three Olympic spots, and he did.

Click to expand...

I don't know what to think about the marketability argument. Perhaps there's something there.

Drifting off-topic:

In terms of marketability, I think Max Aaron would be a great spokesman and public face for the sport. His style is bold and athletic, he's skates "brash", he's a nice-looking young man. The hockey-player-turned-world-class-figure-skater storyline has appeal.

But my perception is that when USFSA has a chance to torpedo Max Aaron, they take it. It seems that when he skates well, he's on the losing end of close decisions. When he skates so-so, then he gets buried.

Now my perception may not match reality, but it is what it is. And I will go to my grave believing he was brutally robbed of a national title.

TontoK said:

But my perception is that when USFSA has a chance to torpedo Max Aaron, they take it. It seems that when he skates well, he's on the losing end of close decisions. When he skates so-so, then he gets buried.

Now my perception may not match reality, but it is what it is. And I will go to my grave believing he was brutally robbed of a national title.

Click to expand...

There are a few very talented skaters who I don't think are appreciated enough at domestic competitions. Max Aaron is one. Courtney Hicks is another. Neither are particularly "artistic" but earn great scores internationally when they perform well.

chameleon said:

Yes, people talk about the Knierims spot being almost assured, but they're easily our best pairs team. And I do say almost- if Knierims start struggling and another team rises, well that's a different situation. But the Knierims have consistently proven themselves to be the top and most consistent pairs team. If Stellato/Bartholomay prove themselves capable of executing their ambitious content consistently, or if Cain/Leduc keep showing improvements, or if even Denney/Frazier come back fighting from the disaster at worlds, etc. it's possible for them to challenge for the Olympic spot. However, at this point Knierims have a body of work advantage that I am personally fine with. Alexa came back from a life threatening illness and they were still easily our top team. Whether that says more about the Knierims or about our other pairs is up to you.

People also say the three dance teams are already locks, which I also agree with. Not only does the Fed have to consider individual medal success, we have the Team Event now as well. There's always the possibility for shakeups over the course of the season, of course. But no one here has a crystal ball, we can't foresee sudden rises or declines.

Click to expand...

I agree, saying that the Knierims are sure to be the team for the Olympics has nothing to do with the result already being fixed, it's just that up to this point, they are by far the strongest current US pairs team. Of course there is a possibility that that could change, but as of now, they are significantly ahead. Their PB (207.96 from 4CC 2016) is over 15 points ahead of the next US team, Denney/Frazier. Then there's Kayne/O'Shea whose PB is almost 25 points behind the Knierims. Castelli/Tran are next, but they aren't eligible because he doesn't have US citizenship. Finally Cain/Leduc, whose PB is close to 35 points behind the Knierims. Now, Stellato/Bartholomay don't have an ISU PB, and both they and Cain/Leduc are new and could improve quickly, but they'd have a lot of ground to make up.

Then in SB, Alexa and Chris are nearly 10 points ahead of Denney/Frazier even though they'd missed most of the season (and D/F got that score at Skate America), nearly 29 points ahead of Kayne/O'Shea (she was hurt at Nationals, so they might have gotten to compete again and get a higher score otherwise), and just over 30 points ahead of Cain/Leduc. The point being, they have a big lead on the other pairs.

SnowWhite said:

I agree, saying that the Knierims are sure to be the team for the Olympics has nothing to do with the result already being fixed, it's just that up to this point, they are by far the strongest current US pairs team. Of course there is a possibility that that could change, but as of now, they are significantly ahead. Their PB (207.96 from 4CC 2016) is over 15 points ahead of the next US team, Denney/Frazier. Then there's Kayne/O'Shea whose PB is almost 25 points behind the Knierims. Castelli/Tran are next, but they aren't eligible because he doesn't have Canada citizenship. Finally Cain/Leduc, whose PB is close to 35 points behind the Knierims. Now, Stellato/Bartholomay don't have an ISU PB, and both they and Cain/Leduc are new and could improve quickly, but they'd have a lot of ground to make up.

Then in SB, Alexa and Chris are nearly 10 points ahead of Denney/Frazier even though they'd missed most of the season (and D/F got that score at Skate America), nearly 29 points ahead of Kayne/O'Shea (she was hurt at Nationals, so they might have gotten to compete again and get a higher score otherwise), and just over 30 points ahead of Cain/Leduc. The point being, they have a big lead on the other pairs.

Click to expand...

I never said that they weren't the favorites. They probably are, although i confess I don't follow US Pairs that closely.

But there's a big difference in saying they're favored, and saying that USFSA will surely send them, as I've seen put forth.

Those comments might be from uninformed participants. But there is some belief among the figure skating fan base that the Olympic spot has been predetermined. It is just assumed that they will get the spot, when the season hasn't even gotten underway.

I don't really think that the USFSA props up the prettiest skaters for the sake of marketability. I think it is the other way around. A skater distinguishes him- or herself at competitions, then the federation uses that person to market the sport. Nathan Chen will be the face of U.S. figure skating this season.

Mathman said:

I don't really think that the USFSA props up the prettiest skaters for the sake of marketability. I think it is the other way around. A skater distinguishes him- or herself at competitions, then the federation uses that person to market the sport. Nathan Chen will be the face of U.S. figure skating this season.

Click to expand...

You may be right, and I would agree that the competitive record trumps anything else. However, it may just be my perception but I did sense that the USFSA was eager for Sasha Cohen to become the US #1, even during Kwan's peak. Michelle really never allowed that to happen with her clear dominance at Nationals, but it was striking the way Peggy and Dick would talk about Sasha as being "unbeatable" if she skated clean.

drivingmissdaisy said:

You may be right, and I would agree that the competitive record trumps anything else. However, it may just be my perception but I did sense that the USFSA was eager for Sasha Cohen to become the US #1, even during Kwan's peak. Michelle really never allowed that to happen with her clear dominance at Nationals, but it was striking the way Peggy and Dick would talk about Sasha as being "unbeatable" if she skated clean.

Click to expand...

Of course, Peggy and Dick did not represent decision-making or marketing of the USFSA. They were not members of the international committee.

I have no doubt they were friendly with some of the federation leaders or at least in a position to chat with them and have some insider info on what the USFSA brass were aiming or hoping for. But I don't think there was any direct influence in either direction.

They had their own opinions about the kind of skating they liked best and most wanted to promote, and that didn't always correspond with the judging rules or trends, or the team selection rules and practices. It often seemed that the commentators were guessing about the judges' or federation's motives just as much as any fans were.

ABC/ESPN, and later NBC during the brief period Dick worked with them, also had their own ideas about how to market the sport to their audiences.

Again, what network executive thought casual fans wanted to see (because the sport is only valuable to the networks if it can attract millions of eyeballs, not just thousands or tens of thousands) was often very very very different from what skating officials want their sport to reward.

Dick Button more than any other single individual in the history of US skating has done the most to shape what networks and US audiences value and expect to see and expect to see rewarded. That has all been part of the national skating culture in that skaters and coaches and judges coming up through the ranks listened to his opinions when watching their sport on television and internalized many of the values he promoted. But still, his commentary tended to gloss over a lot of technical details that he personally and/or the network producers evidently believed audiences would not be interested in.

And for much of the period that Button was commenting amateur/eligible events especially US Nationals on ABC, he was also producing professional competitions that promoted very different values than the Olympic-style sport. To that extent, Button as event producer was to a large degree in direct competition in attracting audiences.

And then there were also made-for-TV events in which elite eligible competitors competed under more relaxed, more audience-friendly rules, sometimes in pro-am competitions alongside ineligible pros. For a few years there, this was a great source of income for the network and the federation, so their interests meshed for a while. But it's not as if the networks or commentators could control how the eligible judges judged even in those events.

drivingmissdaisy said:

You may be right, and I would agree that the competitive record trumps anything else. However, it may just be my perception but I did sense that the USFSA was eager for Sasha Cohen to become the US #1, even during Kwan's peak. Michelle really never allowed that to happen with her clear dominance at Nationals, but it was striking the way Peggy and Dick would talk about Sasha as being "unbeatable" if she skated clean.

Click to expand...

This is completely true!! At Nationals in 2004, even Dick and Peggy admit that they thought Sasha was going to win the event after she defeated Michelle in the SP. Raf looks so young in this video. Here's Michelle's Tosca LP from 2004: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QWQSoIEAxns

drivingmissdaisy said:

You may be right, and I would agree that the competitive record trumps anything else. However, it may just be my perception but I did sense that the USFSA was eager for Sasha Cohen to become the US #1, even during Kwan's peak. Michelle really never allowed that to happen with her clear dominance at Nationals, but it was striking the way Peggy and Dick would talk about Sasha as being "unbeatable" if she skated clean.

Click to expand...

Dick and Peggy loved their Sasha and were so disappointed and frustrated when a fall would mar an otherwise exquisite performance.

But they loved their Michelle, too. As for marketing, the USFSA rode Michelle hard and put her away wet, as they say in horse-racing. At the height of Michelle's appeal the USFSA was paying her almost a million dollars a year directly (to appear in cheesefests and promotions -- this is all on the public record, by the way. The USFSA has to disclose the top few people that they pay money to, for tax purposes). One hand washes the other. Michelle quickly became a millionaire and the USFSA rolled in dough, mostly from ABC TV.

mrrice said:

This is completely true!! At Nationals in 2004, even Dick and Peggy admit that they thought Sasha was going to win the event after she defeated Michelle in the SP. Raf looks so young in this video. Here's Michelle's Tosca LP from 2004:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QWQSoIEAxns

Click to expand...

Michelle totally owned Nationals. This was her greatest Nationals performance, in its own way, greater than Lyra Angelica in 1998.

I actually believe in the "you win, you go" rule. It is used in the Olympic marathon trials, and I'm fine with it in figure skating.

That is a far cry from Round 38 gazillion of Jason v. Vincent, where I have already expressed my opinion and nothing before or after has caused me to change it, so I'll spare everyone from repeating it. In fact, as a Jason fan, I like this concept of top finisher at US Nats because Jason is what we call a "clutch player" in team sports. He comes through in the clutch. To finish third on essentially a broken leg, where if I remember his interview correctly, he was only allowed medically to skate less than an hour a day and spent every off-ice minute in a boot; well, that's the mind-set I want on my "team".

Americans love winners and USFS will market who wins. After all, during US Nats, NBC might as well have been the "Nathan Broadcasting Company" And if he replicates his season, I have no doubt it will be again....

Speaking of marketing photogenic skaters, the queen of the hill was Caroline Zhang in juniors. She was the promoted as the next U.S. star, plus she looked like the very model of what Americans think of when they think figure skating. I remember at Champs Camp the year before she turned senior, cameras followed her wherever she went. They put her on the cover of figure skating magazines. It was a real promo blitz on the part of U.S. Figure Skating.

http://www.usfsa.org/content/skating_mag_jan2009cvr_large.jpg

Ender said:

But coming into this season, Nagasu has been competing for a while and she is doing not bad, she didn't stay out of competition for 2 seasons.

Click to expand...

I was talking about 2014.

Castelli/Tran aren't eligible because he does have Canadian citizenship - not USA.

TontoK said:

Thanks for giving me a chance to clarify.

I think our federation should be focused on providing a fair and level playing field for the athletes.

I think the best way to do that, in terms of Olympic and World team membership, is to provide a high-profile, well run, and highly respected competition to determine those spots, as close as practically reasonable to the Olympics or World Championships.

Everything is in place at US Nationals. All that is left is for them to get out of the way and let the athletes sort out team memberships by virtue of their performances. Athletes will realize their Olympic dreams by virtue of their own merit under a high stakes environment. It is a sad fact that not every athlete will realize their dream, but at least this method keeps any political maneuvering, real or perceived, off the table.

In your example, Nathan would go. He earned the spot by virtue of his placement. If Nathan finished 4th, then Adam would get the spot. Everyone would know this upfront. Their would be no controversy, except for the usual controversies that accompany a judged sport.

Here's an example of the type of thing that bothers me. Everyone assumes that the Knierims will be the American pairs team sent to the Olympics. I read comments like "of course the federation won't send another team." This causes me to scratch my head. What if they fail at US Nats? What if another team emerges, one that is rising very quickly, all the pieces falling into place, but has very limited international eperience? What if... what if...

There's already an assumption, and maybe it's among those who don't know what they're talking about, that the only pairs spot is already locked in.

That there's even a perception that the fix is in... that reflects so poorly on our federation. I'm not sure why I seem to be the only one who views this as a problem.

(Of course, with only one spot, the Champion will get it, as is right, but you get the idea...)

You mentioned curling, so I'll bring up another sport. Sports that run trials have left world champions and world record holders at home, because they didn't finish well at trials. No one that I know views that as controversial in the least. Quite the opposite. Everyone has a right to compete without selection bias.

Click to expand...

You're welcome! And I'm glad you took it that way.

I actually agree with you to a point. The Nat champion should go. In fact, I think the Nat Champ should be allow to go to Olympics, 4CC and Worlds unless that skater chooses to skip one of them. I also very much agree with limiting the choice of who goes to the top 4 or 5 places at Nats. And I think when the USFSA sits down to discuss the opening statement by the chair should be: "Does anyone see any reason not to send the skaters who finished on the podium?" (assuming 3 spots) However, let me put forth another scenario for ladies (pure hypothetical): Skater A --has never finished higher than 6th at nationals; completely bombs the 2 challenger events assigned this year (can't land most jumps, level 2's for footwork and spins). Skater B -- Has always finished within the top 4 at nationals; wins both GP assignments this year, takes silver at GPF, but is only 2 pts behind Medveda. Nationals rolls around. Somehow Skater B pulls it together and takes bronze. Skater A wins the SP, but has a migraine when performing the LP and only places 4th. I think even you would be tempted to send Skater B over Skater A BECAUSE Skater A has proved time again to perform well under pressure. Skater B is a total fluke. Granted, that scenario isn't very likely to actually happen, but I understand wanting to leave the door open to send a skater who seems like a safer bet.

I also agree that the marketing of the process should somehow be better, because no one should believe that the Knierims are a lock for the one pairs spot before the season even starts. And, no one should believe that Nats doesn't matter

BTW, I brought up curling to highlight the money side of things. They do have Olympic trials and whoever wins goes. Nothing too controversial there. It's the Worlds selection that is messed up. Each team gets pts awarded for how they place at various competitions. Nats has the higher point value to give it more weight. BUT no one "assigns" teams to competitions and there isn't much funding given to the teams. So, whoever can afford to go to the most competitions prior to Nats has the most pts going in. And it did happen one year that Team Shuster has so many points prior to Nats that they only needed to place 4th or higher to get the Worlds spot. It's really complete bull. If you can only send 1 person/team it should be the Nat Champion. No question.

It's interesting to compare skating to other sports on this issue. At first glance I like the idea of "you win, you go" - in sports like American football, basketball, and baseball, in playoff situations if you lose the game you're out. Even if it's a total fluke because half the team was out with 24-hour food poisoning and everyone knows you're way better than the team who beat you, you're still out and have to wait until next year. (On this note, actually, I hate it whenever we in figure skating refer to someone's placement as a "fluke" due to others' bad performances. For me, if you have the consistency and capability to have a good showing when someone else has a bad one, that's a skill in and of itself.)

But really, most other sports base who gets into the playoffs/championships/whatever in the first place on who has the best record over the course of the entire season. College football in America, for example, has a complicated formula for determining who plays in which bowl games.

I guess for me personally, the high stakes of Nationals in an Olympic year has its appeal but making them the be-all, end-all is a little too high a stake. I like bevybean's suggestion above of asking "Does anyone see any reason not to send the skaters who finished on the podium?"

I'm actually going to go into a little more detail about the curling, because it does sort of support TontoK's side of things (better than Gladys and Fifi). Plus, sort of a cautionary tale when you look at what happened for the 2014 Olympics.

The criteria for the Olympic trials at the time was the 1st and 2nd place team from US Nats in 2012 and 2013 plus US Curling can opt to pick a 5th team that they feel deserves the chance. In spite of John Shuster skipping a different team to last place at the 2010 Olympics and his new team not having a good record at all, they choose them as the 5th team. Team Shuster wins the trails and places 9th out of 10 at the Olympics. I understand that they won the trials they should go, but I don't understand why they were even at the trials. They didn't earn it and there was no track record to fall back on.

Now they have this silly points system for Worlds, partly to retain IOC funding and partly to retain fans. Ironically, I don't pay much attention to Nats anymore because it seems so anti-climatic when the Champions don't necessarily get to go to Worlds. And I'm not the only one.

Wait, so US curling Olympic trials only include 4 or 5 teams duking it out for an Olympic spot?

That is so very different from figure skating Nationals, even in Olympic years, which serve many other different purposes in addition to selecting the Olympic team.