Should quads per program be limited to balance artistry?

[gkelly]

Was Deanna Stellato competing against "the best" in the world at international competitions as a junior?

She won the JGP Final and then placed 2nd at Junior Worlds in 1999-2000, as well as 9th at US Nationals at senior level.

The next season she competed as a senior at Skate Canada and in at least one made-for-TV competition.

So yes, pretty much.

But then she was injured and withdrew from 2001 US Nationals, and that ended up being the end of her singles career.

There are a number of other US skaters who have reached approximately that level of success within the US and internationally but realize the chances of a national medal/ISU championships assignment is slim and decide to focus on education instead when they get to the age when a decision between skating vs. college needs to be made.

Or was she doing that at national competitions? Can skaters still compete nationally at this level against "the best"?

Generally yes, unless the federation is strict about applying ISU age limits in their domestic competitions as well.

 

[yfan1]

She won the JGP Final and then placed 2nd at Junior Worlds in 1999-2000, as well as 9th at US Nationals at senior level.

Well US Nationals are not really international competitions. I don't know who the JGP Finalists and Junior World skaters were, but were they the "best" that this poster had in mind? I'm guessing not.

OTOH, because she was very much competing as a senior at US Nationals - she would be competing against this poster's definition of "the best" - aka Michelle Kwan and co.

She was not barred from participating at Senior Nationals back then, much like juniors are not barred from participating in senior competitions at a national level now. Mao Shimada, as an example, is set to appear at Japan Nationals surrounded by "the best" in the world.

She'll be on TV.

Medaling there will likely prop her up well for college.

So on.

On the junior circuit, internationally, I'm guessing she could theoretically still compete against the future "best" as well, and likely has been.

But then she was injured and withdrew from 2001 US Nationals, and that ended up being the end of her singles career.

Which, I think, is a great point in favour of the rule. Four hip injuries, before she was fully out of juniors.

 

[gkelly]

Well US Nationals are not really international competitions. I don't know who the JGP Finalists and Junior World skaters were, but were they the "best" that this poster had in mind? I'm guessing not.

JGP Final:

Pl. Name Nation TFP SP FS

1 Deanna STELLATO USA 2,5 3 1
2 Jennifer KIRK USA 3,0 2 2
3 Svetlana BUKAREVA RUS 4,5 1 4
4 Tamara DOROFEJEV HUN 6,5 7 3
5 Yukari NAKANO JPN 8,0 6 5
6 Irina NIKOLAEVA RUS 8,5 5 6
7 Irina TKATCHUK RUS 9,0 4 7
8 Marianne DUBUC CAN 12,0 8 8

Junior Worlds:

1​	Jennifer Kirk	United States		1		2	1
2​	Deanna Stellato	United States			1	1	2
3​	Sarah Meier	Switzerland		3		3	4
4	Tamara Dorofejev	Hungary		2		6	3
5	Elina Kettunen	Finland			5	5	6
6	Sasha Cohen	United States			2	9	5

(There was a whole drama about Cohen that year that is not part of this story)

So perhaps not the very best in the world that year, but a few of them were getting there.


2000 Skate Canada:

Ladies​

Rank	Name	Nation	TFP	SP	FS
1​	Irina Slutskaya	Russia	1.5	1	1
2​	Michelle Kwan	United States	3.0	2	2
3​	Fumie Suguri	Japan	4.5	3	3
4	Jennifer Robinson	Canada	6.5	5	4
5	Deanna Stellato	United States	8.0	6	5

Very respectable

She was not barred from participating at Senior Nationals back then,

The US has never had age limits for dometic competitions at junior or senior level. No one has been barred from Senior Nationals for age reasons.
Remember when Alysa Liu won the 2019 US title before she was even old enough for Junior Worlds?

much like juniors are not barred from participating in senior competitions at a national level now. Mao Shimada, as an example, is set to appear at Japan Nationals surrounded by "the best" in the world.

She'll be on TV.

Medaling there will likely prop her up well for college.

So on.

On the junior circuit, internationally, I'm guessing she could theoretically still compete against the future "best" as well, and likely has been.

Well, Shimada will be old enough for ISU senior competition next year.

But if she should get injured or burnt out and choose to retire before next season, her accomplishments in juniors (and Japanese Nationals, bronze and silver medals in a very deep field) should stand her in good stead with colleges etc.

 

[yfan1]

So perhaps not the very best in the world that year, but a few of them were getting there.

Ooh, Sarah Meier and Sasha! Sarah was very underrated.

But obviously, it's in juniors, so... moot point, or at least a point from OP I am simply not getting. And I'm guessing we aren't focusing on 2000 Skate Canada and Irina Slutskaya there...

Remember when Alysa Liu won the 2019 US title before she was even old enough for Junior Worlds?

And she too was competing against skaters who were considered the "best" in the world at that point, even though I wasn't exactly in agreement with Mariah Bell and Bradie Tennell being branded that.

Alysa indeed used that experience to her benefit.

 

[4everchan]

Figure skating as a hobby is a totally different subject and not relevant to the discussion.

What I wrote is that parents still see it as a hobby. It doesn't meant the the kids are not dedicated elite skaters with huge expenses. Parents are still willing to do it even if for them, it doesn't lead to prestigious accolades. The parents see it as a hobby not a career choice.

It costs far more to do figure skating as a non-hobby, not just monetarily but also in time expenditure and the logistics of needing to home school the kid, and those parents are almost always treating it as an investment. The return on investment is not necessarily money but PRESTIGE. At the very least these parents aspire for their kid to reach the level where they will be seen on TV and be able to use their competitive results as a top-tier extracurricular to get into the best colleges possible.

Meh. Some parents. Not the majority.

The new age rule kills that path for most people, not only in what the parents are willing to do, but also in the experiences the skaters are getting. If teenagers are never allowed to compete at the highest level, then how motivated will they be to continue in the sport?

I don't think there is any issue there. In some sports, juniors remain junior eligible even longer and there is no major issue. Of course, some people will complain whenever there is a change in the rules but I'm the long run, I don't think it will affect the sport negatively, quite the contrary

 

[Mathman]

But obviously, it's in juniors, so... moot point, or at least a point from OP I am simply not getting.

I have to confess that I am not getting the point of this side-bar discussion either. Deanna competed against some good skaters at the junior level and did well. She had the opportunity to complete against Irina Slutskaya and Michelle Kwan. She was off to the races. What are we arguing about?

Do parents really put their daughters into intensive figure skating training in order to have something to put down on their college admissions applications?

 

[yfan1]

In my experience, too, people take sports and arts up as a hobby more often than not. If they're very good, then they might consider entering their kids into local competitions.

Olympics are a distant thought for most. And if we're only talking about extracurricular activity, then I don't see what being shown on TV has to do with it either...

 

[Magill]

Do parents really put their daughters into intensive figure skating training in order to have something to put down on their college admissions applications?

In US, I know some of them do. In Europe they don't cause it mostly just does not count unless you want to study sport. But in US it can secure you a place, and/or a nice fin aid package, and you do not necessarily need to be an Olympian to make it count. So, yes, people try different things to boost their chances and this is just one of many.
And not necessarily daughters, mind you...
I remember I watched an interview with young Nathan years ago, and he said he was training a few different sports (like i think, hockey?) as a child, trying them out, and only at some point, pretty late, made a choice to focus on just one of them. And what I found striking was that he did not say he chose FS because he loved it most, or because it was most fun. No, he said, they picked it up because it seemed to them he had the best chance to excel in it, so even if he did not win very big, it might secure him a place in a good college and open the door to a med school. I don't know if he was serious or half-joking, but it sounded much more like a rational than emotional choice.
I guess, it really depends on how much money you have, and for many people it is a bit expensive to treat it just as a hobby...

 

[Blades of Passion]

Was Deanna Stellato competing against "the best" in the world at international competitions as a junior?

She competed at the SENIOR level internationally as a teenager (and importantly received a 6.0 at a televised competition that was only open to senior competitors). Nearly every successful singles female to date competed at the top level by age of 17 and also the majority of men who have eventually become world medalists.

Blocking all of these people from being able to get valuable life experiences is going to drastically hinder the depth we see in the sport, both in the number of people competing and the performance level.

It's already evident with Mao Shimada. She's older than Yu-Na Kim and Mao Asada were in their first senior seasons, and yet she's skating with less maturity than them. She's not being given the same treatment and experiences that allow for personal growth.

Meh. Some parents. Not the majority.

Almost every successful skater, unless they come from a country that nationally funds their skating, has one of "those parents".

Again, skating is an outlet for prestige. Parents want their kids to be successful. They aren't spending hundreds of thousands of dollars and taking the kid out of regular school simply as a "hobby". The possibility of becoming an Olympian is the major driving force in dedicating all the time and money that is required. Without that option of the kid becoming an Olympian within a desirable timeframe, parents are not going to be nearly as enticed by figure skating.

 

[4everchan]

Almost every successful skater, unless they come from a country that nationally funds their skating, has one of "those parents".

Again, skating is an outlet for prestige. Parents want their kids to be successful. They aren't spending hundreds of thousands of dollars and taking the kid out of regular school simply as a "hobby". The possibility of becoming an Olympian is the major driving force in dedicating all the time and money that is required. Without that option of the kid becoming an Olympian within a desirable timeframe, parents are not going to be nearly as enticed by figure skating.

you can repeat this as much as you want, I still do not buy it. so let's just agree to disagree

 

[gkelly]

Nearly every successful singles female to date competed at the top level by age of 17

Some exceptions:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nancy_Kerrigan, still junior at 17

Maria Butyrskaya - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

She may have been 17 at Piruetten, which I believe was a senior competition when she competed there. But not "top level."
(This link's information doesn't quite line up with Butyrskaya's Wikipedia page. I think I own a print magazine that might have printed results, but it's not handy.)

Figures were a still a thing when they were juniors or starting to make the shift to seniors, so skaters tended to peak a little later. (And then, in the days of strict amateurism, often turn pro early if they hit it big, to make back some of the money they'd invested)


Less successful one-time world bronze medalist, still junior the year she was 17:

Alena Leonova - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Again, skating is an outlet for prestige. Parents want their kids to be successful. They aren't spending hundreds of thousands of dollars and taking the kid out of regular school simply as a "hobby". The possibility of becoming an Olympian is the major driving force in dedicating all the time and money that is required. Without that option of the kid becoming an Olympian within a desirable timeframe, parents are not going to be nearly as enticed by figure skating.

The chances of becoming an Olympian in this sport, much less doing well enough there to have a career that will more than earn back the expenses of getting there, is vanishingly slim, the more so in countries with deeper fields.

For some skaters, some parents, aiming for the moon even though they know it's a longshot is worth the effort and expense, because of all the other rewards along the way.

For others, at some point it could be time to move on without having had any senior international assignments even when younger more talented (or just luckier) skaters were earning them, depending on their financial resources and their other interests and goals for the rest of their lives.

Some may have better chances if they're exceptionally talented from a country with a small field.

And some may just be deluded.

One size does not fit all.

 

[Mathman]

you can repeat this as much as you want, I still do not buy it. so let's just agree to disagree

About the college admissions thing, the pendulum swings back and forth between "well-rounded" and "pointy." I thought that this was just an insider's joke among college admission officers. but it has been ballyhooed on TV crime dramas where parents murder the parents of their child's rival so that he/she feels sad and drops out of competition, etc. Or else stories about parents paying vast sums of money to a professional handler/con man to bribe college presidents, and then the handler double-crosses the parents and keeps the money for himself. Then the handler ends up with his head bashed in. Who done it?

Right now, "pointy" is reputed to be in ascendency. That is, it's better to be really good at something than to be casually interested in a lot of things. I had a friend in college (years ago) whose pointy claim to fame was that in high school he had accumulated a spectacular butterfly collection that won some kind of national award. This showed dedication to a goal, etc., etc. He even got a scholarship from the entomology department.

 

[Blades of Passion]

I still do not buy it

It's not about what you buy, it's about facts. I've experienced being around these parents for many years. Most of them have very strict plans for what they want the kids to achieve. Almost every competitive skater comes from an upper-middle or upper class household in terms of income, generally with the father being the breadwinner while the mother is the one driving the kid to the rink every day. Most of them have their kids in skating for upward social status it presents - because it's a "respectable" way for the kid to spend their time before college, with the possibility of gaining some amount of stardom.

For some skaters, some parents, aiming for the moon even though they know it's a longshot is worth the effort and expense

That's what I already said. Nearly everyone who ever gets heavily involved with competitive skating wants to go to the Olympics (or achieve similar level of success). That's the dream. If that wasn't on the table, there wouldn't be nearly as much interest. The new age rule directly makes that level of success less tangible.

Also, teenagers thrive on being given "adult" assignments, it makes them feel special. People in general want to try and perform at the level expected of them. If you label someone a junior, there's an inherent feeling of "I haven't arrived yet". They think about themselves differently (as do people around them), in addition to simply getting less experience competing at that level.

 

[4everchan]

About the college admissions thing, the pendulum swings back and forth between "well-rounded" and "pointy." I thought that this was just an insider's joke among college admission officers. but it has been ballyhooed on TV crime dramas where parents murder the parents of their child's rival so that he/she feels sad and drops out of competition, etc. Or else stories about parents paying vast sums of money to a professional handler/con man to bribe college presidents, and then the handler double-crosses the parents and keeps the money for himself. Then the handler ends up with his head bashed in. Who done it?

Right now, "pointy" is reputed to be in ascendency. That is, it's better to be really good at something than to be casually interested in a lot of things. I had a friend in college (years ago) whose pointy claim to fame was that in high school he had accumulated a spectacular butterfly collection that won some kind of national award. This showed dedication to a goal, etc., etc. He even got a scholarship from the entomology department.

not sure why you are quoting me here

 

[4everchan]

It's not about what you buy, it's about facts. I've experienced being around these parents for many years. Most of them have very strict plans for what they want the kids to achieve. Almost every competitive skater comes from an upper-middle or upper class household in terms of income, generally with the father being the breadwinner while the mother is the one driving the kid to the rink every day. Most of them have their kids in skating for upward social status it presents - because it's a "respectable" way for the kid to spend their time before college, with the possibility of gaining some amount of stardom.

Maybe, your facts. certainly not what I have encountered. Your experience is not necessarily everyone else's. Moving on.. the age rule changes are not the topic of this thread anyway.

 

[Arigato]

I've experienced being around these parents for many years. Most of them have very strict plans for what they want the kids to achieve. Most of them have their kids in skating for upward social status it presents - because it's a "respectable" way for the kid to spend their time before college, with the possibility of gaining some amount of stardom.

How exactly does a little kid on the ice give anyone "upward social status." What kind of nonsense is that?

 

[yfan1]

She competed at the SENIOR level internationally as a teenager (and importantly received a 6.0 at a televised competition that was only open to senior competitors).

She competed at the SENIOR level nationally as a teenager, unless you're counting Skate Canada 2000 as this very important stepping stone.

She did compete against the "world's best" at nationals. Could you explain why *international* experience is that much more valuable when competing against Michelle Kwan?

It's already evident with Mao Shimada. She's older than Yu-Na Kim and Mao Asada were in their first senior seasons, and yet she's skating with less maturity than them. She's not being given the same treatment and experiences that allow for personal growth.

Which is it? Mao Shimada and others are not skating with the maturity of Yu-Na Kim and Mao Asada in their first senior seasons because of all the rule changes and lack of emphasis on artistry as was with 6.0, the principles of which those two skaters were raised with?

Or Mao Shimada doesn't have the maturity of Yu-Na Kim and Mao Asada in their first senior seasons, despite 1. Yu-Na Kim having not competed against senior skaters internationally before the 2006-07 season 2. Mao Asada not having competed against senior skaters internationally before the 2005-06 season, 3. Mao Shimada getting the opportunity to be competing against the "world's best" nationally as a senior (much like Asada did), even if these "world's bests" are nowhere as good as the "world's bests" of the eras bygone, as I'm sure you think?

Or all of the above? Or none of it?

You are distilling several things in order to make a narrow point. Granted there will be parents who don't put their skaters into skating because of the age limit (a very small sample, I'd guess), but it has little to do with "performance aspects".

That's what I already said. Nearly everyone who ever gets heavily involved with competitive skating wants to go to the Olympics (or achieve similar level of success). That's the dream. If that wasn't on the table, there wouldn't be nearly as much interest. The new age rule directly makes that level of success less tangible.

That isn't at all what @gkelly said. If most skaters competing at the national level know that it's a very long shot for them to be making the Olympics, and yet their parents are still spending money on them anyway, then it's a very different point from the one you've made.

 

[Blades of Passion]

If most skaters competing at the national level know that it's a very long shot for them to be making the Olympics, and yet their parents are still spending money on them anyway, then it's a very different point from the one you've made

No it isn't. The chance is there and thus people work towards that chance. An age eligibility restriction drops the chance to 0, therefore reducing the number of people who will try.

For those who even try to become competitive skaters in the first place under these new restrictions, the current age rule is going to force a lot of people to choose between college and competing for the first time as a senior (if they even have a choice in the matter, aka the parents deciding which to spend money on). These people who are going to be stuck in juniors the entire time, without the possibility of an Olympics until their 20's, they are likely going to choose college. The choice comes at a crucial age when many people want to get away from their parents in the first place. Without the experience of getting to compete as a senior and all the hype that brings (including sponsors), it becomes far less attractive to keep putting work into something that looks even more nebulous, instead of joining along with everyone else at that age who are entering into the "exciting college experience".

She competed at the SENIOR level nationally as a teenager, unless you're counting Skate Canada 2000 as this very important stepping stone.

Getting a senior grand prix assignment is a very big stepping stone. And again, she competed in another exclusively senior televised competition, where she received a 6.0 - that's a very special moment for a skater. Without those fond memories and proven evidence that she could "do it" within the senior level of competition, who knows how motivated she would have been to return to the sport.

Which is it? Mao Shimada and others are not skating with the maturity of Yu-Na Kim and Mao Asada in their first senior seasons because of all the rule changes and lack of emphasis on artistry as was with 6.0, or

It's multiple things.

Someone officially being a senior-ranked skater changes how everyone views them (including themselves). There's a higher expectation. And then of course comes the experience gained with being able to compete at that level.

Yes there's been a reduced emphasis on artistry the past couple decades, but look at someone like Isabeau Levito in 2023, being able to compete at senior worlds at 15 years old. Despite all my qualms about her skating, the sophistication of the choreography was a higher level than what Mao Shimada is doing right now at 17 years old.

 

[yfan1]

No it isn't. The chance is there and thus people work towards that chance. An age eligibility restriction drops the chance to 0, therefore reducing the number of people who will try.

The chance no longer being there doesn't mean there is some significant drop in people participating. I too am stating it without evidence - but I expect I'm correct that FAR more people are deterred by the sport's costs and sexual abuse scandals. Much like, I expect many more members of the audience to not bother with the sport anymore for the simple fact that the costs are too restrictive, and the judging and sex abuse scandals are too hard to stomach.

You don't seem to have anything to say about that.

I am not at all interested in what stage parents might feel for their children. It's not a loss there. Not for me anyway.

It's multiple things.

Someone officially being a senior-ranked skater changes how everyone views them (including themselves). There's a higher expectation. And then of course comes the experience gained with being able to compete at that level.

Yes there's been a reduced emphasis on artistry the past couple decades, but look at someone like Isabeau Levito in 2023, being able to compete at senior worlds at 15 years old. Despite all my qualms about her skating, the sophistication of the choreography was a higher level than what Mao Shimada is doing right now at 17 years old.

I am asking you why you believe similar experience cannot be obtained from national level skating.

And you believe Isabeau Levito gained this experience at the age of 15 - why?

And you ignored the point about Yuna Kim and Mao Asada being better in their first senior seasons compared to Shimada at 17 right now, despite not competing at senior levels internationally before either - why?

You believe Levito is better now than Kim and Asada were back in 2005/2006/2007?

Getting a senior grand prix assignment is a very big stepping stone. And again, she competed in another exclusively senior televised competition, where she received a 6.0 - that's a very special moment for a skater. Without those fond memories and proven evidence that she could "do it" within the senior level of competition, who knows how motivated she would have been to return to the sport.

A lot of untested hypotheses here.

You are going from how important it might be for a skater to receive scholarships/extracurricular credit for college applications (and linking it, incorrectly, to Olympic experience, because that's not at all the standard to which extracurricular activities are held for credit in a college application) - to performance ability, "special moments", and returning to the sport. May I say, frankly, that if Stellato hadn't been injured four times, then maybe she wouldn't have quit at all, making your entire argument moot?

 

[Mathman]

not sure why you are quoting me here

Because I agree with your point that most parents think of skating as their child's hobby, not as some kind of "prestige" thing (prestige for the parent, that is) that comes from dreaming about the Olympics.

In fact, I would go farther and say that 99.99% of the time, parents who obsess over pushing their child beyond his or her talent or interest can only be harmful, like, shame on you, you bad child, to disappoint your parents so willfully as to get only a silver medal, you ungrateful dog, after all we did for you!