Shaidorov says he lost his salary after "speaking out"

[reneerose]

It's been decades that the amateur definition of Olympians has evolved.

Also, semantics. Salary is funding. Most elite athletes get some.

I was gonna say about that... might "salary" be translated more like funding for training or government paid bonuses for doing well in a sport? Also, I recall during the Summer Olympics when that Filipino male gymnast was given a condo by the government...a lot of U.S. amateur Olympians don't get "free" housing for life. I always wonder whether strings are attached when athletes get "free" housing in other countries after they win a medal

 

[decafjava]

Among other things, Olympic Champions could attend theatre for free for the rest of their life. A nice perk, they should revive it!

I read that an ice cream parlor in Oakland offered free ice cream to Alysa actually. I love ice cream but the theatre would be really awesome.

 

[Skating91]

Maybe it still matters for some countries...or some presidents

Yes, I agree with you sport still matters. Great point you make. Nothing wrong with that.

 

[Skating91]

An Olympic champion was funded to the tune of up to $1 million by her father. How can strictly amateur athletes ever hope to compete against someone with that level of funding. Even athletes who receive a stipend or free skates from a governing body that receives some federal funding can't ever hope to have that kind of financial backing. Funding of athletes is a great thing, it levels the playing field otherwise only people of privilege from the wealthiest countries will win.

 

[NanaPat]

Funding of athletes is a great thing, it levels the playing field otherwise only people of privilege from the wealthiest countries will win.

I'm not sure funding at any level can guarantee a win, but without a certain level of funding, talented skaters cannot continue their training.

 

[Mathman]

For me, the guiding principle is this. Each sovereign nation has the right and responsibility to determine for itself what enterprises ought to be sponsored and supported by public funds.

Developing a cadre of elite competitive figure skaters does not, to me, rise to the level of universal human rights, like free public education for all children or access to quality medical care for everyone.

If a country its people and its government, wish -- for reasons of patriotism and national pride -- to pay for the training of world champion athletes, or to reward such athletes after the fact -- OK.

If not -- OK.

 

[DizzyFrenchie]

For me, the guiding principle is this. Each sovereign nation has the right and responsibility to determine for itself what enterprises ought to be sponsored and supported by public funds.

Developing a cadre of elite competitive figure skaters does not, to me, rise to the level of universal human rights, like free public education for all children or access to quality medical care for everyone.

If a country its people and its government, wish -- for reasons of patriotism and national pride -- to pay for the training of world champion athletes, or to reward such athletes after the fact -- OK.

If not -- OK.

I agree.
Now, if they make a false public statement declaring that a given athlete has received this and that while actually they had (freely) committed to but not paid this and not committed to (and not paid) that, it's really wrong and must get promptly rectified.
And if a Federation tries to create a contractual obligation for an athlete to win an Olympic medal, that's outright crazy.
Now, I don't trust enough The Skating Lesson to hold it true that he has received anything; particularly if they spoke of a salary, while Mikhail Shaidorov had made it clear that there was no salary planned? One can wonder what's their source.

 

[Mathman]

In any case, the whole brouhaha seems to have blown over. The Khazakstan Tourist and Sports Ministry is making nice and Shaidorov has apparently calmed down. They played it off a a mere legal delay in getting a new contract signed (the old one expired in March).

No one seems to be mentioning any requirement that the athlete must guarantee an Olympic medal in 2030 or else walk the plank. That part of the story is looking more and more like "translation error."

 

[CoyoteChris]

I've learned that Churchill's "No Sport" was a German attempt at intoxication, so did Jefferson really dislike ball games?

https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhjQiXUgGnZFrdnl44klaRdCvnHBg6Oex4GERm3DQRkHPamxoeqNN-pn0V5jGEfxDVpb1U3efYHXdI9Zt0Yb8rV6NpeKIFBWAyqCV7xx9oUJKDYJ46ZeLYhvoPvG1JYW0VHKgr2MNaBcQc/s640/churchill.jpg

“A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball and others of that nature are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be your constant companion of your walks.”​

 

[CoyoteChris]

For me, the guiding principle is this. Each sovereign nation has the right and responsibility to determine for itself what enterprises ought to be sponsored and supported by public funds.

Developing a cadre of elite competitive figure skaters does not, to me, rise to the level of universal human rights, like free public education for all children or access to quality medical care for everyone.

If a country its people and its government, wish -- for reasons of patriotism and national pride -- to pay for the training of world champion athletes, or to reward such athletes after the fact -- OK.

If not -- OK.

I respectfully disagree due to the limiters in your statement. When I made a fool of myself when I asked Doreen Denny, 1959 and 1960 world champion ice dancer, if she was a big skating fan, she chuckled and sat me down and educated me on what it took to be a world champion back then. You were self funded. But that doesnt seem fair or does it level the playing field for all athletes. Having governments fund skaters for political gain with out the will of the people like the East German Sports machine certainly isnt fair. Having the will of the individual people alone certainly doesnt produce funding...not in the US. When I got my write up in Skating Magazine because I donated, there were only less than 400 of us. The 40 mil per top schools for buying NCAA athletes is from rich alumni. I certainly dont want MY dollars going to games of the ball. In a perfect world, people would vote with their dollars to support the sport they want and let someone decided who gets the money, but that still doesnt level the playing field. In America, people vote with dollars in various ways to further sports they like, I guess. I have no answers as to how to fund talented Am. athletes fairly, but I have a big problem with a country paying big bucks to fund sports for political gain, with or without the "will" of the people.
Put it this way. Ask Americans on a ballot if they would be willing to have their taxes raised to fund Am. Basketball and see what you get.

 

[Mathman]

... I have a big problem with a country paying big bucks to fund sports for political gain, with or without the "will" of the people.

To tell the truth, I don't know what I think.

As an American figure skating fan, I do not in general feel confident in advising, criticizing, or praising other countries' choices, especially on matters of small consequence. Even in cases where the principle is clear, still, to me, the devil is in the details. Should we spend a half a trillion dollars to send an astronaut to Mars? My personal answer is, oh heck yeah -- have we no spirit of adventure in our national soul?

On the other hand, a plebiscite in which the majority of Americans checked the box "What do I care about Mars? I've got a family to feed right here" -- well, that carries a lot of weight, too.

 

[CoyoteChris]

To tell the truth, I don't know what I think.

As an American figure skating fan, I do not in general feel confident in advising, criticizing, or praising other countries' choices, especially on matters of small consequence. Even in cases where the principle is clear, still, to me, the devil is in the details. Should we spend a half a trillion dollars to send an astronaut to Mars? My personal answer is, oh heck yeah -- have we no spirit of adventure in our national soul?

On the other hand, a plebiscite in which the majority of Americans checked the box "What do I care about Mars? I've got a family to feed right here" -- well, that carries a lot of weight, too.

ITA. I am glad we went to the moon. I am glad I was alive during that time. My father in law had all 7 original astronaughts in his station wagon at one time. It was good to be an American and lots to be proud of. But there were things not to be proud of and some of that was changed. (I still cant believe we dont have an equal rights ammendment)
But we are a much different country now. Half of all Americans who have ever lived in those 250 years are alive today. We spend $13 billion on Halloween and I have no idea how much football/basketball costs us every year in the cost of products we buy. So do we go to Mars????? Or do we spend money on our millions of troubled youth? Mentally ill? Or back our figure skaters? And who decides and how?
Figure skating isnt unique but its way different that say tennis. If you have talent in tennis or golf or car racing you can get funding and go up the food chain. Probably doesnt matter alot if your governemnt of your country is kicking in some money. Not skating. Any country that wants to win each and every skating event acutally can do that...with their own skating program or buying skaters from other countries. All it takes is money, time, and committment. But that is not a sport I wish to watch.

 

[noskates]

I think the worst of this is the federation making him sign something to commit to medaling 4 years from now. Can you only imagine the pressure that would put on him? And what happens if he doesn't? He has to pay the money back? This stinks.

 

[Mathman]

I think the worst of this is the federation making him sign something to commit to medaling 4 years from now.

Is that really true, though, or just a rumor based on a mangled interpretation of the federation's actual words?

Frankly, it seems an absurdity on its face -- how can anyone, athlete or federation, possibly guarantee what is going to happen in a competition scheduled for four years from now. We all might all be dead by then..

 

[DizzyFrenchie]

Is that really true, though, or just a rumor based on a mangled interpretation of the federation's actual words?

Frankly, it seems an absurdity on its face -- how can anyone, athlete or federation, possibly guarantee what is going to happen in a competition scheduled for four years from now. We all might all be dead by then..

There may be a mistranslation but I understand that Mikhail Shaidorov saw the contract project and said so himself, so the translation is the only weak point in the reporting in English. Let's remember Einstein words about the two infinite things...