To determine funding levels (see the quoted part in my post above).
USFS has now revised their original press release to include the 2 tiers per level: http://www.usfigureskating.org/Story.asp?id=42938
2009 - 2010 Team Envelopes
- Thread starter PolymerBob
- Start date
USFS has now revised their original press release to include the 2 tiers per level: http://www.usfigureskating.org/Story.asp?id=42938
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2008
so this is about funding?
hmm, the girl that cost the US 3 spots for the Olympics will get the most funding from USFSA!
What irony!
hmm, the girl that cost the US 3 spots for the Olympics will get the most funding from USFSA!
What irony!
Here's a relevant excerpt from the International Committee's 2008-09 report for the upcoming 2009 Governing Council meeting:
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2008
so this is about funding?
hmm, the girl that cost the US 3 spots for the Olympics will get the most funding from USFSA!
What irony!
One could say that maybe she can use it to pay for a psychologist. :sheesh:
And ... err... ahh... as a Kimmie fan, can you REALLY rag that hard on Alissa?
I have to agree on this, what a stupid criteria! Ms Flatt and Ms Zhang deserve better, these two are our MVP in any sense. 
so this is about funding?
hmm, the girl that cost the US 3 spots for the Olympics will get the most funding from USFSA!
What irony!
Last edited:
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2008
Kimmie's current slump doesn't diminish the fact that she is a former World Champion.
And for MANY years to come, she'll be known as the last US woman skater to win the World Championship.
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2007
so this is about funding?
hmm, the girl that cost the US 3 spots for the Olympics will get the most funding from USFSA!
What irony!
Well, I have to give the USFSA a certain degree of grudging admiration for one thing, they follow their own rules. I am certain they would like to organize the ladies' envelopes differently, but there is nothing they can do.
In 2006, the funding for the A envelope was $15,000. I'm not sure what it is now.
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2008
And ... ? You ragged on Alissa for "losing us 3 spots." That's pretty ironic and also hypocritical since in point of fact, Alissa didn't lose us 3 spots, she helped maintain the 2 spots we had -- and who DID in fact lose us 3 spots, in the previous worlds? Take a wild guess...
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2007
Well, this year, my position is that USFSA cost us 3 spots.
...... But that's another matter.
hwell:
...... But that's another matter.
hwell:
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
I do, too.
About Worlds, it was decided years ago to have a big contest -- the U.S. National Champiobnship -- and the winner would be sent to the World Championships to take on the champions of all the other countries.
The only alternative would have been to have the skater chosen behind closed doors based on which skater's coach was part of the in-crowd, and if there were two such coaches, which one could lobby most successfully.
Now they could, if they wanted to, come up with a formula that added up points that skaters earn in international competitions, etc. But any way you do it, there will always be cases where -- in retrospect -- we end up thinking the formula picked the wrong skater.
That's so ridiculous. Kimmie helped us gain 3 spots twice, and was clearly not in her best condition. And Alissa's placement would have "barely!" gotten us two spots by herself.
And yes, the USFSA propping up Alissa likely lost us three spots.
The ONLY reason that Alissa is the top funded lady is that she is US Champion.
By finishing lower than eighth at Worlds, Alissa did in fact cost the US that third spot for the Olympics. Based on the results at 4CC, JW and Worlds, it's abundantly clear that if the USFS hadn't propped up Alissa's scores at Nationals, (thus ensuring her the Championship) Flatt/Zhang would have gone to Worlds, and the US would have had 3 spots for Vancouver.
Flatt, in particular, has received a double whammy. She was pushed down into second at Nationals (again), and despite being the only seeded US lady for the GP next season, she is in a lower envelope than Alissa, who's never cracked even the top 10 at Worlds.
By finishing lower than eighth at Worlds, Alissa did in fact cost the US that third spot for the Olympics. Based on the results at 4CC, JW and Worlds, it's abundantly clear that if the USFS hadn't propped up Alissa's scores at Nationals, (thus ensuring her the Championship) Flatt/Zhang would have gone to Worlds, and the US would have had 3 spots for Vancouver.
Flatt, in particular, has received a double whammy. She was pushed down into second at Nationals (again), and despite being the only seeded US lady for the GP next season, she is in a lower envelope than Alissa, who's never cracked even the top 10 at Worlds.
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2007
^I found that odd too, that Flatt's in a lower envelope. But US nationals apparently take precedence over international events, considering what happened to Johnny this season.
Alissa did not lose the three spots, but she was of no help in trying to fight for the third spot. The SP doomed her chances of placing well at Worlds. It's unfair to blame any of the girl's in 2008 for losing the third spot. The US just had a really weak team. Bebe Liang and Ashley Wagner were at their first worlds, and Bebe did very well placing tenth. Kimmie would have had to win the bronze to maintain the three spots and she was not having a good season. I thought she performed decently at worlds last year considering how she was struggling all season long.
Alissa did not lose the three spots, but she was of no help in trying to fight for the third spot. The SP doomed her chances of placing well at Worlds. It's unfair to blame any of the girl's in 2008 for losing the third spot. The US just had a really weak team. Bebe Liang and Ashley Wagner were at their first worlds, and Bebe did very well placing tenth. Kimmie would have had to win the bronze to maintain the three spots and she was not having a good season. I thought she performed decently at worlds last year considering how she was struggling all season long.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2005
I think everyone will come out better if two or three competitions were considered in the process. I'm sure consistancy is an important part of increases and federations success at the world championships. I think the USFSA are just afraid of loosing some of the prestige Nationals have if they decrease its value in the selection process. After following tennis for the past five years almost everything figureskating do is backwards. So why should this be any different. Most sports rank the difficulty of event by how hard it is to win it(level of competion).(The GPF is actually the hardest event to win. It is early in the season. All the top skaters are participating and there is an elimination process before you even make the final.) The USFSA obviously believe that being National champion is equal to being world champion and that just winning the National make you America's top skater forget the rankings(which are backwards anyway) Sometimes I think this whole sport is mess. Where's that easy staples button when you need one.:banging:
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2007
I am not sure which order Rachael and Caroline should have placed at Nationals, but assuming the results should have been : Rachael - Caroline - Alissa, then the girls were penalized as follows.
Rachael lost:
1) the National championship
2) one tier worth of funding
Caroline lost
1) one placement at Nationals
2) ( almost certainly ) a top 8 finish at Worlds
3) one envelope worth of funding
4) ( possibly, though unlikely ) one Grand Prix assignment
5) valuable high level international experience
6) whatever prize money she would have won
( Double whammy, how about sextuple whammy? )
somebody lost
1) a trip to next year's Olympics
2) a trip to next year's Worlds
I'm surprised that Keegan Messing was not higher up in the envelopes. Do they take into account the accessibility to training sites or is it more or less tough luck?
While I understand your logic with Caroline, I find her to be one of the weakest of the current crop. She has a great deal of technical issues that need fixing that her artistry can not make up for. She also has not had that "growth spurt" that it appears that Rachel may have had - at least the first big one. While Rachel is not as artistic, I much prefer her technique to Caroline's.
Ashely on the other hand - she was robbed. Yeah, she messed up on the SP at Nationals but a great comeback. Her artistry is improving and there is no reason to think it will not continue to do so (look at how much better she looked at Nationals this year). And she looks to actually be trying to improve her technique issues, which I can not say for Caroline or Miari for that matter. They talk about it but I don't see much of it.
As for hanging this all on Alyssa. Well - what do you expect? She's one the most talented skaters of all time but unfortunately has that issue with nerves - how could anyone expect her to overcome it so rapidly. I mean really, what did you expect from her given her past? I feel bad for the girl...so much talent.
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2007
As far as I love and enjoy watching Alissa, I don't ever think she is the top senior lady here. Her jump content is never up there to be in the same league as of Rachel and Caroline.
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2007
Caroline has been getting high TES ( technical element score ) and lower PCS ( program component score ). So the ISU judges are starting to like her jumps. She had a considerable growth spurt over the summer, growing 2 1/2 inches in as many months. As for being one of the weakest of the current crop, well, she was weak enough to be the top American in her last 4 ISU events.
Yes, she has problems. But she appears to know what her weaknesses are and is willing to try to correct them.
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2007
:agree: Hopefully USFSA will learn from this. Otherwise this sport will be even less popular than now
