How much should U.S. Nationals count for World team selection?

[fairly4]

what i think is this--nationals should play a big part in it.
it always has-the international has played a part in it, in the fact of how they might place them at nationals. (the final placement always goes on how they skate at nationals) but how they might finish-pre position placement thinking might go on in saying for example.
I just notice that the skaters who do well internationally tend to stay in the top 6 at nationals regardless of how they skate. so doing well internationally plays a part in making the world team. if you do well internationally it helps you score/placement. -not so well-it doesn't help. most of the time past skaters who made gp events/including juniors did well at nationals by finishing in top 6-7 of nationals. the ones who didn't were the ones who didn't skate well that year/and or medal at international events.
if they were expected to medal and did-they did decent at nationals, didn't medal didn't do well at nationals.-
in a roundabout way -international placement played a part in how they skaters were judged.
the final placement at nationals depended on how the skater skated because of the depth of the U.S. skaters -that is why nationals is so hard. skaters can sometimes make up for a bad internatonals but they have to skate their butts off to do it. the skaters who do well international a given a little leeway because of them doing so well.
u.s. nationals should play a big part, in world selection. like it has always done.
otherwise nationals wouldn't mean a thing. why bother trying your best if you know ahead of time you will make the team.
to me nationals should be 1st, international placement 2nd. but doing well internationally helps you at nationals by giving a little leeway and good scores.

 

[R.D.]

It should be the MAIN factor, but then again, maybe it shouldn't be the ONLY one.

Top 2 (or 3) should go (and always have gone), but the Committee should take a harder look at past results and determine whether, say, a fluke win by an inconsistent skater vs. an uncharacteristically bad performance by a strong skater is enough to deviate from the order of finish. This would prevent the scenario of, let's say, Czisny or someone unproven like Gao getting into the top 2 over a more steady hand like Flatt, or even Nagasu. Look at 5th and 9th place finishes by Flatt as opposed to 15th and 11th place finishes by Czisny for example. Think outside of the traditional box for a bit. If we did that, perhaps we could maximize our likelihood of getting 3 spots instead of crossing our fingers, hoping the top two can do it, even if they got there via fluke.

 

[Mathman]

In case anyone was wondering who “the committee” consists of, I looked it up. (I hope this is up-to-date. The official name seems to be the International Committee Management Subcommittee.)

Doug Williams, chair
Brittney Bottoms
Tamie Campbell
Jeremy Mast
Lorrie parker
Sharon Rogers

Athlete representatives: Justin Dillon
Lindsey Weber

Coach representative: Douglas Ladret.

If you want to know their email addresses so you can send them nasty letters after they make their selection in January, that information is available, too. (I filed this bit of information under, “why I will never volunteer to be on a USFSA committee. )

Here are the mission statement (in part) for the International Committee and charge to the Subcommittee.

The mission of the International Committee is: to select the U.S. Figure Skating Team that wins the maximum number of international medals and berths possible by strategically providing experience to qualified members of the U.S. Figure Skating Team, and by identifying and supporting the best qualified future prospects…

The International Committee shall have a nine-member Management Subcommittee (ICMS), which is responsible for nomination and entry of athletes to compete in all international competitions and the World University Games, based on the approved criteria. Additionally, the ICMS shall name athletes to the team envelopes based on the approved criteria.

 

[R.D.]

^ Just send them Post #122

 

[Layfan]

It should be the MAIN factor, but then again, maybe it shouldn't be the ONLY one.

Top 2 (or 3) should go (and always have gone), but the Committee should take a harder look at past results and determine whether, say, a fluke win by an inconsistent skater vs. an uncharacteristically bad performance by a strong skater is enough to deviate from the order of finish. This would prevent the scenario of, let's say, Czisny or someone unproven like Gao getting into the top 2 over a more steady hand like Flatt, or even Nagasu. Look at 5th and 9th place finishes by Flatt as opposed to 15th and 11th place finishes by Czisny for example. Think outside of the traditional box for a bit. If we did that, perhaps we could maximize our likelihood of getting 3 spots instead of crossing our fingers, hoping the top two can do it, even if they got there via fluke.

Last year our national champion finished 9th, leaving it up to our silver medalist to finish at least 4th. How does that make Rachael the reliable rock that shouldn't be left off the team no matter how she does at nationals? Because she didn't meltdown as badly as Alissa?
It seems that according to your rules Gao or Czisny shouldn't be allowed to go to worlds instead of Rachael no matter how they do nationals. Who should? Agnes? Caroline? Ashley? Nobody? Should Rachael just take a break at nationals since her ninth place finish apparently is good enough for her to make another world team even if somebody else beats her in a "fluke?"

And I'm not trying to be mean about Rachael. I believe she has a great chance of making her third world team _ and defending her national title _ and doing much better at worlds this time around - especially since she won't be tired from the Olympics. Maybe even medaling. But don't think she is so proven that other girls shouldn't even have a chance.

 

[janetfan]

), but the Committee should take a harder look at past results and determine whether, say, a fluke win by an inconsistent skater vs. an uncharacteristically bad performance by a strong skater is enough to deviate from the order of finish. This would prevent the scenario of, let's say, Czisny or someone unproven like Gao getting into the top 2 over a more steady hand like Flatt, .

Are you out of your mind

If Alissa wins or places second at Natls she will be going to Worlds.
Why in the world would Flatt get picked over Alissa or Gao if they beat her at Natls. :think:

Your post seems clueless about how US Natls teams are picked.
Sorry RD, but geez ......... what in the world makes you think US Skating does not want Alissa to succeed? Or Christina for that matter?

Alissa's skating is known and appreciated throughout the skating world which is certainly more than I can say about your choice. Christina is getting higher scores at the JGP than Flatt has gotten this season.

This seems to be the season for skaters like Chan and Alissa. Tomas is doing well too even without his quads. Not sure if I know why but I can certainly spot a trend when I see it.

Intl judges have been giving Flatt low pcs this season - and even if she stays on her feet her qualities don't seem to be what they are looking for. That is why they placed Kanako over her at SA.




Time to wake up and smell the roses ........

 

[Layfan]

Besides, I'm sure Rachael would HATE being sent to worlds under those circumstances. I mean, "hey Rachael, sorry you had a bad nationals and finished 5th. But you we're sending you to worlds anyway because we don't think Gao can get our three spot backs. But you can. Just make sure to finish at least 5th otherwise we'll look like real idiots. Got it? Good."

That would put a ridiculous and undue pressure on Rachael.

I'd rather have the two spots.

 

[FlattFan]

Alissa's skating is appreciated greatly throughout the skating world? Really? The zamboni drivers probably like her ok.

 

[janetfan]

Alissa's skating is appreciated greatly throughout the skating world? Really? The zamboni drivers probably like her ok.

Fair enough - but there are some who appreciate the beauty of Alissa's skating. Reading this board I see comments from Intl members who like what Alissa brings to the ice.

I certainly am not surprised if you dont agree.
Not to be unfair to your favorite - and hope she is recovered and training well. She needs her 3x3's back to impress as a good tech skater. Plus her pcs will go up if she shows rotated 3x3's. Not fair exactly - but that is the way of the CoP.

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

No one is against the Nationals as a factor in selecting the Worlds Team. (I don't believe the Worlds in other Sports have a automatic National title to send to Worlds. Olympics? yes, some do, some don't.)

As someone who believes a scrutiny of all the skaters and a consensus of who are the most apt to do well (not necessarily win) should be undertaken by a committee with expertise in figure skating and not just rubber stamp the results of the US Nats. I do understand that the tradition behind past selections have always been only the podium would be considered. However, since the US Nats does present a formidable contest, I would ok the Winner as first preference to go to Worlds with other qualified skater(s) decided by the Committee.

The case of Mroz/Weir is veeeerrrrry interesting.

My selection for the Ladies would be Mirai, Rachael, with Agnes as first substitute. So if one of them wins the Nats, they automatically go to Worlds.
for the Men, I would select Mroz, Mahmahdoozadeh, either Miner or Abbott. I require skaters who are good under fire.
I have no selection for Pairs and the results of the Nats will be suitable.
For Ice Dance, D/W could be exempt and still qualified to go to worlds, also the Shibutanis and Chock/Zuerlein. If any of these miss the Nats podium, I would still insist my selection. It's time for new blood.

I am sure the Committee will go by tradition and not by their modus operandi.

 

[R.D.]

Folks, my point is this: Nationals results should not be the ONLY thing that counts here. What about past world results? Maybe even GPF or GP skates/results as well? Right now, we treat Nats as a World qualifier, or the Olympic Trials if you will. If it is that, so be it. But USFS seems to want to pretend it isn't (by putting in funny wording such as "only the champion is guaranteed worlds" when they have ALWAYS picked #2 and #3 if applicable to go as well) when it really is. I know this isn't a popular opinion, but if you are not going to take into account previous results as well, just rename the event to the Olympic Trials because that's what it is.

Last year our national champion finished 9th, leaving it up to our silver medalist to finish at least 4th. How does that make Rachael the reliable rock that shouldn't be left off the team no matter how she does at nationals? Because she didn't meltdown as badly as Alissa?

First: I never called her a "reliable rock", that was other posters' wording.

Second: I never said Flatt should go no matter where she places at US Nats.

To make it easier, let's not use specific skaters' names and just go with Skater A and Skater B. I said (or meant) that in the event of a close call, say Skater A has been really strong on the GP, qualifies for the GPF. She has been to worlds once or twice before, didn't medal but placed top 10 with a strong performance. She is rather consistent and be counted on to deliver the goods when necessary. Now, let's take skater B, who has also been to worlds but bombed really badly, placing 18th. The Committee knows that if she does well, though, she is capable of a top-10 finish. But she has been struggling all year long, placing in the bottom half of her GP comps. Now say Skater B has the SOHL and places 2nd, just barely above Skater A in 3rd, who maybe had an uncharacteristic fall or rough patch. Let's say there are two spots. The Champion is in the same boat as Skater A and goes. Now, in this case, who do you pick- skater A or B? The current method is to pick skater B no matter what and just HOPE she can pull it together again at Worlds. MY SUGGESTION HERE is to also consider sending skater A, who has a higher chance of placing top 10 in the world, even though she may have been a bit off on this night- because she's proven herself in the past. Didn't the Japanese fed do this in the past? Just try it, at least once.

It seems that according to your rules Gao or Czisny shouldn't be allowed to go to worlds instead of Rachael no matter how they do nationals. Who should? Agnes? Caroline? Ashley? Nobody? Should Rachael just take a break at nationals since her ninth place finish apparently is good enough for her to make another world team even if somebody else beats her in a "fluke?"

Granted, there are two ways you can operate here. One is the "Olympic Trials route"- nothing wrong with that, except I feel it should be specified clearly- where you pick the top 2 or 3, no matter what, through thick or thin.

Then there is the "maximize your earnings" way, which means you pick the two who you think have the greatest chance of placing well at worlds or Olys. To do this, you weight National results, but also consider the background of the skaters to ensure you are sending your two best skaters overall instead of simply the two skaters who happened to come out on top that night. Yes, many times both situations are one and the same- but I think as we've seen recently, this is not always the case.

Again, I realize this is an unpopular opinion, but I fully stand by it. YMMV- and I say, so be it.

And I'm not trying to be mean about Rachael. I believe she has a great chance of making her third world team _ and defending her national title _ and doing much better at worlds this time around - especially since she won't be tired from the Olympics. Maybe even medaling. But don't think she is so proven that other girls shouldn't even have a chance.

It depends on who we are talking about here. Let's assume Flatt is not the winner here.

Would you send Nagasu over Flatt?

OK. Would you send Wagner over Flatt?

Alright. Would you send Zawadski over Flatt?

fine. Now: Would you send Gilles over Flatt?

 

[gold12345]

Says you. I would have been delighted to see Ryan at the Olympics. Maybe he would have finished ahead of Jeremy, who bombed. It is certainly not written in the rules that Ryan should never ever be allowed to go to the Olympics no matter how well he does at Nats. You "mainly" think that the rules should be changed because Ryan almost made the Olympic team? :disagree:

I'm not saying Ryan should never be allowed to go to the Olympics no matter how well he does. I'm saying if Ryan had beaten Johnny (or Evan, or Jeremy) by a few pts instead of the other way around, I would have taken a long, hard look at whether or not we would be sending our best possible Olympic team with the best scoring potential if we placed a 3rd-place-by-the-skin-of-his-teeth Ryan on the team.

Another example... Although I was impressed by the way Evora/Ladwig performed at the Olympics, I am slightly concerned by the way they were able to qualify for the team. This is not to say I would have selected Inoue/Baldwin instead, but there should be concern over a pair with a relatively poor international history (compared to their closest competitors) being able to qualify for an Olympic berth by 0.6 points. If that 3rd place team had been McLaughlin/Brubaker instead of Inoue/Baldwin, this would have been a far greater issue. It all worked out in the end because Inoue/Baldwin probably wouldn't have finished any higher than 10th either, but that's not the point... My issue is with the way in which the team is selected.

All I'm saying is that sometimes it is beneficial to look at international history rather than relying solely on Nationals placements. I realize we have a committee that is supposed to do this, but there seems to be an unwritten rule that Nationals results truly mean everything.

I'm also in favor of considering GP events of current year as part of world team selection, but the Nationals weighs the majority weight in the processing.

I'd love to see this. I'm not convinced that a country can always put its best possible team out on the ice by only taking one competition into account. But I do agree Nationals should hold the most weight.

 

[Mathman]

Fol I know this isn't a popular opinion, but if you are not going to take into account previous results as well, just rename the event to the Olympic Trials because that's what it is.

That's the one thing they can't do. They can't call it the Olympic trials.

Because if they did then the U.S. Olympic Committee would own U.S. Nationals in the Olympic year, rather than the USFSA. This is in the rules of the USOC and IOC, with regard to their legal relationship to administrative bodies that govern individual sports.

This was the the reason that the USFSA changed the wording of the rules for selecting the Olympic team last year.

It depends on who we are talking about here. Let's assume Flatt is not the winner here.

To me the more important issue is not who we are talkig about, but who is doing the talking.

Would you send Nagasu over Flatt?

It is completely irrelevant whether or not I would send Wagner over Flatt. The question is, would Ms. Brittney Bottoms or Mr. Justin Dillon do so?

Why would we want to leave this decision up to the preference of a committee? Why not have a skate-off and take personal opinion out of the equation?

 

[R.D.]

That's the one thing they can't do. They can't call it the Olympic trials.

Because if they did then the U.S. Olympic Committee would own U.S. Nationals in the Olympic year, rather than the USFSA. This is in the rules of the USOC and IOC, with regard to their legal relationship to administrative bodies that govern individual sports individual sports.

This was the the reason that the USFSA changed the wording of the rules for selecting the Olympic team last year.

So...I wonder if the USFS keeps on selecting the top 2 or top 3 (no matter what they may have written in the rules) whether the USOC will still try to wrestle it away. I don't know and I won't speculate. But both parties know very well that in that case it will basically be an "Oly Trials".

Why would we want to leave this decision up to the preference of a committee? Why not have a skate-off and take personal opinion out of the equation?

Hmm. Still, personally I don't see too much of a point to that because you've already skated nationals. Unless there's the bizarre situation of a tie, but other criteria, such a point totals from another competition, or what I outlined above, might be easier and less costly than arranging a "skate-off".

 

[Tonichelle]

That's the one thing they can't do. They can't call it the Olympic trials.

and yet that's what Tara Lipinski called it during TEB.... which I thought was funny

 

[Mathman]

My selection for the Ladies would be Mirai, Rachael, with Agnes as first substitute. So if one of them wins the Nats, they automatically go to Worlds.

for the Men, I would select Mroz, Mahmahdoozadeh, either Miner or Abbott.

But that's the whole point, Joe. Your choice would be Mirai and Rachael. My choice might be Alissa (the highest finisher so far in the Grand Prix) and Ashley (she has geater potential than any of the others, INHO.) R.D. and janetfan might have yet a dfferent opinion.

But neither you nor I not R.D. nor janetfan is on the committee. Are you content to let Tamie Campbell and Jeremy Mast make this decision based on their preference? (They are on the committee. We are not.)

Or would you rather have the athletes settle the matter in a skate-off?

 

[Mathman]

Another example... Although I was impressed by the way Evora/Ladwig performed at the Olympics, I am slightly concerned by the way they were able to qualify for the team. This is not to say I would have selected Inoue/Baldwin instead, but there should be concern over a pair with a relatively poor international history (compared to their closest competitors) being able to qualify for an Olympic berth by 0.6 points. If that 3rd place team had been McLaughlin/Brubaker instead of Inoue/Baldwin, this would have been a far greater issue....

That paragraph right there is enough to convince me that the current de facto method of team selection is the best after all.

We are 'concerned' about this, and 'unclear' about that, and maybe Evora and Ladwig might do this or maybe Inoue and Baldwin could do that, while McLaughlin and Brubaker, if they were in the place of someone else, might do the other.

Oh well, let's appoint a committee.

I say, let's have a skate-off. That way we don't have to be undecided or confused or in a dilemma between "on the one hand, this team did this, but on the other, another team might do that."

and yet that's what Tara Lipinski called it during TEB.... which I thought was funny

Although, Tara was representing NBC, not USFS, so I guess she could say what she wanted to.

OT: By the way, I think Tara is doing great as a commentator.

 

[R.D.]

Don't want to get too OT, but I do hope Lipinski is not getting "NBCified"...she seems to be rambling on a bit more than she used to for some reason...

 

[Mathman]

After the results [of nationals] are finalized, then the International Committee chooses the team. This is a different group of people than the judging panel and the technical panel.

Almost all the time, they choose the top few finishers from Nationals. Sometimes they will consider other skaters and other results according to the published criteria,...

The changes in the wording of the selection rules two years ago was slight. But for some reason the selection rules seemed to be much better publicized and much more commented upon than ever before.

This gave me the impression that it was the intention to make the International Committee a little bit more assertive in their role. And hence that we might start to see a bit more consideration given to placements at international events than has been the case in the past.

Do you get any such feeling?

What if Lysacek had finished fourth at 2010 Nationals?

 

[Tonichelle]

What if Lysacek had finished fourth instead of third at 2010 Nationals?

I think he might have been teh only exception to the "rule". I think he would have been put on the team ahead of Johnny/Ryan/whoever was third.