ISU, Get it Together and Verify Your Own Rules | Golden Skate

ISU, Get it Together and Verify Your Own Rules

Joined
Jun 21, 2003
I couldn't find the relevant documents on the ISU site, but I would assume that there weren't enough pairs teams entered so there were contingency provisions to add some more.

Many countries do not have a pairs team to send at all, and Japan, Russia and Canada only sent two when they could have sent three.
 

gsrossano

Final Flight
Joined
Nov 11, 2006
I couldn't find the relevant documents on the ISU site, but I would assume that there weren't enough pairs teams entered so there were contingency provisions to add some more.

Many countries do not have a pairs team to send at all, and Japan, Russia and Canada only sent two when they could have sent three.

I have asked my reporter there to find out why. Will let you know what she says. If there is a "fill up" rule for ISU events I would be surprised. I don't think there is. Hopefully an answer will be waiting when I get to work in the morning.
 

Tony Wheeler

On the Ice
Joined
Jul 27, 2003
I have asked my reporter there to find out why. Will let you know what she says. If there is a "fill up" rule for ISU events I would be surprised. I don't think there is. Hopefully an answer will be waiting when I get to work in the morning.

Thanks George. It's frustrating that it's just being blown off like no big deal by most people. If I were Ashley Wagner or someone in her similar situation I'd be getting a lawyer right now-- seriously. If they are just going to let the rules slide once then why can't they do it for others?

Mathman- not sure what you are talking about. Japan had two entries, and they sent one. Canada had three entries and they used all three. Russia, same thing. The relevant documents in this case are linked on my page... and I don't see anything updated since those documents to change the rules they have published.

There were PLENTY of pairs teams entered in this competition. As I said on my blog, the ISU has never stretched the rules any other time, including when there were very minimal numbers of pairs in competitions, so why do it now? And I'm sorry, but if you have governing rules, they are there for a reason. You can't just change something. I mean you can... but it's not going to go unnoticed.
 
Joined
Jul 11, 2003
I have asked my reporter there to find out why. Will let you know what she says. If there is a "fill up" rule for ISU events I would be surprised. I don't think there is. Hopefully an answer will be waiting when I get to work in the morning.
Didn't they 'fill up' in the GPs a couple of years ago, and the Teams who had already skated two segments of Pairs were asked if they wanted to do a third? I thought it was sad for that American Team who did the first Throw Quad and placed 4th but would have placed 3rd and medalled if Pang and Tong were not asked to do their THIRD GP? If there was a rule for fillup, it should have been said then.

I think they were worried about box office receipts which of course is more important than sport.
 

Tony Wheeler

On the Ice
Joined
Jul 27, 2003
All disciplines of the Grand Prix (and when it was called the Champions Series) used to feature the top six skaters skating in three events. Example-- Kwan usually opted to skate in two, while Butyrskaya would usually skate in Germany, France, and Japan each year. Then they had it so that it was only the top pairs that could skate in a third event if they so chose. But it's been a few years since that has even happened.

21 pairs teams at the World Juniors meant that five teams weren't even making the long program... that definitely was a big enough field that there was no need to add extra pairs for no reason.
 

dorispulaski

Wicked Yankee Girl
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Country
United-States
It's particularly heinous if the inappropriately included team either deprives another of a medal, or of a chance to skate their LP or affected the number of pairs another country could send to Jr. Worlds the following year. Thanks for highlighting this Tony.
 

bigsisjiejie

Record Breaker
Joined
Nov 22, 2009
It's particularly heinous if the inappropriately included team either deprives another of a medal, or of a chance to skate their LP or affected the number of pairs another country could send to Jr. Worlds the following year. Thanks for highlighting this Tony.

Yes, the Estonian pair that placed #17 after the SP.
 

dorispulaski

Wicked Yankee Girl
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Country
United-States
Exactly. It's easy to focus on the impact of the medals, or the number of teams next year, but the chance to perform both their programs at Jr Worlds is a big deal to skaters who have spent such an amount of time, pain, effort, and yes, money, to qualify to be there. The ISU should respect their own rules.
 

gsrossano

Final Flight
Joined
Nov 11, 2006
Thanks George. It's frustrating that it's just being blown off like no big deal by most people. If I were Ashley Wagner or someone in her similar situation I'd be getting a lawyer right now-- seriously. If they are just going to let the rules slide once then why can't they do it for others?

When Alexandra Stevenson asked for me, in den Haag, it was a big surprise to everyone there and no one she has spoken to so far understands it. A request is in at the ISU for an official answer.
 

Tony Wheeler

On the Ice
Joined
Jul 27, 2003
When Alexandra Stevenson asked for me, in den Haag, it was a big surprise to everyone there and no one she has spoken to so far understands it. A request is in at the ISU for an official answer.

So basically what that is saying is that ISU wasn't even aware that they were breaking their own rules until some fans simply looked at the 2009 event website and pulled up the results? All the more reason for the ISU to love me right now, I'm sure. ;)
 
Joined
Jul 11, 2003
All disciplines of the Grand Prix (and when it was called the Champions Series) used to feature the top six skaters skating in three events. Example-- Kwan usually opted to skate in two, while Butyrskaya would usually skate in Germany, France, and Japan each year. Then they had it so that it was only the top pairs that could skate in a third event if they so chose. But it's been a few years since that has even happened.

21 pairs teams at the World Juniors meant that five teams weren't even making the long program... that definitely was a big enough field that there was no need to add extra pairs for no reason.
That was quite some time ago, but recently Vise and Trent in one of the GPs did their ground breaking Throw Quad and it looked like a medal and podium for them, but Pang and Tong had their third go at a GP after qualifying for the Final. P&T as well as S&S in another GP of the same year had an extra practice session on competition time,was to their benefit, but it pushed all the other teams back one placement.

Are you saying that was ok based on the years ago championships? Can you get an official explanation as to why that was approved. I don't buy that unwritten contingency deal. If it were then, rules are not sacred, but should be broken as unspecified changes. There are TWO GPs before qualifying for the Final. No?
 

Tony Wheeler

On the Ice
Joined
Jul 27, 2003
The Vise/Trent situation was at the 2007/2008 Grand Prix Bompard, so already over two full seasons ago. The option for the top six placed pairs in the World to do a third event was clearly stated in the ISU rules. THIS situation is not.

If anyone did a third event then it was already stated in the beginning of the Grand Prix series as to which event would not count for points. Remember the 2001 NHK Trophy (I know it was a long time ago too, but just an example) when Slutskaya and Butyrskaya both withdrew in the week before the event? Had they competed and assumingly finished 1-2, then Angela Nikodinov, who was also in the event and had it chosen as her non-scoring event, she would have made the Final. Without the Russians there, Tataiana Malinina won the event and qualified in front of Nikodinov to the Grand Prix Final. It happens. You can also look at that as Nikodinov could have won the event herself instead of finishing the 4th place she ended up, and then she would have protected her own spot.
 

bekalc

Record Breaker
Joined
Nov 1, 2006
That was quite some time ago, but recently Vise and Trent in one of the GPs did their ground breaking Throw Quad and it looked like a medal and podium for them, but Pang and Tong had their third go at a GP after qualifying for the Final. P&T as well as S&S in another GP of the same year had an extra practice session on competition time,was to their benefit, but it pushed all the other teams back one placement.

Are you saying that was ok based on the years ago championships? Can you get an official explanation as to why that was approved. I don't buy that unwritten contingency deal. If it were then, rules are not sacred, but should be broken as unspecified changes. There are TWO GPs before qualifying for the Final. No?

It was okay because as Tony said the rules allowed the top 6 to compete at three events (and they choose before hand which one was non scoring I believe). The current rules did not allow China to have 3 pairs sports. Did they ask another country if they wanted an extra spot? How the ISU didn't know who qualified how many pairs I don't know. How the Chinese didn't know how many pairs they were qualified (which they should know)

Frankly the Chinese federation should be penalized a spot for next years worlds, and any team that is one spot away from qualifiying for another spot should get the spot. Clearly Sui/Han would have been on the team, and they don't deserve to lose their gold because this isn't their fault. But who can say for sure who would have been the 2nd and 3rd teams.
 

gsrossano

Final Flight
Joined
Nov 11, 2006
A few tidbits on this now on my site. ISU is currently stonewalling. Rules for entries at ISU Championships and Grand Prixs are different. Don't muddy the waters by getting into Grand Prix rules. Entries at Championships are covered by Rule 378. Ultimate responsibility for entries being handled correctly rests with Peter Krick.
 
Last edited:

Tony Wheeler

On the Ice
Joined
Jul 27, 2003
A few tidbits on this now on my site. ISU is currently stonewalling. Rules for entries at ISU Championships and Grand Prixs are different. Don't muddy the waters by getting into Grand Prix rules. Entries at Championships are covered by Rule 378. Ultimate responsibility for entries being handled correctly rests with Peter Krick.

Yeah, let's not get off the topic because as I mentioned, the way the Grand Prix entrants are in no way similar to the system used for ISU Championships.

Hopefully Stevenson will get an answer out of somebody!
 

nylynnr

On the Ice
Joined
Apr 19, 2008
Whatever happens with this -- and I think enough people are asking questions so that the ISU may eventually issue a response -- any protests concerning a competitor's participation in a competition must be filed before the event starts. (Right, George?) So it would make little sense for another federation (i.e., Estonia) to protest now. Hopefully Peter Krick addresses this soon.

I say -- let's send three U.S. ladies to Torino just for the heck of it and see what happens.
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
So it would make little sense for another federation (i.e., Estonia) to protest now.

When it comes to raising hell, never too late, never too soon. :)

Estonia should demand that the ISU rent the rink for another day after the competition is over and allow the Estonian kids to skate their long program in front of the judges. :yes:

Edited to add: By the way, giving credit where it is due, this question was first raised (as far as I know) by Watchvancouver (aka Fiercemao, etc., etc., etc.) on this thread several days ago.

http://www.goldenskate.com/forum/sh...llowed-to-send-three-pairs-to-2010-Jr.-Worlds

This is all really quite strange. Yes, mistakes happen. But the Chinese Skating Federation can count to 13. They have known for a year that they had qualified two teams. (?)
 
Last edited:

gsrossano

Final Flight
Joined
Nov 11, 2006
Whatever happens with this -- and I think enough people are asking questions so that the ISU may eventually issue a response -- any protests concerning a competitor's participation in a competition must be filed before the event starts. (Right, George?) So it would make little sense for another federation (i.e., Estonia) to protest now. Hopefully Peter Krick addresses this soon.

I say -- let's send three U.S. ladies to Torino just for the heck of it and see what happens.

For results, protests must go in within a certain (I don't remember) time limit after the event is over. Don't know how the rules cover protests over entrants who should not have been entered in the first palce. In the ancient ancient past (like 100 years ago!) the ISU would just nullify the offending results. From what I hear, no country wants to be "bad cop" and raise the issue with the ISU, though the Estonians would be the logical choice since their team got unfairly eliminated. As afar as I can see it does not affect the number of entries anybody gets next year, so only people who feel that rules should be scrupulously followed are taking note.

Apparently at the ISU rules are like the Pirates' Code in Pirates of the Caribbean -- they are more like suggestions.

Edit: Rule 123 says protests against participation of a competitor must be filed before the start of the competition. Whatever start means. Before the draw? Before the first competitor skates? The rules don't says, but it is obviously too late as the competition is now over.
 
Last edited:

bigsisjiejie

Record Breaker
Joined
Nov 22, 2009
Knowing the Chinese like I do, it would not surprise me if money passed hands in a back room--speculation. Money or no, unless ISU can point to a defined loophole or exception that the Chinese legitimately took advantage of, the Federation should be punished by the ISU nullifying all 3 Chinese pairs' results, and the standings and medals for the pairs events redistributed. And a one-year suspension from international competition. Yes, this sounds harsh and punishes the skaters, but this is the only kind of message the Chinese federation (and govt) will understand. Ignoring "the rules" (age rules) worked for them in more than one Olympics for gymnastics, so why not bend them for figure skating too? If allowed, they WILL take unfair advantage of the rest of the world if it benefits them.
 
Top