Should US Figure Skating have training camps like they do in US Gymnastics ? | Page 2 | Golden Skate

Should US Figure Skating have training camps like they do in US Gymnastics ?

Ptichka

Forum translator
Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 28, 2003
I agree that the Champs Camp is exactly the figure skating equivalent of gymnastics training camps.

Russia also holds national training camps for figure skating, but it is somewhat similar to Champs Camp, too.
 

dorispulaski

Wicked Yankee Girl
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Country
United-States
If your point was that some people find having the world team chosen by back room machinations more objectionable than actually considering how skaters skated in a competition, then I did definitely prove it ;)
 

Scout

Final Flight
Joined
Sep 5, 2009
my gut says no. it's like a bootcamp with some very harsh practices. The girls - especially - already have enough issues to contend with, they don't need that pressure cooker pushing them to do even more to their body.

Does it have harsh practices? I think it did under Bela, but not so much under Marta. Mary Lee Tracy (Head Coach Cincinnati Gymnastics, with 4 girls competiting in the upcoming VISA Championships) said that she loves the ranch, they do not overtrain and that the practices are less gruesome at the ranch, because there isn't enough time to get the same amount of numbers in (i.e. routines) (from a gymnastike interview following the junior Classics comp: "Mary Lee Tracy Head Coach Cincinnati Gymnastics after the Junior Competition"). US gymnasts do have more pressure sets and verifications, but that might be part of the reason they are so successful.

From a Canadian perspective, I think that there's some potential in the idea that skaters "face off" against each other more often. Get the top novice, junior and senior skaters together more often, so that they can motivate and push each other to do better. I understand the earlier point about skating not having as many "skills" as gymnastics, but Canadian ladies skaters are pretty weak jumpers. Canadian junior champs rarely land more than one of two triples, and triple flip and lutz attempts are rare. If novice and junior skaters got together more often, they'd get to see their competitor's progress. If one skater is landing a new triple jump, that can serve as motivation for another skater to get their triple jump.
 

Scout

Final Flight
Joined
Sep 5, 2009
Just to elaborate on what I meant, and provide some examples. Weaver/Poje started working in Detroit to be able to practice with other top dance teams. Virtue/Moir and Davis/White train together, pushing each other on a daily basis. And having V/M and D/W as training partners was likely to the Shibs advantage. My hope is that a training camp would allow the ladies to spur each other on, and to help them deal with pressure/learning how to compete. I don't imagine a boot camp type of event or physically harsh practices.
 

Jtsmith12

On the Ice
Joined
Jun 20, 2011
I agree with you Scout, I should have put this in my OP, but I when I said have training camps like US gymnastics I didn't mean they would have to be exactly be like that. Just a place were top skaters can train with each other and see how their programs stack against each other in a less competitive enivorment. With all the talk about how the skaters should be selected for the world team and with many people saying send the second and third place skater to 4CC and who ever gets the better result send them to worlds, instead of hoping that one skater falters and one that we think should go to worlds does well why not just have a camp and the skaters face off there. Whoever performs the best at camp gets sent to worlds the other gets sent to 4CC. There problem solved. Both skaters go to 4CC hopefully do their best get on the podium and one skater goes to worlds and hopefully does there best and gets on the podium. Does that make sense ?
 

gkelly

Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
From a Canadian perspective, I think that there's some potential in the idea that skaters "face off" against each other more often. Get the top novice, junior and senior skaters together more often, so that they can motivate and push each other to do better.

How would this work in the US, where there are probably a couple dozen novice and junior ladies with the basic skills to deserve consideration and only a dozen spots for each at Nationals, plus a few extras with JGP byes?

Already the federation rewards skaters who do well at Nationals with international assignments, envelope funding, monitoring, Champs Camp...

Skaters who were just as good but had a bad day at sectionals and ended their season early last year won't have those advantages but might be skating better this year than some of those who do. Same for skaters who made a breakthrough, e.g., all of a sudden started landing harder jumps they didn't have yet last year or got past a gawky phase and suddenly look more mature and polished on the ice.

Already there are lots of club competitions in the off season where skaters can try out new programs and size themselves up against the competition. Some of the most prestigious offer critiques and panels filled with national and international judges. These opportunities are open to any skater willing to pay the entry fees, although the big prestigious events do tend to be located in areas that have a lot of competitive skaters and officials, so skaters who train in more isolated locations would have to travel more to take advantage of them. And it's all at the skater's own expense.

These kids are still developing, still growing (which can lead to big changes positive or negative in jumping ability especially). The level of competition in the junior ladies events at the three US sectional competitions may be more intense than at the average JGP event, but some of the strong skaters aren't even going to make it to Nationals in any given year.

Should USFS also offer more extended training camps or invitation-only competitions to 8 or 10 ladies who looked the most promising last year and nothing to everyone else? Or should they try to spread the opportunities to several dozen promising novice-junior-early senior ladies?

How do they determine who gets invited and who doesn't?

What time of year? Always in Colorado Springs or should it move around? Who pays for the travel, hotel/dorm, meals, etc.? Are coaches and/or parents invited too?

The numbers are smaller with other disciplines, but the principles would be similar.

Focusing on just top seniors makes more sense, if you can define what qualifies as "top." But there are still going to be surprises, e.g. Dornbush last season.
 

gkelly

Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Whoever performs the best at camp gets sent to worlds the other gets sent to 4CC. There problem solved. Both skaters go to 4CC hopefully do their best get on the podium and one skater goes to worlds and hopefully does there best and gets on the podium. Does that make sense ?

Ah, I see. So the camp would be after Nationals and before Four Continents. Nationals would choose a select group of seniors to be considered for the senior ISU championships, and then that select group would be invited to another week away from home where they have to prove themselves further.

That would make sense if there were plenty of time between Nationals and 4Cs so skaters could go home and recharge, then come to camp, and then go to whichever championship they get selected for (or go home disappointed if they're not chosen for either).

But very often 4Cs is scheduled only one or two weeks after US Nationals. Not much time for a relaxed training camp in between.

And then there's often almost two months between 4Cs and Worlds. Plenty of time for skaters who were named to the world team after the training camp to get injured, for minor injuries to get exacerbated, etc. A training camp in late January-early February would not have prevented the situation with Rachael Flatt in April (or even March if Worlds had been held on schedule).
 

Tonichelle

Idita-Rock-n-Roll
Record Breaker
Joined
Jun 27, 2003
aren't there numerous training "camps" throughout the summer months? Big name skaters/coaches/choreographers get together with skaters outside their norm and teach them all sorts of things. I know Gregory & Petukhov do (they held one in Alaska last year and have been in CO most of the summer doing the same thing). Ryan Bradley has been doing some. Frank Carroll has done them for years... so it's not like these skaters have never done it. It was the norm for Scott Hamilton when he was climbing the ranks - I assume it's the same for many of the skaters.
 

dorispulaski

Wicked Yankee Girl
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Country
United-States
aren't there numerous training "camps" throughout the summer months? Big name skaters/coaches/choreographers get together with skaters outside their norm and teach them all sorts of things. I know Gregory & Petukhov do (they held one in Alaska last year and have been in CO most of the summer doing the same thing). Ryan Bradley has been doing some. Frank Carroll has done them for years... so it's not like these skaters have never done it. It was the norm for Scott Hamilton when he was climbing the ranks - I assume it's the same for many of the skaters.

Charlie White and Tanith Belbin were involved in a the USFS ice dance camp
(Scroll down a bit. There are 2 stories about it on the front page of ice-dance.com)

http://www.ice-dance.com/
 

mskater93

Record Breaker
Joined
Oct 22, 2005
Skaters who were just as good but had a bad day at sectionals and ended their season early last year won't have those advantages but might be skating better this year than some of those who do. Same for skaters who made a breakthrough, e.g., all of a sudden started landing harder jumps they didn't have yet last year or got past a gawky phase and suddenly look more mature and polished on the ice.
These kids are still developing, still growing (which can lead to big changes positive or negative in jumping ability especially). The level of competition in the junior ladies events at the three US sectional competitions may be more intense than at the average JGP event, but some of the strong skaters aren't even going to make it to Nationals in any given year.
But then there's the summer competitions where a skater can impress and be put into the International Pool for selection by the Competition Committee. Both Lauren Dinh and Gracie Gold got added to the International Pool after Liberty and Detroit respectively for consideration of JGP assignments. Dinh for landing the 3+3 in her SP at Liberty and in general pullling down a pretty big score and Gold for landing a 3+3 in the SP and pulling down the largest summer competition LP score so far (109+).

IF there is a camp, it needs to be in the spring/summer. That's when skaters work on their technique and are best able to make changes to programs, which is really what they need to do to be competitive. During the competition season, there's really "no time" as there's a training plan which focuses on programs. Each coach does it differently, but in general it's similar.
 

Sylvia

Record Breaker
Joined
Aug 25, 2003
But then there's the summer competitions where a skater can impress and be put into the International Pool for selection by the Competition Committee. Both Lauren Dinh and Gracie Gold got added to the International Pool after Liberty and Detroit respectively for consideration of JGP assignments. Dinh for landing the 3+3 in her SP at Liberty and in general pullling down a pretty big score and Gold for landing a 3+3 in the SP and pulling down the largest summer competition LP score so far (109+).
I know you meant to type Leah Keiser (2010 US Novice ladies champion), not Lauren Dinh (who was 2nd in Junior at 2011 US Nationals and already in the International Selection Pool). There's a recent article on Icenetwork about Gold, Keiser, and the 3 other JGP age-eligible singles skaters added to the ISP titled "Notebook: U.S. ladies vie for scarce JGP slots."

BTW, Vanessa Lam (7th in Senior at 2011 US Nationals) reportedly now has a the highest known summer competition FS score (111+) from Silicon Valley Open this past weekend.

US Figure Skating already holds summer mini-camps for their team envelope and ISP skaters at Liberty, Skate Detroit, Glacier Falls (this coming weekend) and Indy Challenge (pairs) and Lake Placid (dance) -- link: http://www.usfigureskating.org/Athletes.asp?id=448

Champs Camp is now designated for Senior Grand Prix skaters only.
 
Last edited:

Scout

Final Flight
Joined
Sep 5, 2009
I think the camps held in the summer and such are very different from the camps that are referred to in the original post. The gymnastics camps refered to in the OP refer to a 2-3 day MONTHLY camp that junior/senior female gymnasts must attend (please correct me if I'm wrong). It seems to me that it's very different from the camps figure skating athletes attend when they spend a few weeks training somewhere other than their regular training base. The gymnastics camps are short, standardized and frequent. They help build mental toughness and allow an athlete to see the progress other athletes have made. It's a type of motivation that doesn't always occur during daily practice sessions, depending on where you train. (Also, 2-3 day camps are held annual for top gymnasts aged 8-11. In the skating world, if a skater doesn't have at least a double axel by age 12, it's obviously harder to reach the top echelon of the sport. IMO, camps could potential help develop a skater.Canada doesn't have 13 or 14 year olds with a full set of triples (sans the 3A). Obviously there's a lot of factors - population size, funding from the country, facilities, etc., that contribute to this, but I do think a better program is needed to develop younger athletes.).

Obviously, camps would have to be different for figure skating. And there are a lot of major issues to address, cost obviously being the most challenging, and location, selection of athletes, frequency of camp, program/activities. I do think that the only deal breaker would be the funding of the program. Everything else could be resolved, although obviously saying cost is a "biggie" would probably be an understatement. Right now, I'm more interested in the development of the idea of the camp itself, and not necessarily all of the logistics of it.

I think it could be beneficial to Canadian ladies -especially the younger ones - to meet up with each other regularly, in a pressure-ish situation, but not a competition. Sort of a "Fire and Ice" exhibition type thing that Broadmoor has, but combined with practice sessions where the top intermediate/novice/junior ladies (30 of them?) could practice together. I think this sort of thing would have been beneficial to a younger Alexandra Najarro, who has probably been the top skater at her club for a long time, and didn't have the advantage of training with a Joannie Rochette - or even a Kate Charbonneau or Rylie M-C to push her. I'm not sure if the same sort of thing would work for a Leah Keiser, who has a great jumping arsenal already and trains with top athletes already. The problem with US ladies is very different than the problem with Canadian ladies, so IMHO, the purpose, type and necessity of a camp differs for the two countries.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Thanks for proving my point. :laugh:

As I understand your point, it is that winning a mere national championship is no big deal in the grand scheme of things, and that we should put sharper focus and greater effort into international events and especially the world championship.

I don't agree. If I were in charge of the USFSA's media office (I am waiting for the call, any minute now :) ), I would push the national program to the hilt. Here's why.

Suppose Mirai wins the world championship next year. At best she will get one line in the U.S. papers the next day, "Marie Naguso wins skate title." Which is one line more than Alissa Czisny got for winning the Grand Prix Final last year (the what?)

I think the model for promoting U.S. Nationals should be the NCAA basketball championships (March madness). Emphasize all the many skaters that are striving to make the tournament. Who are the favorites? Who will be the final four (last to skate in the free program)?

Winner take all. Losers? Well, they will work on acquiring extra skills in the off season for next year's run.

I also think that Skate America could be marketed more aggressively as the best in the U.S. against stars from around the globe, to kick off the new season. Rather than as one of six meets where federations scheme and skaters jockey for position.

Yes, it's a hard sell. But I think it is our best shot.
 

R.D.

Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Again, we should just admit to ourselves that skating's glory days in the US are long over. The Nationals will be relegated to a niche event once again. It's just too difficult with the media fragmentation nowadays. Even the NCAA tourney games are now spread across cable channels (CBS used to carry them all regionally). Major events like the British Open, college football's BCS, and now tennis' Wimbledon are all cable-only events with little to no broadcast coverage. The times have changed.

I don't think there's any amount of selling, advertising, or "toughening up" that skating can do to endear it once again to the public. They got their taste of it in the 90s, and moved on. It's a once-in-4-years Olympic sport that will draw a sizable audience when Olys come around, with only dedicated fans like ourselves caring what happens in between. Luckily for us, NBC cares enough about it to at least put the Nationals on in prime time (they do the same with Gymnastics IIRC). Let's see if maybe we can get expanded cable coverage now with the Versus network becoming the NBC Sports Network starting next year.

As I understand your point, it is that winning a mere national championship is no big deal in the grand scheme of things, and that we should put sharper focus and greater effort into international events and especially the world championship.

Well, I seem to understand the opposing point as being that the whole purpose of holding the Nationals is to determine the World team (a World Trials or Olympic Trials if you will), and to heck with the title.

I think skaters will ALWAYS hold a US championship or medal in high regard. You don't need to throw in guaranteed qualification for Worlds to make the medals more significant. The history of the US Nationals speaks for itself, IMO. The title wouldn't be valued any less if it merely helped you get to worlds rather than guarantee it altogether. Besides, ponder this: is Nagasu's 2008 title less significant than Czisny's in 2011 since the former didn't go to Worlds?

That's the way I see it. Making US Nationals part of the qualification process instead of the ENTIRE qualification process does not make the competition less significant or a "waste of time". The competition is so much more than simply trying to get to worlds. What about all the skaters who aren't in contention to make the team? For them, just COMPETING at nationals is a huge achievement. You're not going to take that away by modifying the world team selection process. JMO.

But of course you want to be as objective as possible when choosing the team, while at the same time sending the strongest team that year to worlds. Historically the top finishers at US Nationals have been significantly better than their competition, so it was fine to send the top 2 or 3. But now, with the IJS, and the increased depth, I don't think it's that simple any more. You're no longer guaranteed to send your strongest team if you simply pick the top 2 in a competition that could well have different results depending on the day you hold them.
 

Dee4707

Ice Is Slippery - Alexie Yagudin
Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 28, 2003
Country
United-States
I don't think there's any amount of selling, advertising, or "toughening up" that skating can do to endear it once again to the public. They got their taste of it in the 90s, and moved on.
I don't understand ....why just the 90's????
 

mskater93

Record Breaker
Joined
Oct 22, 2005
But of course you want to be as objective as possible when choosing the team, while at the same time sending the strongest team that year to worlds. Historically the top finishers at US Nationals have been significantly better than their competition, so it was fine to send the top 2 or 3. But now, with the IJS, and the increased depth, I don't think it's that simple any more. You're no longer guaranteed to send your strongest team if you simply pick the top 2 in a competition that could well have different results depending on the day you hold them.

On the flip side of your argument, how can you be as objective as possible if Nationals is the only time the skaters square off head to head with choosing the team if Nationals is no longer a 99% guarantee of going to Worlds? This is the one time that all the top skaters face each other head to head as the federation tries to keep the top 3-4 separated during the GP season to give them a fighting chance of making the finals. You can't compare scores across events as much as the ISU would like people to think you can because each tech panel is different from a strict/loose standpoint on under-rotations (<<, < and no call), edge call (some let < 6 inches go for a change of edge on a take off), and rotations in a position for spins (some wait for a full revolution in the established position before they count, some wait about 1/2 a revolution, and some have even stranger methods of counting), and judges have different opinions on PCS and GOEs which change depending on the event sometimes.

If you can't withstand the pressure of Nationals and don't put out your best when you know it's do it cleanly or start a new season, why would the International Committee think that the skater will be any better at Worlds? I mean, everyone "knows" that Nagasu on an average-for-her day is a better skater than Flatt on her near-best days, but if Nagasu takes the ice with a defeated look and screws up a few elements (like getting the "Mrs. Dash" for the flying sit spin) right after Czisny blows the doors off the rink with her almost "personal perfection" skate, why wouldn't the IC think that Nagasu would fold if she skated right after someone blows the doors off the rink at Worlds? Yeah, Nagasu skated sublimely at 4CC, but she had nothing to lose/prove there as she wasn't going to Worlds, even if she beat everyone there. Most of the issue with the 2011 team had to do with Flatt's lack of reporting her injury because she was primed to finish in the 8 spot (even with the big mistake on her Lutz in her SP she was ranked 8th after SP) and if she hadn't had an injury meltdown (for the second time of the season) it would be a totally moot point.
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Well, I seem to understand the opposing point as being that the whole purpose of holding the Nationals is to determine the World team (a World Trials or Olympic Trials if you will), and to heck with the title.

I look at it like this. What's up for grabs at the National Championship is the title of "best skater in America."

Now in any sport you can always argue after the fact. Are the Green Bay Packers the best football team in America just because they won the Super Bowl? I think the Steelers are better, and I don't care what the score of the game was.

According to the terms of Lord Stanley's will, the Stanley Cup goes to "the best hockey team in Canada" (now including lower Canada). Is the Stanley Cup winner really the best team in Canada, or is someone else better but just had a couple of bad breaks?

If the title "best in America" is on the line, there has to be a competition to decide it. Second guessing falls into the category of "wait tll next year."

Now...having determined the "best skater in America," who should we send to Worlds? Should we convene around a conference table and and say, well, yes, the Packers won the game, but come on, everyone knows they're not really the best? And who is the "we" who so convenes and says?
 

R.D.

Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
On the flip side of your argument, how can you be as objective as possible if Nationals is the only time the skaters square off head to head with choosing the team if Nationals is no longer a 99% guarantee of going to Worlds? This is the one time that all the top skaters face each other head to head as the federation tries to keep the top 3-4 separated during the GP season to give them a fighting chance of making the finals.

Good point in theory, but in practice what has happened is that the world team has been selected based on increasingly controversial results in recent years. There are issues of skaters being marked much higher in certain scoring components than they would be internationally, which is fine by itself; but there have also been allegations of "favoring" certain skaters by increasing their amount of "Nationals inflation" relative to others...or "boosting" their scores regardless of performance if they had a great season prior to the event. I don't think the current method is as "objective" as some would like to think.


You can't compare scores across events as much as the ISU would like people to think you can because each tech panel is different from a strict/loose standpoint on under-rotations (<<, < and no call), edge call (some let < 6 inches go for a change of edge on a take off), and rotations in a position for spins (some wait for a full revolution in the established position before they count, some wait about 1/2 a revolution, and some have even stranger methods of counting), and judges have different opinions on PCS and GOEs which change depending on the event sometimes.

That is also true; but I tend to see more of a difference in scoring between National and International events than I do among International events. Rachel Flatt for example would NEVER get the program components she gets at Nats at ANY international event, regardless of panel.


If you can't withstand the pressure of Nationals and don't put out your best when you know it's do it cleanly or start a new season, why would the International Committee think that the skater will be any better at Worlds? I mean, everyone "knows" that Nagasu on an average-for-her day is a better skater than Flatt on her near-best days, but if Nagasu takes the ice with a defeated look and screws up a few elements (like getting the "Mrs. Dash" for the flying sit spin) right after Czisny blows the doors off the rink with her almost "personal perfection" skate, why wouldn't the IC think that Nagasu would fold if she skated right after someone blows the doors off the rink at Worlds? Yeah, Nagasu skated sublimely at 4CC, but she had nothing to lose/prove there as she wasn't going to Worlds, even if she beat everyone there.

Nagasu ALREADY wiped out at Worlds the season prior, so she was anything BUT a sure shot this year. We already knew that she was capable of folding under pressure. Then again, that was '09-'10.

In '10-'11, I didn't see any real difference between Nagasu and Flatt. Both had rough outings as well as highlight moments. But Flatt was the one that squeezed into the GPF. I could accept Flatt getting the 2nd spot, but they should have kept a better eye on her health (and all the other World Team members' health for that matter).
 
Last edited:

mskater93

Record Breaker
Joined
Oct 22, 2005
Yes, and I mentioned the health issue further in my paragraph. I suspect that is something that will be rectified in this season by USFS. Tom Z clearly knew the rules since he made sure Bradley reported his broken toe in 2010. He must have known how bad off she was...

I do agree that National vs International has a bigger spread than GP to GP (although there were allegations of a really tough tech panel at one GP last year where the scores were really super low which was "unfair in the tie breaking process" for those who placed there). Yes, there are allegations that Flatt's "National Bump" is higher than other skaters, but these people typically aren't in the arena and often "wuz-robbed" for another skater (take your pick who they love). There are just some people that kick it up a notch (or two or three) when the pressure is on and do their best work when everyone's eyes are glued to them. Since I have not been in the arena when she has skated at any point ever, I can't rightly say that this the case, but it's possible that Flatt actually does her best work at Nationals (and maybe she gets a little more nervous or has a training let down after nationals since she probably sets up her training to peak there and so consequently skates slower at 4CC/Worlds than she did at Nationals) and that the national bump is magnified by the kicking it up a notch. Maybe if she skated exactly like Nationals at Worlds, she would get an equivalent score minus the national bump? Just speculating as I can't say for sure.

On the flip side, if Nagasu had skated the programs she put out at 4CC at Nationals, she would likely have been National Champion for the second time and probably would have outscored Flatt's score from 2010.

In the last couple years, the controversy really should have revolved more around the tech panels than the judging at Nationals among fans. The costly thing for Nagasu that was controversial were the three under-rotations that were called, which the judges are required to give a - GOE to, not her PCS mark or any non-required GOE (she got great GOEs on everything else). Even looking at the slow motion that was available, IMO, one call was ridiculously bad (jump clearly rotated), one was marginal (could have gone either way, likely to get called based on reputation going into Nationals), and one was fair (jump clearly short rotation). For Caroline Zhang, it was a bad under-rotation call (jump clearly rotated) in the short program which cost her a trip to Worlds over Alissa Czsiny. You see the same thing at local competitions as well (since it's club comp season, I can compare). This week you get caller X who's pretty lenient and gives levels on spins and steps, next week you get caller Y who argues with the rest of the panel about the quality of the turns in the step sequence that it's a level 1 and will call review for any toe loop take off that doesn't "scoop the poop".
 
Top