How should USFS identify/cultivate talent?

sunnystars said:

I would love to see how USFS deals with Starr, Alexia, and Ashley. Each with their own potentials and have the technical capabilities that the US needs to combat against Japan and Russia (and S. Korea ) in the junior field.

Click to expand...

What I hope is that USFS becomes more proactive about talented skaters. I.e. Monitoring their technique, giving feedback for improvement, and connecting them resources in addition to their training they do in the summer. Truthfully, I think their program needs to be revamped, but that's a much longer post.

frida80 said:

What I hope is that USFS becomes more proactive about talented skaters. I.e. Monitoring their technique, giving feedback for improvement, and connecting them resources in addition to their training they do in the summer. Truthfully, I think their program needs to be revamped, but that's a much longer post.

Click to expand...

What do you have in mind? (This would probably fit best in a new thread in The Edge)

Keep in mind that there are dozens of junior and senior ladies with some or all triples training at training centers and local rinks thousands of miles apart across the US. It's not like Japan where the distances are much smaller, or Russia where the vast majority of competitive skaters are based in Moscow or St. Petersburg.

Not to mention even more promising girls at lower levels, even more spread out across the US.

Would this program involve getting them all together in one place, on occasions other than when they're competing against each other? Would that be yet another expense for the families?

Would monitors go to specified club competitions where many of the skaters would be competing anyway?

How would talent be identified to be eligible for this program?

Would it involve telling the coaches how to coach? Or telling skaters to change coaches, pressuring them to move away from home?

Some of this already happens. Are you thinking of expanding it to include more skaters, more centralized input? Or what?

Could any of it be done by video/online without requiring travel?

gkelly said:

What do you have in mind? (This would probably fit best in a new thread in The Edge)

Keep in mind that there are dozens of junior and senior ladies with some or all triples training at training centers and local rinks thousands of miles apart across the US. It's not like Japan where the distances are much smaller, or Russia where the vast majority of competitive skaters are based in Moscow or St. Petersburg.

Not to mention even more promising girls at lower levels, even more spread out across the US.

Would this program involve getting them all together in one place, on occasions other than when they're competing against each other? Would that be yet another expense for the families?

Would monitors go to specified club competitions where many of the skaters would be competing anyway?

How would talent be identified to be eligible for this program?

Would it involve telling the coaches how to coach? Or telling skaters to change coaches, pressuring them to move away from home?

Some of this already happens. Are you thinking of expanding it to include more skaters, more centralized input? Or what?

Could any of it be done by video/online without requiring travel?

Click to expand...

I have answers to all of that. Let me just explain after I take a break.

gkelly said:

What do you have in mind? (This would probably fit best in a new thread in The Edge)

Keep in mind that there are dozens of junior and senior ladies with some or all triples training at training centers and local rinks thousands of miles apart across the US. It's not like Japan where the distances are much smaller, or Russia where the vast majority of competitive skaters are based in Moscow or St. Petersburg.

Not to mention even more promising girls at lower levels, even more spread out across the US.

Would this program involve getting them all together in one place, on occasions other than when they're competing against each other? Would that be yet another expense for the families?

Would monitors go to specified club competitions where many of the skaters would be competing anyway?

How would talent be identified to be eligible for this program?

Would it involve telling the coaches how to coach? Or telling skaters to change coaches, pressuring them to move away from home?

Some of this already happens. Are you thinking of expanding it to include more skaters, more centralized input? Or what?

Could any of it be done by video/online without requiring travel?

Click to expand...

Holistically identify potential in young juniors, novices, and maybe even intermediates based on sectionals/nationals practices, performances, and results. Don't look at results alone, because results might not indicate overall potential. Have lots of meetings between these "scouts" on the lookout for talent at these competitions, get them to narrow down to a list of 20 or so girls.

Next look at who is coaching these girls, scrutinize their jump technique. Overall, US ladies always seem to have strong basics, spins, and performance ability - but jump technique (URs especially) hold girls back at the international level. Get involved with the coaches of the girls who need help with technique, pay expenses to bring in specialists - perhaps have a few-week-long jump technique seminar for these girls and their coaches every summer (in a cheap place where travel expenses aren't bad, lol). This also gives the girls a chance to scope out their competition, light a bit of a fire to do better.

At what age/level do skaters and their parents start getting advice to change coaches? For the ladies, that type of "career making-or-breaking" feedback needs to come at, like, 9-12 years old. And I think jump technique needs to take priority in those types of decisions.

andromache said:

Holistically identify potential in young juniors, novices, and maybe even intermediates based on sectionals/nationals practices, performances, and results. Don't look at results alone, because results might not indicate overall potential. Have lots of meetings between these "scouts" on the lookout for talent at these competitions, get them to narrow down to a list of 20 or so girls.

Click to expand...

What about regionals? Sometimes there are more than 4 girls with national potential at the same level in the same strong region -- they're not all going to make it to sectionals let alone Nationals that year.

Currently there is some monitoring of skaters assigned to or in consideration international events at a few designated large summer club competitions. I think that's mainly judges and tech specialists/controllers giving advice about how to maximize their programs for international competition, but I don't know details.

Also, I think an official will sometimes go to skaters' home rinks to monitor their progress -- again, skaters who already have international assignments.

I think you're talking about identifying skaters at a much earlier level and offering them more detailed input.

If the skaters are paying for it, I wouldn't necessarily limit it to just 20 at intermediate or maybe novice level. Maybe establish a skill level that qualifies the skater for an invitation, if 30 skaters meet in one year and 15 another year so be it, and then it's up to those invited whether they want to attend.

Doing it in a way that supports ambitious young coaches in learning better coaching techniques -- disseminating the knowledge more widely to local rinks -- would be preferable to taking talented skaters away from local coaches.

Boys should be included too -- and there would be fewer total numbers, but a higher percentage of the much lower total number of boys competing in the US.

At what age/level do skaters and their parents start getting advice to change coaches? For the ladies, that type of "career making-or-breaking" feedback needs to come at, like, 9-12 years old. And I think jump technique needs to take priority in those types of decisions.

Click to expand...

Nine-year-olds may not even be competing in juvenile yet, unless they're exceptionally precocious (e.g., already have a double axel) or exceptionally ambitious. The talented intermediates tend to be 11-13, and with the new bonus many of the better jumpers are trying two or more triples at that level.

Many families of aspiring national competitors would be thrilled to be singled out and invited to a week-long technique seminar and find a way to make it possible to attend.

They might be flattered to be advised they have talent and should consider moving to a training center, but only a fraction would actually consider doing so -- moving the whole family, breaking up the family so one parent can accompany the child, sending their child away to live with strangers would be deal breakers for many, for financial or family values or educational reasons, etc. Obviously those who already live near a top coach have an advantage and can decide on their own when it's time to make a coaching change.

At my local rink, I see very young girls, <10 years of age, who are jumping doubles all over the place and they all have really bad, bent knee mule kicks jamming their toe picks into the ice to get enough height to do two revolutions on their toe jumps, and a very high bent-knee kick on the axel. I'm just like, where are their coaches, and why are they letting these young girls get away with such terrible technique? Does it not matter as long as you rotate your jumps? I guess most parents don't really see their kids as becoming full-time figure skaters, to them it's just a hobby, but IF these girls end up wanting to do it more, they are very limited because that bad technique learned when you were young will take a lot of work to relearn, if it's even possible.

Is this a normal thing? Like, if they ever decide to start skating seriously, would it be possible to get rid of bad technique like that? They're all still quite young -- all less than 10, the youngest probably around 7.

gkelly said:

If the skaters are paying for it, I wouldn't necessarily limit it to just 20 at intermediate or maybe novice level. Maybe establish a skill level that qualifies the skater for an invitation, if 30 skaters meet in one year and 15 another year so be it, and then it's up to those invited whether they want to attend.

Doing it in a way that supports ambitious young coaches in learning better coaching techniques -- disseminating the knowledge more widely to local rinks -- would be preferable to taking talented skaters away from local coaches.

Boys should be included too -- and there would be fewer total numbers, but a higher percentage of the much lower total number of boys competing in the US.

Nine-year-olds may not even be competing in juvenile yet, unless they're exceptionally precocious (e.g., already have a double axel) or exceptionally ambitious. The talented intermediates tend to be 11-13, and with the new bonus many of the better jumpers are trying two or more triples at that level.

Click to expand...

1. I think a seminar that brings in both the talented students and their coaches would be effective in both disseminating knowledge to promising young coaches (and by extension, their rinks, plus they can observe each other) and in giving the girls a chance to watch each other, too. IMO, Japan and Russia are having success in part due to their centralization. We can at least try a bit of that.

2. Regarding ages, I just came up with those numbers off the top of my head. Based on what we're seeing in juniors from Russia and Japan, we've got to find and train the best girls before the ages of 13-14 - that's the age at which the best start making their names as juniors, which for many, has translated into success at the senior level.

3. Boys can get involved too. I'm just focusing on the ladies at the moment, as that seems to be where the "crisis" is.

narcissa said:

At my local rink, I see very young girls, <10 years of age, who are jumping doubles all over the place and they all have really bad, bent knee mule kicks jamming their toe picks into the ice to get enough height to do two revolutions on their toe jumps, and a very high bent-knee kick on the axel. I'm just like, where are their coaches, and why are they letting these young girls get away with such terrible technique? Does it not matter as long as you rotate your jumps? I guess most parents don't really see their kids as becoming full-time figure skaters, to them it's just a hobby, but IF these girls end up wanting to do it more, they are very limited because that bad technique learned when you were young will take a lot of work to relearn, if it's even possible.

Click to expand...

I think your observation illustrates the problem of parents (rather than a federation) footing the bill. Since parents are paying for lessons, they want to see results. Does a coach train poor technique so a girl can do a lutz at 10, or does he lose a student because the parents don't think he is effective? As an outsider, we know that training technique that can survive puberty is important, but parents might not want to be paying for 10 years of elite training when they see someone like Julia L. doing all the jumps at age 11.

Maybe we could start with something simple:

They could try not turning their noses up at any skater who doesn't fit their snob-nosed narrow-minded definition of artistry.

andromache said:

... perhaps have a few-week-long jump technique seminar for these girls and their coaches every summer (in a cheap place where travel expenses aren't bad, lol). This also gives the girls a chance to scope out their competition, light a bit of a fire to do better. ...

Click to expand...

For the second year in a row, USFS will be holding a three-day jump camp in May in Colorado Springs. For young ladies and men.

I don't claim to remember (or to ever have known) every detail of the inaugural 2016 edition super-accurately, but:

"Jump On It! Camp seems to be a counterpart to the USFS Program Components Camp, which has been going on for years and which is continuing this year.
As has been true for Program Components Camp, USFS did relatively little to publicize the 2016 Jump On It! Camp when the camp was in progress. USFS eventually reposted a few photos from the social media of individual team leaders, from TZ, etc. (I do not know how USFS had publicized the camp to those eligible to enroll.)
At the time that the camp was happening, I did come across a few mentions on social media from individual campers about making headway or even a breakthrough (my word) on a certain jump.
I found the 2017 jump camp page at the link above only because I went looking for it.

Something a little different is that just this week in Kansas City, USFS had some kind of mini-camp (called "Figure U," IIRC) after the conclusion of Nats competition for lower levels. (I realize that it is casting a smaller net to have something limited to kids who already qualified for Nats. Jump camp is open to those who have competed at regionals.)
A couple of Figure U attendees (or their parents??) -- but not USFS itself, iirc -- posted photos on social media of Tanith's keynote. Plus on the latest edition of IceTalk published today, I heard Tanith talk a little bit about Figure U. Definitely included on-ice instruction, b/c she said something about needing to prepare herself by returning to the ice for the first time in months to be ready to demonstrate edges, for example.

The point is that for those of us who are not directly involved with young skaters who are eligible for opportunities like the jump camp or Figure U, I do not think we can really know the full scope of what USFS already is doing for promising skaters.
(I do recognize that some GS members are in a position to be familiar with everything that USFS is doing. But there are plenty of us who are not.)

So whenever I see a wish-list on GS that USFS should do A and B and C and D and E, etc. ... I always think to myself that for all I know, it is very possible that USFS already has been doing A and C and D ... plus something very similar to E ... maybe nothing similar to B ...

It would be even better if something could be done to make skating less expensive, especially for beginners. Everything is so expensive nowadays I bet lots of families would jump on the opportunity for low cost/free weekly ice time at their local skating rink.

Allow more than 12 skaters in singles at Junior Nationals.

The US should give Rafael his own rink, with shut doors and everything. Then we could have some incredible skaters, according to Raf.

Nathan13 said:

Allow more than 12 skaters in singles at Junior Nationals.

Click to expand...

They used to, back when Junior Nationals (i.e. Juvenile/Intermediate levels) were in a separate competition. 2012 Junior Nationals had 41 Intermediate Ladies, 41 Intermediate Men, 42 Juvenile Girls, and 41 Juvenile Boys. Each was then split into 2 qualifying groups and 20 actually competed in the Competitive Round. Also, the Int/Juv singles skaters didn't go through Sectionals. Just Regionals.

With everyone going through one big longer competition now instead of splitting things off, there's probably somewhat of an ice time issue to run through qualifying rounds and competitive rounds in addition to all the other age divisions. Plus, everyone going through Sectionals probably complicates things. It seems like they're trying to keep the qualifying procedure consistent across all levels, which ends up working against the younger skaters who end up now never making it out of Regionals due to eleventy-billion qualifying groups.

(I agree they should allow more of the younger skaters, especially due to sheer volume. Or have some sort of secondary Nationals circuit thing like Russia has a bunch of "Younger Nationals" type competitions)

Chemistry66 said:

They used to, back when Junior Nationals (i.e. Juvenile/Intermediate levels) were in a separate competition. 2012 Junior Nationals had 41 Intermediate Ladies, 41 Intermediate Men, 42 Juvenile Girls, and 41 Juvenile Boys. Each was then split into 2 qualifying groups and 20 actually competed in the Competitive Round. Also, the Int/Juv singles skaters didn't go through Sectionals. Just Regionals.

With everyone going through one big longer competition now instead of splitting things off, there's probably somewhat of an ice time issue to run through qualifying rounds and competitive rounds in addition to all the other age divisions. Plus, everyone going through Sectionals probably complicates things. It seems like they're trying to keep the qualifying procedure consistent across all levels, which ends up working against the younger skaters who end up now never making it out of Regionals due to eleventy-billion qualifying groups.

(I agree they should allow more of the younger skaters, especially due to sheer volume. Or have some sort of secondary Nationals circuit thing like Russia has a bunch of "Younger Nationals" type competitions)

Click to expand...

I think 12 skaters is fine for Juvenile/Intermediate/Novice, but by the time they are Juniors I think it needs to be more than 12. There are many more skaters who could be competitive that don't make it to Nationals. In my opinion, they should do four or so "wild card" entries, where the top 4 scores from any sectional that did not place in the top 4 get to go to nationals (so it could be, for example, 4 skaters from Pacific Coast Sectionals, 5th through 9th, if they are the next four highest scores).

Ideally, they should have a Junior Nationals before Senior Nationals, and then let the top 6 Juniors skate against the Seniors at Senior Nats a month or so later. That way their first time skating in front of a large audience or on live TV wouldn't be at their first Senior GP or their first Senior Nats. I think that is one of the main issues: the juniors are obviously much more inexperienced so it understandably takes them longer to get used to the pomp and circumstance, whereas Russian juniors are skating against seniors and huge, enthusiastic audiences at a much younger age. IMO, there is no reason (other than that he needs a Junior National title) why Alexei Kraznoshon is not skating against the Seniors (as well as his fellow US Junior competitors Hiwatashi, Torgashev, and Zhou) and getting nationwide exposure and legitimate performance experience.