Mathman, VIETgrlTerifa and ice coverage all make very good points. I guess we all just need to accept it and move on. I still think the committee should learn from it and perhaps be more transparent about how they applied the criteria if they need to differ from the podium in the future. For example in ice coverage's analysis above to say "even though Polina's past events were in Juniors we feel she had proved..."
2018 USFS Olympic team selection thoughts
- Thread starter Mrs. P
- Start date
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2003
I agree. Whether they chose Polina or Mirai, it was the handling of it the announcement that was bad. Yes, there are criteria and the committee has some discretion to make a judgment call, but it took fans on a forum to battle it out to justify or argue against the selection when the USFS could have given a better statement explaining why each member was chosen. The selection criteria is a little vague in that we don't know how much weight each factor has in the selection, only that there is a hierarchy.
The post referencing swimming highlights the problems with using nationals as the definitive test.
Example-
2004 OG trials, Ian Thorpe, reigning world record holder in 400m freestyle false-starts in heats and is disqualified from event, therefore is not eligible for selection.
The swimmer who went on to win & was selected happened to also qualify for the Games in another event, and declined to accept his 400m spot.
Swimming Australia used discretion to name Thorpe (who had already qualified in other events) as our 400m representative.
He went on to win gold.
Now, had Thorpe not qualified to the team in other events (making him eligible to be added to the 400m given the availability of a spot) and had Stevens (the other athlete, who was not capable of being in Olympic medal contention in the 400m) not chosen to step aside, Aus would have stuck by their rules and lost a virtually guaranteed OGM.
Point being, the counting of only one event to test readiness, while guaranteeing transparency, can backfire in the event of disaster (the lost skates example, sudden outbreak of gastric illness, etc).
Is there room though to argue that someone worthy of a gold medal should not be making mistakes (such as a false start) at trials? Of course.
I would say that if nationals are to be used as the sole qualifier, they should be
A) close enough to the Games for the skaters to be in the actual shape/readiness they will be in for the Games, which allows for both an accurate assessment of their ability, and sees them only have to undergo one taper
B) followed by a seperate verification competition if necessary for athletes who were injured/ill etc at nationals, kind of like how USA Gymnastics verify their athletes, however this discretion should only be used in extreme circumstances and should have very transparent criteria.
Example-
2004 OG trials, Ian Thorpe, reigning world record holder in 400m freestyle false-starts in heats and is disqualified from event, therefore is not eligible for selection.
The swimmer who went on to win & was selected happened to also qualify for the Games in another event, and declined to accept his 400m spot.
Swimming Australia used discretion to name Thorpe (who had already qualified in other events) as our 400m representative.
He went on to win gold.
Now, had Thorpe not qualified to the team in other events (making him eligible to be added to the 400m given the availability of a spot) and had Stevens (the other athlete, who was not capable of being in Olympic medal contention in the 400m) not chosen to step aside, Aus would have stuck by their rules and lost a virtually guaranteed OGM.
Point being, the counting of only one event to test readiness, while guaranteeing transparency, can backfire in the event of disaster (the lost skates example, sudden outbreak of gastric illness, etc).
Is there room though to argue that someone worthy of a gold medal should not be making mistakes (such as a false start) at trials? Of course.
I would say that if nationals are to be used as the sole qualifier, they should be
A) close enough to the Games for the skaters to be in the actual shape/readiness they will be in for the Games, which allows for both an accurate assessment of their ability, and sees them only have to undergo one taper
B) followed by a seperate verification competition if necessary for athletes who were injured/ill etc at nationals, kind of like how USA Gymnastics verify their athletes, however this discretion should only be used in extreme circumstances and should have very transparent criteria.
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2013
And at that time, it caused endless debate in Australia. The overwhelming feeling was that the rules were the rules, and that it was wrong to ask Craig Stevens to give up his hard-earned Olympic spot, but that how could we justify not swimming Thorpe in his best event?
However, the differentiating factor here is that Stevens had already qualified for Athens, and so had Thorpe. What the choice really was was whether to shuffle the swimmers around for Thorpe to compete in the 400. In the end, Stevens agreed to relinquish his spot in the 400, and it was handed to Thorpe. Stevens became an Olympic medallist in the 4 x 200 relay, and Thorpe won the 400 event. But you are unlikely to find any Australian who was old enough to understand who is 100% comfortable with the decision that was made for Athens. Trust me, I remember the controversy vividly, and to this day, I cannot decide whether I think it was right or not. History shows that Stevens won a medal anyway but probably would not have in the 400, and that Thorpe won gold and Hackett silver - would we have won gold in the 400 anyway? Hackett would have won. How could we justify asking Stevens to give up his spot, it was not his fault. But Thorpe tried to stop himself and overbalanced - is it fair that the false-start rule in swimming is more rigid than in other sports? What is more important, should our desire to win gold override all other factors?
That situation was more complex than you paint it - and the public reaction was also more complex than you paint it.
However, the differentiating factor here is that Stevens had already qualified for Athens, and so had Thorpe. What the choice really was was whether to shuffle the swimmers around for Thorpe to compete in the 400. In the end, Stevens agreed to relinquish his spot in the 400, and it was handed to Thorpe. Stevens became an Olympic medallist in the 4 x 200 relay, and Thorpe won the 400 event. But you are unlikely to find any Australian who was old enough to understand who is 100% comfortable with the decision that was made for Athens. Trust me, I remember the controversy vividly, and to this day, I cannot decide whether I think it was right or not. History shows that Stevens won a medal anyway but probably would not have in the 400, and that Thorpe won gold and Hackett silver - would we have won gold in the 400 anyway? Hackett would have won. How could we justify asking Stevens to give up his spot, it was not his fault. But Thorpe tried to stop himself and overbalanced - is it fair that the false-start rule in swimming is more rigid than in other sports? What is more important, should our desire to win gold override all other factors?
That situation was more complex than you paint it - and the public reaction was also more complex than you paint it.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
To me it was pretty clear that the USFSA put the most weight by far on the first criterion -- so much so that Ashley vs. Mirai could be a real question, but not Polina v. Mirai. Things like winning a medal in a single GP event were too far down the list to really count at all.
Others differ, of course, and I think the USFSA was a little bit caught by surprise at the controversy.
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2015
I brought up swimming earlier on... so i feel i should nuance the topic a bit...
the difference with swimming or for instance speed skating (Canadians remember how Morrison had fallen at the trials and though qualified on 1500 meters, he hadn't qualified in his best event, the 1000m. However Gilmore Junio, gave him his spot... and Morrison won silver)... is that the results are 100% objective... we are comparing times here not what somebody landed and how they did it...
So it's fairly easy to think that a swimmer or a speed skater who is qualified for the games, but not for his preferred event can be given a spot by another athlete who is also qualified for his best event....
What my examples talked about though in my own experience is that I didn't qualify because I didn't reach the standard by a fraction of a second due to extenuating circumstances... I hadn't had a false start or a fall... and nobody could give me their spot.... I needed to qualify on my own first... and knowing the rules, I accepted my fate.
I think among athletes, we are more aware of where we are and what we can achieve. In my case, I knew that qualifying borderline would mean no finals at the big event... I'd go all the way there... for a few days, get behind school work, to swim less than 30 seconds... and would be done as I wouldn't get out of the heats... fine... I would have been given a second race.. but ... in any case, I knew where I stood..... and I am pretty sure that even in figure skating, athletes, despite the subjective nature of the sport, are aware of their chances.... there is always a "omg what if I had the skates of my life" possibility... but what ifs are not very important in the mind of an athlete.... we know it's there... but we count on our training.. not on the miracles.
the difference with swimming or for instance speed skating (Canadians remember how Morrison had fallen at the trials and though qualified on 1500 meters, he hadn't qualified in his best event, the 1000m. However Gilmore Junio, gave him his spot... and Morrison won silver)... is that the results are 100% objective... we are comparing times here not what somebody landed and how they did it...
So it's fairly easy to think that a swimmer or a speed skater who is qualified for the games, but not for his preferred event can be given a spot by another athlete who is also qualified for his best event....
What my examples talked about though in my own experience is that I didn't qualify because I didn't reach the standard by a fraction of a second due to extenuating circumstances... I hadn't had a false start or a fall... and nobody could give me their spot.... I needed to qualify on my own first... and knowing the rules, I accepted my fate.
I think among athletes, we are more aware of where we are and what we can achieve. In my case, I knew that qualifying borderline would mean no finals at the big event... I'd go all the way there... for a few days, get behind school work, to swim less than 30 seconds... and would be done as I wouldn't get out of the heats... fine... I would have been given a second race.. but ... in any case, I knew where I stood..... and I am pretty sure that even in figure skating, athletes, despite the subjective nature of the sport, are aware of their chances.... there is always a "omg what if I had the skates of my life" possibility... but what ifs are not very important in the mind of an athlete.... we know it's there... but we count on our training.. not on the miracles.
Bobsled rides are offered to the public at the Olympic Park in Calgary in both summer and winter. There is no upper age limit, though there are weight and health restrictions. You can look up the details online.
Stevens wasn't asked (by Swimming Australia) to relinquish his 400m spot. Did he feel immense public pressure to do so? Of course (admittedly though, FAR less attention than what Ashley attracted due to the limitations of Internet back in those days. Yes, that's right, I am old enough to remember this era.).
But there was no Gutsu-esque closed-door antics going on.
Nor was he bound to bow to public pressure.
I can't speak for the thoughts of those not involved in the sport, but for those of us in it, it mainly just heralded the era of the track start given that this dive makes what you reference as "toppling over" far less likely.
As for being judged more harshly...it's kinda, um, not. You aren't allowed to false start in track, either, but that's getting off topic.
What the selection process here in Aus re swimming DOES have to offer is the comparison between the timing of our trials and yours; our nationals are months ahead of the Games and require athletes to go through a second taper.
Your swimmers are chosen at the last possible moment, meaning they've peaked when required and as shown in Rio are far better equipped to deliver their best.
This is definitely something to consider implementing for skaters IMO for at least the Olympic year. This will eliminate talk of "oh, but so-and-so peaks later so they should go even though they didn't medal at nationals..".
But there was no Gutsu-esque closed-door antics going on.
Nor was he bound to bow to public pressure.
I can't speak for the thoughts of those not involved in the sport, but for those of us in it, it mainly just heralded the era of the track start given that this dive makes what you reference as "toppling over" far less likely.
As for being judged more harshly...it's kinda, um, not. You aren't allowed to false start in track, either, but that's getting off topic.
What the selection process here in Aus re swimming DOES have to offer is the comparison between the timing of our trials and yours; our nationals are months ahead of the Games and require athletes to go through a second taper.
Your swimmers are chosen at the last possible moment, meaning they've peaked when required and as shown in Rio are far better equipped to deliver their best.
This is definitely something to consider implementing for skaters IMO for at least the Olympic year. This will eliminate talk of "oh, but so-and-so peaks later so they should go even though they didn't medal at nationals..".
Do you really know OR is that the official line? I think that Swimming Australia would never let on if they had done this - I'm sure that would always be presented as the athlete's choice.
I am not truing to target Swimming Australia with my comment - I think something similar happens in all sports at all Federation where there is a lot of arm twisting but the story line is "it was the athlete's decision."
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2013
Um, are you seriously trying to tell the Australian who was definitely old enough to remember how it went down?
No, Swimming Australia did not ask him. But yes, there was immense public pressure and scrutiny. As for "Ashley attracted more attention", I'm sorry, that is complete utter bull**** and shows how little you actually know about the situation. Ashley had hardly any attention in comparison to 20 million people who each had an opinion and the paper and television coverage that pondered the decision every single day between when it happened and the end of the 400m swim in Athens. Every person in this country was talking about it. Just because the internet wasn't huge yet, doesn't mean there wasn't attention, geez.
No, you're not allowed to false start in track either. But in track, you actually get a second damn chance.
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2013
Swimming may be a "team" sport, but it's really individual athletes performing on their own.
In the NCAA's, they add up points for a team winner, but not at the Olympics.
Whether it was a good thing or not, the Aussie who gave up his 400 spot had no impact on a "team" outcome. It was to the benefit of Ian Thorpe, and I guess it could be extrapolated to provide benefit to Swimming Australia or national pride or other intangibles. But there's not a "Team Event" in swimming. Excluding relays.
Not condemning or defending the way things played out... but at least that swimmer was still an Olympian.
Also, just to clarify: Track also has a one-false-start rule. Notably, Usain Bolt false-started during a World Championship 100m final, and he was disqualified and not allowed to run.
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2015
I never considered swimming as a team sport.... relays were fun... yes... each swimmer brings in points to their team, but often we didn't even know about results until a few days after the meet... and when we won a meet as a team we would be like... WOOT-WOOT and that was it... LOL
You are in the water/gym, for hours every day/week, and you are own your own, pushing your limits to cap off a few tenths of your best time, to work on style and technique, dives and turns... seriously, yes, I loved my swimming buddies, I cared about my team, but I never had the feeling that I was doing a team sport... except during the odd relays... I actually chose swimming because I sucked at basketball and I was sick of missing the basket and letting my teammates down
with swimming I could just focus on my own results.This being said : there was a tolle of support and the same amount of protest when Skate Canada named Liam Firus to worlds... and then he no longer was going. I certainly don't want to open a can of worms here as we never got to know the full story... but himself tweeted that he had had his Gilmore Junio moment, taking one for the team, in the hope that with Patrick back, there was a better chance to get 3 spots for next year, if he weren't going.... unfortunately, Kevin Reynolds didn't get his TES minimum (some think he was the one who was going to go to worlds) and Nam wasn't quite ready and had a terrible outing.... so there is precedent in figure skating.
Why yes, yes I am, because I was an adult swimmer racing these athletes at the time and who also had family members holding official positions within Swimming Australia.
Why you're assuming I'm young, or not Australian, I have I no idea.
Attention? Ok mate, what would you consider easier to ignore - a hardcopy newspaper, or a story that pops up on the mobile phone you use constantly?
Let's also remember that there was no racial accusations to deal with unlike Ashley & Mirai.
And perhaps the biggest one - nobody was still whinging about the situation four years later, as everyone is doing now.
"Second chance"in track? Not anymore. That rule changed awhile ago.
Why you're assuming I'm young, or not Australian, I have I no idea.
Attention? Ok mate, what would you consider easier to ignore - a hardcopy newspaper, or a story that pops up on the mobile phone you use constantly?
Let's also remember that there was no racial accusations to deal with unlike Ashley & Mirai.
And perhaps the biggest one - nobody was still whinging about the situation four years later, as everyone is doing now.
"Second chance"in track? Not anymore. That rule changed awhile ago.
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2016
Ladies:
Mirai Nagasu, Gracie Gold, Ashley Wagner. (Alt: Karen Chen, Polina Edmunds, Mariah Bell.)
Men: Nathan Chen, Adam Rippon, Vincent Zhou. (Alt: Jason Brown, Ross Miner, Grant Hochstein.)
Pairs: Alexa Knierim/Chris Knierim. (Alt: Haven Denney/Brandon Frazier, Tarah Kayne/ Danny O'Shea.)
Ice Dance: Maia Shibutanj/Alex Shibutani, Madison Chock/Evan Bates, Madison Hubbell/Zachary Donohue. (Alt: Kaitlyn Hawatyek/Jean-Luc Baker, Lorraine McNamara/Quinn Carpenter, Rachel Parsons/Michael Parsons.)
Mirai Nagasu, Gracie Gold, Ashley Wagner. (Alt: Karen Chen, Polina Edmunds, Mariah Bell.)
Men: Nathan Chen, Adam Rippon, Vincent Zhou. (Alt: Jason Brown, Ross Miner, Grant Hochstein.)
Pairs: Alexa Knierim/Chris Knierim. (Alt: Haven Denney/Brandon Frazier, Tarah Kayne/ Danny O'Shea.)
Ice Dance: Maia Shibutanj/Alex Shibutani, Madison Chock/Evan Bates, Madison Hubbell/Zachary Donohue. (Alt: Kaitlyn Hawatyek/Jean-Luc Baker, Lorraine McNamara/Quinn Carpenter, Rachel Parsons/Michael Parsons.)
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2015
Nooooo!!!!! For the sake of my mental health, Jason must go!!!! Grace over quads any day!
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2013
You can "forget" him, you can trash him, but if you write Max Aaron off, it will be to your detriment.
Gracie Gold over Karen Chen?
Where have you been for last year and half and why do you hate talent?
Lol!! And Mirai over all of the alts? That girl is gonna have to step up her training BIG time!
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2012
LOL, no need to scoff.
For example, we all know the results at 2014 Nats:
(1) The reigning national champion placed fourth.
(2) Mirai placed third.
(2) Mirai placed third.
(As was its prerogative, the selection committee did not go by Nats placements. And I understand that decision.)
The point is that anything can happen.
Karen, Mariah, and Polina (all of whom I like) are hardly shoo-ins. Each will have to earn her spot. As will Mirai (whom I like as well).
Mirai's score at Four Continents was well above Mariah's and Karen's.
I imagine that every lady is stepping up her training for the Olympic season. As they all should.
Similar threads
