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

[janetfan]

Skaters who have been in competition know who the best skaters are. Even in Luxembourg.


So why not eliminate all competitions as well as the Committee?

I think US Natls will be business as usual this season. The skaters/teams who win medals will be chosen to go to Worlds.
I think Wally mentioned that at the moment only D/W can call in sick and still get a free pass to Worlds.

Japan Natls will be very interesting. It seems that reasonable performances from Dai, Kozuka and Oda will be enough for them to podium and be selected for Worlds.

The Ladies will be much more interesting.

We know that Miki, Kanako and Akiko will be at the GPF and the one who places highest there gets a spot on the Natl team. (Also true for the Men,,,,,,,).

We also know the JSF can name a skater based on past performances to the Natl team.
So it seems sure Mao will be placed on the Natl team even if she is not skating as well as in the past.

That leaves one spot and more than one Lady qualified and deserving to skate at Worlds.

If we took a poll now I am sure fans would vote for Mao as a better skater than Kanako. That is because in the past Mao was a better skater. This season at NHK we saw Kanako was better than Mao. We saw Kanako win SA and Mao falter at TEB.

What should the JSF do? Should they have an open competition and let their Ladies skate for the spots on the Natl team?
But that is not what will happen. It looks like it will be a battle royale for the only open spot on the Ladies Natl team.

We saw this happen back in 2006 when the 6th place skater was put on the Olympic team ahead of skaters she could not beat at Natls. The skater also had a tough time in Torino. She was not in good form at Natls and several Japanese ladies could have performed better in Torino. Hindsight makes it easy to say this now but I doubt that 6th place skaters at Natls are going to skate lights out a few weeks later.

Do we know who the best Japanese skaters will be at Natls? Not yet - but we will find out when they compete head to head.
I have my doubts that Japan will send the top three skaters from Natls to Worlds.

A trickier question is will they send their three best skaters to Worlds?

What is better - to be politicked onto the team, to make it from an outside competition or to competet for it head to head?

I really don't know the right answer - but do feel Japanese Natls will not feel as competitive as US Natls - despite the fact the Japanese ladies are such good skaters. I look forward to watching Japanese Natls this season. I love some of their Ladies. But I will be watching more for how the politics play out - as the skating at Japan Natls is secondary to making the Natl team.

 

[ImaginaryPogue]

and why should you? Skaters who have been in competition know who the best skaters are. Even in Luxembourg.


[
So why not eliminate all competitions as well as the Committee?

1. Several other nations DO use the GP circuit to help determine who makes the team (and more generally, international success). Russia and Japan, off the top of my head. Hell, France's Olympic ice dance teams didn't even compete in their nationals. Nor did Brian Joubert. Unless you're arguing that only Americans should avoid the GP circuit, and that's simply incorrect.

2. You get money and points for winning a GP event, which is then used in the overall ranking, which is used to determine, among other things, the order of skate at worlds and the future GP events.

3. The competition at the GP events varies quite considerably. Last year's TEB was considered quite the competitive event given the number of top ranked skaters/formerly top ranked skaters competing. Whereas due to withdraws and such, Skate Canda was startlingly weak. Why should one American girl benefit from weak competition and cruise to worlds (Czisny) whereas another, due to tougher competition at one of her events (Nagasu/CoC) wouldn't make it?

4. "Even in Luxembourg" should be changed to "only in Luxembourg." The US skating team is simply too broad for such an obvious encapsulation. If you asked several junior skaters who their individual favourites/bests were in each, there would be considerable differences. I'd argue your contention is immaculately wrong here, Joesitz.

 

[Mathman]

How adament you are about the one competition to pronounce the Best Team to Send to the Worlds?

I guess what I think is something like this.

No one knows before the fact which skaters will do the best at worlds. So why not have a skate-off to settle the matter of who gets to go?

That way it is not left up to someone's opinion, be that "someone" you, me or a committee.

So why not eliminate all competitions as well as the Committee?

In my opinion, competitions are held for their own sake. If you win the Nebelhorn trophy, yay, good for you! You won is the Nebelhorn Trophy.

If winning the Nebelhorn Trophy means nothing to you, then why in the world would you compete in it?

If you win the Cup of China, your reward is, you won the Cup of China. You ask, Why hold this competition at all? To see who can win the Cup of China.

 

[Mathman]

Many think Mirai won her second US Championship last season on the ice - only to have it taken away by the tech panel - which also included known "enemies" of coach Carroll.

This is the first time I have heard this speculation. Can you elaborate?

The technical specialist was Gale Tanger of Wauwatosa, Wisconsin. The assistant technical specialist was Lisa Ervin of Hamburg, New York. The technical controler was Denice Williamson of Davidson, North Carolina.

Which one is a known enemy of Frank Carroll?

 

[Nadine]

I've only read half of this rather amusing thread. As for my opinion on this subject, I say stick with tradition, whomever wins 1st, 2nd, and 3rd (when the USA is able to send 3 skaters) should go to Worlds. Finito, let the chips fall where they may, and remember all the whining in the world cannot take your medal or placement away from you (except if you're Tonya Harding at 1994 US Nationals; what a sad affair, the only year Nationals was tarnished imho).

LET THE BLOODBATH BEGIN!!!!

 

[demarinis5]

What I think will happen is 1st and 2nd place will go to Worlds. Remember when Brandon Mroz came in
3rd at Nationals a couple of seasons ago and Johnny did not make the podium. Johnny had the better skating record and there was some talk of sending Johnny instead of Brandon but in the end tradition won and Brandon went to Worlds instead of Johnny. Just saying....

 

[Bluebonnet]

What I think will happen is 1st and 2nd place will go to Worlds. Remember when Brandon Mroz came in
3rd at Nationals a couple of seasons ago and Johnny did not make the podium. Johnny had the better skating record and there was some talk of sending Johnny instead of Brandon but in the end tradition won and Brandon went to Worlds instead of Johnny. Just saying....

A tiny correction: in 2009 Nationals, Jeremy came in first, Brandon second, Evan third, Ryan fourth, and Johnny was in fifth.

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.

 

[Layfan]

What I think will happen is 1st and 2nd place will go to Worlds. Remember when Brandon Mroz came in
3rd at Nationals a couple of seasons ago and Johnny did not make the podium. Johnny had the better skating record and there was some talk of sending Johnny instead of Brandon but in the end tradition won and Brandon went to Worlds instead of Johnny. Just saying....

I think most that talk came from Johnny.

Michelle was second in the free skate after Shizuka in 2004. She wasn't skating clean, doubling one of her jump and yet placed higher than Sasha. On top of that, there was some crazy guy running around in tutu and startled poor Michelle.
Sasha was never capable of beating Michelle if Michelle skated like she did at Nationals.

Who cares? They are my two favorite skaters and I don't really have to decide which one is the utlimate bestest ever ever ever skater in the world - I just had to enjoy them both, which I did.

 

[janetfan]

This is the first time I have heard this speculation. Can you elaborate?

The technical specialist was Gale Tanger of Wauwatosa, Wisconsin. The assistant technical specialist was Lisa Ervin of Hamburg, New York. The technical controler was Denice Williamson of Davidson, North Carolina.

?

Tell you what - I went back and edited my post - and you are right that I should not speculate without backup links.....

I am not sure if you listed the tech panel correctly and last year I believe the the runner up to Frank's skater at one of the most disputed Natls in US history was a member of the tech panel.

We have been through this several times - and I am with blades on this one.

Had Mirai been 5th at '09 Worlds and if Rachael had been injured and not on the team the result would have been different at Natls last year.

The result - no matter what you say was much different at the Olympics. The girls jumps were judged differently and their pcs were scored differently by the Intl judges.

Think what you want but I see this much differently.
I got dinged for this last year so I doubt that you don't remember.....

As to skating being non-political and typically fair - I can only wonder what you have been watching for the past few decades as I have seen something much different at times.

 

[Bluebonnet]

I think most that talk came from Johnny.

And many his fans. I was one of them.:

 

[Mathman]

The names I was given for the tech panel are not the same as what you listed here.

Right you are. The tech panel in question was Lisa-Marie Allen, Troy Goldstein and Wendy Enzmann.

This is only my remembering of things that might be useful in this discussion. One year, at US Nationals, Michelle Kwan fell twice; this was under 6.0. Sasha Cohen did not fall, but the federation gave Michelle the gold, and Sasha the silver.

I believe your memory is off a little. Michelle fell once, not twice. (Michelle Kwan does not fall twice. ) And Sasha fell once also, on her last jump in the LP (a triple toe.)

This was 2000 Nationals. Michelle did not fall in her short program, but she skated tentatively and had a wonky landing on her solo triple flip. She finished third behind Sasha and Sarah Hughes.

In the LP Michelle skated well except for a fall on her second triple Lutz. Sasha was exquisite -- she would never skate better. Her positions and extension were peerless. Under CoP she would have got positive GOE on both of her first two jumping passes, 3Lz+2T and 3F+2T. But she did have a scratchy landing on her first triple toe, a two-footed landing on her second triple Lutz, and a wide-swinging free leg on her triple loop, as well as the fall on the second 3T.

Michelle doubled the second jump of her planned triple toe/triple toe combination, but made up for it by inserting an extra triple toe at the very end. (This was "plan B." When the triple-triple was successful, as for instance at worlds, she did a split jump at the end instead.) Michelle landed six triple jumps, Sasha five. Sasha finished, properly in my opinion, second in the free skate.

By factored placements (the LP placement was weighted .67, the SP .33). Michelle won overall, went to wolrds, and -- as you mention -- won the world championship.

Sasha was too young to go to senior worlds. She was sent to junior Worlds, where she did not fare so well, finishing 6th. If she had medaled she could have gone to senior worlds despite her age, the way the rules were that year. (Sarah Hughes was allowed to go to senior worlds because she had medaled at junior worlds the year before. She finished 5th at 2000 senior worlds. )

Unfortunately the next year Sasha injured her back as could not contest nationals.

Here is Sasha's 2000 U.S. nationals short program.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B-loMk4Zrko&feature=related

 

[Mathman]

The result - no matter what you say was much different at the Olympics. The girls jumps were judged differently and their pcs were scored differently by the Intl judges.

No matter what I say? When did I -- or anyone -- say that things were not different at the Olympics?

Mirai got some unfortunate UR calls at U.S. Nationals. Rachael got some unfortunate UR calls at the Olympics. It is what it is.

(Maybe that gives support to Joe's opinion that U.S. nationals alone should not be the only consideration for selecting the world team. What if a worthy world's competitor is unfairly scored at U.S. Nationals?)

Anyway, since you asked , this is what I think about all those under-rotation calls that determined so many placements last year.

(a) Almost all jumps by ladies are under-rotated.

(b) Under-rotations should not be hammered so hard in the IJS. Two-footed landings, uncontroled landings with wildly-swinging free leg, hand down, etc., are just as bad. Falls are much worse.

 

[Layfan]

(Maybe that gives support to Joe's opinion that U.S. nationals alone should not be the only consideration for selecting the world team. What if a worthy world's competitor is unfairly scored at U.S. Nationals?)

Then what hope do we have that some committee will judge the value of past performances fairly? :think:

Unless the rules are very clear cut about what kind of international performance makes you eligible: i.e. If you win a GP event, or make the GP final, or medal at FC, or medal at the last worlds you automatically get on the team no matter how you do at nationals... That, of course, would make nationals completely irrelevant to choosing the world team - unless skaters from one of the disciplines were so bad they couldn't manage any of those feats...

 

[PolymerBob]

So after 8 pages and over 100 notes, I think I have a good handle of all possible ways a World team can be selected. See if I left anything out.

1) Skaters come to Nationals and lay it down, judges judge what they see on the ice, top 2 or 3 are the team.

2) Skaters come to Nationals and lay it down, judges use ISU results to alter the scores using a secret formula only they know. Top 2 or 3 are the team.

3) Skaters come to Nationals and lay it down, judges judge what they see on the ice. USFSA factors in ISU results to pick the team using a secret formula. The team that is picked may and may not be the top 2 or 3.

4) Skaters come to Nationals and lay it down, judges judge what they see on the ice. USFSA factors in ISU results to pick the team, but use a clearly defined formula that everyone knows ahead of time. The team that is picked may and may not be the top 2 or 3.

 

[gkelly]

3) Skaters come to Nationals and lay it down, judges judge what they see on the ice. USFSA factors in ISU results to pick the team using a secret formula. The team that is picked may and may not be the top 2 or 3.

4) Skaters come to Nationals and lay it down, judges judge what they see on the ice. USFSA factors in ISU results to pick the team, but use a clearly defined formula that everyone knows ahead of time. The team that is picked may and may not be the top 2 or 3.

Essentially what we have is somewhere between 3) and 4). The order of importance of the ISU events that can be factored into the decision beyond Nationals results is published ahead of time, with Nationals also listed as clearly the most important. But there isn't a clear formula on exactly how much each one counts.

I don't think there's a secret formula that will always get used and never published. I think the committee will just use the nonnumerical guidelines to consider those international events if it should so happen that a clear favorite has to skip Nationals, and maybe in the less likely event that a skater with zero international experience edges out an internationally accomplished, experienced skater for 2nd or 3rd place.

But 99 times out of 100, they'll just follow the Nationals results.


There is a clear rule that the national champs will go to Worlds as long as they're eligible. So you can count on that.

 

[Kwanford Wife]

While I understand other federations have different methods to their madness - I always appreciated the US's pretty straightforward approach: wanna go to worlds & olympics? win nationals. it just seems to be the most fair way to do this... I also think with this method, a skater like Miki isn't going to drift through her nationals simply because she knows her GP results will carry her through...

 

[Mathman]

Essentially what we have is somewhere between 3) and 4)...

But 99 times out of 100, they'll just follow the Nationals results.

In other words, what we have is 1), not 3) or 4).

 

[PolymerBob]

In other words, what we have is 1), not 3) or 4).

.... with perhaps a little 2) thrown in.

 

[Mathman]

1) Skaters come to Nationals and lay it down, judges judge what they see on the ice, top 2 or 3 are the team.

2) Skaters come to Nationals and lay it down, judges use ISU results to alter the scores using a secret formula only they know. Top 2 or 3 are the team.

I think what we have now is about 90% 1) and a little bit of

1.5) Skaters come to Nationals and lay it down. Judges do their best at judging what they see. Sometimes they are influenced by other considerations, like secretly hoping one particular skater will do well, or believing that a skater is "really" better than what he/she showed today and I don't want to be the one who sabatages his/her "rightful" place on the podium.

 

[gkelly]

In other words, what we have is 1), not 3) or 4).

Heh. Well, the results will almost always come out as 1). But the rules allow for 3/4 (the guidelines are published not secret, but not a fixed formula).

.... with perhaps a little 2) thrown in.

2) Skaters come to Nationals and lay it down, judges use ISU results to alter the scores using a secret formula only they know.

I am certain that there is no secret formula by which to alter scores to produce desired national results.

I think what we have now is about 90% 1) and a little bit of

1.5) Skaters come to Nationals and lay it down. Judges do their best at judging what they see. Sometimes they are influenced by other considerations, like secretly hoping one particular skater will do well, or believing that a skater is "really" better than what he/she showed today and I don't want to be the one who sabatages his/her "rightful" place on the podium.

Well, I'm more likely to believe that -- judges are sometimes consciously or unconsciously influenced by other considerations in addition to what they see on the ice -- than that they have a secret formula to alter the scores.

But anyway, we're talking about two separate groups of people -- three, now, if we also include the tech panel.

Judges judge what they see, the tech panel calls what they see, and maybe there's some extra benefit of doubt given to favorites or pickiness to unproven skaters. But those two groups don't communicate enough information between them during the event, and the judges don't communicate with other judges while they're judging, so there isn't a concerted effort to fix the event.

After the results 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, and some of those times they'll end up naming a skater to the team who didn't finish in the top placements at Nationals -- almost all of those cases a reigning world medalist who withdrew from Nationals.

But the rules do not say that the silver medalist from Nationals automatically goes to Worlds, and therefore the judges choose the second member of the world team in each discipline just by judging what they see on the ice.

The rules say that the International Committee chooses the team, that the winner must be named to the team if eligible, and that Nationals results are the most important criterion in choosing the rest of the team.

So pretty much always the silver medalist will go. But the judges aren't choosing the team.