Is having the Junior Pairs category the best solution for Pairs discipline?

[icewhite]

I am always astonished that any lady can take up pairs at a later age. To me, it’s similar to trapeze. In the glory days of the circus the top flyers (boys and girls) often came from trapeze families and had been launched through the air (and caught by their fathers) since they were toddlers. Later in life, your body just refuses to put itself in a position where serious injury seems inevitable. The body says to the brain, “you might be a reckless fool, but I’m not.”

Like, the average untrained person cannot force himself to fall over backward with the assurance that somebody behind you is going to catch you.

On the men’s side, if your partner is not light as a feather, the trick of just a simple carry lift, to me, is a prodigy of maintaining a secure edge while wrestling with center of gravity, etc. Even just skating around with a real feather (or without one), sometimes skaters fall for no apparent reason.

Maybe the real solution is to phase out this dare-devil discipline altogether.

Yep. Didn't dare to say it, but... if there just aren't enough male partners around to have girls and women rather safely (both physically and emotionally) engaged in this discipline, without parents paying for the male partner, without stark power imbalances... maybe this should not be one of the four main disciplines, no matter how traditional it is or how beautiful it looks when it's done perfectly.
Maybe synchro skating for instance is just a healthier discipline.
I know there are pairs girls and women and teams which are perfectly fine and healthy and everything. But if the whole discipline has major systematic problems that cannot be solved... another possibility might be to get more men into pairs' skating so that the pool is simply bigger... (or even find solutions in the judging to make same sex couples possible).

 

[gkelly]

Maybe the real solution is to phase out this dare-devil discipline altogether.

Yep. Didn't dare to say it, but... if there just aren't enough male partners around to have girls and women rather safely (both physically and emotionally) engaged in this discipline, without parents paying for the male partner, without stark power imbalances... maybe this should not be one of the four main disciplines, no matter how traditional it is or how beautiful it looks when it's done perfectly.

That is certainly an option. There would, after all, only be a relatively small number of skaters who would be affected by not having this discipline available to them.

Fans enjoy it. Especially casual viewers who only watch the top competitors and enjoy the big tricks without knowing much about the technique or the social struggles within the sport to sustain this discipline.

Is that a good enough reason to keep it?

Professional show skating, largely the province of skaters in their 20s and beyond, could still team up couples to perform adagio pair moves and standard pair moves (from the to-become-obsolete discipline of competitive pairs).

I know there are pairs girls and women and teams which are perfectly fine and healthy and everything. But if the whole discipline has major systematic problems that cannot be solved... another possibility might be to get more men into pairs' skating so that the pool is simply bigger... (or even find solutions in the judging to make same sex couples possible).

I don't think female-female teams could compete on an even playing field with mixed-sex teams in pair skating as it is currently defined.

But developing a new discipline that includes only group 1 pair lifts, dance lifts, and maybe single twists, along with side-by-side and other pair moves, could be made available for female-female teams. And maybe be able to include mixed or male-male teams who don't have the ability (size difference) or interest to perform the risky high-flying tricks.

 

[Jumping_Bean]

I don't want to be that person, but the problems that we see in pairs are not isolated to the pairs discipline. The most recent allegations of SA and abuse were not against pairs skaters and coaches, but ice dancers and singles coaches.

Figure skating as a sport has a long, bloody history of abuse and power imbalances - Across all disciplines.
Getting rid of one discipline changes nothing about the culture of abuse perpetuated in the whole sport.

 

[Anna K.]

I think that there are not enough pairs skaters period to fill out all these divisions, especially if we envision that there will be separate Grand Prix competitions for each category. The ISU can scarcely find enough qualified pairts to run the senior Grand Prix circuit.

There were a couple of years, some time ago now, when they had to let the top teams compete in three GP events instead of a maximum of two because there were so few pairs at the level that the ISU wanted to showcase to audiences.

Are there any Grand Prix series for Novice categories? If not, then no. We do not envision any Grand Prix competitions for any of these categories. This is one of the reasons why I did not want to call any of these categories "Junior": none of these categories should then compete at Junior Grand Prix series. Junior Pairs in the Grand Prix series should be replaced with a senior category with a lower qualification threshold instead; for example, a category for pairs that are having their first 3 seasons as seniors.

By your definition of within one year (based on your proposed categories for the pairs), then a lot of dances teams are not, actually.

Of the teams who made the FD at JW:

• Neset/Markelov - she's a bit more than 2 years younger
• Grimm/Savitskiy - she's more than 3 years younger
• Peal/Peal - she's more than 3 years younger
• Nguyen/Giang - she's a little less than 2 years younger
• Fradji/Fourneaux - she's a little less than 2 years younger
• Pederson/Chen - she's nearly 5 years younger
• Kishimoto/Tamura - she's more than 3 years younger
• Slatter/Ongay-Perez - she's more than 2 years younger
• Pidgaina/Koval - she's 4 years younger
• Korneva/MacDonald - she's nearly 4 years younger
• Beznosikova/Leleu - she's a bit less than 3 years younger
• Dovhal/Kulesza - she's more than 3 years younger
• Blaasova/Blaas - she's 3 years younger

So 13/20 who are more than 1 year apart in age.

My proposition was meant for pairs only. But this is very interesting statistics, actually. So, are you saying that almost one third of dancers actually are less than one year apart? I didn't expect this rate to be that high tbh

Anyway, "same age" makes a better point of discussion if we talk about junior pairs and I will explain why.
Our current perception of a junior pair is: we take the best physically fit girl, which means as young girl as possible, pair her with the best physically fit boy, which means the eldest and most mature young man available in juniors, and this is our pair. This formula sounds very sporting but in fact it brings many problems with it. So, is having such junior pairs the best solution for Pairs discipline?

If we want to answer that, we need to ask the question: can we do it differently, then? Can we create same age children pairs, in example? What can such pairs do? (Please, don't answer "they can win Olympic silver twenty years later"! I know that Pang/Tong did it, they were less than a year apart and skated together since the age of 14 but this is rather an exception.)

One year age difference at most at the younger levels is not going to make pairs any safer, but just more dangerous.
In order to safely do pairs lifts, a height difference of at least 10 cm, better 15+ cm is pretty much necessary, especially when the boys have not built up a lot of upper body strength yet. In the US for example, the average 13-year-old girl is just 7 cm shorter than the average 14-year-old boy, as girls enter puberty earlier (and thus finish the majority of their growth earlier).

This should mean only one thing: no pairs lifts for the given age category. So the question is: do we really need girls of the given age being lifted over the head?

Pairs requires a very specific skill set from the male partner, and it just takes a lot of time for them to build up the strength and balance for lifts and twists, and training for pairs (not necessarily competing in pairs yet) from a younger age is very helpful to develop the muscles and muscle memories as you go through puberty.

Going through the puberty in fact means re-learning the same things again and again because the body changes. Wouldn't it be simpler to learn the element when the puberty is over? After all, there are also men who started pairs as adults, not only women.

So, overall I agree that

It's a discipline geared towards already fully-grown people. The US offers beginner levels of pairs, but I often don't see the point to them. For example in Juvenile pairs, the boy lifts the girl to shoulder level and the twist is completely absent, so it practically just feels like a branch of ice dancing, not real pair skating anyway. Most of the young skaters trying it will never become advanced pair skaters for the reasons mentioned above.

Although the acrobatic part remains geared towards already fully-grown people, I wouldn't say that preliminary stages are of no use. To me, such stage rather looks like a branch of synchronized skating since synchronized skating actually uses simplest pairs elements. Doing this as a pair would be a good alternative if synchronized skating is not available.
Which would mean also, that

There is the third option of pairing with another female who wants to skate pairs if she's in Canada. Same-gender ice dance teams are competing at the pre-novice level now, including a team from Newfoundland who would fit the criteria of being in an isolated location without a large pool of male skaters.

It is a way of developing pairs skills at those levels without having to find a male partner at the Juvenile or Pre-Novice level.

girl-girl or boy-boy pairs would be welcome as "same age" pairs.
If we look at the picture of any class at school, the difference between the tallest and the smallest child mostly makes the required 10-15 centimeters or even more. It does not mean that they should do lifts, of course. But they can try acting as a team in which they have different functions. And, above everything, they can have fun. There can exist pairs skating for children that is fun. But to achieve this, pairs skating for children shall not be dangerous.

 

[4everchan]

Going through the puberty in fact means re-learning the same things again and again because the body changes. Wouldn't it be simpler to learn the element when the puberty is over? After all, there are also men who started pairs as adults, not only women.

There is science that says otherwise. Good technique survives puberty and it is much easier to learn such skills -the basics- before puberty. Someone else can bring up the studies. I have seen them years ago but wouldn't know where to find them now.

 

[Jumping_Bean]

Going through the puberty in fact means re-learning the same things again and again because the body changes. Wouldn't it be simpler to learn the element when the puberty is over? After all, there are also men who started pairs as adults, not only women.

How many skaters do you know who learned their triple jumps after going through puberty? Very few, and for a good reason. Sure you will struggle at some points during puberty, that's to be expected, but it's much easier to adjust if you know how it's supposed to feel from before you grew 10 cm.

Looking at pairs men who switched to pairs after going through puberty... Honestly, under similar training conditions, boys who pick up pairs as 14/15-year old seem to get the hang of lifts earlier and their lifts look safer even in Advanced Novices already.
Look at some of Romane Telemaque and Lucas Coulon's Novice and now Junior programs or Laura Heckova/Alex Valky's novice programs and compare to the lifts in for example Murakami/Moriguchi or Nagaoka/Moriguchi's programs.

In my experience, skaters switching from singles later are also more likely to push for more difficulty too early on in development (or maybe their coaches and choreographers are), or as I say "The higher you climb, the farther you fall". If you are used to a certain standard you can expect from yourself, it's difficult to dial back those expectations. Younger teens generally don't have that big of an ego yet - For better and for worse

 

[Anna K.]

There is science that says otherwise. Good technique survives puberty and it is much easier to learn such skills -the basics- before puberty. Someone else can bring up the studies. I have seen them years ago but wouldn't know where to find them now.

Yes, please. If you, or anybody, have studies about pre-pubescent pair skating boys who learned their lifts and throws before puberty and then it helped them (and their partners) to get though the puberty easier, please bring them up.
Or, just studies, stats or simple observations of boys that have learned their pair elements before puberty.
It would be very much on topic.

 

[Mathman]

I think that there are two circumstabces that make junior pairs skating uniquely problematic (compared to single skating, for instance). The first is the outlandish acrobatics. A singles skaters does not have to worry about getting her face slashed by her partner's blade when a side-by-side spin gets out of sunc.. Singles skaters do not have to worry about the girl "getting behind the boy" on a lift resulting in the boy falling on the back of his head, followed by the girl crashing down from 8 feet in the air. Sure, a singles skater might mess up his quad and fall. He suffers momentary embarrassment and a bruised butt, boo hoo.

Second is the emotional factor and potential for unhealthy or abusive situations. Yes, a predatory coach or other authority figure can abuse a youthful singles skater, or anyone else for that matter. But in junior pairs you have the additional complication that the very young adolescent girl spends half her daily life in the arms of a somewhat older boy/man practicing romantically tinged movements and presentation. Is this asking for trouble?

 

[gkelly]

very young adolescent girl spends half her daily life in the arms of a somewhat older boy/man practicing romantically tinged movements and presentation. Is this asking for trouble?

It would certainly be possible to encourage age-appropriate program themes and not encourage romantic themes when one or both of the partners are underage.

 

[Mathman]

It would certainly be possible to encourage age-appropriate program themes and not encourage romantic themes when one or both of the partners are underage.

I remember an instance in juvenal ice dance where the choroegraphy called for the boy to give the girl a little peck on the cheek at the closing pose. She was too embarrassed to do it, despite the urging of both her coach and her nother.

Another situation in pairs and dance where couples have to work around tradition is a brother-sister combo. Many have been able to pull it off, for instance the Shibutanis and Sinead and John Kerr. Alex Shibutani, it seemed to me, took the approach -- "just look at what my little sister can do, y'all. Isn't she something!!!" Still, at the senior level, it is regarded as a handicap with respect to the range of programs they can present.

 

[4everchan]

Yes, please. If you, or anybody, have studies about pre-pubescent pair skating boys who learned their lifts and throws before puberty and then it helped them (and their partners) to get though the puberty easier, please bring them up.
Or, just studies, stats or simple observations of boys that have learned their pair elements before puberty.
It would be very much on topic.

this is just a snippet... It comes from a guide for parents in how to assist their kids in their athletic development. There is a bibliography if you want to acquire some more knowledge. By the way, this is very common knowledge that there are different kinds of sports, some that need kids to start acquire skills early, and some where skills can be acquired later in life.

https://sportforlife.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/A-Sport-Parents-Guide.pdf

2. Specialization
Sports are classified as either early or late specialization. Early specialization sports such as gymnastics,
diving, and figure skating require children to learn complex skills before physical maturation since it is
extremely difficult to fully master these skills if they are introduced after puberty. Late specialization sports
such as soccer, hockey, basketball, and baseball can still be mastered for elite levels of competition if
specialization begins between the ages of 12 and 15, but it is essential that these athletes have already
acquired physical literacy prior to adolescence

 

[gkelly]

Another situation in pairs and dance where couples have to work around tradition is a brother-sister combo. Many have been able to pull it off, for instance the Shibutanis and Sinead and John Kerr. Alex Shibutani, it seemed to me, took the approach -- "just look at what my little sister can do, y'all. Isn't she something!!!" Still, at the senior level, it is regarded as a handicap with respect to the range of programs they can present.

I still love the ways Christopher Dean solved that problem for the Duchesnays.

 

[Anna K.]

From my part, I can add a material from Clevelend Clinic that says boy's puberty begins at age 9-14, it has 5 stages (with different growth rates) and ends for most boys at 17 although in some cases the growth can continue till age 20.

So,

this is just a snippet... It comes from a guide for parents in how to assist their kids in their athletic development. There is a bibliography if you want to acquire some more knowledge. By the way, this is very common knowledge that there are different kinds of sports, some that need kids to start acquire skills early, and some where skills can be acquired later in life.

https://sportforlife.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/A-Sport-Parents-Guide.pdf

2. Specialization
Sports are classified as either early or late specialization. Early specialization sports such as gymnastics,
diving, and figure skating require children to learn complex skills before physical maturation since it is
extremely difficult to fully master these skills if they are introduced after puberty. Late specialization sports
such as soccer, hockey, basketball, and baseball can still be mastered for elite levels of competition if
specialization begins between the ages of 12 and 15, but it is essential that these athletes have already
acquired physical literacy prior to adolescence

There is science that says otherwise. Good technique survives puberty and it is much easier to learn such skills -the basics- before puberty. Someone else can bring up the studies. I have seen them years ago but wouldn't know where to find them now.

do I understand you right that, based on this sports parental guide, you suggest that boys should (since it is not the common practice at the moment, I see it as your suggestion) learn the technique of pairs lifts and throws preferably before the age of 9 and definitely before age 14?

How many skaters do you know who learned their triple jumps after going through puberty? Very few, and for a good reason. Sure you will struggle at some points during puberty, that's to be expected, but it's much easier to adjust if you know how it's supposed to feel from before you grew 10 cm.

Looking at pairs men who switched to pairs after going through puberty... Honestly, under similar training conditions, boys who pick up pairs as 14/15-year old seem to get the hang of lifts earlier and their lifts look safer even in Advanced Novices already.

So, can we draw a summary? Which, in your opinion, is the best age for a boy to learn the difficult pairs elements such as throws and lifts?

Thus far, I understand from your posts that your suggested best practice for boys is learning difficult pairs elements (lifts and throws) at age 14-15 (which would be 2nd or 3rd stage of boy's puberty depending on individual development) and also that this is the most common practice we have today which seems to bring good results. Do I understand it right from your earlier post that, to provide the centimeter and weight difference that would make such learning as safe as possible (or merely possible) such boy should learn them lifting a girl as young as 10 (it doesn't seem to be a common practice but still, technically this is the minimum age for Novice)?

 

[4everchan]

From my part, I can add a material from Clevelend Clinic that says boy's puberty begins at age 9-14, it has 5 stages (with different growth rates) and ends for most boys at 17 although in some cases the growth can continue till age 20.

So,


do I understand you right that, based on this sports parental guide, you suggest that boys should (since it is not the common practice at the moment, I see it as your suggestion) learn the technique of pairs lifts and throws preferably before the age of 9 and definitely before age 14?


So, can we draw a summary? Which, in your opinion, is the best age for a boy to learn the difficult pairs elements such as throws and lifts?

Thus far, I understand from your posts that your suggested best practice for boys is learning difficult pairs elements (lifts and throws) at age 14-15 (which would be 2nd or 3rd stage of boy's puberty depending on individual development) and also that this is the most common practice we have today which seems to bring good results. Do I understand it right from your earlier post that, to provide the centimeter and weight difference that would make such learning as safe as possible (or merely possible) such boy should learn them lifting a girl as young as 10 (it doesn't seem to be a common practice but still, technically this is the minimum age for Novice)?

I actually believe the science and that's all. Have you actually watched baby pairs? They are not doing reverse lasso level 4 lifts you know. But if they want to get there at some point, they need to acquire basic technique early enough.

 

[Jumping_Bean]

So, can we draw a summary? Which, in your opinion, is the best age for a boy to learn the difficult pairs elements such as throws and lifts?

Depends on the individual development of each skater, but yes, around 15 for more than simple lifts and single twists. Single and even double throws are much easier even at a younger age, as the female partner is helping significantly (look at early-development pairs, their throws look more like assisted jumps than throws). In fact, looking at advanced novice pairs, I'd say twists are even the most difficult pairs element to learn initially, many of them have good double throws but only single twists or shaky doubles. Group 1 and Group 2 lifts are relatively easy to learn and these lifts are the ones we see in early Novices, it's the higher group lifts that are more difficult and dangerous, especially when you try to add level features (and if you attempt them before the male partner is developmentally ready, i.e. starting to be able to significantly build upper body muscles, which mostly happens at around age 15).

Thus far, I understand from your posts that your suggested best practice for boys is learning difficult pairs elements (lifts and throws) at age 14-15 (which would be 2nd or 3rd stage of boy's puberty depending on individual development) and also that this is the most common practice we have today which seems to bring good results. Do I understand it right from your earlier post that, to provide the centimeter and weight difference that would make such learning as safe as possible (or merely possible) such boy should learn them lifting a girl as young as 10 (it doesn't seem to be a common practice but still, technically this is the minimum age for Novice)?

The average height of a 14-year-old boy is 163.8 cm, that of a 15-year-old boy 170.1 cm. If we use 10 cm as the minimum difference in average height (as at this age there is naturally already going to be some selection for height by coaches), that would mean for a 15-year-old boy, a female partner could even be 15 themselves (159.7 cm average), though for eligibility purposes, coaches are likely to pick a skater 2 years younger (13-year-old, average height 156.7 cm). At 14, a female partner who is 12 would also work (the average height of 12-year-old girls is 149.8 cm) - I.e. even for starting to learn more difficult lifts, there is not necessarily a need to look at skaters much younger, unless the male partner is shorter than average, or the coaches/parents are out for quick success rather than long-term development. In some cases, age differences are indeed probably the result of there being a limited supply of skaters in one region, as most parents are unlikely to let their early teen skaters move across the country, but even there, coaches need to set limits. Three, maybe four years of difference, not really ideal when skaters are this young, but okay, but 6-7 or even more years? Absolutely not.

Apart from that, we know that puberty in female skaters is delayed (for example the age when menstruation starts is significantly later in elite skaters (average age 14 years) compared to the general public (12.4 years)), but I've been unable to find any studies about the effects of figure skating training in specific on the puberty of boys.
In general, it is difficult to find studies in figure skating, and even more so when you try to narrow it down to a certain discipline. The majority of studies about figure skating look at injuries, or mental health effects on female skaters, and often have very small sample sizes, so it's always difficult to really draw conclusions.

 

[Mathman]

To me it seems obvious that if the only consideration is to develop extraordinary skill at anything, those individuals who have been doing it since the cradle have a leg up on those who begin later. Start skating at three and you might be world champion some day.

i just Googled "At what age should girls start gymnastics training?" The top response was from USA Gymnastics: 2 to 5.

 

[4everchan]

To me it seems obvious that if the only consideration is to develop extraordinary skill at anything, those individuals who have been doing it since the cradle have a leg up on those who begin later. Start skating at three and you might be world champion some day.

It is the case with pretty much anything... musicians, for instance.

 

[Anna K.]

Depends on the individual development of each skater, but yes, around 15 for more than simple lifts and single twists. Single and even double throws are much easier even at a younger age, as the female partner is helping significantly (look at early-development pairs, their throws look more like assisted jumps than throws). In fact, looking at advanced novice pairs, I'd say twists are even the most difficult pairs element to learn initially, many of them have good double throws but only single twists or shaky doubles. Group 1 and Group 2 lifts are relatively easy to learn and these lifts are the ones we see in early Novices, it's the higher group lifts that are more difficult and dangerous, especially when you try to add level features (and if you attempt them before the male partner is developmentally ready, i.e. starting to be able to significantly build upper body muscles, which mostly happens at around age 15).


The average height of a 14-year-old boy is 163.8 cm, that of a 15-year-old boy 170.1 cm. If we use 10 cm as the minimum difference in average height (as at this age there is naturally already going to be some selection for height by coaches), that would mean for a 15-year-old boy, a female partner could even be 15 themselves (159.7 cm average), though for eligibility purposes, coaches are likely to pick a skater 2 years younger (13-year-old, average height 156.7 cm). At 14, a female partner who is 12 would also work (the average height of 12-year-old girls is 149.8 cm) - I.e. even for starting to learn more difficult lifts, there is not necessarily a need to look at skaters much younger, unless the male partner is shorter than average, or the coaches/parents are out for quick success rather than long-term development. In some cases, age differences are indeed probably the result of there being a limited supply of skaters in one region, as most parents are unlikely to let their early teen skaters move across the country, but even there, coaches need to set limits. Three, maybe four years of difference, not really ideal when skaters are this young, but okay, but 6-7 or even more years? Absolutely not.

Based on what you have said, I can't be other than happy with the Novice category. It represents everything that I wanted: preferably same age pairs (within a range but still, we can assume that kids within a 2 year gap can communicate like they are the same age), limited element difficulty to prevent trauma, slow development based on what the boy can do instead of focusing on the sporting abilities of the girl. Plus, all this seems to take place naturally with no need to introduce any additional rules or age limitations.

In theory, if a pair has started from the Novice category, none of the problems I listed earlier should exist. Junior Pairs should be like dance teams, within an age gap that secures smooth transition to seniors and enjoying the benefits of many years skating together. The sickening practice of exploiting the advantage of girls' delayed puberty by pairing girls with 5-7 years older partners, (or by proposals to lower the senior age for pair skaters) should never take place. However, we are where we are and have what we have. Thoughts?

I've been unable to find any studies about the effects of figure skating training in specific on the puberty of boys.
In general, it is difficult to find studies in figure skating, and even more so when you try to narrow it down to a certain discipline. The majority of studies about figure skating look at injuries, or mental health effects on female skaters, and often have very small sample sizes, so it's always difficult to really draw conclusions.

The lack of sufficient studies here is another rather sad matter. We can only hope that it may change by time if this aspect of figure skating (development of boys) draws more attention.

 

[icewhite]

Some things need to be learned at a certain age, you just don't learn them anymore afterwards, and it's better to learn them at 7 than at 10. Still, I think it is a myth that you have to be so VERY young (2-5) to learn certain skills. Most studies (and my personal observations) rather indicate that it is good to be very active as a child and to have to learn a broad variety of movements and to be challenged to learn new movements and make new experiences again and again until the age of ~10, instead of focusing on very limited, specific movements very early.
So it is likely better to do some skating and several other sports until you are about 10, and to then focus.

Just a general remark.

 

[gkelly]

Based on what you have said, I can't be other than happy with the Novice category. It represents everything that I wanted: preferably same age pairs (within a range but still, we can assume that kids within a 2 year gap can communicate like they are the same age),

https://www.isu.org/inside-isu/isu-communications/communications/28837-isu-communication-2489/file

The current ISU Novice age rules:

i) Basic Novice - has not reached the age of thirteen (13).
ii) Intermediate Novice - has not reached the age of fifteen (15).
iii) Advanced Novice - has reached the age of ten (10) and has not reached the age of fifteen (15) for girls (Singles/Pair Skating/Ice Dance) and boys (Single Skating) and seventeen (17) for boys (Pair Skating/Ice Dance).

I.e., there is no minimum age for Basic Novice and Intermediate Novice. Pairs doesn't have an Intermediate Novice category, probably because there just aren't enough pairs to begin with to justify it.

The minimum age for Advanced Novice is 10, and the maximum age for male pair skaters is 16 (as of July 1, might turn 17 during the season).
So it's entirely possible for pairs to form with age differences up to 6 years at these levels.

It's unlikely that pairs would form with those large age differences and even less likely that they would stay together long, because the wider the age difference, the more they will run into years when they are not both age-eligible for the same competition level.

But with the 10-14/16 age range for Advanced Novice and the 13-18/20 age range for Junior, teams with age differences of 2, 3, or 4 years are able to stay together and continue competing together for several years in each of these categories, assuming they are still well matched athletically and still want to compete together.

As kids begin to grow, one partner might outgrow the other so that they become less well matched physically. Sometimes they stick it out together and accept lesser results for a year or two as the skater who grew adjusts to their new body and the team waits for the other skater to also grow and catch up. Other times they decide to take a break or to look for different partners. That can happen even the partners are very close in age. Even if you have boy/girl twins skating together, there might be a period where the girl is taller than the boy. That's not always a problem in ice dance, but it could be a significant issue for intermediate or advanced novice pairs, where their skill development is starting to work on beginning and then intermediate-difficulty overhead lifts.

Overlaps between the age eligibility ranges for the various levels allows young teams that are just starting together in pair skating to start at the level appropriate to their skill level and competitive goals.

Say you have a Pair A consisting of a 13-year-old girl and 14-year-old boy who decide to team up. If their basic skating ability as individual skaters is not yet at an "intermediate novice" level and/or they don't have much size difference or upper body strength, they would not be able to compete in Basic Novice because they're too old.

They could do Advanced Novice, with only Group 1 and 2 (non-overhead) lifts and single twists, but would not be competitive at that level at first. They would still be eligible to stay at Advanced Novice level for a second season, during which their basic skating should improve and they might become ready to attempt Group 3 and 4 lifts and double twists. With a younger girl (larger age range), they could stay in Advanced Novice for more years.

Pair B, also 13 and 14, might already be fast strong skaters with double axels. But they decide to focus on pairs. They might be ready to try those Group 3 and 4 lifts and double twists their first year together, assuming they have sufficient size difference.

Pair C, same ages, might have already skated together in Basic Novice pairs and last year in Advanced Novice pairs already. If he's a strong lifter and she's naturally petite, they may already have some of those skills in their repertoire and could do well in Advanced Novice this year.

If they already have all those skills and are ready to try a beginning Group 5 lift (probably 5S or 5T, without many level features), by 13 and 14 they might even be ready to move up to juniors.

Same-aged teams, different skill levels. That's the advantage of the overlaps between the different skill levels.


Here, by the way, is an example of an 11- and 12-year-old team from pre-IJS era who already had Group 4 lift (with one-arm hold) and double twist:

1994 US Olympic Festival - Junior Pairs Short Program - Natalie Vlandis & Jered Guzman

www.youtube.com

On the other hand, if the tiny number of available potential pair skaters, of both sexes, in a given small country or local region of a larger country might mean that the options are either form a pair with larger age gap or don't form any pairs at all.

Maybe you have a brother and sister 3 or 4 years apart in age who want to skate pairs together.

Here's an even earlier pre-IJS pair competing juniors with a double twist and beginning 5A lift at ages just-14 and almost-18:

Carr & Carr (AUS) - 1984 World Juniors, Pairs' Short Program

Sapporo, JAPAN - 1984 World Junior Figure Skating Championships, Pairs' Short Program - Danielle and Stephen Carr of Australia placed 5th after this skate. ...

www.youtube.com

They competed together for many many years, as Australian national champions from 1981 through 1999. Most of those years there were no other pairs in in Australia. Under your proposal, there would have been zero pairs in Australia for most of those years.

Not to mention this 13- and almost-18-year-old junior world pair champs: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjYR2VggMvU

Under 2026 age rules, they would still have been junior three years later (when they won the 1988 Olympics in real life). But should they really not have been allowed even to team up until 1989, her first year of senior eligibility and his first year of not being junior eligible?