AN Pairs Skating Discussion

[pairman2]

4120 Adult Gold Pairs

Test and Age Requirements

Test qualifications as of the closing date for entries:
One partner in the adult gold pairs event must have passed one of the following tests:
• The adult gold pairs test but not the standard intermediate pairs test
• The adult gold free skate test
• The standard juvenile pairs test and no higher pairs test
• Any standard free skate test at the juvenile level or higher

The other partner must meet the requirements for this level or must have passed no less then one level lower (i.e. adult silver pairs test, adult silver free skate test, standard preliminary pairs test and/or standard free skate test.)

Pair teams in which at least one member has passed the standard juvenile or adult gold pairs test may choose to compete at the adult gold level even if one or both members of the team have passed a masters level free skate test (i.e. standard intermediate free skate or higher).

Age requirements as of the close of entries. Both partners must be at least 21 years of age

Program Duration
Free skate 3:40 max

[flo]

I'm aware of the pair requirements. I'm disappointed in the amazing lack of thought put into the recent changes.

[pairman2]

Flo
The changes never affected you. Your juvenile test put you into adult pairs when there was no bronze, silver, gold (unless you were dragged up by your partner). When that division was made approximately 5 yrs ago, your Juvenile Pair test placed you in gold and so it remains to this day. Your test placed you in gold back in Dallas. No changes for you since then, nothing to be disappointed about.

[flo]

Incorrect, they as all pair changes do affect me. Please do not assume you are aware of my situation, as you clearly are not. And I do not get "dragged' to any level. I tested and competed in pairs before there was an Adult Nationals, let alone a pair structure. I have competed and medaled in adult, master and gold pairs and am well aware of what "affects me".

The curent changes were made without forethought and careful consideration of the skaters and history of the pairs program.

[sk8er1964]

What were the changes? (Just curious)

[flo]

There were several changes this year.
Skaters who qualify by freestyle level basically have the option of skating "down" a level. For example Tara and Steven who have skated gold based on freestyle tests, may skate silver or gold pairs. A pair in which one has passed the intermediate fs may compete in gold or masters.

Also, the preliminary pairs test has once again been removed. It was removed once before in the late 90's, and pre-juvenile added, then put back again later. All skaters who took the test prior to 2008 are now pre-juvenile. However (again, lack of forethought), those who took the test before the preliminary test was first removed, are still at their same pair level from that re-structuring without consideration of actual test requirement equivalents.

So, anyone with a pair test qualifies based on pairs test level with no option, including someone who has a standard test from before the first and recent re-structuring. There is a proposal to change some of this, but it should have been done all together. These changes were made without considering the history of the prgram, and thus no coordinated effort to ensure that equivalent tests compete together.

[pairman2]

Flo, As you mentioned, "I have competed and medaled in adult, master and gold pairs" and as Nova pointed out and I agree; "Gotcha. Though I thought y'all looked very good in the Halloween event!" you have nothing to worry about. You are more then qualified
in your competitive catagory. From Andrea and me, Good luck in this years competitive season.

[flo]

Yes, I have, however my partner has not, and a pair is made up of two skaters. I would have liked the option given to others to determine where we would compete our first time. I also trust our coach to determine "qualified".

[sk8er1964]

There were several changes this year.
Skaters who qualify by freestyle level basically have the option of skating "down" a level. For example Tara and Steven who have skated gold based on freestyle tests, may skate silver or gold pairs. A pair in which one has passed the intermediate fs may compete in gold or masters.

Also, the preliminary pairs test has once again been removed. It was removed once before in the late 90's, and pre-juvenile added, then put back again later. All skaters who took the test prior to 2008 are now pre-juvenile. However (again, lack of forethought), those who took the test before the preliminary test was first removed, are still at their same pair level from that re-structuring without consideration of actual test requirement equivalents.

So, anyone with a pair test qualifies based on pairs test level with no option, including someone who has a standard test from before the first and recent re-structuring. There is a proposal to change some of this, but it should have been done all together. These changes were made without considering the history of the prgram, and thus no coordinated effort to ensure that equivalent tests compete together.

Thanks for the info. That means if my pair partner ever decides to skate pairs again, we could do silver instead of gold. (I'm gold free, he's silver free.) That would be a good thing for us, since we've had our butts kicked by silver pairs before :lol:

[flo]

Go for it. There's so many mixed pairs out there that we'll be all over the place! We're still matching up skills. I've been working on a double sal while my partner has a great axel, so I'm thinking of throwing him! Enjoy and we'll see you there!

[pairman2]

sk8er1964

In order to skate at the Silver Pairs level, one of your team members will need to test up to the silver pairs level. Otherwise, your free skate level is applicable the same as it has been



4122 Adult Silver Pairs

..........Pair teams in which at least one member has passed the adult silver pairs test may choose to compete at the adult silver level, even if one or both members of the team have passed the next level free skate test (i.e. gold free skate free skate and/or standard juvenile free skate test).

[flo]

Actually it is also stated in rule 4122 for silver pairs that
"The adult silver free skate test and no higher than the adult gold free skate test"
Also, there were mistakes within the rules on the website, but once pointed out, they were corrected.

Again, very confusing and lack of thought. The only way to get clarification and be sure is to write Wyane Hundley at the USFSA. waynehundley@earthlink.net He's also the chief referee at nats this year.

There's lots of confusion out there, so he's had numerous requests for clarification.
I think we've taken over this thread enough. 1964, feel free to PM me if you have any questions!

[2salch0w]

I think it'd be nice, Flo, if you stopped saying "lack of thought", because as many of us know, quite a lot of thought went into some of the recent changes. And not only thought, but collaboration, discussion, debate and refinement. I know that you don't belong to the adultpairskating group, which is where this occurred, but your input there could have helped your own cause.

The fact is, the recent changes did address some situations and were an improvement. They did not address ALL situations, but that doesn't mean they weren't positive and a step in the right direction. Sometimes you have to get things done a little bit at a time, and the full comprehensive "let's fix every adult skaters situation all at once or nothing" approach could take forever.

In adult skating, and in adult pair skating in particular, we do end up with many unique situations and some individuals will not be best served by the rules. It has happened to me, too, but I remind myself that the rules are trying to handle the majority and can't cater specifically to me. In 2004, while with my first partner, we couldn't skate Adult Pairs (this was before gold/silver/bronze) because I only had the bronze free skate test. The rule was that both skaters had to have at least the silver free test. We had the bronze pair test, and several skaters that did compete had NO pair test, so it made no sense. But that was corrected and that specific issue will not happen to anyone else now.

The rule we're discussing here is specifically addressing those skaters that get forced to skate Gold Pairs because of their free skate tests, when they would be a better fit in Silver Pairs. The key point being that 2 gold skaters, or 1 gold and 1 silver skater, don't necessarily make a competitive gold team. They may have great SBS elements, but if they don't have pairs experience, they will be very weak on a majority of the elements. I think this makes sense because it gives these pair newbies a chance to come in at a more reasonable level for them, and then grow up into gold as they get more pairs experience. In the discussions on this rule change, the point that I (among others) brought up is that pair skating and free skating are two very different things, albeit related to one another. You cannot conclude that a strong free skater will be equally as strong in pairs, despite the many examples we have out there right now where this is the case.

The rule change that did not get considered, which is what is causing your issue, is dealing with one partner who has a higher PAIR test. Using the logic above, you CAN conclude that this individual will have certain pair skills. Of course, as you say, there is the other partner to consider. I cannot think of an easy solution to that and this is why I say with teams it gets even more complicated. You would need a periodic table of all the possible combinations:

- Pre-bronze free + Silver pairs = Bronze pairs

- Masters free + bronze pairs = Silver pairs

- Senior free + bronze MITF = ?????????


It has been my experience that when one skater has strong pairs experience, and both are good free skaters in general, the "dragging up" does actually work well and is fairer than "pulling down". With my previous partner, she was gold and I'm silver, and we both had pairs experience, and gold is where we belonged. With my new partner, I'm still silver and she is bronze, with no pairs experience. Silver is where we belong, as she is learning pairs at a quicker rate based on my experience.

I can't say that the fairest thing always happens, but I do believe that as the rules evolve, slowly but surely, it is getting better. And my suggestion for tackling the standard track testing and how it spills over to adult track would be to initiate the proposal for a rule change on adultpairskating.com It is there for this reason, and I don't know of another forum specifically for that discussion, but if there is one, then go for it there.

One last thought - age is also a missing factor in the pairs levels, and you'd think that with pair skating, it'd be a more significant factor. A team in their 40s now doing gold may need to step down to silver when they're 60 or so. I don't have a good idea for how to handle yet another dimension like this ... how about, add up the partners ages, and for every increment of 25 over 100, they can drop down a level. So when I'm 95 and my partner is 85, if we ever tested to gold, we can click down to adult pre-bronze pairs (which will surely exist by then.) :-)

Tim



Actually it is also stated in rule 4122 for silver pairs that
"The adult silver free skate test and no higher than the adult gold free skate test"

Again, very confusing and lack of thought. The only way to get clarification and be sure is to write Wyane Hudley at the USFSA. He's also the chief referee at nats this year.

[flo]

Thanks, but there was a definite lack of thought in how these changes impact all pair skaters. If in fact " a great deal of thought" went into these changes, than that's worse, as ignoring the impacts was deliberate. If there is such a concern about matching levels, then a pair test should be required to compete and they should be equitable.

The simple fact that as you said the "collaboration, discussion, debate and refinement" took place in a non-public group and used to make any decision is inappropriate. I have been a part of adult pair skating since it's inception and am well aware that progress is slow. However following the logic that some change is always positive and better than none is no excuse for not doing the research and gaining an understanding of the impact. It would have been much better and more equitable to wait and get it right rather than rushing through. It is great that "newbies" were given such consideration, but highly inconsiderate that the skaters who have been in this program for quite a while and with pair tests, are the last to be considered. The current rule changes totally ignore the historical changes in the pairs structure on the standard and adult tracks. You can't consider changes on one side without this knowledge and considering the changes and status of the other. Under these changes there is a great potential for inequity of skills within a level. This could have been a chance to correct some of the existing inequities, but because of this lack of knowledge and more careful planning, it is worse.

This has been pointed out to the pair chair and will be addressed in a appropriate forum next season.

[skaternum]

I know that you don't belong to the adultpairskating group, which is where this occurred, but your input there could have helped your own cause.I agree with you, Tim, on everything except this. Seeing as how Andrea kicked several of us off "her" forum and has banned us for life, I hardly think it's the model of inclusive, reasoned debate we want to have when making decisions about the future of adult pairs. :roll:

[pairman2]

The only way rules can be changed, as is the case with rules now being discussed, is that they are discussed amoung the adult committee, and in this case, discussions and votes in two levels of subcommittes, before being forwarded to the full adult committee for discussion and vote. Many revisions are made along the way. From there, it is reviewed by headquarters, discussed by any other affected usfs committees and then passed to the GC for a full vote. This is how all rules are made/ changed. Any other incedental discussion has about the same weight as what is being discussed now on skatingforums.com

If anyone happens to be really serious about rules, they can contact all current committe members, as well as petition to actually be included on the adult committee in future years

All the contact emails are made public at the following link.
http://www.usfigureskating.org/Programs.asp?id=114

[vesperholly]

Any other incedental discussion has about the same weight as what is being discussed now on skatingforums.com
I think everyone here knows that any discussion about rules on a forum isn't going to get things done. But there's value in discussing rules and hammering out where the problems lie and what the possible solutions are. Some skaters are a lot more in the know regarding why rules are rules and can correct assumptions and misinformation. If everyone independently contacted the Adult Skating Committee to complain about the rules without the proper background knowledge, real problems are not going to be heard or respected.

forum (n.) - A public meeting place for open discussion.

[flo]

I don't think anyone's advocating complaining to the USFSA withought proper background knowledge.

As Vesperholly pointed out "forum (n.) - A public meeting place for open discussion", obviously all forums are not created nor maintained equally.

[2salch0w]

Hi Lori -- As Lee points out in the next post, I probably overstated things to say that adultpairskating.com is THE place to have the formal discussion. It is really just a step along the way, but in spirit I think it serves us well to get organized, get some early leg work out of the way, let people weigh in, etc. A lot of discussion occurred on the rules before they even began their way along the formal process, which is why I reacted to the notion that no thought was put into it. There were other opportunities to add upon the "pre-work" that was done collectively at aps.com. (Hmmm, in my job we use APS as an abbrev for anti-psychotic. LOL)

As far as some folks being excluded from aps.com, I do believe that is a shame and I'd like to see everyone get over the hard feelings one of these days. But I will say that if it wasn't for your dancing on the grave of the site when it came down at one point, I would probably be more sympathetic to your excommunication (which I know you wear as a badge of honor.)

Tim


I agree with you, Tim, on everything except this. Seeing as how Andrea kicked several of us off "her" forum and has banned us for life, I hardly think it's the model of inclusive, reasoned debate we want to have when making decisions about the future of adult pairs. :roll:

[2salch0w]

I think the key point here is that the rule changes had no effect, one way or the other, on your specific situation. Each rule is very specific, and some pass and some don't. I don't think anyone ever held up the changes as a full and comprehensive restructure, and if that were the case, I'd think you would have a point.

There was no intent to ignore anything, it just wasn't one of the things that came up as something to tackle. Every new idea or proposal needs an author and a champion. I don't understand why you'd be so upset that somebody didn't step in on your behalf and do this for you. Nobody we're talking about here is getting paid for any of this. The collaboration on aps.com is really just a group of skaters trying to be somewhat organized and trying to affect some change that the contributors think makes sense. But it is just the start of the process.

And as you say, there are other avenues to get the ball rolling (as it should be), and you have done just that.

Tim

Thanks, but there was a definite lack of thought in how these changes impact all pair skaters. If in fact " a great deal of thought" went into these changes, than that's worse, as ignoring the impacts was deliberate. If there is such a concern about matching levels, then a pair test should be required to compete and they should be equitable.

The simple fact that as you said the "collaboration, discussion, debate and refinement" took place in a non-public group and used to make any decision is inappropriate. I have been a part of adult pair skating since it's inception and am well aware that progress is slow. However following the logic that some change is always positive and better than none is no excuse for not doing the research and gaining an understanding of the impact. It would have been much better and more equitable to wait and get it right rather than rushing through. It is great that "newbies" were given such consideration, but highly inconsiderate that the skaters who have been in this program for quite a while and with pair tests, are the last to be considered. The current rule changes totally ignore the historical changes in the pairs structure on the standard and adult tracks. You can't consider changes on one side without this knowledge and considering the changes and status of the other. Under these changes there is a great potential for inequity of skills within a level. This could have been a chance to correct some of the existing inequities, but because of this lack of knowledge and more careful planning, it is worse.

This has been pointed out to the pair chair and will be addressed in a appropriate forum next season.

[flo]

You have no idea how these changes "effect my situation", as you do not know exactly what it is. And it's far from "my behalf". The reason I am so "upset" is that this could have been an opportunity to improve the situation for many pair skaters, not just newbies and those with an agenda.

The levels were not equatable before, but at least there were disadvantages across the board. Now by giving the fs qualifiers and option and not the pair qualifiers, it's worse. These changes, both those in the adult and standard structure are a definite disadvantage to those of us with pair tests. To understand this, you need to go back and look at the specific test structures and competition rules from when AN began.

[2salch0w]

One thing I agree with you about is that pair tests should be the criteria for pair competitions. I believe it is the only fair way to put teams at the appropriate level in terms of their pair skating abilities.

Haven't you said in this thread what your situation is? Is there still another twist to it? (ha ha - punny)

I understand your point that relative to the progress made for others' situations, you have been outpaced in terms of your cause. I keep thinking of political analogies. It'd be like if New Jersey senators go to Washington for funds for the roads, but New York doesn't. NJ gets the money, then NY is all like "Hey, how about our bridges?" And NJ is like "What about em?"

Tim


You have no idea how these changes "effect my situation", as you do not know exactly what it is. And it's far from "my behalf". The reason I am so "upset" is that this could have been an opportunity to improve the situation for many pair skaters, not just newbies and those with an agenda.

The levels were not equatable before, but at least there were disadvantages across the board. Now by giving the fs qualifiers and option and not the pair qualifiers, it's worse. These changes, both those in the adult and standard structure are a definite disadvantage to those of us with pair tests. To understand this, you need to go back and look at the specific test structures and competition rules from when AN began.

[skaternum]

One thing I agree with you about is that pair tests should be the criteria for pair competitions.I don't believe this is what flo was saying. I think she was trying to make the point that for those who DO use singles tests as criteria for pair competitions, they now have the option of "skating down" that people who use pairs tests as criteria do not have. Is that correct, flo?

[2salch0w]

I don't believe this is what flo was saying. I think she was trying to make the point that for those who DO use singles tests as criteria for pair competitions, they now have the option of "skating down" that people who use pairs tests as criteria do not have. Is that correct, flo?

I was responding to this from a couple of posts ago:

> If there is such a concern about matching levels, then a pair test should be required to compete and they should be equitable.

[flo]

Skaternum - exactly, I don't have a problem with fs skaters qualifying for pairs, but make it equal.

Before there was an adult pair structure we took the then first test, the preliminary pairs test. A couple years later this test was dropped from the program and it's name changed to juvenile. So we were all then juvenile. Then later a pre-juvenile test was added below the juv test. At first these skaters were not permitted at AN, but following discussions they were allowed to compete. Then the actual requirements for the juvenile test were changed. Then along came the adult structure and the standard tests were not crossing over to the adult tests. So I tested the bronze and silver pair tests. I was involved in several more discussions with the then pair chair and then came the decision that the tests would cross over and juvenile would be silver or gold. So no point in taking any more tests. Following this at some point the preliminary test was brought back. Then juvenile became gold. Recently the preliminary test has once again been eliminated and everyone who has taken the preliminary test prior to 2008 is now pre-juvenile - except if you took the preliminary test when it was around the first time, you are juvenile. Still with me?

So, the problem is that the test that many of us took to compete (preliminary changed to juvenile, preliminary changed to pre-juv) are not the same pre juvenile/Juvenile tests as today, yet the cross-over levels are the same. If you look at the test requirements from 92, when we first started working on the adult program and had visions of a national adult competition, they are more equivalent to a pre-juv or a silver test, which was originally suggested. Up to now, it was not as much of a problem because there were inequities across the board with fs skaters entering pairs and the influx of new pairs.

Now we can have within gold pairs a pair with a gold test, the current juvenile test and those taking the old preliminary turned juvenile test which is equivalent to the silver pair test. In addition, the recent standard changes will alter the placement of those adults who have taken the recent preliminary tests and who are now pre-juvenile. They were bronze pairs, and now are silver. Add to this the flexibility given to the fs skaters skating pairs and it's a MESS. The current gold pair champions can skate silver pairs while silver level skaters will be in gold, and so forth down the line. Given this situation, the first step should have been to give the current pair skaters the flexibility, make sure the standard and adult tests are comparable and then add the fs skaters to the mix.

So a little more involved than roads and bridges.

[2salch0w]

Flo - I wholeheartedly agree that your situation sux, is unfair and should be addressed. And thanks for all the details, I certainly didn't know all of that history. I think the one point that we may not have made yet is that Gold FS skaters can only step down to Silver Pairs if they have the pairs test to back it up. So it allows you to give precedence to your pairs testing level, as long as it is only one level down. I think this rule makes a lot of sense, and came out of some good *thought*, but clearly not full-and-comprehensive thought that encompassed the whole of adult pair skating leveling issues.

Can we agree on that run-on sentence at least? :)

I guess what we'll keep disagreeing on is whether the whole structure should have been addressed in an all-or-nothing fashion or not. I have found that sometimes you need to chip away at these things, and trying to boil the ocean all at once just gets you nowhere.

For all I know, you're the only person affected by the specific situation you describe below. Not that that doesn't mean it is important to address, but I think you need to be your own advocate, which it sounds like you have now done. My earlier posts were just trying to address the resentment you seem to have towards those that tried to address issues that they saw before them, and yours wasn't one of them. You have to admit, your issue is quite esoteric and not something one would just wonder about in the absence of having someone like you to raise it.

So others didn't speak up for you. That's not great, but that is often how it goes. Speak up for yourself ... personal responsibility and all that.

Geez, I sound like a freakin' republican. :)

Tim




Skaternum - exactly, I don't have a problem with fs skaters qualifying for pairs, but make it equal.

Before there was an adult pair structure we took the then first test, the preliminary pairs test. A couple years later this test was dropped from the program and it's name changed to juvenile. So we were all then juvenile. Then later a pre-juvenile test was added below the juv test. At first these skaters were not permitted at AN, but following discussions they were allowed to compete. Then the actual requirements for the juvenile test were changed. Then along came the adult structure and the standard tests were not crossing over to the adult tests. So I tested the bronze and silver pair tests. I was involved in several more discussions with the then pair chair and then came the decision that the tests would cross over and juvenile would be silver or gold. So no point in taking any more tests. Following this at some point the preliminary test was brought back. Then juvenile became gold. Recently the preliminary test has once again been eliminated and everyone who has taken the preliminary test prior to 2008 is now pre-juvenile - except if you took the preliminary test when it was around the first time, you are juvenile. Still with me?

So, the problem is that the test that many of us took to compete (preliminary changed to juvenile, preliminary changed to pre-juv) are not the same pre juvenile/Juvenile tests as today, yet the cross-over levels are the same. If you look at the test requirements from 92, when we first started working on the adult program and had visions of a national adult competition, they are more equivalent to a pre-juv or a silver test, which was originally suggested. Up to now, it was not as much of a problem because there were inequities across the board with fs skaters entering pairs and the influx of new pairs.

Now we can have within gold pairs a pair with a gold test, the current juvenile test and those taking the old preliminary turned juvenile test which is equivalent to the silver pair test. In addition, the recent standard changes will alter the placement of those adults who have taken the recent preliminary tests and who are now pre-juvenile. They were bronze pairs, and now are silver. Add to this the flexibility given to the fs skaters skating pairs and it's a MESS. The current gold pair champions can skate silver pairs while silver level skaters will be in gold, and so forth down the line. Given this situation, the first step should have been to give the current pair skaters the flexibility, make sure the standard and adult tests are comparable and then add the fs skaters to the mix.

So a little more involved than roads and bridges.

[flo]

"I certainly didn't know all of that history."
This is the problem, no one took the time to look into the history.
It's definitely not just my situation, I know several skaters in this exact position.
The rules are very confusing, inconsistent and incorrect. Take a look at the dates, and you'll see that the gold rule has been recently edited to correct one I pointed out, and there are more. The pair test is not required for the option. In bronze, you can qualify with a preliminary pairs test. In the first place, there is no longer a preliminary pairs test. Anyone who has taken the test between when it was re-installed and 2008 is now pre-juvenile and thus silver pairs. Imagine that surprise! Also, you can have a bronze and no higher than silver free to qualify for bronze. In silver it's stated that one skater may have a silver but not higher than gold fs level to qualify. It's a mess.

I'm all for chipping away at issues, but this one is so very riddled with mistakes and inconsistencies that it deserved more care and thought than given. It should be a matter of course to look at the rules and determine how they would impact existing skaters. We're not talking about past skaters or something so distant that no one is around anymore. These are currently active skaters.

[Isk8NYC]

Perhaps the AC is relying on estimates or inaccurate data for their decisions. I have to wonder if the Adult Committee has access to the USFSA rolls. I know that the membership "categories" were changed two years ago, so it's possible that they're not seeing the real impact in advance? I know I sound like I'm making their excuses, but I really think it's a distinct possibility.

I find it incredibly useful to pull a list of all students before I agree to restructure or change required minimum test scores. Then I can run "What If" scenarios to see the impact of the changes. It makes decision making so much easier.

[flo]

Exactly! There has to be a history somewhere. They could also have looked at all AN pair entries for the last 5 years or so. I'd also like to know if the preliminary pairs who are now pre-juv. were notified? It would be a mess if a pair was anticipating to compete in bronze and are unaware that they are now silver. It's misleading in that the announcement still says preliminary pairs, but it no longer exists. Also on the USFSA site, it just states that anyone taking a preliminary pair test prior to 2008 is now pre-juvenile. However this is not true. I took it in '92 and I'm juvenile pairs. It needs a start date.

[Isk8NYC]

I don't think the Adult Committee has access to the USFSA information.

I remember their efforts a few years ago to conduct their own surveys, to ascertain how many "adult skaters" were in different areas around the country. (Part of the Adult Skating Ambassador effort, that's now gone quiet.)

[sk8lady]

So others didn't speak up for you. That's not great, but that is often how it goes. Speak up for yourself ... personal responsibility and all that.



So who exactly DOES one contact to make suggestions about changes to the adult structure? The only time I sent one in--to the then-chair of the adult committee--it was completely ignored, so I figured that was not the right person. No one in my state is involved in the adult committee as far as I know. Anyone have a good idea?

[flo]

The chair should be a good contact, but not always. I sent mine to Lexi as well as the pair chair. The regional reps are also on the adult site.
Good luck

[manleywoman]

I don't believe this is what flo was saying. I think she was trying to make the point that for those who DO use singles tests as criteria for pair competitions, they now have the option of "skating down" that people who use pairs tests as criteria do not have. Is that correct, flo?

If this were fixed, would that solve the problem?

[Mrs Redboots]

So, the problem is that the test that many of us took to compete (preliminary changed to juvenile, preliminary changed to pre-juv) are not the same pre juvenile/Juvenile tests as today, yet the cross-over levels are the same.
But this is surely a universal problem, not just applying to pairs? It is also global.... I know several skaters from many different countries whose test level requires that they compete at a skating level far above their current ability.

Even I have at least twice in my skating career been credited with a skating ability I didn't actually have when test structures/requirements changed, although luckily that hasn't impacted where I need to enter for competitions!

[blue111moon]

But this is surely a universal problem, not just applying to pairs? It is also global.... I know several skaters from many different countries whose test level requires that they compete at a skating level far above their current ability.

It happened to me in freestyle: the Silver test I took in 1992 wouldn't pass Bronze now and yet I'm required to skate in Silver because that's what my record says. Which is the reason I quit competing free skating.

[flo]

Manley - it would definitely help the pairs who took the old preliminary test and were changed to juvenile (and in gold) and those who are took the more recent preliminary test and this year are now pre-juvenile and in silver pairs. It's an odd situation as the test names changed as well as the elements. The main problem is that the test levels have really not been reviewed in a while. I can understand the reasoning behind pairs competing at their true test level, but to do that the levels really have to be equivalent.

Yes, Mrs. R, you're right. That's why it's so important to look back at history before making any of these changes. The adult program is not yet so old that there is not this history easily (relatively) available. And, not that it is unimportant in singles, but I think it's really important in pairs as a safety issue not to put anyone into a level where the expected or allowed elements are not at their test level.

For example, overheads are allowed in gold. With my current partner we're not even going to attempt overheads this season. We know our limits and have a great coach who has no problem telling us if he feels that anything we want to do, or attempt for that matter is not safe. Other pairs may not be so fortunate or have a sense of their limitations and feel really pressured to try elements above their level. It's getting more complicated with the mixed level teams. I've done pairs long enough to know that it takes two for the pair.

[Mrs Redboots]

It happened to me in freestyle: the Silver test I took in 1992 wouldn't pass Bronze now and yet I'm required to skate in Silver because that's what my record says. Which is the reason I quit competing free skating.
You were one of the people I was thinking of, plus two French skaters, and a couple of British ones.... and that's only the ones I know of. How many have given up altogether for just this reason?

[Mrs Redboots]

Other pairs may not be so fortunate or have a sense of their limitations and feel really pressured to try elements above their level. It's getting more complicated with the mixed level teams. I've done pairs long enough to know that it takes two for the pair.

I've only ever skated with one partner, in both dance and such pairs as we've done (only Interp pairs so far), and as I've always been the weaker skater I know absolutely what you mean! We do try to stretch ourselves very slightly each year, but you can't go too far.

At least the IJS does tend to reward simpler elements done well as well as complicated elements! At least, that's the theory.....