Skate Detroit-Pairs

[Scott]

Ok, I don't want to stir up a hornets nest here BUT I must say that I was rather surprised to read that Roth and McPcherson placed 4th in this competition. This team was chosen for a grand prix event over other more experienced sr. teams and in a club competition they pull up 4th? They lost out to Speilberg/Joeright who were passed over for grand prix assignments and to a new team that has only been together for a number of weeks. This boggles my mind and only reinforces my view that assignments should be earned through sr. level competitions and not selected based on opinions. This placement certainly is not very encouraging. This reinforces my opinion that the USFSA should have been looking at Inoue/Baldwin, Orscher/Lucash, Quigley/Cording and Sppielberg/Joeright before assigning a valuable grand prix competition to an untested Sr. team coming up from the Jr. ranks.

BTW, Aaron I want to again thank you for your reporting. I think we should all chip into a fund and then hire you to travel around to national and internation competitions so that you can report back to us. The work you did and have done in the past was amazing! :) :)

[haribobo]

From reading the reports, it sounds like the 2-4 teams were fairly close in ability. And this was only a short program anyway-- 2-4 might have come out much differently in a free skate. It's not as if R/M were falling all over the place and H/H and S/J were perfect. S/J is my favorite pair and I can't wait to see what H/H looks like, but it did not bother me in the least to see R/M given GP assignments. I don't believe Marcy Hinzmann has ever competed in any international competition. The U.S. never sends its brand new teams on to the to GP, because they believe experience will help them be competitive with the top international skaters. Besides, it is an honor to get Grand Prix events. What kind of message is that sending to the long-term pairs to keep passing them by for new teams, especially ones who only plan to stay together for a year or 2? I am not saying Marcy and Steve are not in it for the long haul, but both R/M and S/J have been together much longer and have earned their position by competing at Nationals while Marcy and Steve have never even competed at Nationals. Most likely, any teams we send on the GP besides I/Z, S/D, and K/P will finish at or near the bottom this year anyway, due to the lack of average international pairs teams whom our 4th pair could potentially beat at GP events. So now what it comes down to is who the USFSA feel has earned the honor to compete and might at least be on the level of the teams they are competing with, and this may be Steve Hartsell but it is not Marcy Hinzmann. It is not her fault-- she's hardly had time to establish a name for herself, but it's also not really Roth/McPherson's fault that they sustained an injury after having the best finish at Junior Worlds for a U.S. pair since Handy/Binnebose. Besides, these results and reports from Skate Detroit indicate that R/M were skating at a high level with the other 2-4 teams and one element could have made the difference. They were not, for example, only doing double jumps and throws. They nearly skated a clean program!

I believe that with time Hinzmann/Hartsell could be a great team. They might even be a great team this year. But I don't ever think we should put so much pressure on a new team as to force them into the spotlight in their first season competing. Let them get things together, maybe skate at a B international, and have a strong debut at Nationals so that *next* year they can compete for a spot on the B events. As for S/J, I love them but Larisa has not shown that she is capable of consistently landing a 3jump or a 2axel in competition. Until she can do that (or manage to earn bronze at U.S. nationals while fudging the jumps like Stephanie Kalesavich has done), they will not be considered. Aside from the jumps though, Stephanie (and of course Aaron) is a very strong skater which is what allowed them to claim bronze despite the jumping problems. I am not trying to undermine their talent...

[Trillian]

haribobo, you make a good argument for favoring R&M over Hinzmann & Hartsell and S&J. But what about Inoue & Baldwin, who only have one GP assignment, or Orscher & Lucash, who have none? Both those teams were in the top five in seniors at nationals, and for that matter, beat S&J (who beat R&M here). I'm not saying they should [i:d8a5449e38]necessarily[/i:d8a5449e38] have automatic preference over R&M, but I think it should have been pretty obvious that R&M--especially coming off an injury--weren't guarunteed to be the strongest team of that group. At the very least, O&L and I&B should have had the opportunity to beat R&M at Indy or possibly the Nebelhorn Trophy before GP assignments were handed out. As far as I'm concerned, this result only lends further weight to that argument, however close it may have been. R&M lost to a brand new pair and to the 7th place team from nationals; I can't imagine they'd have done any better against I&B or O&L.

[sk8pics]

I don't think that H&H should have automatically been given GP assignments, but it does bother me that a team that did not compete at nationals last season has been given two assignments. True, the Hartsells got GP assignments after missing nationals, presumably based on their prior record as international competitors at the senior level and former national champions, and true, R&M were successful at junior worlds, but that was (relatively speaking) a long time ago. Plus, it seems to be that over the past 3 years the 4th place team at nationals received 2 assignments; the 5th place (or lower) teams only received assignments when a team ahead of them was injured (for example, S&D in '99).

The results of SKate Detroit don't impress me that much, since it was only a short program competition and it's so early in the season. But since R&M haven't competed as seniors, I think it is unfair for them to have been given two grand prix assignments, ahead of I&B. I&B earned their fourth place spot and if it were last year or the year before, they'd have had 2 assignments. It would have been fairer IMO to have reversed the assignments, and given two to I&B and one to R&M, if someone is so determined to give R&M some exposure, which is how it sure looks to me.

Pat

[NiceIce]

I agree that it is odd and seems unfair that Ross-MacPherson got 2 important assignments ina category that they have been unproven in, while others who were at Senior Nats got looked over!
Odd...but typical for the USFSA :?

[Scott]

I would certainly not buy into the argument that Hinzman/hartsell should be out on the international circut. They should have to earn this honor by their placement at US Nationals and that is the same argument that I have for Roth and McPherson. The argument that Skate Detroit was only a short program doesn't move me. If you fail in the short you are dead in the water. I agree that it sounds like the competition was close and that R/M were not falling all over the place but the Judges obviously saw something to place this team 4th. For a Sr. Grand Prix Team to fall down this low in a short program in a club competition raises my eyebrows. There is certainly no way that R/M should have lost out to Hinzman/Hartsell who have been hardly together for what, 2 months? My guess is that if Quigley/Cording, Inoue/Baldwin and Orscher/Lucash had been competing R/M would have been down the ladder another three notches. My argument here is that we should be like other sports where you only move up based upon actual competitive results in the division that you are competing in. I am sure that who ever placed R/M on the grand Prix list is probably scracthing their head about this decision after see the Skate Detroit results.

To the credit of Hinzman/Hartsell all I can say is congratulations and what a confidence booster! Good Job!

[Louis]

I highly doubt that the USFSA International Committee has any more regrets about naming Roth and McPherson to Grand Prix events than they do about naming Matt Savoie to the Grand Prix events. (He was beaten by a skater ranked in the [i:9c8bf51fe0]teens[/i:9c8bf51fe0] at Nationals!) The issue is not where R&M are now, but where they will be in November. A slow start is to be expected when coming back from a missed season, and nothing at Skate Detroit showed any signs of impending disaster or otherwise being unready to compete internationally four months from now. The results of summer competitions are meaningless; it's the performances that are meaningful. Time is on their side.

As for the other pairs, they'll get GP assignments when they've been together longer, achieved more, and start to consistently show more promise. There was nothing compelling from the pairs outside of the top 3 at Nationals, and Four Continents was perhaps the poorest pairs competition I have ever seen at the senior level. Who cares if a pair is 4th or 5th at Nationals when they are basement dwellers internationally? R&M have medalled at the JGP Final and Junior Worlds. When the other pairs show the same kind of promise and potential, they'll get the benefit of the doubt, too. So what if R&M lose to other pairs at Indy when they're probably skating at 60-70% of their ability? The bottom line is that the USFSA knows what R&M are capable of doing at 90-100% of their ability and believes they'll get there by November.

Edited to add.... does anyone have the most recent USFSA point rankings? I would expect that R&M's JGP, JGP Final, and Junior World medals would still have them ranked 4th (or maybe even 3rd) in the U.S. even with the missed season.

[Mayra]

[quote:dc30dc85b0]The argument that Skate Detroit was only a short program doesn't move me. If you fail in the short you are dead in the water. I agree that it sounds like the competition was close and that R/M were not falling all over the place but the Judges obviously saw something to place this team 4th. For a Sr. Grand Prix Team to fall down this low in a short program in a club competition raises my eyebrows. [/quote:dc30dc85b0]

Not only were R/M not falling all over the place they didn't fall at all. In fact they sounded a lot like what they are, a junior team making their senior debut after a year off with an injury and adjusting to growth. Landing sbs 3t *2ft by her* and a throw 3sal w/ turn out and unision problems in the sbs spins and probably a little rough overall as compared to S&J is to be expected. I'm not even sure THEY thought they would go out there and nail everything in that program. This team by no means "failed" in the short program, and with 3 months to go until Skate America to clean up the rough spots in their program, I think this team did fine. Certainly no less consistant than I&B, S&J, O&L or Q&C IMO.

[Scott]

Louis and Myra, no one is saying that Roth and Mcpherson are not a strong or potentially strong team. However, they have to prove themselves as in any other sport and it should be in face to face competition. Why is this such a problem? I don't know of any other sport where a competitor is awarded a spot on a team or for an international competition based on abilities achieved at a lower level. There may be expectations but you don't get to go to big competitions or events unless you prove it in competition.

Now, concerning Skate Detroit. You make the argument that it is early in the season. That the team has time to make corrections and improve. That is all true, But do you suppose that the other teams are not going to continue to improve? They are not going to just sit down and be happy with their current state either. The comparison with Savioe's situation is not valid either. This guy has proved himself in the Sr. ranks and has achieved the positions he maintains. In his case he probably had a bad day and that can be understood. Roth and McPherson have yet to be at the same level of competition that Savioe has experienced and succeeded at. And there is no measuring stick for them other than what was achieved at Jr. Competition levels, which is an entirely different environment.

I have no doubts that Roth and McPherson should do well. I am sure that they will make a great impression and marked improvements. But i still say we should not be awarding competition assignments based on expectations. In Sport it must be based on performance and National ranking. That ranking must be at a sr. level of competition. If we want this venue to be a sport then that the way it should be.

[haribobo]

I believe Kristal Uzelac (gymnastics) was given an international senior assignment this past season based on her fantastic record in junior and never having competed as a senior before. Sometimes, it happens in many sports. This is not a totally isolated and corrupt event.

Scott, I completely understand what you are saying and in some respects actually agree with you. What I think you are not taking into account is that the USFSA does not have time to take Indy into account before announcing the Skate America team. Perhaps Kalesavich/Parchem and/or Scott/Dulebohn requested that they not be sent to Skate America this year. And maybe the USFSA is required legally to honor their requests. Thus, maybe they HAD to decide who to send to Skate America and it is counterproductive to just waste their slots and only assign Ina/Zimmerman. There is a lot going on under the surface that neither you nor I know about.

What I do know, is that the USFSA sends monitors out to training locations of the more prominent skaters and sometimes, if necessary, uses that information to make assignments. How do you think they decided to send Jason Wong and Wesley Campbell to the JGP and NOT Evan Gibbs BEFORE Liberty Open and the NACS took place? Someone must have been watching their practice and they must have been looking good enough (in addition to their strong finishes at the recent Nationals) to send out internationally. Now say you are working for the USFSA and someone tells you that you have 2 weeks to monitor all the teams and choose 2 for skate America. Your choices are these teams...

Inoue/Baldwin- 4th at 2002 Nationals, 7/10 at 4CC, 2nd season competing
Orscher/Lucash- 5th at 2002 Nationals, 10/10 at 4CC, 1st season competing
Spielberg/Joeright- 7th at 2002 Nationals, has been together for the 4+ years but she still rarely lands the difficult jumps and throws
Quigley/Cording- 8th at 2002 Nationals, never too strong internationally.
Roth/McPherson- Injured in 2002, 2nd in Juniors at 2001 Nationals, 3rd at Junior Worlds 2001.

Now none of these skaters have a really wonderful record on the highest level of competition, so let's say that they all start at a clean slate, perhaps with I/B a little ahead due to their highest finish of the teams at the most recent Nationals and decent finish at 4CC. Now the monitors all went out to report on these teams and came back with their thoughts. Very few of us are lucky enough to see these teams training, but I do trust the USFSA and do not believe they were at a corrupt organization. A week and a half ago, I saw Phyllis Howard, president of the USFSA. She came and sat with the other fans in the audience, met people, and answered questions. How many other sports organizations do you know of whose presidents have the time and care enough to attend minor non-qualifying competitions in the summer? So when I hear that Roth/McPherson got 2 Grand Prix assignments, I can only assume that the monitors that saw them said they were skating very well. And I believe it. This is a young team who has been competing nationally and internationally longer than I/B and O/L, has had decent to great results, and is showing in practice that they are currently the 4th or 5th best team in the country. You are forced to make your decision, oh, let's say July 10. You cannot wait for the Detroit or Indy competitions to make your decisions-- the ISU wants NAMES of competitors, now! What do you do?

Please keep in mind that the actual performance and skating ability and potential also matters-- it's not all about results all the time in this sport. I definitely believe in earning your way and putting your time in, but when you are forced to make a decision for GP assignments earlier than you like and R/M are looking like the best bet, is there really any harm in choosing them over O/L who despite all their potential and jumping prowess, have competed in 4 competitions in their career (last year's Indy I think, Easterns, U.S. Nationals, and 4CC)? I saw O/L at Easterns and saw a tape of their performance at U.S. Nationals. Actually rewatched the tape just this morning. They look like what they are-- a promising new pair who are just getting their feet wet in competition and aren't quite sure where all their arms and legs should go yet. They have nowhere near the polish I have seen displayed by Roth/McPherson in their performances. I am sure O/L will be looking much better this season than last, but whoever went to monitor them must have decided they were not looking as good as R/M *yet*. I can say that, yes, it would have been ideal if the USFSA could wait till Indy, make all the pairs compete there, and assign the top 2 to Grand Prix events. But when you are forced to make the decision and sometimes don't have all the information you'd like, you have to go by what looks like the best bet, and R/M were that best bet at that point.

[Trillian]

[quote:fcdbb60540="haribobo"]I believe Kristal Uzelac (gymnastics) was given an international senior assignment this past season based on her fantastic record in junior and never having competed as a senior before.[/quote:fcdbb60540]

Without even getting into the rest of the argument, that's not a comparable situation. The ONLY reason Uzelac hadn't competed as a senior was because of age restrictions. Her level of performance was ridiculously high when she won her third national junior title and she'd have easily made the senior world team that year. Besides, with skating you can't compare scores from one competition to another; with gymnastics, theoretically, you should be able to do that to some degree (though not entirely). And as I recall, Uzelac's all-around scores from the 2001 nationals would have put her third or fourth among the seniors. Besides, Uzelac's record in junior competition can't really be compared to that of R&M. R&M did very well in junior events in one season; Uzelac accomplished things no other athlete ever has over a three year period. It's not the same thing.

As far as R&M are concerned, unless they do something exceptional in their GP events, I'm going to maintain my original POV: giving them two assignments without even allowing O&L and I&B the chance to face them at Indy was a mistake. Not only was it unfair to the other teams IMO, but it may be yet another case of the USFSA pushing young skaters into a position they're just not ready for yet (thus leading to potential burnout).

Things will balance out at nationals, though. I'm not worried about that. If R&M are one of the best teams there, they'll get placed accordingly. And if they're not, someone else will get placed accordingly.

[Mayra]

Actually gymnastics is probably a good example of another sport that doesn't use National results as the sole measuring stick in which to issue international assignments. Even Kristal Uzelac herself was passed up for an invitation at the American Cup this year in favor of Courtney Kupets who had nil experience. Marta Karolyi does monitor the gymnasts at camps and such and if you impress enough you might just find yourself with an assignment. :!:

[sk8pics]

[quote:774b5cbcc9="haribobo"]Perhaps ...Scott/Dulebohn requested that they not be sent to Skate America this year. [/quote:774b5cbcc9]
Scott & Dulebohn made no such request.

[quote:774b5cbcc9="haribobo"]Inoue/Baldwin- 4th at 2002 Nationals, 7/10 at 4CC, 2nd season competing
Orscher/Lucash- 5th at 2002 Nationals, 10/10 at 4CC, 1st season competing
...
Roth/McPherson- Injured in 2002, 2nd in Juniors at 2001 Nationals, 3rd at Junior Worlds 2001.[/quote:774b5cbcc9]

My position is that in the last 3 years the USFSA has given 2 assignments to 4th place teams, so why not this year? It's not like those teams had successful international records anyway, and most (if not all) have split by now. Maybe this is a case of the USFSA trying to give assignments to a team they THINK will be successful and they THINK will stay together. But I just disagree with that, and with those of you who think it's fine that R&M were given these spots. One spot, fine, but I think it's unfair to I&B to give R&M two.

I do remember reading about deadlines for naming teams, and perhaps that's an issue, but couldn't both I&B and R&M have been named as alternates? They could have both skated at Skate America and then the second slot could have gone to whichever team performed better. Really, I think the choice should be/have been between I&B and R&M. The fifth place team at nationals has only gotten a spot in the past in the case of injury to a higher placed team.

My last comment is on monitoring. I would hope that all those teams mentioned above were monitored, but even if they were, competition tells the whole story. I can think of a number of instances where a team looked wonderful in practice and failed to perform in competition. I can also think of reverse situations, where a team really skated "up." This is why I personally would rather see assignments based on results of recent competition, rather than monitoring or performance from two seasons ago.

JMO.
Pat

[Scott]

Haribobo, (I was going to post a quote but your response was a bible!) some of your arguments are interesting but let me address one issue you raise : you suggest that the USFSA sent monitors out to review the potential skaters. In talking with people in California, Tenneessee and Connecticut no one is aware of such events taking place. Maybe they did go out but one would have thought that the coaches and skaters would have been informed if such an event were to take place.

I guess what I am trying to say is that we should use our national competition as the prime determination as to who gets to go to international assignments before we go down the list and start including others. Do you remember the unfortunate circumstance of Mark Mitchell who was bumped off the Olympic Team because Todd Eldridge had to withdraw from Nationals due to an injury and then went on to compete in the Olympics several weeks later. That was wrong! Mark earned the Spot on the team. He completed and placed 2nd at nationals. Because Todd was out doesn't matter. The decision by the USFSA to do this cheapened Mark's wonderful acomplishment. In sports what counts is the day of the event. you do well, you win. Period. That should be the standard. All this fluff about expectations is just that: fluff! And it has no meaning.

If we went on expectations then the results coming out of Detroit can not be good. Based on your comments concerning monitoring I have to wonder what the judges at Detroit saw that would move them to place Speilberg/Joeright ahead of Roth/McPherson, particularly after Larissa having a hard fall. Not to mention that the new team of H/H placed second.

I agree with your comments about two of my favorite teams. In particular Orscher/Lucash do a a long way to go, but you can not take away from the fact that they are the 5th ranked team in the USA right now. They competed and won that spot! Inoue and Baldwin did the same but are 4th. They shoud be treated with the repect that should come with those positions. As I have said in other postings I see limiitations for Inour/Baldwin ( who are #1 in my heart of hearts) and I wonder if they will be able to stand up to the coming years competitiors. I can see Roth and McPherson giving them a hard time at nationals and I expect to see great improvement from Quigley and Cording. While they are not my favorites at this point I expect that Orscher and Lucash will break out of the pack and be in the top three. I did get a chance to view one of their practices very recently and i will tell you that no one is going to recognise this team. They have quite a coaching staff which has brought out an artistic element that I would never had expected to exist. But despite this, the fact remains that when the competition comes they will have to deliver and beat the other teams. I don't care what i see in practices or in shows, if they don't do it in the short and long program at nationals then that is it.

Now one thing that we should be careful of is not to belittle any of these skaters who have worked so hard to get to this level of competition. Louis I can't believe that you meant what you said when you refered to the participants at 4cc's as basement dwellers. Both O/L and I/B have not been around long enough to earn that distintion!

So, let me be clear, I do not deny that R/M may in fact be the future of pairs skating. They could well be. But based on competitive results it seems to me they should have to walk up the same steps as everyone else. There is nothing wrong with that. I am looking forward to seeing them skate at nationals this year ( they are one team thath I haven't had the pleasure of seeing yet). Lets encourage all the teams to do well but also lets not play politics with favorites, lets go by actual placements to determine our international team. That should be the reward.

[Louis]

[quote:361ce10a0a="Scott"]Haribobo, (I was going to post a quote but your response was a bible!) some of your arguments are interesting but let me address one issue you raise : you suggest that the USFSA sent monitors out to review the potential skaters. In talking with people in California, Tenneessee and Connecticut no one is aware of such events taking place. Maybe they did go out but one would have thought that the coaches and skaters would have been informed if such an event were to take place. [/quote:361ce10a0a]

I'm not Haribobo, but have you talked to any skaters specifically? All skaters receiving international assignments have USFSA judges who act as monitors. Perhaps they're falling asleep on the job....

[quote:361ce10a0a]
I guess what I am trying to say is that we should use our national competition as the prime determination as to who gets to go to international assignments before we go down the list and start including others. [/quote:361ce10a0a]

Fall internationals are not Worlds or the Olympics. The Nationals results already determine the World and Olympic team. It would be silly to let strict order of finish at Nationals determine everything for the coming year. The USFSA does have a point ranking system that takes into the past two years, and as I said, I expect that R&M's 2001 achievements have them ranked higher than both I&B and O&L in the point system. I'm completely against exceptions being made to a World or Olympic team, but the GP doesn't carry that kind of importance.

[quote:361ce10a0a]
Louis I can't believe that you meant what you said when you refered to the participants at 4cc's as basement dwellers. Both O/L and I/B have not been around long enough to earn that distintion![/quote:361ce10a0a]

I mean no disrespect, but the U.S. pairs performed abominably at Four Continents-- the athletes know that better than anyone else. I know there were extenuating circumstances with the competition being a week after U.S. Nationals, but still... 4-6 disruptive mistakes and terrible-looking falls don't do much to inspire confidence.

People seem to think that R&M have to prove themselves, but my view is the opposite-- let I&B and O&L prove that they can skate half-decent programs at the smaller internationals before sending them on the Grand Prix. It's not as if these teams are being given nothing.

And I don't think that the USFSA is pushing a young team too quickly. What are the alternatives? Send R&M back to the JGP, where they would face the expectation of winning everything and be forced to train two version of each of their programs? Tell them everything is based on Indy and have them rush back into training for a club competition?

[quote:361ce10a0a]
Lets encourage all the teams to do well but also lets not play politics with favorites, lets go by actual placements to determine our international team. That should be the reward.[/quote:361ce10a0a]

Let's look at actual placements at international competitions (like JGPF, Junior Worlds, 4 Continents), too. I'm not a huge fan of Roth and McPherson's skating, nor am I convinced that they are the future of U.S. pairs, but I think it was absolutely the right decision to send them on the GP given their level of proven consistency on the international level and the other teams' level of proven inconsistency on every level. If O&L or I&B do well at their internationals this year and/or place in the top 4 at Nationals this year, then I'll be all for their inclusion in the GP *next* year. It's not a case of playing politics with favorites-- it's rewarding one good turn with another.

[Josef]

Answering Louis's question here on the rankings.. the ISU has moved 01/02 to previous season now, in preparation for this next season I'm sure.. so R/McP's points moved down another level. Here are the US pair rankings:

5. Ina/Zimmerman
10. Scott/Dulebohn
25. Kalesavich/Parchem
31. Inoue/Baldwin
41. Orscher/Lucash
44. Hartsell/Hartsell
49. Roth/McPherson

[haribobo]

Josef-- those are not the rankings that Louis was referring to. Those are the ISU rankings. The USFSA has its own set of rankings but they are not on their website at the moment. I think they can be obtained somehow by contacting the USFSA but I'm not sure. I don't have them.

Scott-- didn't see 1992 Nationals, so I can't make an informed judgement about this decision. Mark was actually 3rd there, if Skatabase is correct,

1992 Nationals Senior Men
1. Christopher Bowman
2. Paul Wylie
3. Mark Mitchell
4. Scott Davis
5. Aren Nielsen

And then there was Todd who was injured. Nationals were, what, one month before the Olympics? I guess Todd being defending national champion and world bronze medalist, there was a case for putting him on that team but it also seems that Mark earned that spot. And usually if two guys are on a pretty similar level and both have plenty of international experience, I would have given the spot to the one who was healthy. And Todd finished 10th...so it doesn't seem that he got himself in top form. I feel terribly for Mark Mitchell, if I were him I would have felt robbed too and I think he should have gotten that spot based on the circumstances. Now if you are going to bring this scenario in, what about 1994? Nancy Kerrigan or Michelle Kwan? Well at that point Michelle had next to no senior experience and probably would have ranked somewhere in the 5-10 range while Nancy was a contendor for the gold medal and had worked her whole career towards that year only to be attacked-- would you have told her, too bad you didn't compete against Michelle Kwan at Nationals this year so you can forget about the Olympics? I think you have to weigh each situation differently-- in 1992 they probably made the wrong decision but in 1994 it was the right one.

This year they were faced with a decision about who to put on the GP. I don't believe this situation is at all analagous to who you send to the Olympics *a month* after the Nationals championships. The Grand Prix is taking place 9-11 months after Nationals-- a *lot* can change in that time, and Nationals may no longer be relevant. 7 months ago, according to our Nationals results, Handy/Hunt were the 6th best team in the country. Now they're not skating together anymore. Does that mean Spielberg/Joeright are the 6th best because they were 7th at Nationals? Or is it the new team of Hinzmann/Hartsell? Or maybe it's Roth/McPherson. It's too bad we can't have a Nationals every 3 months to reorganize our teams and see who belongs where, right? :o The point to me is, Nationals results have their own specific rewards-- O/L and I/B got to go to 4CC. If R/M were sent to 4CC I would have been majorly upset because that would have been a ridiculous decision. GP assignments are and have been for some time now about previous international success as much as nationals results.

And I do think that waiting to see who comes out ahead at Skate America might have been a good decision in regard to I/B and R/M. I/B may very well end up beating R/M there. Maybe if I/B finish 5th and R/M are last, the USFSA will take away R/M's 2nd assignment and give it to I/B. It's possible, and it's been done before. But at this point R/M are on that NHK roster. Perhaps the USFSA initially assigned this event knowing that I/Z and S/D are most likely in their last few years as eligibles and they'd like to give a young team some international experience. And it's not as if R/M have had no accomplishments to warrant these assignments. Where were I/B and O/L when R/M were winning the bronze at Junior Worlds? Even if R/M never hit top 10 in the world, I certainly cannot fault the USFSA's strategy. There are a lot of factors that play in to who gets a GP assignment. Whether you like it or not, Nationals 2002 is only *one* of those many factors, and things are going to stay that way no matter what any of us say.

[Scott]

Haribobo- my mistake, Mark was third! He edged out Scott Davis that year, which was considered an upset.

Louis, I understand what you are saying but it is not Inoue/Baldwin or Orscher/Lucash who have to prove themselves anymore than Roth/McPherson Do. These two teams did it at Nationals. Roth/McPherson have not, until Skate detroit, really competed as Seniors. Ans I really have to question what the judges saw there that placed them 4th. I know that it is early in the season and they may not have beenb prepared but if you are going to skate at this level and be in the spotlight you really have little room for outings such as this. Placing 4th in this competition is certainly in the basement where compared to an international event such as 4c's. There is a very big difference between a sr. level competition and a jr. level competition. You can not compare the two. For example in the jr. competition level what elements were completed? Doubles, Triples, etc? Most proably doubles. But that is neither here nor there. The fact is that Roth and McPherson are a good Pair team, they wouldn't be where they are if they weren't. But Louis so are Inoue/Baldwin, Orscher/Lucash and there are others. And concerning the monitoring, if any monitoring occured other than in Detroit everyone that i have talked to is not aware of it and I will leave it at that.

The good news is I think we are going to have a really good competitve season in pairs. Everytime I think of how nationals will turn out i come up with different scenariois. I don't think that we have ever had a year with so many possibilities. Thats the fun of it.

[Scott]

Opps, one other comment. If we are going to use a monitoring system shouldn't the skaters be viewed by the same monitors so that fair comparisons are being made?

[Trillian]

[quote:f44bcfc063="Scott"]Opps, one other comment. If we are going to use a monitoring system shouldn't the skaters be viewed by the same monitors so that fair comparisons are being made?[/quote:f44bcfc063]

Well, that would require a lot of work and traveling for people whom I understand are essentially not making any money for doing the job. If the USFSA wanted monitors to look at every competitor, they'd need to at least pay travel and lodging expenses, and I doubt they want to start making that kind of investment.

Anyway, it is the monitor's responsibility to speak up in favor of the skaters, so if that wasn't being done, it's not the USFSA's fault. If the USFSA has been hearing positive things and simply hasn't been listening, that's another story, but it's also possible that these skaters' monitors aren't doing their jobs--or, for that matter, aren't impressed for whatever reason. I mean, sure, I've been hearing some great things from Connecticut about how Orscher & Lucash are looking, but if there's no one saying the same things to the USFSA, then why would the USFSA feel compelled to give them international assignments?

Frankly, you also have to look at the coaches in these situations. While I'm told Naumov is quite willing to speak up for his teams, and I don't know about the other coaches, I'm sure the coaches of O&L, I&B, S&J, Q&C, etc., are NOT in the same political league with the Detroit pairs coaches when it comes to getting things for their teams. (Yet, anyway. Naumov is going to go places.) And why not? The Detroit pairs program has delivered results; these other coaches are less experienced and/or less accomplished. There's a reason for the USFSA to trust Detroit at this point; the others are still in the process of trying to earn that trust.

That's not saying I agree with the decision; I still don't. But some of the arguments Louis makes are reasonable, and I can at least see why the decision may have been made. Also, it's worth noting that I was hugely impressed by R&M in their season as juniors, and if these GP assignments pay off for them after all, I'll be the first one to give them the credit they deserve for the accomplishment. I'm not anti-R&M, and I hope I don't give anyone that impression--I wish them all the best.

[Ellyn]

[quote:247f8c5e18]That's not saying I agree with the decision; I still don't. But some of the arguments Louis makes are reasonable, and I can at least see why the decision may have been made. Also, it's worth noting that I was hugely impressed by R&M in their season as juniors, and if these GP assignments pay off for them after all, I'll be the first one to give them the credit they deserve for the accomplishment. I'm not anti-R&M, and I hope I don't give anyone that impression--I wish them all the best.[/quote:247f8c5e18]

Is it also possible that the Japanese federation was impressed by R&M at Jr. Worlds and was not impressed by these other teams at 4Cs and asked for R&M specifically?

[ChicaTica]

[quote:75f88d5c29="Scott"]Louis and Myra, no one is saying that Roth and Mcpherson are not a strong or potentially strong team. However, they have to prove themselves as in any other sport and it should be in face to face competition. Why is this such a problem? I don't know of any other sport where a competitor is awarded a spot on a team or for an international competition based on abilities achieved at a lower level. There may be expectations but you don't get to go to big competitions or events unless you prove it in competition. [/quote:75f88d5c29]

Well, that is the was skating works. It is a very conservative sport and the athletes are aware of how the system plays out. As David Pelletier said, if he didn't want to deal with this he would have taken up skiing.

I am not saying, Scott, that is isn't worth discussing how one feels about the manner in which international competitions are assigned. I am just saying don't expect any change in the system.

--CT

[Scott]

[quote:ea20351e93="Trillian"][
Well, that would require a lot of work and traveling for people whom I understand are essentially not making any money for doing the job. If the USFSA wanted monitors to look at every competitor, they'd need to at least pay travel and lodging expenses, and I doubt they want to start making that kind of investment.[/quote:ea20351e93]

well then, if we are going to do it this way why not send in tapes to cut down on the work load? Have the tapes reviewed by a panel. That would be fair.

[Trillian]

[quote:88ed5a2e87="Scott"]well then, if we are going to do it this way why not send in tapes to cut down on the work load? Have the tapes reviewed by a panel. That would be fair.[/quote:88ed5a2e87]

It might be fair, it might not. Think about the singles skater who might be able to land seven triples in a program 1% of the time, and the skater who might be able to do it 80% of the time. They could both send in tapes of themselves performing programs with seven triples, and the less consistent skater might happen to look better on that tape. That doesn't make them more worthy of international assignments; a more general picture of the skater's abilities needs to be gained.

Which is also why one competition (nationals OR Indy, for example) shouldn't be the be-all and end-all of determining assignments. A more general picture of the skaters' overall abilities needs to be gained, one that includes both practice sessions and competitions. And when it comes to the latter, even if I&B and O&L weren't stellar at 4CC, both did well in their other events--while R&M didn't compete at all last year (or ever, at the senior level). Thus my opinion that there's reason to give I&B and O&L the chance to at least show where they stand in direct comparison to R&M before determining assignments. But I can also see the logic behind conflicting points of view, which is more than I could say a couple of months ago when I first heard that R&M were getting the nod for the GP. It does make some sense to me now--I just disagree. :)

[NiceIce]

I think Scott has very valid points, but in the skating world the politics take priority often over normal procedure.
A skating team should not have to rely on "connections", or opinions about their practice sessions in order to be in line for international assignments.
Judges are not impartial!
Does anyone out there still believe they are??
Judges have close connections to certain coaches/rinks/clubs/regions etc.
Why should assignments be even partially based on opinions by a judge who secretly? viewed practices?
If [i:e387a06cc1]Team A [/i:e387a06cc1]competed as Seniors and were in the top 4 at Nationals, they DESERVE internationals BEFORE [i:e387a06cc1]Team B [/i:e387a06cc1]who didnt even compete in Seniors, regardless of Team B's potential.

[Scott]

Thank you Niceice! I guess I couldn't have said it better.

[Aaron W]

This is only part of the argument, but I really think people are reading too much into Roth & McPherson's placement at Skate Detroit. They really didn't look bad at all, and I still think 3 months is plenty of time for them to be ready for Skate America.

[NiceIce]

Skate Detroit is irrelevant!
It is not a selection competition, nor is it a qualifying competition.
All the Senior teams who chose to participate there were adequate.
However,
Senior International assignments should reflect current and recent success at the Senior level, and should be distributed in a fair and impartial way.
To hand those assignments out to teams who were NOT in the top 4 at Nationals seems suspect to me.
There are many good teams with potential, among them Ross-MacPherson, but it was my understanding that AFTER you have proven your ability at the senior level the rewards are handed out-not before!