View Full Version : Grand Prix Series -- how important is it?
icedancer2
08-07-2003, 03:54 PM
I've just been perusing a list of the Senior Grand Prix assignments and wondering -- how important is it that skaters participate in these events and how do the results at the Grand Prix reflect what eventually will occur at the ultimate competitions like World Championships and Olympics?
Mayra
08-07-2003, 04:02 PM
If you are Michelle Kwan, then not competing in the GP series isn't going to affect her all that much. If you are L&T however, it will probably have a bigger impact in their results at Worlds. On the other hand, L&A missed the entire GP series in an Olympic year and wound up with the Olympic Silver medal in SLC. I guess it just depends.
Artemis
08-07-2003, 06:01 PM
The other "importance" of the GP events is the $$. For mid-ranked skaters who don't get the high-paying sponsors or tour deals, this is a way for them to pay for nearly an entire year of training and travel fees. Especially when someone who's ranked, say, 10th in the world can have a great shot at a GP medal.
I think a lot of skaters have also come to rely on the GP events to iron out all the kinks in their programs before they get to nationals and Worlds.
Nicki
08-07-2003, 10:05 PM
I don't think you can make a poll with an either/or question when it comes to the Grand Prix.The importance is different for each skater. For some the international exposure is extremely important, but for others who have been doing this series for a while and are well known by the judges it may not be as important for them.
icedancer2
08-07-2003, 10:10 PM
Originally posted by Nicki
I don't think you can make a poll with an either/or question when it comes to the Grand Prix.The importance is different for each skater. For some the international exposure is extremely important, but for others who have been doing this series for a while and are well known by the judges it may not be as important for them.
You're probably right. I mostly wanted to see a discussion about the Grand Prix and since I'm new to the board, wanted to see how the poll worked. It's definitely not a cut and dried topic like: "what kind of skates do you wear?";)
Matryeshka
08-07-2003, 11:21 PM
Interesting topic. I've been wondering what others have thought about the Grand Prix too.
loveskating
08-08-2003, 11:12 AM
Without the Grand Prix, fans would only see Nationals and Worlds...which is apparently what those only skating at Nationls and then Worlds would like for skating fans (unless they are carving out a special position for themselves alone, which I find arrogant).
There may be too many GP events...that would be a reasonable argument, but frankly, I do not want to be reduced to seeing great skating only twice a year on television...and most skating fans, especially in America, simply do not have the TIME to go to live events that often since most people, including women, work full time.
Otherwise, we could see so-called pro ams (all in the USA, it seems) where the amateur programs are watered down with 4 jumps and a few pros are thrown in to play loosers to the kings and queens! I found the pro ams very boring...the problem is the pro ams, not the Grand Prix!
Without the pro ams, skaters could skate FOUR competitions a year, is all...which is not too much to ask, winners FIVE, but since that is not all at once for the individual skaters, we fans get to see great skating all season!
Let the PROS define professional skating...
Oracle
08-08-2003, 12:57 PM
With the exception of Cup of Russia & the new Chinese GP event all the other Grand Prix competitions existed for years before they were pulled together under the Grand Prix title. So you can dismantle the Grand Prix but that does not mean there will be no more Skate America or NHK, Skate Canada, etc. It was the individual federations that determined whether they would or would not host an international competition. The only difference is that the ISU (Grand Prix) pays out prize money. The federations did not.
icedancer2
08-09-2003, 05:52 PM
It's also true that most of these competitions were televised before they were all grouped in the "Grand Prix", especially in the mid-90's when televised skating became very popular.
It's hard to say if these competitions would be dropped from television coverage now if they weren't under this umbrella called "Grand Prix" -- no way of knowing I guess.
IMO, if you are MK, IS, AY or EP, the GP is less than important for clout purposes. These four could miss the GP circuit and not be held down or jumped over by any other skaters. (I did not include Pairs or Dancing because I know little about the politics).
Now, for someone on the rise, or trying to knock on the door of the Top skaters, then the GP is priceless.
If Sasha Cohen or Sarah Hughes can win a GP, then that really sets them up for the podium at Worlds, granted that they can deliver there.
loveskating
08-11-2003, 08:54 AM
Originally posted by icedancer2
It's also true that most of these competitions were televised before they were all grouped in the "Grand Prix", especially in the mid-90's when televised skating became very popular.
That makes absolutely no difference as to the bottom line issue of some skaters skating only 2 events a year [Nationals and Worlds] and others skating up to 5 or 6 [minimum 2 GP, GP Finals, Nationals and Worlds]. How many competitions you can skate effectively is certainly a competitive issue, not just in skating, but in all sports, and comes into play in the athletic arts, as well...ballet, dance in general and opera!
If, by the rules, some have to skate 5 or 6 competitions while others only have to skate a measley 2, then the rules need to be cleaned up because a huge advantage is being given outright to anyone who has to skate significantly fewer competitions!! This advantage consists in less wear and tear on the body, less travel time and its consequences to health, less pressure, and more training time.
This sort of tayloring of the practice and/or rules of competition to fit some popular or politicaly favored skater(s), is one thing that makes a lot of people think that figure skating is not a sport and is riddled with corruption!
Imagine if in football or basketball, some team claimed the right to play fewer games because they were National Champs for 5 years running, for goodness sakes! Not in a MILLION years!!
Originally posted by icedancer2
It's also true that most of these competitions were televised before they were all grouped in the "Grand Prix", especially in the mid-90's when televised skating became very popular.
Originally posted by loveskating
That makes absolutely no difference as to the bottom line issue of some skaters skating only 2 events a year [Nationals and Worlds] and others skating up to 5 or 6 [minimum 2 GP, GP Finals, Nationals and Worlds].
I agree with this because basically I don't see the link between televised events comment and this one.
I don't see why it is unreasonable for someone to skate in less competitions. The rules state that if you want to skate in proams you HAVE to skate the GP series...otherwise, you can skip it. No bending or tailoring here needed.
Some people don't feel the need to skate more to warm up their programs; others do. There's nothing wrong with either.
Also, some skaters have to skate through Regionals to get to Nationals, while other don't due to their standings from the previous year's competitions. By your reasoning, this is not fair either.
quarkiki2
08-11-2003, 09:23 AM
I'm not sure anyone *has* to skate 5-6 competitions per year. I believe that any skater can turn down an event.
And I don't know that it is a tremendous benefit to only skate in two competitions a year -- your programs don't have the mileage nor the comfort you get from competing them several times before "the big one". I'm pretty sure Sarah Hughes would agree with that.
Is there an advantage? I dunno -- Evgeny Plushenko skated the heck out of last season on the Grand Prix and looked very fresh and ready to go at Worlds. Sasha Cohen looked super on the GP and looked ready to go at Nationals and Worlds, too. On the other hand, Timothy Goebel was out half the season and didn't seem to suffer for it.
It would be interesting to do a study on whether momentum has a significant effect on outcome. Plushenko, Cohen, Joubert and Onda surely had momentum last GP. Plushenko and Cohen delivered, Joubert and Onda not so much.
loveskating
08-12-2003, 10:55 AM
Well, I think the ISU should make a rule that if you want to skate at Worlds, IF you are a seeded skater, you HAVE to skate at least the minimal 2 GP events and GP Finals if you qualify.
Of course, as in the case of Yagudin in 2002, or Eldredge a lot, one can get out based on injuries!
Because it would apply only to seeded skaters, this would leave room for surprises at Natioanls by up and comers, like if Naomi Nari Nam had had a lutz, LOL, and since Sokolova was a surprise.
The advantage of competing 2 vs. 5 or 6 competitions is obvious...one need not prove some connection between number of competitions and winning to know that it is. Again, if the University of Texas under Darrell Royal had demanded a schedule with a ratio of 2/5 or 6 because they were repeat National Champs, and perhaps because Royal revolutionized the sport thus making a HUGE contribution to it, then the UNFAIR calls would have been SHATTERING because it would have given the existing National Champs a HUGE advantage, based on wear and tear to the body alone, not to mention other things.
I dunno...to me, Americans do not give the winners an advantage of any kind. Its just something we don't do here. They get fame and fortune, but no indulgences or special priviledges of any kind, IMHO.
Its the same in opera...if some top singer announced they were going to do only 2 operas to everyone else's 5 or 6, then they would not any longer be top singers, is all...in fact, when they do such things its clear they intend to retire because they cannot handle a full schedule (usually a singer is expected to sing twice a week during the season).
I don't think anyone in college football would want to have that type of game play ratio. Their win average might be better, but the way that the BCS system works would not allow for a team with so few games to advance to a BCS bowl game. Teams tend to move up either when another top team loses or when they beat another team, preferably a top team. Also, difficulty of schedule is not there which also comes into play in the rankings.
If the team were to play only 2 games, than the rankings would leave them behind. Also, only playing two games would not sufficiently prepare the team for a champinoship bowl game.
There are advantages and disadvantages to competing less. You DO have less chance of injury, BUT you have less chances to warm up your program and to present your program to the judges. Competing more allows you to test your program and to make changes as you see fit to make yourself ready to compete at Nationals/Worlds.
quarkiki2
08-12-2003, 12:20 PM
Originally posted by loveskating
Because it would apply only to seeded skaters, this would leave room for surprises at Natioanls by up and comers, like if Naomi Nari Nam had had a lutz, LOL, and since Sokolova was a surprise.
This seems a bit like strong-arming athletes. I may be wrong, but I don't know of any "individual" sport where you are required to participated in non-championship-qualifying events (golf, tennis, etc.) Nobody's protesting because Tiger Woods and Pete Sampras don't play every single tournament.
Besides, this plan would greatly upset the "You've had your chance, you're getting too old, we're tired of seeing you skate the same type of program, you only win because you skate clean, now get out of the way and give someone else a chance" faction.
And since none of the seeded skaters have entered Nationals to attempt to qualify for Worlds yet, we can't really say that they are going to skate in only two competitions. We just don't know yet! This debate could be all for naught, LOL!
Originally posted by Bondo
Well, if the person who should turn pro is sticking around, they should compete fully rather than do a half-schedule...so I don't really think this causes any problem for that faction.
Why should that one person have to compete a full schedule?
loveskating
08-13-2003, 10:07 AM
Originally posted by quarkiki2
This seems a bit like strong-arming athletes. I may be wrong, but I don't know of any "individual" sport where you are required to participated in non-championship-qualifying events (golf, tennis, etc.) Nobody's protesting because Tiger Woods and Pete Sampras don't play every single tournament.
Besides, this plan would greatly upset the "You've had your chance, you're getting too old, we're tired of seeing you skate the same type of program, you only win because you skate clean, now get out of the way and give someone else a chance" faction.
And since none of the seeded skaters have entered Nationals to attempt to qualify for Worlds yet, we can't really say that they are going to skate in only two competitions. We just don't know yet! This debate could be all for naught, LOL!
Those are PROFESSIONALS...there is no major amateur sport I know of where there are different standards applied to some teams as to the seasonal schedule...except that the winners get to play MORE, not LESS!
loveskating
08-13-2003, 10:27 AM
Originally posted by Kemy
Why should that one person have to compete a full schedule?
Because there IS a full schedule!
Why should anyone be excepted from a full schedule?
quarkiki2
08-13-2003, 10:32 AM
If you get rid of Worlds, what's the point of Sectionals, Regionals, and Nationals here in the US? Or the qualifying competitions in other countries? These competitions seem more like your basketball competitive structure than the GP.
If we got rid of those competitions, no other skaters would ever be invited onto the GP. The invitations are what make the GP seem more like the PGA than the step-by-step qualifying for Nationals does. It's not like the top four finishers at Skate America advance to Skate Canada, whereas that's how the Nationals qualifying cometitions are designed.
And again, this may all be entirely moot as no one has committed to Nationals at this point in the season. We may be making assumptions that never come to fruition. We can always assume that, for example, Ann-Patrice McDonough will compete at nationals, but what if she wins the GP Final and decides to be done with her season then and there? She's not required to skate at Nationals, after all.
Originally posted by loveskating
Because there IS a full schedule!
Why should anyone be excepted from a full schedule?
Didn't say that...I just felt that Bondo implied that he feels that a person who "should" go pro should be forced. Why should he single that one person out?
Anyways, how is gymnstics done? I know you have to go to Nationals to be eligible to go to Worlds, and then be chosen to be on the squad. There are also other competitions. It might be beneficial to enter all the side competitions to show what you can do, but it's not mandatory.
Competitive team sports are a bit different. There is only the road to the championship. There is no GP series. Yes...if they win, they GET to play more, in that they make it to the championship game. Like if you do good at Nationals, you get to go to Worlds, aka the championship game. So if you want to compare to team sports, it seems like figure skating is where it should be.
I don't see a sport where a team or individual is FORCED to enter a certain events that have nothing to do with becoming a champion in that sport.
icedancer2
08-13-2003, 05:01 PM
Originally posted by Bondo
[Since it is so obvious who this conversation uses as an example...Michelle claims she stays elgible because of the desire to compete and enjoyment is still there. That reasoning is such rubbish. If she wanted to compete she would use every oppertunity she had, she wouldn't avoid a whole set of competitions. It is clear the reason she hasn't gone pro is she wants her Olymic gold. She skates Nats and Worlds to keep her status up enough to remain solidly in the mix in 2006...if she just didn't skate until 2006 Nats she would risk losing the ability to basically get a bye into the Olympics.
I find this rather offensive to other skaters who are actively working their butts off to achieve things in the sport. I find it a disgrace to the sport which is why I think she needs to either be a fully active participant or go pro. I don't think the USFSA or ISU should get involved in changing how she acts, I just will not have any admiration for her unless she does. [/B]
Well, you said it like it is. She has been in long enough. Give someone else a chance!!
Besides, the pro ranks could really use her right now!! (ie., SOI)
adrianchew
08-13-2003, 06:47 PM
Originally posted by Kemy
I don't see a sport where a team or individual is FORCED to enter a certain events that have nothing to do with becoming a champion in that sport.
That's the problem with skating to some extent - the GP series is probably not as important as it should be. The recognition factor is missing.
Motor racing requires just that - the ability to compete through a full season, to become a champion in that sport. The reason is pretty simple really - shit happens on the track, get into an accident, race could be over for that day.
Skating is similarly a high risk sport - shit happens on ice too - you can have an off day on the ice, and skate badly - that could cause the loss of the championship in skating. If the overall champion was decided by a series of competitions, you find yourself the overall best skater in that season as the champion. If you base it on a single competition, its simply the skater that skates best at that competition.
There is the concept of trying to peak for skaters, simply because of this, they have to pace themselves that they don't overextend themselves too early in the skating season, so they can do well at stuff like Nats and Worlds that come later. So a skater that does less overall in a season with requisite experience, can train to peak for certain specific events, and thus easily become the champion, when its more like they were just the best skater at that competition.
If you want to take Michelle as an example, her lack of success at winning Grand Prix titles is offset by her success at winning Nats/Worlds... so she tends to peak for specific events rather well, but has to give something in return for that.
But Adrian...NASCAR doesn't force you to enter all the side events ( I don't even think that they have any.) The way NASCAR works is an accumulation of points. You win points for placement, number of laps in first place, starting at the poll position, etc. You need to race in every race in order to accumulate points to win the Winston Cup. If you miss a race, you miss valuable points that could cost you the championship.
So are you saying that skating should be like this? An accumulation of points? If definitely would be interesting. I don't mind something like this. Not a point system exactly, but some sort of advantage that you get.
Maybe if you qualify for the GP Finals, you don't have to do the QR at Worlds (If they would just go BACK to the old system of JUST using the QR for QUALIFYING :roll:)...or something along those lines...
That way, no one is forced to do something that they really don't want to do, yet give soemthing to those that WANT to compete in the GP.
Mayra
08-13-2003, 07:48 PM
Originally posted by adrianchew
If the overall champion was decided by a series of competitions, you find yourself the overall best skater in that season as the champion. If you base it on a single competition, its simply the skater that skates best at that competition.
So long as we're comparing sports using this method, imagine football crowning the overall best team by who won the most games in the season? Basketball? Baseball. Ultimately, it can be said that the team/athlete who wins the most that season is the best, but there is more to sports than that IMO.
Working your way up to the sports biggest event whether that is the Olympics or Worlds is what makes the sport exciting to watch, and its what makes other sports exciting to watch. Super Bowl anyone? Its about an opportunity that only comes once a year and maybe once in a lifetime. Who will step it up? Its about knowing that the best can fall and that someone waiting in the wings can have the skate of their lives and beat the best to become the best (if only for one night). You really can't beat that. IMO
loveskating
08-14-2003, 09:59 AM
Well, the ISU already rates skaters internationally based on factoring in numbers of competitions...which is why Irina and Sasha are rated highest by the ISU last season.
But I think that if seeded skaters were required to skate in at least 2 GP series competitions (and if they qualify, to go to the GP Final) or not be allowed to compete at Worlds, that would sufficiently link Worlds (and Nationals) to the GP series and ensure the GP Series' existence and prestige.
I don't see much respect on the horizon for a sport in which the World Champ can sit out the seasonal schedule and then win his or her Nationals and then Worlds...only skating TWO serious and relevant competitions a year! This alone tends to degrade the GP and ITS participants as irrelevant, quite obviously.
Aside from that, I just don't see how it is in the BUSINESS interests of U.S. companies in the skating industry to downgrade the GP Series in this manner or any other! The GP series is international, and as such, it is clearly bringing other countries into figure skating (among them, China), thus creating new markets for the figure skating business!!
For instance, the expertise that exists in the USA (and as to hardware, in Russia) will be marketed to China as it develops its own figure skating market and infrastructure I'm sure. Those are business opportunities not to be dismissed for the sake of so any national market already saturated...much less for the sake of some diva/devo's personal goals. Under those conditions, the "primacy" of some national federation's competitions if at the expense of the prestige and relevance of international competitions are not going to stand the test of buisiness interests, ESPECIALLY U.S. business interests (which include hardware all the way to management and intellectual property).
Television is relevant...and if the networks do not pick up skating, you can bet some cable network will...because skating IS second only to football in ratings, and making money is the name of the game, and overrides everything with the sole exception of national security!
AxelAnnie22
08-14-2003, 10:26 AM
Originally posted by loveskating
Well,
But I think that if seeded skaters were required to skate in at least 2 GP series competitions (and if they qualify, to go to the GP Final) or not be allowed to compete at Worlds, that would sufficiently link Worlds (and Nationals) to the GP series and ensure the GP Series' existence and prestige.
I don't see much respect on the horizon for a sport in which the World Champ can sit out the seasonal schedule and then win his or her Nationals and then Worlds...only skating TWO serious and relevant competitions a year! This alone tends to degrade the GP and ITS participants as irrelevant, quite obviously.
I totally agree with you. The fact that you can waltz (or skate) into your Nationals and Worlds, grab a title, and go home, does real damage to the "Skating is Sport" theory.
You know, the 49ers would have a team in much better shape if they showed up only for the NFL championship and Super Bowl games. They wouldn't have all those injured players, and would probably win every time.
It is my never-to-be-humble opinion that if you are going to compete at Nationals and Worlds, you have to have competed through the season. The venue for that is: sectionals, etc., if you are not seeded or of a certain level, and the GP Series if you are of a certain level. Conversely, if you compete in the GP Series at all (using resources, money, prizes, points that could go to someone who is seriously trying to make a mark) then you should be required to go to the final if you qualify. If you don't, you lose your ticket to Worlds.
Anything less demeans skating as serious sport. Goes back to pretty people in flowing sequins looking pretty on the ice.
Skating keeps shooting itself in the foot, and I don't know why.
loveskating
08-14-2003, 10:30 AM
Originally posted by Mayra
So long as we're comparing sports using this method, imagine football crowning the overall best team by who won the most games in the season? Basketball? Baseball. Ultimately, it can be said that the team/athlete who wins the most that season is the best, but there is more to sports than that IMO.
Working your way up to the sports biggest event whether that is the Olympics or Worlds is what makes the sport exciting to watch, and its what makes other sports exciting to watch. Super Bowl anyone? Its about an opportunity that only comes once a year and maybe once in a lifetime. Who will step it up? Its about knowing that the best can fall and that someone waiting in the wings can have the skate of their lives and beat the best to become the best (if only for one night). You really can't beat that. IMO
But your example makes the opposite point! In football, who goes to the Super Bowl or say the Cotton Bowl etc. is determined CUMULATIVELY...in the football competitive conferences, like the Southwest or the Big 10, you have to win the MOST games to go to, say, the Cotton Bowl! For instance, in 1961, I think it was, if A&M had actually beaten the University of Texas (they almost did), then Arkansas would have gone to the Cotton Bowl, NOT A&M! And only then is it from the survivors undefeated of the bowl games that the National Champ is picked. All the teams in the conference or pro division have the same competive schedule, with perhaps one less in some strange instances, and the conference or divisional champs have to compete MORE, not less!
This certainly does not detract from the excitement or appeal of football!
What would, IMHO, detract from the excitement and appeal of skating would be if everyone only skated nationals and worlds...and that being the case, there ought not to be any "exceptions" which are based on...what? What "exceptions" would you have that could apply to everyone, not just one or a few skaters (other than injury or illness)?
Ellyn
08-14-2003, 10:57 AM
It wouldnt' be feasible require participation in the GP series as a prerequisite to competing at Worlds.
Sometimes skaters miss the fall season because of injury but then place well at their nationals and qualify for Worlds. (E.g., Hughes, Goebel, and Lang & Tchernyshev just among U.S. skaters last year -- and Goebel was seeded, so even if you only limit the requirement to seeded skaters, such a rule would have eliminate a skater who by most accounts deserved to be at 2003 Worlds despite missing the GP. Lobacheva/Averbukh in 2001-02 and Bourne/Kraatz in 02-03 would be other examples, and they ended up winning those Worlds after missing that year's the GP.)
Some skaters come from small countries whose GP invitations, if any, are dependent on world ranking. If they and/or their teammates had a bad year last year, there might be no GP opportunities for them this year -- but as long as all ISU members are allowed to send skaters to Worlds, even if they don't get past qualifying, these skaters do have the right to skate at Worlds.
Some skaters are just making the transition from junior to senior and skate on the JGP in the fall and may go to both Junior Worlds and Euros/4Cs and Worlds. (E.g., Kostner last year)
Sometimes skaters who didn't do well last year and come from countries with large fields or don't get GP assignments because the available spots go to other skaters ranked ahead of them
but then go on to medal at or *win* their nationals this year. E.g., Galindo in 1996 . . . Sokolova last year had one GP assignment, but if things had been just a little different, e.g., Butyrskaya staying in, she might not have had any GP opportunity.
By requiring GP participation as a prerequisite for Worlds, you would be eliminating all of these deserving Worlds contenders as well as skater(s) who you think are just blowing off the GP of their own free choice. Whether said skater(s) deserve that free choice as well is another question.
Impromptu
08-14-2003, 11:28 AM
Kind of elitist to require that skaters compete in an invitational event in order to qualify for worlds. What happens to the skaters who don't get invited?
The Grand Prix series is an invitational group of competitions, linked together solely to make it attractive for television. It's important for the ISU to get television money (why do you think the Nations Cup moved from Germany to China? Because the Chinese Federation has money, the German Federation does not). For the skaters who win money at the events, it's obviously a nice thing, but when you come right down to it, the GP series is just like a cheesey made-for-television event. Skaters are invited to compete, and the whole thing is packaged for television.
quarkiki2
08-14-2003, 11:50 AM
Originally posted by Ellyn
By requiring GP participation as a prerequisite for Worlds, you would be eliminating all of these deserving Worlds contenders as well as skater(s) who you think are just blowing off the GP of their own free choice. Whether said skater(s) deserve that free choice as well is another question.
I suppose I shouldn't mention this again, but since no one has commented: said skater(s) has NOT committed to anything beyond the October competition, where said skater(s) MUST compete according to said skater(s) USFSA contract. AND, should said skater(s) compete at Nationals and Worlds, who says said skater(s) will qualify or win? I'm not going to assume that at all.
I find this thread amusing in part because until the ISU changes the rule or MIchelle retires it's going to crop up over and over. :-) What would crack me up to NO end is if they change the rules and the following year due to a nagging but not career threatening injury Sasha Cohen was unable to compete in the GPF and therefore was not allowed to compete at worlds..... BUT anyway, Ellyn makes the best point, unless you want to say "Only Michelle Kwan has to skate in 2 GPF events to qualify for Worlds" there is no fair way to change the rule. Skater's get hurt, parents get seriously ill etc. ,things happen that aren't scheduled. Right now Michelle is taking advantage of the way things are to live her life exactly how she wants and she's totally working within the system and I guess that just burns some people up. :-)
Originally posted by loveskating
But your example makes the opposite point! In football, who goes to the Super Bowl or say the Cotton Bowl etc. is determined CUMULATIVELY...in the football competitive conferences, like the Southwest or the Big 10, you have to win the MOST games to go to, say, the Cotton Bowl!
Not necessarily. Quite a few factors go into selecting the teams that get to go to the championship game. It's all about ranking, reputation, and difficulty of schedule. The two teams with the lowest cumulative score in rankings which include the poll average of the AP poll and ESPN poll, a computer average of Richard Billinglsey, Dunkel Index, Kenneth Massey, New York Times, David Rothman, Jeff Sagarin's USA Today, Matthews/Scripps-Howard and The Anderson & Hester/Seattle Times rankings, and losses.
Originally posted by Ellyn
It wouldnt' be feasible require participation in the GP series as a prerequisite to competing at Worlds
Originally posted by Impromptu
Kind of elitist to require that skaters compete in an invitational event in order to qualify for worlds. What happens to the skaters who don't get invited?
I didn't say that. I said that the GP finalists should be allowed a bye from the QR. Quite a different thing from what you said. You would still have to get there by doing well at Nationals
Mayra
08-14-2003, 02:12 PM
Originally posted by JDC1
Right now Michelle is taking advantage of the way things are to live her life exactly how she wants and she's totally working within the system and I guess that just burns some people up. :-)
:bow:
AxelAnnie22
08-15-2003, 09:55 AM
JDC1 The problem isn't that Michelle gets to take advantage of the rules, the problem is the rules!
Having a sport (and I use that term lightly) where a participant can sit out the season, risk nothing, watch the other guys, and come in at the end and get crowned champion, is a little whacked!
Sitting out because of injury, of course is one thing. The rules need to be fixed so that they reflect the true competitive nature of sport-----not tv popularity, or whatever. And, I assure you, there would be a different set of posts if Tara was the one using full advantage of the rules so that she could "live her life the way she wanted". :roll:
I don't think the rules would be changed if Tara was the one doing this. If the ISU really had a problem with Michelle sitting out the Grand Prix, they would do something about it. When she skipped the Grand Prix to just skate in proams, they immediately changed the rules for the next season so that it couldn't be done again.
If it were up to "tv popularity" now, then the rules WOULD be changed because ratings would definitely be up if MK were skating more during the season. Many people out there only watch competitions in which their favorites are skating (not all...just many.)
Mayra
08-15-2003, 01:49 PM
Originally posted by AxelAnnie22
And, I assure you, there would be a different set of posts if Tara was the one using full advantage of the rules so that she could "live her life the way she wanted". [/COLOR] :roll:
The posts would be the same, the posters would be different.
;)
loveskating
08-15-2003, 03:47 PM
I don't see why if it were a rule that SEEDED skaters participate in the GP series in order to be allowed to go to Worlds from their national competitions, that L&A (or anyone) would have been out of worlds...they were injured, and of course they would have been excused from the requirement...injury and/or illness are real excuses. Of couse, unless one KNEW they would be injured for ages, they would as seeded skaters sign up for the GP series as I see it.
Also, the national competitions would still mean a lot...and offer the opportunity for an up and comer who is not seeded to go to Worlds.
So what you all are saying is that its just fine if a skater only skates at Nationals and at Worlds...that the entire seasonal schedule ought to be purely at the discretion of the skaters, all of them and that the GP series ought to be a venue for "up and coming skaters" and that all the World Champs should be able to sit the GP series out?
Well, again, I think that degrades the GP series, makes it second rate...as is clear from the original question of this discussion "Is the GP Series Important?" Virtually ALL the people who advocate the 2 competition season say that the GP series is NOT important to them!
I think those who claim this is about any one skater do think its about one skater...and that accounts for the logical inconsistencies...for me its not about any one skater, its about fairness in the whole sport, to all the skaters...and its about making a full season of skating important to the skaters and the fans!
Heck, even I never argued that it was ok for Pavarotti to divorce his wife! Sheesh.
I am saying I don't care what a skater does, it's that simple. I love skating and am not all caught up in who wins this or that or who "deserves" to win this or that because they skated more etc. As long as skater's are not breaking rules or faking illness or injury and working within the system then truly what's the big deal? I wouldn't care if Sasha was hurt at Nats, got a bye and won Worlds, those kinds of things are allowed and she would simply be working within the system. Somehow I feel if this was anyone else BUT Michelle doing this there wouldn't be such a constant harping on it OR if she had skated horribly at Worlds but she won and now seems like there's lots of sour grapes growing on the vines. :-)
sashathegreat
08-15-2003, 04:49 PM
Originally posted by JDC1
Somehow I feel if this was anyone else BUT Michelle doing this there wouldn't be such a constant harping on it OR if she had skated horribly at Worlds but she won and now seems like there's lots of sour grapes growing on the vines. :-)
Well, but Michelle is THE ONLY ONE, who's doing that (and Sarah, but Sarah's amateur skating is probably over).
I'd like to make a different point: Michelle's absence from the GP series urge her die hard fans to dismiss it's importance entirely. They're the ones who're saying that these competitions are only for not very well known skaters, it's not really necessary to compete in them, and so on. At the same time questions are posed from the same quarters, about Michelle's diminishing standing in the ranks of skaters. If she chooses not to compete, there's no need to be surprised, that she'll continue to slip down in her position (doesn't appear like that worries her, though).
loveskating
08-15-2003, 07:24 PM
Originally posted by JDC1
I am saying I don't care what a skater does, it's that simple. I love skating and am not all caught up in who wins this or that or who "deserves" to win this or that because they skated more etc. As long as skater's are not breaking rules or faking illness or injury and working within the system then truly what's the big deal? I wouldn't care if Sasha was hurt at Nats, got a bye and won Worlds, those kinds of things are allowed and she would simply be working within the system. Somehow I feel if this was anyone else BUT Michelle doing this there wouldn't be such a constant harping on it OR if she had skated horribly at Worlds but she won and now seems like there's lots of sour grapes growing on the vines. :-)
I have nothing against ANY deserving skater getting a bye...
The positions that have come up seem to imply that the Grand Prix is NOT important except as a venue for skaters "who need exposure", and that nationals and worlds are the "real" competitions! You seem to want an institutionalized two tiered system of competition at the elite level...one for those who are world champs etc. already, and another for those who are not!!!!
I want to see a full season of skating on television! I want that for myself, and for the American people and other people, and I want ALL the top skaters to participate in that full schedule unless injured or ill, as they always have, and as the overwhelming majority of sports REQUIRE. Yes, there ARE requirments in any competive sport...no one gets a free ride!
You reduce the issue of "Is the Grand Prix Important" to a claim that those who say it is are "anti-Michelle Kwan". But its possible that other skaters, like Yagudin, would do the same thing Michelle did last year...and I would not like that either. I think its WRONG, its very diva/devo in the worst sense, and in the long run, I think it will be very bad for skating if it happens!
hiliairyh
08-16-2003, 10:46 AM
Deju vu all over again? I thought this was discussed to death last season. ;) Some HYPERBOLE.
Originally posted by Ellyn
It wouldnt' be feasible require participation in the GP series as a prerequisite to competing at Worlds.
By requiring GP participation as a prerequisite for Worlds, you would be eliminating all of these deserving Worlds contenders as well as skater(s) who you think are just blowing off the GP of their own free choice. Whether said skater(s) deserve that free choice as well is another question.
Thanks Ellyn for your well balanced insight. I am just a skating fan, I do not get all worked up for something that may not even happen. Michelle has not made any committment beyond October. :)
What I want - Skaters to be free to do what they do when they want. I want Tara Lipinski and Sarah Hughes to be free to say "bye, bye got my medal" and not be attacked. I want Michelle/Alexei/Plushy/Slute whomever of the seeded skaters to be able to say "I'm tired" "Family crisis" or "I just don't wanna" to the Grand Prix and Speedy and all his rules and STILL be able to skate at their respective Nationals IF they qualify under the rules. I really don't give a rat's a** about the Grand Prix to me the biggies are Nats/Worlds/Olys but I can enjoy the GP and do occasionally watch competitions if I'm not to busy.
I’m one of the 10 or so that voted that I felt the GP series has become more about TV coverage and money than about the skaters. It was a hard decision as I do feel the GP series gives skaters a chance to gain valuable international experience. However, I feel more strongly that the “rules” have changed over the years and are now directed toward getting TV$s-–the skaters be d@#$%!.
Someone correct me if I am wrong, but I think the series started in ’94 as “Skate International.” Six federations that hosted annual independent international competitions got together and decided to join together and host events where points would be awarded at each event and then the top point winners would have a “skateoff” to determine the big winner of the series. No prize money was awarded.
Was it in ’96 that the ISU instituted awarding prize money and renamed the series the GP? I was ecstatic. I thought it was absolutely fabulous that the skaters had the opportunity to earn some money to help defray the cost of their training. I couldn’t say enough good things about the ISU.
Unfortunately, that didn’t last long.
It soon became apparent that the ISU was dependent on the lucrative TV contracts to fund the prize money and it started changing “rules” to appease the TV execs regardless of whether the changes were in the best interest of the skaters.
Requiring two DIFFERENT long programs for the GP final was the final straw for me. The skaters have raised the technical bar so high that injuries have become a major concern. What possible justification is there for changing the rules so that the skaters have to practice two 7/8 triple performances-—particularly since TV never shows both of them?
I think international exposure for the skaters is important; I applaud the awarding of prize money; but, I think the ISU needs to rethink some of the rules it has made and stand up for the skaters when negotiating TV contracts.
vBulletin® v3.8.4, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.