How can USFS better develop the sport?

lappo said:

A question to US people: how does the public funding exactly works?

Click to expand...

There is no public funding for figure skating in the US.

The closest thing to "public" funding I know of is funding from the US Olympic Committee, to a handful of elite athletes with Olympic potential per sport.

http://usathletictrust.org/athlete-...soc-and-11-other-important-olympic-questions/

Here's what USFS has to say about funding: http://www.usfsa.org/story?id=84089

I ask so, because in my country FS is an expensive sport (and there aren't many rinks, the closest to my home is two cities from here) and therefore the partecipation from young age is somehow naturally restricted to well to do people while the rest is encouraged to pursue other, far more accessible sports. So big expenses = less skaters = less potential to get a champion = less potential to build a long standing interest.

Click to expand...

That is true in the US as well. The vast majority of expenses for all skaters coming up and even for most skaters at the national level are paid by the skaters' own families.

Also, is the whole "ice princess" concept still appealing to the millennials?

Click to expand...

Probably not.

But it does often appeal to little girls who take up skating at young ages -- and pretty much all serious competitors need to start at young ages.

In the USA, if a parent wants their child to skate, the parent pays the associated bills. Simple as that.

Only when your child reaches a certain level (Novice?) AND you child is at the top of that level does USFS funding kick in. My impression is that funding is a drop in the bucket compared to the what the parent is paying to supplement the difference. And let us not forget the parent's time associated with getting the skater to and from all the skater's training activities.

I think USFS fails at educating the parents of skaters. They assume that most parents know about skating when the reality is most of us have abosolutely no clue. Some parents pass on their knowlege but those are few and far between.

USFS needs to put together information (pamplet) to give out at the LTS level that outlines what a young skater needs to suceed. Information about what to look for in beginner skates would have been great to know. Remember at that level, most skaters do not have private lessons so there is,really no "coach" to follow up with.

Then once USFS testing begins, similar information should be posted on their website. Like at the 6.0 level, competition placements are based on the "package" not individual components and at those levels, no young skater should be having back problems. If they are, that means your child has bad technique that needs to be corrected ASAP. Things I was never told.

Then once a skater reaches the IJS level, there should be a new section on the website. For example, it could explain how to enter the program componets information for a competition (jumps are easy, the spin info is CRAZY). Then a section on scoring would be nice -- What is a < vs << and ! And those affects the score. What is difference between a fall (butt goes down) vs a non-fall (two hands go down) and how those are graded differently. All "simple and obvious" things for a skater but overwhelming for the parent of a new IJS skater.

Re: public funding....

I lol'd at Dave's point on the latest TSL episode that maybe we should get public funding for figure skating with President Trump in office, because we know he puts America First, loves winning, and the Olympics are the best opportunity for promoting nationalistic sentiment.

Isn't that in part why federal funding exists for sport in Russia? And why there was a lot of federal involvement in spot in East Germany during the Cold War and in 1930s Germany - for promoting the image of the country abroad?

(In contrast, the US has stood by a decentralized, non-federal system of sport in order to promote the ideal that less government involvement and the superiority of the individual is the best way to go. National systems of sport do, in part, reflect a country's ethos and overarching social narratives.)

(I hope this post isn't too political because it isn't intended to be controversial or to spark debate, I promise. Just some thoughts.)

Speaking as an American, I do not support public funding for athletics.

Don't get me wrong. I love our sport. I love most sports. I love the Olympics.

But most US taxpayers don't, and I do not believe that those people should be responsible for funding the Olympic dreams of people they don't care about.

Of course, to be fair, I'm against funding a LOT of what what we already fund. Further expansion on that thought is not appropriate for this board.

karne said:

For me I've always thought one of the USFS' weaknesses was that they seemed to be fixated on this idea that only a top lady can be a star. So they've ignored star-potential men and dancers and other skaters in favour of chasing their "ice princess" star. The problem is that they don't have a lady who can beat the best in the world right now.

Click to expand...

While I agree this is a problem, I think we can not really lay all of it at the feet of USFSA. Part of it is public interest is just skewed to the ladies. I don't fully get it, but it is a reality. Figure Skating for many in the USA is ladies skating. That is its own problem that we need to move past. I mean I have a family member that claims to love figure skating, but clearly zones out of the conversation when i talk much about the men. She is all about the ladies and I don't know why - I think it is just part of the culture she grew up in and now she is set in her ways. But sadly I think her attitude is not uncommon.

I mean if market research says the people want an Ice Princess, I can't really fault them for trying to provide that. Sadly they need to promote Ice Dancing and Mens as interesting before they can promote the skaters as stars. While i certainly have my criticisms of USFSA, this is an issue that I feel they are a bit between a rock and a hard place.

The idea of funding pro sports or elite athletics seems like it'd be anathema to me - but it depends on execution, for me. If public funding for elite athletics means money for programs for children and adolescents (after all, a future elite figure skater has to have lots of ice time as a kid), that's pretty cool. It has the potential to promote public good and public health. But it'll never happen, and that's fine too.

Unfortunately, there are a lot of sports, like figure skating, that may be cost-prohibitive for a lot of kids and families. But there are also a lot of sports that are accessible for kids of all backgrounds, with groups/teams/organizations/institutions on the lookout for talent no matter where it comes from.

(Still, Donald Trump is a world leader whom I can envision taking an active level of interest in Olympic results, certainly moreso than his predecessors, given his emphasis on nationalism. Perhaps if there was to be an Olympic Games held in the US in the next 4-8 years, we would see it play out.)

I see 2 ways of supporting the sport (and they need to come together).

1. "Base" funding, so virtually all / most kids have access to skating at some basic level if they want to and its affordable for their families.
2. Special funding for talented kids so they have access to high level coaches and choreographers. Because suppose there is an extremely talented kid from a rather poor family. Because there is some funding, this kid got to skate. But his family cannot afford to pay a top coach, to move close to one and so on. And then nothing happens out of this kid, because while the kid is talented, its not on a level where he/she can do shows and/or earn prize money to cover those expenses, and cannot develop further either.

moriel said:

1. "Base" funding, so virtually all / most kids have access to skating at some basic level if they want to and its affordable for their families.

Click to expand...

At least where I live, the cost of 8-weeks of swimming lessons is about the same as 8- weeks of ice skating. In both I am comparing a group lesson, once a week.

When you figure that in ice skating, you also get rental plus 8 practice passes (1 per class), the real cost for ice skating group lessons is less than swimming.

But in ice skating, you quickly surpass group lessons and private lessons become your only option. With swimming, you can join a swim team so only minimal private lessons are needed (usually only to correct the strokes).

I think any sport that requires the participants to make it look easy causes uneducated viewers to feel it IS easy which makes them feel it's not a sport. I can't begin to tell you how many people have asked my teenage daughter if she can land a triple axle. And when she laughs and says no they assume she's not a good skater. Because that's easy, right? Anyone can do it.

Also, I think USFSA hurts the sport by not always letting the "winner" advance. In most sports if you have a bad day in the playoffs and lose, then you're out. Too bad, better luck next year. Because that's how sports work. However, in figure skating a skater can medal at Nationals yet USFSA will announce hours later they are not being sent to Worlds or the Olympics over someone who did not do as well. It's hard enough for people to understand the scoring but then when the winners don't really seem to win it's hard for people to take it seriously as a sport.

Just my opinions though....

concorde said:

At least where I live, the cost of 8-weeks of swimming lessons is about the same as 8- weeks of ice skating. In both I am comparing a group lesson, once a week.

When you figure that in ice skating, you also get rental plus 8 practice passes (1 per class), the real cost for ice skating group lessons is less than swimming.

But in ice skating, you quickly surpass group lessons and private lessons become your only option. With swimming, you can join a swim team so only minimal private lessons are needed (usually only to correct the strokes).

Click to expand...

Again a question for US citizen...are there tax detractions for sport in the US? In my country, a family pays the fees for any sport lesson for a minor child and then at the end of the year will receive 19 % of it back. The whole point of this is to make sport more available to everybody in order to promote a more healthy lifestyle.

Would a group lesson/academy model for middle and higher level skating instruction be feasible in the US?

In training centers, with enough ice time, enough competent coaches, and a large enough population base that can afford group but not individual lessons, I don't see why not.

Would families who can afford it and who want their kids to get an edge over the others also supplement group instruction with one-on-one instruction? It might depend on the ice time and coaches available.

There are currently a lot of different models at different rinks, different parts of the country, based on resources available and needs of the local skating communities. Adding more options, trying some out and disseminating those approaches more widely if they prove successful, would be a plus.

But I can't see US skating training ever fitting a one-size-fits-all model. Nor USFS imposing any model from the top down.

Their best roles might be to work with the PSA to spread the word about training models that produce good results.

Could skating training for non-wealthy local skaters of all abilities, and/or targeted to those with proven talent who lack the financial resources to continue, be funded through some national program? Where would the money come from, and how would such a program work?

sk8momto1 said:

Also, I think USFSA hurts the sport by not always letting the "winner" advance. In most sports if you have a bad day in the playoffs and lose, then you're out. Too bad, better luck next year. Because that's how sports work. However, in figure skating a skater can medal at Nationals yet USFSA will announce hours later they are not being sent to Worlds or the Olympics over someone who did not do as well. It's hard enough for people to understand the scoring but then when the winners don't really seem to win it's hard for people to take it seriously as a sport.

Just my opinions though....

Click to expand...

This almost never happens though, and when it does, no one notices except for people who are already fans with opinions about who deserves what. Ashley/Mirai 2014 got some attention because it was an Olympic year. That's it. And 2-3 years later, everyone who isn't already a skating fan has completely forgotten about it.

I think we are giving the "figure skating isn't a sport" perception way more credit than it deserves. I don't think anyone really feels that way about singles or pairs (though they probably do about ice dance). Most people I know who are unfamiliar with skating are very impressed by the athletics of it when they take the time to watch it. Splatfests, not so much.

IMO, the biggest difficulty about the transition from 6.0 to IJS in the US is the fact that under 6.0, people never really won with falls. If you fell, you lost. The cleanest skater won the day, and it made sense to Joe Football Fan who happens to be watching skating. That guy fell? Loser. That guy didn't fall? Winner. Makes sense. The guy who fell twice beat the guy who didn't fall at all? WHAT??? HOW?

gkelly said:

W

Could skating training for non-wealthy local skaters of all abilities, and/or targeted to those with proven talent who lack the financial resources to continue, be funded through some national program? Where would the money come from, and how would such a program work?

Click to expand...

The money will come from me when I finally make it rich.

I apologize if this has been answered before, but how is it that CBC can broadcast events on TV, have free streams during live events and also upload full performances on their youtube channel but not NBC/icenetwork? What is the difference between their business models or broadcasting rights? Do they generate more revenue elsewhere to allow them to do that?

Raomina said:

I apologize if this has been answered before, but how is it that CBC can broadcast events on TV, have free streams during live events and also upload full performances on their youtube channel but not NBC/icenetwork? What is the difference between their business models or broadcasting rights? Do they generate more revenue elsewhere to allow them to do that?

Click to expand...

The CBC does get government funding and has a mandate to serve Canada. You might not notice because it also has advertising and in some ways functions like a private broadcasting network. So it's complicated.

The CBC is big on Olympic sports, and I think they regard that as part of their public mandate. They group content under "Road to the Olympics", so if you tune in to a figure skating show, you may also see snippets of how the short track speed skaters, or bobsledders, or some other winter sport, are doing. It does give their programming an "olympic" flavor, even in non-olympic years, and I kind of enjoy it, as long as they don't take too much time away from the competition I tuned in to see.

NanaPat said:

The CBC does get government funding and has a mandate to serve Canada. You might not notice because it also has advertising and in some ways functions like a private broadcasting network. So it's complicated.

The CBC is big on Olympic sports, and I think they regard that as part of their public mandate. They group content under "Road to the Olympics", so if you tune in to a figure skating show, you may also see snippets of how the short track speed skaters, or bobsledders, or some other winter sport, are doing. It does give their programming an "olympic" flavor, even in non-olympic years, and I kind of enjoy it, as long as they don't take too much time away from the competition I tuned in to see.

Click to expand...

I always thought CBC was comparable to PBS in the U.S. or BBC in the UK.

I'm not Canadian, but I have a friend who works for CBC Radio in Vancouver and one thing she mentioned to me is that there are conversations about whether CBC needed to take more of an NPR style model, i.e. getting donations from the public. She mentioned that CBC is kind of at the mercy of whoever is running things. Things are fine under Trudeau but when Harper was at the helm there were definitely some funding issues.

zschultz1986 said:

You're a horrible person to argue with Karne. Point out WHERE i said those words? HINT: I didn't. You're putting words in my mouth. So don't argue with the adults unless you ACTUALLY want to argue the merits.

No one wants that sexual abuse to go on, that was horrible. However, Marta DID get results. So adapt the system, and not the people, to your sport. However, I don't think you came here with intentions of conversing at all. You just wanted to snark and make jokes. Which is funny, considering you seem to disparage Dave to no end for doing the exact thing you're doing now. Take a look in the mirror before you start pointing out other people's flaws, Karne.

Click to expand...

Karne is blinded when it comes to TSL because he talks bad about Max Aaron's skating (there isn't much positive about Max's tbh) and Karne is far up Max's behind.

I can see this thread is going to be locked before I can even response. Sadly my response is so long I doubt anyone would read it anyway.

frida80 said:

I can see this thread is going to be locked before I can even response. Sadly my response is so long I doubt anyone would read it anyway.

Click to expand...

I would read it!

lappo said:

Again a question for US citizen...are there tax detractions for sport in the US? In my country, a family pays the fees for any sport lesson for a minor child and then at the end of the year will receive 19 % of it back. The whole point of this is to make sport more available to everybody in order to promote a more healthy lifestyle.

Click to expand...

The USA has nothing like that.