2018 USFS Olympic team selection thoughts

This is being discussed on the Skate Detroit thread (and I've moved some of the posts over).

i expect the Olympic criteria to be similar to the 2017 World criteria (source: http://web.icenetwork.com/news/2017/01/20/214003280/new-rule-impacts-world-team-selection-procedure); That won't come out until this fall, but for the skate of discussion, let's just use it for now.

Athletes shall be selected based upon performance(s) in the events below. The events have been stratified into tiers from the highest value events in Tier 1 through the lowest value events in Tier 3. Events within each tier shall be evaluated at equal weight.
Tier 1
- 2018 U.S. Figure Skating Championships
- 2018 ISU Grand Prix Final
- 2017 ISU World Figure Skating Championships
Tier 2
- 2017 Grand Prix Series Competitions
- 2017 Four Continents Figure Skating Championships
Tier 3
- 2017 Challenger Series Events and other senior international competitions
- 2017 U.S. Figure Skating Championships
- 2017 World Junior Figure Skating Championships
- 2017 ISU Junior Grand Prix Final

The names of the top five athletes/teams at the current U.S. Figure Skating Championships will be automatically placed into the pool of athletes/teams being considered for the World Team, if eligible. Consideration will be given to add additional athletes/teams to the pool by reviewing the events above in priority order and adding others due to extenuating circumstances as approved by the respective International Committee Discipline Group. Discussion on, and the selection of the pool of athletes identified by the International Committee Discipline Group, will be limited to the competitions listed above.

Click to expand...

Please discuss your scenarios, faceoffs, and start wringing your hands!

Ender said:

Not a fan of her programs this season but judging her tendency to peak by February, I would send Nagasu to Olympic.

Click to expand...

That's the problem, though. To make the team Mirai will first have to peak at U.S. Nationals in January, then hope to have something left in February. Plus, with the "new" U.S. selection criteria, her performance on the Grand Prix will be taken into account.

In that regard, she will meet Mariah Bell twice in the Grand Prix, which will be an interesting test for both skaters.

Mathman said:

That's the problem, though. To make the team Mirai will first have to peak at U.S. Nationals in January, then hope to have something left in February. Plus, with the "new" U.S. selection criteria, her performance on the Grand Prix will be taken into account.
In that regard, she will meat Mariah Bell twice in the Grand Prix, which will be an interesting test for both skaters.

Click to expand...

It's so ironic that the skater who has the highest chance to peak by Olympic might not go as she flops in other competitions. But it has been like this for years.

Ender said:

It's so ironic that the skater who has the highest chance to peak by Olympic might not go as she flops in other competitions. But it has been like this for years.

Click to expand...

I'll get into the pre-argument, because there's an excellent chance one will be coming.

US Nationals should be the Olympic trials. Period.

The skater with the "hot hand" early in the season may not be the one who has it when it counts. Likewise, someone who has struggled with injury or consistency early in the season may be coming into peak form at exactly the right time.

TontoK said:

I'll get into the pre-argument, because there's an excellent chance one will be coming.

US Nationals should be the Olympic trials. Period.

The skater with the "hot hand" early in the season may not be the one who has it when it counts. Likewise, someone who has struggled with injury or consistency early in the season may be coming into peak form at exactly the right time.

Click to expand...

I think there should be a different way to reward the placement. As skaters have to skate so well in the early season to get some pass from their federation, only to lose breath by the most important competitions? I don't think it's a good way.

Ender said:

I think there should be a different way to reward the placement. As skaters have to skate so well in the early season to get some pass from their federation, only to lose breath by the most important competitions? I don't think it's a good way.

Click to expand...

Fair opinion, but not one I share.

Most important criteria for me: Can you deliver when it counts? When all the chips are on the table, when the nation's eyes are turned squarely on you, when you reach the moment when your preparation should be exquisite... will you out-perform the competition?

If not, enjoy the games on NBC. No excuses.

TontoK said:

Most important criteria for me: Can you deliver when it counts? When all the chips are on the table, when the nation's eyes are turned squarely on you, when you reach the moment when your preparation should be exquisite... will you out-perform the competition?

If not, enjoy the games on NBC. No excuses.

Click to expand...

This is a powerful argument. IMHO the one thing that pushes the other way is this. Suppose you have a really strong skater, say the reigning world champion. Suppose he flubs nationals. There will be a big temptation for the nationals judges to nudge his score up a little to make sure he grabs a spot. (Evan Lysacek at 2010 Nationals?)

Mathman said:

This is a powerful argument. IMHO the one thing that pushes the other way is this. Suppose you have a really strong skater, say the reigning world champion. Suppose he flubs nationals. There will be a big temptation for the nationals judges to nudge his score up a little to make sure he grabs a spot. (Evan Lysacek at 2010 Nationals?)

Click to expand...

Again, a fair point.

My snarky counterpoint: USNats judges seem to have no problems now in skewing the judging to achieve the desired outcome.

I won't call out examples, but we've corresponded on the boards enough that you probably have a good idea of whom I might be referencing.

TontoK said:

Fair opinion, but not one I share.

Most important criteria for me: Can you deliver when it counts? When all the chips are on the table, when the nation's eyes are turned squarely on you, when you reach the moment when your preparation should be exquisite... will you out-perform the competition?

If not, enjoy the games on NBC. No excuses.

Click to expand...

What if the ones you send to the Olympic based on National selection don't deliver. And the one who don't get sent might deliver? Yes we could never know. How about...
Skater A has been consistent the whole season but messed up the national and didn't get sent to WC, she is sent to a competition near WC and delivered.
Skater B has been inconsistent the whole season but did well at National and was sent to WC only to mess up there.
Which one you prefer to send to the WC?
In this case, I think Nagasu has quite a tendency to peak at mid February which by the time is Olympic. Thus I hope she can get the chance.

Ender said:

What if the ones you send to the Olympic based on National selection don't deliver. And the one who don't get sent might deliver? Yes we could never know. How about...

Skater B has been inconsistent the whole season but did well at National and was sent to WC only to mess up there.
Which one you prefer to send to the WC?
In this case, I think Nagasu has quite a tendency to peak at mid February which by the time is Olympic. Thus I hope she can get the chance.

Click to expand...

Here's the problem. We can play "what if" all day long.

What if this guy: Skater A has been consistent the whole season but messed up the national and didn't get sent to WC, she is sent to a competition near WC and delivered. skated so poorly at Nationals that his confidence is shattered, and he fails to even make the free skate at the Olympics?

What if this guy: Skater B has been inconsistent the whole season but did well at National and was sent to WC only to mess up there. has been struggling with injury and self-doubt all season, but a great competition just before the Olympics sends him to the final flight?

Nobody can predict the future. I still advocate for a hard-won and well-earned World/Olympic spot based on merit at US Nationals. And nothing else.

In athletic competitions, things should be settled on the field of play, not by a committee in a conference room behind closed doors.

Imagine this scenario, and while I've invented the case, it's the sort of thing that can occur when the athletes aren't allowed to decide matters.

Vincent finishes third at USNats. Jason finishes 4th, barely behind. Practically tied.

Some will want to send Jason to the Olympics. Some will say Vincent. Jason-backers will point out that Jason helped earn the third spot at World's. Vincent-backers will respond that Jason's trip to World's was an unearned opportunity stolen from Vincent. Jason backers will say that Vincent didn't have the Minimums. Vincent supporters will say he earned them in Bavaria, no problem, and coulda/shoulda been sent to World's.

So what's the resolution?

At the end of the day, hidden away and unaccountable to anyone, Mrs Gladys Hornswaggle, from Tulsa, casts the deciding vote, in between sneaking snacks of foie-grois on Ritz crackers to her purse-dog, Fifi.

In the case I presented above, Vincent wins. But, put the shoe on the other foot:

Vincent has been skating great all season with a couple of GP medals, but chokes during the LP at Nats and coughs up a big lead to finish 4th, just behind Jason, who has landed only one quad all season. I'm true to principal: Jason wins the spot.

TontoK said:

In athletic competitions, things should be settled on the field of play, not by a committee in a conference room behind closed doors.

Click to expand...

Except that it IS settling it on the field of play if Skater A has superior results to Skater B in ALL other events listed beforehand as contributing to Worlds/Olympic selection. For many years, USFS has made it clear that Nationals placement has priority, but is not the only factor. And on its list of criteria, ALL are "field of play"; none take anything else into account.

TontoK said:

Vincent finishes third at USNats. Jason finishes 4th, barely behind. Practically tied.

Some will want to send Jason to the Olympics. Some will say Vincent. Jason-backers will point out that Jason helped earn the third spot at World's. Vincent-backers will respond that Jason's trip to World's was an unearned opportunity stolen from Vincent. Jason backers will say that Vincent didn't have the Minimums. Vincent supporters will say he earned them in Bavaria, no problem, and coulda/shoulda been sent to World's..

Click to expand...

Two factors:

1) Was the tech panel as marshmallow soft as usual at US Nationals? (ie, was Vincent allowed to get away with several URs that would be called internationally?)

2) How did the GP season go in your scenario? Let's say Jason has been skating beautifully and being rewarded for it all season. He's won a couple of GP medals, just missed qualification to the Final. Vincent, though, has had a torrid GP series, struggling to get his jumps rotated, and doesn't medal at either event. How does this tip the balance of your scenario?

karne said:

Two factors:

1) Was the tech panel as marshmallow soft as usual at US Nationals? (ie, was Vincent allowed to get away with several URs that would be called internationally?)

2) How did the GP season go in your scenario? Let's say Jason has been skating beautifully and being rewarded for it all season. He's won a couple of GP medals, just missed qualification to the Final. Vincent, though, has had a torrid GP series, struggling to get his jumps rotated, and doesn't medal at either event. How does this tip the balance of your scenario?

Click to expand...

1. In my scenario USFSA has the same crooked judging it generally does. Let's be neutral in terms of who that would benefit.

2. In my scenario, it doesn't tip the balance at all. Either skater could have a good track record, or neither. Both or either could be on the ascendancy, or not.

I prefer a one-take, winner take all (or top 3 take all) over Gladys and Fifi in the conference room. Any day of the week.

Let USNats be the Trials.

karne said:

Two factors:

1) Was the tech panel as marshmallow soft as usual at US Nationals? (ie, was Vincent allowed to get away with several URs that would be called internationally?)

2) How did the GP season go in your scenario? Let's say Jason has been skating beautifully and being rewarded for it all season. He's won a couple of GP medals, just missed qualification to the Final. Vincent, though, has had a torrid GP series, struggling to get his jumps rotated, and doesn't medal at either event. How does this tip the balance of your scenario?

Click to expand...

Vincent should go but usually US fed overscores the skater who did have a successful season so they would probably inflate Jason's scores in order to give him the medal in that case. (they did it two years ago when they inflated Gold free skate score to beat Polina Edmunds)

Anyway i do believe that Nathan Chen, Vincent Zhou and Jason Brown are on a safe spot, i see Adam Rippon in trouble right now or at max it will a battle between him and Jason for the third spot.

People may benefit from having a separate thread of Nationals vs. Committee selection rather than going OT in the summer comp thread.

To those that say US Nationals be all end all. What about stupid crap that is beyond the skaters control?

I.e. the airline lost their skates and they had to use a borrowed pair in the SP end got the pewter by a point? Or if they were running a 102 degree (38.8 C) fever, but still managed pewter? Or someone was careless in handling their food and and they suffered anaphylactic shock during/shortly before the comp?

I can kinda see the logic of wanting to reward when the pressure is on. But to me, managing the pewter in any of the above situations is delivering when the pressure is on.

well you guys, I am not following American skating as much... but didn't the federation last year say that results at nationals PLUS body of work would be up for consideration when sending someone to worlds? I am guessing that it was in preparation for the upcoming games as well.

1) Nationals : shows the guts of the skaters who will manage to WIN on a specific event.

2) Body of work : shows consistency towards a season, experience, international recognition.


I think that both are important but when it comes to select, this combination of both factors makes it quite difficult for skaters and fans to understand.

I honestly think that a system were the champion is sent automatically if there is only one spot,
The champion + either the 2nd or 3rd finisher result+ based on body of work if there are two spots
and
the champion, the vice-champion + 3rd or 4th place finisher based on result+ body of work if there are 3 spots.

I think one spot needs to be the national champion in any of the situations described above. And of course only one spot IMHO should consider the body of work if available but not 2. I find it personally ridiculous not to send a vice-champion when there are 3 spots. In the end, we all have favourites.... and sometimes, they fail... but that is sport. They know what it means to compete and they are equipped to deal with this.

Today... to humour you, I was watching the world championships of swimming. Yesterday in the semis, the Canadian Sidney Pickrem swam a new National Record and was seeded 3rd heading to the finals. Commentators were saying that she was doing a great time on her worst stroke, the butterfly (it was the 200 M IM)... but then,... she stopped..... I had NEVER seen that ever in my entire life, or personal experience as a swimmer : when she arrived at the end of the first 50m, she caught water and it was too much for her to keep going.

Now, this sucks... will she ever have a chance to medal at worlds? Will she ever beat her own National record again, which she was perhaps in shape to do?
It's competition and the officials won't stop the race because one swimmer had an issue.

Other example from swimming : I needed to reach a time a standard to access provincials. In practice I was way below but i had missed the previous event and I had ONE SHOT to make it. It was for the 50M butterfly. The race started : I jumped... I felt like there was maybe a swimmer caught for a false start but I couldn't hear anything (the gun) nor did the officials manage to pull down the rope in time... so I pretty much swam 20M before anyone got to me.... a teammate had jumped into the pool to stop me....

1) I hadn't stopped because I wasn't sure there was a false start.
2) I swam the first 15 meters usually without taking air, so i never saw anything...
3) I was the favourite to be ahead in this race so not seeing anyone beside me or ahead of me was normal.

The officials then decided to run the race right away. I was already exhausted. Sometimes, they would run another heat in such circumstances but we were the last heat... and after it was relays... so they simply decided to run the race... I had no time to breathe, drink water etc... I won the race... missed the standard by 0.05 second and didn't qualify to provincials. I swam the IM medley later on with an unofficial time (only the backstroke can be counted as official time) that would have qualified me.

So did i deserve to go? Rules are the rules... and yes... extenuating circumstances but nope... i didn't get to go...

I don't mean to highjack the thread with an example from another sport but athletes are equipped to deal with these circumstances, even the worst possible ones. What was I supposed to do? I missed my shot at qualifying but at the same time, it allowed me to focus on my studies which was needed at that point

TontoK said:

.... At the end of the day, hidden away and unaccountable to anyone, Mrs Gladys Hornswaggle, from Tulsa, casts the deciding vote, in between sneaking snacks of foie-grois on Ritz crackers to her purse-dog, Fifi ....

Click to expand...

Your offensive stereotypes only weaken your position in my eyes (although I can see the merits both of the Olympic Trials approach and of the body-of-work approach).

More important, I doubt that you have any factual basis for insinuating that members of the USFS selection committee are not fully-engaged individuals of integrity who do not take their decisions very seriously.
And/or whose brains are incapable of considering the selection criteria and making an informed judgment.

Why should someone from Tulsa or someone named Gladys be a laughingstock in the context of skating (or any other)? Mariah Bell and Elvis Stojko might not find your sneering to be funny.
The likes of Tanith and Charlie White, Madi Chock, and Ashley Cain have been known to bring their dogs to competitions. They might not find your sneering at purse-dogs to be funny.
As for your misspelling of foie gras, maybe you did it on purpose -- for a reason that I cannot fathom. Or maybe it showed a lack of focus on your own words.

Again, I do not object to your opinion that Nats should be Olympic Trials. You are entitled to an opinion, as we all are.
But the stereotypes are uncalled for.

---

ETA:

Mrs. P said:

This is being discussed on the Skate Detroit thread (and I've moved some of the posts over).

Here is the current USFS Olympic team criteria (source: http://web.icenetwork.com/news/2017/01/20/214003280/new-rule-impacts-world-team-selection-procedure); replaced for this season, obviously.



Please discuss your scenarios, faceoffs, and start wringing your hands!

Click to expand...

Small red flag that the USFS lists of selection criteria were *not* the same for the 2014 Olympic team and the 2014 World team. (Similar, but not the same.)

So remains to be seen how accurate a model (or not) the 2017 World team criteria will be for the 2018 Olympic team criteria. (As well as for the 2018 World team criteria.)

Thank you for the new thread, Mrs. P.

ice coverage said:

Your offensive stereotypes only weaken your position in my eyes (although I can see the merits both of the Olympic Trials approach and of the body-of-work approach).

More important, I doubt that you have any factual basis for insinuating that members of the USFS selection committee are not fully-engaged individuals of integrity who do not take their decisions very seriously.
And/or whose brains are incapable of considering the selection criteria and making an informed judgment.

Click to expand...

The Gladys and Fifi scenario was artistic rhetoric. Since it was an artistic choice, you have to honor it. I think that rule was established on a different thread. OK, maybe it applied to skating, but whatever.

As to the second point: I will happily concede that USFSA members are the finest and most honorable people who have ever walked the earth.

But you know what they are NOT? They're not athletes on the ice competing.

They are administrative officials. Outsiders to the competitive ring, or at least the current competitive ring. And no matter how honorable they are or how noble their intentions or the criteria they use... at the end, they are picking who THEY believe deserve to go. They pick the winners and losers. They decide whose dreams will be realized, and whose will be crushed.

Meanwhile, the athletes, the gladiators of our sport, are on the outside of that locked conference room door, waiting patiently for their pronouncements.

Truthfully, their are pluses and minuses to both selection scenarios being discussed. But the trials proposal removes the non-athletes from the decision.