USFS proposes lowering the age limit in pairs skating to 16

[Mathman]

The age needs to be 18 minimum for seniors. 17 is inadequate.

I think having young children competing has become so normalised that the involvement of young children in adult events, or wild age discrepancies in pairs skating is not alarming to anyone. Instead adults work to manipulate the system to their federation's advantage.

Seriously, this is out of hand. No other sport would this be tolerated....

If they cannot find a 17 year old to match with a 17 year old, or 18 year old to match with an 18 year old, maybe the discipline needs to be abandoned.

I think that the core of the problem is the direction that figure skating has taken over the last couple of decades. The emphasis now, at least for ladies, is on skills that children can do better than adults. Fourteen-year-old girls can, as the Russian ladies proved, do quads. Grown women can't. This creates a tension within the ranks of the powers that be. Should a national skating fereration try to develop and protect children (and lose) or exploit them and win?

Same with pairs. Little girl + adult man = win. Same age = lose. To me, the only solution is to redefine the scoring system to place more value on what adults can do well (blade-to-ice skills, [dare I say it?] artistry, unison for pairs) and less on what children can do well (flexibility moves, ladies quads).

 

[Jumping_Bean]

Same with pairs. Little girl + adult man = win. Same age = lose.

The average age difference of Olympic medalists since 2001/02 is 2.56 years. If coaches/parents/federations/etc. were more interested in long-term development, they'd see that big age gaps are not necessary or even conductive for success in pairs.

or wild age discrepancies in pairs skating is not alarming to anyone

Except that clearly, it is, considering how many people are talking about it on this forum and many other social media platforms. Even adult partnerships with big age gaps are being publicly criticised.

If they cannot find a 17 year old to match with a 17 year old, or 18 year old to match with an 18 year old, maybe the discipline needs to be abandoned.

Pairs development does not start at 17 or 18, of the 7 most recent Olympic gold medalist pairs (including Sale/Pelletier), only two skaters switched to pairs at the age of 17 or later. On top of that, 2-3 years of age difference are common even in Ice Dance, but there, I don't see people complaining about those age gaps already. Chock/Bates, for example, are criticised for a lot, but not for their 3 years and 4 month age gap (which is not to say people don't complain about age gaps in Dance at all, they do, but for larger age gaps like Green/Parsons).
Apart from that, if an 18-year-old and a 35-year-old partner up, what even can the ISU do about that, even though the power and experience difference is still huge? Even raising the Sr age to 18 doesn't help in situations like this.

 

[Jeanie19]

The average age difference of Olympic medalists since 2001/02 is 2.56 years. If coaches/parents/federations/etc. were more interested in long-term development, they'd see that big age gaps are not necessary or even conductive for success in pairs.


Except that clearly, it is, considering how many people are talking about it on this forum and many other social media platforms. Even adult partnerships with big age gaps are being publicly criticised.

Pairs development does not start at 17 or 18, of the 7 most recent Olympic gold medalist pairs (including Sale/Pelletier), only two skaters switched to pairs at the age of 17 or later. On top of that, 2-3 years of age difference are common even in Ice Dance, but there, I don't see people complaining about those age gaps already. Chock/Bates, for example, are criticised for a lot, but not for their 3 years and 4 month age gap (which is not to say people don't complain about age gaps in Dance at all, they do, but for larger age gaps like Green/Parsons).
Apart from that, if an 18-year-old and a 35-year-old partner up, what even can the ISU do about that, even though the power and experience difference is still huge? Even raising the Sr age to 18 doesn't help in situations like this.

Green/Parsons both skated with their siblings. Christine was only 16 when they paired up, but she had years of experience. And 20/28 is not a gringe age difference. 13/21 is. 14/19 is wrong.

 

[Jumping_Bean]

Green/Parsons both skated with their siblings. Christine was only 16 when they paired up, but she had years of experience. And 20/28 is not a gringe age difference. 13/21 is. 14/19 is wrong.

G/P actually partnered up when Caroline was 15 and Michael was 23, as they partnered up in July (both are born on October 3). And people rightfully found that uncomfortable. Just as people weren't really comfortable with Pereira/Michaud's age gap (also 8 years), despite Lia already having turned 18 when these two partnered up.

15 and 23 is certainly no better than 14 and 19, no matter how much experience someone has. Nobody here is advocating for partnerships of 13 and 21-year-olds - And definitely not me.
I've said from the beginning that 4 years (4 seasons, maybe the better wording) is the absolute most I am willing to accept in Junior pairs, which is exactly what raising the Sr age to 17 sets as the limit for a sensible partnership (read: partnership without eligibility issues). I am also not a fan of new Sr (yes, even under the new rules) partnering up with anyone 5+ years older, and have made my unhappiness clear about some of the partnerships with 10+ years of age difference (Kam/O'Shea, Beccari/Guarise).

 

[Janice4th]

@Jumping_Bean already did tracking for the pairs this season in this thread. The number of competitors is fine at the moment with the age eligibility issues. Teams will split and form as they adjust.

It's nice that a 14 year old and 21 year old can be like brother and sister. It doesn't mean that other pairs teams where they would be in significantly different stages of life would have the same relationship, or would be appropriate.

I don’t know how anyone can say the number of pairs is fine. There are significantly fewer pairs teams competing on the Junior and Senior level compared to other disciplines.

I don’t agree about the age issue. Presumably the parents of the minor would be present for training.

The US voted on the age requirements, and now it’s a bed they have to lie in.

 

[Amei]

I don’t know how anyone can say the number of pairs is fine. There are significantly fewer pairs teams competing on the Junior and Senior level compared to other disciplines.

Is there any evidence that the age limits, which are less than 2 years old, is the reason for the lack of pairs? The ISU would increase their Pairs counts by 10-20 pairs easily across both Juniors & Seniors the moment they remove the ban from the Russians.

 

[saine]

I don’t know how anyone can say the number of pairs is fine. There are significantly fewer pairs teams competing on the Junior and Senior level compared to other disciplines.

I don’t agree about the age issue. Presumably the parents of the minor would be present for training.

The US voted on the age requirements, and now it’s a bed they have to lie in.

Pairs is also a discipline which requires skaters who have singles skills sets in addition to being able to do the required throws/lifts/death spirals. They also need to have appropriate physical differences to be able to accomplish those elements. I don't think it will ever be a large discipline in comparison to the others.

If they have enough teams with the Worlds minimums that they don't all qualify to the free automatically, I think there's enough teams. There's 24 entries this year for Worlds, and only 16 of them will make the free. That's pretty good in my opinion.

For the age issue, it isn't just a matter of needing the parents to be present. It's that a 14 year old and 21 year old are in different stages of life. A 21 year old man could be looking at finishing up the season with his partner, graduating college and then moving onto the job market finished with his skating career. His partner may still be expecting to continue competing since she isn't at that stage of life yet. His social life will look a lot more different than her social life will look like.

I don't think it's conducive to long-lasting partnerships to have large age gaps. If they're closer in age, then they should be able to relate to each other better and have similar goals for the stage of life they're at. I'd rather see teams be encouraged to form with the goal of developing their skills together over the long-term than a large number of teams that may not last.

 

[Diana Delafield]

I don’t know how anyone can say the number of pairs is fine. There are significantly fewer pairs teams competing on the Junior and Senior level compared to other disciplines.

There have always been fewer entries in pairs than in the other disciplines. There are the obvious reasons -- fewer skaters willing to take the risks, particularly the girls, and fewer chances to find a partner at all, and one you can trust on top of that. (Shae-Lynn Bourne started out in pairs, but had a partner with a serious case of butterfingers. She got tired of being dropped, and switched to dance, to everyone's benefit.) Fewer skaters with the all-round skills needed in an event that demands both singles skating and pairs elements combined.

One reason I don't often see mentioned is the cost to a club with pairs in training among their members. The rule of thumb is that four pairs on the ice at one time is the maximum safe number, and preferably fewer. Clubs that rent ice at a publicly-owned arena have to rent enough hours for just eight skaters or fewer at a time to train in pairs, on top of the hours they book for their singles and dancers, where they can accommodate more skaters on the ice together. I know of clubs that discourage kids who want to try pairs moves because it's just not cost-effective.

 

[surimi]

One reason I don't often see mentioned is the cost to a club with pairs in training among their members. The rule of thumb is that four pairs on the ice at one time is the maximum safe number, and preferably fewer. Clubs that rent ice at a publicly-owned arena have to rent enough hours for just eight skaters or fewer at a time to train in pairs, on top of the hours they book for their singles and dancers, where they can accommodate more skaters on the ice together. I know of clubs that discourage kids who want to try pairs moves because it's just not cost-effective.

Out of curiosity, can the number of available rinks for pairs be lower also due to off-ice training gym height limitations? I think I recall it being an issue with at least one arena considered for a major championship - the gyms didn't have ceilings high enough to allow safe twist practice. I can imagine this could be an issue in a smaller city.

 

[Diana Delafield]

Out of curiosity, can the number of available rinks for pairs be lower also due to off-ice training gym height limitations? I think I recall it being an issue with at least one arena considered for a major championship - the gyms didn't have ceilings high enough to allow safe twist practice. I can imagine this could be an issue in a smaller city.

That's another of the reasons, yes. I have a series of photos my husband took of my partner and me practicing lifts outdoors on the grass on a sunny day, because the old rink we were using only had 8' ceilings in the halls and any off-ice areas.

 

[Crowdproud]

If they have enough teams with the Worlds minimums that they don't all qualify to the free automatically, I think there's enough teams. There's 24 entries this year for Worlds, and only 16 of them will make the free. That's pretty good in my opinion.

FYI: since 2019, it's 20 pair teams who make the free.

I agree with the general point, however: there are enough teams and the age "freeze" is both unnecessary and cynical.

 

[Jumping_Bean]

I don’t know how anyone can say the number of pairs is fine. There are significantly fewer pairs teams competing on the Junior and Senior level compared to other disciplines.

This is by both nature and design. Pairs is a difficult (and in the wrong hands and under the wrong circumstances dangerous) discipline, there's a limited pool of skaters who are a) willing to try it, b) psychologically and physically suitable for pairs, and c) have the necessary Single's skills to transition over to pairs smoothly.

On top of that, there are other limiting factors like finding a suitable partner in a small selection pool, having a limited amount of qualified pairs coaches and suitable training locations, or even just the availability of spots at international competitions making pairs less desirable (for example, there are 48 pairs spots available on the GP circuit, 20 of which are occupied by the top 10 from the previous Worlds - For Ice Dance, it's 20 out of 60, for both single's disciplines it's 24 out of 72).

You simply cannot compare across disciplines when it comes to the number of active skaters, just like you cannot compare scores.
You can compare to past seasons within one discipline though, and - surprise, surprise - the number of teams who have achieved WS points or Season's best scores this season is actually back on an upward trend (despite the continued lack of Russian pairs), with a particularly significant increase in Junior pairs.
The average and top scores are down though, I will give you that, but that is hardly surprising considering the relatively inexperienced and young field.

 

[gkelly]

I don't think it's conducive to long-lasting partnerships to have large age gaps.

That is very true.

But sometimes it is in the best interest of the skaters to form a local partnership that does not have long-term potential, in order to learn pair skills.

Think of it as a starter partner.

Then when they have some pairs experience they are in a better position to cast a wider net in searching for their next partner.

Sometimes teams that form young will need to break up one or a few years later even if they are close in age. In some cases because they were too close in age and the girl becomes bigger than the boy.

Or all sorts of other reasons unrelated to age or size.

That doesn't mean there wasn't value in skating together for a couple of years.

 

[yyzskater]

I don't understand the glorification of super tiny young pairs girls. The Canadian Novice silver medalists (Muramoto/Lau) are 10/18 respectively (he was listed as 17 as of Mar 2023). I find that type of pairing extremely irresponsible on the coaches part. The boy's previous partner was also only 11. So obviously the age gap issue is not concerning to the coaching team. But I have to wonder what is the point if he will age out of Jr before she can even start Jr.

 

[gkelly]

But I have to wonder what is the point if he will age out of Jr before she can even start Jr.

Learning how to skate pairs so that they will have the skills to find other partners they can compete with?

Just having fun at a lower level without hopes of an elite career?

 

[yyzskater]

Learning how to skate pairs so that they will have the skills to find other partners they can compete with?

Just having fun at a lower level without hopes of an elite career?

I think novice at 10 is probably aiming for elite levels at some point. The amount of training to get a 10 year old to that level is not going to be at a recreational level.

But I agree that learning to skate pairs fully knowing it won't last is probably the mindset. But at the same time, at 18, it may be time for him to find a more suitably aged partner as his time in Jrs would be shrinking as well.

 

[Jumping_Bean]

Just having fun at a lower level without hopes of an elite career?

2nd at Novice Nationals at 10... I find it difficult to believe that you'd be able to achieve that without significant training time that already ventures in the direction of elite training.

 

[saine]

That is very true.

But sometimes it is in the best interest of the skaters to form a local partnership that does not have long-term potential, in order to learn pair skills.

Think of it as a starter partner.

Then when they have some pairs experience they are in a better position to cast a wider net in searching for their next partner.

Sometimes teams that form young will need to break up one or a few years later even if they are close in age. In some cases because they were too close in age and the girl becomes bigger than the boy.

Or all sorts of other reasons unrelated to age or size.

That doesn't mean there wasn't value in skating together for a couple of years.

Those starter partners are what I expect to see at the juvenile/pre-novice/novice level. I don't expect all those teams to last long-term. Situations change, even with the best planning.

They wouldn't necessarily need to be partners of different genders at that level. Girls can lift other girls at the juvenile/pre-novice level. That can keep the girls who grow too tall involved, and help set them up for other disciplines like synchro where there's lifting involved as well.

At the Junior/Senior level though, I would expect teams to be formed with the target of international competition. That's where the goals of team formation should be looking for long-term success.

 

[Skating91]

Maybe the pairs discipline simply has run its course if a major fed has to resort to undermining age rules introduced to protect children, and people are trying to justify partnering for example a 14 year old with a 21 year old, etc.

 

[SubRosa]

The age rule I am eager to see: raising the maximum age of the woman in junior pairs/dance to be the same as the maximum age of the man, i.e. currently, reaching 21 after July 1 of the competitive year.

This doesn’t affect many pair teams, but there are teams where the woman has aged out of juniors before the man has under the current rules (thinking specifically of Panetta/Thrasher here). Also, there is the occasional partnership where the woman is older than the man (again, e.g. Panetta/Thrasher).

The rules as they stand now reinforce this larger societal norm that, in a man/woman relationship, the man should be older than the woman. I won’t get into the reasons that this norm made sense in earlier societies. It’s a norm that doesn’t make sense today, and in fact can set up a power imbalance that does not favour the woman in the partnership.

I don’t like that this antiquated principle is embedded in the rules for who is allowed to skate pairs/dance at the junior level, with all that implies about the power dynamics between the male and the female partners.

I think that when Russians were banned from ISU events, there was kind of this indrawn breath about the future of pairs skating. After all, what was pairs skating without Russian pairs? The discipline would die! (Context: the dearth of pairs at 2022 Worlds and Junior Worlds).

In fact, the lack of Russian pairs seems to have spurred a renewed interest in other ISU countries in developing their pair skaters, likely because there is now greater opportunity to qualify to skate at ISU championships and GP/JGP events.

We don’t need to lower the age minimums for pair skaters, the discipline is thriving!