Midwesterns
BaleofAKS
on the USFSA website, Todd Eldredge will competing in next week's Midwestern
Sectionals.
Here's the link:
http://www.usfsa.org/events/200001/sectionals/midwestern-prview.html
LB
Bale...@AOL.com
blo...@my-deja.com
Whoa. I guess because he sat out the last two ISU seasons (more or
less), he has to qualify at Sectionals to compete at Nationals.
Seems strange because of his elite status, but I guess it's good in
that he's showing everyone that he's willing to take all the steps
necessary to get to Nationals rather than expecting a bye.
Good for him.
blondee
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
MorryS
>From: blo...@my-deja.com
>Date: 11/11/00 1:46 PM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id:
>Whoa. I guess because he sat out the last two ISU seasons (more or less), he
has to qualify at Sectionals to compete at Nationals.<
The last two ISU Grand Prix seasons have no effect on any skater when it come
to qualifying for the United States Figure Skating Championships.
>
>Seems strange because of his elite status, but I guess it's good in that he's
showing everyone that he's willing to take all the steps necessary to get to
Nationals rather than expecting a bye.<
>Good for him.
>
>blondee
There is nothing special about Todd being required to skate Sectionals. The
USFSA Bye policy would have given him a Bye should he have competed at Nation's
Cup (just ending) or Cup of Russia. Skate America and Skate Canada were more
than one week before Sectionals so there could be no International Bye. .
Todd did not ask for special consideration. Yes, good for him.
kbra...@binghamton.edu
> USFSA Bye policy would have given him a Bye should he have competed at Nation's
> Cup (just ending) or Cup of Russia. Skate America and Skate Canada were more
> than one week before Sectionals so there could be no International Bye. .
> Todd did not ask for special consideration. Yes, good for him.
I agree that it's not a bad move on Eldredge's part -- as we've seen here,
he was coming under some pretty silly criticism for qualifying through
sectinals as others did. It *is* unfortunate, though, for the person who
ends up in 5th place. Oh, well.
Out of curiosity...Is there any limit to the number of byes the USFSA can
give? I know there are some rules -- i.e., what place you came in during
the previous season's nationals -- but in terms of competition conflicts
and injuries, are there any limits? I'm thinking not, but that means that
from year to year the number of maximum competitors at Nationals varies
slightly, yes?
-- Kate
Sandra Loosemore
> Out of curiosity...Is there any limit to the number of byes the USFSA can
> give? I know there are some rules -- i.e., what place you came in during
> the previous season's nationals -- but in terms of competition conflicts
> and injuries, are there any limits? I'm thinking not, but that means that
> from year to year the number of maximum competitors at Nationals varies
> slightly, yes?
No, there are no limits specified in the rulebook. The number of byes
granted varies a lot from year to year -- the USFSA seems to alternate
between being generous and giving byes to everyone who might possibly
have an excuse for getting one, and being very strict and giving out
almost no byes at all. In a previous instance of this cycle, one year
the USFSA gave byes to Nationals to all the junior worlds competitors
(back when this competition was held in late November or December)
even when there was no direct schedule conflict at all for most of
them. The next year, they were being so tight-fisted with byes that
the national dance bronze medalists had to compete at sectionals less
than a week after competing at an international in Europe, and they
also denied a medical bye to a past national medallist and defending
sectional champion in the senior men's event.
Anyway, the practical limit is that it starts to get cumbersome at
Nationals when there are more than 20 or so competitors in the singles
events -- they have to schedule more time for the competition, practice
ice, etc.
-Sandra
Trudi Marrapodi
(MorryS) wrote:
[snip]
> There is nothing special about Todd being required to skate Sectionals. The
> USFSA Bye policy would have given him a Bye should he have competed at
Nation's
> Cup (just ending) or Cup of Russia. Skate America and Skate Canada were more
> than one week before Sectionals so there could be no International Bye. .
> Todd did not ask for special consideration. Yes, good for him.
Morry, how does this relate to Brian Boitano's situation in 1994? I ask
sincerely, as I am curious. My understanding is that he was byed out of
qualifying for nationals all the way up the ladder because he placed
second at Skate America that season and won a pro-am which, I believe, was
held in November.
--
Trudi
Just Another Ventilator of Ice Skating Around the World
****Be Stupidly Happy, RSSIFers! Forget Pledges--Get a Filter!****
"Life is too damned short for me to read the dubious opinions of idiots"--Peg Lewis
To mail me, replace the double vowel at the end of the name with the correct single letter. Sorry to make it so hard, but I'm being spammed to death lately and I'm sick of it.
Sandra Loosemore
> Morry, how does this relate to Brian Boitano's situation in 1994? I ask
> sincerely, as I am curious. My understanding is that he was byed out of
> qualifying for nationals all the way up the ladder because he placed
> second at Skate America that season and won a pro-am which, I believe, was
> held in November.
I'm not Morry, but as I noted in my previous message, the USFSA seems
to change its policy on byes every year. They even seem to change the
*rules* on byes every year. At one point, the rules were such that
previous World and Olympic medallists were eligible for automatic byes
to Nationals; now only the *current* World and Olympic medallists are
eligible. They've also recently changed the rules so that the top three
from the previous Nationals get automatic byes, instead of only the
winners. So it's pointless to compare what is happening this year with
what happened 7 years ago, because the rules have changed.
OTOH, I think it would be fair to cry foul if Eldredge were getting
preferential treatment compared to other skaters in the same situation
*this* year -- for instance, if Eldredge got a bye through his
sectional for competing in Skate Canada last weekend, but the skaters
who were competing at the Norway JGP at the same time (and who had
much farther to travel) did not get byes.
-Sandra
Scotland Skates
thank you for your years of dedicated work.Tonia Kwiatkowski competed
and won Mids in the 97/98 Olympic season.I am not a huge fan of Todd
Eldredge,but admire and respect the man.Maybe Todd's prescence at Mids
will shed a bit more light on sectionals.
Trudi Marrapodi
<san...@frogsonice.com> wrote:
> tru...@clarityconnect.com (Trudi Marrapodi) writes:
>
> > Morry, how does this relate to Brian Boitano's situation in 1994? I ask
> > sincerely, as I am curious. My understanding is that he was byed out of
> > qualifying for nationals all the way up the ladder because he placed
> > second at Skate America that season and won a pro-am which, I believe, was
> > held in November.
>
> I'm not Morry, but as I noted in my previous message, the USFSA seems
> to change its policy on byes every year. They even seem to change the
> *rules* on byes every year.
Yeah, I was afraid you were going to say that...
> At one point, the rules were such that
> previous World and Olympic medallists were eligible for automatic byes
> to Nationals; now only the *current* World and Olympic medallists are
> eligible. They've also recently changed the rules so that the top three
> from the previous Nationals get automatic byes, instead of only the
> winners. So it's pointless to compare what is happening this year with
> what happened 7 years ago, because the rules have changed.
Whew. I don't even think I can keep up with this.
> OTOH, I think it would be fair to cry foul if Eldredge were getting
> preferential treatment compared to other skaters in the same situation
> *this* year -- for instance, if Eldredge got a bye through his
> sectional for competing in Skate Canada last weekend, but the skaters
> who were competing at the Norway JGP at the same time (and who had
> much farther to travel) did not get byes.
>
> -Sandra
Well, I think it's questionable as to why the byes seem to keep changing
from year to year in such a whimsical way.
Sandra Loosemore
> Well, I think it's questionable as to why the byes seem to keep changing
> from year to year in such a whimsical way.
To be honest, I suspect it's because the powers-that-be want to make
sure that all the top skaters have an opportunity to advance to
Nationals each year, and they'll start being more generous with byes
if there are more than four top contenders left in any particular
section. For instance, last year I suspected that the real reason why
Jenny Kirk got a bye through Easterns wasn't just because she
qualified for the Junior Grand Prix Final, but that the Eastern
sectional was looking awfully crowded with Pensgen, Kwon, Wheat,
Doyle, and Roth also in the field. This year, I imagine the USFSA
would have found some excuse for giving Todd Eldredge a bye if there
weren't already a bunch of Midwestern senior men who had better
excuses for byes (Savoie, Jahnke, Bradley) to thin out the field.
-Sandra
Sandra Loosemore
> >Seems strange because of his elite status, but I guess it's good in
> >that he's showing everyone that he's willing to take all the steps
> >necessary to get to Nationals rather than expecting a bye.
>
> Eh... It's not like he has a chance of NOT qualifying at
> Midwesterns... I see it more like that's one less struggling male
> skater who might be able to go to Nationals, but will get kicked off
> the podium by Eldredge. Isn't that why medalist byes were invented
> in the first place - so that more skaters could attend Nationals?
Yeah, but the problem is that Eldredge isn't a medalist.
BTW, Christopher Bowman had the same problem in qualifying the next
year, after he withdrew from 1990 Nationals with a back injury. The
USFSA made him skate at regionals even though he was a reigning world
medalist. He didn't meet the then-current criteria for an automatic
bye, he wasn't sick or injured, he didn't have a conflicting
international assignment -- so he had to qualify just like everybody
else.
-Sandra
Alizea
>Morry, how does this relate to Brian Boitano's situation in 1994? I ask
>sincerely, as I am curious. My understanding is that he was byed out of
>qualifying for nationals all the way up the ladder because he placed
>second at Skate America that season and won a pro-am which, I believe, was
>held in November.
My memory may be *very* faulty, so forgive me if I'm way off on this, but I
remember there being a lot of discontentment on the part of skaters and coaches
who were afraid that the returning Olympic skaters would bump "traditional"
skaters out of qualifying-- such as, if Kristi Yamaguchi chose to return, she
would win her Regional/Sectional and a "normal" kid who normally would have
qualified would end up fifth and not get to go. For these reasons, I think
they enacted special bye rules--if you had previously won medals at x level,
you needed to begin the qualifying ladder at y level. This rules were deleted
after that season, I think, and were enacted when it was thought more
Olympic-level skaters were going to reinstate and compete than did.
I could be crazy, though, and the above wrong. I wasn't very old during the
1993-1994 season and was more worried about the fact that my regionals were
held during Halloween and this meant my training partner and I weren't going to
be able to trick-or-treat. That regionals and '94 baby Nationals were probably
my favorite two comps ever...
Alizea
MorryS
>From: ali...@aol.comeskate (Alizea)
>Date: 11/11/00 7:19 PM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <20001111221914...@ng-fi1.aol.com>
do not remember the circustances of the BB bye.
It is true that the USFSA By rules change almost every year. Some years a bye
is granted if the International Event is within two weeks of the Regional or
Sectional and other times it is only one week.
International Byes are not the greatest problem however. I is the fake
injuries that result in Medical Byes. At this point that program is out of
control and unfair to many skaters who are not faking injuries or "terminal
hangnail" to get out of Sectionals.
>
>
>
>
Jocelyn
>that he's showing everyone that he's willing to take all the steps
>necessary to get to Nationals rather than expecting a bye.
Eh... It's not like he has a chance of NOT qualifying at Midwesterns... I see
it more like that's one less struggling male skater who might be able to go to
Nationals, but will get kicked off the podium by Eldredge. Isn't that why
medalist byes were invented in the first place - so that more skaters could
attend Nationals?
Jocelyn
--
http://members.xoom.com/vesperholly/
ad astra per aspera
davidw...@my-deja.com
nonn...@aol.communique (Jocelyn) wrote:
> >Seems strange because of his elite status, but I guess it's good in
> >that he's showing everyone that he's willing to take all the steps
> >necessary to get to Nationals rather than expecting a bye.
>
> Eh... It's not like he has a chance of NOT qualifying at
Midwesterns... I see
> it more like that's one less struggling male skater who might be able
to go to
> Nationals, but will get kicked off the podium by Eldredge. Isn't
that why
> medalist byes were invented in the first place - so that more skaters
could
> attend Nationals?
>
Which brings up a question....what would be considered a "full field"
at nationals? Would that be 12 (i.e. a minimum of 4 from each region) ?
I am sure there will be enough men at nationals, but in the event their
werent, would they take the 5th place skater from Midwesterns?
kbra...@binghamton.edu
> injuries that result in Medical Byes. At this point that program is out of
> control and unfair to many skaters who are not faking injuries or "terminal
> hangnail" to get out of Sectionals.
Well, who has recently skipped sections due to injury? Are there lots of
people?
-- Kate
barbk
Trudi Marrapodi wrote:
> In article <m3r94ij...@lilypad.frogsonice.com>, Sandra Loosemore
> <san...@frogsonice.com> wrote:
>
> > tru...@clarityconnect.com (Trudi Marrapodi) writes:
> >
> > > Morry, how does this relate to Brian Boitano's situation in 1994? I ask
> > > sincerely, as I am curious. My understanding is that he was byed out of
> > > qualifying for nationals all the way up the ladder because he placed
> > > second at Skate America that season and won a pro-am which, I believe, was
> > > held in November.
> >
> > I'm not Morry, but as I noted in my previous message, the USFSA seems
> > to change its policy on byes every year. They even seem to change the
> > *rules* on byes every year.
>
> Yeah, I was afraid you were going to say that...
>
> > At one point, the rules were such that
> > previous World and Olympic medallists were eligible for automatic byes
> > to Nationals; now only the *current* World and Olympic medallists are
> > eligible. They've also recently changed the rules so that the top three
> > from the previous Nationals get automatic byes, instead of only the
> > winners. So it's pointless to compare what is happening this year with
> > what happened 7 years ago, because the rules have changed.
>
> Whew. I don't even think I can keep up with this.
>
>
> Well, I think it's questionable as to why the byes seem to keep changing
> from year to year in such a whimsical way.
> --
>
They change because people perceive that there is a problem with the current interpretation or execution. It is hard to write (good) rules, and not surprising when they have
unintended consequences. Take the rule on byes for National Sr. medallists. On the one hand, exempting Kwan, Cohen, Hughes (and Nikodinov?) from qualifying ensures that the top
of the field from last year is able to come back and try again. But I'm equally sure that quite a number of ladies from the Pacific Region (can you say Naomi Nari Nam?) are just
as glad that they don't have to compete for one of four spots against a field that includes Kwan, Cohen and Nikodinov.
Other skaters (and coaches) may have wanted more certainty in the process with less left up to discretion which might vary substantially from one person to another. Some might
argue that travel is not all created equal and that traveling halfway around the world requires different recovery than traveling half an hour away.
The fact that the rules are different now than they were ten years ago is pretty reasonable. How many skaters participated in fall internationals ten years ago? It was probably
a small handful, while this year there have been quite literally dozens of skaters sent round the world. Relatively informal systems that worked well when applied to a handful of
skaters look arbitrary and capricious when you're trying to make decisions for dozens of skaters. Different people look at similar situations and come up with different results,
and skaters (quite reasonably) perceive this as unfair. So they move toward articulating more rules regarding byes. These don't work quite the way that is wanted, so they get
modified. And so on.
I'm not surprised, shocked or unhappy that the rules keep changing. It seems like a pretty natural progression to me.
Cheers,
Barb K.
Trudi Marrapodi
Yes, but when the rules for byes keep changing, an organization opens
itself wide to all kinds of accusations of favoritism and preference
toward certain skaters over others. I think that's dangerous.
> Other skaters (and coaches) may have wanted more certainty in the
process with less left up to discretion which might vary substantially
from one person to another. Some might
> argue that travel is not all created equal and that traveling halfway
around the world requires different recovery than traveling half an hour
away.
True, but it gets so sloppy...what I'm saying is, if the rules just keep
changing and changing, an organization begins to look really
unprofessional, like they just can't get their act together.
> The fact that the rules are different now than they were ten years ago
is pretty reasonable. How many skaters participated in fall
internationals ten years ago? It was probably
> a small handful, while this year there have been quite literally dozens
of skaters sent round the world.
This aspect makes sense. Yes, that is different.
> Relatively informal systems that worked well when applied to a handful of
> skaters look arbitrary and capricious when you're trying to make
decisions for dozens of skaters.
Boy, do they.
> Different people look at similar situations and come up with different
results,
> and skaters (quite reasonably) perceive this as unfair. So they move
toward articulating more rules regarding byes. These don't work quite the
way that is wanted, so they get
> modified. And so on.
>
> I'm not surprised, shocked or unhappy that the rules keep changing. It
seems like a pretty natural progression to me.
>
> Cheers,
> Barb K.
I don't know. To me, "progress" would be if they could create a set of
rules and, in most cases, stick with it. There would be very few instances
in which the need would be felt to make an exception. Until then, the
USFSA looks as if it's just experimenting until it gets it right. To me,
anyway.
DG511
>I don't know. To me, "progress" would be if they could create a set of
>rules and, in most cases, stick with it. There would be very few instances
>in which the need would be felt to make an exception. Until then, the
>USFSA looks as if it's just experimenting until it gets it right.
Sorry, Trudi, I disagree. It sounds like Sandra and the others are basically
saying that this is a judgment call by USFSA. And I believe this is a
situation in which that is not only acceptable but desirable. If the
multi-faceted goal is to 1) have the top skaters competing at Nationals while
2) not going overboard with preferential treatment and yet 3) giving the
skaters at regionals and sectionals (terminology may be wrong) incentive to go
out and do their very best, then the USFSA may have to make adjustments from
year to year. While I seldom buy into the "you don't understand because you're
not an insider" line of thinking, I'll accept it here.
What matters most to me is that the top skaters have an opportunity to make it
to nationals, that those who do well at nationals are rewarded with the
opportunity to go to worlds, and that the U.S. does well at worlds.
Judiciously given byes will help assure that the top skaters make it to
nationals in the first place.
Daria
kbra...@binghamton.edu
> It seems like a pretty natural progression to me.
>
But Morry said that they changed every year -- and I thought he meant that
they didn't necesssarily change in one direction, but that it was sort of
arbitrary. Of course, if Sandra's right, and the reality is that the
rules are adjusted based on the quality of the skaters, that makes more
sense.
-- Kate
janet swan hill
>from year to year in such a whimsical way.
>--
I don't think it's whimsical. They change as a need for change is seen.
Or they are clarified as ambiuguity is noticed.
janet
BaleofAKS
different levels of skating, which is my idea of Heaven) is that they are
*free*.
Yep, free. No cost. Zero. Nada. Zilch. When was the last time you were
able to attend any type of sporting event and not have to fork over some dough?
Heck, I even have to give the gate man some money when I go to the racetrack
(which usually takes even more of my money via their betting windows <g>).
You know, I may have to make a six hour drive for this event. :-) Many, many
years ago, the Midwestern Sectionals were held in my city, and it was a *blast*
to attend. [Aside to Morry: hey, we have plenty of rinks in Omaha....IMG held
an event here two years ago and all of the skaters *loved* the crowd....come
back, USFSA, please!]
If you are in the Wichita area -- or in any of the Sectional areas -- be sure
to go and support all these wonderful skaters. You'll be glad you did.
LB
Bale...@AOL.com
Podium99
>Cup (just ending) or Cup of Russia. Skate America and Skate Canada were more
>than one week before Sectionals so there could be no International Bye. .
>Todd did not ask for special consideration. Yes, good for him.
>
good for todd.
>
>
>
>
>
Ann Craven
> Eh... It's not like he [Eldredge] has a chance of NOT qualifying at
Midwesterns... I see it more like that's one less struggling male skater who
might be able to go to Nationals, but will get kicked off the podium by
Eldredge. Isn't that why medalist byes were invented in the first place -
so that more skaters could attend Nationals?
My thoughts: I wouldn't have a *philosophical* problem either way with
respect to Eldredge and Midwesterns, but my first reaction when I heard that
he had to qualify was, "This decreases Braden Overett's chances of making
Nationals." For those who haven't seen him, Braden is sort of the opposite
of Timothy Goebel--musical, with nice carriage and stretch, but with some
jump problems (at least at Nationals).
Since I'm greedy, I'm all for judicious/fair use of byes to fill out the
field at Nationals to whatever number can be judged fairly. I hate to see
only 12 entries, even in the novice events. It was wonderful having a field
of 21 senior ladies in 1999.
Sandra Loosemore
> My thoughts: I wouldn't have a *philosophical* problem either way with
> respect to Eldredge and Midwesterns, but my first reaction when I heard that
> he had to qualify was, "This decreases Braden Overett's chances of making
> Nationals." For those who haven't seen him, Braden is sort of the opposite
> of Timothy Goebel--musical, with nice carriage and stretch, but with some
> jump problems (at least at Nationals).
Well, I for one haven't written Braden off yet! I think that if he
skates well at Midwesterns he will likely qualify, and if he doesn't,
it would probably be a sign that he'd be unlikely to do any better at
Nationals anyway. The way I see it, Eldredge and Lysacek are shoo-ins
to qualify, and the remaining two slots will be up for grabs with
probably Clausen, Overett, and Lee having the best shots. I'd hate
for Braden to be going into sectionals thinking that he's doomed,
because it's not true; he just has to be ready, and hold himself
together to deliver a good program when it counts.
-Sandra
Smallovian Insider
(BaleofAKS) writes:
>You know, the great thing about Midwesterns (besides watching a bunch of
>different levels of skating, which is my idea of Heaven) is that they are
>*free*.
>
>Yep, free. No cost. Zero. Nada. Zilch. When was the last time you were
>able to attend any type of sporting event and not have to fork over some
>dough?
Southwesterns, October 14, 2000. :^)
Skating is a grand sport.
Peg
reply to p.egl...@aol.com [re move the obvious ext ra dots]
27vfl00aml
==
join OT-r...@egroups.com - for off-topic discussions. Send an email to
OT-rssif-...@egroups.com to subscribe
@>--\-Any request to delete this post is a forgery-/--<@
Smallovian Insider
<acr...@mindspring.com> writes:
>
>"Jocelyn" <nonn...@aol.communique> wrote...
>> Eh... It's not like he [Eldredge] has a chance of NOT qualifying at
>Midwesterns... I see it more like that's one less struggling male skater who
>might be able to go to Nationals, but will get kicked off the podium by
>Eldredge. Isn't that why medalist byes were invented in the first place -
>so that more skaters could attend Nationals?
>
>My thoughts: I wouldn't have a *philosophical* problem either way with
>respect to Eldredge and Midwesterns, but my first reaction when I heard that
>he had to qualify was, "This decreases Braden Overett's chances of making
>Nationals." For those who haven't seen him, Braden is sort of the opposite
>of Timothy Goebel--musical, with nice carriage and stretch, but with some
>jump problems (at least at Nationals).
And at Southwesterns, where he began his program falling on a 3 Axel attempt,
and then turned out of a 3 Lutz landing on two feet and still hit the boards,
at which point he went down, and had a fall on a 3 flip later in the program.
He's doing Zorro for his free skate this year, and the program has nice
character, with some fine footwork and something that looked an awful lot like
a serpentine spiral step sequence, which I thought was way cool to see a male
include in a long program. Nice centering on his spins, too. Cute suit of
lights.
I think Braden's program is very good. I wish him good fortune in landing his
jumps.
>Since I'm greedy, I'm all for judicious/fair use of byes to fill out the
>field at Nationals to whatever number can be judged fairly. I hate to see
>only 12 entries, even in the novice events. It was wonderful having a field
>of 21 senior ladies in 1999.
On TV, we don't know the difference. :^(
Trudi Marrapodi
dg...@aol.comDaria (DG511) wrote:
> Trudi writes:
>
> >I don't know. To me, "progress" would be if they could create a set of
> >rules and, in most cases, stick with it. There would be very few instances
> >in which the need would be felt to make an exception. Until then, the
> >USFSA looks as if it's just experimenting until it gets it right.
>
> Sorry, Trudi, I disagree. It sounds like Sandra and the others are basically
> saying that this is a judgment call by USFSA. And I believe this is a
> situation in which that is not only acceptable but desirable. If the
> multi-faceted goal is to 1) have the top skaters competing at Nationals while
> 2) not going overboard with preferential treatment and yet 3) giving the
> skaters at regionals and sectionals (terminology may be wrong) incentive to go
> out and do their very best, then the USFSA may have to make adjustments from
> year to year. While I seldom buy into the "you don't understand because
you're
> not an insider" line of thinking, I'll accept it here.
OK...I can understand the goal being to have the best at nationals, not
hand out byes like candy, and do right by the skaters having to compete
all the way up the line. But I think it's very, very important that a
rhyme and a reason be given for *every* change. So long as that happens,
there is less chance for outsiders to feel that the decisions are being
made whimsically or because this skater is being preferred to that skater
or because this skater has been "a good, obedient little skater" and that
one hasn't and is being punished for it.
> What matters most to me is that the top skaters have an opportunity to make it
> to nationals, that those who do well at nationals are rewarded with the
> opportunity to go to worlds, and that the U.S. does well at worlds.
> Judiciously given byes will help assure that the top skaters make it to
> nationals in the first place.
>
> Daria
I think that's the operating statement here..."judiciously given."
skatesurfer
>International Byes are not the greatest
> problem however. I is the fake injuries
> that result in Medical Byes. At this point
> that program is out of control and unfair
> to many skaters who are not faking
> injuries or "terminal hangnail" to get out
> of Sectionals.
If this is the case, I give Todd a *lot* of credit for not trying to
use his back injury suffered at the Skate America practice session for a
way out of Sectionals.
Good for Todd, he is a class act.
janet swan hill
>rhyme and a reason be given for *every* change.
Oh, it happens. Proposed changes to the rules get written into the
supporting documentation for Governing Council, and discussed (sometimes at
GREAT length) by all and sundry before the vote.
janet
Dave Amorde
news:20001111230940...@ng-fd1.aol.com...
>
> International Byes are not the greatest problem however. I is the fake
> injuries that result in Medical Byes. At this point that program is out
of
> control and unfair to many skaters who are not faking injuries or
"terminal
> hangnail" to get out of Sectionals.
>
My personal opinion is that there should be NO medical byes. The current
system "forgives" injuries that take place before Regionals or Sectionals.
If Kwan tears a hamstring the week before Nationals, is the competition
going to be put back while she heals? Of course not. Illness and injury have
always been "Act of God" risk factors in sport. The athlete that gets hurt
loses, the one that is able to move up wins. That's life.
-Dave-
blo...@my-deja.com
"Dave Amorde" <ShutUpA...@Prodigion.com> wrote:
>
> My personal opinion is that there should be NO medical byes. The
current
> system "forgives" injuries that take place before Regionals or
Sectionals.
> If Kwan tears a hamstring the week before Nationals, is the
competition
> going to be put back while she heals? Of course not. Illness and
injury have
> always been "Act of God" risk factors in sport. The athlete that gets
hurt
> loses, the one that is able to move up wins. That's life.
>
> -Dave-
But Dave, don't you think it's a different set of circumstances when a
skater is injured prior to Sectionals or Regionals, but is healthy for
Nationals vs. the example you cite above where the skater is injured
and can't compete at Nationals?
Surely an injury earlier in the season shouldn't prevent a skater from
participating later in the season -- even if it's via a medical bye --
if they qualify. Sure, as Morry S. pointed out, there will be some
abuse of this process (shall we call it the "hangnail excuse"?). But
don't you think it's important to keep the loophole intact for the
legitimately injured?
Just curious what you think.
blondee
Margaret Burwell
MorryS (mor...@aol.com) writes:
> It is true that the USFSA By rules change almost every year. Some years a bye
> is granted if the International Event is within two weeks of the Regional or
> Sectional and other times it is only one week.
>
> International Byes are not the greatest problem however. I is the fake
> injuries that result in Medical Byes. At this point that program is out of
> control and unfair to many skaters who are not faking injuries or "terminal
> hangnail" to get out of Sectionals.
That is a rather harsh way of phrasing it. Soft tissue injuries
can be difficult to assess, particularly if you did not see the person at
the time the injury occured. Several years ago, a pair team walked
through their programs at Eastern Ontario Sectionals. He had pulled a
muscle in his side two weeks previously and was unable to lift her easily.
In order to get a medical bye, he would have had to have been examined by
a doctor nominated by CFSA. There was no guarantee the CFSA doctor would
agree with the previous assesment. Since they were the only pair in the
event, they knew they would qualify if they made some kind of appearance.
The situation becomes more difficult in events where there are
more competitors than there are spots at the higher competition. Is the
injury serious enough that the skater is not able to compete at the
required event? Is the injury minor enough to believe that the skater
will be fit to compete at the higher competition? Is the skater
accomplished enough to assume that (s)he would have qualified if (s)he had
skated in the qualifying event? I wouldn't want to make the call.
Marg
Margaret Burwell
Somewhere in this thread, someone mentioned that Midwesterns is free. In
Canada, there is an entry fee for all competitions. In most cases it is
minimal -- $5.00 to $10.00 for the weekend. Every competition has
expenses. Ice time has to be paid for. Officials have to be housed and
fed. Volunteers have to be fed. All of this costs money and the entry
fee paid my competitors isn't going to cover all of these expenses. It
doesn't seem unreasonable to ask spectators to pay something. Who does
pick up the expenses? Does the USFSA cover costs? Maybe this explains
the astronomical ticket prices at Nationals.
Marg
janet swan hill
It's really very simple: Most of the attendees at USFSA Regionals and
Sectionals are family members, other skaters, and coaches. There are few
members of the "general public". The skaters and coaches all "have
credentials" (or they would have to be credentialed if the event were to charge
admission), and most of the parents would think they SHOULD have credentials.
Most of the rinks where these events are held are not set up to make taking
tickets at all easy ...... sometimes it's barely feasible.
Add to that, that the people selling and taking tickets would be volunteers --
which are in short supply, and are needed for more critical jobs .... like
skater registration monitoring, announcing, helping out in accounting, etc.
I once went to a Midwesterns where a small entry fee was charged, based on the
same kinds of questions that Marg raises. There was hardly ever anyone
available to take tickets. When there was, there were arguments with people
who would be "credentialed", and to top it all off, they sold VERY FEW tickets.
The income from the tickets in no way made up for the hassle. If a part
of the hassle was the need for credentials, then the cost of the credentialling
process would have eaten into the income from the very few "general public"
attendees.
As for the cost of the rinks, the judges, etc., the skaters pay for it. The
skaters would need the rink and the judges REGARDLESS of whether there is
anyone there watching. And there are VERY FEW people watching who would not
be "getting in free" based on credentials.
I can imagine that if the rink were actually set up in such a way that limiting
access and checking for tickets were easy/feasible to handle, and there came to
be a larger number of the general public, and you could settle the issue of
credentials cheaply/reasonably, a Sectional or Regional competition
would/could/might try to recoup some of its expenses through selling tickets.
I believe that some already do. I know that some have in the past. But
the amount of money brought in in this manner is going to be a bagatelle.
>From: aj...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Margaret Burwell)
janet