The De-evolution of Figure Skating
The De-evolution of Figure Skating
Originally published July/Aug 2015 PS MAgazine
At the past governing council an interesting request for
action came up in new business. Janna Blanter, a delegate representing the
Broadmoor Skating Club, wanted to amend rule 1041 B to require the 6.0 judging
system to be used for juvenile and intermediate levels in all disciplines at
qualifying events. Her rationale was IJS is designed to be transparent in
judging at the elite level of skating and was never intended to be used at the
developmental levels. That is true. I have also heard from many that IJS does
not develop young skaters and that a return to 6.0 would help that. I don’t
believe that either.
It doesn’t matter which judging system we use as neither are
meant for development but to determine the best skater on a given day. What
does develop skaters then? U.S. Figure Skating’s Basic Skills or the ISI weSkate
program develop skaters. The test structures of both programs develop skaters.
But most importantly, coaches are the most significant piece of this
development puzzle. The skill of the coach IS the difference maker.
While there are several factors to the decline of skating
skills, the real culprit is what I call, “de-evolution of figure skating” in
the 90’s. In 1991, the ISU abolished compulsory figures, followed in 1992 with
the eligibility rule that allowed professionals to compete. In mid-1990’s,
skating in the United States was exploding and in many areas learn to skate
programs literally doubled in size. Within this explosion of new skaters was a
growing need for learn to skate instructors. Notice I didn’t use the word
qualified. I was a skating director at this time and the manager of our rink would
not let me turn skaters away. I had a Saturday session where I had 144 tot
level skaters on the ice at one time. That was 11 classes with an average of 13
kids per class. I did not have enough instructors and so I did what many of us
did. I hired my 16 year old competitive skaters to teach. I admit not all
teenagers are created equal and there were some great kids…but some, if not
many, did not understand how the progression of skills worked, nor had any
knowledge of the standards required to keep kids progressing. Think back even
further … these 16 year olds were 12 when figures went out. Most of my younger
skaters were on their 1st or 2nd tests. They were now
teaching skills like edges and three turns that they themselves never developed
to the degree of expertise their coaches had. Fast forward another 10 years and
another new crop of 16 year old skaters are teaching. Twenty-five years later,
these coaches are a majority of our association. We hear often that the loops
need to be removed from the MIF. De-evolution of our sport explains why. It’s
not that they can’t teach but there was a whole generation of skating knowledge
that was not passed on through the tradition of figures. We just can’t replace
that knowledge of skating skills.
Fortunately, those young skaters could teach jumps and spins.
When I finally turned professional and began teaching, passing on my
understanding of jump mechanics was easy. It was those early developmental
skills I learned when I was three, four and five where I struggled. As critical
as this sounds of our young coaches, it is what it is. They can’t pass on what
they did not learn. We perpetuate this same problem today as a majority of
clubs continue to use their young athletes as learn to skate instructors.
Interestingly, those 1990’s rule changes did not appear to
affect Asia or the former Soviet Union as it did in the US. Quite possibly
because those associations did not need nor allow young people to teach. What
did affect Russia however, was the migration of many coaches and athletes from
their homeland. Their loss was our gain and the honor roll of Russian coaches
listed in our PS Magazine should not surprise anyone.
Another issue is the lack of judges which also impacts the
development of skaters. My point - during the critical issues session prior to
governing council, a delegate said that finding judges for test session was
difficult as many only want to do competitions. Ann Gerhli, of the Skating Club
of New York, got up and said maybe we need to get rid of tests! It’s hard to
read Ann sometimes as I wasn’t sure if she was being sarcastic or not.
Coaches and judges also constantly complain about the
standards of tests. The quality of skating and the disparity of passing
standards between regions are the main issues. Coaches putting out tests that
are not ready and judges whose standards are too lenient perpetuate de-evolution.
This is where we need to put our resources. We need to overhaul the test
structure to develop our skaters to today’s standards. If the powers that be
believe our skaters too slow, then add speed and power to the free skate, pair,
dance, and moves tests. Train the judges to a higher standard. PSA needs to
educate coaches on how to teach those figure skills that we are losing. We need
to develop better techniques for the development of our skaters. As a whole PSA
needs to get better.
Going backwards from IJS would be a mess but one we would
recover from. Removing tests however, would plummet figure skating into a deep,
black abyss never to see the light of day again.
Comments