USSA's Semi-Secret Elections Are Happening Soon

There's been quite a bit of interesting stuff going on that we've completely failed to cover here. What can we say? Follow the money.

One thing that came up yesterday that sparked some interest is Charles Christianson's candidacy for athlete representative on the USSA board of directors. It's interesting for a number of reasons. Charles posted his application and resume, as well as some information about the process, on his website. It's a pretty revealing glimpse into the inner workings of USSA. If you even knew that there was an athlete rep, it's less likely that you knew exactly what that person's role is, and even less likely still that you knew how that person came to be the athlete rep. Incidentally, Scott Macartney is the incumbent and he is up for re-election. It's impossible to say whether or not he's done a good job, because basically nobody knows what the heck sort of stuff goes on in the Center for Ants Excellence.

Charles is taking a populist position: he's advocating for greater inclusion of collegiate athletes into the development pipeline. Now if we can get him to push for a repeal of the 67% head tax increase we're experiencing this year (it went from $6 to $10 overnight, and it's now over $50 to enter a USSA race pretty much everywhere), we might see some real benefit to the vast majority of USSA members toiling away down here, miles from the World Cup. Was anyone on the board advocating for the athletes impacted by that tax increase? USSA's extreme focus on the upper end has never been more clear, and lately I have the sense that USSA is more akin to MLB or the NFL, and less akin to the youth sports or member-driven organization that many people think of it as. Maybe that's the source of the growing pains we seem to be constantly experiencing: a simple identity crisis. What are we?

Without trying to take sides in the election, Charles would be a great pick. He's a true fanatic when it comes to ski racing. His brother is on the Development Team, Charles has raced a World Cup and done a lot of fairly recent trench warfare in Europa Cups, Nor-Ams, collegiate racing, and regional FIS. He is as much a man of the people as we might be able to have in that position. All that said, Macartney is a really intelligent guy, and a huge advocate for our brothers and sisters trying to make the Ski Team. He's already successfully advocated for a number of positive changes at the upper levels, and without him the World Cup Dreams Foundation might not even exist.

Frankly both Charles and Scott would probably do a good job. And the fact is that the voting pool is so small and exclusive (read Charles' blog post about it) means that it doesn't really matter what most of us think anyway. But it does beg the question of what the point of an athlete rep is. So at that, here's a question tossed to the ether, to anyone out there with a vote in this particular election: What, in your view, is the job of an athlete rep? What makes a good candidate?

PS - don't forget about the real election that's happening today. Romney brought us SLC '02 (thanks to funds from the federal government), but Obama's family supported the local economy in Aspen (freeloading off millionaires while the rest of us suffer through the recession. Plus they skied at Buttermilk. Ugh.)


-

35m GS Skis: The Jury Deliberates

Alright, I'll say it: Warner Nickerson has produced what might be the best ski racing-related video of all time. Okay, that might be a stretch. But it's really good, and I've never seen anything like it. It's up close, informal, totally unscripted, with the biggest stars of men's ski racing including Marcel Hirscher, Ivica Kostelic, and Robby Kelley. It perfectly captures the subject at hand, from the initial freakout (guilty), to the real issue of FIS's style of governance, to the projections that 35m skis will hurt the sport in the long run because they aren't fun (a dubious claim, in my opinion).

Regardless of what you think of the issue, this is a new style and perspective on ski racing that we're hopefully going to see a lot more of in the future. I have no idea if Warner plans to do more of this - he probably doesn't know either - but I really hope he does.

-

Skier's Social Calendar

Fall dryland has already started for a lot of people, but it's still too early to get too caught up in Winter's hyperfocused whirlwinds. Make time to socialize with other members of our community this Fall:

WARNER NICKERSON CHARITY GOLF CLASSIC - Alright, Warner isn't a charity exactly, but in the last few years his tournament has morphed from a purely personal fundraiser to a pretty legitimate charitable endeavor. This year, the money that he raises will be split 3 ways. To quote the registration form:

"This tournament is a fundraiser where the proceeds are distributed to three separate entities. 1/3 will help offset the costs of travel, training, racing, and housing for Warner during the prep period leading up to the World Cup season. Warner is ranked 31st in the world in Giant Slalom, but is not a member or funded by the United States Ski Team because of age discrimination. 1/3 will go toward development of World Class athletes in grants. 1/3 will go to a non-profit of our choosing where the funds can make a dramatic impact. We have not decided on the final non-profit so if you have an idea please feel free to make a recommendation."

Warner always calls it like it is, and the tournament is always a good time. Go to his website for registration forms and more information on playing in, or sponsoring, the tournament.


SKI BALLS - Ball. As in "gala" or, according to Thesaurus.com "hoodang." I actually think that's worse. Ball jokes aside, the USSA ski balls (ugh) are a good time, if you can get in. I say that not because USSA is particularly picky about who attends, but because the cost of entry is ridiculously high. But, if I recall correctly, it's usually an open bar and there are lots of fun and interesting people there. It's a good opportunity to network with program directors and private equity people alike. And it's a good opportunity to crop dust the management. In my case, last year was a good opportunity to be eyed suspiciously by people from the national office that I sort of know. I hope to have the opportunity to repair relations this year, but I also hope to keep my $500.


COACHES' CLINICS AND REF UPDATES - Ref updates are everywhere, and you should attend. If you attend a race as a coach and don't possess a referee's certification, then shame on you. Instead of a 100 question test in order to get a license, maybe coaches should just have to get their ref certification. You can't set courses anymore unless you are also a referee, so if you're not a ref, then you relinquish all rights to complaining about course sets. Of course, you'll pay extra for the great privilege of officiating, but at the end of the day, we're all in this together and it's your turn. Check your region's website for information. The coaches' clinics can be of dubious value, but you'll never know unless you show up. You might learn something new, or you might sit around arguing about the qualification system for J4 Intergalactics U14 States. Either way, you can't win if you don't show up. There may be one in conjunction with your local ski ball, and it's more than likely that someone in your region is putting something together too: Rocky Mountain go here, Western Region here, and Eastern Region here. Sign up!

Now then, back to the weight room.

-

Cameron Smith is the Second Coming of Bode Miller, and Other Totally Rational Thoughts

Editor's Note: Charles Christianson called me today and demanded that there be some new blog posts. He sounded pretty serious (read: he chastised me and used the word "bullshit" a lot), so I figured he was right and I asked him to write the piece. So just like that we're back online. Fans of the site will be glad to know that we're planning something bigger and better, but for now we're going to keep the action on Blogger. So without further ado, please welcome Hard Snow Life's newest contributor. He has his own blog, about his own self at www.charleschristianson.com

Killa Cam Sauce, Camslice, Cam Dogg, Cam’Ron on Ice, Nightcrawler, Daddy, The Other Guy Who Rocks Airbrushed Tees. These are just a few of the nicknames that have been given to Cam Smith throughout his ski racing career. Yesterday morning a new name was added. He’s now known as “That Guy Who Scored Sub-Teens and Single Digits in Australia.”

Yesterday (tomorrow?) in Australia, Cam Smith won two ANC Cup GS races with the Swedish national team in attendance. These races, as sanctioned Continental Cups, did not have the typical 3-point adder to the penalty that normal FIS races do, meaning it was especially awesome for him to ski so well. Scoring a 9.17 and a 12.74, Cam Smith now has 10.96 GS points (much lower than mine, btw) and should be ranked around 59^th in the world and 7^th in the US. He barely eked out a win over Johan Oehagen to score the 12, but he won both runs of the next race and took the overall by almost a second to score the 9. Point being, he skied to win (we think); always a good decision.

So who is Cam Smith? You might remember Cam Smith from HSL WikiCoaching blogposts last year, where this site posted video of Cam skiing GS and solicited coaching advice from the crowd. Cam was hoping to get faster so the CU Ski Team would consider putting him in the starting lineup. Well Cam can relax about skiing for CU now, as he just qualified through objective criteria for the B-Team of the USST. And given the way that FIS points lists work, these points should be good not only for this year but through next season as well. Can you say fresh course anyone?

So. “Cam F***ing Smith” (nickname credit: Bart Molin). How did he do it? As usually happens when someone goes big, rumors are flying. I’m in the dead heat back in the States rehabbing my knee and I’ve heard a few reasons why, besides good quality skiing, Cam won the annual ANC Points-For-Nothing Sweepstakes.

A confirmed-totally-unconfirmed source tells me that the new skis are the main reason for this success. I mean lets face it, how could a guy with a Brandon Walsh haircut from 90210 ski so fast in 2012?

The much talked about FIS regulations for longer (195cm), straighter (35m) GS skis go into effect this year for the World Cup and European Cup circuits, with the rest FIS and every other Continental Cup following next year. The longer skis are harder to steer than the older cut of skis (27m, ~191cm). The difference is negligible on a hard, icy surface, and many WC skiers attested to skiing faster last spring on the new dimensions. But in Australia, where the snow was apparently sloppy and the courses were turny, the older boys had no shot against all that is Cam.

It’s quite a story, but, believe it or not, we’ve heard it before. In the spring of 1998 1996, an 18-year old kid named Bode Miller got ahold of some crazy new skis just before Junior Olympics. K2, his equipment sponsor, had just created the first-generation of radical sidecut K2 Fours. Bode had ~60 FIS points, and he used his new parabolics to torch JOs at Sugarloaf and then finish third at US Nationals in the slalom. These results put him on the Team and he never looked back.

That was an incredible Cinderella story, and although Bode has had a few ups and downs (mostly with the American media), his rise to prominence was pretty smooth. But that isn’t always the case, and it remains to be seen what will happen with Cam. Hopefully he can accept his new start position at high level races and use the opportunities to continue getting faster, better, and more consistent.

What Cam achieved in Australia may have had contributing factors, but the reality is that his decision to train at Mount Hotham for the last 4 years with his Aussie high-school roommate, working hard year-round, taking advantage of a situation, and without question getting Wikicoaching and the HSL Bump all contributed to some amazing results for the world’s 59^th best skier. As my buddy Warner Nickerson likes to say, “Never trade luck for speed.” In skiing this couldn’t be more true, and sometimes, if you’re patient and you work hard, you find both on the same day. Congrats, Cam. You got the world’s attention, and it’s going to be great for you to capitalize on the new opportunities you’re sure to have.


Update: Since posting there have been new confirmed-totally-unconfirmed claims that the Swedes in fact did not use the 35m skis because the snow was so rotten. This is interesting, but a similar argument has been floated: that training on 35m skis since last March, only to jump back onto different sidecut skis, would be equally disruptive to performance. Who knows, either way Cam still has better points than you.

Disappearing Development

Julia Ford won the Nor-Am DH title.

UPDATE: The original caption for the lead photo stated that Julia Ford had made the US Ski Team in addition to winning the Nor-Am DH title.  In fact, she just missed making criteria, so we won't know for sure until the nominations come out in May.  It's also worth mentioning that a couple skiers are very close to criteria, and depending on what happens with adders and expiring scores with other athletes across the world, they may sneak in and make the criteria based on the May list, which is the list the nominations are made from.

 Lots of great stuff has happened since the last post (almost a month ago... oops).  There was that time that Ford Swette scored a 13 and a 12.  There was that time that Mikaela Shiffrin repeated as US National Slalom champion.  There was that one guy who tore his ACL on the new 35m skis, reported by Ski Racing.  Then there was the ensuing commentary below on that story that pointed in that a few others skiers have already fallen victim to the new skis as well.  3 or 4 skiers doesn't exactly constitute a major crisis, but the nature of the rules and of these injuries does ensure that we'll all be watching carefully over the Summer.  Of course, this all happened AFTER Ted figured out that he's maybe actually faster on the 35m skis than on his old stuff.  Man, this is getting pretty complicated.

And now, it seems, there's no more women's D-Team.  You read that right.  The US Women's Development Team is no longer a thing.  Instead, word is that they've opted to move a few of the best skiers from the D-Team up to the C-Team (most of whom were already on the C-Team, for all intents and purposes), along with the D-Team coaches, and it appears that USSA is leaving it to ski clubs across the country to figure out the rest.

So, women in ski racing, good luck realizing your dreams of making the US Ski Team and trying to ski World Cup.  It's been difficult to get your foot in the door in the last year or two, what with the political roulette and abundant use of Discretion.  Now the door has closed even tighter.  You now have to have under 20 points in SL or GS, PLUS either a Nor-Am title or sub-12 points in the other event (or 22 DH points or 15 SG points) to make the US Ski Team at the lowest level.

The US Ski Team's "Best in the World" slogan has now become a delightfully self-fulfilled prophecy.  To make the Ski Team, you have to already be one of the best in the world.  Nice how that works out, isn't it?  Essentially, if you take a PG year and aren't skiing around 12 points by the end of the year, you're not going to make the US Ski Team.  More athletes will probably take PG years because of the age change (college coaches only have 1 year of FIS skiing to look at to evaluate recruits), but to meet this sort of criteria they'll have to take multiple PG years (like probably 3 or 4).  This is impossible for most people, and since USSA has never looked favorably on college skiing as a means of development, what does the future hold for the US Women's Ski Team?

Right now, the following skiers qualify for the US Ski Team based on published criteria:

Lindsey Vonn
Julia Mancuso
Mikaela Shiffrin
Leanne Smith
Laurenne Ross
Stacey Cook
Alice McKennis
Resi Stiegler

And I believe that's it.  Will there be more than 8 skiers on the Team?  Probably.  How will they qualify for the Team?  It's really anyone's guess.  The blanket of Discretion is big, soundproof, and doesn't let very much light through.  In any case, there has been no information about any sort of women's tryout camp disseminated to coaches or athletes outside the Ski Team, so that integral part of the the equation, important enough to be used for men's C- and D-Team selections this year, appears to have gone by the wayside.

This is disappointing on a number of levels.  First of all, it's disappointing that this is the caliber of development system that USSA feels it owes female skiers in this country.  The youngest person to qualify for the Women's Team was born in 1989, aside from Mikaela Shiffrin, who is a '95.  If you take Mikaela out of the equation (because she's a special case.  Stop denying it), the youngest skier to make criteria is 23-years old.  Given the huge percentage of athlete turnover at the D-Team level in the last two years, this does not speak well of the development system we've been given by USSA.  The response of the US Ski Team?  Cut ties with your development program altogether.  Don't believe it?  Check the status of the NDS in a couple of months.  Word is that it's already all but gone, with regions already wondering, "Who's going to pay for this?"

It's also disappointing that the nomination system has regressed from a clear set of objective standards to a game of politics and discretionary picks.  On first glance, a read through USSA's nomination criteria seems straightforward.  Different standards for different ages.  Seems to make sense.  Except that, starting at the B-Team level and moving down, there's that little bullet that says "Coaches' Discretion."  Get down to the D-Team list and you'll notice that, in addition to Discretion, your nomination only counts towards a selection camp, at which point you are sized up on ability (a subjective measure) and not points/rankings (an objective measure).  It's a fine line.  After all, without Discretion, we might not have a D-Team for either gender.

So, issues with ageism aside, the objective criteria set forth by USSA are rendered almost meaningless as politics and favor take over.  The Criteria guidelines explain that part of Coaches' Discretion is an assessment of "Attitude and Commitment."  This says it all.  If they don't like your attitude, or they judge your "commitment" (in quotes because, really, what does that even mean?) to be sub-par, then they don't have to take you.  This kind of interpersonal assessment and judgement is unacceptable, especially for young skiers who are developing not only as athletes, but as human beings too.  Want to develop an athlete's attitude?  Want to help them learn to be more committed?  Coach them well.  Don't kick them out.

Didn't we go to objective criteria specifically to get away from stuff like this?

If this were pro sports, this would all be fine.  If the New York Yankees don't like your attitude, then you're fired.  Should've had a better attitude.  They're a private business, so they can do that.  But it's not pro sports.  Quite the opposite, in fact.  This is a system that we all pay into at length, and though some skiers are paid with endorsement deals from individual companies, USSA itself is an amateur sporting organization, and as such should be obligated to us, the paying members, to provide equal opportunity for advancement based on a set of objective criteria.  They are not free to hire and fire athletes as they see fit, but it sure seems like that's what's going on.

Incidentally, cutting out the women's D-Team may put USSA in violation of the Ted Stevens Olympic and Amateur Sports Act.  Specifically, Section 220524, Subsection 6, which states that one of the duties of a national governing body is to:

(6) provide equitable support and encouragement for participation by women where
separate programs for male and female athletes are conducted on a national basis;

Seems pretty straightforward.  Binding arbitration, anyone?


--Lead photo of Julia Ford borrowed from Zimbio.com


-