How to Manipulate a Pure Sport: Favoritism and Discrimination in US Speedskating
After five years of competing on the international level in the sport of metric speedskating and experiencing the working of the federation known as US Speedskating, I've come up with a way of explaining how this federation's unfair treatment of its athletes comes about. You may wonder how it is possible to manipulate the results of a sport where we race against the clock. Well, it seems unlikely, but it happens, and here's how.
At first glance, the rules for team selection and the awarding of benefits seems very clearly set out in the Ice Chips: Skaters have to earn certain placings and/or achieve certain time standards. But if you look closely, you may notice that "coach's discretion" is the final standard by which the skaters are judged.
The thing is, even without coach's discretion coming into play, the written standards are manipulated in such a way that they literally become meaningless, except when US Speedskating chooses to refer to them for their own advantage against particular athletes.
I don't think that the methods by which US Speedskating makes decisions about its athletes are clearly defined, even by some "unwritten protocol." But even though there doesn't seem to be any plan or "conspiracy" behind it, there is still a recognizable pattern that emerges from the phenomenon as it occurs, and this pattern is worth describing.
For every rule and standard that is written by US Speedskating, there are three possible "levels of treatment" of athletes according to that rule. From lowest to highest, these are:
1. Discrimination
2. Strict adherence to the rule
3. Favoritism.
1. At the level of discrimination, the athlete is denied a benefit or a spot on a team that they've rightfully earned through their own performance. One of the worst examples of discrimination by US Speedskating against one of their athletes happened to Nate DiPalma, with regard to high altitude funding through the "Live High-Train Low" program.
According to this program, athletes who achieved a high enough placing at the US Nationals, and lived at a high enough altitude, were entitled to either free housing in a US Speedskating high altitude house, or a stipend of $300 a month if they lived in their own home. Nate was entitled to that funding because he had met both of those requirements, but he wasn't getting it, and nobody at US Speedskating was answering his emails and phone calls regarding his stipend.
Finally, Nate had to take US Speedskating to court to get the funding that he had rightfully earned. He won.
But there's more to the story. During US Speedskating's presentation of their side of the story, President Andy Gabel said that the reason why USS was denying Nate his funding was because they were supporting other skaters instead: "You may have heard of Derek Parra...K.C. Boutiette..." Oh yes. The actual argument presented by Gabel was that US Speedskating was denying Nate a benefit that he had rightfully earned BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T BELIEVE THAT NATE HAD THE TALENT TO GET ANY BETTER.
The judge thought that was ridiculous, awarded Nate his funding, and ended up giving the USS representatives a lecture on the unfairness of their rules. You see, the judge had been involved in track and field in his younger days, and he told USS that he couldn't believe how subjective the rules of USS were, compared to track. He said that USS should expect to face more lawsuits from their skaters in the future, unless they did something about the subjectivity of their rules and their openness to interpretation.
2. Most of us speedskaters have experienced a time when the rules set down in the Ice Chips cracked down on us. Strict adherence to written rules is important and it would be totally fine and acceptable IF THE RULES WERE APPLIED IN THE SAME WAY TO EVERYONE. But those of us who've been subjected to the rules really resent the way that US Speedskating can and does pull strings for certain people to protect them from the standards that are used against everyone else. More on that in the next section on favoritism.
When you're held to the rules, you lose your OJOB with Home Depot when you fail to perform up to the standards of the program, like what happened to Chris Callis and Tim Hoffman after last year. Or, like the story I posted in the spring about short tracker Lindsay Appuglise, you're told to go searching through the Ice Chips for the rule that says you can't be Category I even though you won Nationals, because if you're over a certain age you have to skate a certain time standard in the 1000 meters that is different from those skaters under that age, blah, blah, blah.
In the year when I trained with the National Team and half our group underperformed due to the "Overtraining Experiment," I didn't get to go to the winter World Cups because of such a technicality. I had earned a spot at the Nationals, but skated the time standard a week late because I didn't know there was a deadline. Also, as a result of not making any World Cups that season, I lost my stipend and was not put on the list to get a bike from the Orbea deal.
When I explained to Andy Gabel that my season had been trashed by Cushman for the purpose of data collection, he asked me if there was anything that US Speedskating could have done after that. I suggested that maybe they could have tried to make it up to me by letting me get a bike, since I had met all of the requirements to go to those World Cups anyway, it was just that I had skated the time standard a week late. Gabel's reply? "Oh, we couldn't do that. That would be FAVORITISM."
No, not really. That would have been REPARATIONS. I should have sued the pants off them for using me in an experiment without my consent.
3. Favoritism happens when someone fails to meet a standard but they are given things anyway, because someone is protecting them and doing them favors. An example of this is when Amy Sannes got to keep her OJOB at Home Depot for this season, even though the people running the program wanted to take it away from her and give a job to someone who was ranked higher in their sport. Technically, being 25th in the World Championships is the last possible ranking that can earn someone an OJOB, but these jobs are in high demand, and often, people who were ranked much higher are not given OJOBS because there aren't enough jobs available. One season, Chris Callis finished Top 10 and was still denied a job!
But somebody called in a favor and made sure Sannes kept her job. I can just imagine the conversation: "She's not focused on the third season of the Olympic cycle; she'll do better next year at the Games; look how she finished in the last Olympics; please give her another chance."
(The final verdict has yet to come in, but things are looking up so far. At this year's World Sprints, Sannes finished two spots higher -- at 23rd!)
The things you hear from an athlete who knows she is protected are priceless. On the Fall World Cup trips, I heard her say that the Milwaukee race weekend would be "a write-off" because she had a cold. (Yeah, Jen had the same cold, and she won the 1000, setting a track record in the process.)
Then in Italy, she said something about the volunteer hours she had been working in a veterinary clinic. What the hell?? You mean she was getting paid by Home Depot to meet requirements for vet school?
The fact that USS officials will pull strings for certain people to make it easier for them to keep skating tells me that, despite their best efforts to ignore the issue, they realize how hard it is for athletes to support themselves. If you're one of those skaters who has always been fully accountable for your own performance, and who has only been paid for the hours you actually worked, then it's very hard to watch someone else getting special treatment.
The view that metric speedskating is "pure" is only an illusion that is (not very successfully) perpetuated by US Speedskating. The judge presiding over the DiPalma lawsuit was very clear on his views on the subjectivity of the rules. The rules themselves are only "pure" when it is convenient for USS to use them against certain athletes. And, of course, the sport is far from pure when someone's friendship with the program director makes sure they get special treatment.
These are just some of the things I have observed over the years. I can say for sure that these actions and decisions destroy team unity, make athletes disloyal to the organization, contribute to early burnout, and cause skaters to leave the sport with a bitter aftertaste. I also believe that such treatment of athletes ends up being detrimental to the main goals of US Speedskating. But maybe the root of the problem involved losing sight of the goals in the first place.
After five years of competing on the international level in the sport of metric speedskating and experiencing the working of the federation known as US Speedskating, I've come up with a way of explaining how this federation's unfair treatment of its athletes comes about. You may wonder how it is possible to manipulate the results of a sport where we race against the clock. Well, it seems unlikely, but it happens, and here's how.
At first glance, the rules for team selection and the awarding of benefits seems very clearly set out in the Ice Chips: Skaters have to earn certain placings and/or achieve certain time standards. But if you look closely, you may notice that "coach's discretion" is the final standard by which the skaters are judged.
The thing is, even without coach's discretion coming into play, the written standards are manipulated in such a way that they literally become meaningless, except when US Speedskating chooses to refer to them for their own advantage against particular athletes.
I don't think that the methods by which US Speedskating makes decisions about its athletes are clearly defined, even by some "unwritten protocol." But even though there doesn't seem to be any plan or "conspiracy" behind it, there is still a recognizable pattern that emerges from the phenomenon as it occurs, and this pattern is worth describing.
For every rule and standard that is written by US Speedskating, there are three possible "levels of treatment" of athletes according to that rule. From lowest to highest, these are:
1. Discrimination
2. Strict adherence to the rule
3. Favoritism.
1. At the level of discrimination, the athlete is denied a benefit or a spot on a team that they've rightfully earned through their own performance. One of the worst examples of discrimination by US Speedskating against one of their athletes happened to Nate DiPalma, with regard to high altitude funding through the "Live High-Train Low" program.
According to this program, athletes who achieved a high enough placing at the US Nationals, and lived at a high enough altitude, were entitled to either free housing in a US Speedskating high altitude house, or a stipend of $300 a month if they lived in their own home. Nate was entitled to that funding because he had met both of those requirements, but he wasn't getting it, and nobody at US Speedskating was answering his emails and phone calls regarding his stipend.
Finally, Nate had to take US Speedskating to court to get the funding that he had rightfully earned. He won.
But there's more to the story. During US Speedskating's presentation of their side of the story, President Andy Gabel said that the reason why USS was denying Nate his funding was because they were supporting other skaters instead: "You may have heard of Derek Parra...K.C. Boutiette..." Oh yes. The actual argument presented by Gabel was that US Speedskating was denying Nate a benefit that he had rightfully earned BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T BELIEVE THAT NATE HAD THE TALENT TO GET ANY BETTER.
The judge thought that was ridiculous, awarded Nate his funding, and ended up giving the USS representatives a lecture on the unfairness of their rules. You see, the judge had been involved in track and field in his younger days, and he told USS that he couldn't believe how subjective the rules of USS were, compared to track. He said that USS should expect to face more lawsuits from their skaters in the future, unless they did something about the subjectivity of their rules and their openness to interpretation.
2. Most of us speedskaters have experienced a time when the rules set down in the Ice Chips cracked down on us. Strict adherence to written rules is important and it would be totally fine and acceptable IF THE RULES WERE APPLIED IN THE SAME WAY TO EVERYONE. But those of us who've been subjected to the rules really resent the way that US Speedskating can and does pull strings for certain people to protect them from the standards that are used against everyone else. More on that in the next section on favoritism.
When you're held to the rules, you lose your OJOB with Home Depot when you fail to perform up to the standards of the program, like what happened to Chris Callis and Tim Hoffman after last year. Or, like the story I posted in the spring about short tracker Lindsay Appuglise, you're told to go searching through the Ice Chips for the rule that says you can't be Category I even though you won Nationals, because if you're over a certain age you have to skate a certain time standard in the 1000 meters that is different from those skaters under that age, blah, blah, blah.
In the year when I trained with the National Team and half our group underperformed due to the "Overtraining Experiment," I didn't get to go to the winter World Cups because of such a technicality. I had earned a spot at the Nationals, but skated the time standard a week late because I didn't know there was a deadline. Also, as a result of not making any World Cups that season, I lost my stipend and was not put on the list to get a bike from the Orbea deal.
When I explained to Andy Gabel that my season had been trashed by Cushman for the purpose of data collection, he asked me if there was anything that US Speedskating could have done after that. I suggested that maybe they could have tried to make it up to me by letting me get a bike, since I had met all of the requirements to go to those World Cups anyway, it was just that I had skated the time standard a week late. Gabel's reply? "Oh, we couldn't do that. That would be FAVORITISM."
No, not really. That would have been REPARATIONS. I should have sued the pants off them for using me in an experiment without my consent.
3. Favoritism happens when someone fails to meet a standard but they are given things anyway, because someone is protecting them and doing them favors. An example of this is when Amy Sannes got to keep her OJOB at Home Depot for this season, even though the people running the program wanted to take it away from her and give a job to someone who was ranked higher in their sport. Technically, being 25th in the World Championships is the last possible ranking that can earn someone an OJOB, but these jobs are in high demand, and often, people who were ranked much higher are not given OJOBS because there aren't enough jobs available. One season, Chris Callis finished Top 10 and was still denied a job!
But somebody called in a favor and made sure Sannes kept her job. I can just imagine the conversation: "She's not focused on the third season of the Olympic cycle; she'll do better next year at the Games; look how she finished in the last Olympics; please give her another chance."
(The final verdict has yet to come in, but things are looking up so far. At this year's World Sprints, Sannes finished two spots higher -- at 23rd!)
The things you hear from an athlete who knows she is protected are priceless. On the Fall World Cup trips, I heard her say that the Milwaukee race weekend would be "a write-off" because she had a cold. (Yeah, Jen had the same cold, and she won the 1000, setting a track record in the process.)
Then in Italy, she said something about the volunteer hours she had been working in a veterinary clinic. What the hell?? You mean she was getting paid by Home Depot to meet requirements for vet school?
The fact that USS officials will pull strings for certain people to make it easier for them to keep skating tells me that, despite their best efforts to ignore the issue, they realize how hard it is for athletes to support themselves. If you're one of those skaters who has always been fully accountable for your own performance, and who has only been paid for the hours you actually worked, then it's very hard to watch someone else getting special treatment.
The view that metric speedskating is "pure" is only an illusion that is (not very successfully) perpetuated by US Speedskating. The judge presiding over the DiPalma lawsuit was very clear on his views on the subjectivity of the rules. The rules themselves are only "pure" when it is convenient for USS to use them against certain athletes. And, of course, the sport is far from pure when someone's friendship with the program director makes sure they get special treatment.
These are just some of the things I have observed over the years. I can say for sure that these actions and decisions destroy team unity, make athletes disloyal to the organization, contribute to early burnout, and cause skaters to leave the sport with a bitter aftertaste. I also believe that such treatment of athletes ends up being detrimental to the main goals of US Speedskating. But maybe the root of the problem involved losing sight of the goals in the first place.
posted by Eva at 9:14 AM
<< Home