• For more information on how to avoid pop-up ads and still support SkiTalk click HERE.
Thread Starter
TS
Muleski

Muleski

So much better than a pro
Inactive
Joined
Nov 14, 2015
Posts
5,243
Location
North of Boston
Besides a funky title, what does an Alpine national discipline win get you? A World Cup start? A Nor-Am spot?

It gets you a nice trophy, a medal, and the right to call yourself a National Champion. Nothing else.

Anybody who's on the podium at NC's can enter any NorAm on the schedule, based on their point profile. Making the start list in a NorAm is nowhere near as difficult as it was 10 years ago.

There are World Cup starts that are awarded based on the NorAm season titles. The top two get them. For example, River Radamus has a guaranteed start in ever WC next season. Whether he skis I them, and how they chose to manage his schedule is a different thing.

About 15 years ago, making the podium in any of the NC events meant an instant spot for the following season on the USST. That's actually how Bode first made the team, placing third in the SL at Nationals at Sugarloaf, when he was a senior at CVA, in 1996.

The team stopped that practice, according to some when the closely "dodged a bullet" by having some 4th place finishers come within hundies of thhe podium. The "wrong" skiers. Not worthy of the team. etc. Yeah......for real. It's always been a political mess, and being a "chosen one" was good. Put you in the system, and made it very hard for you to get dumped out. Many a discretionary pick went to a chosen now who failed to make criteria in one year or another. And the flip side were a number of people who the staff pretty visibly treated as second class citizens. Not selected as teens, not "chosen ones". Heck, they are good enough for us to be wasting time. They're on the team through some back door. Sad. A number of one year on, then gone.

That has changed to a large degree, as we have so many independents who are representing the USA even at the WC, and Olympic levels. We have athletes turning down the team, preferring to invest the $30-50K into their own controlled program.

It's "pretty confusing." More so if you haven't been witness to this for many years. Is to say "that doesn't make sense....." And it doesn't.

Look at the "committee" who selects the discretionary picks. Pretty inwardly focused. No surprises.


Not surprised at some the confusing and conflicting stuff on the 2016 990. I am 100% positive that the $100K+ income list is wrong, as one item.

BTW, the USSSA board is the one that runs the show. The Foundation board is the one that is much more of a nicety. There are people who are Foundation members who represent that group on the USSSA board, i.e. serve on both.

85% goes to athletics. "Athletics" is a big bucket, so to speak.
 
Thread Starter
TS
Muleski

Muleski

So much better than a pro
Inactive
Joined
Nov 14, 2015
Posts
5,243
Location
North of Boston
I'd encourage anybody interested to keep up with the comments on Dan Leever's Facebook account, and his posted manifest about what's wrong with US ski racing. They are still coming in, every day.

Today, Deb Armstrong weighed in. Olympic gold medalist, coach, former Program Director at Steamboat. She makes some interesting points, and is quite critical of Marolt, and the Marolt years. She feels tat the solutions must start at the club level, in younger years.

There are a multitude of comments, quite clueless, that tend to be form parents {no offense}, who clearly are not in the heart of the sport {again no offense}. For example "Skills Quest" is hardly part of this problem. Nor is the fact that a lot of our tech skiers DNF'd this season. When you are starting in the 40's, 50's and 60's, you pretty much much ski over the limit to try to get that second run, and you tend to blow out.......

At any rate, interesting comments. And we're all certainly entitled to our opinions.

EDIT:

Deb Armstrong's comments were just published in SkiRacing.com, as a letter to the editor. Good read:

https://www.skiracing.com/premium/l...ck-of-us-talent-stems-from-decades-old-issues
 
Last edited:

James O

Putting on skis
Skier
Joined
Mar 10, 2016
Posts
50
Location
S.F., CA, USA
It gets you a nice trophy, a medal, and the right to call yourself a National Champion. Nothing else.

Anybody who's on the podium at NC's can enter any NorAm on the schedule, based on their point profile. Making the start list in a NorAm is nowhere near as difficult as it was 10 years ago.

There are World Cup starts that are awarded based on the NorAm season titles. The top two get them. For example, River Radamus has a guaranteed start in ever WC next season. Whether he skis I them, and how they chose to manage his schedule is a different thing.

About 15 years ago, making the podium in any of the NC events meant an instant spot for the following season on the USST. That's actually how Bode first made the team, placing third in the SL at Nationals at Sugarloaf, when he was a senior at CVA, in 1996.

The team stopped that practice, according to some when the closely "dodged a bullet" by having some 4th place finishers come within hundies of thhe podium. The "wrong" skiers. Not worthy of the team. etc. Yeah......for real. It's always been a political mess, and being a "chosen one" was good. Put you in the system, and made it very hard for you to get dumped out. Many a discretionary pick went to a chosen now who failed to make criteria in one year or another. And the flip side were a number of people who the staff pretty visibly treated as second class citizens. Not selected as teens, not "chosen ones". Heck, they are good enough for us to be wasting time. They're on the team through some back door. Sad. A number of one year on, then gone.

That has changed to a large degree, as we have so many independents who are representing the USA even at the WC, and Olympic levels. We have athletes turning down the team, preferring to invest the $30-50K into their own controlled program.

It's "pretty confusing." More so if you haven't been witness to this for many years. Is to say "that doesn't make sense....." And it doesn't.

Look at the "committee" who selects the discretionary picks. Pretty inwardly focused. No surprises.


Not surprised at some the confusing and conflicting stuff on the 2016 990. I am 100% positive that the $100K+ income list is wrong, as one item.

BTW, the USSSA board is the one that runs the show. The Foundation board is the one that is much more of a nicety. There are people who are Foundation members who represent that group on the USSSA board, i.e. serve on both.

85% goes to athletics. "Athletics" is a big bucket, so to speak.
So, from what you have been told, Radamus is the next basket in which they will put all the eggs? From this article seems he is a fairly level-headed lad with parents that are somewhat less hands-on than others. https://www.skiracing.com/premium/who-is-river-radamus
 
Last edited:
Thread Starter
TS
Muleski

Muleski

So much better than a pro
Inactive
Joined
Nov 14, 2015
Posts
5,243
Location
North of Boston
It's a nice article. He's an incredible talent. Has been all along. He's an amazing skier, not just a racer. His parents, and extended family are huge in the sport.

If the USST sticks with devoting huge resources to a small few, yes no question in my mind. It you're trying to look at future American medalists, male, under 20 {not advocating that approach, personally}, I can see many betting the farm on him.

There are a LOT of changes underway with the USST. You'll see a new Alpine Director, a new Head Men's Coach....and generally that means at least some new staff under them. Always turnover after an Olympic year anyways, but probably more.

So the all the eggs in a couple of baskets may not be part of the plan....until you establish yourself as a MS or LV, and need your own program.

River had unlimited upside, I hear, so yeah, at his age he should get a lot of attention paid to how to manage his career.

Article is not totally accurate, IMO. I sort of doubt that MG is "his coach." His parents would become quite involved were that the case. He is one of many team coaches, and probably one who the author could connect with. MG has almost exclusively been a women's coach at the ski academy level {where he developed a lot of athletes}.

One interesting thing, which I have heard often enough to believe is that neither of his parents ever talked about results, etc.Just let it rip.

Which he does......
 
Last edited:

James O

Putting on skis
Skier
Joined
Mar 10, 2016
Posts
50
Location
S.F., CA, USA
It's a nice article. He's an incredible talent. Has been all along. He's an amazing skier, not just a racer. His parents, and extended family are huge in the sport.

If the USST sticks with devoting huge resources to a small few, yes no question in my mind. It you're trying to look at future American medalists, male, under 20 {not advocating that approach, personally}, I can see many betting the farm on him.

Article is not totally accurate. I sort of doubt that MG is "his coach." His parents would become quite involved were that the case. He is one of many team coaches, and probably one who the author could connect with.

One interesting thing, which I have heard often enough to believe is that neither of his parents ever talked about results. Just let it rip.

Which he does......
TX Muleski, knew you would give your unadulterated viewpoint. In any event, here's hoping he's the next Stenmark!
 
Thread Starter
TS
Muleski

Muleski

So much better than a pro
Inactive
Joined
Nov 14, 2015
Posts
5,243
Location
North of Boston
I've said before, and I'm one of hundreds, that we have a TON of young {under 25} talent in this country. River has always stood out. But others have, too. The challenge still remains how to get them from where he is to being consistent WC scorers, and beyond. That's perhaps different that being focused on medals. The pool of people who you channel in that "medals" direction and bet on, at young ages is really small, IMO. And I don't think other countries do it it that way, for the most part.
 

Karen_skier2.0

AKA - RX2SKI
Skier
Joined
Nov 13, 2015
Posts
659
Location
Johnstown, CO
EDIT:

Deb Armstrong's comments were just published in SkiRacing.com, as a letter to the editor. Good read:

https://www.skiracing.com/premium/l...ck-of-us-talent-stems-from-decades-old-issues

They actually excluded a large part of her FB post--she wrote a really good essay on the culture.

There is lots to agree with in Dan’s post and I will interject my thoughts on the matter. First, the team does not become good or bad in a year, or in a couple years. The lack of depth we are experiencing today (not including the women’s speed team!) is, in part, an outcome of Marolt’s focus from 2002-2015ish. Success followed Marolt’s vision back in his day. That was medals and the “A” team and it worked. However I was alpine director of the SSWSC at this time and I remember feeling strongly that the system in place would cause problems for the future; a lack of talent in the pipeline. Marolt’s emphasis was not on development and not only that, those young athletes for the first time had to pay for much of their way. Another shift we experienced in the 2nd Marolt era was the rise of the mega star and how the star negotiated the world cup tour. It became acceptable, and even the norm, for the stars to travel and operate independently of the team. Mikaela’s support team has brought this concept to a whole new level. One cannot deny that it has worked for Mikaela. I would suggest that access to the team’s best talent ought to be a core value and guiding principal of the USST; a pillar of development. I know of no champion out there who did not learn from watching and rubbing shoulders with those better. As for the NCAA topic, Tiger has been in active conversations about this very thing for the past year. If anyone values what the NCAA brings to USA skiing it would be Tiger and his staff has programming in place in an effort to bridge this divide. I believe a new day has arrived for the NCAA and the USST partnership. This has certainly not been the case in the past and the cry to engage these two organizations is heard by Tiger. As for salary, Tiger’s salary is half what Marolt’s was. In my view it’s not too much for a job so significant.
I find it fascinating that such an awakening is happening now at a time that the system of the past is only more entrenched than before. Yes, the system has been somewhat misguided and Tiger has come on board to redirect the ship. Dan speaks of how the athletes are treated today, I remember in 1984 when the Olympic team was not filled; US team athletes who were the best our country produced were denied spots on the team; denied the opportunity for the rest of their lives to answer “yes” to the first question that everyone asks, “did you go to the Olympics”. I know of athletes from early 2000’s who paid over $100,000, the equivalent of their college education, to be on the team. This angered me to no end. These athletes were “serving our country” in my view, competing for American pride, while Marolt was taking a massive salary (double Tiger’s) and building the COE. Gang, the issues Dan speaks of have been building for quite some time. Marolt did great things for US skiing while simultaneously dealt Tiger a weak hand. Marolt took great care of his stars but left nothing in the pipeline for the future. Tiger is rebuilding, shifting focus, tackling the NCAA opportunity that Marolt never touched and negotiating a complicated athlete funding dilemma Marolt initiated. I wish all outrage we are hearing today came about back then when the seeds of our issues today were planted.

A significant point I would like to focus on is culture. Everything gets back to culture and this is where we stumble in my view. For us in the USA this includes the internal culture of the athlete, family culture, club culture and our national ski racing culture. Let’s begin with the internal culture of an athlete. Internal culture includes personal accountability, an entrepreneurial/innovative spirit, complete ownership, visualizing the path, stopping at nothing, not relying on a system. Internal culture is an equal access commodity for the rich and poor and cannot be bought. Next, family culture. I see two types of family cultures that work best in USA ski racing. One, being the mega informed parent. These parents know much more than the average informed parents. These parents were former USST athletes or coaches or professionals in the sport in some capacity. These parents know the sport, understand timelines, have perspective, implement disciplined thought and planning, and do not follow the trend of the day in the sport. The other family culture is that of the parents being clueless, and they know it, so they stay out of the way. This allows for full mastery and management by the athlete at an early age and this athlete pulls the parents along for the ride. Families in the middle of this spectrum often struggle. Then comes club culture which accounts for community, LTAD, educating families, offering leadership at multiple levels to reinforce guiding principles. And finally our overarching USA racing culture. Gang, we think we got it but as a country we don’t to a large degree. As we know football, the Europeans know ski racing. Every European mom understands what a flex gate is and shinning, like every mom understands the end zone in football; you don’t have to be a fan but you are versed in verbiage and the sport to an extent. Some of what we experience in USA ski racing is the blind leading the blind. Equally bad are folks who are somewhat informed and heavily invested in their child’s ski racing pursuit with strong personalities influencing everyone else who will follow. That’s how we get multiple skis for youngsters. Emphasizing gates over a base of skill development. Parents elevated pride at their child’s U10 podium. Then our kids go to school and, for most ski racers, their teachers don’t understand the sport and their friends are wondering why they are gone so much. We, for some crazy reason, have technicians at the start of races for U12s, U14s, U16s. Club directors become swayed by parental pressure. USSA executives are swayed by huge $$. Let’s fix: culture, education, the equipment arms race, the deep and broken need to “win” at the tender ages. Let’s empower Tiger get his complete system in place which includes the NCAA, addressing the cost issue incurred by team members, bolstering development and club support, etc. He has not been handed a full deck. He must rebuild and this takes time. Elevated emotion surrounding the USST is nothing new. If you love our sport of ski racing, now is the time for solutions. If everyone takes ownership in making things better we will all be better off. It is at the club level where we have the control and will make US ski racing better. Educate the parents. Inspire the kids. Don’t cave to short sided ego driven pressures. And with that, how about more representation of female coaches and female leadership in the equation. Those female brains have lots to offer. Just some of my thoughts for all you interested ski racing fans........
 

Started at 53

Making fresh tracks
Skier
Joined
Mar 26, 2017
Posts
2,129
Location
Not Ikon, UT
I am cynical, I don’t donate money to charities as I have seen UNICEF food bags being sold in Africa, I have seem the numbers of how donated money is given to the actually needy via percentages of total money donated. I do not trust charities with large budgets.

IF I thought money I donated would go directly to a needy young ski racer I would donate. But I refuse to donate one dollar when I think more than 5% would go towards bureaucracy.

I am sure I am not the only one.

As for the article/op-ed posted in SkiRacing by Deb Armstrong, I am new to this, my passion is new and I did not know what happened in the past. We can never change the past, but we can learn from it. Deb claims that Tiger was dealt a tough hand and it takes time to turn it around. I like what she had to say. I am a results guy, and yes it takes time to turn a large organization around. I think we the just want to see some changes taking place to create some hope.

I want to see USA Alpine Skiers who are competitive, by competitive I mean top 10’s. I think that is a good short/medium term goal. Next would be a podium, then and ONLY then can we start thinking about winning. There is NO magic pill to just start winning, so let’s be realistic, short, medium and long term goals. I like both men’s and women’s skiing, obviously women’s is in a much better “medium and long term” goal place with MS, LV along with Breezy, Alice and a few others. I am sorry, but men’s is just sucking right now. I do not care why, or how it happened, SHOW me how you are planning to turn it around. I have read the Project 26 BS, sorry I am not a believer. NO, I do not have any answers, but I am a firm believer in ground up. EVERY sport is built from the ground up, Tennis (foot work), baseball (ready position with the feet), golf (gotta have a good base and footwork), Build a building and it better have a good foundation, skiing is all about “boots” and the base. I want to see USST fix what I believe is an imbalance in the bureaucracy and tilt the money/support towards the athletes. Until the athletes are the 95% focus, this ship is unlikely to be turned around in my opinion. I admit, I don’t know crap about ski racing beyond knowing when a skier is bleeding time on the slope by taking a poor line or sliding rather than carving, but I do have a problem tolerating less than 100% focus on the #1 goal, and that is producing results. Screw the social media, screw the PR BS, lets get down to teaching our racers to slide down a mountain on long slippery planks faster than the rest. That is all that matters. Let the bigwigs answer thier own phone and emails, let the athletes (kids love social media) post their own stuff on FB and Instagram. Get rid of the non-essential employees, direct money to training and coaching and get the job done. Give me a timeframe for the results. 2 years, 5 years, 7 years? I don’t care, but tell me when you are going to have it turned around. What “business” does not have a plan they submit to a board and have to be answerable to how they are both implementing and advancing towards that goal as time passes?????????? Sure, it is a non-profit and not a business, but let’s take a business approach as I for one think it might produce better results. Claiming non-profit is a cop-out! Kinda like saying I will “try” to do something. You tell my you will try and I will immediately reply that you have just opened the door to FAILURE! It is ok to fail, but fail while DOING IT. Fail with the intention of success, but if you leave open the door to failure by telling me you will try, in my mind you have already accepted the possibility of failure. So yeah, let’s get this done. Show me a plan for the next year, show me a plan for year 2 and 3, and show me a plan for years 4-7. And next year I want an update on how you did relative to your one year plan, how you are doing on your 2-3 and 4-7 year plans. That is how things get DONE!
 
Thread Starter
TS
Muleski

Muleski

So much better than a pro
Inactive
Joined
Nov 14, 2015
Posts
5,243
Location
North of Boston
They actually excluded a large part of her FB post--she wrote a really good essay on the culture.

There is lots to agree with in Dan’s post and I will interject my thoughts on the matter. First, the team does not become good or bad in a year, or in a couple years. The lack of depth we are experiencing today (not including the women’s speed team!) is, in part, an outcome of Marolt’s focus from 2002-2015ish. Success followed Marolt’s vision back in his day. That was medals and the “A” team and it worked. However I was alpine director of the SSWSC at this time and I remember feeling strongly that the system in place would cause problems for the future; a lack of talent in the pipeline. Marolt’s emphasis was not on development and not only that, those young athletes for the first time had to pay for much of their way. Another shift we experienced in the 2nd Marolt era was the rise of the mega star and how the star negotiated the world cup tour. It became acceptable, and even the norm, for the stars to travel and operate independently of the team. Mikaela’s support team has brought this concept to a whole new level. One cannot deny that it has worked for Mikaela. I would suggest that access to the team’s best talent ought to be a core value and guiding principal of the USST; a pillar of development. I know of no champion out there who did not learn from watching and rubbing shoulders with those better. As for the NCAA topic, Tiger has been in active conversations about this very thing for the past year. If anyone values what the NCAA brings to USA skiing it would be Tiger and his staff has programming in place in an effort to bridge this divide. I believe a new day has arrived for the NCAA and the USST partnership. This has certainly not been the case in the past and the cry to engage these two organizations is heard by Tiger. As for salary, Tiger’s salary is half what Marolt’s was. In my view it’s not too much for a job so significant.
I find it fascinating that such an awakening is happening now at a time that the system of the past is only more entrenched than before. Yes, the system has been somewhat misguided and Tiger has come on board to redirect the ship. Dan speaks of how the athletes are treated today, I remember in 1984 when the Olympic team was not filled; US team athletes who were the best our country produced were denied spots on the team; denied the opportunity for the rest of their lives to answer “yes” to the first question that everyone asks, “did you go to the Olympics”. I know of athletes from early 2000’s who paid over $100,000, the equivalent of their college education, to be on the team. This angered me to no end. These athletes were “serving our country” in my view, competing for American pride, while Marolt was taking a massive salary (double Tiger’s) and building the COE. Gang, the issues Dan speaks of have been building for quite some time. Marolt did great things for US skiing while simultaneously dealt Tiger a weak hand. Marolt took great care of his stars but left nothing in the pipeline for the future. Tiger is rebuilding, shifting focus, tackling the NCAA opportunity that Marolt never touched and negotiating a complicated athlete funding dilemma Marolt initiated. I wish all outrage we are hearing today came about back then when the seeds of our issues today were planted.

A significant point I would like to focus on is culture. Everything gets back to culture and this is where we stumble in my view. For us in the USA this includes the internal culture of the athlete, family culture, club culture and our national ski racing culture. Let’s begin with the internal culture of an athlete. Internal culture includes personal accountability, an entrepreneurial/innovative spirit, complete ownership, visualizing the path, stopping at nothing, not relying on a system. Internal culture is an equal access commodity for the rich and poor and cannot be bought. Next, family culture. I see two types of family cultures that work best in USA ski racing. One, being the mega informed parent. These parents know much more than the average informed parents. These parents were former USST athletes or coaches or professionals in the sport in some capacity. These parents know the sport, understand timelines, have perspective, implement disciplined thought and planning, and do not follow the trend of the day in the sport. The other family culture is that of the parents being clueless, and they know it, so they stay out of the way. This allows for full mastery and management by the athlete at an early age and this athlete pulls the parents along for the ride. Families in the middle of this spectrum often struggle. Then comes club culture which accounts for community, LTAD, educating families, offering leadership at multiple levels to reinforce guiding principles. And finally our overarching USA racing culture. Gang, we think we got it but as a country we don’t to a large degree. As we know football, the Europeans know ski racing. Every European mom understands what a flex gate is and shinning, like every mom understands the end zone in football; you don’t have to be a fan but you are versed in verbiage and the sport to an extent. Some of what we experience in USA ski racing is the blind leading the blind. Equally bad are folks who are somewhat informed and heavily invested in their child’s ski racing pursuit with strong personalities influencing everyone else who will follow. That’s how we get multiple skis for youngsters. Emphasizing gates over a base of skill development. Parents elevated pride at their child’s U10 podium. Then our kids go to school and, for most ski racers, their teachers don’t understand the sport and their friends are wondering why they are gone so much. We, for some crazy reason, have technicians at the start of races for U12s, U14s, U16s. Club directors become swayed by parental pressure. USSA executives are swayed by huge $$. Let’s fix: culture, education, the equipment arms race, the deep and broken need to “win” at the tender ages. Let’s empower Tiger get his complete system in place which includes the NCAA, addressing the cost issue incurred by team members, bolstering development and club support, etc. He has not been handed a full deck. He must rebuild and this takes time. Elevated emotion surrounding the USST is nothing new. If you love our sport of ski racing, now is the time for solutions. If everyone takes ownership in making things better we will all be better off. It is at the club level where we have the control and will make US ski racing better. Educate the parents. Inspire the kids. Don’t cave to short sided ego driven pressures. And with that, how about more representation of female coaches and female leadership in the equation. Those female brains have lots to offer. Just some of my thoughts for all you interested ski racing fans........

Good catch.

I read it that SHE submitted the cut down version as a letter to the editor. Not sure why.

Like so many in the sport, mixed opinions. Many think that SSWSC, under Deb's leadership as alpine PD, hit it's crater. One of the oldest and strongest programs in the sport, and now looking very strong again {and not just based on results}.

What is ironic in this whole Marolt, medals, 1984 decision to only bring those who could medal, was that Debbie was not considered to be "legit." She was one who snuck in, despite making his criteria. And, yeah, Bill, seems that she won the GOLD in GS.

The culture stuff is good. But...a lot of her thinking is formed by living in Steamboat and being in this game there. It's one of the most ideal spots to raise a ski racer, if you can be there.
 
Last edited:

ScotsSkier

USSA Coach
Industry Insider
SkiTalk Tester
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
3,150
Location
North Lake Tahoe, NV
The problem that deb's letter highlights is that it shows how the " establishment " is still fighting back defending tiger.....he is still" one of the club". Now I am sure he is a decent guy and the acceptable face for a lot of the board - acquiescent, non confrontational, says all the right things in a " nice" way - but that is part of the problem and the glacial rate of change. He has had 2(3?) years now and basically made no impression on it. Whether fair or not it is time for him to step down or be removed and bring in a real change agent to make the tough decisions and turn the ship around. That may be an interim CEO for 2-3 years o do the heavy lifting and then transition to a longer term hire since the type of person who is prepared to make drastic changes is very often not suited - or interested- in running it on a steady state basis once it is transformed
 

Seldomski

All words are made up
Skier
Joined
Sep 25, 2017
Posts
3,052
Location
'mericuh
Why use podiums or starts lists only to gauge entry to the team? I think there is some potential here to use analytics of split times in races to help with the 'coaches discretion.' Say you have someone who often gets in top 5 when you look at split times, but can't quite put together a full run just yet. Isn't that the type of racer you want to identify for further development? Or someone who is really good at glide heavy, or 'turny' courses, or 'whatever' type splits. If you could improve the rest of their game, they could be a contender.

Maybe they already do this?
 
Thread Starter
TS
Muleski

Muleski

So much better than a pro
Inactive
Joined
Nov 14, 2015
Posts
5,243
Location
North of Boston
The best comment that I have read, which I'll try to find {it was a comment on skiracing.com,} was written by Nick Cohee's dad, Tim. He's got a great deal of experience and it's on point. Deals with some really strange decisions, and "athlete management." Tim is one of the owners, and the guy running China Peak. Very knowledgeable guy.

Here it is:

"Dan Leever has the best judgment on this of anyone who has a passion for the sport. He is smarter than everyone else, has studied this more than anyone else, and cares more about getting this right finally more than anyone else. As a parent of a recently retired elite ski racer (10FISGS, WC start, NCAA 2X 1st Team AA, Nor AM Cup winner, bronze medalist USNAT GS), who has also spent 2.5 decades watching this travesty, I could not agree more. Following a significant NCAA career my son was given a WC start on two weeks notice, paid the $3,000+, was thrown into the WC season opener on what many consider the toughest hill on the WC circuit, battled, and when he came back to the U.S. was given the leper treatment, not invited to train with the US Team, even though they were right down the street. When the USST sent athletes to Europe shortly after the Nor Am opener my son was in BC for the WC, ready to go, had success on the BC GS hill, and the USST instead left two GS starts open, no US athlete allowed to start, missing another opportunity for a US athlete to start in front of a home town crowd with a legitimate shot at a second run. When challenged with this clear and ignorant mistreatment, the highest levels of USST management (CEO, VP) could not and would not offer any reasonable explanation for how they treat their athletes who were not named Ligety, Vonn, Shiffrin and few others. This incident was just one of many I observed over a decade, well beyond just my son. I am a resort owner, was President of a division of US skiing for 10 years, and have been close enough to USST for well over a decade to know exactly what Dan Leever is talking about."
 
Last edited:

Tricia

The Velvet Hammer
Admin
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Posts
27,298
Location
Reno
I just saw this post on FB from a frustrated race mom, talking about the parent meeting at Wenatchee, WA


It was about Project 26 and how the US ski team is trying to improve development and its hopes to integrate college skiing more fluidly in the pipeline....lots of challenges and a lot of frustrated parents...
 

Erik Timmerman

So much better than a pro
Instructor
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
6,304
I just saw this post on FB from a frustrated race mom, talking about the parent meeting at Wenatchee, WA


It was about Project 26 and how the US ski team is trying to improve development and its hopes to integrate college skiing more fluidly in the pipeline....lots of challenges and a lot of frustrated parents...

What post? Link?
 

Tricia

The Velvet Hammer
Admin
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Posts
27,298
Location
Reno
What post? Link?
It is a race mom talking about how she walked by the wax room after attending a parents meeting at a race venue and found her son waxing his skis.
Someone asked her about the meeting, which is when she made the comment I posted above.
I feel like I'm seeing this kind of thing more frequently. You must be feeling it too, as a race dad.
 

Erik Timmerman

So much better than a pro
Instructor
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
6,304
I have thoughts on this for sure. Probably won't share them all, but I did just read Deb's article. I think she's not wrong. I totally agree that Tiger has to deal with what Marolt has wrought, and it will take some time. One thing is for sure, if this is an arms race, I know we will not win it. Might as wells top now with what some people are able to put into it. Of course it's more than that, the ones with the most $$$ aren't doing all the winning, but just as an example, I was talking to the dad of our club's most talented U16 boy and he won't be doing any camps this summer or fall "he cried" his dad said, but that's just how it is. He is beating kids that will spend their entire summer in South America or NZ, but for how long.

I just spent the day as starter for the final Eastern Cup FIS race. A friend that works under Rearick was there too. I t does seem pretty obvious where the talent is and where it isn't. That said, as an instructor, I can't help looking at the kids that are farther back in the order and seeing where you might be able to improve them. I'm not so sure that the academies or the USST even have an interest in doing that. They just look at who is winning now and let everyone else fade away.

So much money goes into this sport and I'm not sure it goes into the right places.
 

Erik Timmerman

So much better than a pro
Instructor
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
6,304
I was also going to say, Project 26, that would be right into my kid's window. Her priorities are make UVM Ski Team, make Olympics and be on Slalom Tokyo Drift. I'm not sure that last one is a great goal, but probably more achievable than the others. I'd like to think the talent could be there, I hope that if it is, things will have improved by the time it matters. We were so blown away by being the Italian team put 5 girls in the top-10 at last year's race in Killington. Honestly, more impressed by that than by watching MS. She's just an amazing phenom, and nothing for the USST to pat their back about. FISI obviously is doing something right.
 

Tricia

The Velvet Hammer
Admin
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Posts
27,298
Location
Reno
So much money goes into this sport and I'm not sure it goes into the right places.
Is this where we do this? :micdrop:
 

Sponsor

Top