From: ac999257@umbc3.umbc.edu (ac999257)
Newsgroups: rec.skate
Subject: Pro vs Am
Date: 7 Jan 93 03:24:34 GMT
Organization: University of Maryland, Baltimore County Campus
NNTP-Posting-Host: umbc8.umbc.edu

I have a hard time believing that if pros are allowed to compete
in the Olympics, that the quality of figure skating will decrease.
I think it will improve. Thinking of what I've seen during
pro competitions and amateur competitions -- the amateurs put
a lot more technical elements into their pieces. Isn't it
required, especially in the short programs? The pros have virtually
no requirements. I watched one pro-ladies competition where the only
requirement mentioned was a double axel. If pros compete
in competitions like the Olympics, they won't be able to rely
on crowd appeal as much as they do in pro competitions, they'll
have to put a lot more difficulty into their programs.

And don't forget, a skater has to be good first before anybody
is going to pay money to see them or give them endorsement
contracts. And doesn't an Olympic caliber skater stand a chance
of making better money if he/she stops competing after winning
a few significant medals? How can they
tour for many months at a time in shows and keep themselves in 
Olympic shape? I don't think skaters who are in the sport for
money will stay in Olympic competition for long, whether they're
allowed as pros or not. Skaters who want to compete because they
love the sport deserve to be in the Olympics whether or not
they're pros.

Look at the sport of tennis. Except for collegiate tennis, it is
an open sport. It used to not be an open sport. Do you think the
quality of the game has improved? Has it affected the number of
young vs old players in the sport? Is it still only the game of
the rich and privileged? I'm sure people felt at the time
that tennis became an open sport that it would adversely
affect the game. But I sure don't think it has. 

I'm not sure who the first lady was to land a triple in figure 
skating. But I recall hearing that she was criticized for 
unladylike behavior and triples were banned. I also seem to
recall that Elaine Zayak landed 7? triples to win the World
Championship in 82, and by the next year, the women were limited
to 5 in their long program (until at least 1988). Anyone --
feel free to correct me on my stats.  But my point is that a sport
that never changes with the athletes is a really boring sport!

One thing I don't think is fair about Olympic sports in general
is that so many companies make so much money off the Olympics. I
think the athletes should be getting what is due them for their
efforts. It's not fair to think the athletes have to remain 'pure'
and not accept that horrible thing called money, when other
people get to make money because of them. They shouldn't have to
struggle and wonder where the money to buy new skates is going
to come from when networks have bidding wars over TV rights.

Lots of people are always afraid of change. Women used to be
tormented if they wore pants, drove a car, had a job, had sex
before marriage!! What would the world be like if nothing ever
changed? 

Do you know, there are mathematicians in my office that
refuse -- flatout and downright obstinately refuse -- to use
a computer, even for word processing? They handright memos
and papers and have an overworked underpaid secretary type them.
Change! It makes life what life is -- interesting and diverse!
We shouldn't be afraid to take informed, well-thought out chances
and change a few things that need it in this world.

I truly, seriously, and honestly believe that allowing pros
to compete in the Olympics is not going to degrade the sport
of figure skating. (I do, however, think allowing Katarina
Witt back into the Olympics is an entirely different issue.)
But I can't predict the future, so I can't say with 100%
certainty that I am right. I do know that if we keep
something stagnate when it's crying out for change, we're
making a worse mistake by not changing it at all.

Mary :)
Newsgroups: rec.skate