Competitive versus Recreational Skaters

[fsk8r]

How do you define the terms and when does a recreational skater become a competitive skater and do competitive skaters become recreational skaters?

I've heard a coach say that she only thinks competitive skaters should test because they need to test to move up the competition categories. But my understanding is the recreational skaters also compete and so also need to test to move up the categories.

[sampaguita]

I think it depends on the skater's motivation. How often does the skater compete? What are his/her motivations for competing? For competitive skaters, I find that it's a lot of competitions every season, and the aim is to advance in the most efficient way possible. For recreational skaters (like myself), competition is not the main goal, and so recreational skaters don't join as many competitions as competitive skaters do.

[Clarice]

Some folks consider anyone who competes a competitive skater.  Others reserve the term for those going to qualifying competitions.  As far as I'm concerned, it's irrelevant when it comes to testing.  Why shouldn't a skater test even if they have no interest in competing?  Passing a test is a real achievement and a measure of progress.

[FigureSpins]

In the US, there are formal definitions of "competitive skater" vs. "recreational skater."  A competitive skater is training and competing with the goal of pursuing the Qualifying competitions.  Anyone else is a recreational skater.

For younger skaters, they have the option of competing in the Basic Skills/Test Track events throughout the year.  Regardless of how serious they take their skating or how many competitions they do, they are defined as recreational. 

The Ice Skating Institute (ISI) has only recreational skaters - it's their forte'.

Basic Skills competitions have some restrictions:

. Skaters up through Basic 8 cannot have passed any "official" tests, including Moves.

. Skaters in Freeskate 1-6 can compete in those level if they haven't taken any official Free Skate tests, but they can have passed Moves tests.

. Skaters in the Test Track and lower Well-Balanced events cannot have passed any official Free Skate tests. 

. The lowest-level events' restrictions are worded differently, which might mean no Moves tests either.  I'm not certain.

In the ISI, testing is encouraged as soon as you're ready, the USFSA holds skaters back until their skills are at least on par with the next-higher test level, but moreoften, it's two levels up.  That's because the competition requirements are higher than the tests.

An adult pre-bronze skater at a competition last year won with a  program that included a camel-sit-change-sit-scratch spin.  The test only requires a two-foot and a one-foot spin.  Most of the other skaters only did scratch spins, one did a sit spin.  This woman took and passed the PBF test late last year, along with the Pre-Bronze and Bronze Moves at the same time.  I guess she needed the confidence booster of winning the Pre-Bronze event since she could have skated in Bronze against stronger competitors, but she might not have been on top of the podium.

Personally, I think anyone who trains regularly and competes more than twice a season should be considered "competitive."  But that's just my opinion, it's not the real definition.

As far as I'm concerned, it's irrelevant when it comes to testing.  Why shouldn't a skater test even if they have no interest in competing?  Passing a test is a real achievement and a measure of progress.

As long as they don't change their minds about competition later, it's fine to test up.  In fact, Synchro is one of the biggest encouragements of Moves testing.  Skaters who've passed Moves tests do well on Synchro.

[Skittl1321]

In the US, there are formal definitions of "competitive skater" vs. "recreational skater."  A competitive skater is training and competing with the goal of pursuing the Qualifying competitions.  Anyone else is a recreational skater.

Whose definition is this? Could you cite the source?

[fsk8r]

So under the US definition a skater competing well balanced at pre-pre would be considered competitive however much that skater trained because at that stage in their skating they're aiming to reach Qualifying competitions eventually?
It could be argued at that stage in a skaters progression they're only recreational as they're not attending Qualifying competitions yet and presumably the average pre-pre skater doesn't put as many hours in as the average Juvenile skater.

[sarahspins]

I don't know.. I'm not a competitive skater but don't see myself as a recreational skater either - a think a majority of us fall somewhere in between.  I somehow think of rec skaters as the ones who don't take lessons at all.  That's not me, and I don't consider most ISI skaters to be truly recreational - lots of USFSA skaters start in ISI, making the transition to standard track once they've completed FS5 or 6 (pretty much the same level skaters who transition from basic skills).

I think it would be simple to label all skaters who don't compete as recreational, but I am training, I'm working towards tests - I just have no interest in competing.  That doesn't mean I should be excluded from being allowed to test - that would just be unfair.

[FigureSpins]

The "Competitive Skater" is listed on the USFSA member registration form:
http://www.usfsa.org/content/ClubMbrRegForm.pdf
They titled it "Primary Activity."

The "Competitive Skater" term is also outlined in sample absence excuse template:
http://www.usfsa.org/content/0910%20School%20Absence%20Letter.pdf

The current registration forms show these "Primary Activity" categories:
❑ Parent/Guardian
❑ Coach
❑ Competitive Skater
❑ Recreational Skater
❑ U.S. Figure Skating Official/Officer
❑ Club Officer/Board Member
❑ Other

The Activity definitions aren't defined on the current form, but when renewing in years past, I read that competitive skaters are those planning to pursue qualifying competitions.  It was a controversial topic on this board because there was a question as to what category adult skaters going to AN in qualifying events should choose. 

Our Club has their own online enrollment for membership, so I think the detailed USFS categories I saw were listed on the individual membership application.


ETA: Found the definitions I remember on the SC of NY form:
http://www.thescny.org/sites/default/files/SCNYMembershipApp%202012-2013_0.pdf

[Skittl1321]

I see that "competitive skater" is listed on the membership form, but I don't see a definition.  It appears members are allowed to self-define.

The absence excuse letter says "Qualifying Competitive Skater" which leads me to believe that is a subset of Competitive Skater (which may also included "non-qualifying competitive skater".  Otherwise, wouldn't that just be redundant.



So I'm not sure USFSA considers competitive skaters to only be those aiming for qualifying structure (which as someone mentioned for pre-pre skaters that makes little sense, it surely should be those IN the qualifying structure, right?) is the 'official' definition of a competitive skater.  Many ISI skaters will call themselves competitive because they compete in that structure, as opposed to ISI skaters who do not compete- I don't think there is a US definition, and I'm still not convinced there is a USFSA definition.


ETA: Thanks for updating the form.  This appears to be membership classes for a specific club, and what their board defined as competitive.  I don't think that should be taken as any official definition for any purpose outside of the club.

[FigureSpins]

I see that "competitive skater" is listed on the membership form, but I don't see a definition.  It appears members are allowed to self-define.

The absence excuse letter says "Qualifying Competitive Skater" which leads me to believe that is a subset of Competitive Skater (which may also included "non-qualifying competitive skater".  Otherwise, wouldn't that just be redundant.

If the USFSA's letter specifically outlines their definition of a "competitive skater," why would you assume that it's up to the registrant?  I agree that it could be a subset, but I think it's worded that way because the letter is for a skater who HAS qualified for the next-level event.

As for the SCoNY form, that's exactly what I read on the Individual Member form, which doesn't have those other options.  (Junior, Junior with Parent, etc.)  I never looked at the SCoNY for membership; an internet search brought that link up.  Note that USFSA membership expires months before Regionals registration, so the form indicates what the skater's planned primary activity will be for the new season. 

[hopskipjump]

I look at that letter and think that "competitive" should be those in a qualifying comp.

[Skittl1321]

I don't see anything in the letter that says "skaters who do not participate in the qualifying structure are not competitive skaters".
The letter is specifically addressing competitive skaters who do participate in Qualifying structure, it doesn't mention at all those who do not.


It mentions that competitive skaters train year round, follow nutrition plans, do off ice activities, attend summer camp.  There are many many skaters who don't go to qualifying competitions who show this same level of dedication.  Even if it is a po-dunk nothing competition, they are training to be competitive.


And even if USFSA does have a steadfast definition that they want members to follow when checking the box on their registration form (I've checked competitive in the past, and then secondary as adult- since it is not a primary designation) it would a)be useful to have a definition, but b)not be a country-wide designation, as there is another skating authority whose members might believe elsewise.

[Skittl1321]

but I think it's worded that way because it's for a skater who HAS qualified for the next-level up event.

No, the letter talks about skaters attending regionals too.  Regionals is an open event anyone with a test pass can attend.  Many of those skaters have no hope of ever making it to sectionals, so they haven't qualified for anything, except the ability to participate in the level.


I'm sticking with the idea that qualifying skaters are a subset of competitive skaters.  This phrase from the rulebook (about required CERs) also makes them sound like a subset.  Otherwise why is there the clarification of the level, shouldn't it just say coach of competitive skaters? 

Professional Coach (or Choreographer) of qualifying levels of competitive skaters.

[FigureSpins]

No, the letter talks about skaters attending regionals too.  Regionals is an open event anyone with a test pass can attend.  Many of those skaters have no hope of ever making it to sectionals, so they haven't qualified for anything, except the ability to participate in the level.

It defines the entire qualifying structure of competitions for a school administrator who might not understand it, and lets them know that this skater is pursuing that structure and will miss school due to training and competitions. 

Regionals and Adult Sectionals are open competitions, but the registrations are handled separately for Qualifying.  The non-qual events are held during the same time frame, but they're clearly not the same as the Qualifying events. It's more like there are two competitions being held at the same time.

[FigureSpins]

I'm sticking with the idea that qualifying skaters are a subset of competitive skaters.  This phrase from the rulebook (about required CERs) also makes them sound like a subset.  Otherwise why is there the clarification of the level, shouldn't it just say coach of competitive skaters? 

Because the qualifying levels require a different CER level.  YOu have to be CER-A to coach a qualifying skater, CER-B for everyone else.  (CER-C is for Basic Skills Instructors)

[Skittl1321]

Yes, I am aware.  But they say you need CER A to coach qualifying levels of competitive skaters.
If there are no competitive skaters at any other level, it would just say you need CER A to coach competitive skaters.

I don't see USFS using an official definition of competitive skater that precludes those competing at a non-qualifying level.  (The rulebook also talks about the competitive season for ice dance all the way down to the pre-bronze level. How does one have a competitive season if there are no competitive skaters?)


Based on the rulebook and website, USFS uses the membership form as self-identification of skating category.  They are probably much more concerned with their eligible vs non-eligible and Team USA skaters than whether a skater is competitive or recreational.


To go back to the original post: there are plenty of skaters who are only test skaters, and that is a lofty goal.  I personally think competition is too expensive, so I don't do them very often, though at one point I focused more on it.  I like to test.  To me a recreational skater is one who does it soley for fun, and does not compete.  A test skater is one who only tests, and a competitive skater is one who trains for competitions and competes.  If the 'competitions' are never against actual other people, I'm not sure I would call that competitive.

[SynchKat]

In my mind and coming from a background of skating my entire life and having been a competitive skater I would define as follows:
Competitive skater is someone competing to eventually get to nationals with the hopes of course of competing at a World level.
I never used the term recreational skater, I would call them a test skater.  Someone who skates with the goal of passing tests.  Yes they would compete at invitational competitions but wouldn't be in the qualifying stream.  I do think tests are important to all skaters.  It is how you assess  your progress and tests should not just be reserved for those who need them to qualify for competitions. 

So I think calling them competitive and test skaters is a good description.  That's how I have described them for the past 35 years! 

[Clarice]

I don't know whether this will help or just further muddy the waters, but here's the official USFS rule book definition of an "athlete":

A.  Any person who has competed in a sectional championship in singles, pairs, or ice dance in a qualifying event, or U.S. Figure Skating Championships, the U.S. Junior Figure Skating Championships or the U.S. Synchronized Skating Championships during the prior five years; or

B.  Any person who has placed first through fourth in singles, pairs, or ice dance in the U.S. Collegiate Figure Skating Championships or the U.S. Adult Figure Skating Championships during the prior five years; or

C.  Any person who has competed for U.S. Figure Skating as a member of the U.S. Figure Skating team as defined in ICR 4.01 and ICR 9.01 within the prior 10 years.  (This refers to athletes, team leaders, coaches, medical staff and judges selected by USFS to participate in various international competitions.)

I'm considered an athlete by virtue of medaling at ANs.  Athletes who meet these definitions can serve on various committees, and can participate in certain votes.

[sarahspins]

Yes, I am aware.  But they say you need CER A to coach qualifying levels of competitive skaters.
If there are no competitive skaters at any other level, it would just say you need CER A to coach competitive skaters.

It's not about coaching (any coach can coach any skater), it's about being at competitions putting them on the ice.. basically you need CER-B to take a student to any local level USFSA (not regionals) competition and put them on the ice (same for test sessions and teaching on club ice - those both require CER-B).  To take a skater to regionals and higher (because it is a qualifying competition - you don't have to qualify to enter, but you do qualify for sectionals if you win) and put them on the ice you need to be CER-A.  To confuse the issue even more most regionals also have open competitions in conjunction with the qualifying events, which are treated like a local comp which would only require CER-B.

For a basic skills competition, as a coach you don't need to be anything other than a registered basic skills instructor.  CER-C is encouraged (and free) but it is very much optional

[treesprite]

 I consider all skaters to be recreational skaters.  Do you know any skaters who do it without ever enjoying it as recreation?  I define skaters by how serious they are about skating, regardless of whether or not they are testing or competing.

[fsk8r]

I consider all skaters to be recreational skaters.  Do you know any skaters who do it without ever enjoying it as recreation?  I define skaters by how serious they are about skating, regardless of whether or not they are testing or competing.

Given that most skaters aren't going to ever make it to the Olympics, pretty much everyone is doing it as a recreation activity. Some as you say are just more serious that others.
It just seems very odd that a coach would be wanting to categorise skaters and make decisions as to what they're capable of doing.

[sampaguita]

Given that most skaters aren't going to ever make it to the Olympics, pretty much everyone is doing it as a recreation activity. Some as you say are just more serious that others.
It just seems very odd that a coach would be wanting to categorise skaters and make decisions as to what they're capable of doing.

Anyone who AIMS to go to Worlds/Olympics is a competitive skater. I also think that anyone who aims to make it to Nationals, regardless of actual skill level, can be considered competitive.

[hopskipjump]

Anyone who makes it out of regionals for sure!  We have such competitive groupings, it really is a feat to just get moved to another round.  I think that being in the qualifying structure really works for the definition.

I don't think that an adult or child at a lower level is any less of a skater who not doing this at the lower levels.   

I know 7 year old kid in prepre who trains over 2 hours a day on their own and 2+ hours with a coach testing free skate, artistic, and dance since they were 3, that is as much or more time than some competitive skaters (she is homeschooled).  But since she is prepre in the freeskate test structure (higher in the other tests), she still isn't a "competitive" skater.

[treesprite]

For some people the only competition opportunities are local non qualifying ones - does that mean they are not competitive even though they AIM to win those competitions against competitors? When I was a kid that's all there was in the area due to lack of rinks, so for those types of regions that should be just as much a big deal as big qualifying competitions when it comes to defining a skater as "competitive". The skaters feel as much like they are competing as any qualifying competition, have to practice, do programs, and skate in front of judges against other skaters - what's the difference in how the skaters perceive themselves? "Competitive" is a term a person would apply to oneself and how one feels/thinks about one's own skating life. I certainly felt like I was competing and being competitive back then.

[Bunny Hop]

I somehow think of rec skaters as the ones who don't take lessons at all.

I take lessons but don't test or compete, so consider myself a recreational skater, but possibly in a different recreational category to those who just come to the rink to skate around and will never have a lesson (Ice Tourists?  ).