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

Swede

Making fresh tracks
Skier
Joined
Jan 29, 2016
Posts
2,390
Location
Sweden
I don't race, but i am a technical skiing video junkie. Lila Lapanja is inspirational,


Her skiing has made mine better.

Nice skiing with, and now I’m saying it, admirable quite upper body.
But someone should spray some water on that terrible soft, dry Colorado snow.

:)
 
Last edited:

Tricia

The Velvet Hammer
Admin
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Posts
27,298
Location
Reno
@Tricia, Thanks for asking the question: great job! The Answer: well, that speaks for itself. It's on the record though....
Thanks, I had several different versions of the questions rolling around in my head, and had hope to get the point across that there are qualified racers being left off the roster because of spots being filled by fan favorites. I just didn't qualify that part of it, but I also wasn't sure how it would be taken.
 
Thread Starter
TS
Muleski

Muleski

So much better than a pro
Inactive
Joined
Nov 14, 2015
Posts
5,243
Location
North of Boston
Those girls training with coach Mange Andersson? I know Resi has worked with him last season and perhapds this too? He’s a friend of a relative to the family.

Yes, He was brought on last season when Mike Day took over women's tech, and became one of MS's two exclusive coaches.

Magnus was going to coach LL and Resi. They keep moving around the pieces of this tech team, partly because they have so few WC starts. Only three at Levi, I think.

So Magnus is coaching Resi, Nina O'Brien, Magnan, and that group. Not sure who is assisting him. Pretty soon that group of skiers will be heading in different directions...Resi to the WC, others flipping back and forth between WC, EC, NorAms, other stuff in Europe.
Sounds like a lot to juggle. Not sure who Magnus has working with him. Karin Harjo last year.

It's kind of confusing. I think everybody {other than MS} is racing the NorAm series at Loveland CO right now.
 
Last edited:

HardDaysNight

Making fresh tracks
Skier
Joined
Nov 7, 2017
Posts
1,343
Location
Park City, UT
This whole subject of funding is always danced around. You want to close the gap? Get better at fundraising, partnerships and development. This is a non profit. It's very seriously not "rocket surgery." Is it easy? Not at all. Maybe they need more horsepower there?

In fact one could argue that this is the CEO’s primary function. Together with rational allocation of those funds to develop the depth their strategy identifies as essential. Contrary to my hopes neither is being done well and I fear the results are entirely predictable. MS will continue to win events - and that’s it!
 

HardDaysNight

Making fresh tracks
Skier
Joined
Nov 7, 2017
Posts
1,343
Location
Park City, UT
Sorry to snip this quote from the greater reply (which made many excellent points), but it reminds me of arguments made about Tina Maze and how other Slovenians, Stuhec most especially, emerged almost immediately once the resources devoted to Tina were spread out. Do ski federations have it backwards? They devote the most resources to the athletes who need it least, and hamstring the athletes who need it most? I understand that national teams are able to leverage the presence of star athletes to bring in greater revenue, but I wonder if there is a balance to be found somewhere that doesn't starve the system. Why do athletes like Schiffrin, Vonn need the total support of a national federation?

This. Although to be fair the Slovenians continued to do a decent job at the development level. Given that Slovenia has approximately the same population as West Virginia and one-fifth of the per capita wealth of the US, they outperform the US by close to 1000:1.
 

Rudi Riet

AKA songfta AKA randomduck - a USSS coach, as well
SkiTalk Tester
Contributor
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
2,462
Location
Washington, DC
I started following this over on Facebook (work has been crazy - working for a startup always is), but here are my $0.02 regarding U.S. Ski & Snowboard's funding and development channels (copied almost verbatim from the Facebook thread):

If many of the "fan favorite" athletes (read: the ones with all of the PR spin - MS, Vonn, Ligety, Mancuso, even Nyman to some extent) could self-fund their World Cup or Europa Cup racing schedule, why don't they? This could result in opening up funds for up-and-comers. Note that I said "could" - the word choice was purposeful.

Honestly, the U.S. Ski Team is a mis-managed as it gets (and also decidedly ageist) when it comes to team nomination.

As to holding spots for the "PR stars", look at the team holding a fully-funded spot for Bode Miller the past two seasons, even though he truly had no real intention to race again (in my opinion, at least - I think the Bomber/Full Tilt thing was a complete PR stunt). This is similar to the team holding onto a fully funded roster spot for Mancuso (whose chronic hip issues have been a known commodity for many years). All of this money is essentially held in escrow while deserving athletes are told to pay their own way, though they are "welcome to race under the U.S. Ski Team flag."

Similarly, the U.S. Ski Team closes the door on older athletes who are peaking later in life. Heck: Mario Matt (Austrian who won both early and at the end of his long career) would likely have been shown the door during his mid-career slump if he'd been with the U.S. Ski Team (and I'm guessing that the OSV came close to dropping him a few times during said fallow period). But Matt was a solid athlete who raced well and earned his spot, despite being in his late-30s.

Let's face it: the depth of elite talent in U.S. alpine ski racing isn't the same as it is in Austria, France, Germany, Sweden, Switzerland, Norway, Italy, et al. Yet U.S. Ski & Snowboard puts up this front that they are "Best in the World™" and acts like theirs is rarefied air. While it's true that they receive no government funding, they certainly act like their development model is the only *true* way to go.

In this system there is a constant push back against athletes who don't fit their so-called "data driven" model of alpine development. If you peak late? Sorry, can't help you, but please wear our uniform as you beg for table scraps of private funding. Meanwhile, ignore the fact that the national development system has been so maligned that the Eastern Division of U.S. Ski & Snowboard came very close to seceding from the entire system a few years back due to a sense of being given the cold shoulder by the national governing body. That's likely a big contributor to Tiger Shaw's promotion to head honcho a few years back: he's U.S. Ski & Snowboard Eastern Division royalty.

All I can say is that, come the 2018-19 season, the U.S. Ski Team will likely be without a lot of longtime veterans. I can see Ligety, Vonn, Stiegler, and Nyman calling it a day for their careers - possibly others. Three of the aforementioned athletes have won on the World Cup level over the past few years, joined primarily by Shiffrin in that regard. As to those who are knocking at the door of a World Cup breakthrough, they are being challenged to fund their own tour: paying for coaching, lodging, travel, even the team uniform. Yes, gear and logo sponsors can pick up some of the tab, but it's not cheap to fund a year-round ski racing career.

I applaud CLIF for funding Lapanja's season. They are taking the high road and giving a promising U.S. athlete a fighting chance at international success. But this shouldn't have to be the case.

Just my $0.02 - YMMV.

FYI: the new selection criteria that were linked in Tiger Shaw's email to U.S. Ski & Snowboard members have mysteriously disappeared from the org's website over the past 24 hours. Hmmm....
 

Tricia

The Velvet Hammer
Admin
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Posts
27,298
Location
Reno
FYI: the new selection criteria that were linked in Tiger Shaw's email to U.S. Ski & Snowboard members have mysteriously disappeared from the org's website over the past 24 hours. Hmmm....
Hmmmmm,
 
Thread Starter
TS
Muleski

Muleski

So much better than a pro
Inactive
Joined
Nov 14, 2015
Posts
5,243
Location
North of Boston
FYI: the new selection criteria that were linked in Tiger Shaw's email to U.S. Ski & Snowboard members have mysteriously disappeared from the org's website over the past 24 hours. Hmmm....

@Rudi Riet, great post!

Here's the criteria. I saved it. I assume that it's being reviewed and perhaps was NOT supposed to be released.
The bit about being out of the system once you turn down a nomination has energized a few people. People who are not clueless.

The entire process needs an overhaul.

https://usskiandsnowboard.org/sites/default/files/files-resources/files/2017-11/Alpine Team Criteria 2018-19_0.pdf
 

newfydog

Making fresh tracks
Skier
Joined
Nov 23, 2015
Posts
834
Good for Clif Bar!
Here's my worst day at Sochi:
Sitting next to this guy, who took nearly $700,000 a year from the team, but was too cheap to hire a taxi when drunk:
marolt.JPG


While watching the top ranked XC sprinter in the world exhusted. She had to take a part time job at a shoe store to make ends meet.

kikken.JPG
 

Viking9

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Sep 9, 2016
Posts
788
Location
SO CAL
I have no idea who this young lady is but on the home page that helmet / goggle combo might be the coolest one I have ever seen.
 
Thread Starter
TS
Muleski

Muleski

So much better than a pro
Inactive
Joined
Nov 14, 2015
Posts
5,243
Location
North of Boston
Team Oracle? What does Larry Ellison do in the winters?

As a near life long sailor, and sailboat racer, I chuckled at this one. Talk to somebody who raced for the Cup back in "the old days" and ask them about today's AC!

Yeah, Larry {let alone Oracle} could pretty easily fund the whole team budget. It's a fraction of what he's spent on his Cup campaigns.

It got me thinking of the YSC. Ellison is one of the more public people who was not able to make it through the admissions process there. Was turned down. But amount the 400 or so members, one would think that there is no better target group to approach. Obviously these people, and their foundations, are hounded by every single organization on the planet. Bill and Melinda Gates are not going to solve the world's problems by supporting the USST.

However, an average gift of $5K by that group pretty much closes the funding gap. These people pretty much love skiing.

I think you could raise the funding for the entire budget, right there. Every single person on the foundation board of trustees knows a dozen or more members. Most of these folks essentially need to make a lot of gifts each year. Why not the USST?

It just makes me wonder how they approach this. This is NOT easy, but it sure isn't impossible. Maybe they track tail numbers on every private jet in Aspen, Jackson, Sun Valley, etc. Or check the Bay Area big hitters at Tahoe. You need a sniper rifle and a night scope to bag these donors.......not the early 18th century scatter gun that this group seems to still be using. I blows me away at the number of people I know who have the capacity to give, and could easily be persuaded who have never been approached. With today's technology, it is not hard to figure them out.

There is a couple in our town who recently made a $10Mil gift to a non-profit. When he and his wife were asked "Why now?", their response was "Nobody asked us before now......"

I really have my fingers crossed for a lot more success with this at the USST. How? I have no clue.

Among other things, this bold move by Clif is raising awareness of WHY this support is needed. The flip side is that some donors may just not "trust" the USST with their money. This may give a bigger lift to some of the independents. Dunno.

It is interesting, for sure.
 
Thread Starter
TS
Muleski

Muleski

So much better than a pro
Inactive
Joined
Nov 14, 2015
Posts
5,243
Location
North of Boston
Good for Clif Bar!
Here's my worst day at Sochi:
Sitting next to this guy, who took nearly $700,000 a year from the team, but was too cheap to hire a taxi when drunk:
View attachment 33422

While watching the top ranked XC sprinter in the world exhusted. She had to take a part time job at a shoe store to make ends meet.

View attachment 33424

Nice smile on Marolt. Must not have appreciated your humor!
What a great experience. Whenever you talk about Sochi, I just shake my head. Incredible.

When I was a kid, and you know how young, my dad was able to weasel family invitations to the 1964, and 1968 games. My parents went to the 1972 and 1976 games. We all went to the 1980 games. And after then, I think it all really started to change. And has since. Hard to believe how low key it once was, and how it really was all about the athletes.

Marolt. I was reading some comments made by the former Board Chair of the USSA, absolutely gushing over Marolt's 18 years of incredible leadership and vision. I was actually shocked.

This funding gap, and the objective team criteria metrics just continue with minor tweaking. It could have been managed differently a long time ago. Wasn't.

Watching a good friend struggle to exist while representing our country on the world stage is actually painful. The process and system is broken. I'm not close to the Nordic world, but I have to believe that it is worse for the high majority of our athletes.
 
Last edited:

Started at 53

Making fresh tracks
Skier
Joined
Mar 26, 2017
Posts
2,129
Location
Not Ikon, UT
The flip side is that some donors may just not "trust" the USST with their money. This may give a bigger lift to some of the independents. Dunno.

From the video that @Tricia posted, the dude needs to lose the hat, find a jacket that fits rather than one that tries to hide his girth and join the 21st Century.

I bet that the YSC group could fund the whole shebang let alone filling the gap.

I am ashamed that our national ski team is not ranked higher given the resources we should have at our team’s disposal
 

hbear

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Aug 17, 2016
Posts
890
The flip side is that some donors may just not "trust" the USST with their money. This may give a bigger lift to some of the independents. Dunno.

It is interesting, for sure.

Likely the above combined with the view that ski racing is a sport for the affluent and may have philosophical challenges donating funds which can be spent on more worthwhile cause...
 
Thread Starter
TS
Muleski

Muleski

So much better than a pro
Inactive
Joined
Nov 14, 2015
Posts
5,243
Location
North of Boston
From the video that @Tricia posted, the dude needs to lose the hat, find a jacket that fits rather than one that tries to hide his girth and join the 21st Century.

I bet that the YSC group could fund the whole shebang let alone filling the gap.

I am ashamed that our national ski team is not ranked higher given the resources we should have at our team’s disposal

I love this perspective, from somebody fairly new to the sport, with incredible interest and passion, and who is NO stranger to high level, professional, and global athletics. It's a very sincere, "what the heck?" perspective. A great one.

There is a lot of inertia, as some describe it, with this organization. Well intended, but just doing maybe not the same thing, but similar things year after year. I think that rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic would be a harsh metaphor, but it needs a lot of "new" in countless ways. Much of what they do is same old. Many alums. Like there is magic to solving this that has to come form having been part of the system.

Yes, any one of a number of the YSC members could write a check to cover the entire budget, and not miss it. If you approach this with some serious targeting, I just don't see how this is such an ongoing struggle. If this crowd could meet some of these athletes who are self funding, they would be very, very impressed with them as people. They are very good people. And my hunch is that those approached would be shocked to learn of the way this does NOT hang together. It is not logical to many.

When you hear some race families in conversation, it is eye opening. The friends make a comment like "You must be so proud that your child is a "professional" athlete. Skiing at the highest level of the sport." And they parents, if these are close friends, explain that their child is NOT on the USST, because she is two months "too old", and that they are paying about $100K a year for her to represent the USST. Yes she races with MS and LV, but unlike them, who earn multiple millions, we pay and sacrifice. She tries to raise money, but this sport is demanding. You only have so much time. Oh, and we understand that life is not fair, and that she is no MS, or LV. But she's one of the best 100 in the world.

That conversation has taken place, with "kids" of both genders, for many, many years.

I had never thought of this one, but last weekend over dinner, a friend who is quite clued into this made the comment that he wonders if the organization is to some degree embarrassed at how things are, in terms of approaching individuals for a big ask. If so, that is really bad and foolish. I sure hope there is no hint of that.

I'm not a complete neophyte to this. I am with respect to the USST, and their internal development plan. In other lives in volunteer work, I have done a fair amount of "asking." I recall asking a couple for a $1Million gift. For a school. The guy asked me what on earth they should do it, as we were in such trouble. I was brutally frank. Told him that we had all new leaders, swept out the old. Told him that his gift would make a huge difference, etc. Then I said, to be honest, I'd like to ask you to consider $2Mil. The next day, he gave us $2.5Mil. Said that he believed in the case made, and appreciated our honesty in discussing how bad things were, how we had fallen into the mess, and how we planned on moving forward.

I don't know how the USSA pitches things. Do they admit that the "Center of Excellence" was possibly a real misuse of funds? Do they admit that the "US Team Academy" was a mistake? I have no idea. What I do know is that when you approach people with the resources and a potential interest, you need to have a strong case for why their support will make big difference, and on why your organization needs to move up the list of their philanthropic priorities. As one of my friends who does a lot of this says "Why you should give a S***, much more."

The challenge here is, IMO, that this has the perception of being a rich, white kids sport. And it's almost inconceivable to many a smart person that you could not secure corporate sponsorships, and partnerships to cover the entire thing. I have heard that over and over again. People not so familiar with this just shocked.

It's a serious challenge. I really hope that it can be "fixed." And one last time, I KNOW that people tasked with this care, and are working hard at it. Sometimes, you need to shake things up. More.

I am very glad that my kids did not follow the USST dream, and instead raced though college, and stopped. That was costly, and emotionally, rough enough. This ride of being so close, but not on the team, and not being funded is brutal.

Best of luck.
 

Started at 53

Making fresh tracks
Skier
Joined
Mar 26, 2017
Posts
2,129
Location
Not Ikon, UT
I had never thought of this one, but last weekend over dinner, a friend who is quite clued into this made the comment that he wonders if the organization is to some degree embarrassed at how things are, in terms of approaching individuals for a big ask. If so, that is really bad and foolish. I sure hope there is no hint of that.



I don't know how the USSA pitches things. Do they admit that the "Center of Excellence" was possibly a real misuse of funds? Do they admit that the "US Team Academy" was a mistake? I have no idea. What I do know is that when you approach people with the resources and a potential interest, you need to have a strong case for why their support will make big difference, and on why your organization needs to move up the list of their philanthropic priorities.

So.... How can an organization go to a group/individual and ask for big money when they have not posted acceptable results in the past? I would think that anyone/group/company with the money required to make a difference would use the successful business practices that got them “in the money” to begin with take at least a cursory look at things before pledging any money. So from listening to you all in the know, it is obvious that there are issues in the USST system. IF I was going to pitch to a smart money guy/gal/company/foundation I would expect them to say.... “We would be delighted to donate $X Million, but please tell me the changes that will take place to be a better use of the funds, to better manage a foundation (as in building) for creating WC and Olympic champions.”

I personally, IF in that position, would want a very solid and well laid out “business” plan to show how the money being pledged would get the desired results rather than a continuation of the past.

But.... I am not really one to beat around the bush so to speak. Show me a NEW plan, with definitive plans to succeed from a beginning and to the end... to include 15 year olds and how you plan to get them to Olympic Gold.

I personally wold be reluctant to invest the money in a guy/system stuck in the 80’s.

Note: Blindly following (maybe hoping) that the failing current plan will create different results is kind of stupid.
 

Sponsor

Top