Thanks! That really clears up some of the confusion.
What an interesting (and perilous) journey for the athletes. Makes me respect them a whole lot more.
Up here in New England, some families pay for their children to go to private schools like the Burke Mountain Academy. I have a friend who recently moved to northern Vermont so his 11-year old son could attend school and train there. (It’s already expensive for them at his son’s age, but it’s my understanding that the cost to go to school there goes up dramatically once the child hits high-school age—comparable to an expensive private college.) Even at age 11, my friend’s son skis over 100 days per season and races every weekend.
Anyway, most racers at schools like this don’t become Olympians. But most Olympian ski racers (here in the U.S. at least) come from training academies like this. For example, Mikaela Shiffrin graduated from BMA in 2014.
P.S. If you’re wondering why there are so many ski academies in northern New England, it’s because New England ski resorts are [in]famous for their boilerplate ice conditions similar to the conditions that ski races are typically held on (as opposed to the fresh powder found out west).
At least you guys still have snow! Here it’s record low snow and a regional snow drought. I hope our Olympians have big walk-in coolers to train in…
I coach fencing in the US at the national level, and a bit international (though not Olympic). I’m at this tournament right now. In an Olympic year, the Division I events here would be part of the Olympic qualifying process.
@ricepad’s summary above is pretty accurate. From the top down, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) designates for each sport how many athletes they can send to the Games and how many medal events they can run. They’re pretty stingy since managing that many events and athletes is a huge undertaking. For a particular sport, that sport’s international governing body (FIS as mentioned above, for fencing it’s the FIE) decides how their quota of athletes qualify.
I’m not up on the latest Olympic qualifying paths for fencing, but in years past it was something like this:
- Fencing gets 200 athletes total from the whole world, across 5 events.
- For a particular event (weapon), the countries that finished in the top 8 of the previous year’s World Championship team event get to send a full team of 3 fencers. That takes 24 spots.
- Take the official world rankings for that weapon (determined by points earned at World Cup/Grand Prix/World Championship events), cross out fencers from those 8 countries, the top 8 fencers remaining qualify.
- Countries that did not qualify through either of those two paths can send one fencer each to their Zonal Qualifier tournament. The four zones are Europe, America, Asia/Oceania, and Africa. From those four tournaments, the top 3 from Europe, 2 from Americas, 2 from Asia, and 1 from Africa qualify.
This is how they avoid Eddie-the-Eagle type scenarios.
Within a particular country, that country’s national governing body (NGB) - in this case USA Fencing - has its own rules for how athletes earn points to make the team. It’s a combination of domestic events like the one linked above, plus international events. You have to reach a certain level in the national rankings before you’re eligible to sign up for big international events. And you won’t make it to the top 3 of the national rankings without significant international results.
In a well-run NGB, the rules are kept very clear, very concise, and very resistant to tampering by politically interested parties, such as the national coaches or the coaches of particularly talented athletes. The results and the rankings determine everything, so string-pulling and corruption are ideally minimized.
The side note I always temper students’ Olympic aspirations with: yes, you’ll need to train hard and you’ll need to do your absolute best. But we can’t guarantee anything - if there are 4 fencers whose absolute best ends up better than yours, sorry, better luck next year.
Thank you for this detailed, specific example!
I was a target shooter. I had an Anschutz 1813: single-shot bolt-action rifle, .22 calibre, iron sights.
I was a member of a club, and won more than a few club championships. I was asked to join our club team that competed against other club teams. Sometimes at home, sometimes away. Being a member of our club team involved a lot of practice, but that was fine by me; I was practicing pretty much every day for a couple of hours a day. I liked shooting.
One day, a few of us, probably the best of the best at our club, were asked if we’d like to go to a big match in another city. All expenses paid—not first-class, but transportation, hotel, entry fees—all paid for by our club. Sure, why not? And off we went.
It was an experience. First, we had to be credentialed, which involved having a photo taken, and putting a name on the corresponding ID card, which was then laminated. This was to be worn on a lanyard around the neck. If you did not wear your credentials, you would not be admitted into the range. Then, our rifles had to be inspected, which involved weighing the rifle (mine had to weigh at least 10 pounds), and weighing the trigger pull (cannot remember exactly what the max weight on that was, but it was an ounce or less). This was a lot more than I was used to, but okay, go through it and then we’re on to the best part: the competition.
In this kind of shooting, you are shooting at a sheet of paper that has eight targets on it: two for sighting, or just to calm the jitters; and the remaining six for scoring shots. You’d put five scoring shots through each scoring target, for a total of 30 scoring shots per target sheet. Then, you’d do it again on another target sheet. And after 60 shots, you’ve finished what is known as a half-course.
And you did another half-course the next day, to complete a full-course.
Scores were marked by judges, and results were posted. There were dozens of shooters, but I was pleased to see that my score placed me solidly in the top ten.
My coach liked my results. “Spoons, did you know that you just tried out for the Canadian Olympic team?”
“Huh? Is that was this match was all about? Why didn’t you tell me?”
“Yep, it was an Olympic tryout. I said nothing, because I didn’t want you to get nervous. I’m glad I shut up, because you did extremely well.”
Not well enough, as it turned out. The top three, out of the dozens of us, made the team. But I wasn’t far behind them—like I said, I was in the top ten, and I’m pretty damn proud of that achievement.
I suppose this is an anecdote, so it is not data. And I have no idea how Olympic team members are selected for team sports. But for individual sports, and based on my experience, it comes down to doing well and getting noticed, and then encouraged to compete at higher levels, to the point where you are worthy of consideration for the national Olympic team.
That seems to jive with the previous data, though — basically, you get noticed somehow, by someone, usually a club leader of some sort.
Also, I didn’t know shooting clubs were a thing. That sounds like a lot of fun, actually! Thanks for the sharing the anecdote.
@ricepad and @Tierce explained things really well, but adressing this from the OP:
My son is involved in a minor sport, and has gone to world championships with it. I’ve gotten involved in the competition management side and helped in various local, national and world championships. When Japan hosted the world championship, I got pretty involved.
In our sport, then the Japanese government isn’t involved at all for national teams for most international competitions.
All expenses are up to the competitor (or their parents). I presume that there would be a difference with the Olympics.
Also, Japan has a program for developing Olympic talent and while my son’s friends were accepted into it, my son isn’t that level.
None, in fact. AFAICT, the USOC and the sport-level organizations are funded entriely through donations and sponsorships.
Why not? Was a bill of such nature ever attempted? Was there ever a public sentiment for or against government funding for them?
I know that in America, trial competitions are usual, but that doesn’t apply to every country or their different associations and their subdivisons for different kinds of sports, respectively. I can’t say with absolute certainty for Norway, but in general for most leading ski jumping nations like Norway, Austria, Slovenia, Germany, Poland, Japan and so on the selection process for the Olympic athletes would go like this: the ski jumping season already starts about late November, so three months before the Olympics, and the best athletes of their respective countries will be nominated for the World Cup events, which are held about weekly in the season at different localities. So there will have already been dozens of WC competitions in the season before the Olympic athletes have to be nominated, including the Four Hills Tournament (which is more prestigious for the jumpers than an Olympic gold medal, just like a Grand Slam title in tennis). The coaches thus can access who had the best results, form and the biggest chances to win medals and will propose these athletes to their association as nominees, which will then forward them to their national Olympic committee.
And that’s how it works for most kind of sports for European nations.
No, that applies to some sports, but really not “in general” of for the whole world. It’s usual for sports like track and field, swimming, basketball, but why for instance should a talented German biathlete go to America? It’s not a college sport AFAIK, and the opportunities and facilities at home and the neighboring countries are much better.
Nitpick: and probably from English footballers playing in foreign leagues. I know that this is an exception for English players because of the appeal of the Premier League, but the norm for most other countries.
Good correction, that man!
Yes, there will be a few players (e.g. Harry Kane playing in Germany) who are selected.
Many times longer than that, for the Olympics.
Quite a while ago, there was an uproar in women’s marathon selection process here in Japan because although a fan favorite had done better in the qualifying races, the coaches picked someone they thought would do better in the Olympics.
I don’t follow the sport to remember all the details, but it was all over the news for while a while.
In the off years you’re trying to qualify for the World Championships. Pretty much the same bar, within the sport.
While true, it’s still not an Olympic medal that they’d be competing for.
The UK has a “discover your gold” campaign where teenages with raw sporting prowess are assessed to determine which sport they would most likely excel at given their build, stamina, power, balance, reflexes etc. I do not know if other countries have anything similar.