The Skating Lesson Podcast Transcript On the Other Side of the Boards: An Interview with Chuck Foster Part I

Jenny Kirk: Hello, and welcome to The Skating Lesson podcast! I’m , a former world junior champion, Four Continents ladies champion, a US Ladies Competitor, and three-time world team member as well as the 1999 New England Junior Ladies Champion, 1995 Bay State Games Ladies silver medalist, and the 1995 Monadnock Interclub Competition Showcase Showdown Future Medalist. Beat that, Dave Lease!

Dave Lease: Well, I am Dave Lease. I have passed my adult silver move test and my adult pre-bronze freestyle. I am an Eagle Scout in New Jersey, Scholar, like I am an AP Scholar, I got the outstanding effort award from Middle School in 1998, and I am the High School Nobility Award recipient for the Class of 2004!

Jenny: Well, you totally beat me with that nobility award – I have no personal accomplishments like that! But we are thrilled today to have Chuck Foster on The Skating Lesson podcast. We talk about how we interview influential from the world of figure skating, and Mr. Foster really is one of those such people.

Dave Lease: Oh, absolutely! Chuck Foster has been a judge for 58 years! He was the national junior pairs champion with Maribel Owen – skating royalty! He served as a Board of Directors for seventeen years. He served in the United States Olympic Committee as the vice president and secretary for two terms from 1989-1996, he was inducted into the United States Figure Skating Hall of Fame in 2003. And that same year he was elected the president of the United States Figure Skating Association, which he served from 2003 until his resignation in 2005.

Jenny: Okay, Chuck, well thank you so much for joining us! We are so happy to have you here! And before you became a world and Olympic judge, president of the US Figure among a myriad of other accomplishments, you actually started out the sport as a pairs skater. You won a national junior pairs title with Maribel Owens. What was that experience like?

Chuck Foster: It was great. But it was a bit of a problem. I was a college sophomore or junior and she was fourteen years old. I didn’t relate too well to a fourteen year old girl at the time. But it was great fun, and we enjoyed getting together and having – becoming a success. And it was a generally good experience.

Jenny: Did you and she train under the tutelage of her mother?

Chuck: Her mother, yes.

Jenny: How was she as a coach?

Chuck: Well, all you have to hear is Frank Carroll and Ron Ludington talk. They’re her greatest admirers. I found her to be a very tough woman. And she was – she was difficult. Of course, I’m difficult, so two of us like that!

Jenny: In what ways was she difficult?

Chuck: Just getting her way, I think, or doing things her way. She had – she was, you know, very demanding. Very bright woman. She graduated from Radcliffe College, was a sports reporter for the New York Times, and had many successful things. And she knew skating terrifically. She wrote a book about figure skating and figures and that. She was a very articulate – and as I told you, Frank and Ludy are great fans of her, as am I. And – she coached Tenley, too, in the 1956 Olympics. She was a great coach. Dave: So, after winning the junior pair title, why did you decide to move on from skating?

Chuck: Well, in the days when I was competing, we won in 1955, we skated in senior pairs in 1956, but then I graduated from college. And there was – I just had to go on with my life. And that’s what prompted me to resign – or, to quit from skating with Maribel. And it was difficult because we had been – in those days, they selected the world team from the nationals the year before. So we had been selected for the world team in 1957, but didn’t go ahead. Of course Maribel – I was back in North Dakota at the time, and it drove her crazy that I quit there. So – but I had to go on with my life, and that was understood.

Dave: Where were you when you heard about the 1961 plane crash?

Chuck: Actually, I was in the lumber business, and I was on a business trip in Oregon. And I was in – well, I’ve forgotten the town, but I was in a motel and I got up and turned the TV on, and ohhhhh… they said they were all gone. All gone. So I immediately couldn’t believe it – in a state of shock. Because they were all my friends. I had just seen them. I had just been with them after the nationals and back in Boston – just seen them. And I called the club, Mary [inaudible] – I don’t know if Mary was there when you were there, but she was the club secretary. And I said – Mary, is it true? And she said – Chuck, yes, it’s true. They’re all gone. Very, very traumatic for all of us. We’d spent the summer, all of us, having fun. They’d come to Duxbury Peak – Maribel and the two girls. A lot of the other skaters who were skating up in Deadham at the time – had a rink in Deadham off Route 128. So, it was quite tragic, and I still think about them, you know, every day. Little memories pop up.

Jenny: Did you ever have thoughts, Chuck, that you could have been on that plane had you decided to stay in the sport?

Chuck: Yes, in that respect, but I had left skating, so I’ve never said – gee, I was lucky I missed that plane. And I skated – Maribel wouldn’t let you quit. So, I don’t know whether Dudley – the timing was great because for Dudley, he had just come out of the army in 1958. Or, he got out in ’60, I believe. I went into the army in 1958, so I would have been in the army at that time. So he was back, so he was easily – slid into the spot to skate. He was a fine skater, and they had a lot of success.

Jenny: Well, and you talk about moving on from the sport. But you didn’t leave skating. You then decided to become a judge. And I’m wondering – that’s kind of an unusual decision for someone who’s gone to college. You talk about moving on with your life. So why did you make that decision, and what was the process like of moving up through the ranks as a judge? And how does that process compare for judges today who are starting at the bottom?

Chuck: Well, I think we should encourage young skaters to become judges more than maybe they’re doing. While I still was competing, I started to trial judge – to become a judge when I was in college. Why did I do that? Because I thought I could do a better job than some of the judges! And so I thought – I would like to be a judge. So I actually became a judge while I still was in college. I was a low-test judge. And I just progressed from there. You went from a low test to an intermediate to a high test to a national judge and then international, and then championship. It just is a progression – and it was a hobby. It was a hobby that grew beyond my wildest dreams for me in that respect. Just – I never thought I would be involved like that. But it just grew. And fortunately, at the time that I could devote to it, we were all volunteers, and it took a lot of time. But it was very worthwhile.

Dave: Given the amount of time in travel that goes into being a judge, what kind of jobs do judges have? Because I think that many of us have thought about judging, but we only get so many personal days of vacation days from work. Judging a full day of skating tests isn’t an option for many. What was your career?

Chuck: Well, when I came back out of the army, I had no idea what I was going to do. My father was a physician, and when I was going through college, and then I thought I would go to medical school. Well, I spent too much time at the skating rink, and my grades were lousy. And then it was not an option. So when I came back out of the army in 1960, I came back to Boston and started looking around – what I would do. Was there – I would work at a bank, an investment bank, or do something like that. Through my brother-in-law, I got introduced to a company in Western? That was a wholesale lumber company. It was a very Harvard-oriented company – almost all of the guys had gone to Harvard. And we had three former Harvard football captains working there at the same time! No company had ever done that – so I went into the wholesale lumber business, and I spent forty years in that industry.

Dave: As a judge, you reached the highest level. When you served at a judge on the ladies panel at the 1980 Olympic Games in Lake Placid. This is an event that has been debated for more than thirty years. To this day, many in the skating world, including Linda Fratianne and Frank Carroll, feel that Linda was really robbed of the gold medal, which she lost to Annet Pötzsch. She lost the gold in part to Denise Biellmann in winning that long program. Now on that night you gave the win to Linda. Have you ever felt that Linda was robbed in 1980 at the Olympics?

Chuck: I gave the win to Linda! If you look at the ordinal sheet, I was the only one that gave her first place. I thought she certainly deserved to win, so that was my opinion. Then, and now.

Jenny: And I’m wondering – at an event, like the ’80 Games where it is such a close competition between a skater like Linda Fratianne and Denise Biellmann – have you ever seen that there is pressure for a judge on the panel who has a skater from their country to kind of feel like they need to promote that skater or have that skater come out on top – persuade the other judges? Did you ever see that during your career?

Chuck: Of course. One thing you have to look at, or I looked at, was – most of these federations in the European countries – they’re very small. They may have fewer skaters than the for the entire country. The judges are with them all, a lot of the time. They don’t have many competitors. So they become sort of a family. They like their kids. So they promote them – they travel through Europe as the kids come up and up. So they all know each other. We, on the other hand, have a large country with many competitors. All over the country. Many times I went to an event and I met the skaters for the first time when we were there. I didn’t know them. But my point is – they do want to support their skater. They know them, there are very few of them. And I think it’s human nature, really, to try to support them.

Jenny: So do you think it’s more of a personal thing where they have this personal relationship and they want to see the skaters skate well versus the federation is – wants to promote their skaters?

Chuck: Well, yes. I think it’s because – like a family. But they’re all part of the federation. What I’m saying is the federation is so small that – yeah, they would like to have, to promote their skaters.

Dave: Now, there are often judges that we see year after year on skating panels. They become fixtures in this skating world.

Chuck: I was!

Dave: And there are obviously so many judges who would love to judge the world championships or the Olympic Games. If a top competitor like a is skating against a close rival like an . Does Michelle’s success or failure at the event impact the career of the American judge on that panel whether or not she gets the win?

Chuck: Not at all. In fact, there has been a complaint a few years ago from, I think, the Olympic committee, that we, the American judges, weren’t supporting their athletes enough.

Jenny: So, they want you to cheat, basically.

Chuck: Well, they want us to support the American athletes! Jenny: Well, what do they mean by the word “support,” though?

Chuck: Put ‘em in first place! Put them in a higher place. The Americans have been a desperate group, the judges. They’re a little more difficult to get behind the skater, I think. A lot of them say – you know, I call it the way I see it. Whereas the European judges, they’re small, the country is – they’re going to support their skater unequivocally. But, you can see where – as I say, I would go and I’ve never met the skater before. I never had any natural bias. I have a US bias, but not towards the skater particularly. Well, Michelle was the case, by herself – of course, I always thought she was terrific no matter what. So I was always glad to be involved on the panel.

Dave: Now in 1980, the United States had a contender for gold in both the ladies and the pairs event. Given the politics that have played along history in skating and political strategy that goes into it, does a federation have to angle which gold medal they wish to go after if they do have a –

Chuck: No. There is never a conversation like that.

Jenny: So it just plays out how it is. Now you ta – oh, I’m sorry.

Dave: In 1980, regarding the pairs competition, given how skating was and that Tai and Randy were going against the Russians who hadn’t lost at that point. Do you feel that Tai and Randy could have earned the ordinals to defeat Irina Rodnina and Alexander Zaitsey should they have skated clean?

Chuck: That’s a tough question because Rodnina had been out the year before in ‘79 because she had a baby. She missed the whole year. Politically, with depending on the makeup of the panel, I think it would have been tough for a US pair to win. Not that I didn’t love Tai and Randy, too, but just the way the nine judges were, I think that perhaps the outcome would have been Rodnina and Zaitsey. That’s just my own – that’s just speculation.

Dave: And when Tai and Randy won their world title in ’79, was that the year that the Russians were not allowed to have judges on the panel because there was a – weren’t the Russian judges banned on year?

Chuck: They were suspended for a year but I’ve forgotten which year. I can’t recall which year that they were suspended. And I was in , I was a judge at the worlds in Vienna in ’79 when they won. And it was an outstanding evening, outstanding performance by Tai and Randy.

Dave: Oh, absolutely, yeah.

Jenny: Well, we talk about these events like the world and Olympic championships. How important is it for a country to have their best skaters or skater on paper, the skaters that have the most chance at winning a medal, perhaps a gold medal, going in as the reigning national champion?

Chuck: I used to think that was very important. And I think it’s quite important. If you take your top skater and they get defeated, and this is under the old system, that worked against them if all the other countries see that your skater has just been beaten by someone else, it works against their chances of winning. That’s my own opinion.

Jenny: Do you think it’s still as important under the new system?

Chuck: No. Judges have little or no impact. Technical callers – no.

Jenny: And you talked earlier about your love for Michelle Kwan. And in 1998, she and Tara both went to Nagano, both some would argue had equal chances of winning the gold medal. But of course Tara came out with the victory. But she didn’t win the ordinal from the American judge. And at the time, there was a lot of talk in the skating world that it seemed like the backing of US Figure Skating was behind Michelle Kwan, that she really had that support and that momentum. And a lot of Tara fans were up in arms that the federation didn’t seem to be supporting Tara. And in recent years it makes me also think of Evan Lysacek and , that Johnny Weir fans said the same thing. So as a member of US Figure Skating, did you ever see that there was any sort of explicit conversations where officials get together and say – we’re going to promote this skater versus another other skater? Or is that all just fodder among skating fans?

Chuck: Never. Never. Never happened. I keep coming back – we have a huge country. We have judges all over. They don’t get together, they don’t discuss things like that at all. I keep coming back to the smaller federations that they do discuss it because they only have one skater. We’ve got many, and there is no collusion in that respect. The federation doesn’t back anyone particularly more than anybody else. You win it on your merits.

Jenny: And that’s really the way that it should be. Well, during your career as a judge, you served as the figure skating member on the USOC from 1973-1980. And then you said that you were kicked off because you had to get your politics in order. Then, in 1988, you were elected as the vice president, secretary of the USOC which you served for two terms. And I’m wondering – what did you mean by “you had to get your politics in order?” And how political are these organizations?

Chuck: Excuse me, I have a cold… Here’s the deal. Chairman or an appointee is annual in US Figure Skating. So in 1980, there was a president who didn’t like me, pure and simple, and so he did not reappoint me to be the representative on the Olympic committee. So, it was simple as that – I was off.

Jenny: Just because he didn’t like you.

Chuck: That, you know, things change, and I sort of got my politics in order, and another president liked me! I got reappointed. People in the Olympic Committee afterward didn’t even know I’d been gone.

Jenny: So do you think it comes down to having people like you when you talk about your politics? Is that really what it comes down to?

Chuck: Well, of course – sure, I mean, yes. I think they – as I said, the president was the one that did the appointing.

Dave: Now, in 1994, threatened to sue the United States Olympic Committee for attempting to remove her from the United States Olympic team. As vice president at the time, what was your position on her participation at the Olympic Games?

Chuck: Well, it boiled down to this, and it happened before with a diver – an Olympic diver who dove into a group of kids and killed one. They hadn’t been found guilty of anything at that point. Tonya hadn’t been found guilty of anything. She won a right to go, and our position was to let her participate because she hadn’t been found guilty of anything. When you’re found guilty, it’s a whole different scenario.

Dave: Now given the many changing stories by Tonya Harding of her involvement in the attack on , the one assertion that Tonya has made that has always remained consistent in all of her interviews is that she claims a high-ranking official of the USFSA called her and told her to get back with her then ex- husband, Jeff Gillooly, for the appearance of stability if she wished to get the marks she deserved at nationals.

Chuck: [who had previously been emphatically shaking his head through half of that last statement] That’s pure fantasy. I’ve never heard – I don’t know anything about that.

Dave: Given you knowledge of the culture at the time, do you think that there is any possibility that that phone call took place?

Chuck: I highly doubt it. Dave: Okay. On the flip side, you were also a part of the test skate that allowed Nancy Kerrigan to compete at the Olympics. In 2006, Michelle Kwan had to perform a test skate of her own and went to the Olympics only to withdraw after injuring herself during the first moments of the first practice session. There are going to be those forever if she was too big of a star to keep home, if sponsors wanted her to march in the Opening Ceremonies. Given her success and star power, what would the federation’s positions have been had it been clear at the test skate that she was unable to represent the US as well as Emily Hughes was? Would they have announced if she didn’t pass – and just say it in a press conference, “Michelle skated, and we’re very sorry but we don’t feel she was able to go?” Or would they have named her to the team and asked her to withdraw herself? What would they do in a sticky situation like that?

Chuck: Well, you see, I’d have to refresh myself with all the rules because the Olympic Committee demands from every participating federation a selection procedure. Now Michelle qualified to sit with the team because of the approved election procedure. Because she was – whatever she was the year before, she was the US Champion, she may have even been the world champion, I don’t remember.

Jenny: She was fourth.

Chuck: But my point is there is a selection procedure that is approved by the US Olympic Committee. It’s demanded from all the sports governing bodies. And this was followed. So if she had failed the demonstration, I think they would have said she failed because there’s no use sending an injured person, a knowingly injured person to the games. Same with Nancy Kerrigan, on that panel, and appointed by the US Figure Skating, ahd an athlete member of the panel in Kathy Kelly Peutoad? And you know it was all – the panel appointed by the organization with a task, see if she is physically able to perform at a high level.

Jenny: And what actually goes on? You were there with Nancy in ’94. What goes on during one of those test skates. What do you have the athlete do?

Chuck: Do the short program and the long program. She did ‘em, Nancy Kerrigan, performed every element in her program and there was nothing you could do except go out and say – she’s fine, which we were all pleased.