America loses an Olympian: Jakob Fak heads to Canada

Look, Paul Jones7, I honestly don't get where you're coming from. We had this guy who basically cut a side deal with the Canadians, and all while he was leading us Americans on, making us scratch our heads in confusion. It wasn't even his intention to play for the US, and his own comments pretty much prove that. A lot of money was poured into him, and I'm guessing people thought he had real potential.

The fact that our federation is seeking damages after Fak's blatant double-dealing and extortion is actually an understatement.

I wouldn't go as far as calling him a traitor... maybe a little bit, but mostly just because of how shady and unprofessional he was being with his little games...

Jessica Davis12 said:this isn't about making life difficult for anyone—it’s more of a side effect.

...

so you basically think some American institution should just bend over backwards for someone just so they don't have a hard time?
I mean, honestly, that's just not how things work—not in sports, and probably not much else in life, either. 🤷

Actually, I don't see any instance where the US government went out of its way to cause trouble for an athlete who took citizenship and played for our national teams. Do you actually have even one example?

Basically, the rule is: don't mess with the athletes.

Jessica Davis12 said:😕
So, I guess you've seriously never heard anyone say they'd walk over a mountain of bodies just to get something done? I mean, come on—it's a classic. It's one of those expressions that just sticks with you, right? I don't know, maybe it's just me, but there’s something about that kind of raw, unapologetic determination that feels... well, intense, I suppose. Anyway, just a thought. 😬

I mean, I heard what you were saying, but honestly? It doesn't really apply to what's actually happening here—so, I guess your comment is kind of missing the mark entirely.

Jessica Davis12 said:I mean, hopefully you get the difference between just grinding away at some random startup and actually playing for the national team. It’s not even really the same league, I guess. 😕

I don't really see the fundamental difference here—not really. I mean, besides the fact that an athlete is constantly under a microscope where every little move gets scrutinized, whereas if some regular guy does something just to line his own pockets, people just shrug and call it fine. I guess we expect athletes to be like Jesus or something, while the average Joe can do whatever he wants and everyone thinks it’s perfectly okay.

The real question here—and I mean this quite sincerely—is whether you actually see the massive disconnect between these two totally cookie-cutter ways of looking at things? It feels like both sides are just following some pre-written script, you know? I guess it’s worth wondering if anyone is even seeing the mismatch there.

Paul Jones7 said:On the contrary, I don't see anyone giving America a hard time over any athlete who took citizenship to play for our national teams. Can you actually name a single instance where that happened?

So, I guess the rule is basically just don't mess with the athletes.

If I remember correctly, we’ve had way more people coming to us than the other way around.🤔
Was there ever anyone who won a medal for the US and then just ditched us for somewhere else right after? 🤷

wanderinghawk17 said:I honestly don't follow you, Paul Jones7. We have this guy who basically cut a deal with the Americans behind our backs, leading us all here in the States on a wild goose chase—just making us scratch our heads. He never actually intended to compete for America, and his own statements pretty much confirm that. There was money poured into him, too, so I assume he had some real potential or something.

The fact that our federation is asking for compensation after Jakob Fak's double-dealing and blackmailing is nothing.

I wouldn't go so far as to call him a traitor... maybe a little bit, but mostly just because of how shady and dishonest the whole thing was...

Just try putting yourself in his shoes for a second—let's see what that looks like. You're an athlete with actual talent, but the US doesn't have the infrastructure to help you develop it. So, the Americans offer you a chance to train with them. At some point, once they see you're actually good, they tell you they want you to represent them. You work out a two-year deal to delay the final decision, and they agree. Why wait? Because you don't want to just walk away from your American roots that easily.

Two years pass, you're winning medals left and right, and then the moment of truth arrives. The Americans tell you that you have to choose now, because without citizenship, you can't keep training with them. So you knock on the door back home. But you already knocked once before, and they promised you a year ago they’d fix up the facilities. Great. Except nothing has moved an inch in a full year. So you knock again.

This time they offer $100, but there's no agreement with the Americans, no deal with a different coach, no arrangement with any other country to use their training resources. There is $67 for a coach, which is fine, I guess. But from $100, you're supposed to cover competition fees, travel, hotels, skis, rifles, gear, technicians—there isn't even a physical therapist (edit: and where is the money for training abroad?). It's obvious that's not enough to cover everything, but the real kicker is that you don't even know where you'll be training. Probably on some local hills or poorly maintained trails. They'll fix the tracks "one fine day," they say. Yeah, sure. They said that before.

It's pretty clear you're losing ground, and under these conditions, medals aren't happening anymore. You basically have two choices: stay and rot, or leave and compete for the Americans.

I don't see a dilemma at all. If someone actually has athletic ambition, in a situation like this, they have to leave.

Paul Jones7 said:I’ve heard it before, sure, but it doesn't apply to this specific situation, so I guess your comment is totally irrelevant here.

You've heard the term, but you clearly don't get what it actually means, right? 😬
I mean, it doesn't literally mean someone died 😁 (though I see you're heading in that direction, so...)
It means someone would do absolutely anything—crossing every moral line imaginable—just to reach their goal. I don't know what part you find inapplicable, but fine.😁

I don't see any fundamental difference. Except, maybe, that an athlete is under a microscope so everything they do is criticized, whereas when an average person does something just for their own benefit, it's considered perfectly fine. I guess an athlete is supposed to be like Jesus, while an ordinary person can do whatever they want and it's totally okay.

Yeah, exactly.
That pretty much sums it up.🙂
It seems you're one of those people who doesn't grasp that this is just the price you pay for high-profile jobs (public roles). It's the same for politicians, actors, singers, etc. (an athlete is just as much a public figure as they are.)
They live a hundred stories above the "average Joe," but I guess that can't come without a cost.🙂
And it shouldn't.😳
Quote:The question is, do you see the discrepancy between these two such stereotyped perceptions? Which ones? I honestly have no idea what you're referring to.
😁

slypilot12 said:On the contrary, I never understood the manufactured hype surrounding his medals in some random biathlon event. WTF???
A sport that has barely any following here in America, unless you count people obsessed with that tragicomedy of curling.

Just another person who insists on splitting Olympic medals into those won in "Sports" versus those won in sports
honestly, where do you people get the nerve?

Jessica Davis12 said:if my memory serves me right, we actually had more people coming our way than leaving, 🤔
so was there really anyone who won a medal for the US and then just packed up and moved abroad right after? 🤷

I don't see what that has to do with anything,

I honestly can't think of a single athlete where the national federation actually sued for damages—that’s just not how things work. It seems pretty logical, though... I mean, you can only claim compensation if there’s an actual contract in place, right?

If this ends up heading to court or some arbitration panel, HBS is going to lose. They just don't have any grounds for this.

Jessica Davis12 said:it's pretty clear you're one of those people who doesn't get that this is just the price you pay for those kinds of roles (public ones). it's the same deal for politicians, actors, singers, etc.—an athlete is just as much a public figure as any of them.
they live a hundred floors above the "average Joe," but it can't exactly be free 🙂
and it shouldn't be 😳

alright, Sean Hernandez5

just imagine you're leaving a company. and now the firm tells you: we aren't giving you your employment records back until you reimburse us for all those training seminars we paid for

what would you say to them? you'd probably tell them, 'look, I didn't sign anything agreeing to that, so you have no grounds to charge me'

but they’d still withhold your paperwork anyway, telling you, 'oh, we can settle this in thirty seconds once you pay up. it's your choice. your next employer can just ☕'

Jessica Davis12 said:what? I honestly have no idea what you're even talking about, man 😁

it seems to me like you're totally missing the point here

Paul Jones7 said:What does that even have to do with anything?

I can’t think of a single athlete where the national federation went after them for compensation; that just isn't how things work. It seems logical, though—I guess you only have a claim to damages if there’s an actual signed contract in place, right?

If this ends up in court or arbitration, HBS is going to lose. They simply don't have a leg to stand on here.

What do you mean, "what does it have to do with anything?"
You were the one who brought up the issue of consistency, so when I said I couldn't recall a single example and asked if you knew of any, that was my response.😕
You're the one who raised the question about consistency, not me.🤷

Jessica Davis12 said:I mean, what does that even have to do with anything?
Well, you're the one who brought up the whole topic, so I just said I couldn't think of a single example and asked if you knew any 😕
Look, you were the one questioning the consistency here—not me 🤷

Whether someone won a medal or not shouldn't dictate how we handle their departure from the scene

Athletes aren't property—just like us regular citizens aren't some kind of assets owned by the state

Just imagine this... say you want to work in the States, and they offer you a job with incredible benefits, but there’s a catch: you need citizenship. It’s offered to you, but then the American government refuses to give you the paperwork. They basically tell you, "Hey, why don't you pay us back for the cost of your free education in America? We invested in you, so we want our money back first. Until we see that cash, you aren't getting those papers, and you can't get your U.S. citizenship until they compensate us."

How would that feel to you? Do you honestly think that's fair?

Paul Jones7 said:Look, Sean Hernandez5,

Imagine you're leaving a company. Suddenly, they tell you: "We aren't handing over your employment records until you reimburse us for every single training seminar we paid for."

What would you say to them? I suppose I’d tell them, "I never signed anything agreeing to this, so you have no legal grounds to charge me."

But they wouldn't care. They'd just hold onto your paperwork and claim, "We can settle this in thirty minutes once you pay up. It's not your problem; your new employer can ☕"

It seems pretty obvious to me that you don't get what's happening here.

Well, that actually applies to federal employees too. 😁
The Civil Service Act, Section 95.

Paul Jones7 said:whether someone won medals or not shouldn't dictate how we handle their departure

athletes aren't property, just like us citizens aren't property.

Imagine you want to work in the States, and they offer you a job with incredible benefits, but there's one catch: you need citizenship, which is also offered. Now, imagine the US government refuses to give you the paperwork. They basically say, "Go ahead and pay back the costs of your free education here in America; we invested in you, and we want our money back. Until we see that cash, you don't get the papers, and you can't get US citizenship until they compensate us."

How would you feel? Would you honestly think that's fair?

You can always renounce your citizenship.🙂

Your analogies are terrible.😁
They're bad because you can't compare this situation to what happened with Pere Peric. I don't think you'll ever grasp that.😢
And you aren't even reading what I write (or often what I've already written).😢
I get what you're trying to prove, but you're completely missing my point. (The biggest issue here is your fundamental misunderstanding of public figures, i.e., athletes.)

We've gone down the wrong path.
I'm done.

Jessica Davis12 said:well, I guess that applies to civil servants too 😁
Civil Service Act, Section 95.

Look, just give me the gist—I have zero interest in reading through the entire legal code, especially when I've already got enough on my plate as it is.

Jessica Davis12 said:you can always renounce your citizenship🙂

Your analogies just don't work--they really don't😁
And they fail because you can't compare what's happening here to some situation involving LeBron James. I don't think you'll ever quite wrap your head around that distinction😢
Plus, you aren't actually reading what I'm putting down—and honestly, half the time you aren't even processing what I *have* written😢
I get what you're trying to prove, I really do, but you're missing my point entirely. (The core issue here seems to be how you perceive public figures, specifically athletes)

We've gone completely off the rails
Anyway, I'm out

Of course you can renounce your citizenship—though, just to make sure we're on the same page, that's a hypothetical. Like, would it be okay if the government could basically blackmail its own citizens? Maybe not. But athletes just don't have that same level of standing. If they did, nobody would be asking for special waivers in the first place. And it isn't right. Athletes are in a much tougher spot than the average person

And I don't get why you're refusing to see the parallel. Actually, I think you *do* see it, you just hate admitting that you don't have any actual arguments on your side

On the contrary, I think you're just struggling to accept that Jakob Fak is essentially the same kind of figure as LeBron James, and he deserves those same rights. It's not like we all have to love Fak—honestly, I couldn't care less if people like him or not. For all I know, I won't like him either. But we have to let him go

wanderinghawk17 said:I honestly don't follow your logic, Paul Jones7. We had this guy who made all his deals behind closed doors with the Canadians, leading us Americans on a wild goose chase while we sat there scratching our heads. It wasn't even his intention to compete for the US, and his own comments pretty much confirmed that. There was money poured into him, too; I suppose he had some actual potential once upon a time.

The fact that our national federation is demanding compensation after Jakob Fak’s duplicity and extortion is practically nothing.

I wouldn't go so far as to label him a traitor... well, maybe a little... but mostly it's just that incredibly shady way he played the whole game...

Paul Jones7, what daz wrote here is probably the most accurate, albeit brief, summary of the whole Fak situation. He led us all by the nose. Even before he managed to snag an Olympic medal, that shady associate of his was already bragging about how Fak had promised them everything. So, enough with the nonsense; as I've said before, some corrupt officials won't even hand over a registration form unless they get their hundred-dollar kickback.

Paul Jones7 said:Put yourself in his shoes just to see how it feels. Give it a shot. You’re an athlete with actual talent, but America doesn't have the infrastructure to actually develop it. So, the Americans offer you a spot to train with them. Eventually, once they see you're killing it, they ask if you'll represent them. You negotiate a two-year window to delay the decision, and they agree. Why wait? Because you don't want to just ditch your home country overnight.

Two years fly by, you rack up some medals, and now it's decision time. The Americans tell you that you have to choose right now—if you don't take their citizenship, you can't train with them anymore. So, you knock on America's door. You already knocked once before, and they promised a year ago they'd fix up the training facilities. Great. But a whole year later, nothing has moved an inch. So, you knock again.

This time they offer you $100, but there’s no deal with the Americans, no agreement with a different coach, and zero deals with any other country to use their training resources. There's $67 for a coach, which is fine. But from $100, you’re expected to pay for your own competitions, travel, hotels, skis, rifles, gear, technicians—there isn't even a physical therapist (edit: and where's the cash for training abroad?). It's obvious that's not enough to cover everything, but the real kicker is you have no idea where you're even going to train. Probably some local patches of ice and half-broken trails. They promise the facilities will be fixed "one fine day." Yeah, right. They promised that before too.

It’s clear you're losing ground, and under these terms, medals are off the table. You basically have two choices: stay and rot, or leave and compete for the Americans.

I don't see a dilemma here at all. If someone actually has athletic ambition, in this situation, they have to go.

👍
...as if my heritage takes away my right to say anything about this—according to some people here 😳

swiftwalker43 said:Paul Jones7, I think what wanderinghawk17 wrote there is probably the best—and definitely the shortest—way to sum up this whole mess involving Fak. He really led everyone on, too. Even before he snagged that Olympic medal, his buddy Velepec was out there bragging about how Fak had already made them promises. So, honestly, let's just stop spinning our wheels here. Like I said before, if those naysayers want to pay a hundred bucks for a ticket themselves, fine, but otherwise, they can just forget about getting an entry slip.

He was actually pulling the Americans along all this time.

About two years ago, he gave them some sort of vague promise—just to make sure he could keep training over there—that he’d officially switch over to their side in a couple of years. If our folks had offered him decent terms back then, he probably would have blown them off too, I guess.

Paul Jones7 said:Just try stepping into his shoes for a second to see how it feels. You’re an athlete with genuine talent, but the US just doesn't have the infrastructure or the setup to actually nurture it. Then, the folks over in Canada come along and offer you a chance to train with their squad. Then, at the exact moment they realize you’re actually hitting your stride, they drop the line about wanting you to represent them. So, you strike a deal with them for a two-year grace period to buy some time, and they agree. Why wait? Because you aren't ready to just turn your back on America without a fight.

Why didn't the big names snap him up when he was still under the radar?
If they knew he was going to jump ship, why play along? Why go through this whole charade with the sponsors?
The Americans ended up with a medalist, and they're acting like paying 100,000 EUR is some massive burden. Is Velepec really the only coach on the planet? Why did the Canadian side do everything in their power to corner Fak now, only to act all innocent and disinterested after the fact?

See, that’s where we differ. Those are the questions that make me look at things differently than you do...

Though, if you ask me, there's probably a whole lot of dirty laundry on both sides that neither of us knows anything about.

wanderinghawk17 said:Why didn't they just sign him when he was still an unknown quantity?
Why did he mess with us all this time knowing he was eventually going to leave? Why the whole charade with the sponsors?
The Americans ended up with a medalist, yet they had to shell out 100,000 USD? Is Velepec really the only coach worth a damn in the world? And why did the Americans go out of their way to back Fak into a corner, only to act like they have nothing to do with it now?

See, that’s the thing. Because of those questions, I don't see the situation quite the same way you do...

Though, honestly, I suspect there’s a lot of dirty laundry on both sides that neither you nor I will ever truly know about.

They wanted him the second they realized he could actually deliver results—that was years ago. But Fak wasn't interested back then; he was holding out hope that America would provide the right conditions.

Now, Velepec isn't exactly the only coach on the planet, but the bigger issue is the training grounds. I think I mentioned this before, but everyone seems to ignore it—you included. Why hasn't the USA Biathlon Association arranged for training facilities in a country that actually has the right environment for biathlon training?

Probably because either it's a nightmare to negotiate, or they're asking for ridiculous amounts of money—and maybe, just maybe, money isn't even the real issue here.

I mean, imagine you're Austria, Italy, Switzerland, or Germany. Would you really let your direct competition come in and train alongside you? If I were in their shoes, I probably wouldn't budge unless someone was cutting me a massive check.

When Fak was a nobody, he could have trained wherever he wanted for peanuts—probably in some small town somewhere. But once he started producing actual results, everything changed. Suddenly, he becomes a threat.