Quad Limitations?

Hi all,

I came across for the first time in the "Figure Skating: The Edge" part of this forum, in the "Three Impossible Wishes" post, the mention of quad limitations for the first time. On the surface it seems like maybe a good idea, or just limitations in general, because some people wouldn't be able to do quads (or whatever the hardest jump would be for their level). Could someone explain to me why it isn't something that is going on and the pro's and cons to it please?

Thanks ^^,
Skylar

It's not going on because it's ridiculous, you can't hamper the sport's technical progression by limiting it in such an artificial way.

And limiting or banning quads isn't going to stop skaters from trying them in practice, so it puts the kibosh on the injury argument too.

There are Senior skaters who can't do 3As, or even all their triples, and you don't see people arguing to limit those just because some skaters can't do them.

Haha, sorry, this suggestion really irks me, in case you couldn't tell

yeah, you can't limit quads. How else would we eventually arrive at quintuples? lol

karne said:

It's not going on because it's ridiculous, you can't hamper the sport's technical progression by limiting it in such an artificial way.

And limiting or banning quads isn't going to stop skaters from trying them in practice, so it puts the kibosh on the injury argument too.

There are Senior skaters who can't do 3As, or even all their triples, and you don't see people arguing to limit those just because some skaters can't do them.

Haha, sorry, this suggestion really irks me, in case you couldn't tell

Click to expand...

Karne, I agree.

I was following the sport when ladies started doing triples regularly... and it was some of the same hysteria we hear today as the sport progresses in the quad era.

For the OP, we have discussed this subject, and will discuss this subject, until the end of time.

Folks can differ on the subject of quads. I am one who happens to think that the endless push for quads diminishes other aspects of the sport.

But I also think that being told my opinion is a part of "hysteria", that I am standing in the way of "technical progress", and that it will have no effect on how skaters practice, or that I should go watch exhibitions.....



It doesn't change my mind, it doesn't make me any less secure that my outlook is indeed grounded in an understanding that figure skating is a sport, and an athletic contest, and heck, I remember when men were doing single axels, on purpose, as part of their programs, and now they're not, and so ?????? My opinion doesn't change.

But it's not important enough to bring out the old lady cane. Some other time

el henry said:

For the OP, we have discussed this subject, and will discuss this subject, until the end of time.

Folks can differ on the subject of quads. I am one who happens to think that the endless push for quads diminishes other aspects of the sport.

But I also think that being told my opinion is a part of "hysteria", that I am standing in the way of "technical progress", and that it will have no effect on how skaters practice, or that I should go watch exhibitions.....



It doesn't change my mind, it doesn't make me any less secure that my outlook is indeed grounded in an understanding that figure skating is a sport, and an athletic contest, and heck, I remember when men were doing single axels, on purpose, as part of their programs, and now they're not, and so ?????? My opinion doesn't change.

But it's not important enough to bring out the old lady cane. Some other time

Click to expand...

I am totally with you @el henry!!!!
I am not a quad enthusiast or fan either, but I do stop short of discounting the merit of those who can jump 10 quads in a program, or who can introduce 4A which is sure to arrive in the near future. The sport should set a new, separate discipline which focuses on jumps, well something like the aerial challenge which happens to take place this weekend. Figure skating is, at the end of the day, is about skating. It should have more importance in the overall outlook.
I jump off the soapbox and run away before I get assaulted. :scard7:

Figure skating needs to evolve without limitations. After all, compulsory school figures were abolished from competitions after many decades. Perhaps in the future, there will be an artistic freestyle and an athletic freestyle, similar to gymnastics in which there is a rhythmic gymnastics and an athletic gymnastics. Who knows where all this will lead? Perhaps quads will become as commonplace as triples are today, and quints will be the new frontier.

tstop4me said:

Figure skating needs to evolve without limitations. After all, compulsory school figures were abolished from competitions after many decades. Perhaps in the future, there will be an artistic freestyle and an athletic freestyle, similar to gymnastics in which there is a rhythmic gymnastics and an athletic gymnastics. Who knows where all this will lead? Perhaps quads will become as commonplace as triples are today, and quints will be the new frontier.

Click to expand...

The language alone shows what side one takes (not surprisingly). I do not mean to pick on this post, but....

evolve. grow. progress. unlimited.

I disagree that unlimited quads in unlimited number is progress. or that it is growth. or that it is the evolving of the sport. or that it is a frontier. Or boldly going where no man has gone before

So those arguments don't inspire me, because I don't see those words or adjectives as applicable to the "more quads" hysteria (to coin a phrase

But maybe a two prong path is the way; I know bupkes diddly boop about gymnastics, so I don't know how it works there. But two prongs could stop the thread a week on the subject however.

Olympic motto "Faster, higher, stronger." The absurd idea of limiting one's talents is the complete opposite of what elite sports is about

I acknowledge the need for more focus on the basic edge work, as well as artistry. This sport isn't about the jumping. At least in my opinion. It's about how it all comes together. I believe I was watching one of Jin Boyang's earlier performances, and hearing and agreeing with the judges as the commented how his program lacked that refined grace and artistry that you need to have your program look like more than a jump exhibition. You know? The difference between watching the performer go from one transition to the jump, rinse and repeat.

However, watching a more recent program, you can see the vast improvements he's made! He's gaining that artistry to back his jumps.

I don't agree with limiting quad jumps any more than any other kind of jump has been limited. I'm not super keen on the technical rules yet, but isn't it like, 1-2 of each type, and I think I heard something on a total revolutions limit or something?

Coebalt said:

I believe I was watching one of Jin Boyang's earlier performances, and hearing and agreeing with the judges as the commented how his program lacked that refined grace and artistry that you need to have your program look like more than a jump exhibition.?

Click to expand...

You better have been making those exact same comments about Chen this year.


I'm with icybear - "faster, higher, stronger". You don't get that trying to haul everyone back to triples.

This has been really interesting to see haha. I didn't know this was such a debated topic.

I think I'm with most people (here at least) that conclude two different types of competition would be nice. I think the Olympics should stay the same, because indeed the "faster, higher, stronger" motto would be broken with limitations and doesn't really require two different types of competition. Outside of that though, I think it would be beneficial to have an artistic and athletic type of competition. That would be a very big change though. It all gets so confusing haha. I do think that a limitation on quads wouldn't be the way to go though now.

I don't quite get some of these posts. Current scoring takes into account both athleticism (technical score) and artistry (component score). Sure, mathematically, it's possible for someone to win with an exceptionally high technical score in combination with an exceptionally low component score [which scenario appears to be the pet peeve of some here]; but, mathematically, it's also possible for someone to win with an exceptionally high component score in combination with an exceptionally low technical score [which scenario so far no one is railing against]. Note, however, that the key qualifier is "exceptionally" ... these scenarios are outliers, anomalies. Most scenarios will be in the middle.

Even, if assuming for argument, that overall program scores are currently unbalanced in favor of exceptional technical scores, however, I have faith that the sport will evolve to restore balance ... a sufficient number of skaters will routinely pull off multiple quads that the component score will be decisive (or, at the very least a mediocre component score will not be sufficient). So, in addition to "faster, higher, stronger", we will also have "more graceful, more elegant, more beautiful". And I see that as a good course of evolution for the sport. I'm sure there were similar debates when doubles and then triples were first introduced, and I'm sure there will be similar debates when quints are first introduced. [As an aside, my pet peeve is that exceptional spinners don't get sufficient credit relative to exceptional jumpers.]

To throw this into historical perspective, in the old days half the score was based on compulsory figures and half the score was based on freestyle. So again, it was mathematically possible for the winner to have the extreme scenario of an exceptionally high score in one category combined with an exceptionally low score in the other. And there was one notable Olympics in which the Gold medalist so thoroughly trounced her competitors in compulsory figures that all she had to do was stroke around the ice during freestyle, and she would still win (though, to be fair, she did do a little more). But fortunately this was an anomaly.

Coebalt said:

I don't agree with limiting quad jumps any more than any other kind of jump has been limited. I'm not super keen on the technical rules yet, but isn't it like, 1-2 of each type, and I think I heard something on a total revolutions limit or something?

Click to expand...

The rule is that only two jumps with 3 or more revolutions may be repeated, and no jump may be executed more than twice.
(Triples and quads with the same takeoff are considered different jumps.)

There has never been any kind of limit on total revolutions. Some fans have suggested they would like one.

tstop4me said:

I don't quite get some of these posts. Current scoring takes into account both athleticism (technical score) and artistry (component score). Sure, mathematically, it's possible for someone to win with an exceptionally high technical score in combination with an exceptionally low component score [which scenario appears to be the pet peeve of some here]; but, mathematically, it's also possible for someone to win with an exceptionally high component score in combination with an exceptionally low technical score

Click to expand...

I think the problem is that the latter is becoming impossible in the elite men's category.

The maximum Program Component Score in a men's freeskate is 100. At Worlds this year, the top 4 freeskates all exceeded 110 in Technical Elements Score -- the top 2 exceeded 120.

It is not possible to achieve those scores without multiple quads. Exceptional technique on triple jumps, spins, step sequences, and the technical aspects of PCS can't make up the difference. Even one reliable quad, performed twice in the freeskate, won't keep up with skaters who have three or four different quads in their repertoire and repeat two with full rotation if not clean landings.

There are also skaters whose body types won't allow them to jump high enough to rotate 4 times in the air even if they train hard to maximize their own athleticism and technique, and even if their spinning and skating and presentation skills are among the best in the field.

Whereas skaters to whom jumping high comes naturally can master quads with technique that is just very good, not exceptional. And can earn so many points for those quads that they can afford to be less than very good on non-jump skills and still contend for medals.

Even, if assuming for argument, that overall program scores are currently unbalanced in favor of exceptional technical scores, however, I have faith that the sport will evolve to restore balance ... a sufficient number of skaters will routinely pull off multiple quads that the component score will be decisive (or, at the very least a mediocre component score will not be sufficient). So, in addition to "faster, higher, stronger", we will also have "more graceful, more elegant, more beautiful".

Click to expand...

The winners, typically, are those who can do both on competition day. And as you suggest, the sport will evolve so that there will be more than just 2 or 3 skaters in the world who can excel at both. But it will be more a matter of skaters who do fit the athletic profile of having potential for multiple quads also working to improve their other skills so that they can challenge each other for top medals.

When there are 10 or 12 skaters in the world who can do multiple quads and also skate well and difficultly with good performance quality, the final group(s) at the big championships will be even more exciting.

But what happens to skaters who don't have the natural physical gifts to master clean quads at all, or who can inconsistently squeak out 4T or 4S but no more? Will they risk career-ending injuries beating their bodies against the quad barrier? Will they just quit as teenagers when they realize they'll probably never get the jumps to contend for top medals, no matter how much they improve everything else including the jumps that are within their reach? Will they work on maximizing what they can do -- triple jumps and spins and skating and transitions and performance -- for their own pride in hopes of medaling at smaller competitions or even getting the chance to compete internationally at all if they're from larger federations?

Or will the men's field consist of men who can rotate lots of quads even if they're not much good at anything else, teen boys who are still working on them but are young enough to still have reasonable hope, and a handful or two of medal contenders who have mastered the quads sufficiently that they're motivated to push all their other skills to give them an edge against the other quadsters?

It might help make room (in the international field, if not on the big podiums) for those who can excel at everything except quads if the points available for non-quad skills are not so overshadowed by the base values of the quads.

E.g., raise the multiplying factor for the PCS so that those scores will max out at 120 or 125 or 150 instead of 100. (And half as much for short programs)

Introduce rewards for more difficult jumping skills involving triple jumps (or easier quads, e.g., more value for triple+4T or triple+1Lo+4S combos than for combos with the quads at the beginning) and even double jumps, in opposite directions or from currently unlisted takeoffs or with full-body in-air variations (not just arm positions)

Allow skaters who can do enough 3-3 combos, or 4T+triple or 4S+triple combo, to fit all their difficult jump content into 5 or 6 jumping passes to then use the extra slots opened up for additional level 4 non-jump elements with higher base values than double axel

Replace the current short program-freeskate breakdown with some other distribution of skills so that there will be a separate competition phase or a separate competition altogether that favors maximum jump content, and others that reward best spins or best skating skills or best performance to music, as well as one that prioritizes balancing all skills.

One way or another, the rules should evolve as the ability of the field evolves. I'd like to see rules that encourage evolution in all areas, including many jumping areas, of which adding more revolutions in the air is only one option among many for increasing difficulty.

I mean, if you're going to talk about people who don't have the potential for quads, what about the people who can't even do triples? Or even doubles? Why shouldn't they, also, be allowed to compete on an international level, with televised events and recognition for where their work managed to take them? I'm sure there are just as many dismayed teens sulking over the fact that no matter how hard they work, they can't make it into triples, and that they'll thus never make it into the big leagues.

Again though, I am newer to the sport, so there may be info I'm unaware of that explains away my concerns.

Coebalt said:

I mean, if you're going to talk about people who don't have the potential for quads, what about the people who can't even do triples? Or even doubles? Why shouldn't they, also, be allowed to compete on an international level, with televised events and recognition for where their work managed to take them? I'm sure there are just as many dismayed teens sulking over the fact that no matter how hard they work, they can't make it into triples, and that they'll thus never make it into the big leagues.

Again though, I am newer to the sport, so there may be info I'm unaware of that explains away my concerns.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you're asking, whether you are being sarcastic or serious.

There are plenty of skaters who can't do triples who compete internationally:
in ice dancing, including some top-level ice dancers;
in synchronized skating;
at junior level in singles and pairs but not in the top junior ranks;
even some senior ladies and senior pair skaters, at "senior B" events, who will not score or place high enough to earn minimum scores for ISU championships or invitations to the Grand Prix

They won't make into the "big leagues" of competing at championship events in jump-focused disciplines or being shown on TV, let alone contending for important medals. But they can compete, and can compete internationally if they represent small enough federations where they're among the best that country has to offer.

Skaters who can't even master doubles won't be able to compete at even middle levels of freestyle disciplines, but they may be able to compete nationally in synchro or ice dance, and locally at lower levels.

The rules are different for different levels.

If we're talking only about senior competition, recognize that the same rules apply to the world medal contenders and the skaters who just barely meet the minimum requirements to qualify as seniors.

As far as rules for senior competition go, the short program for both men and women requires a minimum of two different triples and a double axel, and as of a year or two ago skaters get no points at all for doing doubles or singles instead. Nevertheless, some skaters who enter senior competition knowing that they can only attempt the easier triples and they don't expect to land them successfully, don't expect to get credit for rotating them.

They may be solid skaters in non-jumping skills, but they know they're not going to be elite competitors (unless they can excel in a different discipline instead).

Do you respect their efforts to excel to the best of their physical abilities? Or do you mock them for continuing to pursue a serious hobby at which they will never be world beaters?

I criticize the merit of saying that "there are some skaters whose body type won't allow then to jump high enough to rotate 4 times in the air", when in respect to senior level competition, but then having there be a minimum, as you just said, of two triples and a double axel. Also, I thought I heard an announcer saying that a triple axel is also required? I may have misunderstood/heard him though.

Anyway, my point is that saying that some people are just physically unable to perform quads, and thus something should be done about quads in senior competition doesn't seem to mesh with the fact that triples, which are now required, used to be looked at similarly. It just seems a little silly to split the sport into further disciplines when there's already, as you said, disciplines that less jump-able skaters could choose to take up instead.

I'm sorry if I'm being unclear ^^;

Coebalt said:

I criticize the merit of saying that "there are some skaters whose body type won't allow then to jump high enough to rotate 4 times in the air", when in respect to senior level competition, but then having there be a minimum, as you just said, of two triples and a double axel. Also, I thought I heard an announcer saying that a triple axel is also required? I may have misunderstood/heard him though.

Click to expand...

The men's short program (and senior ladies' now, for that matter) requires "a double or triple axel."

It's possible that a commentator referred to "the required triple axel" but what they really meant was either that an axel was required and this skater chose to do a triple, or else that a triple axel is necessary for anyone who wants to win a major event in men's figure skating.

Anyway, my point is that saying that some people are just physically unable to perform quads, and thus something should be done about quads in senior competition doesn't seem to mesh with the fact that triples, which are now required, used to be looked at similarly. It just seems a little silly to split the sport into further disciplines when there's already, as you said, disciplines that less jump-able skaters could choose to take up instead.

Click to expand...

We may have reached or at least be soon approaching the point where it is pretty much impossible to win a world or Olympic or GPF medal, and unlikely to win a European or Four Continents or individual Grand Prix medal in men's figure skating, without at least two different quads and a triple axel . . . and also strong skating and spins and presentation. If there are enough guys who can accomplish all that, more power to them -- the level of competition is very exciting.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I don't think "something should be done about quads" such there is no more incentive for those skaters to push those boundaries.

What I do want is for non-jump skills, especially blade-to-ice technical skills, and non-quad jump quality, to retain enough importance that it won't be possible to win medals with lots of quads and significantly subpar everything else. Or, below the medal level, for the rest of the field to be filled with skaters who can do quads and not much else while the skaters who can do almost everything else except quads are actively or by default encouraged to quit the sport. If not on the championship podiums, there should be room for guys with no consistent quads, or one quad but an inconsistent triple axel, to make it to the championships, to fight for spots in the freeskate and maybe in the top 10, to get invited to Grand Prix events, etc., ahead of guys with several quads if the non-quad guys skate cleaner that day and/or have higher quality in everything else.

Coebalt said:

Also, I thought I heard an announcer saying that a triple axel is also required? I may have misunderstood/heard him though.

Click to expand...

You misheard. A triple Axel has never been a required element. For Senior men, the Axel-type jump in the short program is required to be a double or triple.

Many years ago it was required to be a double, meaning you would see layouts from skaters like Kulik that were like 2A, 3Lz, 3A-3T. Now, such a layout is not possible.

I don't disagree. I just didn't like that particular argument you used. I don't like watching jump exhibitions anymore than the next guy. I am up too late at night and enjoy talking about skating, as ill-educated as I am. Mostly because it helps me learn.