ISU releases official agenda with proposals for 2024: age limits, jump limits and more

[Mathman]

@sisinka posts # 296 and 297.



Ok, I’ll be back in three weeks or so after I have digested all this information.

I will say, though, that what we should be looking at is not the raw number of points in various categories, but the margins. For instance, looking at base values for non-jump elements, every single skater from best to worst gets 3.00 for his choreo step sequence. Suppose we increase this from 3.00 to a million for each skater. No difference (GOEs as a percentage of base value is another matter. )

A case study. Lucas Britschgi and Jason Brown were essentially tied in the free skate. One got 180,68 overall and the other 180.46. Your breakdown shows

Britschgi: Jump base values 62.50, non-jump element base values 17.90, PCS 86.08

Brown: jump base values 54.87, non-jump element base values 17.10, PCS 93.98

So the spins and footwork were a wash and it comes down to “how much did Lucas beat Jason by in jumps (with two quads) versus “how much did Jason beat Lucas by in compenents” (with superior edge work and better musicality and chorography).

Well, a sample of size two is not much to go on, but I would hazard that the spread in non-jump base values is not very large all up ad down the board. (I see that Fa got 16.50)

So if the ISU wanted to encourage more skating like Jason’s, then reducing the value of jumps across the board, and especially of quads, would do the trick. If the ISU does not want to do this, then, OK, business as usual and may the best man win.

I agree that Malinin is an outlier. But for non-jump elements (base values) he got 16.31 – right along with everyone else in the top group.

 

[Jumping_Bean]

I like that you try to find an order in ISU Judging System. But I am not sure that comparing TES and PCS is reflecting the difference between rather technical skater (jumper) or rather artistic skater.

Because TES contains not only jumps, but also Step Sequences and Spins.

And PCS contains Skating Skills which are helpful in expressing the music but are not direct determinant of how good dancer / interpreteur our skater must be. In the same moment Skating Skills are determinant for quality of Step Sequence (which is part of TES).

From this point of view Judging system is not making things really simple and visible, right?

Many people believe that strong jumpers have advantage thanks to ISU Judging system.

So try to compare Jumps VERSUS Spins + Step Sequences + PCS.

Put aside GOE as it brings points based on that day's execution which can be different at every competition.

Jump Base Value = (JBV)
Base Value of other elements + PCS = (BV+PCS)


Men’s Short program at World Championships 2024:

- Ilia Malinin - 2 quad jumps (lutz and toeloop):
Jump Base value (JBV) = 34 points
Base Value of other elements + PCS = (BV+PCS) = 13 + 44.67 = 57.67 points
(Just for fun with GOE - 44.26 X 61.71 points.)

- Yuma Kagiyama - 2 quad jumps (salchow and toeloop):
(JBV) = 32.20 points
(BV+PCS) = 13.60 + 46.46 = 60.06 points
(With GOE - 41.59 X 64.76)

- Lukas Britschgi - 1 quad toeloop:
(JBV) = 28.19 points
(BV+PCS) = 13.10 + 42.89 = 55.99 points

- Jason Brown - no quad:
(JBV) = 24.41 points
(BV+PCS) = 13.60 + 45.92 = 59.52 points

Looking at this I don’t think that skaters with quad jumps would have an advantage in Judging System. As you can clearly see “other than jumps“ elements and components are getting higher points overall.

If I take Jumps Base Value and COMPARE it with Base Value of the rest of elements + PCS (taking Lukas's and Yuma's like the lowest and highest)...

Having two quad jumps one of them being lutz you get Jumps Base Value around 57% to 60% of points for the rest of elements + PCS.

With two quad jumps being toeloop and salchow you get Jumps Base Value around 53% to 57.6% of points for the rest of elements + PCS.

With one quad jump being toeloop you get Jumps Base Value around 46.9% to 50.4% of points for the rest of elements + PCS.

Men’s Free program at World Championships 2024:

- Adam Siao Him Fa - four quad jumps:
(JBV) = 77.22 points
(BV+PCS) = 16.50 + 92.07 = 108.72 points
(with GOE – 94.64 X 113.43)

- Lukas Britschgi - two quad toeloops:
(JBV) = 62.50 points
(BV+PCS) = 16.90 + 86.08 = 102.98
(with GOE – 71.78 X 108.90)

- Jason Brown - no quad jump:
(JBV) = 54.87 points (counted with double axel at the end)
(BV+PCS) = 17.10 + 93.98 = 111.08 points.

Once again taking Jumps Base Value and compare it with Base Value of the rest of elements + PCS (taking Lukas's and Jason's like the lowest and highest)...

Having four quad jumps one of them being lutz you get Jumps Base Value around 69.52% to 74.99% of points for the rest of elements + PCS.

Having two quad toeloops you get Jumps Base Value around 56.27% to 60.69% of points for the rest of elements + PCS.

Having no quad jump you get Jumps Base Value around 49.40% to 52.28% of points for the rest of elements + PCS.

Once again “other than jumps“ elements + PCS are getting higher points overall than jump elements. With one less jump element in Free Skate the percentage of Jumps Base Value versus the rest of elements + PCS will go lower.

Looking at only the "raw points" is a bit one-dimensional when the issue is not necessarily the weighting of non-jump and jump elements within the same program but the value placed on jumps when compared across different programs.

Taking the highest jump TES from this season's Worlds in the men's category and the added-up highest spin TES, step sequence score and PCS, and comparing it to the lowest equivalent each, we can see a bit of a different picture than the one painted by "raw points".

The maximum difference in points in the SP for jump elements is 35.84, for non-jump elements+PCS it's 30.7. Not too bad, right? A bit more variation in jump TES, but overall not that huge of a difference. So what's the issue? The Free Skate. The maximum difference in jump TES in the FS is 75.1, in everything else added up, it is 41.16 - Almost 34 (!) points more difference between the strongest and the weakest jumper, than between the strongest skater and weakest skater in everything else.

Does this also apply to the women's category? Absolutely not. In the SP, it is 15.29 in variance for jumps vs. 22.06 in non-jump elements+PCS, in the FS, it is 28.98 in jump elements and 35.78 in everything else added up. The women's field is scored much more closely together overall than the men's field (duh), and has much less of a difference in variance between jumps and the rest of the total score, with a bias towards non-jump elements being more valuable in creating score differences.

Obviously, this is just one competition, and this also only looks at the total field and not at the top 10 or even top 5 - There, things might look much different. If I wasn't so busy offline currently, I might have done some more analyses, but as it stands currently, that will have to wait for the weekend (or whenever else I can find some free time ).

(And yes, Ilia accounts quite heavily for the jump TES difference in the Free Skate, but his success strategy very much cannot be ignored when talking about the relative possible advantage of jumps compared to all other aspects of skating.)

 

[Magill]

Another point is that jumps are literally the only part of the total score which is not really capped. If you add a rotation to a jump or increase the number of quads against triples, you get more points, you can increase your score and increase the gap between yourself and your close competitors if they cannot do the same at a given moment in time. But increasing difficulty of a spin, a step sequence, choreo, improving your SS etc can give you only as many points as the guy close to you gets anyway. No matter what you do, you will not get Level 5 on a spin. So at a certain level, you get rewarded only on the jump elements, while on the others you can only get punished. This is the structural bias of IJS towards jumps. Nothing can be done about it unless you put a cap on the total number of points which can be scored on jumps, or unleash other elements to reward their advancement, too.
Combined with the tendency to reward top jumpers with undeservedly high levels and GOEs on non-jumping elements and PCSs, it would be surprising if we did not get to the point we are at.

 

[Mathman]

Although there is a correlation between risk factor and difficulty, the two are not identical.

Thank you, thank you, thank you. I have been wanting to say that for months but I was afraid to.

Not ony that, but the whole idea that it is obvious that the riskier something is the more higly it should be rewarded -- no, that is not obvious at all. It is not even obvious that the more difficult something is the more points you should get for doing it. Sword-swallowing is both difficult (in the sense that not many people can do it) and risky. I would not therefore vote to ammend the IJS to give a base value of 20 points to any skater who can stop in the middle of his routine and put on his sword-swallowing act -- not even if it matched the music and supported the choreographic vision.

In the hundred meter dash you do not win by taking a risk but by running faster than everyone else (unless you count the risk or popping a tendon from the effort). In pole vault if I clear 17 feet and you clear 18, you win. There might be a little strategy involved in deciding whether you want to pass at 15 feet and save your strength for the finale, or whether you want to have money in the bank at 15 feet going in. But that is not what we mean by risk and rewrad.

The University of Michigan (American) football team won the national collegiate championship this year. The Michigan motto is "three yards and a cloud of dust." The game plan is to run straight at the oppnents on every play and by the forth quarter they are so beaten up that Michigan goes on to win. No risk at all, just better football players.

I would like to see more of that sporting philosphy in figure skating. The way to win is to skate better than everyone else.

 

[Mathman]

The maximum difference in points in the SP for jump elements is 35.84, for non-jump elements+PCS it's 30.7. Not too bad, right? A bit more variation in jump TES, but overall not that huge of a difference. So what's the issue? The Free Skate. The maximum difference in jump TES in the FS is 75.1, in everything else added up, it is 41.16 - Almost 34 (!) points more difference between the strongest and the weakest jumper, than between the strongest skater and weakest skater in everything else.

Does this also apply to the women's category? Absolutely not. ..

I wish I'd said that!

That is what I have been fumbling around trying to say, but I could not find the words to express it so directly and succinctly.

 

[4everchan]

Although there is a correlation between risk factor and difficulty, the two are not identical.

For some kinds of skills, if you make a mistake, at least certain kinds of mistakes, you will probably fall.

For other kinds of skills, if you make a mistake it is unlikely that you will fall or even that a casual viewer would notice anything wrong, but the percentage of success as defined by executing the move correctly may be similar or lower than with the riskier move.

Suppose, for example, that "camel spin with a change of foot that also changes direction, at least 6 revolutions on each foot and a change of edge on each foot" was a required element in the short program.

We don't see that very often because it's not currently required and there are easier ways to earn spin levels so most skaters don't bother learning it.

If it were suddenly to become required, everyone would do their best to learn it and would include the attempts in their short programs. Many skaters who can't do it now would manage to master it at least adequately enough to get full credit. But quite likely more skaters would struggle to earn full credit for that element because it is difficult in ways that do not play to their strengths. I would expect, at a minimum, that it would be common for the bad-direction spin to have less than 6 revolutions. It would also probably be common to fail to achieve 2 revolutions on each edge on both feet. We might also see inadequate camel positions (<90 degrees), severe traveling, free leg clunking to the ice, etc. Some of those failures would be obvious to casual observers, others more subtle.

There would probably be a lot of negative GOEs and a fair amount of asterisks for attempts where the skater doesn't manage to meet the minimum requirements for CCSp with change of direction (3 revs in position on each foot).

Of course with more years to practice, more skaters will master that element. But some will always struggle with it because they naturally lack the ambidexterity to allow them to execute strong spins in their bad direction. Add a catch-foot position requirement, and some skaters will struggle more with that because they naturally lack the flexibility.

One could certainly argue that that spin would be more difficult than a 2F or 2Lz, possibly more difficult than a 2A. But there would probably be fewer outright falls on that spin than there would be on those double jumps.

So is risk determined/difficulty defined by the kinds of failures that are likely to occur?

everything in here is true. However, that's the whole thing : some skaters do not have the ambidexterity nor the flexibility to achieve such spins but they are not required. The ISU removed mandatory spiral sequences and the layback spin. Skaters who do not have these qualities can earn points differently. For instance, Patrick Chan, never did bendy position but would manage high points on spins because of the quality of his position and he was able to reach level 4s differently. The opposite is also true : some spinners are truly wonderful but would have trouble meeting the ISU requirements : Keegan Messing for instance. One of the best spinners I have seen live, yet often level 2 or 3... is that fair ? I saw lots of very dubious spinning get level 4s just because there was a catch foot somewhere in the spin or an ugly position.
So in this case, the ISU has deliberately chosen ways to get levels that are possible for not so great spinners yet impossible for some fabulous spinners

Now what I am after is the following : if most skaters do manage to get points out of spins and steps, even the worst skaters, if a skater cannot jump a quad, they are not able to include that element in their program. Worse than that, a guy like Jason Brown has to include a double axel in his LP at this point.

So the gap between the wealthy quadsters and the poor non-quadsters gets bigger and bigger in the LP... And it's not really possible to make up points with the non jumping elements.


Some pointed out the number of points Lukas and Jason got for their non jumping elements : about 17 points... Well, that amount of points for 3 spins, one step sequence and a choreo sequence, so five elements, is almost equivalent to a quad combo with good GOE... ONE JUMPING PASS.

It's about time the ISU removes one jumping pass from the LP, but they should bring back the second step sequence too. There will never be a fair balance between jumping and non-jumping elements but that's also fine. It's not like in gymnastics there is automatically a balance between release moves on the high bar and the other moves... the dismount is another animal too... Flexibility on the floor or on the beam is not rewarded as much as tumbling.

I am fine with the unbalance but at this point, it's just a bit too much for me.

BTW : since people have mentioned Lukas : now that's a really awesome spinner ! Bravo !

 

[gkelly]

It's about time the ISU removes one jumping pass from the LP, but they should bring back the second step sequence too.

For women, there was a leveled spiral sequence at the time when men had two leveled step sequences.

Did you want to bring this back to replace the choreographic sequence?

It seems that the ISU has been promoting the choreographic moves (including a choreo spin for singles skaters starting next year) as a way to encourage creatvity and variety, to be more fun to watch. Some skaters have managed to use the choreo sequence to achieve that goal, but others just use it as more or less a rest break.

What the ISU has not done, except to some degree in removing the eighth jump pass from the men's FS a few years ago and now the seventh for both men and women, has been to try to adjust the balance of points available for jumps vs. non-jump elements.

Personally, if it were up to me, I would increase the number of leveled blade-to-ice elements that can be used in a free skate and introduce the variety for viewers (and also for skaters to play to their personal strengths) by having a larger variety of different kinds of leveled sequences/edge elements and also a wider variety of different ways to achieve levels. All available to both men and women.

For example:
*Allow a second leveled step sequence with the same features available in the existing step sequence and only require that the two sequences each be performed in clear patterns (straight line/diagonal, circular, serpentine) that are different from each other
OR
*Offer two different styles of leveled step sequences with some different level features available to each, e.g., one that emphasizes edges and turns, another that emphasizes quickness and different kinds of "steps"

*Remove the clusters as a level feature from the step sequence and introduce a separate element type of one-foot turns as in ice dance?

*Restore the leveled spiral sequence as an option -- with additional level features based on blade work rather than positions, and define the requirements such that even if only 3 positions can be counted toward levels, it would also be possible to count 2 transitions between positions as features and also require a change of foot (there might be one or more ways of changing foot that could count as features)
AND/OR
*Introduce a leveled "field moves" sequence that includes level features for various spread eagle, Ina Bauer, shoot-the-duck/hydroblading positions, possibly also including spirals
AND/OR
*Introduce the "short edge element" and "combination edge element" as currently used in solo ice dance

*Introduce a figures variation element in which skaters perform two or three (or more?) tangent circles with features available primarily for turns and loops performed on the circles and transitions between circles (counters, rockers, choctaws, edge changes) but possibly also for some kinds of body position variations while performing these edges and turns

*Introduce a leveled low-revolution jump sequence element that includes at least three half- to 1.5-revolution jumps linked together by steps, turns, or smaller jumps, with features for difficult air variations and difficult connections, and for 1.5 jumps in both directions

Make the first leveled step sequence required, and then allow skaters to choose two more of the other leveled elements.

Obviously this would take more time in a program, so they wouldn't coexist with choreo sequences. You'd lose the freedom of choreo sequences as they currently exist, but the skaters who showcase good skills and artistry in their choreo sequences now would also benefit from earning levels for those skills in their chosen leveled sequences.

And different skaters would choose a different mix of these elements, so audiences would see more variety.

Yes, I know that would make a lot more work for the technical panels, which may be why the ISU has never pursued this approach.

 

[4everchan]

For women, there was a leveled spiral sequence at the time when men had two leveled step sequences.

Did you want to bring this back to replace the choreographic sequence?

no.. i don't want more choreo sequence... i want real steps

It seems that the ISU has been promoting the choreographic moves (including a choreo spin for singles skaters starting next year) as a way to encourage creatvity and variety, to be more fun to watch. Some skaters have managed to use the choreo sequence to achieve that goal, but others just use it as more or less a rest break.

its'a double edged sword if it's judged like everything marked choreo in ice dance .

What the ISU has not done, except to some degree in removing the eighth jump pass from the men's FS a few years ago and now the seventh for both men and women, has been to try to adjust the balance of points available for jumps vs. non-jump elements.

Personally, if it were up to me, I would increase the number of leveled blade-to-ice elements that can be used in a free skate and introduce the variety for viewers (and also for skaters to play to their personal strengths) by having a larger variety of different kinds of leveled sequences/edge elements and also a wider variety of different ways to achieve levels. All available to both men and women.

clap

For example:
*Allow a second leveled step sequence with the same features available in the existing step sequence and only require that the two sequences each be performed in clear patterns (straight line/diagonal, circular, serpentine) that are different from each other
OR
*Offer two different styles of leveled step sequences with some different level features available to each, e.g., one that emphasizes edges and turns, another that emphasizes quickness and different kinds of "steps"

*Remove the clusters as a level feature from the step sequence and introduce a separate element type of one-foot turns as in ice dance?

yes... one foot skating... it has been a feature in the past in the SP i believe... i still remember fondly some of those one foot sections... and it was like a decade ++ ago

*Restore the leveled spiral sequence as an option -- with additional level features based on blade work rather than positions, and define the requirements such that even if only 3 positions can be counted toward levels, it would also be possible to count 2 transitions between positions as features and also require a change of foot (there might be one or more ways of changing foot that could count as features)
AND/OR
*Introduce a leveled "field moves" sequence that includes level features for various spread eagle, Ina Bauer, shoot-the-duck/hydroblading positions, possibly also including spirals
AND/OR
*Introduce the "short edge element" and "combination edge element" as currently used in solo ice dance

*Introduce a figures variation element in which skaters perform two or three (or more?) tangent circles with features available primarily for turns and loops performed on the circles and transitions between circles (counters, rockers, choctaws, edge changes) but possibly also for some kinds of body position variations while performing these edges and turns

*Introduce a leveled low-revolution jump sequence element that includes at least three half- to 1.5-revolution jumps linked together by steps, turns, or smaller jumps, with features for difficult air variations and difficult connections, and for 1.5 jumps in both directions

Make the first leveled step sequence required, and then allow skaters to choose two more of the other leveled elements.

Obviously this would take more time in a program, so they wouldn't coexist with choreo sequences. You'd lose the freedom of choreo sequences as they currently exist, but the skaters who showcase good skills and artistry in their choreo sequences now would also benefit from earning levels for those skills in their chosen leveled sequences.

And different skaters would choose a different mix of these elements, so audiences would see more variety.

Yes, I know that would make a lot more work for the technical panels, which may be why the ISU has never pursued this approach.

the TECH panel is there to work. I don't care if they have to work more

 

[Mathman]

BTW : since people have mentioned Lukas : now that's a really awesome spinner ! Bravo !

This summarizes the whole thing. Awesome Lucas got all level 4s and a lot of GOE. How much did this profit him, compared tp, for onstance the last place skater?

Lucas: Total base values for his three spins, 10.00. With GOE, 14.08.

Sihyong Lee: Total base values: 9.30 (two level threes and one level 4). With GOE, 10.26.

Britschgi wins... by 3.92 points.

(For comparison, Lucas got 12.79 for his tripla Axel sequence, while Lee received 0.89 for his. This however, doesn't really prove anything except that downgrades and falls are to be avoided.)

 

[4everchan]

This summarized the whole thing. Awesome Lucas got all level 4s and a lot of GOE. How much did this profit him, compared tp, for onstance the last place skater?

Lucas: Total base values for his three spins, 10.00. With GOE, 14.08.

Sihyong Lee: Total base values: 9.30 (two level threes and one level 4). With GOE, 10.26.

Britschgi wins... by 3.92 points.

(For comparison, Lucas got 12.79 for his tripla Axel sequence, while Lee received 0.89 for his. This however, doesn't really prove anything except that downgrades and falls are to be avoided.)

we are preaching for the same parish... (not sure this is a valid expression in English) ... but yeah... this is also what pisses me off... there is no incentive to because a Roman or a Lukas or a Deniss kind of spinner if it doesn't even give you a double axel advantage on the worst spinners... what they need is to go for quads... and in their case, not to get ahead... but just to survive.

 

[gkelly]

yes... one foot skating... it has been a feature in the past in the SP i believe... i still remember fondly some of those one foot sections... and it was like a decade ++ ago

Ca. 2010, there was a level feature to perform half the step sequence pattern all on one foot.

More recently, the comparable feature is "Two combinations of 3 difficult turns on different feet executed with continuous flow within the sequence. Only one difficult turn may be repeated in the two combinations. Only the first combination attempted on each foot can be counted."

This has been around for several years already.

In both cases, the level features/requirements were/are the same for step sequences in both short and free programs.


In solo free dance, there is a separate element, not part of the step sequence, called One Foot Turns Sequence: "One Foot Turn Sequence to be skated anywhere in the program. It must include the following difficult turns: Rocker, Bracket, Counter, Twizzle (Single Twizzle counts for levels 1 and 2 and Double Twizzle counts for levels 3 and 4)"

In partnered free dance, the comparable element is defined as "One (1) One Foot Turns Sequence FD Option, Not-Touching
Difficult Turns performed on one foot by each partner and must be started with the first Difficult Turn at the same time. The additional Difficult Turns do not have to be performed at the same time."

So I'm suggesting that we could consider having something like that for singles, outside of the full step sequence.

 

[4everchan]

Ca. 2010, there was a level feature to perform half the step sequence pattern all on one foot.

More recently, the comparable feature is "Two combinations of 3 difficult turns on different feet executed with continuous flow within the sequence. Only one difficult turn may be repeated in the two combinations. Only the first combination attempted on each foot can be counted."

This has been around for several years already.

In both cases, the level features/requirements were/are the same for step sequences in both short and free programs.


In solo free dance, there is a separate element, not part of the step sequence, called One Foot Turns Sequence: "One Foot Turn Sequence to be skated anywhere in the program. It must include the following difficult turns: Rocker, Bracket, Counter, Twizzle (Single Twizzle counts for levels 1 and 2 and Double Twizzle counts for levels 3 and 4)"

In partnered free dance, the comparable element is defined as "One (1) One Foot Turns Sequence FD Option, Not-Touching
Difficult Turns performed on one foot by each partner and must be started with the first Difficult Turn at the same time. The additional Difficult Turns do not have to be performed at the same time."

So I'm suggesting that we could consider having something like that for singles, outside of the full step sequence.

I love one foot skating... those who are good at it impress me so much, balance, edge quality and power... so wonderful to watch.

 

[zebobes]

This summarized the whole thing. Awesome Lucas got all level 4s and a lot of GOE. How much did this profit him, compared tp, for onstance the last place skater?

Lucas: Total base values for his three spins, 10.00. With GOE, 14.08.

Sihyong Lee: Total base values: 9.30 (two level threes and one level 4). With GOE, 10.26.

Britschgi wins... by 3.92 points.

(For comparison, Lucas got 12.79 for his tripla Axel sequence, while Lee received 0.89 for his. This however, doesn't really prove anything except that downgrades and falls are to be avoided.)

While I agree with your point in theory, Lee is actually a decent spinner, and he was ranked sixteenth in spins. If you look at the 24th ranked skater in spins, it would be Semen Daniliants, whose base values in spins was 7.88, with a total of 7.63 in spins.

Also, I'm not sure which competition you are looking at, but Lukas got 12.89 in his spins, which admittedly isn't that huge of a gap point wise, but is a big difference percentage wise. Jason's spins only got him a couple of points more, 14.56, which is almost twice of Semen's.

 

[SmileHappy34]

I wasn't going to comment on this because I as a person that sponsor the sport through watching television and once in a while buys the sponsor products. It is irrelative.
I think they are trying to make it watchable and less injury to the skaters.


But because you are comparing skater to skater to figure out why doing what they are doing I decided to state my two cents


1. Why go to shows? What do u expect from skaters jumps , spins, footwork ?
Do u want overall enjoyment from show?

Do u go to SOu, Japan show to see Ilia jump, Yuma quads, Patrick step sequence or how they make u feel when done skating?

Do u tell others to watch the skaters jump or how they make u feel with how the jumps are incorporate, spins, footwork connect to music to make u feel glad, happy , sad.

I am curious because all I have read is who should /shouldn't have received yes or PCs scores.

Not once did I read about how doing those quads cause injury it , lifts that the skaters claim haspen off season that prevents from skating or shortens their careers.

Not once did I read applies to what the question is about.

U mention youth ahe should increase to injury but all talk is how jumps differentiate and just doing them wins.

Ilia did do spins, footwork, and connection but claims not enough.
They lower or changing jumps and all I read ( interpret) is they shouldn't.

As u stated most are connected to the sport somehow

Yey nothing in the ISu proposal connects sport to public perception to increase it .

Nothing in this blog.
All compares one skaters tes to other and who better in PCs or tes.

I would like to know how this increase viewers or people in shows. Nothing

They will practice jumps in shows so shows become a jumping contest

No one will see nor receive the emotional impact from skater despite music

 

[el henry]

we are preaching for the same parish... (not sure this is a valid expression in English) ... but yeah... this is also what pisses me off... there is no incentive to because a Roman or a Lukas or a Deniss kind of spinner if it doesn't even give you a double axel advantage on the worst spinners... what they need is to go for quads... and in their case, not to get ahead... but just to survive.

Very close: You are preaching to the choir.

(If you said to me, one foot skating and good spins should be rewarded more, I would reply to you, You are preaching to the choir But you know that... )

 

[Mathman]

I would like to know how this increase viewers or people in shows. Nothing

They will practice jumps in shows so shows become a jumping contest

No one will see nor receive the emotional impact from skater despite music.

Thank you for that persprctive. The ISU scoring rules are not, of course, about shows but rather about ISU competitions.

I do, however, think that the ISU cares about the entertainment value of the sport of figure skating, and that this concern played a role in the proposed rules changes. The reason given for eliminating one jumping pass and replacing it with a choreograpic spin is to provide the skters with more time to present to the audience an emotionally and aesthetically satisfying overall experience.

To me, the majority of the debate revolves around the question of whether the proposed changes will accomplish this, or if not, what changes might work better (for instance, would decreasing the value of jumps and/or increasing the value of Program Components be an improvement or not?)

I agree that arguing about which individual skaters will be helped or hurt by the rules changes is not the relevant point. If I had to guess at what the majority of Golden Skate posters on this thread believe it is that the changes will not matter much. A few hardy souls have made suggestions about other changes in the scoring rules that might lead to better programs and greater audience appeal, but there are also quite a few contributors who think that jumps are the most exciting part of a competition.

 

[Mathman]

Also, I'm not sure which competition you are looking at, but Lukas got 12.89 in his spins, almost twice of Semen's.

Thanks for the correction. When it comes to reading ISU protocols I am reading-across-the-line challenged. I accidentally gave Lucas the score for his triple loop (3rd element) instead of his first spin (4th element).

Actually, it is kind of interesting that the scores for level 4 spins, up to 3.50 base values, are not too terribly far off from triple jumps- -and a tick higher than a double Axel.

 

[TallyT]

I would like to know how this increase viewers or people in shows. Nothing

They will practice jumps in shows so shows become a jumping contest

No one will see nor receive the emotional impact from skater despite music

I agree with @Mathman that the ISU is more concerned with the competitive sport rather than shows even if the two are inextricably entwined (and even more for say JSF, who I believe sponsor quite a few in Japan and would like to not lose money on them.) The shows in Asia at least are unlikely to turn into jumping competitions anyway when the pundits look at where the big money is. The ones in Russia seem from what I can see to be heavily story-based (and the stars are the group of 'name' Eteri girls who have slowed down, not the current crop), so are a different animal. Dunno about the rest of Europe. And the shows in NA are errr.... not doing well anyway.

The entertainment factor for competition does fade quite a lot where there is no competition. Malinin is gaining social media traction at the minute because he is doing byte-sized things no one else can but if others aren't able to challenge his scores because of the pro-jumping bias, that will become less interesting (which may be why he keeps talking about quints. There will come a time even and especially if no one else gets the quad axel where the audiences will start going 'seen that been there what's new?' and find something else to do)

I agree that arguing about which individual skaters will be helped or hurt by the rules changes is not the relevant point.

Me, I think (and as I said, I don't have a current specific horse in this race) that they may need to ignore the outliers and concentrate on the mass of international-level-but-not-podiuming skaters, to try and make competitions as a whole more interesting and appealing. Competitions are long, they need to be entertaining all the way through, not just the last half-hour. Because if folk can watch Malinin, Kagiyama, Kaori etc online without having to first sit through a lot of others trying to do the same (because it's the only way to get points), why stump up for tickets when they can sit at home in comfort and fastforward through the bits they don't want to watch?

 

[TontoK]

So the gap between the wealthy quadsters and the poor non-quadsters gets bigger and bigger in the LP... And it's not really possible to make up points with the non jumping elements.

I see absolutely nothing wrong with this situation. Skaters who can't do triples would also be buried by those who can. Is that similarly unfair? And what's so magical about cutting the jumping passes to 6? Why not 4? Or 2?

Imagine this list would have been the top six finishers at the recent WC: Yuma (G), Adam (S), Shoma (B), Jason, Lukas, Deniss.

Would we have thought, "Hey, this is troubling! Our sport is headed in the wrong direction!" I doubt it.

But guess what? That WOULD have been the outcome if Ilia had not been there, and by his telling, he almost wasn't. Ilia's staggering free skate has people forgetting that the so-called (let's agree that personal tastes can vary) artistic cream also rose to the top.

But the sky is falling, because one guy finally managed to get himself organized and skate a clean competition for the very first time this season. It was a career event for Ilia, who delivered a historic performance. That, coupled with mistakes from his competitors, resulted in an absolute ass-kicking on the scoreboard, and I think part of the angst is "OMG, what if he does it again?"

In some respects, we are in agreement. I'd also like to see more innovative spins and footwork - we don't see nearly enough interesting ones now. The solution to that is to tweak the rules to give those qualities more value. The solution is not "Let's hobble the other guy."

Every now and then, the board has a struggle session about the declining popularity of the sport. And now we have a guy that has us on the edge of our seats, his shows seem to be well-attended, he's getting press outside of our usual collection of bloggers and niche reporters, he's bringing attention and new fans... and our first move is to put a lid on his strengths?

The good news from my perspective is that the skaters themselves don't appear as defeatist. They know where they need to improve, and they appear committed to doing so. In recent interviews, Ilia has said he wants to work more on interpreting music. Adam plans to resume training for the 4A (I had not known he'd worked on it previously), and Kao wants to improve his consistency.

Good, I'm a greedy fan; I want more from everybody.

 

[el henry]

I don't think the sky is falling and I don't care if Ilia jumps a gazillion quads. Good for him and good for everyone who loves to watch that (I am not being sarcastic, I mean that). I enjoy watching Ilia, although I am not on the edge of my seat with bated breath. I also don't think the whole wide skating world is watching with bated breath, but maybe that's my bias for the type of skating I prefer.

I don't want the scoring system to reward a gazillion quads to the exclusion of other skating skills, and that has jack squat to do with any one skater. I don't see the proposals as "anti-Ilia" and I don't evaluate them that way.

To the extent I understand the new proposals as adjusting the reward for skating, I like them. Of course, "to the extent I understand" is doing a lot of heavy lifitng.