'Radical change' could be on the way

TontoK said:

Hey, El!

This sort of makes my point. When (not if) Andrew rises to his potential, he will be great in BOTH technical merit and artistry. Which is what we all should hope for.

Not particularly relevant to your post, but if jumping elements are so inconsequential to a TRULY beautiful program, then why do we assume that it's just quads that are the problem?

I mean, someone out there is probably the most beautiful "pure" skater in the world, but can't land anything above a 2A. Why should't that man be Olympic champion without a triple of any sort?

The answer, whether the Champions of Artistry will admit it or not, is that we expect some minimum level of technical expertise in our champions. So the argument is really about what that level should be. I say the sky's the limit.

Click to expand...

I hear you - but at what cost. If you think of science - for every action there is a reaction - not always good.

The way I see it, TES is a way for skaters from traditionally non-dominate countries (like in Asia) to climb to the top. Artistry is subjective. Look at how Ice Dancing is dominated by North American and European nations. This seems like a way for powerful countries like the US rise in the ranks based on artistry.

TontoK said:

Hey, El!

This sort of makes my point. When (not if) Andrew rises to his potential, he will be great in BOTH technical merit and artistry. Which is what we all should hope for.

Not particularly relevant to your post, but if jumping elements are so inconsequential to a TRULY beautiful program, then why do we assume that it's just quads that are the problem?

I mean, someone out there is probably the most beautiful "pure" skater in the world, but can't land anything above a 2A. Why should't that man be Olympic champion without a triple of any sort?

The answer, whether the Champions of Artistry will admit it or not, is that we expect some minimum level of technical expertise in our champions. So the argument is really about what that level should be. I say the sky's the limit.

Click to expand...

Yes, on behalf of the Champions of Artistry, Inc., we do concede there should be a minimum for jumps.:agree: And that the argument may be what constitutes a minimum. So see, we agree!

In my COA, Inc., chart a high, lofty beautifully landed 3A (or S or T or whatever) should be worth more than a barely-clearing-the-ice two foot 4ChooseYourLetter. It takes more athleticism as well as complements a program better. It sounds like we might even agree there.

And having seen them up close and personal, I remain convinced in my opinion that other elements are just as important. Tim Dolensky's perfect, centered and beyond-speedy spins are the athletic equivalent of anyone's jumps. Maybe we can't agree on that. But I'm not talking just "pretty", not just "artistic", with the spins and steps I admire, I'm talking amazing athletic endeavors...

And just to prove I do know my manly man sports, how bout my guy Carson Wentz?

ETA: And just to jump in on another conversation, Noskates was not talking about you. Folks who have reached years of discretion need to stick together

Back in 2016 Lakernik gave an interview where he talked about the technical and artistic programs and what they might contain:
- Technical program would be like the short or free skate, with a certain number of elements
- Artistic would focus on presentation, with easier elements
- They'd be equal in length
- Medal for each program and possibly overall (sum of scores of the two programs? overall winner seems more like an afterthought, not the purpose)

http://web.icenetwork.com/news/2016/08/16/196138174

So, yeah, the artistic program might likely end up as biased and political as Ice Dance...

sheetz said:

This is exactly how Japanese media promoted this year's Worlds.
https://youtu.be/jwhvj3M4H44?t=29s

Click to expand...

thank you very much for sharing this. what a great promo Video.
just from seeing this - a QuAD is just a WOW Moment where you can see even if you know nothing of figure Skating.
dont take that away from Sport!!

Manitou said:

Still one idea is missing: Removing three skaters per country limitation, making the skaters earn their participation in the competitions, rather than being dependent on federations. Create a point system through the season preceding the World Championships, which would become the Grand Slam of the season for the top group in each discipline. And if that top group is exclusively, or dominantly, one country then so be it!
Removing the three per country limitations would open the door to an even more radical and fantastic change: multinational dance or pair teams. I would love that!

Click to expand...

this would kill the Sport everywhere except the big countires. mostly you only get funding if you can qualify for worlds. so this is stupid idea!

The Grand Slam thing isn't needed (as someone else said we already have the GPF), but the qualification rules really do need to be updated. I don't see any argument as to why skaters shouldn't qualify themselves, rather than some arbitrary way of decided spots and limiting it to 3 at most country. It wouldn't hurt smaller countries, there would just be more people participating overall. It would actually help smaller countries, when they develop to the point of having multiple people who can qualify, but only 1 spot available. Like with Israel in 2016, Daniel Samohin would have been a worthy participant for Worlds, but Israel only had 1 spot.

Some japanese fans have done calculations on the proposed new Scale of Value (speculated based on the info we have from the Icenetwork article about the 10% increments on GOE) and compared it with the current scale of values.

https://twitter.com/e_ba_raa/status/907610087866343424

Falling/negative GOE on quads will be extremely damaging. To the point a good triple can outscore a bad quad. With the wider range in GOE, will we actually see it being properly applied? Can a triple gain a +5? Will a quad ever reach that unsurmountable GOE, whichever bullets it'll need to reach it? Will we even have people risk quads they're not hitting 90% success rate on in a program during practice, given that just falling on a 4T would make it worth all of 4.75 points plus a -1 deduction, which would be worse than just an okay 3T? Will negative GOE even be applied on the same sliding scale as the positive GOE? And the 3A on the ladies, will we ever see them try one anymore? Food for thought.

I think at a fundamental level fans enjoy watching athletes taking risks and succeeding on the biggest stages. Yuri on Ice, The Cutting Edge, and Blades of Glory all feature skaters attempting difficult and risky moves in order to win. I don't think they'd be nearly as popular if the main characters won by skating conservatively while their risk-taking competitors falter.

Blades of Passion said:

40 seconds is a loooong time, nobody goes over that amount right now. I think it needs to be 25 seconds max and also greatly cut down on the amount of required turns. They are asked to do every type of "difficult turn" in both directions right now and it's so boring to see every single skater attempt this in every program. There's way more to footwork than just these turns, but that's mainly all we see these days. Skaters don't even really have a concept of interesting footwork anymore; even in the "choreography sequence" where they do have more freedom (or in exhibitions) we don't see the creativity happening.

Click to expand...

Hmm then ISU will need to redefine the definition of the levels of the StSq. Right now, not too many have the superb SS and edge control to manage the turns and deep edges to reach level 4 without a very looooooong sequence. 40s was just my rough guess, so 25 to 30s may work but it will mean only the very best may get the highest level. I will be ecstatic if the BV of the footwork sequence goes up to reflect this and perhaps it will be an incentive for skaters to work on basic SS work to boost their StSq.

drivingmissdaisy said:

Let's also not forget that, a few years back, many people were complaining that a certain skater was winning events mostly on PCS, despite multiple falls. Increasing the weight on artistry would probably exacerbate this problem.

Click to expand...

Hmm but is this really a case of PCS being a problem or is it more a case of judging and scoring not properly accounting for multiple falls and disruptions? Surely multiple falls will disrupt the flow of the program that the PE / CH should drop. If the skater loses heart (e.g. like a Pogorilaya after the meltdown) post fall(s), the IN will also be affected and should get a hit. I don't think the PCS per se is the issue but more a lack of guidance to the scoring on the impact of errors and falls.

TontoK said:

But I also think these are (or should be) risk/reward elements. Do them well, and get rewarded. Do them poorly, and get hammered. Otherwise, there's no point.

For example, I don't think any jump that ends in a fall should receive any points at all, and the fall should still be penalized. After all, part of a jump is the landing. If it's not landed, then it shouldn't count as a jump.

I also don't believe in edge calls. If the jump is off an inside edge, then it is a flip. It is NOT a lutz (e). A lutz does not start from an inside edge. If that means that a skater suffers penalties from repeated jumps, then so be it. That skater needs to fix his/her technique.

And I definitely believe in stricter enforcement of rotation, perhaps even stricter penalty for shortcomings.

Just because I admire great jumps, that doesn't mean those jumps shouldn't be properly executed.

Click to expand...

Can't agree more. This is like the biggest mystery in figure skating, why would you reward a fall? By just trying to do the difficult jumps? While quad have much higher BV and the current scoring system doesn't have enough negative GOE to eliminate all the BV in a quad. By leaving marks on the table when the skater doesn't preform the required element, that's need to be change. Otherwise, is it another way of promoting quad? even the skater have 50/50 chance of getting the quad land, they won't leave with empty hand, while other skaters did a avearge triple, end up with similar marks?

DorYiu said:

Can't agree more. This is like the biggest mystery in figure skating, why would you reward a fall? By just trying to do the difficult jumps? While quad have much higher BV and the current scoring system doesn't have enough negative GOE to eliminate all the BV in a quad. By leaving marks on the table when the skater doesn't preform the required element, that's need to be change. Otherwise, is it another way of promoting quad? even the skater have 50/50 chance of getting the quad land, they won't leave with empty hand, while other skaters did a avearge triple, end up with similar marks?

Click to expand...

I agree with you and I might add that it is truly difficult to explain to casual viewers why a performance with one or two falls may top a clean performance. Even when you explain to them the meaning of BV they remain totally unconvince that a program with falls should deserve a gold medal. What is worst for FS reputation is that they start asking you if scores were arranged and the judges paid. Rewarding performances with falls does no good to the sport in general, IMO, in terms of attracting new fans. However, I do not agree with the proposed reduction of quads BV at all. If they really want to balance TES and PCS they just need to start judging them SEPARATELY (and judge each component of PCS separately as well and not "in block" as it happens now...I mean, a skater may not have the best SS or speed, but what if he/she has a super choreography or a very brilliant interpretation on that given day? Why should not this be properly reflected in the appropriate PCS area? What saddens me the most is that this happens mostly with second tier skaters, who may have performed the hell out of their program but, for lack of TES, will never or very rarely see that rewarded in their scores). Sorry for the rants, but I don't get the need of changes at all, they should simply judge with better sense (and less politicking).

gmyers said:

Only thing that makes sense is return to 6.0. People have nostalgia for it.

Click to expand...

Not we skaters. We skaters mostly like the COP system.

drivingmissdaisy said:

I do find that change radical, mostly because I think the right people are (generally) winning the big events. The artists like Patrick and Hanyu can be vulnerable if they get passed too much technically by the others, and I think that's how a sport should work. I think the single worst thing about figure skating today is how much time the footwork takes away from a program, so I'd welcome any change that made the element more straightforward, so that straight-line, circular, and serpentine sequences looked more like the shape used to describe them.

Click to expand...

Sent from my Pixel XL using Golden Skate mobile app

CanadianSkaterGuy said:

Yeah... especially the judges, who can place skaters wherever they want and just subjectively give 2 marks as such... instead of being compelled to consider each element.

The skaters would love it too! They can go back to doing easy combination spins with 6 rotations in basic positions. :sarcasm:

Click to expand...

Here's an idea for judging the "artistic" program. Have the "judges" judge the current PCS as they are now and the audience in attendance vote on a scale 1 to 10 on how each skater did. Make the judges' and the audience's marks worth equal percentages of the total artistic program.

Jumps, spins and footwork should get no TES score at all but only count for their artistic value to the over all program.

In essence, it would be like an interpretive program.

What do you all think about my ideas for the Junior and Senior programs?

Sent from my Pixel XL using Golden Skate mobile app

I'm not sure we'd ever see a quad in a program again if they were worth 0 points on a fall... Falling on one might become more damaging with the new BV/GOE range so it will already make people hesitate a bit on them, but to make a jump worth 0 points when you fall? Any jump even, not just quads. This could demoralize skaters too much the moment a fall happened.

Blades of Passion said:

The Grand Slam thing isn't needed (as someone else said we already have the GPF), but the qualification rules really do need to be updated. I don't see any argument as to why skaters shouldn't qualify themselves, rather than some arbitrary way of decided spots and limiting it to 3 at most country. It wouldn't hurt smaller countries, there would just be more people participating overall. It would actually help smaller countries, when they develop to the point of having multiple people who can qualify, but only 1 spot available. Like with Israel in 2016, Daniel Samohin would have been a worthy participant for Worlds, but Israel only had 1 spot.

Click to expand...

Take a look at the JGP, notice how many Russians get to compete? Taking away the limit of 3, would make every competion a Russian National Competition.

Globetrotter said:

Hmm but is this really a case of PCS being a problem or is it more a case of judging and scoring not properly accounting for multiple falls and disruptions? Surely multiple falls will disrupt the flow of the program that the PE / CH should drop. If the skater loses heart (e.g. like a Pogorilaya after the meltdown) post fall(s), the IN will also be affected and should get a hit. I don't think the PCS per se is the issue but more a lack of guidance to the scoring on the impact of errors and falls.

Click to expand...

Sent from my Pixel XL using Golden Skate mobile app

Tahuu said:

3. Reduce TES to increase the weight of subjective PCS. It's ludicrous to think PCS value should be made equal to TES. The technical difficulty has progressed and can continue to progress but artistic expression in skating cannot equally progress.

Click to expand...

Why not?

If you ask a bunch of experts on stage dance, they would probably think that figure skating has a long way to go to become equally artistic to dance masterpieces.

Is it possible to achieve the level of coherence and detailed expression of the best off-ice dance performances, or the best show skating programs, at the same time as executing the most difficult technical elements? If yes, then those are the programs that should earn 9.75s and 10.0s and earn medals.

If not, then skaters who can do 5 quads with very good artistry or 2 quads with outstanding artistry can make a choice to focus on the quads or on the program components. (I expect their choices would be different at 17 than at 27.)

Those who don't have it in them to do any quads should be able to add other kinds of technical difficulty, more difficult spins and steps and transitions/connections between elements, and/or to improve the overall performance quality and coherence and musicality to earn the highest possible PCS. Should there be a cap on PCS based on jump content, or should a Jason Brown, for example, be capable of earning top PCS with good triples and everything else but no quads?

How high should the top PCS be in relation to the highest possible TES? Or to the highest reasonably expected TES? What happens if "reasonably expected" changes?

How large should the numerical gaps between individual or total program components be for skaters who are exceptional vs. just very good?

Is it justice to punish the men/women who push the sport forward by reducing TES and artificially inflating PCS?

Click to expand...

There are different ways to push the sport forward. When IJS was introduced ~15 years ago, including both 4S and 4T in a program was cutting edge, and no one was earning 9s in PCS. The standard has been raised on both the technical and the component side. If the program component factors were designed to balance TES and PCS according to 2003 standards, then would officially changing the PCS factors and/or encouraging judges to use wider ranges including the top of the scale constitute "inflation" or "rebalancing"?

Yes, there also has to be some recalibration on the part of judging community as to what constitutes highest possible PCS and how large the gaps should be between different skaters contending for the same placements regardless of technical content, or how large the differences could or should be between different components for the same performance. I think that generally happens gradually, but if the ISU put out new rules or official guidelines or official training on how to use the numbers we'd see distinct change across the judging community within a season.

TontoK said:

I mean, someone out there is probably the most beautiful "pure" skater in the world, but can't land anything above a 2A. Why should't that man be Olympic champion without a triple of any sort?

Click to expand...

There's always ice dance. For a man, finding a partner should not be a problem. For women, just being the most beautiful pure skater in the world who can't land triples won't necessarily get you there.

Maybe there should be a separate discipline for elite solo ice dance with emphasis on blade-to-ice technical skills and program component skills.

singerskates said:

Here's an idea for judging the "artistic" program. Have the "judges" judge the current PCS as they are now and the audience in attendance vote on a scale 1 to 10 on how each skater did. Make the judges' and the audience's marks worth equal percentages of the total artistic program.

Jumps, spins and footwork should get no TES score at all but only count for their artistic value to the over all program.

In essence, it would be like an interpretive program.

What do you all think about my ideas for the Junior and Senior programs?

Sent from my Pixel XL using Golden Skate mobile app

Click to expand...

You will have a popularity contest in this case and the skaters with the most fans will have an advantage that has nothing to do with their skating.

xeyra said:

I'm not sure we'd ever see a quad in a program again if they were worth 0 points on a fall... Falling on one might become more damaging with the new BV/GOE range so it will already make people hesitate a bit on them, but to make a jump worth 0 points when you fall? Any jump even, not just quads. This could demoralize skaters too much the moment a fall happened.

Click to expand...

And would women go back to doing doubles?