Future of FS competitions?

el henry said:

I was indulging in a tad of hyperbole. . But for me, the skill involved in steps and spins *is* technical.

Click to expand...

No one would disagree with this. But the way you presented it made it seem like you made a different point there, especially taking into account what the point of the article and the thread was.

But I don’t think I’m going to convince anyone, I just wanted to put out there that “how the sport has always been” depends on how you look at it.

Click to expand...

I don't think so. The tenets of the sport have been clear. It always did use to encourage the technical and the artistic. What someone chooses to value is entirely up to them, however. I think it's harder for the skaters to achieve both at the same time, and therefore they should be made to achieve both, but that doesn't mean they should be shunned for working their way up by being good at one of those aspects.

jenaj said:

It already has been turned into gymnastics, with ubiquitous Biellmanns and bendy and twirly moves. The second mark is driven mainly by the number of transitions, whether they are meaningful elements or not. There is no score for artistry. This past Olympics said it all about the sad state of ladies skating, when the OGM was awarded to a skater whose program was blatantly constructed to maximize points, with no thought to whether cramming all of the jumps into the second half was effective choreographically. Thankfully, the ISU has tried to remedy that situation, though it remains to be seen if it will result in any more artistry. I have my doubts.

Click to expand...

If the ISU were to adopt my approach - and I cannot understand why they would not - the tech side would fix itself.

I am a "jump purist." For examples:

If a "lutz" proceeds from an inside edge - then it is not a lutz. It is not a Lutz (e). The jump should be scored as a flip. If that means disallowing another flip jump, then the skater should learn to execute the lutz properly.

If a jump ends with a skater on his backside, then it is a failed element, and should receive no points. And the penalty for a fall remains in place.

Start scoring jumps properly, and skaters will quit throwing them in willy-nilly without thought to execution.

TontoK said:

If a "lutz" proceeds from an inside edge - then it is not a lutz. It is not a Lutz (e). The jump should be scored as a flip. If that means disallowing another flip jump, then the skater should learn to execute the lutz properly.

Click to expand...

But this is almost never true. A Flutz is almost never a Flip.

chopinskate said:

But this is almost never true. A Flutz is almost never a Flip.

Click to expand...

Then it is an invalid element. My point is that leeway on technical elements has become so lax as to contravene the rule book and common sense.

A lutz proceeds from an outside edge. End of story. If it does not... then I suppose it could be counted as part of choreography, but nothing more.

A skater sliding across the ice on his butt at the end of the jump should not be given points for the effort.

TontoK said:

Then it is an invalid element. My point is that leeway on technical elements has become so lax as to contravene the rule book and common sense.

A lutz proceeds from an outside edge. End of story. If it does not... then I suppose it could be counted as part of choreography, but nothing more.

A skater sliding across the ice on his butt at the end of the jump should not be given points for the effort.

Click to expand...

Good luck in trying to do that Really, I‘m in favor of correct judging but giving zero points to a lutz jump just because the edge is incorrect? That would be ridiculous, really. Do you even have any idea how many skater flutz regularly? Yes, call them out on it, reduce points but counting it as a part of choreography? No, just no.

My problem with the current layout, which has been echoed by others, is that there isn’t enough differentiation between the free skate and the short program. Basically right now the short program is a mini free skate, and tbh, I think the FS is just redundant at this point.

I would like to see the SP restricted more, and be more comparative than it is now, and the FS less. For example, I would like to see to the SP requirements (women, in this case) as:
A combination (triple and double/triple)
A solo triple from preceding steps/skating movements (if the judges could recognize it for the past 40 years they can earn to recognize them again... but I’d make it a tech panel call and put it out of the judges’ hands)
A double Axel (sorry, Mao, Liza, Rika)
A leveled spin in one position with no change of foot (rotating between Camel, Sit, and Upright/Layback/Sideways Leaning)
A leveled spin in one position with a change of foot (rotating Camel, Sit, Upright/Layback/Sideways Leaning)
A leveled spin combination
A leveled flying spin (rotating between Camel, Sit, Upright/Layback/Sideways Leaning)
A leveled Step Sequence (although I’d like to see the Level requirements slightly relaxed)

This leaves a little bit of wriggle room in the jumps: strong jumpers can do a 3+3 and even a 3A (from steps) if they want to and are capable of it. I went with the 2A to ensure maximum comparitive-ness, though, since 3As from women are so rare, and for the same reason, no quads. Everyone will do the same spins, except they can elect to do an Upright Spin instead of the Layback/Sideways Leaning in case of back issues.) Steps need to meet Level requirements.

I would also tinker with the PCS factors like they once did in Ice Dance, so that SS/TR are more heavily weighted in the Short.

I would remove a lot of FS restrictions except those which are necessary to constrain the points system: so, we’ll probably see 3 combinations/sequences being planned, for example. I would make spins a GOE only element and allow skaters to choose what spins they want to include, steps will also be GOE only (however, they’ll need to meet at least Basic Level requirements to be valid.) I would keep the ChSq. Add an option for another Choreographic Element.

The difference will come down to jumps, which except for capping combinations and I suppose repetition rules, would be unrestricted. Maximum 7 passes and three combos/sequences still, but I would go back to the older definition of a sequence (I hatehatehatehatehate the new one; it’s so boring and prescriptive.) I would really like to be able to reflect spin and step difficulty but under a points system I just don’t think it can be done without the FS just morphing into a longer SP. So this willl slightly favor quadsters and 3As.

Between the jumps and spins/steps/Choreo éléments this is 13 elements. I would set the max to twelve, and let the skater do whatever non-jump Choreo element they want— could be a ChSq, ChSt, ChSp, ChSpiral— OR an additional jump pass.

PCS I would tweak to favor PE/CO/IN, then SS, then TR. I’d have the whole PCS score be worth still about the same as maximum expected TES.

TontoK said:

If the ISU were to adopt my approach - and I cannot understand why they would not - the tech side would fix itself.

Click to expand...

The reason they don’t do that is obvious: because they think entirely discounting jumps with falls (or other technique errors, though this to a lesser extent) will encourage excessive conservativism in skating.

And as far as skaters throwing in jump elements willy-nilly, nobody adds jumps without thought to execution. It’s a simple fact that the rules as currently constructed require you to pursue certain elements if you want to get anywhere. The Zayak rule means that you cannot reasonably hope to stand on the major podiums with only the jumps you can do best. Otherwise a flutzer might do better to just add a third flip; I’m sure many would happily do so.

I love this idea! I'll probably be killed by some for saying this, but doesn't the idea of artistry as proposed and measured, remind one so much of opera fan wars?

I mean really, at some point we could do it like an audition for an opera role. Think about the debates we could have, over 2 different programs of Turandot from skaters.
Person A: "I think that skater X did a lovely interpretation, she was the best artistic skater today."
Person B: "But Skater Y also did turandot..."
Person A: "No no, you don't get it, skater X had the best held spiral to the climax of Turandot!"
Person B:" No she did not-"
Person A: "That spiral was on the beat, and did you not see how those hands extended more?"
Person B:" But skater Y had the better singing in Turandot, and besides she can at least also skate to Tosca!"
Person A: "But her edges on Tosca sometimes slip off, and then that flip-"
Person B: "Excuse me, but one does not call someone bad just because she occasionally slips off key..."
Person A:"Sure, but she's off key all the time."
Person B: "Does not matter, she better embodies the spirit and role of Tosca!"

And somewhere along the way, we have person C thinking Skater Z is superior because in addition to Tosca and Turandot, Skater Z also has Andrew Lloyd Webber in her artistic repertoire.

I'm all ready with the popcorn, who's with me?

Edit: even better, if we go this direction. I mean, in Opera all the people auditioning have to sing the same piece. Maybe we can have skaters compete using the same music pieces? Like one year is you have to interpret Andrew Lloyd Webber, then another year everyone does Puccini, then another year everyone does Rach. This way we are less likely to have issues such as music actually affecting the perception of artistry, since everyone has to interpret the same music type artistically. And of course everyone gets a pretty even shot, since some are naturally better at translating Puccini on ice, and others are better at translating Llyod Webber. This is fair of course, and then we can determine the greatest artistic skater by the sheer number of music types/pieces that skaters can win on. Right?

Xen wins.

Xen said:

I love this idea! I'll probably be killed by some for saying this, but doesn't the idea of artistry as proposed and measured, remind one so much of opera fan wars?

I mean really, at some point we could do it like an audition for an opera role. Think about the debates we could have, over 2 different programs of Turandot from skaters.
Person A: "I think that skater X did a lovely interpretation, she was the best artistic skater today."
Person B: "But Skater Y also did turandot..."
Person A: "No no, you don't get it, skater X had the best held spiral to the climax of Turandot!"
Person B:" No she did not-"
Person A: "That spiral was on the beat, and did you not see how those hands extended more?"
Person B:" But skater Y had the better singing in Turandot, and besides she can at least also skate to Tosca!"
Person A: "But her edges on Tosca sometimes slip off, and then that flip-"
Person B: "Excuse me, but one does not call someone bad just because she occasionally slips off key..."
Person A:"Sure, but she's off key all the time."
Person B: "Does not matter, she better embodies the spirit and role of Tosca!"

And somewhere along the way, we have person C thinking Skater Z is superior because in addition to Tosca and Turandot, Skater Z also has Andrew Lloyd Webber in her artistic repertoire.

I'm all ready with the popcorn, who's with me?

Edit: even better, if we go this direction. I mean, in Opera all the people auditioning have to sing the same piece. Maybe we can have skaters compete using the same music pieces? Like one year is you have to interpret Andrew Lloyd Webber, then another year everyone does Puccini, then another year everyone does Rach. This way we are less likely to have issues such as music actually affecting the perception of artistry, since everyone has to interpret the same music type artistically. And of course everyone gets a pretty even shot, since some are naturally better at translating Puccini on ice, and others are better at translating Llyod Webber. This is fair of course, and then we can determine the greatest artistic skater by the sheer number of music types/pieces that skaters can win on. Right?

Click to expand...

this reminds me of interpretive events...i don't know if any club competitions even still do them, but no one knew ahead of time what the music was until it was played on competition warm up. whoever came up with the best program and interpretation won. it would kind of be like that, except obviously the skaters would know the music and train the choreo. would probably get a slight bit repetitive after a while after hearing the same music over and over.

edit: i actually think that interpretive would be a really cool elite event; the true masters of creativity and artistry would dominate. that would really separate the jumpers from the artists!

Xen said:

I love this idea! I'll probably be killed by some for saying this, but doesn't the idea of artistry as proposed and measured, remind one so much of opera fan wars?

I mean really, at some point we could do it like an audition for an opera role. Think about the debates we could have, over 2 different programs of Turandot from skaters.
Person A: "I think that skater X did a lovely interpretation, she was the best artistic skater today."
Person B: "But Skater Y also did turandot..."
Person A: "No no, you don't get it, skater X had the best held spiral to the climax of Turandot!"
Person B:" No she did not-"
Person A: "That spiral was on the beat, and did you not see how those hands extended more?"
Person B:" But skater Y had the better singing in Turandot, and besides she can at least also skate to Tosca!"
Person A: "But her edges on Tosca sometimes slip off, and then that flip-"
Person B: "Excuse me, but one does not call someone bad just because she occasionally slips off key..."
Person A:"Sure, but she's off key all the time."
Person B: "Does not matter, she better embodies the spirit and role of Tosca!"

And somewhere along the way, we have person C thinking Skater Z is superior because in addition to Tosca and Turandot, Skater Z also has Andrew Lloyd Webber in her artistic repertoire.

I'm all ready with the popcorn, who's with me?

Edit: even better, if we go this direction. I mean, in Opera all the people auditioning have to sing the same piece. Maybe we can have skaters compete using the same music pieces? Like one year is you have to interpret Andrew Lloyd Webber, then another year everyone does Puccini, then another year everyone does Rach. This way we are less likely to have issues such as music actually affecting the perception of artistry, since everyone has to interpret the same music type artistically. And of course everyone gets a pretty even shot, since some are naturally better at translating Puccini on ice, and others are better at translating Llyod Webber. This is fair of course, and then we can determine the greatest artistic skater by the sheer number of music types/pieces that skaters can win on. Right?

Click to expand...

Hahaha! I love your irony.

- - - Updated - - -

And I'm an opera fan, especially Puccini's works. Yay.

Fluture said:

Good luck in trying to do that Really, I‘m in favor of correct judging but giving zero points to a lutz jump just because the edge is incorrect? That would be ridiculous, really. Do you even have any idea how many skater flutz regularly? Yes, call them out on it, reduce points but counting it as a part of choreography? No, just no.

Click to expand...

As I said, I'm a purist. An lutz is not a lutz if the takeoff edge is incorrect.

I absolutely have an idea of how many skaters flutz. I hear so many complaints about how the technical side is over-emphasized. Well, for starters, how about not rewarding faulty technique?

TontoK said:

As I said, I'm a purist. An lutz is not a lutz if the takeoff edge is incorrect.

I absolutely have an idea of how many skaters flutz. I hear so many complaints about how the technical side is over-emphasized. Well, for starters, how about not rewarding faulty technique?

Click to expand...

I’m not nearly such a purist but this is as sound as any other argument I’ve heard

TontoK said:

As I said, I'm a purist. An lutz is not a lutz if the takeoff edge is incorrect.

I absolutely have an idea of how many skaters flutz. I hear so many complaints about how the technical side is over-emphasized. Well, for starters, how about not rewarding faulty technique?

Click to expand...

The problem there is that flutzing is something skaters lock in at a very young age and is almost impossible to correct after that point. Mao Asada, one of the greatest skaters of the present era, struggled with it her entire career and only just managed to do it correctly in her very final competitions, long past the point where she was a major force in skating. If flutzes could be fixed readily, it wouldn't be a problem.

macy said:

this reminds me of interpretive events...i don't know if any club competitions even still do them, but no one knew ahead of time what the music was until it was played on competition warm up. whoever came up with the best program and interpretation won. it would kind of be like that, except obviously the skaters would know the music and train the choreo. would probably get a slight bit repetitive after a while after hearing the same music over and over.

edit: i actually think that interpretive would be a really cool elite event; the true masters of creativity and artistry would dominate. that would really separate the jumpers from the artists!

Click to expand...

This would be cool, and as a fan I would enjoy it. But I don't think it would be appropriate for the Olympics.

Colonel Green said:

The reason they don’t do that is obvious: because they think entirely discounting jumps with falls (or other technique errors, though this to a lesser extent) will encourage excessive conservativism in skating.

And as far as skaters throwing in jump elements willy-nilly, nobody adds jumps without thought to execution. It’s a simple fact that the rules as currently constructed require you to pursue certain elements if you want to get anywhere. The Zayak rule means that you cannot reasonably hope to stand on the major podiums with only the jumps you can do best. Otherwise a flutzer might do better to just add a third flip; I’m sure many would happily do so.

Click to expand...

I'm not talking about the jumps they can do best. Just the jumps they can do.

Again, if the problem (real or perceived) is that the technical side of skating is over-emphasized, then a reasonable first step is to stop rewarding bad technique.

If a diver's list states that he is to do a reverse dive, but instead he does a forward dive, he isn't awarded partial points because his approach to the end of the board was proper. Why reward a "flutz"?

Likewise, if he lands on his back, he doesn't get credit for the revolutions he achieved before he splatted. So why reward a fall?

In both of these examples, he has failed the dive and receives no points for the effort.

Colonel Green said:

The problem there is that flutzing is something skaters lock in at a very young age and is almost impossible to correct after that point. Mao Asada, one of the greatest skaters of the present era, struggled with it her entire career and only just managed to do it correctly in her very final competitions, long past the point where she was a major force in skating. If flutzes could be fixed readily, it wouldn't be a problem.

Click to expand...

But Mao did fix it; and she shores it up at one point around the middle of her career too for a while. Even Ashley Wagner, not exactly a technician, has done two or three real Lutzes in her career when she tried. And no one mentions Satko’s lip anymore. It can be done.

jenaj said:

It already has been turned into gymnastics, with ubiquitous Biellmanns and bendy and twirly moves. The second mark is driven mainly by the number of transitions, whether they are meaningful elements or not. There is no score for artistry. This past Olympics said it all about the sad state of ladies skating, when the OGM was awarded to a skater whose program was blatantly constructed to maximize points, with no thought to whether cramming all of the jumps into the second half was effective choreographically. Thankfully, the ISU has tried to remedy that situation, though it remains to be seen if it will result in any more artistry. I have my doubts.

Click to expand...

I don't understand why people keep saying that backloading ruins the sport when ONE skater has done this. The rules allowed this arrangement of the jumps in the second half, the skater has the stamina and mental strength to do it, in addition to all of this with great, powerful, energetic music with fitting musical accents. And it's the FREE program, I don't see anything here ruining the sport.

To be honest, I was in Milan at Worlds 2018 and Alina's performance was, aside from Carolina's, the most anticipated, people were quite nervous and interested if she would manage to do her technically challenging programs like she did the whole season. And at previous competitions there was again this feeling of tension and uncertainty what will happen now, at least among people here in GS. And the emotion and drama and the risky aspect are what makes sports events interesting to watch.

bewitched said:

To be honest, I was in Milan at Worlds 2018 and Alina's performance was, aside from Carolina's, the most anticipated, people were quite nervous and interested if she would manage to do her technically challenging programs like she did the whole season. And at previous competitions there was again this feeling of tension and uncertainty what will happen now, at least among people here in GS. And the emotion and drama and the risky aspect are what makes sports events interesting to watch.

Click to expand...

High risk, high reward. And in Milan, she bombed. It's hard to recover from a mistake when you have very little time in between your jumps, so you end up with a lot of mistakes.

saphire said:

maybe I misunderstood but weren't they talking about using what was done at Broadmoor as an example? I still don't like the separation. Is this supposed to make it easier for judges, why couldn't they have passed the proposal to split the judging GOE/components?

Click to expand...

At Broadmoor, there were technical requirements along with the artistic elements.