SP and FS replaced by Technical and Artistic programs?

el henry said:

I know we’ve got some examples already, and we could get many more probably, but....

Click to expand...

Michelle Kwan, 1996. Romanza SP was better than Salome LP.

1998. Rachmaninov SP was (even) better than Lyra Angelica.

1999. Carmen Suite SP was a better constructed program than Ariane LP.

2005. Spartacus was better than Bolero.

And that doesn't even count Eric Clapton or the Feeling Begins.

I’m finding I like SPs more than LPs these days, but that could be because less of an emphasis on jumps?

Click to expand...

I think it is the difference between quality of jumps and quantity of jumps. In the Short Program you only have three chances at it, do or die. Every little detail counts and a mistake can kill you.

In the LP, if you fall on your opening triple Axel, under-rotate your 3Lz+3T , and step out of your triple loop -- no biggie. Just land the next triple Axel attempt and toss up a gang of other jumps to make up for it.

anonymoose_au said:

Pretty much. I'm not sure they even broadcasted it because you wouldn't be able to see the figures in the ice on TV. Even the audience at the rink wouldn't have been able to see it very well, so if you went to the Figures portion of an event it'd just be six hours of watching skaters sloooowly skate about on one foot and then a whole bunch of judges peer at the ice afterwards

However, they do have black ice now, so that you can see the figures...still not sure it'd be much fun. I like the idea of fancy figures though Imagine Yuzu designing Pooh Bear on the ice for his portion!

Click to expand...

I willing to bet that technology exists that could digitally map the skaters etchings, enhance and broadcast them on a jumbotron, and perhaps even score them in terms of the accuracy of the shape and the overlay of the etchings.

Honestly, I think that would be very interesting. There's not really an artistic element to figures, is there? It's all about the accuracy of the patterns. Can you imagine any component of an ISU competition where politicking would do absolutely no good at all?

el henry said:

I know we’ve got some examples already, and we could get many more probably, but....

Click to expand...

I think we just this weekend got an object lesson in what as-near-as-possible perfect timing and emphasis/structure in both short and free should be in their own way. And yes, I'm biased, but you know who I mean.

(ps - Jeffrey Buttle is a master of the short form, no one fight me on this)

TontoK said:

I willing to bet that technology exists that could digitally map the skaters etchings, enhance and broadcast them on a jumbotron, and perhaps even score them in terms of the accuracy of the shape and the overlay of the etchings.

Honestly, I think that would be very interesting. There's not really an artistic element to figures, is there? It's all about the accuracy of the patterns. Can you imagine any component of an ISU competition where politicking would do absolutely no good at all?

Click to expand...

There is actually an annual World Figures Championship that uses black ice and it does include artistic figures - ie the skaters develop and trace elaborate patterns on the ice, much larger and more complex than school figures. It's still very technical, but also very beautiful and rather hypnotic to watch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhfyWpIdypM

But IIRC, when figures were part of competition they were absolutely not invulnerable to politicking. In fact, some of the worst of it seems to have happened in that section of the events!

Please no!

TontoK said:

I willing to bet that technology exists that could digitally map the skaters etchings, enhance and broadcast them on a jumbotron, and perhaps even score them in terms of the accuracy of the shape and the overlay of the etchings. ...

Click to expand...

I also thought of this: Once the technology is developed accurately to measure the number of degrees of rotation in the air for each jump, you could just give a set amount -- say .005 points -- for each degree of rotation. So a triple, 1080 degrees = 5.40 points, and a quad, 1440 x .005 = 7.20.

Supernovaimplosion said:

Honestly, the idea of a program without jumps doesn't scare me the most, its a program that's ONLY jumps, with no choreography or anything. I don't know, it doesn't sound very interesting to watch to me. Figure skating is best as a marriage between artistry and athleticism. I can't see either being too exciting without the other
Obviously we don't have the full details of the proposal, but like.. What?

Click to expand...

Only right now, athleticism is taking over by far, so...something does need to change...

Harriet said:

There is actually an annual World Figures Championship that uses black ice and it does include artistic figures - ie the skaters develop and trace elaborate patterns on the ice, much larger and more complex than school figures. It's still very technical, but also very beautiful and rather hypnotic to watch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhfyWpIdypM

But IIRC, when figures were part of competition they were absolutely not invulnerable to politicking. In fact, some of the worst of it seems to have happened in that section of the events!

Click to expand...

In America, we never got to see or hear enough about figures at major events, so I really don't know. But, my point was that if the figures were digitally mapped and automatically scored without humans being involved at all, then any bias would be removed.

I revisited the question of whether the multiplication factors for PCS need to be raised to take into account the rising tech maximums. For instance, in the Skate Canada men's short program last week end, the technical element scores and PCS (with current men's SP factoring of 100%), came out like this. Leaving out Hanyu (who did 2 quads) the other 11 men scored a total of 466.66 points in TES and 470.52 in PCS.

The ISU must be congratulating itself for the success of the IJS in balancing the weight of tech elements versus the weight of program components.

To me, this suggests a way to turn the SP into an "artistic program" (keeping the LP as is but maybe shorter in duration, so it is not so much of an endurance contest -- can I get in all my jumps before the gong sounds?).

For the new SP/artistic program, expand the time to 3 minutes. (This is only 10 seconds more than currently.) keep the three jumping pass rule with the extra proviso: no more than 1 quad allowed; no more than 1 Axel-type jump allowed; no more than 1 combination allowed; no jumps repeated.) For the non-jump elements, provide a long list of scored elements and let the skaters choose 9 to be scored. These will include spins (no more than 3) step sequences, spirals, Ina Bauers, spread eagles, split jumps, etc., etc., which would be worth 2 points each, with GOE reflecting quality.

The PCS would be combined into 1 overall score (basically the old choreography, presentation, and interpretation mark with emphasis on how well the skater used his choice of elements to weave an esthetically meritorious program. No need for a separate TR score, or even SS. SS would be folded in under "how well did the skater use his blade and edge skills to mesmerize the audience, translate the essence of the music to the ice, execute the vision of the choreography, etc.

The objective would be use a richer pallette of individual scored technical elements, while putting greater emphasis on how they come together to make a program.

IMHO this would be plenty sporty enough -- all those technical elements! The judging would be only slightly more subjective than it is now, and after all, this is the "artistic" program of a judged sport, so it is not an outrage to consult the opinions of expert judges as to the artistic merit of the work.

It would remain to be seen whether fans and casual TV watchers would like what they saw. And the big jumpers -- viewing all this with scorn -- could still clean up in the LP.

Isn't skating without jumps just "killing time" by Ashley Wagner's definition? https://twitter.com/AshWagner2010/status/962882943885524992

neud said:

Isn't skating without jumps just "killing time" by Ashley Wagner's definition? https://twitter.com/AshWagner2010/status/962882943885524992

Click to expand...

No. Ashley Wagner is quite wrong about that.

For one thing, jumps comprise only a few seconds of a 4 minute program. (No skater is in the air for even 1 full second on a jump.)

For another (I assume she is talking about Alina Zagitova's Olympic LP), that was a wonderfully constructed program. The backloading did not detract from the esthetic appeal -- not at all.

Mathman said:

No. Ashley Wagner is quite wrong about that.

For one thing, jumps comprise only a few seconds of a 4 minute program. (No skater is in the air for even 1 full second on a jump.)

For another (I assume she is talking about Alina Zagitova's Olympic LP), that was a wonderfully constructed program. The backloading did not detract from the esthetic appeal -- not at all.

Click to expand...

It would be interesting to see some of people-other-than-Yuzuru's programs with the big jumps basically stripped and what is left. I may be inexpert and biased, but I suspect with the top skaters, even those I don't necessarily like, folk like Ashley would have to admit just how much great and compulsively watchable stuff is still there.

TontoK said:

In America, we never got to see or hear enough about figures at major events, so I really don't know. But, my point was that if the figures were digitally mapped and automatically scored without humans being involved at all, then any bias would be removed.

Click to expand...

I think that this whole "school figures" discussion is very relevant to the question of the thread.

In the olden days a skating contest had two parts: technical (figures) and artistic (free skating). The technical dominated because of the scoring system. The best technicians would pile up such a huge lead in the figures part that the free skating was often irrelevant.

But the only sense in which skating was a spectator sport was that touring ice shows were very popular (and lucrative both for the skaters and for the producers). This was entirely free skating (the artistic part) and discarded the technical part altogether.

In the television age, the ISU realized that no one wants to watch the great master of figures, Beatrix Schuba, demonstrate her technique. They wanted to see the lovely and graceful Janet Lynn ... well, looking lovely and skating gracefully. So they changed the rules to de-emphasize the technical part, and eventually eliminated it altogether. (Give the public what it wants!) Technique mattered only in the sense that you needed technical mastery in order to skate artistically.

Maybe we are at a similar crossroads now. The concept of the "artistic program" would be this: the reason you learn how to do a quad Salchow is so that you can put your jumping technique to the service or an artistically pleasing performance. Then separately there is a technical program where you demonstrate your quad Salchow for its own sake, just to show that you can do it. (LPs currently are headed in that direction.)

The Devil is in the details, of course.

Mathman said:

In the television age, the ISU realized that no one wants to watch the great master of figures, Beatrix Schuba, demonstrate her technique. They wanted to see the lovely and graceful Janet Lynn ... well, looking lovely and skating gracefully. So they changed the rules to de-emphasize the technical part, and eventually eliminated it altogether. (Give the public what it wants!) Technique mattered only in the sense that you needed technical mastery in order to skate artistically.

Click to expand...

It's certainly true that the public was much more interested in freeskating than in school figures and that they tended to prefer skaters who could be considered artistic.

But I think it is false that freeskating was not technical.

Janet Lynn stood out from the majority of her contemporaries because she could move more gracefully and musically than most, and also more powerfully and with more complexity, which judges also rewarded.

Triple jumps were rarer in the ladies' event ca. 1972 than quads are in 2019, but within a few years they became common.

The new short program used freeskating skills but was very much about executing specified technical elements and being evaluated on the technical quality of those elements. If skaters could also be artistic while executing them, that was definitely a plus for judges, but it was only part of what was being judged, even if it was what audiences cared about most.

As triples, and then quads for men, became more common, some portion of the audience became most interested in difficulty and success of jumps attempted.

What American TV commentators emphasized in their commentary tended to drive what American audiences were most interested in, and doubtless the same for other countries.

But judges and skaters still cared about technique in freeskating elements and in connecting skating between the elements, even if the commentators didn't talk about it much.

The internet allows interested serious fans to learn much more about skating technique than TV commentary geared toward more casual audiences ever could. Though it seems that technique-minded online fans tend to be more interested in jump technique than other aspects of skating technique.

Maybe we are at a similar crossroads now. The concept of the "artistic program" would be this: the reason you learn how to do a quad Salchow is so that you can put your jumping technique to the service or an artistically pleasing performance. Then separately there is a technical program where you demonstrate your quad Salchow for its own sake, just to show that you can do it. (LPs currently are headed in that direction.)

The Devil is in the details, of course.

Click to expand...

Yup!

https://olympics.nbcsports.com/2020/02/13/figure-skating-scoring-changes-proposal/

In an attempt to rebalance the athletic and artistic sides of figure skating, the sport’s technical committee for singles and pairs is submitting a proposal with sweeping changes for consideration by the International Skating Union at its biennial congress this June in Thailand.

....

Click to expand...

I like the proposal, but I do like having one program shorter and one program longer.

Mathman said:

Michelle Kwan, 1996. Romanza SP was better than Salome LP.

1998. Rachmaninov SP was (even) better than Lyra Angelica.

1999. Carmen Suite SP was a better constructed program than Ariane LP.

2005. Spartacus was better than Bolero.

And that doesn't even count Eric Clapton or the Feeling Begins.



I think it is the difference between quality of jumps and quantity of jumps. In the Short Program you only have three chances at it, do or die. Every little detail counts and a mistake can kill you.

In the LP, if you fall on your opening triple Axel, under-rotate your 3Lz+3T , and step out of your triple loop -- no biggie. Just land the next triple Axel attempt and toss up a gang of other jumps to make up for it.

Click to expand...

I liked short programs under 6.0 because they included a spiral sequence and didn't require/reward Biellmann laybacks. IJS short programs kind of leave me cold. There is even less time for artistic moves than in the long program and so we just have jumps and spins, twirlies in between jumps and spins, and a footwork sequence. The only difference from one program to the next is the jump content. To be clear, I am mainly talking about the ladies. I think the difference in the men's programs under the two systems is not that great. As for the do or die aspect, that is true to an extent but it was much more the case under the old system, where if you didn't finish in the top 3, you had to depend on other skaters to make mistakes to win. A step-out could kill a skater's chances at a medal. Depending on the severity, a mistake in the short program is not as fatal under the IJS.

ETA: I disagree on Carmen Suite vs. Ariane. Ariane is one of Michelle's most under-rated programs, mainly because she was rarely able to skate it clean. But her performance of it at 1998 World Pro was stunning.

neud said:

Isn't skating without jumps just "killing time" by Ashley Wagner's definition? https://twitter.com/AshWagner2010/status/962882943885524992

Click to expand...

What I think she meant by that was killing time until the halfway mark, when the bonus kicked in. It made for an unbalanced program. Thank goodness they changed the rules on backloading.

Zagitova's program was a perfect interpretation of the music. It was daring, exciting, and made sense artistically.

PyeongChang2018 said:

Zagitova's program was a perfect interpretation of the music. It was daring, exciting, and made sense artistically.

Click to expand...

Funny how backloading stopped making sense artistically after bonus was removed...