A "radical" proposal to reshape the sport: Phil Hersh article | Page 2 | Golden Skate

A "radical" proposal to reshape the sport: Phil Hersh article

Joined
Jun 21, 2003
How are they different than Boyang, Nathan, and Shoma were a few years ago? Why can’t they just make women’s PCS the same as men’s and insist that judges stop awarding unwarranted PCS and GOE?

I can't speak for Fabio Bianchetti or Phil Hersh, but to me it has a different feel. Boyang Jin and Shoma Uno accomplished some inpressive feats, but never won a world championship, much less "dominated" one. Nathan kind of snuck up on us, getting a little better every year. And in fact, quads for men was more evolution, while the 3 Eteri girls seem like they dropped an atom bomb on the sport.

As for making the PCS factoring the same for women as for men, I just remarked on another thread that this is not such a straightforward proposal as it seems. Raising the value of women's PCSs would help Alexandra Trusova beat a lot of the men. But for the vast majority of ladies it would have the effect of elevating the PCSs far above the TES, which would skew the results in ladies' skating. The new proposal would have this effect for the Artistic Program, but I don't think it would be desireable for the Technical Program, or for either the SP and LP as currently constituted.

As for insisting that the judges stop awarding unwarranted PCS and GOE, that's not going to happen no matter what, so ... :shrug:

Anyway, that's my opinion.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
By the way, this question of multipliers for the PCS is a detail that the ISU will have to work out very carefully in the new proposal. The TES will automatically be higher in the Technical Program than in the artistic program. So to come up with multipliers that will make the PCS, on the average, count 60% of the total in the Artistic Program and 40% in the Technical Program will involve some guesswork and perhaps a strange-looking result. 60% might turn out to be lower than 40%, which would be kind of hard to explain. ;)
 

TallyT

Record Breaker
Joined
Apr 23, 2018
Country
Australia
How are they different than Boyang, Nathan, and Shoma were a few years ago? Why can’t they just make women’s PCS the same as men’s and insist that judges stop awarding unwarranted PCS and GOE?

But of course everyone agrees how well that's worked with the men....
 

CanadianSkaterGuy

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
There is nothing less convincing - as every schoolboy knows - than "I'm a big fan but..." and go on to disparage and bring down. As with Yuzuru and Rika and others, I find myself thinking quite often "with 'fans' like this, who needs bashers?"

I can still be a fan of a skater and still actually have a critical mind when it comes to matters involving them or their skating.

I get that certain fans are not like that though, and only choose to see their faves through rose coloured glasses and believe they can do no wrong, which is of course their prerogative. :)

The best thing a skater can have not people coddling them saying that they’re doing everything perfectly fine when there is evidently room for critique and improvement.
 

Tavi...

Record Breaker
Joined
Feb 10, 2014
I can't speak for Fabio Bianchetti or Phil Hersh, but to me it has a different feel. Boyang Jin and Shoma Uno accomplished some inpressive feats, but never won a world championship, much less "dominated" one. Nathan kind of snuck up on us, getting a little better every year. And in fact, quads for men was more evolution, while the 3 Eteri girls seem like they dropped an atom bomb on the sport.

As for making the PCS factoring the same for women as for men, I just remarked on another thread that this is not such a straightforward proposal as it seems. Raising the value of wpomen's PCSs would help Alenandra Trusova beat a lot of the men. But for the vast majority of ladies it would have the effect of elevating the PCSs far above the TES, which would skew the results in ladies' skating. The new proposal would have this effect for the Artistic Program, but I don't think it would be desireable for the Technical Program, or for either the SP and LP as currently constituted.

As for insisting that the judges stop awarding unwarranted PCS and GOE, that's not going to happen no matter what, so ... :shrug:

Anyway, that's my opinion.

You know what? I’ve decided raising PCS isn’t such a great idea, but for the opposite reason than you. Take a look at PCS scores for most recent comps, including Worlds, challengers, etc. Notice anything interesting? Except for a favored few, almost no one is getting 30+ PCS. On the GP, about half the women get PCS of 30+. At Euros this year, only about 5 women did; at Worlds, it was about the top 10. There are only a few skaters anywhere near the current cap of 40, and guess who they are? And since I agree with you and @TallyT that judges probably won’t change their ways, what would raising the PCS ceiling do? It would mean that a few ladies would start getting even more astronomical PCS relative to the field - the ones who are already winning. Maybe Mariah Bell could become the female Jason Brown and occasionally challenge for a championship medal. But the vast majority of skaters would fall further behind, just as they have in men’s. As I said before, IMO the current system isn’t the problem- it’s how it’s being applied.

Regarding Shoma/Boyang versus the 3 Eteri girls: none of the 3 Eteri girls has won Worlds yet, and only one can do so this year. So it seems pretty much the same to me. The only difference is that that they all have the same coach. However, unlike with men, until these three appeared, almost no ladies were doing 3As or quads. So more people were caught by surprise. Still, with the number of ladies trying to up their tech I think that will take care of itself in a few years even if there are no changes to the system.
 

Sam-Skwantch

“I solemnly swear I’m up to no good”
Record Breaker
Joined
Dec 29, 2013
Country
United-States
I have for years thought PCS should actually be reduced. Not because I don’t appreciate a program that has subtlety and grace (I do) and not because I love programs that exhibit blistering technical movements packed with transitions (I do). I believe both can and should score high marks. Honestly I just don’t think there is a fair way to accurately measure these differences with much plausibility that lends itself the ability to accurately calculate a value to what we just saw performed. How can there be? Tastes and values differ from person to person, fed to fed, judge to judge.

It’s not to say I wouldn’t be interested to read a proposal to introduce an artistic program because I am. I must admit though.... I’m very skeptical of increasing the PCS and it’s impact on the final results. I’m just not sure I trust it but I’m willing to be convinced.
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
I have for years thought PCS should actually be reduced.... I just don’t think there is a fair way to accurately measure these differences with much plausibility that lends itself the ability to accurately calculate a value to what we just saw performed. How can there be? Tastes and values differ from person to person, fed to fed, judge to judge.

I think we have to bear in mind that the equation Tecnical = Element Scores and Artistic = Program Components is wrong. Skating Skills and transitions are the "technical" program components, while the other three comprise the "performance" components. I think that SS and TR can be judged quite accurately and consistently and do not depend on judges tastes. Speed, acceleration, depth and security of edges, difficulty and variety of transtitional moves -- these are fairly objective.

So are GOEs: height and distance of a jump, smooth flowing exit edge -- these are technical aspects of skating, even though they do have an impact on the program as a whole.

So right off the bat the current split is 70% technical, 30% presentation. I would be OK with lowering the PCSs so that the split was 75% tech, 25% presentation, but already figure skating scoring is tech, tech, tech.

If the proposal goes through to have a separate Artistic Program where the PCSs are 60% of the total, stiil the split is not 40% tech, 60% artistry. It 67% tech and 33% artistry (instead of the current 70-30).

I think the ISU is pulling the wool over our eyes a little bit in bragging about how much this will help the "artists." The big jumpers will still win everything, as long as their jumps are of high quality and they skate fast, etc. The main thing that might help the more artistic skaters is the part about combining placements.
 
Last edited:

gkelly

Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
I don't see anything in the Hersh article about going back to factored placements. In fact, quite the opposite:
"The scores would, as now, be simply added together to get the final result."
 

Elucidus

Match Penalty
Joined
Nov 19, 2017
I think we have to bear in mind that the equation Tecnical = Element Scores and Artistic = Program Components is wrong. Skating Skills and transitions are the "technical" program components, while the other three comprise the "performance" components. I think that SS and TR can be judged quite accurately and consistently and do not depend on judges tastes. Speed, acceleration, depth and security of egfes, difficulty and variety of transtitional moves -- these are fairly objective.

So are GOEs: height and distance of a jump, smooth flowing exit edge -- these are technical aspects of skating, even though their impact is on the program as a whole rather than attached to a particular highlight element like a jump.

So right off the bat the current split is 70% technical, 30% presentation. I would be OK with lowering the PCSs so that the split was 75% tech, 25% presentation, but already figure skating scoring is tech, tech, tech.

If the proposal goes through to have a separate Artistic Program where the PCSs are 60% of the total, stiil the split is not 40% tech, 60% artistry. It 67% tech and 33% artistry (instead of the current 70-30).
On a paper - maybe so. In reality we both know that even such obvious factors as GOEs are highly subjective and they are judged very differently by different judges. Moreover, they have strong reputational trend - the more known skater is going to get higher GOE for the same jump. Also we both know that SS and TR in reality are not assessed at all. All components always are being very close to each other - so skater with already established high PCS is going to get high SS marks even if he/she doesn't have such skills at all. Why you pretend that PCS is not a complete mess and pure reputational thing now - is beyond me. I am with Sam-Skwantch on this - before trying to fix made up problems with tacky rules changes - they need to fix basic issues with PCS judging first. Else it's going to make reputational judging even worse than it is now - making distance between top skaters and everybody else absolutely insurmountable. And one way to make judging more fair is, on the contrary, reduce the weight of reputational tool known as PCS - in both programs.
In fact, we can observe such effect even now already. Ladies skating judging is more fairer now to an extent - than men's. Because of lower PCS factor relatively unknown lady skater have more chances to get on the podium with clean skate with solid TES content. While in men someone like Selevko or Ayrapetyan, for example, has almost zero chances to do it even if he will land all his quads.
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
I don't see anything in the Hersh article about going back to factored placements. In fact, quite the opposite:
"The scores would, as now, be simply added together to get the final result."

!!! It does say that. I am pretty sure that in earlier interviews with Alexander Lakernik he floated the idea of averaging placements (unweighted). I guess they backed off that idea (or my memory is wrong).

Well, in that case, if they just add all the points together, this proposal is absolutely nothing. You get an extra jump here, one less there, a couple extra PCS points in one program, take them away in the other.

This will not have any effect whatsoever. Nathan Chen beats Jason Brown by 40 points in the Technical Program, then Brown skates his heart out in the Artistic Program and wins by 1 point. Overall winner: Chen by 39 points.
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
On a paper - maybe so. In reality we both know that even such obvious factors as GOEs are highly subjective and they are judged very differently by different judges. Moreover, they have strong reputational trend - the more known skater is going to get higher GOE for the same jump. Also we both know that SS and TR in reality are not assessed at all. All components always are being very close to each other - so skater with already established high PCS is going to get high SS marks even if he/she doesn't have such skills at all. Why you pretend that PCS is not a complete mess and pure reputational thing now - is beyond me. ...

Well, OK. But I don't see what relevance that has to the point I was making in the quoted post. Which was, that the SS and TR components, as well as the GOEs, are more on the tech side than on the artistic side. Whether the judges do a good job with the GOEs and the technical components SS and TR -- that's a separate question, and one that has nothing much to do with this ISU proposal. one way or the other.

You and Sam_Squanch don't ike PCSs at all. That's a legitimate position to take. But changing their weight to a tiny bit more in one program and a tiny bit less in another -- eh? It's not worth the effort of being either for or against this insignificant realignment.

Now that GKelly has pointed out that all the points are just added together at the end, I don't have anything more to say about this nothing-of-a-proposal.
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Because of lower PCS factor relatively unknown lady skater have more chances to get on the podium with clean skate with solid TES content.

I will put aside the fact that the factors do not "lower the ladies PCS" relative to the expected tech of a ladies' program. On the contrary, their purpose is to provide the same balance as exists in men's. But never mind that.

Consider the unknown lady skater who skates cleanly with solid TES. Let's say she has 70 base value on her elements. But she is slow. She does not exhibit efficient and powerful stroking. Her edges are shallow and wobbly. She does nothing in between her jumps except to begin setting up for the next one.

The other skater also does some big jumps and doesn't make a major mistake. She gets 65 base value on elements. In addition she skates fast, she has excellent control of her edges, she embellishes her program with interesting and difficult transitions, she throws in a lovely Ina Bauer and a rousing split jump.

The scoring system needs some mechanism to say that the performance of the second skater was the better of the two.
 
Last edited:

Casual

On the Ice
Joined
Jan 26, 2018
This is a terrible idea. Not only is it blurring the lines between the SP and FS, this will also put way more power in the hands of the judges to manipulate the final results based on propping up popular skaters on PCS.

"It also has made it very difficult for consummate artists like Jason Brown, who never has landed a quad, to make global podiums in men’s events. Many of the sport’s longtime fans say they have lost interest in what they see as a jumping contest."

No. Consummate artists like Jason Brown have made global podiums (4CC silver, most recently.. and several GP medals) on the merit of their artistry. But they can't make the top of it because they lack a quad. Which is how it should be.

I see the point in ladies where a handful of skaters can do quads and primarily from one country, so there is an imbalance. But in men's the quad is a standard. If Brown can't do a quad, that's on him, as literally hundreds of male skaters have landed quads in competition.

And never mind "Oh well, that will compel skaters to improve their PCS." The judges have their faves, and no matter how much some skaters who are classically inferior in PCS (Jin/Nguyen/Tomono, etc.) show improvement, they will never get the PCS needed to reach higher level. The benefit of them executing a quad will be immediately negated by their upper-tier rivals getting higher PCS (even if the upper-tier rival bombs their skate).

This isn't a radical proposal, so much as a handout to skaters who are unable to achieve the technical standards needed to compete at the upper echelons of the sport.

Brown should always be in contention for a medal, but putting him in contention for gold at Worlds or Olympics without a quad is simply ridiculous. It would be like weighting under 6.0 more to artistic impression so that skaters who couldn't do a 3A would still have a shot at winning. Except now it's the quad. Brown has superb elements and is the most talented in terms of artistry IMO, but he should consider himself lucky to be in the running for the World bronze in 2020 without a stable quad.

Figure skating without artistic perfection should not be allowed anywhere near the world podiums. However, the true mastery (whether piano playing, ballet, or figure skating) demands both. True artistry demands perfection of execution, which demands a very high level of underlying technical skill. The higher the technical skill, the freer and more refined the artist becomes to express himself/herself and reach the deepest emotions.

But until ISU fixes their blatant cheating problem (biased judging - propping up "favorites", "reputation scoring" and "country bonus" are all cheating), nothing would fix this sport.

As for this particular proposal: I'm a huge fan of artistic perfection in figure skating, and I hate this proposal. Lets compare Jason Brown to Yuzuru Hanuy. Is Hanuy any less "artistic" than Brown? Nope. Should the two have equal standing on the world podiums due to Brown's artistry? Nope. Hanuy is clearly superior, because he manages to attain the highest levels of artistry along with the highest levels of tech content. That makes him a virtuoso.

The problem is not that skaters like Brown do not get enough PCS. The problem is that all those other skaters who are allowed to have zero artistry and lack finesse (and ugly executed jumps to boot) are unfairly awarded sky-high PCS and GOEs.

A musician who misses notes and is tone-deaf and sloppy in his/her execution, would be booed and laughed off the stage, and never reach the top of the podium. But in figure skating, they are rewarded with highest scores, AS IF they had a perfect pitch and soul-stirring artistry. It's a travesty.

So, what would be the point of giving the judges even more opportunities to pad the scoring, if they are already doing it?

Fix the underlying problem first, and stop rewarding uncouth cows-on-ice as if they were artistic virtuosos.
 

shine

Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 27, 2003
Could you please stop with the Jason bashing? He didn’t ask Phil Hersh to make him the poster boy for the proposed changes. He’s trying his best to succeed under the current system, just as he did in prior one - and that has included improving his jumps. Regarding his quad, unless you know for a fact why he’s struggled with it, maybe you shouldn’t be so judgmental about his failure to land one cleanly yet. Regarding his competitiveness under the current system: even a year ago, who but a few deluded Jason fans would have thought he’d win a silver medal at 4 Continents or that he’d be talked about as even a long shot for a bronze at Worlds? The mantra until recently was that he’s just not competitive, period; the change in perception has come because he’s worked his butt off to maximize his scores under the current system. Finally, I think it’s pretty disingenuous to ignore the fact that despite his lower BV, Jason would be far more competitive even under the current system if other skaters weren’t sometimes gifted with higher than deserved PCS and GOE simply because they’re jumping lots of quads, regardless of their skating skills, interpretation, or the overall quality of their programs. Judges are using the scoring system in a way it wasn’t intended, just as they did in the last iteration. A skater who is awarded a +5 on his 4Z instead of a deserved 0 or +1, for example, receives an additional 5-6 points in TES. Multiply that by a few jumps and add a few extra bonus points in PCS and you can start to see why there are such huge point gaps. I’m not saying there are no high BV programs deserving of astronomical scores. But they are fewer and farther between than the number of astronomical scores being awarded. Unless that problem is addressed, it doesn’t matter what changes are made to program structure or the scoring system.
I read CanadianSkaterGuy’s entire post and it didn’t sound like bashing to me, nor was it targeted at Jason Brown even if his name was mentioned. We all have a sort of ideal picture of what the sport / art of figure skating should be, some more well defined, others more vague. And we are all hoping for a scoring system that will propel FS toward that ideal equilibrium. I read this post as simply an expression of his personal ideal - that someone (and it doesn’t have to be Jason) without demonstrating the strongest combined technical abilities achievable in the sport, shouldn’t be contending for the top spot. You may disagree with that philosophy, but it wasn’t “bashing” and has very little to do with Jason Brown personally IMO.
 

Sam-Skwantch

“I solemnly swear I’m up to no good”
Record Breaker
Joined
Dec 29, 2013
Country
United-States
Figure skating without artistic perfection should not be allowed anywhere near the world podiums. However, the true mastery (whether piano playing, ballet, or figure skating) demands both.

Instead of ballet and piano playing could you maybe use another or other Olympic sports to highlight your point. I think it would be more effective that way when considering that playing piano and ballet aren’t even sports or Olympic sports for that matter. I’m genuinely curious.
 

gkelly

Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
tl;dr: There is not a direct correlation between artistry and deserved PCS. Sometimes better technicians with lower artistic ambitions deserve higher PCS than artistically inclined skaters with weaker technique.

Figure skating without artistic perfection should not be allowed anywhere near the world podiums.

It has never been true in any past era of figure skating that all world podiums consisted only of skaters who demonstrated artistic perfection, nor that artistic superiority ever guaranteed higher placements ahead of other skaters with similar technical content who skated comparably "clean."

So you may want artistic perfection to be so important that it would be impossible to medal without it. But historically the skating community has not demanded that, and the top athletes have not consistently been able to deliver it.

Of course, how we define "artistic perfection" or "artistry" in general would make some difference in how possible it might be to insist on its presence for all world medal programs.


However, the true mastery (whether piano playing, or ballet dancing, or figure skating) demands both. True artistry demands perfection of execution, which demands a very high level of underlying technical skill. The higher the technical skill, the freer and more refined the artist becomes to express himself/herself and reach the deepest emotions.

Very true.

However, in the performing arts, I'd say that the purpose of the performance is to reach the audience with deep emotions etc., and that the technical skill is needed in service of that primary purpose.

The artistic communication is the end and the technique is the means.

This could also be true in a skating show.

Whereas the purpose of a figure skating competition is to demonstrate mastery of the technique. "Artistry" is valued in large part because its presence attests to that mastery.

And also it makes the performances more enjoyable for general audiences as well as more enjoyable for judges and other tech-knowledgeable viewers who appreciate the technical feats on their own merits. All else being equal, more-artistic is more valuable than less-artistic within the same general range of technical ability.

However, in a competitive context demonstrating the technical mastery is the primary end in itself; I think of "artistry" or "perfection" (which might be defined in terms of perfect execution of the technical skills -- which would as a byproduct make the performance more aesthetically pleasing to watch) as add-ons that enhance or transcend the athletic aspects of the performance, but not as the primary point of the sport.

Skating faster, including more and more difficult in-between skills that aren't listed in the Scale of Values, and most other aspects of the Skating Skills and Transitions components, as Mathman has mentioned, are primarily technical skills rather than artistic skills. They are scored as program components and not under the Technical Element Score because they are not discrete Elements but exist throughout the performance as a whole, including and in some cases primarily between the actual scored elements.

There are also some aspects of the Performance, Composition, and Interpretation components that can also be considered as markers of technical mastery. For example, it's easier to skate in time with the music when you have full technical control of what you're doing so that you are able to vary the timing at will.

The problem is not that skaters like Brown do not get enough PCS. The problem is that all those other skaters who are allowed to have zero artistry and lack finesse (and ugly executed jumps to boot) are unfairly awarded sky-high PCS and GOEs.

I agree that skaters who don't demonstrate the artistic skills that make up the majority of the PE, CO, and IN criteria should score lower on those components and should not be awarded high scores solely because they include difficult jumps, for example.

However, if they skate fast, then they should be rewarded for that in the Skating Skills component. If they fill most of the other SS criteria as well -- technical criteria -- such as acceleration and balance and deep edges and one-foot skating, then they should score high overall in that component.

If they have varied and difficult nonlisted elements and other movements between the elements, they should be rewarded for that variety and difficulty in the Transitions score. (If they also have high quality in those in-between moves and maintain continuity from one movement to the next throughout the program they should score even higher, but those you'd consider to have "zero" artistry would probably be lacking in that quality and/or continuity.)

If they fill the ice surface and the space around them fully -- often thanks to strong technical skating skills -- that will be a plus for their Composition score even if they are lacking other aspects of that component.

If they commit fully to what they're doing physically and project strongly to the spectators, those will be pluses for the Performance component.

And so on.

Again, it's hard to know what it would mean to have "zero" artistry, but for the most part elite skaters who have little to no interest in presenting themselves as artists do fulfill some of the PCS criteria at quite high levels, and other criteria at lower levels. In which case, they should score lower on the various components than skaters of similar technical skill who do successfully aim for artistry, but higher than weaker skaters who don't have the interest or just don't have the technical mastery to focus on artistry, and also often higher than weak or average skaters who do aim for artistry but can't quite technically support their artistic ambitions.


A musician who misses notes and is tone-deaf and sloppy in his/her execution, would be booed and laughed off the stage, and never reach the top of the podium

Does music even have podiums?

I think that there are certainly singers who may have less than perfect vocal technique but put their heart and soul into their performances and deservedly gain plenty of fans and applause.

However, if they were competing in a technical singing competition against someone with perfect technique, depending on how the competition is structured, the technically superior singer may score higher even while the skater who moves audiences emotionally gains more fan appreciation.

The same might be true of instrumentalists who are able to perform in ways that touch audiences despite occasional technical mistakes.
 

McBibus

On the Ice
Joined
Dec 7, 2019
I will aside the fact that the factors to not "lower the ladies PCS" relative to the expected tech of a ladies program. On the contrary, their purpose is to provide the same balance as exists in men's. But never mind that.

Consider the unknown lady skater who skates cleanly with solid TES. Let's say she has 70 base value on her elements. But she is slow. She does not exhibit efficient and powerful stroking. Her edges are shallow and wobbly. She does nothing in between her jumps except to begin setting up for the next one.

The other skater also does some big jumps and doesn't make a major mistake. She gets 65 base value on elements. In addition she skates fast, she has excellent control of her edges, she embellishes her program with interesting and difficult transitions, she throws in a lovely Ina Bauer and a rousing split jump.

The scoring system needs some mechanism to say that the performance of the second skater was the better of the two.

I think, referring to girls, this year GPF FS is good for analysis.
Anna won the FS, but if I think of the two performance Aliona really won the day.
She's been magical.

Some will say this is not counted in the score and to me this shows that we are losing something.

Try reviewing the 2 skates forgiving the actual scoring system: just ask yourself who was the better skater that day technycally and artistically.
Of course we can do that because we're talking about two technically superb skaters and that day was also the 1st time Anna convinced me in her interpretation of the firebird.
It was like she let it finally go and started to project her sensation to the audience.

On the contrary, if I do the same test for RusNat i give it to Anna without esitation.

Agreed that everybody could disagree of course, but that day the FS score did not reflected what I saw.
 

Casual

On the Ice
Joined
Jan 26, 2018
Instead of ballet and piano playing could you maybe use another or other Olympic sports to highlight your point. I think it would be more effective that way when considering that playing piano and ballet aren’t even sports or Olympic sports for that matter. I’m genuinely curious.

It would be even more effective if you compared figure skating to figure skating, which was the point of my post. Could Yuzuru Hanuy ever be compared to a cow-on-ice? Nope. He's a virtuoso. That's the point. That's how it should be, at the top tier.

Remove music from figure skating; remove movement to music; remove costumes, creating a character and a story; remove emotional impact on the audience; remove searching for a transcendent "moment", through an artistic performance via precise movements set to music; THEN we'll talk about comparing figure skating to other Olympic sports.

Figure skating should strive to achieve the level of "Hanuys", i.e., the highest level of artistry based on the highest level of technical proficiency. Instead, there's no bar to sloppy execution of zero artistry getting highest PCS and GOEs, AS IF they were virtuosos. That's the problem. ISU corruption promotes ugliness. It kills the sport.

P.S. Is Cirque du Soleil acrobatics sport or art? Could figure skating ever be viewed as complete without either artistic or technical side?
 

Tavi...

Record Breaker
Joined
Feb 10, 2014
I read CanadianSkaterGuy’s entire post and it didn’t sound like bashing to me, nor was it targeted at Jason Brown even if his name was mentioned. We all have a sort of ideal picture of what the sport / art of figure skating should be, some more well defined, others more vague. And we are all hoping for a scoring system that will propel FS toward that ideal equilibrium. I read this post as simply an expression of his personal ideal - that someone (and it doesn’t have to be Jason) without demonstrating the strongest combined technical abilities achievable in the sport, shouldn’t be contending for the top spot. You may disagree with that philosophy, but it wasn’t “bashing” and has very little to do with Jason Brown personally IMO.

We all have different opinions. This is the text that particularly struck me as negative, judgmental, and as such, bashing:

“If Brown can't do a quad, that's on him, as literally hundreds of male skaters have landed quads in competition.”
 
Top