A "radical" proposal to reshape the sport: Phil Hersh article | Page 5 | Golden Skate

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

el henry

Go have some cake. And come back with jollity.
Record Breaker
Joined
Mar 3, 2014
Country
United-States
I want to come hang out in your world of standards. Can we also dictate they need to have amazing step sequences?

Absolutely, welcome to the el skating union! Where spirals, cantilevers and hydroblades held for more than three seconds are awarded points, as well as split jumps.

I could get into this ;)
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Absolutely, welcome to the el skating union! Where spirals, cantilevers and hydroblades held for more than three seconds are awarded points, as well as split jumps.

I could get into this ;)

I think the ISU will have to do something like this if they want this new proposal to be anything more than a scam.

They may even decide that this adding up the points concept, the IJS, didn't really work out.
 

moonvine

All Hail Queen Gracie
Record Breaker
Joined
Mar 14, 2007
Country
United-States
I think you are on to something there. To me, it is very telling that the new ISU proposal puts the Artistic Program last, as the grand finale -- step right up, ladies and gentlemen, this is what you have all been waiting for! -- instead of the Technical Program.

They must have decided that the one-quad-after-another business model wasn't all that appealing to their customers after all.

I think it depends. For the USA audience, which seems to be dwindling, I’d agree. For the Japanese and Russian audiences, which seem to be at least holding steady if not surging, perhaps not. In other countries, I don’t have enough knowledge to form an opinion.
 

moonvine

All Hail Queen Gracie
Record Breaker
Joined
Mar 14, 2007
Country
United-States
Absolutely, welcome to the el skating union! Where spirals, cantilevers and hydroblades held for more than three seconds are awarded points, as well as split jumps.

I could get into this ;)

Hydroblades, yes, my man Keegan has some of the best! I can get into this as well!
 

Miller

Final Flight
Joined
Dec 29, 2016
I hope the ISU technical committee is listening. :) This is exactly the thing that would make this idea of an "Artistic Program" deserve the term "radical" that appears in the title pf Hersh's article.

However, that would still pose a big headache when it comes to preparing the revised Scale of Values. If the "Artistic program had, as you say, fewer jumps but additional features like a "character step sequence :rock: :rock: " or an edge element with change of edge, these would have to be valued really highly to compensate in point value for the missing one or two or three quads and triple-triples.

At present I do not see any way that the skaters will be able to score as many points in the Artistic Program as they can in the Technical Program. Whoever wins the Technical Program will automatically win every time. A skating competition will become two programs, "The Real Competition" and "The Gala Exhibition." (This is why I am disappointed if the proposal simply adds up the total points to determine the overall placements. To me, this removes the description "radical change" and replaces it with "same old, same old." :( )

I’ve had a play with a few figures for different types of skaters to see if it might be possible to get even scoring across the 2 programs, while at the same time achieving the 60/40 and 40/60 TES/PCS split they're looking for for each individual one.

It does like it might be possible (took some time but got there in the end), however I’m not sure people will be too thrilled about the overall results, plus I’m sure one or two aspects might get people talking e.g. how much higher the PCS is compared with the TES in the Artistic Program, plus maybe how much higher it is compared with the PCS in the Technical.

I took 3 male skater examples with the following current scores and splits –

Skater A, total 240, consisting of SP 80 (TES 40/PCS 40), and LP 160 (80/80)

Skater B, total 270, consisting of SP 90 (TES 45, PCS 45), and LP 180 (90/90)

Skater C, total 300, consisting of SP 100 (TES 55/PCS 45), and LP 200 (110/90)

and with the following assumptions -

Technical Program = current LP – choreo sequence i.e. same as current junior program. TES reduced by 5 points. Every other TES rule re BVs, GOEs etc. remains the same. No jump passes affected.

Artistic Program = current SP + 2 sequences added i.e. +10 TES points more. Could be more if it’s an extra jump pass + 1 extra sequence, but to my mind this is moving away from the idea of an ‘artistic’ program. Instead I’d be fairly sure they’d be looking at a net extra 2 sequences.

PCS. Increases to a total of 170 across the 2 programs, with 70 max in the Technical Program and 100 in the Artistic. This is the best distribution I’ve come up with that gets close to the 60/40 and 40/60, plus the overall re-balancing of TES and PCS has to come from somewhere.

The figures -

Skater A
Technical Program TES 75, PCS 56, total 131
Artistic Program TES 50, PCS 80, total 130, grand total 261 (+21)

(Splits – TP TES/PCS % split = 57/43, AP = 38/62, overall TP vs AP = 50/50)

Skater B
Technical Program TES 85, PCS 63, total 148
Artistic Program TES 55, PCS 90, total 145, grand total 293 (+23)

(Splits – TP TES/PCS = 57/43, AP TES = 38/62, overall TP/AP = 51/49)

Skater C
Technical Program TES 105, PCS 63, total 168
Artistic Program TES 65, PCS 90, total 155, grand total 323 (+23)

(Splits – TP TES/PCS = 63/37, AP TES/PCS =42/58, overall TP/AP = 52/48)

The results -

Splits are very close to that that is desired. However you have to question if it’s all worth it. The results have hardly changed but when you think about it not a lot has changed. Jumping passes have not changed and you’ve got 1 extra sequence across the 2 programs. All that’s really changed is that PCS figures are higher, so those skaters with high PCS scores go up by more, and those with lower don’t go up by quite as much. All the time the TES stuff is pretty much unchanged.

It might be possible to reduce the TES in the Artistic Program by a bit by limiting quads to 1 in there, but then again you’d probably have to have some sort of quad restriction in the Technical Program, or drop a jumping pass in there – skaters would drop a triple as their lowest value jumping pass, which would kind of even out the loss of TES of only having 1 quad in the Artistic. However yet again the overall results wouldn’t change a lot, though it would benefit a Jason Brown type skater by quite a lot – TES values would close up by 10 points or more depending on how it was done.

Finally I feel the PCS/TES imbalance in the Artistic Program could attract a lot of comment. This will be the deciding program under the proposals, and will people really want competitions where the much more subjective PCS figure is as much as 30 points or more higher than the TES figure, and seemingly the deciding factor.

I feel personally that the overall concept is not bad, but they’d be far better having the Artistic Program first, and maybe not as much as 50% of the overall figure. Maybe 40-45%, up from the current 33-35% (allow only 1 quad, but not affecting the overall result a vast amount), but starting to emphasise the skating skills and variety aspect of skating a lot more.
 

McBibus

On the Ice
Joined
Dec 7, 2019
I’ve had a play with a few figures for different types of skaters to see if it might be possible to get even scoring across the 2 programs, while at the same time achieving the 60/40 and 40/60 TES/PCS split they're looking for for each individual one.

It does like it might be possible (took some time but got there in the end), however I’m not sure people will be too thrilled about the overall results, plus I’m sure one or two aspects might get people talking e.g. how much higher the PCS is compared with the TES in the Artistic Program, plus maybe how much higher it is compared with the PCS in the Technical.

[...]

Splits are very close to that that is desired. However you have to question if it’s all worth it. The results have hardly changed but when you think about it not a lot has changed. Jumping passes have not changed and you’ve got 1 extra sequence across the 2 programs. All that’s really changed is that PCS figures are higher, so those skaters with high PCS scores go up by more, and those with lower don’t go up by quite as much. All the time the TES stuff is pretty much unchanged.

It might be possible to reduce the TES in the Artistic Program by a bit by limiting quads to 1 in there, but then again you’d probably have to have some sort of quad restriction in the Technical Program, or drop a jumping pass in there – skaters would drop a triple as their lowest value jumping pass, which would kind of even out the loss of TES of only having 1 quad in the Artistic. However yet again the overall results wouldn’t change a lot, though it would benefit a Jason Brown type skater by quite a lot – TES values would close up by 10 points or more depending on how it was done.

Finally I feel the PCS/TES imbalance in the Artistic Program could attract a lot of comment. This will be the deciding program under the proposals, and will people really want competitions where the much more subjective PCS figure is as much as 30 points or more higher than the TES figure, and seemingly the deciding factor.

I feel personally that the overall concept is not bad, but they’d be far better having the Artistic Program first, and maybe not as much as 50% of the overall figure. Maybe 40-45%, up from the current 33-35% (allow only 1 quad, but not affecting the overall result a vast amount), but starting to emphasise the skating skills and variety aspect of skating a lot more.

If content is not differentiated between the art and tec programs it's just scoring gimmick that will lead to more void polemics.
If the meaning of an artistic program is just inflated old PCS bettere remain the way we are.

Imo in the tec program you should be required to present all the jumps and not just repeat your favorites top scoring jumps.
Spins should have required position like in SP now and in the steps there should be mandatory elements.
There also should be a choreo sequence including a double jump that should not break the flow and the rithm of the sequence.


In the artistic program jumps should be free (no quad limiting), but GOE should be more important compared to Tec program where BV should be king.
Spins should be free, but level and goe should be related to difficult (like now) and the spins BV should be more.
Step sequence shold contain "dance-like" requirements to achieve the top level (maybe level 5) that should worth a lot.
The choreo sequence should have levels too (or very heavy GOE): speed, coverage, tempo and music intepretation should be cardinals to obtaing a good score.
"Spiraling" should count as elements and be scored.

PCS could remain as they are now, but start judging them separately.
I want to read in the scores that a skater has very good edges but presented an horrible composition or vice versa.
I'm tired of reading 8.25 8.00 8.25 8.50 8.25

Or maybe we could have a pair of different PCS categories bewteen the 2 programs.
 

sdwyer52

On the Ice
Joined
Oct 19, 2019
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.

Stop bashing Jason! he is a fabulous skater with great edges, flow and dramatic lines. His spins are better than all the rest of the men. Spins don't get the recognition jumps get. Who says they aren't hard to do correctly? Some skaters get better marks just because of who they are and not how they skate on a particular day. Costumes for the men have really gotten ridiculous. Nathan needs a real costume - not practice clothes. He is given way to high PCS marks for the hunched over posture and sloppy landings on his jumps.
 

sdwyer52

On the Ice
Joined
Oct 19, 2019
I think it depends. For the USA audience, which seems to be dwindling, I’d agree. For the Japanese and Russian audiences, which seem to be at least holding steady if not surging, perhaps not. In other countries, I don’t have enough knowledge to form an opinion.

If US skaters were given the financial help they need to compete more skaters would be skating. This is the reason for the lower audience participation. The US doesn't advertise their skaters or the sport itself. Other countries enjoy and compensate their skaters as performers and athletes. It is sad for sure.
 

Baron Vladimir

Record Breaker
Joined
Dec 18, 2014
I disagree. Quads should be compared to other quads. If you give a quad +3 with no difficult entry and a sloppy landing, a good quad will not be rewarded enough relative to the former.

Difficult entry is one positive bullet point from six of them. (There are certanly some jumps which fullfil all six recommended bullets, but there is no +6 in the system to reward them). Sloppy landing can be one negative bullet point or two, so mathematically +3 is more than possible with no difficult entry and sloppy landing included. Quads are type of jumps, and as that they have the same bullet points as triples. Comparing average clean quads with average clean triples, quads will more likely get one bullet point more, based on height and distance they requared to be performed. Without difficult entry awarded GOE bullets can be practically the same. The 'problem' with the current system is that GOE is a percentage of a base value, so +3 on quad will bring you more translated GOE points than +4 on triples.
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Comparing average clean quads with average clean triples, quads will more likely get one bullet point more, based on height and distance they requared to be performed. Without difficult entry awarded GOE bullets can be practically the same.

I would think that "effortless throughout" would also be more difficult to attain for a quad than a triple.
 

Baron Vladimir

Record Breaker
Joined
Dec 18, 2014
I would think that "effortless throughout" would also be more difficult to attain for a quad than a triple.

It should be like that on paper. But fast rotation in the air typical for the quads, together with one rotation more needed for it (as more height and distance), can create ilussion of effortlessness very easily. Visual impact of what skaters are doing in the air is usually better with more rotatations, especially watching it live. Compare doubles and triples for the same matter. Unless jump ended with obvious under rotation, step out (or any landing which is not on one foot), hand down, or with a fall, GOE on quad will be most likely positive. It's not that judges are giving high GOE just because jump is a quad, but because of visual perception they have while watching it. And reaction of the audience in the arena based on the same visual perception is usually louder when quad is performed. Quads are simply more exciting to experience than triples :biggrin:
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
I think that the people who are going on and on about Jason Brown (even Hersh mentions him) are off the mark with regard to the impetus behind this proposal. I think it's the ladies.

Up until this year the biggest jump that the ladies routinely did was the triple Lutz (once in a blue moon a Mao Asda would come by with a triple Axel, but this was a rarity and for the most part did not inspire other skaters to follow in her footsteps.)

On the 2011 Scale of Values, a triple Lutz had a base value of 6.0 with the possibility of earning 8.1 with maximum GOE.

The hardest spin (FCCoSp4) had a base value of 3.5 and a max of 5.0.

A Level 4 step sequence had a base of 3.9 and a max of 6.9.

Jumps were higher valued, but not outrageously so.

Fast forward to the year 2020. Top jump for ladies: 4Lz. Base value 12.5, max 17.25
Hardest spin: 3.5 and 5.25.
Step sequence 3.90 and 5.85.

Something has gotten out of balance. Of course not every lady has a quad Lutz, but the times they are a-chnaging, and you don't have to be a weatherman to tell which way the wind is blowing.

But what about "artistry"? Here are the scores in the LP at the Grand Prix final:

Shcherbakova: TES, 94.52. The three artistic program components combined (after factoring by 1.6), 41.82.
Kostornaia: TES, 88.87. Artistic components, 44.51.
Trusova: TES, 96.80. Artistic components, 39.98.
Kihira: TES, 77.90 (she missed her quad attempt). Artistic components, 41.65.
Tennell: TES, 71.65 (no big jumps). Artistic components, 41.36.
Zagitova: TES, 57.84 (disaster). Artistic components 41.60.
 
Last edited:

moonvine

All Hail Queen Gracie
Record Breaker
Joined
Mar 14, 2007
Country
United-States
They have been talking about this change for several years, though. I specifically remember Jimmie Santee mentioning it on Skate Radio at Kansas City nationals, I think. At any rate it was a Nationals before Greensboro because there was no Skate Radio in Greensboro.
 
Top