New ISU rules for the upcoming season

[Mathman]

... so everyone skating is above average or superior in an ISU event... Fair is listed at a 4-4.75 and average is 5-5.75..

We have to remember that the scale is for ALL skaters, from beginners on up. Yes, I would expect everyone competing in major Senior ISU events to be "above average or superior."

 

[Mathman]

By the way, since triple and quad Lutzes and flips have the same value, we might as well combine them into one jump -- either edge OK. Then for a jump that is truly different, add in the "wrong way Lutz" (clockwise if you are a counterclockwise jumper.

This would truly be a new skill. I wonder how many skaters could do a double wrong-way Lutz (or a double Walley, for that matter.

Sonja Henie had a dandy clockwise (single) Lutz.

 

[Mathman]

3F = 3Lz is puzzling to me. Not because of any reason favoring flutzers or lippers but because 2Lz still > 2F and 1Lz still > 1F. What gives?

I don't know thus for sure, but I suspect it has to do with how easy a quad Lutz seems to be (everyone and his little sister seems to have one) compared to how hard a quad flip is (only a couple of skaters in the world have even tried one in competition).

Maybe the ISU reasons that skaters just learning to jump find the flip easier than the Lutz, but as they go on to more revolutions, not so much. (?)

 

[lopsilceci]

Instead of changing the rules, they should work on a system to make judges and tech panel do their jobs more consistently and efficiently. Adapt technology to reduce subjectivity and doubt, etc...

 

[Yuzuruu]

Ahh It’s like Christmas came early this year [emoji4][emoji170] now judges please apply correctly.

 

[nussnacker]

By the way, since triple and quad Lutzes and flips have the same value, we might as well combine them into one jump -- either edge OK. Then for a jump that is truly different, add in the "wrong way Lutz" (clockwise if you are a counterclockwise jumper.

This would truly be a new skill. I wonder how many skaters could do a double wrong-way Lutz (or a double Walley, for that matter.

Sonja Henie had a dandy clockwise (single) Lutz.

Meanwhile Alois is rolling in his grave hearing those proposals

 

[SkatingIsLife]

4Lz, 4F, 4Lo all have the same Base Value of 11.00 now.
Now a skater gets a donwgrad call << which means the Base Value of the triple jump.

4Lz (BV 11.00) 4Lz<< = BV 5.30 (3Lz) skaters loses 5.70 points of the BV
4F (BV 11.00) 4F<< = BV 5.30 (3F) skaters loses 5.70 points of the BV
4Lo (BV 11.00) 4Lo<< = BV 4.90 (3Lo) skaters loses 6.10 points of the BV

On the one hand ISU is telling us that the 3 quad jumps are all of the same difficulty and they give them the same BV.

At the same time if skaters do a mistake and do not fully rotate this quad jumps they get penalized more if they get a downgrade call on the 4Lo???

Where is the logic here??? Why a skater for the same mistake gets a bigger reduction in his score than other skater for the same mistake???

Cant be fair....

 

[kolyadafan2002]

I don't know thus for sure, but I suspect it has to do with how easy a quad Lutz seems to be (everyone and his little sister seems to have one) compared to how hard a quad flip is (only a couple of skaters in the world have even tried one in competition).

Maybe the ISU reasons that skaters just learning to jump find the flip easier than the Lutz, but as they go on to more revolutions, not so much. (?)

so what ive gathered is that you can basically pick your fav quad and do it well and get a good goe and get the same score as someone else doing their good quad.. makes it closer I guess.. I find it humorous they expect judges to decifer 3 types of under rotations .. full on down grade, 1/4 to half, 1/4 exactly and less than 1/4 LOL they cant even get 1 UR right never mind deciding what kind it is.. I bet scoring will take longer because it will be so many longer reviews. I also must say looking at the PCS scoring table.. there are far too many skaters that get far too high marks.. so everyone skating is above average or superior in an ISU event... Fair is listed at a 4-4.75 and average is 5-5.75.. You mean to tell me Tarasova and Morozov's Olympic FS to that insanly god awful Candy Man program that everyone on this plantet cold see their disconnect and lack of any rhythm in that program gets an VERY GOOD TO EXCELLENT?!?! 8.75-9.50.. WHAT WERE THE JUDGES WATCHING?!?!?! I dont care how elite that team is.. if your performance sucks.. then make that reflect in the marks!! GEEZUZ !!!!! IF judges would be judging properly in the first place we wouldnt have to wait year after year to set new standards for scoring figure skating.. just saying..

The Tech specialist will take more time checking rotation, but on the other hand take less time checking edges - so this may even out. I still don't know how they can tell between 90 degrees "q" and 89 degrees with this new BS.

By the way, since triple and quad Lutzes and flips have the same value, we might as well combine them into one jump -- either edge OK. Then for a jump that is truly different, add in the "wrong way Lutz" (clockwise if you are a counterclockwise jumper.

This would truly be a new skill. I wonder how many skaters could do a double wrong-way Lutz (or a double Walley, for that matter.

Sonja Henie had a dandy clockwise (single) Lutz.

It's easy enough if you practice it hard. Lambiel could do some triples both ways and double axels both ways. I can do double loops both ways. Me and a friend used to train 2Lz+1Lz+2Lz rotating both directions in the combo and with practice it was doable.

It won't be as much of a skill if kids are trained from the beginning to jump both ways. In fact, if they are struggling with it or have a bad habit they could move on from it and correct it the other way and get the child a jump without a bad habit from a different rotational direction. I'm all for teaching all singles in both directions at the beginning ensuring that they are solid before moving onto doubles in the chosen / preferred direction.

 

[karne]

First: my stance is and always has been that correct jump technique should be the endgame for rule changes. Therefore, I have always been on the side of punishing UR and <<, and e and !, even more harshly than they already are, because you do not get people learning correct jump technique when there is no incentive for them to fix the bad technique.

The q is an absolute joke. The ISU will be left red-faced the very first time a skater with a sheet full of qs beats a skater with cleanly rotated jumps. You rotate your jumps, or you don't. If you don't - if you land on the quarter, which is underrotated - you suffer the punishment, and it should encourage you to work on fixing your technique. The GOE reduction is only -2 - we could literally see q jumps getting +GOE. (But that'll only be for big country skaters. Little country skaters, I imagine, will be stuck in the negative GOE for q jumps).

The ISU's message to those skaters who have put in the blood, sweat and tears to rotate their jumps properly is: "We don't care about the work you've put in for proper jumps. We won't reward it." Congratulations, ISU.

(And may the poor Data Operators of this season rest in peace. Imagine, at the end of a 30+ group of Basic Novice ladies, when you've been in the rink all day and your tongue is frozen, reading back: 2Lzq-2Tq-2Loq. Not to mention the mess this will surely make of the screen. It's 2p-3p all over again.)

I have the same feeling about the equation of the flip and the lutz. The Lutz is and always has been the much harder jump for a reason. Where is the incentive for skaters to learn a proper Lutz, if they can get the same value from a flip? And don't get me started on the 4Lo-4F-4Lz equivalency; whatever your thoughts on the loop's place in the scale of difficulty, to compare it to a 4Lz is ridiculous. People weren't doing 4Lz because it was easier; they were doing 4Lz because it got the most points. Go big or go home.

And just do not get me started on the "full blade" lunacy. Of all the things the ISU chose to pay attention to in the fandom, that toxic bulldust from one whinging toxic crybaby group of fans is it?! It's not even a proper technical term - it's not even a proper thing - you try taking off a Lutz from the full blade you're going to eat ice quickly and hard. Skaters using the lower part of the toepick and front part of the blade is not, I repeat not, bad technique, and it's not using the full blade.

In summary: WHAT THE BEEP, ISU.

 

[kolyadafan2002]

Right. Well, you all know how I feel about jump technique, so let's just jump right in.

The q thing is utterly ridiculous and a disgrace. It's a giant backwards step. Say it with me: underrotation is bad technique that deserves to be punished. On the quarter is underrotated. Therefore, it deserves the < and the reduction in base value. The q and -GOE is utterly useless because we know already that the judges won't apply it correctly. How is this going to look the first time a skater with a sheet full of q's finishes ahead of a skater with cleanly rotated jumps? You may as well just say to the skaters who do rotate their jumps "don't bother trying, we won't reward it".
(My data operator brain is also less than happy imagining the disaster that the data screen will be with the stupid q and having to read back 2Lzq-2Tq-2Loq. This is the 2p-3p all over again.)

Before the "q" jumps that landed on the quarter were considered clean though. If missing MORE than a quarter they were under.

Not sure the difference between 89 degrees and 90 degrees though.

 

[SkatingIsLife]

still dont get the "q" sign thing either ... haven't we seen in the past many questionable calls for < and << which describe a range of missing rotation. So a Technical Panel couldn’t figure this out correctly or used different attempts to get this right or wrong ...

Now they make the Technical Panel to call on an exact measure point of landing "on the quarter" ... how is this possible for them to exact say this jump was missing 90° and gets the "q" sign and not only missing 89,99° or it misses 90.1° and will get a < ???

For sure we will wait even longer for the scores as they have now maybe to review all the 13 jumps to get it right if it was on the point of the quarter landed...

If they would maybe use some technology which measures for them exactly such things we would be moving the right way ... but with only the "q" sign how it stands now … it just will add more questionable calls and open up manipulations to play around with on the Technical Panel side and in a further consequence on the GOEs the judge can give…

 

[kolyadafan2002]

Just want to mention full blade can't be seen in full speed. Either they need to call it via tech panel where they can slow mo it, or they won't call it at all.

But it does clearly exist when you see with good camera's: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQqVreuD7A0

 

[karne]

Before the "q" jumps that landed on the quarter were considered clean though. If missing MORE than a quarter they were under.

Not sure the difference between 89 degrees and 90 degrees though.

Incorrect - since the start of the 2018-2019 season on the quarter has been UR. Don't you remember Zakrasjek's famous post-SkAm meltdown after the tech panel correctly showered Zhou with carrots?

 

[kolyadafan2002]

Incorrect - since the start of the 2018-2019 season on the quarter has been UR. Don't you remember Zakrasjek's famous post-SkAm meltdown after the tech panel correctly showered Zhou with carrots?

sorry confusing myself with older communications.
Still goes back to the argument 89 degrees vs 90 degrees with current technology.
Still annoyed with myself that didn't notice that rule change after 17/18 season.

 

[NadezhdaNadya]

And just do not get me started on the "full blade" lunacy. Of all the things the ISU chose to pay attention to in the fandom, that toxic bulldust from one whinging toxic crybaby group of fans is it?! It's not even a proper technical term - it's not even a proper thing - you try taking off a Lutz from the full blade you're going to eat ice quickly and hard. Skaters using the lower part of the toepick and front part of the blade is not, I repeat not, bad technique, and it's not using the full blade.

In summary: WHAT THE BEEP, ISU.

As I said before - not the full blade is the biggest problem. The biggest problem is the excessive pre-rotation (which is always related to a full blade, but whatever). Some skaters have 270 degrees pre-rotated flips and lutzes (Like Shcherbakova), they rotate a big part of these jumps on the ice, when these jumps should be completely airborne. Just compare Kolyada's 4 Lz to Shcherbakova's 4 Lz.
Skaters like Yuzuru, Nathan, Boyang, Kolyada, Yuna Kim, Carolina Kostner, Alexia Paganini, Elizaveta Tuktamysheva, Anastasiya Tarakanova, Polina Tsurskaya, Maria Artemieva, Polina Edmunds, Alaine Chartrand, Tomoe Kawabata have textbook technique.

 

[NadezhdaNadya]

https://youtu.be/Q7tl_zfGjW4
Amazing lutz by Polina Tsurskaya

 

[Lunalovesskating]

ISU Vice President revealed in an interview that the new q rule for underrotations was invented because the Russian Federation was unhappy with the strict judging during the Grand Prix last season.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/sportmail.ru/amp/news/figure-skating/41738243/

 

[zounger]

ISU Vice President revealed in an interview that the new q rule for underrotations was invented because the Russian Federation was unhappy with the strict judging during the Grand Prix last season.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/sportmail.ru/amp/news/figure-skating/41738243/

Yes lakernik you convinced us.

 

[Fluture]

ISU Vice President revealed in an interview that the new q rule for underrotations was invented because the Russian Federation was unhappy with the strict judging during the Grand Prix last season.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/sportmail.ru/amp/news/figure-skating/41738243/

Wow. I had suspected already that this new “q rule“ would be abused - with only certain skaters getting the q and others losing BV with a real UR call. (Because there‘s no way for technical callers to differentiate between all these criteria with the insufficient camera angles and equipment they‘re being given. They‘re only human)

But that it was quite literally invented to serve one federation and their skaters only? And that they‘d openly admit it, without any shame? Just... wow. Looks like the temper tantrum and the “letter“ to the ISU worked.

Why do I watch this sport again?

 

[ancientpeas]

Instead of changing the rules, they should work on a system to make judges and tech panel do their jobs more consistently and efficiently. Adapt technology to reduce subjectivity and doubt, etc...

Um.. do you remember when the ISU decided that USB sticks were too new fangled? That was.. last year or the year before.