- Joined
- Oct 20, 2010
Oh, lets be clear - I'm quite annoyed at the changes made to the second step sequence and think the benefits outweight the demerits. I definitely saw that as a move against skaters like Chan/Lysacek, who did level four footwork without the quad (along with all the changes).
I think that's really overly cynical. After years and years of skaters, coaches, and fans complaining that the number of required elements in both programs didn't leave time for much artistry or creativity, the ISU reduced them across the board, for ladies and men. If we buy into your conspiracy theory about this, who exactly benefitted from the removal of the spiral sequences for ladies? Everyone complained about how all the skaters did the exact same thing to get a Level 4, but that invalidates your point: almost every female skater in contention for medals could easily achieve L4, and both Yuna and Mao were getting good +GOE for theirs, albeit for different reasons. Along with the changes to spins, which require more diversity of positions, it seems really unfair to take it at anything other than face value: most of the rules for this season were designed to promote more varied programs, with more "breathing room" for the skaters to add personal touches. And, you know, I think it's worked pretty well.
If you want to talk about rule changes that really were aimed at a particular skater, the "Mao Asada rules" fit the bill a lot more than the choreo step sequence. I happen to agree with the Mao Rules, personally, because they're a move in the direction of fairness and will be good for the sport in the future, but it's pretty clear they were designed with her in mind.