# Thread: ISU rule changes

1. 0
Originally Posted by Mathman
Little by little it's all coming back to me I only have a couple of months left to re-memorized Communications 1319, 1342 and 1396 before the season starts.
But are you really going to realize this as you are watching or wait for the details to show up the next day?

2. 0
It just occurred to me that this new Sequence rule could address, in some cases, the problem of the high point value of a fully rotated quad with a fall.

Suppose you planned 4T+3T, 4T as your first two elements. Your intended base value is 22 points for the two passes.

But instead you fall on your first quad and can't do to 3T. Then you hit your solo quad OK.

So you get 9.0 - 3.0 - 1.0 = 5.0 for the first element and 7.2 for the second, for a total of 12.2. The penalty for the fall now totals 9.8 points.

But all is not lost! You quick-wittedly tack a 2T onto your second quad. This restores the combo and recovers the full 9.0 for the second quad, plus an extra 1.3. Your new total is now 15.3.

MM

3. 0
Originally Posted by Joesitz
But are you really going to realize this as you are watching or wait for the details to show up the next day?
You got me there! When I watch skating on TV, it is hard for me to tell whether the performer did a triple toe or a triple flip, much less keep track of whether he already did two triple loops in combination or not.

In fact, I find that the more I try to "keep score at home," the less I can sit back and enjoy the actual performances.

This is all the more the case when I see an event in person, where I don't have the benefit of the expert commentary from Uncle Dick and crew.

So I am content to settle in with my Diet Lime Coke -- the two-liter bottles with Michelle on them left over from the short-lived Olympic promotion (fortunately I bought 1000 of them) -- and watch the show.

Then the next day, my pleasure is doubled as I have all those delicious numbers to dive into!

MM

4. 0
Originally Posted by Mathman
.

In fact, I find that the more I try to "keep score at home," the less I can sit back and enjoy the actual performances.MM
I could not agree with you more. I can keep the details going while watching but I get caught up in exciting performance (e.g. Kimmie in Calgary) or lose interest in a less than expected performance (Rochette in Calgary). when that happens it's to h--l with the details. I'm still a Whole Package Viewer. the details tomorrow if I am up to it. Actually, the whole package has been working for me as far as the results of the recent competitions have shown. A few details like Lambiel's 3A and Sokolova's results were kind of eyebrow raising for me but not much else.

It would be nice if ABC or ESPN commentators who have the chit sheets of the skater's planned elements to shout them out, like a 4Lx4Lp will be his opening followed by footwork in a circle into a 3A., etc., etc., and another commentator announcing that the Tech Specialist oks those jumps.

Joe

5. 0
Originally Posted by DORISPULASKI
There's no handicap given by the ISU for size, other than Novice, Junior, and Senior, ratings, which keeps 9 year old girls out of the mix.
And I get that when they are judging they don't take this into consideration, say - she is bigger, he is smaller, they didn't get the hight, but the execution was good so we will score the same as the big guy and small lady because it is equally impressive from the difficulty factor?
Originally Posted by DORISPULASKI
And the Chinese are often said to fling the lady, accompanied by a large kick, sort of, of their back leg.
I had seen the difference, just thought that type of thing would be considered a difference in style. I see what you are pointing out that the style will be factored into the score. that is interesting, and at face value seems a little unfair, but I am learning.
Originally Posted by DORISPULASKI
Downloads, I get from rinkside, youtube, and the ever popular fsvids. Olympic vids, which is what the Campbell Brown vid was, are in the restricted section of fsvids. You have to upload a vid or two and register to enter the restricted sections.
Been to 3 of these, one I just joined and had not been aware of the restricted sections.

As always thank you!

6. 0
Valova and Vasiliev's Worlds 1988 LP has a good example of an axel entry twist. The catch is just the same as other types of twists (analogous to jumps-the takeoff is different, but the landing is always the same if the skater is doing it right).

7. 0
Originally Posted by Mathman
But I still want to see someone do a 4 double-Axel sequence. Give them 5.3 points for the last two and an extra +2 GOE for an unusual entrance!
And a MEGA transitions score

8. 0
Originally Posted by Mathman
I think the reason that it is a real change and not just an aesthetic change is because of that .8 multiplier. (Thanks to Hockeyfan for being the first to explain this to me, post 8 above.)

If you did a second solo quad and it was scored as a (failed) combo, you would still get full value (9.0) for the quad as the first jump of a combo.

But if it is scored as a failed sequence, then, because of the .8 multiplier applied to all jumps of a sequence, you only get 7.2 points for the quad.

Now that I understand it, I think the change is a good one.

MM
Thank you, I had forgotten that both jumps in a sequence were multiplied by .8 (as if it were harder to do two solo jumps than to do two jumps in sequence).

This is a much bigger penalty especialy for a quad.

9. 0
Originally Posted by DORISPULASKI
Valova and Vasiliev's Worlds 1988 LP has a good example of an axel entry twist. The catch is just the same as other types of twists (analogous to jumps-the takeoff is different, but the landing is always the same if the skater is doing it right).
That's where Eltsova & Bushkov's must have been a strange variation of a thorw double axel because i think they had already done a regular split twist and only did one thrown jump aside from the double axel type one.

Without being able to download Valova and Vasiliev's can you tell us whether it was single/double/triple? Also can you describe the technique in performaning the twist - i would have thought the technique for a throw axel (hand to hand and usually lady's left arm on the partner's shoulder and the partner's right hand at her hip) wouldn't be too good since that seems to give the jump length rather than the height required for the twist. Does it go up with the man's hands on the ladies hips?

Ant

10. 0

## Cooments

Ok so i've finally gotten round to reading the communication (i'm procrastinating!) and i have a couple of questions:

1. Section I number 4 says that it "allows retrogressions in step sequences of singles and pairs short programs" what is a retrogrssion and what does this mean for the step sequences?

2. Have the writers of the CoP actually been reading our threads? There is a clarification at the end in section V number1 reagrding Sitspin positions which says:

"A sit position is obtained when the angle of the skating leg and the knee is not more than 90 degrees; if this angle is more than 90 degrees, the position is considered as an upright.

If the buttocks are higher than the knee, there must be a GOE reduction from -1 to -3 (depending on the height and the duration of such position)"

So a couple of observations - if he plans to come back to competitive elligible skating, Plushcenko better get working on that sit spin because on a bad day he might risk getting his sitspin called an upright (though given the pluschenko love he'd probably get credited with a difficult variation of an upright ) or get the reduction on the GOE for his buttocks above knee position.

A more important observation (and i'd have to go away and check tapes to confirm) is that i've noticed that most skaters (i'm thinking mostly men here) can transtition from the back sit on the traditional outside edge moving it onto an inside edge without adjusting the position of the spin, but on the more difficult forward sitspin that goes from the LI edge to LO edge nearly all of them have to rise a little bit to get the weight moved onto the right part of the blade to spin. My question is - don't they all move their buttocks above the spinning knee or at least have more than a 90 degree angle?

If it does then it will be intersting to see how the spins are called/graded and if people will risk the forward sitspin edge change anymore?

Ant

11. 0
PS i can't seem to change the typo in the title so you'll have to read my cooments (!) from here on in!!!

Ant

12. 0
Originally Posted by antmanb
1. Section I number 4 says that it "allows retrogressions in step sequences of singles and pairs short programs" what is a retrogrssion and what does this mean for the step sequences?
It means that the steps can go back the way they came (along the same line or in a loop or zigzag). E.g., if you're doing a step sequence starting at the west end of the rink and heading east, it's now allowed for some of the steps to head west.

13. 0
Originally Posted by Theatregirl1122
Thank you, I had forgotten that both jumps in a sequence were multiplied by .8 (as if it were harder to do two solo jumps than to do two jumps in sequence).
I think the point of the .8 multiplier is to encourage skaters to do a genuine triple-triple combo if they can, while still allowing them to make full use of all their jumping passes if they can't.

Example: Suppose your jump layout (lady) is

3Lz+2T
3F+2Lo+2Lo
3Lo
3Lz
3F
2A
7th pass ?

You've done 5 triples and the required Axel.

You have repeated the two highest-scoring jumps, the Lutz and the flip.

What should you do now?

(a) 3S+3T combo, if you can (9.4 points, including second half bonus).

(b) 3S + half loop + 3T sequence (7.5 points).

(c) Solo 3S (5.0 points).

14. 0
One thing I have noticed in all these rule changes is that it is mostly pairs, rather than singles skating, where the ISU seems to be constantly coming up with new refinements in the CoP.

I suppose this is because pairs scoring is more subtle -- you have to be looking for various holds, etc., not to mention unison and complement.

In singles skating, despite all these pages of rules, it is still pretty simple. You get 4.0 for a triple toe, 4.5 for a triple Salchow, etc. Then you pick up an odd point here and there for spins, footwork and spirals. Then the judges weigh in with the artistic mark, and most points wins.

MM

15. 0
...and that's where subjectivity creeps in. At least IMO we're on the right track.

Page 5 of 8 First 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Last

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•