"Clarifications" to the 2007 ISU rules changes

Thanks to AussieWilly, who posted this on FSU.

Here are the answers to some coaches' questions that came up in connection with the last refinement of the ISU Judging System, as codified in ISU Communication 1445.

New clarifications:

http://www.isa.org.au/Documents/Officials/Clarifications_to_ISU_Communication_1445.pdf

Original document:

http://www.isu.org/vsite/vfile/page/fileurl/0,11040,4844-183415-200633-121139-0-file,00.pdf

Samples:

Flutzing. What does "obvious" mean in the rule about an "obvious" wrong edge?

A: It means the Tech Panel can tell it's a wrong edge in real time without recourse to slow-motion replays.

Jump sequence. If you do a 3-turn or a Mohawk between the two jumps of a sequence, that's a no-no and the element counts as two separate jumps.

Death spiral. The "backward inside death spiral where the lady is looking at the man" is eliminated as a proper death spiral position.

Could MM or someone help me comprehend the INTENTIONS of these changes in rules shown as "Communication 1445" ?

To a non-skater like me, it looks as if it's meant to ask the competitors to abandon some part of what they've become proficient at, to pay attention (while performing) to their memories rather than to their musicality, and to be less improvisational.
Much confusion already seen before everyone gets the meanings, no?

It sort of resembles a pace-car coming into the middle of a formula car racing.

Simply, what is gained by this "1445" ?? :scratch:

They are new Rules for the skaters to digest. The Senior skaters should have no problem with these Rules or they shouldn't be Seniors.

The Flutz Rule is obvious. That's what School Figures were all about - edges.

Ah yes, little basics between jumps and the whole question of Free(?) skate comes up.

The death of a Death Spiral. We can't get too Free.

Joe

Yes, calling the "wrong edge" is indeed an improvement.
That's obvious; but what other improvements?

Mathman said:

Death spiral. The "backward inside death spiral where the lady is looking at the man" is eliminated as a proper death spiral position.

Click to expand...

I don't get this one... don't the ladies always look at the man on those BI death spirals? I mean, if you arch your back, and follow the general curve created by her body, well, yes, she will end us staring at her partner...

Kypma

Mathman said:

Here are the answers to some coaches' questions that came up in connection with the last refinement of the ISU Judging System, as codified in ISU Communication 1445.

New clarifications:

http://www.isa.org.au/Documents/Officials/Clarifications_to_ISU_Communication_1445.pdf

Click to expand...

FYI, this document (posted on the Ice Australia web site) appears to be pretty much the same document (I haven't compared it word-for-word) that was posted on the USFS site on June 5th (based on a May 17, 2007 conference call): http://www.usfigureskating.org/content/Answers to Questions for Conference Call on ISU 1445.pdf

USFS is publishing all IJS-related documents and clarifications/updates in this section of their site:
http://www.usfigureskating.org/New_Judging.asp?id=311

The latest Coaches Conference Call Q&A document (singles and pairs) took place on June 27th -- here's the link to the transcription:
http://www.usfigureskating.org/content/Answers 062707.pdf

I get the fluzing one too, but am very confused with the death spiral - including by the leading and still unanswered question in the link MM posted.

I haven't read the rules for jump sequence yet - Joe, do I take it you dislike this rule?

Ah, good. I was going to make a thread talking about how things are going to be much different next season.

*It's now harder to get levels in a Change-of-Foot Combination Spin. I don't like this too much. People aren't already doing difficult enough spins???

*There are now more options for getting levels in a Layback Spin. This is a very good change (the "8 revolutions in a single position" is a great addition for other non-combination spins too). The rules were much too strict before and getting that Level 4 Layback was even more rare than a lady doing a Triple/Triple combination. However, the point change they made to the layback this past season needs to be corrected...a Level 4 Layback is only worth .2 more than a Level 3 Layback!

*The same type of spin can no longer be performed twice. This is a good change but, as per usual with the people who write the CoP, the change is too black-and-white. A skater shouldn't get 0 points if they accidently do the same type of spin twice...it should just be downgraded.

*Jump sequences are now much more strict. You must have actual hops and non-scoring jumps in between the jumps of your jump sequence. While it's good that they are trying to reward more rhythmic jump sequences, they've absolutely ruined other types. If you fall out of the first jump on a planned combination or have to take a step before the next jump, that next jump takes up an entire extra jump pass. This tells skaters "No, you're NOT allowed to fight and try to recover from your mistake" (since losing the extra jump pass obviously just isn't going to be worth it), which is a very lame notion. Similarly, landing a jump and doing a 3-turn afterwards because of a slight imbalance means that your next jump also counts as an entirely different jumping pass. Really, really horrible idea. What they NEED to do is give a bonus to jump combinations and "true" jump sequences, leave the "faulty" sequences as they are now (you get hit with a deduction rather than eating up an ENTIRE extra jump slot), and lower the base value of jumps a bit (to compensate for the increased points people are getting from the combinations), .

*Spiral Sequences are going to be more compact. I'm VERY happy that they eliminated the "unsupported free leg" rule as a feature for a level (was too easy just by itself) and the requirement for a backward inside spiral position (was too often a waste of time). However, I hate the new rule that changing edge in the Spiral means you've already used up two out of three of your possible positions. How does changing your edge relate to changing position anyway?? Changing the edge doesn't count as a change of positions when you do spins. This rule destroys the "Michelle Kwan" Spiral. It's IMPOSSIBLE to get a Level 4 Spiral Sequence if you perform that move (traditional backward leg position with change-of-edge) in your sequence. You now have to do your forward change-of-edge Spiral in the Beillmann position or in total split position. If you choose the total split position, you now MUST do your backwards spiral position as a Beillmann. If you do a forward Beillman, you MUST now do a back Charlotte. These are the only options to get level 4, unless you leave out the change-of-edge or change body position along with the change-of-edge. Arawkawa's wonderful change-of-edge Y-Spiral with the arm release is now only level 3 (unless she releases the arm as soon as she changes edge, diminishing the effect of that difficult transition) because when she goes to finish off the sequence with the backwards Spiral component, it doesn't count since it's a "4th" position. Cohen's wonderful backwards Y-Spiral, with arm release, into a forward change-of-edge Spiral with the free leg behind her is now also only level 3 because after she changes edge, she has hit a "4th" position which does not count (therefore making the change-of-edge not count, since it must be held for 3 seconds after the change in the so-called "new position").

But you get some extra GOE for f'rinstance the 4th position? no?
Because of this GOE margin, you can't re-calculate accurately your last season's protocol by simply applying the new 1445? no?

... Anyway, who will be most affected??

sorcerer said:

Could MM or someone help me comprehend the INTENTIONS of these changes in rules shown as "Communication 1445" ?

To a non-skater like me, it looks as if it's meant to ask the competitors to abandon some part of what they've become proficient at, to pay attention (while performing) to their memories rather than to their musicality, and to be less improvisational.
Much confusion already seen before everyone gets the meanings, no?

It sort of resembles a pace-car coming into the middle of a formula car racing.

Simply, what is gained by this "1445" ?? :scratch:

Click to expand...

I am far from an expert in these things, but every year the ISU technical committee gets together at the end of the season to tweak the judging system, based on the previous years' experience. For instance, two years ago there were too many Biellmanns, so they changed the rules slightly to prevent skaters form picking up gratuitous points just by throwing in a Biellmann position at the end of every spin and spiral.

Communication 1445 reflects what they came up with after the 2006-07 season.

Yes, rules changes can hurt skaters who might have to change what they do best under the old rules.

IIRC the most famous example of this was, just before the 2006 Olympic season the ISU changed the rules on pairs throws in such a way that Shen and Zhou couldn't do one of their signature moves any more, while at the same time the new rules gave a green light (point-wise) to the version that Totmianina and Marinen were used to doing. There was a big scream that the Russians on the ISU technical committee were trying to cheat to give T&M an edge over their chief rival.

It is even possible that re-working the program contributed to Zhao's subsequent injury, in the same way that Michelle Kwan hurt her back trying to bring her spins into line with new requirements for higher levels.

Mathman said:

IIRC the most famous example of this was, just before the 2006 Olympic season the ISU changed the rules on pairs throws in such a way that Shen and Zhou couldn't do one of their signature moves any more, while at the same time the new rules gave a green light (point-wise) to the version that Totmianina and Marinen were used to doing. There was a big scream that the Russians on the ISU technical committee were trying to cheat to give T&M an edge over their chief rival.

It is even possible that re-working the program contributed to Zhao's subsequent injury, in the same way that Michelle Kwan hurt her back trying to bring her spins into line with new requirements for higher levels.

Click to expand...

I am wondering if the example with pairs was about the jump rules ???

sorcerer said:

Yes, calling the "wrong edge" is indeed an improvement.

That's obvious; but what other improvements?

Click to expand...

IMO this is not really much of a change. It does not address the question of whether a flutz is really a flip. As far as I can make out, the only difference is that now in obvious cases of flutzing, the judges will be required to give a negative GOE for the whole element.

Before, it was up to the discretion of each judge as to how much to penalize the skater, and whether other good features of the jump (air position, ice coverage, flow out on the landing) would be allowed to override the negative feature of the wrong-edge take-off.

emma said:

I am wondering if the example with pairs was about the jump rules ???

Click to expand...

I might be wrong about that. Was it lifts?

For this year, though, we had a thread a while back on which it was pointed out that almost all pairs teams will be adversely affected by the new 2007-08 rule about putting in extra steps in a sequence.

Pairs skaters mostly can't do real combos, both because they are not as strong jumpers as singles skaters anyway, and also because maintaining unison is a huge issue. Almost all pairs skaters currently have some kind of turn or step in their sequences for timing. This will no longer be allowed.

Kypma said:

I don't get this one... don't the ladies always look at the man on those BI death spirals? I mean, if you arch your back, and follow the general curve created by her body, well, yes, she will end us staring at her partner...

Click to expand...

I don't get that one either. I guess they are talking about the position where the lady is almost lying on her back, on an inside edge.

In the other position (which I think of as the "standard" one), she is turned more sideways. But isn't that an outside edge death spiral? Are they saying that only an outside edge posrition will be acceptable now, or am I all wet?

I hope someone will clear this up for us.

Mathman said:

I don't get that one either. I guess they are talking about the position where the lady is almost lying on her back, on an inside edge.

In the other position (which I think of as the "standard" one), she is turned more sideways. But isn't that an outside edge death spiral? Are they saying that only an outside edge posrition will be acceptable now, or am I all wet?

Click to expand...

On the back outside death spiral, the lady is almost lying on her back (supine), so she would be looking up or arching back forther to look behind her head as in a layback. If the position is a good low one, a good arch would keep her head below her knee as now required.

Back outside was the first death spiral, BTW, and it was the Protopropovs in the 1960s who popularized using the other edges. So 40+ years ago back outside was the "standard" death spiral, but since then back outside, forward inside, and back inside are all standard and rotate from year to year as required elements in the short program. Forward outside is almost never done. Shen & Zhao used to do it. Probably not low enough to count under the new requirements though.

For the forward and back inside death spirals, the lady's normal position is more like lying on her front (prone), so with a straight back and neck she would be looking down, not up. It's easier to get low on the inside edges, so in long programs where skaters have the choice of which death spiral to do, the two inside versions are the most common.

However, one variation is for the lady to raise her head and arch her back upward so that she is looking up at the man.

This is the variation that the question in the document linked is about. That variation may be more difficult and more attractive than keeping the head down, and it certainly allows for more eye contact/connection between the partners, but it involves lifting the head higher than the rest of her body, so it causes a problem with the rule that the lady's head is supposed to be no higher than her skating knee, which according to Communication 1445 is now required for the death spiral position to be considered for any features.

Thanks, gkelly. Informative as always. :yes:

emma said:

I get the fluzing one too, but am very confused with the death spiral - including by the leading and still unanswered question in the link MM posted.

I haven't read the rules for jump sequence yet - Joe, do I take it you dislike this rule?

Click to expand...

Emma, yeah! What's wrong with a variation on a death spiral? Maybe an official who has a skater that could not do this, is pushing this new rule.

Joe

Mathman said:

IMO this is not really much of a change. It does not address the question of whether a flutz is really a flip. As far as I can make out, the only difference is that now in obvious cases of flutzing, the judges will be required to give a negative GOE for the whole element.

Click to expand...

At least it is now showing that the powers that be are aware of the destruction of the lutz. I think it should be an automatic -2 or -3 in the GoEs since they wont admit that it satisfies the definition of a flip.

Joe

sorcerer said:

But you get some extra GOE for f'rinstance the 4th position? no?
Because of this GOE margin, you can't re-calculate accurately your last season's protocol by simply applying the new 1445? no?

Click to expand...

If your Spiral isn't Level 4, you only get half as many points for positive GOE.

IMO, it should be a +1 bonus for ALL levels. Even still, doesn't it feel wrong that the best Spirals we've ever seen (from Arakawa and Cohen) are now only Level 3?

Thank you GM and MM for your replies, GoldMedalist's summary (first post) gives us bigginers quite a clearer view.

Mathman, FISA to formula car racing is quite similar to
your description on ISU tweaking rules every year.
In the FISA case, it's often written that a great part of the intentions of rule changes is to keep the authority of the organization.
It's by making the participants obey that they keep the power, regardless of whether the change is appropriate or not.

I hope that 's not the case in figure skating.