IJS point system and robots

[Sk8tr321]

And that the foot is no more than a fist difference from the head

OK,

Maybe it is not a hair cutter (Still learning all these terms) Maybe it is is a catch foot after layback. It looks really cool but if she does not get any points and it is really hard to do we are not sure if she should do it. On the other hand it is so beautiful to see it would be a shame to take it out.

Here is a picture of the position in question:

http://fscoh.org/Photos/katiePearl.jpg

and she pulls it up to here:

http://fscoh.org/Photos/KatieBiellmann.JPG

She is trying for 8 revs in normal layback then side for 3 revs (to grab foot) then pulls up to Biellmann.

I really want her to work on this but the sit spin 8 revs, pancake, clam, change edge is soooooo much easier and looking at the DVD, gets a level 4.

[gkelly]

Isn't this sport supposed to be about creativity and expression? I thought that was supposed to factor in to the score and the making of the program.

That is a part of the sport, although basic technique is a larger part especially at the developmental levels.

Creativity and expression can be rewarded by the judges in the component marks.

Sometimes skaters get overly focused on earning the highest possible levels on their elements and building up the highest possible base mark. This judging system outlines fairly clearly how to earn those points. So once the skaters and coaches understand what the technical specialists are looking for, they can plan the programs to include just that and count on earning those base marks as long as they execute the elements and features well enough to count.

Doing harder jumps and harder spins isn't the only way to earn points, though. Depending on their individual strengths, some skaters might be better off choosing to do easier elements and aiming for higher GOEs from the judges.

Timing the elements to the music, for example, can be one bullet point toward higher GOE, along with the actual quality of the element. That might mean, for example, leaving out a position variation in a spin that would earn a higher level but adding arm movements during the spin that don't increase the level but do make the spin more meaningful in relation to the music and the program theme.

They can also choose to focus on creative choreography with a point of view and good expression of the music, and earn higher scores for transitions

The system gives skaters choices of where to place their emphasis. Aiming for the easiest way to earn the highest levels from the tech panel is not the only possible choice. Another approach would be to aim for higher GOEs and/or higher program component marks from the judges.

The best possible performance will have difficult elements with high-quality execution and also creativity and musicality. But not everyone can achieve all of that, especially while they're still developing their skills.

[Sk8tr321]

That is a part of the sport, although basic technique is a larger part especially at the developmental levels.

The best possible performance will have difficult elements with high-quality execution and also creativity and musicality. But not everyone can achieve all of that, especially while they're still developing their skills.

I am learning a lot here. The documents on IJS that you guys pointed to help a lot. The system is very complex though. It is hard to know for sure what will count. i.e. only two difficult variations count. You need to do 8 revs before Biellmann. It seems that we need to find a coach that is a technical specialist as well. Is there a way to know for sure if a coach has the qualifications to plan it out? Is there an IJS certification program?

Thanks!

[mskater93]

OK,

She is trying for 8 revs in normal layback then side for 3 revs (to grab foot) then pulls up to Biellmann.

A grab foot to bring it to your head is a haircutter, but the new directives to the tech panels is no more than a fist distance away from the head - further away = no credit for the variation.

I know I have spent tons of time pouring through these ISU docs as has vlaurend to try and attain the highest points possible for our programs at our level. I also know that if you live in the right areas (LA, Chicago, Boston, Detroit, Minneapolis, Colorado, etc), you can easily find bucketloads of coaches/choreographers that know their stuff when it comes to IJS. Tech Specialists are former skaters at the Novice+ Regional level (mostly current coaches and former competitors - like Todd Sands, Charlie Tickner, etc). Technical controllers are judges. They all take classes/tests for their respective appointments like regular judges and accountants.

My primary coach is a TS and knows her stuff and keeps up with each communication as released. I ask her questions regarding levels and we try many, many, many different things to come up with the one thing in the program that will attain the highest number of points for that element (for example, I CAN do a CCoSp4 but I am better off doing a consistent CCoSp3 because I am more likely to get a positive GOE on it versus a negative GOE on the CCoSp4 I can do. I don't stop working on the additional feature, but it's just not in the program). My secondary coach is along for the ride when it comes to IJS and is learning from my primary coach and me (and is incorporating it into his own programs).

Coaches who are unsure about what the program should contain or how to increase levels should schedule a critique with a TS and/or TC that they know. It's not a weakness to get an outside consultation from a tech panelist. I swear!

[vlaurend]

I know I have spent tons of time pouring through these ISU docs as has vlaurend
. . .
Coaches who are unsure about what the program should contain or how to increase levels should schedule a critique with a TS and/or TC that they know. It's not a weakness to get an outside consultation from a tech panelist. I swear!

Yep! Welcome to IJS Nerds of America, LOL! I have learned *SO* much by studying those ISU documents I posted and watching the Grand Prix and other events while looking at the scoresheets. It's easy to do, since the scoresheets are posted on www.ISU.org at the end of each competition and we've got IceNetwork and YouTube in addition to TV. You see the level each skater got for each element, then you replay it and count the features, noting which ones the skater went for but did not do clearly enough or long enough to get a level.

I also agree wholeheartedly that you should have your coach set up a critique with a technical specialist who is affiliated with your club so you can ask what levels your daughters spins, spirals and step sequences would get.

OK, Maybe it is not a hair cutter (Still learning all these terms) Maybe it is is a catch foot after layback. It looks really cool but if she does not get any points and it is really hard to do we are not sure if she should do it. On the other hand it is so beautiful to see it would be a shame to take it out.

Here is a picture of the position in question:

http://fscoh.org/Photos/katiePearl.jpg

and she pulls it up to here:

http://fscoh.org/Photos/KatieBiellmann.JPG

She is trying for 8 revs in normal layback then side for 3 revs (to grab foot) then pulls up to Biellmann.

I really want her to work on this but the sit spin 8 revs, pancake, clam, change edge is soooooo much easier and looking at the DVD, gets a level 4.

Wow, she's got a limber back! The position your daughter is doing is not really a haircutter; it is more difficult than a haircutter because she is leaned way back and holding her blade with both hands. I think it would be classified as a pearl, even though her free leg is less extended than Caroline Zhang's famous pearl position. As long as she can hold that position for 3 revolutions before pulling up to the Biellmann (technically, 2, but 3 is safer if you want them to count it as a separate position), she should be able to get another level for that. I have no doubt that her pearl would qualify as a difficult variation of a layback position based on the definition given by the ISU:
"A difficult variation is a movement of a body part, leg, arm, hand or head,
which requires more physical strength or flexibility and that has an effect on the balance of the main body core."

And once again, it's not all about the levels. You are comparing her layback spin to a level 4 sitspin (8 revs, pancake, etc) but a level 4 sitspin is not worth as many points as a level 4 layback! A LSp4 is worth 2.7 base points and a SSp4 is only worth 2.5. Your daughter can get a level 4 on her layback if she does 8 revs in layback, 3 revs side leaning, 3 revs pearl, then 3 revs Biellmann.

[Sk8tr321]

Wow, she's got a limber back! The position your daughter is doing is not really a haircutter; it is more difficult than a haircutter because she is leaned way back and holding her blade with both hands. I think it would be classified as a pearl, even though her free leg is less extended than Caroline Zhang's famous pearl position. As long as she can hold that position for 3 revolutions before pulling up to the Biellmann (technically, 2, but 3 is safer if you want them to count it as a separate position), she should be able to get another level for that. I have no doubt that her pearl would qualify as a difficult variation of a layback position based on the definition given by the ISU:
"A difficult variation is a movement of a body part, leg, arm, hand or head,
which requires more physical strength or flexibility and that has an effect on the balance of the main body core."

And once again, it's not all about the levels. You are comparing her layback spin to a level 4 sitspin (8 revs, pancake, etc) but a level 4 sitspin is not worth as many points as a level 4 layback! A LSp4 is worth 2.7 base points and a SSp4 is only worth 2.5. Your daughter can get a level 4 on her layback if she does 8 revs in layback, 3 revs side leaning, 3 revs pearl, then 3 revs Biellmann.

Thanks,

This is where it gets fuzzy for me. I agree it is harder than a hair cutter but was not sure how "the system" would count it. From what you are saying I believe it counts and may even get +GOE so she should keep at it.

I guess the bad score she received was a shock. I was definately a learning experience. I think she went 7 times around in a camel and 6 in a doughnut and 3 in a Biellmann. Really hard to do and looks really cool but got a level 2. Having a tech specialist look at her spins would certainly be the smart thing to do. So how do we find a tech specialist in NJ area?

Thanks for all the useful info. This BB is great! There are definitely a lot of knowledgeable people here.

[mskater93]

There are a ton of TSs around - have your coach contact one (it's important that he/she be involved with the process). Either that, or look through your club's membership roster versus names on the "front sheet" from a competition

[gkelly]

Find someone who has a directory, which comes with the hard copy of the rulebook. That lists all the technical specialists by state.

That section is not online with the rest of the rulebook, probably for privacy reasons -- it includes some home addresses and phone numbers, including for some well-known names.

[Sk8tr321]

Thanks,

I will involve her coach. He has been OK and actually suggested her going to a jump specialist so I would expect him to be on board with a tech specialist.

I had a though about why every program last week looked just about the same. It is not the system itself it is what we are doing within the system. I talked to three other parents that are doing the same thing we are doing. Also, someone on this board suggested it. Get the video and the scores and see what scores people are getting for each move, spin, etc. So now we look for things that are relatively easy to do, that get a good level and put it in the program. Also, I imagine that a coach may incorporate something that got a good level with another skater.

By the way, now that I am learning this stuff I cannot watch skating anymore without counting revolutions.

[sk8rdad]

Thanks,

I will involve her coach. He has been OK and actually suggested her going to a jump specialist so I would expect him to be on board with a tech specialist.

I had a though about why every program last week looked just about the same. It is not the system itself it is what we are doing within the system. I talked to three other parents that are doing the same thing we are doing. Also, someone on this board suggested it. Get the video and the scores and see what scores people are getting for each move, spin, etc. So now we look for things that are relatively easy to do, that get a good level and put it in the program. Also, I imagine that a coach may incorporate something that got a good level with another skater.

By the way, now that I am learning this stuff I cannot watch skating anymore without counting revolutions.

Reviewing programs with a tech specialist is invaluable. One thing to keep in mind with the spins is you not only need to obtain level but also good GOE. If you hold a position for 8 revs but the spin slows down significantly then you will lose much of what you gained on level from the negative GOE you will get for bad execution. Someone else here said it well lower level spins well executed can be every bit a effective scorewise as a badly executed high level spin.

If you think spins are difficult to figure out just wait to you see the section on footwork, revision 1097798237973242397. Footwork rules seem to change daily.