Results 1 to 15 of 115

Thread: Should the ISU have separate scoring systems for men and women?

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Custom Title Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    28,330

    Should the ISU have separate scoring systems for men and women?

    Is there any reason why there could not be different rules for men’s skating than for women’s? In gymnastics, for instance, women do not do the high bar or rings. These strength apparatuses are just more appropriate to men’s gymnastics than to women’s.

    Here are two suggestions, neither of them new, about possible rules changes that might be appropriate for ladies singles.

    1. Raise the base value for triple Axels.

    Pro: For ladies, a triple Axel is a truly prodigious feat. This should be acknowledged, encouraged and rewarded by the CoP.

    Con: The triple Axel is already 2.2 points higher than the next lower-valued jump, the triple Lutz. We do not want one single element, however marvelous, to dominate the scoring.

    Comparison to men: For men, a triple Axel is not such a big deal – many juniors have a 3A. If we raise the base value of a 3A to, say, 9.0 points, then consistency would require that we raise the value of a quad toe to 12 points or more.

    But then, in order to preserve the idea of a “balanced program,” we would have to raise the values of spins and footwork, and also give more weight to program components. Competitively, nothing would change except that everyone would get a few extra points across the board.

    No change necessary for men.

    2. Combine the flip and the Lutz into a new jump called the “left foot take-off toe-pick assisted” jump.

    The LFTOTPA (or RFTOTPA for clockwise jumpers ) could go off either the inside edge or the outside edge, skater’s preference. A clear, deep outside edge is a feature for +1 GOE.

    Pro: This would eliminate all these judgment calls about “e” and “!” and whether judges must follow the tech specialist's call or score by their own real-time eyes, etc. It would also prevent (via the Zayak rules) skaters from omitting the edge jumps (loop and Salchow).

    Con: This is a cop-out. If you can’t do a proper Lutz and a proper flip, go home and work on them until you can.

    Comparison with men: Most men have a true flip and a true Lutz. No change necessary.

  2. #2
    Mashimaro on Ice
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    1,419
    For the first one I agree because compared to men, 3A is very difficult for a woman. That's why very few have done it. I also think they should increase the base value for difficult 3-3 combos, because not that many women try the harder 3-3's either. The second suggestion make me laugh a bit. I guess there is a gender difference for flutzes because many ladies have flutzes currently and in the past. However, I am not sure a new jump should be made to account for that. Perhaps, they can be less harsh on edge violations. I think either a deduction for edge violation or neg GOE, not both.

  3. #3
    Custom Title bekalc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    3,083
    There are tons of men who lip. And I really disagree with the concept of making the 3lutz and the 3flip into one jump. There are plenty of women who can do both jumps correctly.

    I do think though that maybe the jump values should be changed for women altogether, so we see no more Lepistos on the medal stand. And I don't see the big deal for the ! or E rules anyways. For me it was about darn time they did something about it, and I like what they are doing.

  4. #4
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    268
    I don't think the base values for the triple axels should be raised. Unless we get a female skater that both consistently lands the triple axel AND gets so high GOE's on them that the other ladies have to start either incorporating the jump or doing harder jumps, I don't think that the value should be raised. Yeah, it might serve as an incentive; but then again, I'd rather see, say, a clean triple lutz or flip than a barely there axel. Or just a plain splat-fest.

  5. #5
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    282
    1. possible. Not only triple axels, quads also. Maybe 0.5 point increase each? But then, they should be more strict on the rotation.

    2. just silly.

    I strongly encourage ISU to give some incentive to those who land the complete set of triple jumps, like Joannie in the ladies. Maybe Mirai too, if she can get her edge corrected.
    Also, I desperately hope they do something with the technical panel deciding everything from leveling spins to rewarding jumps. It's just too subjective. Maybe two of them can do the leveling spins and steps, but when it comes to downgrading a jump, I think all three of them should agree before doing so. I just want them to be consistent so there won't be any doubts and complaints.
    Last edited by Basics; 04-17-2010 at 08:27 PM.

  6. #6
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    747
    I have no opinion whether a 3a should have more base point. I do disagree with the rather narrow view of don't do 3a, becuase of "barely there" 3a or splash fest. I don't think skaters are stupid and put a jump that they can't master in a competitive program. I have seen Arakawa landed perfect 3a in practice without splashing, but she was consistent enough to put it in her programs. So far the only ladies who have put 3a in their program consistently are Ito, ? Harding and Mao, none of them have "barfely there 3a". So far none of them splashed, they actually land the jump on their feet. Even with downgrade Mao's 3a does not look "barely there".

    FS is a sport someone has to take the risk to advance the sports. I am quoting and hopefully am not misquoting Kwanford wife, it is better for skaters to have a full set of triple jumps. In 2 consecutive olys the lady OGM were loopless. Hope the future lady OGM will have a full set of triple jumps including the 3a.
    Last edited by rtureck; 04-17-2010 at 05:36 PM.

  7. #7
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    289
    Quote Originally Posted by Lilith11 View Post
    I don't think the base values for the triple axels should be raised. Unless we get a female skater that both consistently lands the triple axel AND gets so high GOE's on them that the other ladies have to start either incorporating the jump or doing harder jumps, I don't think that the value should be raised. Yeah, it might serve as an incentive; but then again, I'd rather see, say, a clean triple lutz or flip than a barely there axel. Or just a plain splat-fest.
    I agree. Plus, right now Mao is the only skater who actually does the 3A. The Japanese federation will probably not be able to push through any rule change without the support of the European federation and I doubt they would agree to the change since none of their skaters will benefit.
    Last edited by Figure88; 04-17-2010 at 05:31 PM.

  8. #8
    can't come down to Earth prettykeys's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    1,801
    Quote Originally Posted by Mathman View Post
    Is there any reason why there could not be different rules for men’s skating than for women’s? In gymnastics, for instance, women do not do the high bar or rings. These strength apparatuses are just more appropriate to men’s gymnastics than to women’s.
    In Gymnastics, women uniquely do the balance beam, uneven bars, and the thing on the floor with the ribbons/hula hoops...men uniquely do the pommel horse, parallel bars, and rings (maybe something else I'm forgetting). In Figure Skating, men generally do more technically difficult jumps and steps, where women uniquely get points under the ISJ for doing a spiral. I think these activities are indeed "more appropriate" for men and women to compete in.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mathman View Post
    1. Raise the base value for triple Axels.
    ...
    But then, in order to preserve the idea of a “balanced program,” we would have to raise the values of spins and footwork, and also give more weight to program components. Competitively, nothing would change except that everyone would get a few extra points across the board.
    No, there is a very basic but significant change you are proposing. This is the equivalent of keeping the current point system for the 3Axel and the spirals, steps, PCS, etc. intact, but making every other jump's base value worth ~0.5 points less. Is there any particular reason why you want to downgrade the relative worth of all the jumps (except the 3A)?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mathman View Post
    2. Combine the flip and the Lutz into a new jump called the “left foot take-off toe-pick assisted” jump.

    The LFTOTPA (or RFTOTPA for clockwise jumpers ) could go off either the inside edge or the outside edge, skater’s preference. A clear, deep outside edge is a feature for +1 GOE.

    Pro: This would eliminate all these judgment calls about “e” and “!” and whether judges must follow the tech specialist's call or score by their own real-time eyes, etc. It would also prevent (via the Zayak rules) skaters from omitting the edge jumps (loop and Salchow).

    Con: This is a cop-out. If you can’t do a proper Lutz and a proper flip, go home and work on them until you can.
    It sounds kinda crappy (explained below), but it's not a horrendous idea. Sure, as you said, they already did it for the 3ToeLoop. However, sometimes the way people do 3Loops and 3Salchows look similar to me, too. So if we're going to do that, might as well apply the same principle to the 3Loop/Salchow.

    Now most women's programs will have:
    3Toe (your pick of ToeLoop or Walley)
    3SalLoop (your pick of Salchow or Loop, Loop +1 GoE)
    3Flutz (your pick of Flip or Lutz, Lutz +1 GoE)
    2A

    Cool...3 different types of triples. Sounds like a backwards step to me.

    I think it's "crappy" because if we want skaters to train demonstrate different skills (in this case, edge control in jumping), we should maintain the difference between a 3F and a 3Lz. I've heard half the reason the flutzing and the lipping became so common is because judges started to not be so picky about identifying and penalizing this type of cheating.

    A better option mentioned elsewhere in this thread is something like a +5 point bonus for doing five different triple jumps--that's pretty nice, it's like getting credit for doing an extra imagined triple jump.

    That, on its own, would also add further incentive to possibly doing a 3Axel without needing to raise its base value--a girl could substitute it for any other triple jump she may have trouble with (e.g. 3Lz), and in the process, she is doing a jump that is worth more. I do not think a higher base value at this time is merited or justified. You never see a 2.2 difference of base value for any other half-rotation's difference. 2Lz to 2A is 1.6 difference. 3A to 4T is 1.6 difference. The difference between a hypothetical 4Lz and a 4A is 1.5 LOL!

    In general, I don't like the idea of different base values between men and women. A couple reasons include consistency/simplicity of the judging system; and also for the implication that women are physically inferior in terms of athleticism. I realize that the reality does point in that direction, but if a woman can do a 3Axel, she should be given credit for it along the same lines as a male's 3Axel, no "female bonus".

    I don't even like the principle of different PCS factors between the men and women (1.0 vs. 0.8 in the SP, 2.0 vs.1.6 for the LP) because although I understand the reasoning behind it, I think it would have been better to make it factored against the actual TES a skater gets. Something like (TES x 0.5) + (raw PCS x 0.5) = Total Score. That way, the factoring correlates automatically to the TES instead of the fixed/absolute/embedded factoring.

    I think GoE's also need to be factored to the element they are referring to...but related to this topic are the standards to which they are applied. e.g. "good height & speed" for a woman doing a jump may be different for "good height & speed" for a man. Should we make it absolute, or relative to the respective sexes?
    Last edited by prettykeys; 04-17-2010 at 11:37 PM.

Posting Permissions

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