Major Changes Expected in Single Skating in 2010-2011

gkelly said:

The ISU Congress isn't until next month. I'm sure Golden Skate can fill up a whole thread with speculation and hypotehticals before any of these proposals are decided on.

Click to expand...

Amen, Amen, I say to you, let's wait and see just what the ISU Congress has in mind. They may be tyring to improve the SP which certainly needs it. I for one, can not grasp the need for it. A lady skater does her 3x2 in the SP and then falls on it in the LP. What does that tell us about a skater with respect to her skating ability? How can we honestly say a skater has deserved to win a championship on the basis of his SP only. Think Joubert in 2007 Worlds with a huge lead in the SP and then faltering badly to a 5th place LP while Daisuke and Lambiel were outstanding. Does it make sense? I understand the methodology to have him in 1st place but I'm not convinced he was the best in that competition. Best thing for the ISU to decide would be to test only elements in the SP without music and have a Free Skate at a later date. And that's only if they insist on having a 2 part competition.

Mathman said:

Does anyone have an opinion on the actual merits of the new rule?

Click to expand...

Not while there is a hot nationality debate going on.

Sad, that most posters have to think of their Country first and then the Sport. It's all that media blitz.

Who was it that said he/she hates seeing the same spirals put into a program for the sake of garnering points? Would I be the only one glad to see the spiral sequence go as a requirement in the SP? It's one of my least favorite elements in many skaters' programs, at times forced into the routine and ruining flow. I don't, however, like that it will be considered just a "transition element." Would any skater include it, once without any clear benefits? What if one required element was left open for a spin or spiral? Could the rule change concerning spirals in the FS be a blessing in disguise, and in fact encourage greater creativity on the part of skaters? People were complaining about how the levels don't encourage much. Or is that my hopeless little wish

dlgpffps said:

Who was it that said he/she hates seeing the same spirals put into a program for the sake of garnering points? Would I be the only one glad to see the spiral sequence go as a requirement in the SP? It's one of my least favorite elements in many skaters' programs, at times forced into the routine and ruining flow. I don't, however, like that it will be considered just a "transition element." Would any skater include it, once without any clear benefits? What if one required element was left open for a spin or spiral? Could the rule change concerning spirals in the FS be a blessing in disguise, and in fact encourage greater creativity on the part of skaters? People were complaining about how the levels don't encourage much. Or is that my hopeless little wish

Click to expand...

I agree. I would like to see a back spiral as an MIF and transits to a triple toe-off jump.

Joesitz said:

Not while there is a hot nationality debate going on.

Sad, that most posters have to think of their Country first and then the Sport. It's all that media blitz.

Click to expand...

That's what I was going to say. This thread is turning into the same debate that has populated other threads.

dlgpffps said:

Who was it that said he/she hates seeing the same spirals put into a program for the sake of garnering points? Would I be the only one glad to see the spiral sequence go as a requirement in the SP? It's one of my least favorite elements in many skaters' programs, at times forced into the routine and ruining flow. I don't, however, like that it will be considered just a "transition element." Would any skater include it, once without any clear benefits?

Click to expand...

The benefits will be in the transitions score . . . which we hope will be judged more consistently according to the guidelines, although they'll never be as clearly spelled out as the element scoring.

However, since spirals would no longer be required in short programs, many skaters will choose to do other kinds of transitions instead.

Since it doesn't appear that the short program time limit will be reduced, skaters will have time to do more non-element moves between the elements with only 7 instead of 8 elements in the same time period. We hope that they won't spend the extra time just stroking around or posing. Since the SP time limit is only a maximum with no minimum, what we might see is some skaters cutting their music shorter again.

What if one required element was left open for a spin or spiral?

Click to expand...

So which of the existing short program spins would be deleted?
If this did happen, I'm sure it would not be free choice of the skater whether to include a spiral sequence or a third spin. (In long programs yes, but not in the short.)

I could imagine a rotation such as spiral sequence one year, flying spin the next year, layback the year after that.

But what would be the parallel rotation for the men? Some years they do three spins and one step sequence, and other years two spins and two step sequences?

Anyway, that possibility is not currently on the radar.

In the 1970s and 80s, the short program consisted of three jump elements, three spin elements, and a step sequence. The spiral sequence and men's second step sequence were added in 1989. So this change would be going back to the original 7-element SP structure.

Could the rule change concerning spirals in the FS be a blessing in disguise, and in fact encourage greater creativity on the part of skaters? People were complaining about how the levels don't encourage much. Or is that my hopeless little wish

Click to expand...

I'm sure it will inspire greater creativity.
Look at the spiral sequences from the 1990s and early 2000s. There was a lot more variety then because skaters could do whatever spiral-related skills they thought would impress the judges without worrying whether it officially counted as a "difficult variation" or whether they could hold the edges for 3 seconds.

The current skaters have spent the last few years working on their edge changes and catch-foot positions and whatever you want to call the position with the free leg in front and the upper body slightly leaning back, because those were the easiest ways to assure higher levels. Now that they have developed those skills, I'm sure we'll still see them plenty often.

But anyone who can do something else that looks just as impressive but wouldn't have counted as a feature in the current rules, or not consistently, will now be free to put their own personal wow moves into the LP spiral sequence and stand out from the crowd that way.

E.g., I expect we'll see more slide spirals (hard to hold for 3 seconds) coupled with a 6-second spiral on the other foot.

My concern is whether judges will have enough room in the GOEs to distinguish between a skater with great edges, positions, creativity, and difficulty vs. someone who excels at only one or two of the above.

gkelly said:

My concern is whether judges will have enough room in the GOEs to distinguish between a skater with great edges, positions, creativity, and difficulty vs. someone who excels at only one or two of the above.

Click to expand...

Good point. Thanks for your input. I've been wondering about GOE-limits. I guess we have nothing else to do but sit and wait. The first event of the year will probably tell (if the rule's passed, of course).

Originally Posted by janetfan
Or maybe some judges/fans like to say this skater was an incredible jumper:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQXiiknXAH8

but he lacked the artistry of this skater:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MhIiisXRBys

Did the judges get it right - and if so how did the "Crossover King" place ahead of the "Quad King?"

Click to expand...

Sigh. Plushenko was not placed ahead of Tim because of artistry. There's a reason the judges put Yagudin ahead of Plushenko at the Grand Prix Final, even though Plushenko was cleaner. The North American judges weren't necessarily "enamored" with Plushenko's artistry.

Plushenko was placed ahead of Tim because of basic skating. I.e Tim had very poor skating skills, basics and posture. And a lot of people felt Tim's medaling was what was wrong with the system. Because he was a poor skater. And even I'm told Tim will admit that.

In contrast, while the North Americans may not have been enamored with Plushenko's artistry. They could not deny the fact that he was a much better skater than Tim. Plushenko in his prime was someone who could generate a ton of speed with a few crossovers and skated with a ton of power. The only thing Tim had over Plushenko was the 4sal (and the fact that a quad was at the end of the program) when it came to quality of his jumps, Plushenko's was much better.

Think Joubert in 2007 Worlds with a huge lead in the SP and then faltering badly to a 5th place LP while Daisuke and Lambiel were outstanding

Click to expand...

Joubert didn't "falter poorly" in the long. He just skated safely and watered down his jump content. He wasn't that far ahead behind most of the others in the long. In the free skate at that competition, a LOT of men skated extremely well and that was one of the best free skate portions of a Worlds in recent memory. However, Joubert's win was very much deserved because the other men all made some mistakes in the short.

bekalc said:

Sigh. Plushenko was not placed ahead of Tim because of artistry. There's a reason the judges put Yagudin ahead of Plushenko at the Grand Prix Final, even though Plushenko was cleaner. The North American judges weren't necessarily "enamored" with Plushenko's artistry.

Plushenko was placed ahead of Tim because of basic skating. I.e Tim had very poor skating skills, basics and posture. And a lot of people felt Tim's medaling was what was wrong with the system. Because he was a poor skater. And even I'm told Tim will admit that.

In contrast, while the North Americans may not have been enamored with Plushenko's artistry. They could not deny the fact that he was a much better skater than Tim. Plushenko in his prime was someone who could generate a ton of speed with a few crossovers and skated with a ton of power. The only thing Tim had over Plushenko was the 4sal (and the fact that a quad was at the end of the program) when it came to quality of his jumps, Plushenko's was much better.

Click to expand...

I agree with almost everything you said. My post was meant to be a reminder to the quad freaks that there is more to skating than jumps.

As to Tim's quad - they remain the best I have seen. Not a fan of the muscled looking quads with heavy landings we see from most of the guys. Tim's quads looked effortless compared to just about every skater I have seen and had great air position.

Plushy's jumps? Never my favorite and the best thing I could say about them - even back in 2002 is that he had such consistency.

About speed and power - Mirai appears to have better acceleration than Mao - but that hardly means she is a better skater.

About speed and power - Mirai appears to have better accelaration than Mao - but that hardly means she is a better skater.

Click to expand...

Its not like Tim had Mao like knees, posture, or edge quality. He had not very good stroking at all. Sure the spins and stroking improved under Carroll, but it was still no where near the top level. There's a reason Tim only has one national championship in the US, even though Tim was by far our best jumper for years..

And I disagree with the idea that Plushenko's quads were forced back in the day. Plushenko's jumps as a whole were pretty effortless. The guy's one of the best jumpers in the history of the sport. And if you want to give Tim the quad, I'd say the rest of the jumps still go to Plushenko by a mile (like the triple axel)

janetfan said:

About speed and power - Mirai appears to have better acceleration than Mao - but that hardly means she is a better skater.

Click to expand...

Really? It doesn't appear that way to me.

But I've never seen Mao live. Maybe her acceleration that appears effortless to me on video is less impressive live. (I doubt it though.)

brianjyw said:

You are absolutely right. So I don't understand why there is still a rule restricting ladies from doing a quad in SP. Why just limited to one 3A in SP? If a skater can do 3A three times in SP, it would be a gread advance in FS, don't you agree?. As a matter of fact, there should be no restrictions regarding types of jumps skaters are allowed in SP. Freedom promotes advancement and progress.

Click to expand...

I can't tell if this post is meant to be sarcastic or not, but I will give my opinion of the issues that you raised.

Yes, I think it would be a good rule to allow ladies to substitute a quad for one of the triples. If no one ever achieves that, no harm has been done. If some skater comes along who can do it, good for her.

This could all be taken care of (for both men and women together) by just changing the rules consistently to "an Axel of two or more revolutions," and "a combination with at least one of the jumps having three or more revolutions, the other having two or more" etc.

As far as doing three triple Axels in the same program, I do not like that suggestion. I like the current rule that says you cannot do two of the same kind of jump in the same program (SP). A lady who does 3A, 3Lz+3T, 3F out of footwork, or 3A, 3F+3Lo, 3Lz out of footwork, has shown a greater variety of skills than the skater who does 3A, 3A, 3A. The rules should reflect and reward this.

I also am not crazy about 3A+2T, 3Lz out of footwork, 2A, which the current rules allow and encourage. Showing two Axels in the same program, out of three jumping passes, is not a "balanced program."

Looks like they are bending the rule instead of advancing FS.

Click to expand...

They are proposing to change the rules, not to bend them. Whether this change will "advance figure skating" or not remains to be seen. I like the proposed change just on the basis of logic, aesthetics, and common sense, never mind making guesses about the future, ragging on skaters' nationalities, and lamenting ISU politics.

bekalc said:

Its not like Tim had Mao like knees or great edge quality either. It would be like comparing Kevin Reynods or Kevin Vanderperen to Brian Joubert. Non of them have much in the way of transitions. But Joubert has good skating skills, speed and power to recommend himself. While the other two skate slowly etc..

Click to expand...

Again I agree - but have read so many of your posts about the importance of quads and wonder how you can overlook Tim's greatness in the air. Even his spread eagle into a 3A+2t is a move most of today's guys don't do.

Tim's 4S+3T remains one of the greatest jumping passes ever done on Olympic ice. I saw no such thing from Plushy, Jouby, Dai, EVAN or any of the others in Vancouver. Not even close when we factor in the quality and ease Tim showed.

Kevin Reynolds - hmmm - are you sure you want a higher value on quads? If they raise the value and Kevin lands two in his SP he will have a commanding lead heading into the LP.

It feels like you wouldn't mind if Jouby and Plushy got more points for their quads - but not so much for skaters you don't like. (OK, just kidding )

Let's not forget when the CoP was formulated it was Tim's exceptional jumping skills that were used to balance the element scoring. ISU had to keep the values of jumps down or a clean Tim would have been unbeatable.
If I have that part wrong - no problem if somebody wants to correct me.

gkelly said:

Really? It doesn't appear that way to me.

But I've never seen Mao live. Maybe her acceleration that appears effortless to me on video is less impressive live. (I doubt it though.)

Click to expand...

I found Mao's skating slower the past two seasons. If she is accelerating from a very slow speed it is one thing and different than comparing it to a skater who is covering much more ice.

Maybe "accelerate" was the wrong word - but I have no doubt Mirai was skating considerably faster than Mao was last season. But still did not mean that to imply that Mirai has better skating skills.

The same would be true for Joubert and Abbott. No doubt Brian skates faster - but he is basically skating around the rink as opposed to what Jeremy is doing.

ETA: I will try and post a link - but Frank Carrol said he has never coached a skater who accelerates as "effortlessly" across the ice as Mirai.

More ETA: Here is Mao's SP from Worlds - I stand corrected - her speed is not only OK but her acceleration looks "effortless." I agree with the EuroSport guy who called her skating "staggeringly good."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwGdc-oqDoI

and Mirai - at 16 quite impressive but not as polished as Mao YET. But what a layback and spins!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6FFEcjxCQo8

So, I understand that proposed 3a rule is intended to benefit Mao, but who was the 2 quads rule written for? Kevin Reynolds? The ghost of Joubert's salchow? Daisuke Takahashi who rarely tries the quad in his SP?

I see this rule combined with the spiral/step sequence rule as Increasing the value of the quad/3a without having to change the base value because it reduces the number of areas where someone without a 3a/quad can "make up" for not having a 3a/quad and reduces the risk factor by allowing a skater not to risk a combination pass to do either.

I think a big question a lot of "average" viewers ask is why the "better," more exciting technician never wins, so I see these two proposals as addressing that by de-emphasizing technicality in non-jump elements and emphasizing the ability to do harder jump elements in the outcome.

PROKOFIEV said:

It is not only Japan which put pressure on athletes. Yuna had so much pressure from the entire South Korea. Can you imagine how korean media would have treated her if Mao won instead of Yuna? Chinese and Russian goverments and sports federation put a lot of pressure on all the top athletes as well.It is just way it is.

Click to expand...

well then, you don't know a thing about Korean media and her fans. As far as where I've been esposed to all these years, they've supported her no matter what the results might had been. Yuna also knows that, cause she always thank fans for "unconditional support and love".

janetfan said:

Tim's 4S+3T remains one of the greatest jumping passes ever done on Olympic ice.

Click to expand...

This is a little bit off-topic, but comparing Goebel's and Plushenko's jump layouts gives a stark picture of how the Zayak rules play to the disadvantage of jumpers with big combinations. Goebel did only one combo in which both jumps were three or more rotations. That meant that every one one his eight jumping passes scored at least as high as a triple loop.

Plushenko, on the other hand, did

4T+3T+3Lo (<)
4T
3A+half loop+ 3F seq
3A

Now he is Zayacked out. He cannot repeat 3T, 3Lo, or 3F.

3Lz
3S (he doubled it in this performance)

Now he is totally Zayacked out. All he can do is a double Axel in each of his remaining two passes.

In ladies, Yu-na Kim has the same problem. With 3Lz+3T and 2A+3T, she is going to run out of options If the new rule about only two double Axels goes through, she will probably have to give up the 2A+3T and replace it with a 3F+2T.

bekalc said:

And I disagree with the idea that Plushenko's quads were forced back in the day. Plushenko's jumps as a whole were pretty effortless. The guy's one of the best jumpers in the history of the sport. And if you want to give Tim the quad, I'd say the rest of the jumps still go to Plushenko by a mile (like the triple axel)

Click to expand...

Their first big showdown. No quads yet. Do you think it was jumps or other qualities that made the difference?

Mathman said:

This is a little bit off-topic, but comparing Goebel's and Plushenko's jump layouts gives a stark picture of how the Zayak rules play to the disadvantage of jumpers with big combinations. Goebel did only one combo in which both jumps were three or more rotations. That -- together with his quad -- meant that every one one his eight jumping passes scored at least as high as a triple loop.

Plushenko, on the other hand, . . .
is totally Zayacked out. All he can do is a double Axel in each of his remaining two passes.

Click to expand...

I don't think that using up the big jumps in 5 or 6 jump passes and having an extra couple passes to fill with double axels is necessarily a disadvantage.

As far as the base mark is concerned, what matters is not the number of jump passes worth more than 5 points, but the total value of all the jumps added together, minus sequence factors as applicable and plus combo bonus if that proposal passes.

However, skaters also have to take into account the risk of failure on any of the big jump elements. Triple axel isn't worth more than a double axel, or quad more than an easy triple, if it's downgraded or if you fall. Triple-triple combo isn't worth much if the second jump is downgraded or if you fall on the second jump. And you'd better have a Plan B for that second triple if you fail on the first jump of the combo and never get to try the second.

Also GOEs for completed jumps also need to be considered. Is it worth doing cutting-edge difficulty with 0 GOE if you succeed, or are you better off planning a jump layout with lower base value but less chance of failure and more opportunities to earn +1s and +2s?

If you can earn as many points (base mark plus GOE) for the difficult jumps in 6 jump passes as other skaters need 7 or 8 to earn, then you have an extra slot to get creative with. Maybe choose a single or non-axel double jump, or combination, that you can enhance in ways you can't do with the triples. Single axel or even double lutz with +3 GOE may be worth less than a decent double axel, but if you've already earned lots of points from the harder jump passes any TES points you earn from the extra slot will be gravy, plus you also have the opportunity to use it to earn PCS points for transitions, choreography, etc.

Again I agree - but have read so many of your posts about the importance of quads and wonder how you can overlook Tim's greatness in the air. Even his spread eagle into a 3A+2t is a move most of today's guys don't do.

Tim's 4S+3T remains one of the greatest jumping passes ever done on Olympic ice. I saw no such thing from Plushy, Jouby, Dai, EVAN or any of the others in Vancouver. Not even close when we factor in the quality and ease Tim showed.

Kevin Reynolds - hmmm - are you sure you want a higher value on quads? If they raise the value and Kevin lands two in his SP he will have a commanding lead heading into the LP.

It feels like you wouldn't mind if Jouby and Plushy got more points for their quads - but not so much for skaters you don't like. (OK, just kidding )

Click to expand...

I don't mind anyone getting more points for their quads. In fact I thought Kevin V deserved more points for his 4toe/3toe/3toe. However marks for things such as skating skills, should get them appropriately off the podium.

As for the new rule about the 3axel being used to help Mao. I think its true it will benefit MAO. But once again, I think the rule is more than fair. If the rules allow Yu-na to take advantage of her 3lutz/3toe and the girl certainly does, its only right and fair that Mao should be able to use her big trick too. I strongly disagree with Wally's well Mao should just do a 3lutz/3toe, because the point is that Mao struggles with that. But she can do a jump Yu-na can't do.

I will say that I think if its true Mishin's Elizaveta has the 3axel in practice. IF she can get it and the rest of the jumps consistent, than the rule changes will mainly benefit her. Because she can do 3/3s, and has all the other triples. And I have no issues with a lady who can do a 3/3 and a 3axel and all the triples getting rewarded for it.

As for the double axel thing, once again yes it hurts Yu-na but I don't think this one is just about Yu-na vs Mao, as much as it is about the people in charge being tired of seeing woman doing all these 3axels instead of actual triples.

Brezina reportedly has a 4toe and a 4sal. I don't know if he has a 4toe/3toe but if he does the rule changes could really benefit him.

bekalc said:

I don't mind anyone getting more points for their quads. In fact I thought Kevin Vanderpelt deserved more points for his 4toe/3toe/3toe. However marks for things such as skating skills, should get them appropriately off the podium.

Click to expand...

Ok - good points and fair enough.
But then do you also agree that superlative SS /CH can get a skater on the podium - as in Patrick Chan or Jeremy?

Do you think it is fair when a skater like Joubert or Plushy who have limited TR and IMO average at best CH get marked the same or even better simply because they do a quad?

That is where i have a problem. Give the big jumpers their due and even more points but watching Jeremy and Brian deliver a program feels like apples and oranges to me. They look to be competing at different sports so great is the difference in their TR, CH and IN.

I think the pcs have to be judged and scored more realistically and then it would be possible to reward the big jumps and keep a semblance of fairness.

When a skater like Jeremy says he knows his pcs will always be higher when he lands a quad there is something amiss with the scoring.