Page 2 of 28 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 419

Thread: Major Changes Expected in Single Skating in 2010-2011

  1. #16
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,818
    Quote Originally Posted by Figure88 View Post
    These are actual rule changes or just proposals? I thought the ISU meeting isn't until June to decide on new changes.
    These are ACTUAL TECHNICAL RULE CHANGES proposed by the Single & Pair Technical Committee, which is not the same as the proposals floated by individual ISU Members. Rule 510 to 521 have actually been re-written and that's what I am summarizing here, NOT the individual proposals of some Members like Denmark, which is asking that all jumps done after the 2 minutes mark in the SP to be given a 1.1 factor bonus.

    What this means is while these changes are not official until after the ISU Congress in June, however these are the recommendations of the ISU Technical Committees and they are generally pretty much done deals unless specific Member of ISU (country) specifically objects to the proposed changes and second by at least another Member. Member here means another country. So for example, say South Korea objects to the 3A being allowed in Ladies SP. The ISU will not entertain the objection unless South Korea's position is backed by another country, say China. Even then, South Korea will not be able to submit any amendment, the objection only means the specific proposal can be rejected and therefore, not take effect. In other words, these rule changes will be adopted by silent acclamation without any voting being necessary. Therefore, in most cases, it's pretty safe to assume they will be adopted when the rule changes are being presented under this format, as part of an ISU Technical Committee technical rule change. This is not the same compared to a specific country proposing a rule change via a proposal, in which case, a vote will be necessary (e.g. the 1.1 factor bonus for jumps after 2 minutes in the SP).

  2. #17
    Banned janetfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    6,889
    Quote Originally Posted by Mrs. P View Post
    Can't speak for janetfan or the Wallylutz, but I interpreted it as the money spent to lobby to the ISU. My guess is that the Japanese Fed. spent a ton of money in between meetings, research and other related things to get this rule passed. It may also include phone calls, letters to ISU decision makers. Long-distance calls are expensive!

    It's not big secret that the Japanese Fed. asked for this.
    What about all of these rumors that Mishin is training an army of young Russian Ladies to do 3A's and that they will be unleashed on the skating world in time for Sochi

    And wasn't it reported that Rachael is working on a 3A? The other day I saw a clip of 13 year old Mirai practicing a 3A. Maybe it is the Russians and USA who are supporting this

    Actually I agree and like you would rather use the word "lobbying" as opposed to "bribery."

    Next Spring the Japanese are supposed to host the second WTT event. Japanese TV money basically paid for this event and if Speedy wants to do it again he needs the support of the Japanese Federation.

    We should consider the 10% proposed bonus for combination jumps. Nobody has better or more consistent combo jumps than Yuna. Does this mean the Korean federation is behind this proposal?
    And if they are so what? Every federation has the right to lobby for rule changes.
    Last edited by janetfan; 04-30-2010 at 04:50 PM.

  3. #18
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,818
    Japan did not submit a proposal to allow ladies to do 3A in the SP. That's why this is shocking. The change came directly from the ISU Technical Committee, which changes the dynamic of this issue entirely. If Japan had submit this as a Member proposal, it will be voted on and many of us suggested such proposal will be voted down in another thread. If Japan has anything to do with this, they certainly did via the smart way - by convincing the ISU Technical Committee to re-write the rule, then submit it to a hearing which basically requires other countries to engage and organize an active opposition or else this will be adopted without even a vote.

  4. #19
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    251
    I think this is a result of all the regression talk at the Olympics.

  5. #20
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    289
    Quote Originally Posted by wallylutz View Post
    Even then, South Korea will not be able to submit any amendment, the objection only means the specific proposal can be rejected and therefore, not take effect. In other words, these rule changes will be adopted by silent acclamation without any voting being necessary. Therefore, in most cases, it's pretty safe to assume they will be adopted when the rule changes are being presented under this format, as part of an ISU Technical Committee technical rule change. This is not the same compared to a specific country proposing a rule change via a proposal, in which case, a vote will be necessary (e.g. the 1.1 factor bonus for jumps after 2 minutes in the SP).
    Just to clarify here, although no voting is necessary to adopt the rule changes, if 2 ISU member countries put forth an objection, a specific proposal can still be rejected???

  6. #21
    Custom Title Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    27,132
    I don't really see anything controversial or unexpected about these proposed changes. These are suggestions that have been vigorously discussed all year. Personally, I like all of them. I don't think we need to get paranoid about how it will affect this particular skater or that.

  7. #22
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    268
    I'm personally not for these changes. The removal of the spiral sequence for the ladies in the SP? What?! I love seeing high-quality jumps, but spirals are a part of figure skating as well as the jumps. T_T As for the triple axel... I'm okay with that. The only thing is, there's not many ladies currently (I don't know about the Russian girls; they're still young and maybe the puberty monster hasn't hit them yet), scratch that, no lady currently who can do the 3A in competition other than Mao Asade (in competition at least). So the way I see it, it seems kind of strange to make a change that will favor only one skater currently. I do like the part on giving jump combos more value; like Bekalc has said before, a 3Lz and 3T is definitely harder than those jumps alone. But w/the men's proposed changes... it's like they're trying to move it in the "jump" direction. I disagree with that; if you do superior footwork to someone, you should get rewarded for it. Skaters like Joubert can do the quad, awesome. But do they also have great edges, can they do complex footwork, can they spin, can they express the music well, can they- there's so much more to figure skating than just the jumps.

  8. #23
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    552
    Quote Originally Posted by Mathman View Post
    I don't really see anything controversial or unexpected about these proposed changes. These are suggestions that have been vigorously discussed all year. Personally, I like all of them. I don't think we need to get paranoid about how it will affect this particular skater or that.
    Agreed. We should be celebrating the sport going forward.

    Imagine the ISU had banned 5 triples from ladies field just because there was almost nobody doing it in the 80's? Where would the sport be now? Don't be afraid, people.

  9. #24
    Mashimaro on Ice
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    1,419
    I don't have a problem with the new rules except the "all or nothing" clause for spirals in the LP. I feel this requirement is a bit severe. As for the triple axel in the SP, it will only be a benefit for the skater if she is capable of doing a 3A and a 3/3 really well. As of now, I don't see this new rule benefitting Mao very much since she has some issues with her 3/3 and the new rule that rewards 3/3 more will offset any benefit she may get from a 3A. If she gets a solid 3/3 again, then she will benefit. Some of the Russian girls are already learning 3A and have good 3/3. If they get past puberty and still have these jumps, then I see no problem rewarding future skaters who are capable of executing both of these jumps.

  10. #25
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,818
    Quote Originally Posted by Figure88 View Post
    Just to clarify here, although no voting is necessary to adopt the rule changes, if 2 ISU member countries put forth an objection, a specific proposal can still be rejected???
    In theory yes, in reality, don't count on it.

  11. #26
    - * - blue_idealist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    2,673
    I like most of them.

    Allowing ladies to do the triple axel instead of double is good - why should they be limited to doubles when some are capable of triples? (not very many, but with this new rule, there might eventually be more).

    I like the one step sequence thing as well. I don't think that jumps should be the be-all and end-all, but it was almost getting to the point at which step sequences were being rewarded so much more than jumps, it was kind of unfair. Ie. Chan's SP ahead of Joubert's at the World Championships.

    Limiting the double axels.. good too.. now more women will be 'forced' to do all or almost all of the triples, or lose jumping passes.

    The only thing I don't like is the all or nothing spiral sequence. Why is that happening, were the spiral sequences THAT bad the past seasons? lol.

  12. #27
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    282
    No spiral in sp? This I don't get it.

    Well, I think many of them will not go through. Let's just wait. lol
    Last edited by Basics; 05-01-2010 at 10:32 AM.

  13. #28
    Custom Title Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    27,132
    Here is why I like both of the proposed Axel rules.

    Allowing a 3A as the Axel jump in the ladies’ short program is just common sense. The short program is supposed to demonstrate your technical skills. If you do a triple Axel as your solo jump, what extra skill are you demonstrating if you are then required to do a double of the same jump?

    To me, it makes a lot more sense to do, say, 3A, 3Lz+3T, 3Lo out of footwork (“balanced program”) than to do 3A out of footwork, 3Lz+3T, 2A.

    As for allowing at most two double Axels in the free skate, that is consistent with Zayak principles. If a skater wants to present a triple-triple and has only four triple jumps in her repertoire, she can still do it without penalty (3Lz+3T, 3F+2T, 3S, 3T, 3Lz, 2A+2Lo+2T, 2A – assuming the new rules allow two triple Axels plus two different triples repeated.)

    What we don’t want is skaters throwing in a third double Axel gratuitously at the end just because she has run out anything else to do. (This happens in men’s programs a lot.)

    I also like the two quad idea for men. Why in the world should the rules prevent men from doing two quads if they are able to – or, for that matter, two quints?

  14. #29
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    282
    I have a question for you wallylutz. As for 10% bonus thing, does it only apply to 3-3 or any jump combination?

  15. #30
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,818
    Quote Originally Posted by blue_idealist View Post

    Allowing ladies to do the triple axel instead of double is good - why should they be limited to doubles when some are capable of triples? (not very many, but with this new rule, there might eventually be more).
    In my opinion, no ladies actually land Triple Axel at this time. Mao Asada's is not really a Triple Axel, she is almost always on the borderline, even when she managed to get the benefits of the doubt, it's like 3.25 rotation, not 3.5 Even then, you got the whole panel of judges nervous as to: "Did she or didn't she?" everytime. Frankly, it's very hard to discern if her jump is truly a Triple Axel most of the time. I almost always come away with ??? in my head when I see her doing that jump, even in person at the rink. Her batting average on that jump is very low, in the past season, much lower than 50%. Excluding the Olympic Games, which had an unusually generous calls for everybody, her batting average on that jump is dismal in the 2009-2010 season. Using your logic, then we should also remove the restriction re: ladies not being able to do Quads in the SP. Where is the logic in such restriction, eh, you'd ask? For one thing, so that young girls are not put under completely unrealistic expectations and completely self-destruct? To me, that's a compelling reason not to allow this kind of pie in the sky. I am concerned a lot of young girls will hurt themselves or suffer catastrophic injuries similar to Yu-Na Kim's back injury by trying the Triple Axel. Nobody thought about luge track in Vancouver was unsafe until an athlete died, do we really need young girls breaking their backs or suffer similar fate on TV before waking up? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCXBoMQz75Y

    I like the one step sequence thing as well. I don't think that jumps should be the be-all and end-all, but it was almost getting to the point at which step sequences were being rewarded so much more than jumps, it was kind of unfair. Ie. Chan's SP ahead of Joubert's at the World Championships.
    Joubert's SP at the Torino Worlds was sloppy, including his jumps. Chan didn't beat Joubert because he had poor step sequences. Joubert dug himself in the hole because he was sloppy everywhere else, including the spins. Using the same misguided logic, Lysacek's win over Plushenko must be outrageous in your opinion but figure skating is not a sport for the obvious. It's a complex sport. Fairness stems from understanding and knowledge, not gimmicks.

    The only thing I don't like is the all or nothing spiral sequence. Why is that happening, were the spiral sequences THAT bad the past seasons? lol.
    Devil is in the detail. This and the 2nd step sequence for men on a fixed BV is new. I am not sure how that works. Both of this will represent a departure from the IJS framework as this seems to call for a focus on the GOE for this element. I will need to know more about how exactly this works before I can comment any further. At first glance, the requirements for the Spiral Sequence seems to have been relaxed a little. I am not sure if the change of edge is still required for instance. We'll find out shortly.
    Last edited by wallylutz; 04-30-2010 at 07:28 PM.

Page 2 of 28 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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