Page 3 of 28 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 419

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

  1. #31
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    3,782
    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 I understand the proposal, it's approximately level 1 or nothing.

    In order to get no credit at all, the skater would have to perform less than is currently required for level 1 in a long program.

    So there's no reason to object on the grounds that skaters with good spirals would get no credit. That's not likely to happen. Even Yu-Na Kim's disastrous spiral sequence from this year's Worlds SP would qualify for the base mark.

    What could be a problem is that large differences in quality won't be reflected with large differences in scores. E.g., in the 2010 Worlds SP, Kim's spiral sequence got the lowest scores of any of the ladies who qualified for the LP, more than a point and a half below the next-lowest skaters' except for that of Akiko Suzuki, who also struggled with that element, and almost 4 full points below those of Asada and Kostner, who earned the highest marks for that element. That difference consisted of the difference in base mark between level 1 and level 4 plus the difference in GOEs between mostly -2s and mostly +2s.

    If everyone gets the same base mark, then the only distinctions in the scores for the element will be in the GOEs. So I would hope that they'll use the larger GOE increments currently used for the level 4 spiral sequences, and that judges will take into account the difficulty of what the skaters include in the element as well as the quality.

    Of course, now that difficulty can be whatever the skater is good at, not whatever fits most clearly and reliably into the specified level features.

    And the skaters will have the freedom to show more creativity and uniqueness in this element. They'll be able to design their spiral sequences better to fit the musical structure and program theme instead of designing them to earn the highest level.

    I hope that judges would take those qualities into account when awarding the GOE, and that the spirals will contribute more positively to the PCS, especially Choreography.

    Plus the fans won't have to watch every skater do the same three or four variations that are easiest to earn levels with over and over again and never get to see other variations that don't count as features or are too hard to consistently execute well enough to count.

    From the point of view of fairly scoring differences in difficulty, I don't love this proposal.

    But from the point of view of spirals being used to enhance the program as a whole rather than just for points, I think it could be positive.

  2. #32
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,818
    Quote Originally Posted by GoPC2018 View Post
    No spiral in sp? This I don't get it.

    I think many of them will not go through. Let's just wait. lol
    In case you missed it, most of these changes will not be voted on at all. These are being presented as Technical Rule Change, not Member Proposals. There is a big difference between the two. The Technical Committee can instruct these kind of changes virtually without opposition. While technically there is still a chance to object to these changes, the chance is pretty slim. Workshops are organized to sell these ideas to Members and the ISU will be aggressively pushing for those as they are. I have purposely excluded changes that are presented as Member Proposals in this summary as those are much less certain and would indeed require approval. The ones I summarized in post #1 DO NOT REQUIRE ANY FURTHER ACTION TO BECOME RULES. This is confusing I know, hopefully, it's a little clearer now.

  3. #33
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,818
    Quote Originally Posted by GoPC2018 View Post
    I have a question for you wallylutz. As for 10% bonus thing, does it only apply to 3-3 or any jump combination?
    Any jump combination that fits the ISU definition of a jump combination, it doesn't have to be 3-3.

  4. #34
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,818
    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly View Post
    As I understand the proposal, it's approximately level 1 or nothing.

    [...]

    But from the point of view of spirals being used to enhance the program as a whole rather than just for points, I think it could be positive.
    Again, the devil is in the detail. This concept is new, nothing like this has been presented under the IJS framework before. In a way, this is almost odd because all elements under IJS have Levels (if you think Jumps as having double, triple and Quad as their Levels for instance) but the concept of Level is being removed for this element, which is pretty uncharacteristic of this system. How much BV? What are the criteria for GOE? What else is required? I doubt the element would be as simple as holding the position for 6 seconds only without change of position or change of edge, which seems to be implied here because it would be way too easy. The value may be so low that it almost becomes pointless. Can the skater intergrate that as part of another elment or does it have to be performed separately. Too many questions to answer still. I will wait and see until I learn more.

  5. #35
    Custom Title Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    28,078
    Quote Originally Posted by wallylutz View Post
    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....
    Well, it is the responsibility of the technical panel and the judges to decided how to score Asada's performances. As I see this proposed rules change, it is not about what Mao Asada can or can't do but about the triple Axel. If supergirl of the future comes along, why should she be held back by short-sighted rules just because Mao Asada only landed 50% of her attempts way back in 2010?

    About the safety feature, I don't think supergirl will be deterred from training a triple Axel just because she is forced also to do a double Axel in the short program.

    Quote Originally Posted by wallyl;utz
    - Moves in the field will now be given extra attention in order to reward transitions

    Honestly, a vague clause like this will continued to be ignored in practice and someone like Plushenko will continue to receive outrageous transition marks inconsistent with his level of skating.
    Maybe not. This could be a signal that the Joe Inmans have made their point: that skaters must do some recognizable steps, turns or moves in the field in order to get top scores in Transitions. I think it is the vagueness, rather, of the present rules on Transitions that allows the big jumpers to get away with weak in-betweens.(?)
    Last edited by Mathman; 04-30-2010 at 07:51 PM.

  6. #36
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    3,782
    Quote Originally Posted by Mathman View Post
    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?
    Skater's choice, but potentially the ability to add a difficult entry, air position, and/or exit to the double axel after sweating through the triple.

    Right now the ladies' SP jump requirements are essentially the same as the men's were 1989 through 1998. It wasn't until a substantial majority of the men were doing 3A combos in the short program and even more were including 3A in the long that the solo axel requirement was changed to allow a choice of double or triple. That's a decade of pretty much all the top guys and a good chunk of the middle-ranked guys doing both 3A combo and 2A in their SPs.

    I do think that that choice will be available to women eventually, but I'm not sure that the state of women's jump content across the senior field is in a state right now that justifies it.

    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.)
    The way the restrictions are currently worded and separated, yes, that would be legal.

    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.)
    Of course, it happens more for the men because they get an extra jump pass to work with. If they only had seven, many men would not bother with a third, second, or in some cases even first double axel.

    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?
    They're free to do that in the LP.

    As for two different quads, that standard is at approximately the same level of development for men as triple axel for women. A handful of skaters have done it over the years, only one or two have done it consistently. We know that it's possible but it's far from commonplace. Is it time to allow it in the SP, or should it wait until it's more common in LPs? Is the SP the place for pushing the current limits of what's humanly possible? The answer should probably be the same for both those questions.

    Quints are not allowed in the SP and won't be until and unless several skaters are doing them in the LPs.
    Given the downgrade penalties, I don't think that will happen until there are significant changes in boot/blade technology, ice technology, and/or gravity -- i.e., something that allows skaters to stay in the air for more than a full second just by jumping.


    Quote Originally Posted by wallylutz View Post
    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.
    They've been relaxed a lot, as I understand the proposal.

    And change of edge was never required. It's a cheap way to get a feature, which is why almost everyone chooses to do it.
    Last edited by gkelly; 04-30-2010 at 08:04 PM.

  7. #37
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    3,610
    Plushenko did simple crossovers a lot. Some judges have him 5's in the trasnitions marks others gave him 8's. As long as transitions have no fixed value but are judged from 1 to 10 in PCS you will have major differences between judges.

  8. #38
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,818
    Quote Originally Posted by Mathman View Post
    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?
    Because that's not the purpose of a short program. Long story short, and gkelly does a much better job in summarizing the essence of skating history than I do - SP has always had restrictions so that the focus is on the precision aspect of the skating. When Midori Ito was landing Triple Axel in competitions, she was still required to do Doubles in her SP.

    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.
    It doesn't make sense if no skater can actually do it.

    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.)
    Then they are leaving a lot of points on the table, so they suffer a penalty in the form of opportunity cost, which is not very smart if they are capable of doing more than a Double Axel.

    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?
    First, because there is not actually a point table for Quints, it simply doesn't exist. The majority of Quads landed by men over the years has been overwhelmingly Quad toe and only Quad toe. But men have evolved to a point where loosening the restriction on Quads in SP makes sense because several men at the world level have demonstrated capability of landing them. The same cannot be said about ladies and Triple Axel however.

  9. #39
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,818
    Quote Originally Posted by Mathman View Post
    Well, it is the responsibility of the technical panel and the judges to decided how to score Asada's performances. As I see this proposed rules change, it is not about what Mao Asada can or can't do but about the triple Axel. If supergirl of the future comes along, why should she be held back by short-sighted rules just because Mao Asada only landed 50% of her attempts way back in 2010?

    About the safety feature, I don't think supergirl will be deterred from training a triple Axel just because she is forced also to do a double Axel in the short program.
    Let me state this bluntly as a question. How many lives of little girls are you willing to risk and destroy before such imaginary Midori Ito #2 appears in say, another 20 years?

    Maybe not. This could be a signal that the Joe Inmans have made their point: that skaters must do some recognizable steps, turns or moves in the field in order to get top scores in Transitions. I think it is the vagueness, rather, of the present rules on Transitions that allows the big jumpers to get away with weak in-betweens.(?)
    I hope so but I won't hold my breath.

  10. #40
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,818
    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly View Post
    I do think that that choice will be available to women eventually, but I'm not sure that the state of women's jump content across the senior field is in a state right now that justifies it.
    It doesn't justify such change at all. This is completely inconsistent with the way ISU functioned in the modern era when it comes to the evolution of SP jump requirements. I hope this particular change will be aggressively questioned in Barcelona but I suspect the politicking involved where many Members have their own proposals which require Japan's support means that it would be futile to fight for this change.

    And change of edge was never required. It's a cheap way to get a feature, which is why almost everyone chooses to do it.
    I stand corrected, I am accustomed to think of the change of edge as a requirement because by default, it almost always is in order to receive Level 3 or higher.

    This new element seems to be completely different animal however. What's the point of such element? I could probably hold a spiral for 6 seconds and I am a guy and no longer young. This thing is a little odd. Also, why would the 2nd step sequence in Men's FS be automatically assumed to be of fixed value and graded like the Spiral in Ladies' FS. What's the point of doing that? To me, these two changes will require a fair amount of education on the part of the ISU because a lot of Members are probably going to be scratching their heads with these two changes.

  11. #41
    - * - blue_idealist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    2,760
    To the people who think it's unsafe for girls to do triple axels or quads in the SP (I know that the quad is still not an element in the SP as of now, but say it was), there isn't much more that could happen to girls because of these jumps than could happen to guys. Some guys like Nobunari Oda and Kevin Reynolds who are doing triple axels and quads are as light and small as the girls are.

  12. #42
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,818
    Quote Originally Posted by gmyers View Post
    Plushenko did simple crossovers a lot. Some judges have him 5's in the trasnitions marks others gave him 8's. As long as transitions have no fixed value but are judged from 1 to 10 in PCS you will have major differences between judges.
    Except he ended up getting an average TR value of about 8s. You just have to shrug your shoulders when ISU consistently allows some judges with obvious poor understanding on what TR means to judge an event like the Olympics or World Championships because the said judges' countries have little to non-existent national skating program for which he/she can learn from. This problem seems to largely depend on the quality of the judges we get on a given day. The Ladies panel in Torino Worlds was very good for instance, however the Men's panel was a total mess. We can't afford this kind of inconsistency where the quality of judging depends on the luck of the draw, it's not fair to the skaters and it hurts the credibility of this sport a great deal.

    There are several members who are again proposing that the # of judges be increased and/or the secret random selection process by the computer be dropped in order to expand the number of scores averaged beyond just merely 5 people (9 judges -2 who are randomly selected out -2 who are the highest and lowest). I am hopeful some changes will be adopted in this area.
    Last edited by wallylutz; 04-30-2010 at 09:12 PM.

  13. #43
    skating philosopher
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The land of Agent Dale Cooper
    Posts
    8,073
    Quote Originally Posted by wallylutz View Post
    This is just in this morning, I am still in shock re: a number of changes that are being proposed. There are so many changes, even I haven't been able to digest all of it. But I thought some of you would be extremely interested to know a few major ones that are coming up, especially if you are a Mao or Yu Na fan.

    - Ladies will now be allowed to do a Triple Axel in lieu of a Double Axel in the SHORT PROGRAM

    I certainly didn't see this coming, as do many other observers.

    In addition, the SP will now consist of 7 required elements, as opposed to 8. Men will be doing only 1 step sequence instead of two. Spiral Sequence will now be removed as a required element for ladies in the SP but will be considered as part of transitions if executed. This change will presumably increase the weight of jumps overall, favoring someone like Brian Joubert for example whose relative poor step sequences hold him back against Chan or Takahashi.

    Separate proposal is being made to give a 10% bonus base value for jumps done in a jump combination. For example, Triple Lutz + Triple Toe has a Base Value of 6 + 4 = 10. Under the new proposal, it will now receive a 10% bonus for a total base value of 11, prior to the application of GOE.

    Another big change is that men will now be allowed to try two different types of Quads in the SP. Previously, if a skater did, say a Quad Salchow + Triple Toe as a jump combo, he will not be able to do another Quad as a solo jump, even if that Quad is not a Salchow. The proposed change will now allow the said skater to do another Quad as a solo jump provided that it is a different type of Quad. This change will likely push men who are able and willing to include two Quads in the SP. Such change will greatly favor men like Kevin Reynolds who consistently lands two different types of Quads, he will be delighted by this kind of change. But I expect more men will now try to do another Quad other than the Toe Loop as well, this is potentially huge for men.

    - No change to the number of elements performed or maximum allowed in the Free Skate but the second Step Sequence for Men will now receive a fixed base value ( ), same goes for the Spiral Sequence in the Free Skate for Ladies

    - Spiral Sequence (Ladies) in the FS will now have an All or Nothing clause if the requirement is not fully met

    This can be potentially be quite serious and scary IMO because it used to be you will still get some points even if the element is downgraded, but someone like Mirai Nagasu who has had trouble meeting all the requirements in her Spiral could see that element be given a zero for instance.

    - Double Axel can only be performed a maximum of two times in the Free Skate, as opposed to three

    This last change will hurt someone like Yu-Na Kim the most, who heavily relies on three Double Axels to compensate for the lack of a Triple Loop.

    - Moves in the field will now be given extra attention in order to reward transitions

    Honestly, a vague clause like this will continued to be ignored in practice and someone like Plushenko will continue to receive outrageous transition marks inconsistent with his level of skating

    There will also be a cap on the number of actual entries into the World Championships and all skaters must meet a minimum total score internationally in order to be eligible to enter into the Worlds by their federation. Qualifying Round for certain lower rank skaters will be re-introduced so that top skaters will not have to qualify like before.

    There is a lot of changes, I am summarizing the major highlights to give you guys a heads up.
    I have mixed feelings on the cap idea on the World Championships. I do think 55 entries (for the ladies) for 2010 without any qualifying round was WAY too many. But on the other hand, it would hurt poorer federations or less politically influential federations because how would their skaters build up the points internationally to compete at Worlds? For many of those skaters Worlds is the only chance they get.

  14. #44
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,818
    Quote Originally Posted by blue_idealist View Post
    To the people who think it's unsafe for girls to do triple axels or quads in the SP (I know that the quad is still not an element in the SP as of now, but say it was), there isn't much more that could happen to girls because of these jumps than could happen to guys. Some guys like Nobunari Oda and Kevin Reynolds who are doing triple axels and quads are as light and small as the girls are.
    You can't possibly be seriously comparing a male athlete's physique and capability to that of a female athlete. :sheesh: The difference is like night and day. There are men who can't make it through the Top 24 cut at a World Championship but can land solid Triple Axels whereas it would pretty much take a Midori Ito #2 for this to happen in women. It's not about the height. As talented as Yu-Na Kim may be, she almost killed herself by trying to practice the Triple Axel and she still suffers the consequences even today despite stopping years ago. There was a female Olympic medalist who won medals in both Winter and Summer Olympics interviewed in Vancouver, I believe her name is Clara Hughes. She was quoted as saying that the reason why Canada's medals in Vancouver Olympic were overwhelmingly women (like 70%) is because men's sport, any sport, is extremely cut-throat vs. women's. She went on to say even just to make top 10 at a men's sport in an Olympic Game is quite incredible, not so much for a woman. If an accomplished female athlete like her understands that, then it should serve to explain why it would be foolish to compare ladies skating to men's.

  15. #45
    Custom Title bekalc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    3,083
    Wally all of the triples are dangerous for girls, not just the triple axel. And to be quite frank Mao has the triple axel and has had less major injuries than Yu-na. Its about how the training is done.

    Its not like a triple axel is going to be absolutely necessary to win, and a smart coach isnt' going to push a girl to have it. But if a girl can do it-a girl can do it.

    I also think that the new rules for combinations are MUCH needed. The current system with combinations was unfair. Plushenko could have done a single 4toe and a double axel/3toe in his free program at the Olympics, and got the same base value. That's just ridiculous.

    The Russian federation is likely to support the triple axel rule, since reports are their Elizaveta has the triple axel.

Page 3 of 28 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 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
  •