Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 76

Thread: THE LONG PROGRAM - why it needs variety and what CoP can do.

  1. #16
    Banned janetfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    6,889
    Quote Originally Posted by FlattFan View Post
    You just answered yourself

    Q: With the layout BOP suggested could Alissa outscore Miki?
    A: few members here would self-combust if Miki or any Lady did a quad and a 3x3 and did not win. Duh. Why not let alissa spin for 4 minutes and 10 seconds and win the Olympics.
    gkelly had a more interesting answer.
    This is not based on winning and losing but since it is about competitive skating scores matter.

    For instance if Alissa is not losing points on missed jumps and instead scoring points with additional spins she might be more competitive.

    If Rachael never had to do a spiral sequence or fewer spins it might be better. Not sure if it would help her score but it could make her program more interesting.

  2. #17
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    2,751
    That's why the current system is decent enough. You just work on your strength. Who here think Miki's programs and Alissa's programs are even remotely alike under CoP? hence, variety.

    It's not the CoP, it's the people who have trouble tallying up points and then cry foul.

    You have 7 jumping passes, you do what you can do. If you can't spin as fast as the other girls, you focus on your jumps. The variety is built into the system as is. Making it anymore is just silly.

    Most people watch figure skating watch the big events only. As I've said, this proposed system only distance the jumpers from the spinners. And Alissa will never break into the top 10 under this system. She might still retain her 11th place, but her score would be 100 less than the winner's.

    Under the new proposed rules, I suspect MANY skaters who are decent spinners will abandon spins all together and focus on jumps. It will be a jumping contest.

  3. #18
    Banned janetfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    6,889
    Quote Originally Posted by FlattFan View Post
    That's why the current system is decent enough. You just work on your strength. Who here think Miki's programs and Alissa's programs are even remotely alike under CoP? hence, variety.

    It's not the CoP, it's the people who have trouble tallying up points and then cry foul.

    You have 7 jumping passes, you do what you can do. If you can't spin as fast as the other girls, you focus on your jumps. The variety is built into the system as is. Making it anymore is just silly.

    Most people watch figure skating watch the big events only. As I've said, this proposed system only distance the jumpers from the spinners. And Alissa will never break into the top 10 under this system. She might still retain her 11th place, but her score would be 100 less than the winner's.

    Under the new proposed rules, I suspect MANY skaters who are decent spinners will abandon spins all together and focus on jumps. It will be a jumping contest.
    Let's say Alissa retained her 11th place and Rachael retained her 9th place. If their programs were more interesting that still might be an improvement. Skating is not exactly booming in the USA and many place the blame on the current USA Ladies.

    I think that because CoP breaks down the scoring into categories - often getting marks on TR and the pcs in general wrong - doesn't in any way make the LP more like a freeskate.

    Under the IJS I see a short technical program and a long technical program. I see little difference other than the duration.

    I think the topic post made it clear that "Zayak" type rules would still be in effect - in fact it was suggested to limit a few of the top jumps in order to try and get more variety in the jumps. I think we saw the ISU take a step in that direction by limiting the 2A's.

    ETA: This is what I like from blades original post :

    "This should be the "base" requirement for a Free Skating program:

    *6 jumping passes, with 2 of them being a two-jump combination (7 jumping passes for male programs)
    *3 spins
    *1 footwork sequence or (for a female program) spiral sequence

    From there, skaters would have 3 optional slots available. They can use these flexible slots to add anything they want to the program - spins, footwork sequences, spiral sequences (males included), jumping passes, or extra jumps done in combination (doing a 3-jump combination instead of a 2-jump combination would count as a slot and a 3-jump combination would be a maximum a skater can attempt in a single combination...additionally note that something like a 3Toe/half loop/3Sal would count as a 2-jump combination).

    The limitations would be as follows:

    *No more than 3 footwork sequences in a program (skaters may not repeat the same type of footwork pattern and could do 1 circular, 1 straightline, and 1 serpentine at most).

    *No more than 2 spiral sequences in a program.
    Last edited by janetfan; 10-19-2010 at 05:07 PM.

  4. #19
    Skating is art, if you let it be. Blades of Passion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Hollywood, CA
    Posts
    4,108
    FlattFan, stop double posting and stop wasting space in my thread with your misinformed posts.

    Quote Originally Posted by FlattFan View Post
    The variety is built into the system as is. Making it anymore is just silly.
    It's not silly at all. It's better for the entire skating World. When skaters are able to create programs more fluidly and more personally tailored, the skating becomes more interesting, more varied, and less predictable. That is what figure skating needs.

    Quote Originally Posted by FlattFan View Post
    Most people watch figure skating watch the big events only. As I've said, this proposed system only distance the jumpers from the spinners. And Alissa will never break into the top 10 under this system.
    Incorrect. First of all, spins (well executed) would be worth more points than they currently are. Second of all, skaters would be able to execute TWICE as many spins as they are currently allowed to, if they so desired.

    Quote Originally Posted by FlattFan View Post
    Under the new proposed rules, I suspect MANY skaters who are decent spinners will abandon spins all together and focus on jumps. It will be a jumping contest.
    You make absolutely NO sense. The current rules only allow skaters to do 3 spins and forces every skater to attempt a total of 11 jumps (12 for Men) when you count all of the jumps done in combination. How does reducing the number of required jumps and allowing for more non-jump elements make it more of a jumping contest?!?

  5. #20
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    135
    I agree that something has to be done.
    In Juvenile, Intermediate, and Novice, you have all of these girls doing the same program:
    Flying combo spin, footwork, another combo spin, and then 6 jumps, 5 of which are in the second half, followed by another spin to end the program.
    99% of the time this does not go with the music at all, and they just do this to get the most points.
    I think there should be a rule that half of the jumps HAVE to be in the first half, half of the spins HAVE to be in the first half, and half of the footwork/spirals HAVE to be in the first half. THIS is a well balanced program. I do not want to see 6 jumps in a row with random footwork in between to get transition points that has nothing to do with the music.

  6. #21
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    2,751
    Quote Originally Posted by Blades of Passion View Post
    FlattFan, stop double posting and stop wasting space in my thread with your misinformed posts.
    There should be a homestead act for threads.

    It's not silly at all. It's better for the entire skating World. When skaters are able to create programs more fluidly and more personally tailored, the skating becomes more interesting, more varied, and less predictable. That is what figure skating needs.
    Less predictable? How about Miki have more jumps, Alissa have more spins, Caroline have more spins. It's not better, it's dividing skaters into two camps, the spinners and the jumpers. It's more predictable because everyone knows the path the skaters will pick.

    Incorrect. First of all, spins (well executed) would be worth more points than they currently are. Second of all, skaters would be able to execute TWICE as many spins as they are currently allowed to, if they so desired.
    I said "most people who watch figure skating only watch big events." Incorrect? Eh? You have other idea? First of all, spins aren't worth more points unless you're rewriting the entire base value for every single elements. Then that opens another can of worm. Why not give Alissa 100 points for her spin, too?

    You make absolutely NO sense. The current rules only allow skaters to do 3 spins and forces every skater to attempt a total of 11 jumps (12 for Men) when you count all of the jumps done in combination. How does reducing the number of required jumps and allowing for more non-jump elements make it more of a jumping contest?!?
    Which part did I not make sense? Most skaters will choose jumps over spins unless they have spectacular spins and can milk the points on spins. This crazy system will be the dead of 3x3. Everyone will attempt 7 triples LP without a single 3x3.
    There's no logic to your system at all, not very well thought out, and I pointed out all the drawbacks. Why so defensive?

  7. #22
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    3,929
    Quote Originally Posted by Mathman View Post
    I think GKelly was talking more about the whole gamut of skating competitions, not just the tiny handful of elite senior champions.
    Yes.

    Intermediates and novices, for instance, might be better off to show off their moves in the field and get points for it, rather than to fill up their jumping passes with double Salchows.
    Well, intermediate is a US category that limits the number of double jumps that can be repeated, so we expect intermediates to do either one or two double salchows (except for the rare few who attempt triple salchows or who have problems with the salchow or prefer to load up on higher-point-value doubles instead), but they can't throw in more than two double sals. Single axels would make the same point, though.

    Different countries have different names and rules for the comparable level.

    For those who don't have double axels or any triples but can do 2-2 and 2-2-2 combos with ease, it's easy to fill up 5 jump slots with single axel and all the doubles they are able and allowed to do. They're allowed 6 jump slots but don't always need them all.

    Quote Originally Posted by FlattFan View Post
    They are probably not good enough at anything to score more points than a double Salchows. . I rather see a nice double jump than a Level 1 footwork or ugly level 3 spiral.
    Have you watched many intermediate or novice skaters? The best spinners among them can easily rival all but the best senior spinners, with +GOE on level 4 spins. You'd enjoy watching them, and they could earn more points with the spins than with another double jump.

    Of course the worst spinners at those levels are worse than the worst you see among seniors, but you're not going to enjoy watching them whatever they do. And then there are the vast majority in between, at each level. The rules have to cover all the skaters.


    I'm going to start another thread for folks to play around with designing programs for hypothetical mid-level senior skaters.

  8. #23
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    5,609
    I'm not sure I agree that the BOPing the sport would introduce more variety and here's why

    a) Any system that is points based is gonna have better ways to achieve points than others. Skaters will strive to fit into those molds.

    b) Restrictions? Help or hinder? I don't know. I tend to think restrictions do help creativity in that they force any artist to stop relying on crutches and try something different (see the filmThe Five Obstructions for a fuller explanation of that thesis, or any film from the Dogme 95 series. Or imagine what Jaws would've been like if the robotic shark worked perfectly instead of screwing up all the time). But when the goal is to create a program that will get you the most points (that one can skate, of course. But that remains a secondary concern), you'll get programs that are skewed as much as possible to fit.
    • Example: BoP has introduced a new Zayak rule (presuming the old one stays in place): Can only repeat one of the following jumps: 3A, 3Lz, 3F.
      • Now checking out the Men's FS at 2010 Worlds (top twelve) we see the following jumps being repeated w/ the number of skaters repeating them (skaters)

        4T: 1 (Joubert)
        3A: 10 (Takahashi, Chan, Brezina, Rippon, Abbott, Schlutheiss, Reynolds*, Fernandez, Contesti, Kozuka)
        3Lz: 5 (Chan, Joubert, Rippon, Schlutheiss, Kozuka)
        3F: 2 (Brezina, van de Perren*)
        3T: 4 (Abbott, Reynolds, van de Perren, Contesti)
        NUMBER OF SKATERS IN THE TOP TWELVE THAT DIDN'T DO ALL SIX JUMPS: 1 (Brezina - no 3-loop or 3-toe, though I suspect he meant to do a 3toe)
        • So of the top twelve, just under half repeat two jumps from the BOPed group (Chan, Brezina, Rippon, Sclutheiss, Kozuka). Six if you count Takahashi's ur'ed 4F. I don't because he didn't plan that.
        • Even skaters who have the difficult jump but don't always score the highest GOEs on it are inclined to go for it (3-Axel: Chan, Reynolds, Rippon)
        • So, the consequence of this rule on programs is twofold.
          1. I suspect we'd see a lot more quads this way. If you can only repeat one jump, might as well have that be the 3A (same as now), with a solo quad taking up another jump slot, so you can still maximize the points. OR
          2. More sequences/combinations w/ 3Ts at the end of them. Frankly, I'm not all that thrilled by that. Triple-loops as the first or second jumps in combination seem so rare that I can't imagine this rule encourage them

      • So essentially, I don't see the need for this change. It's not like a majority of skaters fit the cause (10/24 of the LP's at Worlds, and I included intended triples that were doubled/UR'ed; 1/12 didn't do a complete set of jumps).
      • And even if I did see the need for the change, I'm not convinced that this would provoke the variety that is the stated aim of this post.



    c) To me, a great system is one that promotes and rewards excellence in ALL areas of figure skating, and I’m not convinced that this would do that in practice.

    d) I LOVE Level four footwork. I need to get that out there. I love Chan’s footwork. I love how much ice coverage he gets. I love how particularly in character Takahashi’s footwork is. I wouldn’t give that up for the world. Indeed, when watching Yagudin’s OGM programs recently, I thought they would be better with more complicated/dynamic footwork. I don’t like restriction here (though I might take that back) because I don’t see how removing one tool that some skaters have to acquire points (through complicated footwork that gets high levels) promotes variety (because individual GOEs only help so much, and when we’re talking about footwork, the GOES aren’t huge as it is). And more than that, its zero sum time. If you privilege something a little less, you privilege the rest a little more. And I think the balance we have right now is actually quite good.

    e) Ice dancing is also my favourite discipline, so what do I know?

  9. #24
    Skating is art, if you let it be. Blades of Passion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Hollywood, CA
    Posts
    4,108
    Quote Originally Posted by FlattFan View Post
    Less predictable? How about Miki have more jumps, Alissa have more spins, Caroline have more spins. It's not better, it's dividing skaters into two camps, the spinners and the jumpers. It's more predictable because everyone knows the path the skaters will pick.
    It's not about jumps vs. spins. It's about tailoring programs to the music and to each skater's best abilities. It's less predictable because you don't know exactly how many elements of each type a skater will perform. It provides more variety to skating because even if you do know a skater's exact layout beforehand, odds are the layouts will be much more varied than they currently are. You won't see everyone attempting ungainly 3-jump combinations. You won't see everyone doing the exact same quantity of footwork/spiral sequences. You won't see everyone doing the same quantity of spins or jumping passes.

    Also, Miki wouldn't have more jumps. The amount of jumps skaters are currently doing is the absolute maximum that would be allowed under the new rules. If Miki wanted to do as many jumps as she currently does, which I'm sure she would, the Spiral Sequence would have to come out to make room for all of those jumps. And that's perfectly fine if she drops the Spiral Sequence. I don't think anyone really wants to see her grab her leg in a half-stretched position for 5+ seconds anyway.

    Quote Originally Posted by FlattFan View Post
    First of all, spins aren't worth more points unless you're rewriting the entire base value for every single elements. Then that opens another can of worm. Why not give Alissa 100 points for her spin, too?
    Don't misstate the points. Spins wouldn't be worth Quads or Triple Axels.

    Base value and GOE values would certainly be adjusted, but it's not at all a can of worms. It has been talked about in the past in a very long thread. I didn't want to bring all of that other CoP talk into this thread, I wanted to save it for another thread, but I'll talk about it here since you are so uncooperative. These would be the new base values for jumps:

    4Lutz - 12.6 (-2.6, +1.0 for GOE)
    4Flip - 12.2 (-2.5, +1.0 for GOE)
    4Loop - 11.8 (-2.4, +1.0 for GOE)
    4Sal - 10.2 (-2.1, +1.0 for GOE)
    4Toe - 9.8 (-2.0, +1.0 for GOE)

    3Axel - 8.0 (-1.7, +1.0 for GOE)
    3Lutz - 5.4 (-1.3, +.8 for GOE)
    3Flip - 5.0 (-1.2, +.8 for GOE)
    3Loop - 4.6 (-1.1, +.8 for GOE)
    3Sal - 3.6 (-1, -1, -.9, +.7 for GOE)
    3Toe - 3.4 (-1, -.9, -.9, +.7 for GOE)

    2Axel - 2.5 (-.7, -.7, -.6, +.7 for GOE)
    2Lutz - 1.5 (-.5, -.4, -.4, +.5 for GOE)
    2Flip - 1.4 (-.4, +.5 for GOE)
    2Loop - 1.3 (-.4, -.4, -.3 +.5 for GOE)
    2Sal - 1.0 (.-3, -.3, -.2, +.5 for GOE)
    2Toe - 1.0 (-.3, -.3, -.2, +.5 for GOE)

    1Axel - .8 (-.2, +.5 for GOE)
    1Lutz - .4 (-.1, +.2 for GOE)
    1Flip - .3 (-.1, +.2 for GOE)
    1Loop - .3 (-.1, +.2 for GOE)
    1Sal - .2 (-.1, +.2 for GOE)
    1Toe - .2 (-.1, +.2 for GOE)

    I'll leave the values for underrotated jumps out if it for now (and also the specifics about bonuses for combinations). Here are the new values for spins:

    (the 4 point values listed for each type of spin reflect the 4 levels of difficulty)

    *Spin in one position and no change of foot* - 1.2, 1.5, 1.8, 2.1 (-.4, +1 GOE for all levels)

    *Flying spin with no change of foot or position* and *Change of foot spin with no change of position* - 1.6, 1.9, 2.2, 2.5 (-.5, +1 GOE for all levels)

    For all of the types of spins listed so far, these are the base values for an upright spin. Add .1 to each base value for a Sit Spin, .3 for a Camel Spin, and .4 for a Layback Spin.

    *Combination spin with no change of foot* - 1.8, 2.3, 2.6, 2.9 (-.5, +1 GOE for all levels)

    *Combination spin with change of foot* - 2.2, 2.7, 3.0, 3.3 (-.5, +1 GOE for all levels)

    These base values for spins aren't too different from the current values (my base values are actually slightly lower at the top ends). That would be a minor change. Much more important is the increased +GOE. Doing spins with great quality is very difficult. Even the best spinners don't get huge +GOE on all of their spins.

    Quote Originally Posted by FlattFan View Post
    Which part did I not make sense? Most skaters will choose jumps over spins unless they have spectacular spins and can milk the points on spins. This crazy system will be the dead of 3x3. Everyone will attempt 7 triples LP without a single 3x3.
    And here we come to your single-minded train of thought that makes you feel threatened. "OMG, Rachel Flatt's 3x3 might be in jeopardy, so I better argue without having any clue what I'm talking about."

    The 3x3 wouldn't be dead at all. 3x3 combinations would be MORE valuable, in fact. If you are a female skater and trying to do a standard 7 Triple program (no Triple Axel) without a 3x3, or without a 2Axel-Triple combination (or sequence, but it's not worth as much that way), that means you need 8 jumping passes. If you try to construct your program like that, it means you have no additional slots for other point-gaining moves. Doing a 3x3 and completing your 7 Triples + Double Axel in 7 jumping passes would not only gain a bigger combination bonus but also give you slots for other moves.

    The system I proposed was specifically set up to promote non-jump technical elements with quality execution. You will get more points for extrodionary non-jump elements than you will for a Double Axel, or for tacking on double jumps in combination (doing a 2Loop on the end of a difficult combination, especially a Quad-Triple or 3Axel-Triple, is another story). It doesn't mean you can just ignore all of the necessary core jumps.

  10. #25
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    3,790
    How many quads did Yagudin do a competition? Three? It was a different time. When jump progression was important.

  11. #26
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    2,751
    Quote Originally Posted by Blades of Passion View Post
    It's not about jumps vs. spins. It's about tailoring programs to the music and to each skater's best abilities. It's less predictable because you don't know exactly how many elements of each type a skater will perform. It provides more variety to skating because even if you do know a skater's exact layout beforehand, odds are the layouts will be much more varied than they currently are. You won't see everyone attempting ungainly 3-jump combinations. You won't see everyone doing the exact same quantity of footwork/spiral sequences. You won't see everyone doing the same quantity of spins or jumping passes.
    Yes you will. Miki will do the maximum number of jumps. She will not leave out a jump for a spin.
    Alissa will do the maximum number of spins and least # of jumps.
    Are you suggesting skaters and choreographers cannot tailor programs to the music and to each skater's best abilities currently?
    I'm very sure I can pinpoint the exact jumps and spins layout for most girls. They just focus on the things they can do better. You will see two group of girls doing the exact SAME things. Do you not see this very possibility?

    Also, Miki wouldn't have more jumps. The amount of jumps skaters are currently doing is the absolute maximum that would be allowed under the new rules. If Miki wanted to do as many jumps as she currently does, which I'm sure she would, the Spiral Sequence would have to come out to make room for all of those jumps. And that's perfectly fine if she drops the Spiral Sequence. I don't think anyone really wants to see her grab her leg in a half-stretched position for 5+ seconds anyway.
    Yes, something has to give. You'll have a group of girls who jump and jump and jump. Another group of girls who spin and spin and spin. Do you realize you'll get the SAME sameness?

    Don't misstate the points. Spins wouldn't be worth Quads or Triple Axels.
    Then Alissa will never beat Miki. That should answer janetfan's question which was my answer.

    And here we come to your single-minded train of thought that makes you feel threatened. "OMG, Rachel Flatt's 3x3 might be in jeopardy, so I better argue without having any clue what I'm talking about."

    The 3x3 wouldn't be dead at all. 3x3 combinations would be MORE valuable, in fact. If you are a female skater and trying to do a standard 7 Triple program (no Triple Axel) without a 3x3, or without a 2Axel-Triple combination (or sequence, but it's not worth as much that way), that means you need 8 jumping passes. If you try to construct your program like that, it means you have no additional slots for other point-gaining moves.
    Yes, a lot of girls will opt for that. Look at how many 3x3 got downgraded. They would opt for 3x2, and another triple. That would be the best bet for the maximum number of points. Miki, Mao, Caroline all got their 3x3 downgraded to 3x2, on top of -GOE. Basic math would tell you it's better to just leave the 3x3 combination out all together.
    3lz+2lp + GOE, and a separate 3loop + GOE would net you a higher score than 3lz+3lp<< - GOE, and a spin or footwork.
    It will be the dead of 3x3.

  12. #27
    Skating is art, if you let it be. Blades of Passion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Hollywood, CA
    Posts
    4,108
    Quote Originally Posted by ImaginaryPogue View Post
    Any system that is points based is gonna have better ways to achieve points than others. Skaters will strive to fit into those molds.
    True, but people can only strive so far. Everyone has different natural abilities and they should be able to formulate their "Free Programs" to best present their abilities.

    Quote Originally Posted by ImaginaryPogue View Post
    BoP has introduced an additional Zayak rule: Can only repeat one of the following jumps: 3A, 3Lz, 3F.

    Now checking out the Men's FS at 2010 Worlds (top twelve) we see the following jumps being repeated: [I've deleted the list for the purposes of saving space in the quote]

    So essentially, I don't see the need for this change.
    The additional rule is only for female programs. Look at how many skaters have focused on those jumps at the expense of ignoring other Triples - Mao Asada, Fumie Suguri, Yukari Nakano, Emily Hughes, Bebe Liang, Julia Sebestyen, Mira Leung, Alissa Czisny, Elena Liashenko, Sarah Meier. Plenty of others I can't currently think of. Even Michelle Kwan during that last part of her competitive career...

    Instead of a skater setting up yet another Lutz or Flip, and not attempting a more complete set of jumps in a program, I think the skater should instead have to repeat an easier jump (or only repeat 1 Triple in the program and do a non-jump element instead). That's the price for not trying a full set of Triples. I am also in favor of rewarding a bonus point to anyone who cleanly lands all of the different jumps (3Axel for Men, 2Axel for Women, and then a Triple or Quad of each other type of jump). Those reinforcements together would promote trying the full array of jumps.

    Quote Originally Posted by ImaginaryPogue View Post
    To me, a great system is one that promotes and rewards excellence in ALL areas of figure skating, and I’m not convinced that this would do that in practice.
    How does the current system better reward excellence in all areas of skating? It forces skaters to do a bunch of jumps. Remember, there even used to be 4 spins required in the "Freeskate" but then they cut it down to 3 because it took so much time to do all of these required jumps + spins + footwork. Why can a skater instead not choose to do more of one thing and less of another? Why should a 3-jump combination be a requirement, for example? To me, that's like telling every skater you MUST do a Beillmann spin or you MUST do a catch-foot Spiral or you MUST do a footwork sequence with only one foot. Give the skaters a more open minimum requirement and then let them choose from there what best suits the MUSIC of the program and their own personal abilities.

    The other problem - tacking a Double Loop onto the end of a Double Axel, and then doing a Spin worthy of +0 GOE, will give you more extra points right now than if you had instead done a Double Axel and followed it up with a spin worthy of +3 GOE. Clearly not an accurate representation of the varying difficulty between those to things.

    Quote Originally Posted by ImaginaryPogue View Post
    I LOVE Level four footwork. I need to get that out there. I love Chan’s footwork. I love how much ice coverage he gets. I love how particularly in character Takahashi’s footwork is. I wouldn’t give that up for the world. I don’t like restriction here (though I might take that back) because I don’t see how removing one tool that some skaters have to acquire points (through complicated footwork that gets high levels) promotes variety
    Skaters who do Level 4 footwork well would still be rewarded for it. The thing that should change is ALL footwork should receive the same +1 point per GOE mark, not just Level 4 footwork. Look at the Footwork sequences of Takahashi and Chan that get called as Level 4 vs. their Footwork sequences that get called as Level 3. There isn't much of a difference (the Level 3 footwork is actually sometimes more appealing...compare Chan's "Level 3" footwork to his "Level 4 footwork"). Why should one be worth far more points than the other?

    Most definitely, though, footwork sequences should not travel all over the place. They should move continuously in the direction of the pattern. Minor deviations from that pattern for a flourish is okay, but significantly backtracking or going askew is not good. That's not called ice coverage, it's called messy. Better ice coverage would mean increasing the size of the pattern - a larger serpentine, a larger circle/oval, or starting a straightline sequence at one of the corners of the rink and moving diagonally across the rink all the way to the other corner.

    Being able to include all of the various steps and turns into a clear, clean pattern is more difficult. Being able to perform "less complicated" footwork with excellent, continuous speed and crisp movements is also a worthwhile skill that should not be lost in the sport.

  13. #28
    Skating is art, if you let it be. Blades of Passion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Hollywood, CA
    Posts
    4,108
    Quote Originally Posted by FlattFan View Post
    Miki will do the maximum number of jumps. She will not leave out a jump for a spin. Alissa will do the maximum number of spins and least # of jumps.
    You don't know that for sure. Excellent non-jump elements would be worth more than tacking on double jumps in combination. It might make Miki work harder and include an extra step sequence in the program or, yes, even a spin. Alissa might do multiple Spiral Sequences instead of the maximum number of spins. She might include a footwork sequence. It depends on the program. Allowing the skaters the choice means we won't know for sure beforehand.

    Quote Originally Posted by FlattFan View Post
    Are you suggesting skaters and choreographers cannot tailor programs to the music and to each skater's best abilities currently?
    That is correct. Choreographers and skaters can do the best they can within the limitations provided, but there is definitely a range of artistry that is being lost with the current rules.

    Quote Originally Posted by FlattFan View Post
    Something has to give. You'll have a group of girls who jump and jump and jump. Another group of girls who spin and spin and spin. Do you realize you'll get the SAME sameness?
    You've pointed out 2 different program layouts right here. 2 is more than 1, last time I did the math. Currently every skater has to do the exact same general technical structure - 1 option. You're of course being horribly reductive because you've only pointed out 2 possible options my rules would allow - maximizing jumps or maximizing spins. I pointed out 4 very different program structures in my opening post and there are MANY more different ones to choose from. In total, there would be 100+ exact technical program structures skaters could pick from when you look at all of the different possible combinations of extra spins, extra footwork, extra spiral sequences, extra jumping passes, and extra combination jumps.

    Quote Originally Posted by FlattFan View Post
    Then Alissa will never beat Miki. That should answer janetfan's question which was my answer.
    This assumes that the skater who is the much stronger jumper always skates their best. It also assumes that the skaters' programs and performances are equally good. If Miki did all of those jumps but her program was awful and her performance was uninspired, then she could still lose to a 5-Triple program from Alissa, given that Alissa nails her spins and has an excellent program and delivers an inspired performance.

    Quote Originally Posted by FlattFan View Post
    Yes, a lot of girls will opt for that. Look at how many 3x3 got downgraded. They would opt for 3x2, and another triple. That would be the best bet for the maximum number of points. Miki, Mao, Caroline all got their 3x3 downgraded to 3x2, on top of -GOE. Basic math would tell you it's better to just leave the 3x3 combination out all together.
    3lz+2lp + GOE, and a separate 3loop + GOE would net you a higher score than 3lz+3lp<< - GOE, and a spin or footwork. It will be the dead of 3x3.
    If your 3-3 is SO badly underrotated that it is fully downgraded to a double, you deserve to get less points overall. That's generally not what happens, though. Furthermore, you need to read exactly what I've written. A skater can not add in 2 extra jumping passes (therefore giving a female 8 jumping passes and allowing them to do 7 Triples + a Double Axel without a 3x3) without extra penalty being incurred.

  14. #29
    Banned janetfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    6,889
    Quote Originally Posted by Blades of Passion View Post
    Skaters who do Level 4 footwork well would still be rewarded for it. The thing that should change is ALL footwork should receive the same +1 point per GOE mark, not just Level 4 footwork. Look at the Footwork sequences of Takahashi and Chan that get called as Level 4 vs. their Footwork sequences that get called as Level 3. There isn't much of a difference (the Level 3 footwork is actually sometimes more appealing...compare Chan's "Level 3" footwork to his "Level 4 footwork"). Why should one be worth far more points than the other?

    Most definitely, though, footwork sequences should not travel all over the place. They should move continuously in the direction of the pattern. Minor deviations from that pattern for a flourish is okay, but significantly backtracking or going askew is not good. That's not called ice coverage, it's called messy. Better ice coverage would mean increasing the size of the pattern - a larger serpentine, a larger circle/oval, or starting a straightline sequence at one of the corners of the rink and moving diagonally across the rink all the way to the other corner.

    Being able to include all of the various steps and turns into a clear, clean pattern is more difficult. Being able to perform "less complicated" footwork with excellent, continuous speed and crisp movements is also a worthwhile skill that should not be lost in the sport.
    I like your views on footwork. As to Pogue's points about Patrick and Dai - they will score well on steps regardless of the system for obvious reasons. Pogue did not mention Evan's level four steps but I assume he loves them as well since he loves Cop level four steps.

    Your last sentence brought to mind skaters like Yuka Sato - whose footwork I typically preferred over most of today's Ladies.
    But Yuka would have flourished under the CoP but even more so under BOP's system since she would be able to keep the superior flow and musicality too often missing from today's Ladies.

    Seeing skaters like Evan and Plushy thrash about trying to reach a level is not anything I love watching.
    Watching skaters like Yagudin and Browning doing steps that highlight not just the music but the theme of the program was something I did like very much.

    A level achieved just for points that sacrifices the cohesiveness of the program does not make skating more fun or exciting to watch.
    I feel the same way about spins and spirals.
    Last edited by janetfan; 10-20-2010 at 05:51 AM.

  15. #30
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Texas, United States
    Posts
    4,971
    I don't even get why people are comparing Miki and Alissa? Isn't it clear that under the current system Miki is much better? Her international results are much more impressive, she makes the GPF pretty much every year and won silver last year, medaled at every GP event she's been in since 2006 with the exception of 08 NHK Trophy where she was 4th, has been 1st, 3rd, and 4th at the three Worlds she's attended since her Olympic meltdown in 06, was 5th at this year's Olympics, is consistently on the podium at Japanese nationals except for this year when she was 4th probably because she had already qualified for the Olympics, and won bronze at the 08 4CC which was a deep field.

    Most of Alissa's success was pre-2006, so to compare her with Ando directly in the 2006-present period, she has won 2 GP medals (no golds), has not qualified for the GPF since 2005, won 2 medals at US nationals - a gold and a bronze, but finished 9th and 10th in the years she didn't medal, went to Worlds twice and finished 15th and 11th, finished 5th and 9th at the two 4CCs she's attended. I mean I guess she won gold at Nebelhorn twice.

    Basically, Miki is a very strong jumper and Alissa is not, implying:
    JUMPS MATTER MORE THAN SPINS AND SPIRALS AND ALWAYS WILL.

    If they didn't, no way would Yuna have won Olympic Gold by a margin of 23 points over Mao Asada and no way would Rachael Flatt be the 2010 US Champion over Mirai Nagasu.

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 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
  •