- Joined
- May 15, 2009
I was trying to give the judges and/or the CoP the benefit of the doubt. But have it your way - ineffective judges working a flawed system equals disappointing results at Skate Canada.
I used to love the COP
- Thread starter Poodlepal
- Start date
I was trying to give the judges and/or the CoP the benefit of the doubt. But have it your way - ineffective judges working a flawed system equals disappointing results at Skate Canada.
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2009
Well, I think that's rather true. Regardless of my love for COP, the flaws in the system were in fact exacerbated by judging that I didn't care for.
LOL!!! I just spent close to an hour reading through the last five pages and tring to figure out "my position" or questions or....and then, I read this....too funny
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2008
- Country
-
Bingo. A fall on a Quad Toe should really only be worth a Triple Toe. Note that even if a skater rotates and falls, that would still often be better than if they had only done a Triple. No male plans a solo 3Toe in their program - it's a waste of points. For male programs, the 3Toe is exclusively a jump you do in combination. Tripling out on a planned Quad means you've not only gained far less points on that jumping pass but also hindered your program in terms of the Zayak rules. You may as well have just doubled out on the jump.
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2003
Absolutely correct. The ISU and its Federations need money to run these extravaganzas. A real tech competition will not sell to the public. The fans want their artsy craft with music. In the phase competition where Tech is supposed to be the most important, the elements are selected by a Committee and they are limited. They are rightfully judged by values but they do not cover the scope of the individual possibilities of displaying their Tech. Yet the Performance is Also judged and in many cases overrides the point of it being a Tech Competition.
The Fans are eager for a nationality, costume, music and ballet-like arms to satisfy their art requirements.
My take on ART would be that I would rather listen to great serious music in its entirey than the abridged versions of figure skating. However, I do enjoy the occasional skater who displays some artistry in an LP. Laura Lepisto has that quality, and even Patrick if he can just not fall.
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2009
Funny, I do not find artistry to be Laura Lepisto or Patrick Chan's strength. Laura Lepisto is pretty enough but she's got very stiff arms and back and she doesn't dance to the music. I appreciate Laura Lepisto for her GREAT SPEED when she skates though. Patrick Chan apparently has great SKATING SKILLS but he doesn't skate to the music nor is his facial expression all that artistic and it's not like he's a great dancer.
But then, I guess artistry is subjective.
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2003
You got it, Hurrah. In ballet some say so-and-so has the best white swan. Some say what's-her-name has the best black swan. But which dancer has both?
- Joined
- May 15, 2009
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2009
Is this a true story??
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2006
- Country
-
I'm of the same opinion as Stephane. The idea of attaining the highest levels (4 on all elements) is mainly what has stripped figure skating of its freedom and beauty. It has forced the skaters to compromise quality for quantity, which is a real shame. COP would allow skaters more time to breathe and express their programs choreographically if they were not having to try and achieve a level 4 on everything. I vote to do away with the levels component of COP. BTW, these 2 are just so precious . . . I so love both Stephane and Shizuka, two beautiful and admirable ambassadors of this sport!
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
No. Sorry. I was trying to make a joke, based on the suggestion that you shouldn't get credit for a jump if you fall at the end.
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2010
I'm of the same opinion as Stephane. The idea of attaining the highest levels (4 on all elements) is mainly what has stripped figure skating of its freedom and beauty. It has forced the skaters to compromise quality for quantity, which is a real shame. COP would allow skaters more time to breathe and express their programs choreographically if they were not having to try and achieve a level 4 on everything. I vote to do away with the levels component of COP. BTW, these 2 are just so precious . . . I so love both Stephane and Shizuka, two beautiful and admirable ambassadors of this sport!
I really don't think this is fair at all. Over a decade of watching skaters (most particularly the men) who could not spin, whose MITF were perfunctory, and whose footwork was effectively non-existent, was more than enough for me. Actually, I think assigning levels to elements has done more to advance the actual sport than anything that's happened since the removal of school figures. Maybe even more than figures as a part of competition, just because of the shenanigans in how they were judged. I have seen some dubious level calls on elements with skaters getting higher than I thought they should, but that's extremely rare, and it's mostly just a flaw in how the criteria are constructed.
Most fans of skating who're more than once-every-four-years viewers have no problem accepting that there's a range of difficulty between the different jumps, and that difficulty should be rewarded. Just look at all the fights over Laura Lepisto. Why should non-jump elements be any different? If you take out the levels, what you get is a race to the bottom in terms of quality on those elements, where everyone does the bare minimum possible on the required elements, and no more, because doing better gets a skater very little reward for the effort.
It's a sport, for crying out loud. Objectively identifying and qualifying the elements a skater performs in a given program is probably the one innovation of COP that needs to stay in place. GOE could stand to be reworked, PCS badly needs an overhaul, but levels and the tech panel are wonderful. There was just as much choreographic mediocrity and moves done for the sake of satisfying the requirements under 6.0, and anyone who thinks otherwise is deluding themselves. The difference is that under 6.0, skaters have overall been forced to become better at those elements. People joke about how Evan won the Olympics on the strength of his spins, and you know what? It's true, and that's actually a good thing for the sport. Take that away, and you do not get a field of Yagudins, you get a field of Stojko clones, with one or two Yagudins in the mix. Same as it's ever been.
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2006
- Country
-
^ I see it more in terms of Angela Nikodinov's classic 6.0 style layback vs. Sasha Cohen's I-spin. To me, Nikodinov's spin is far and away more beautiful because of its simplicity and purity. Cohen's spin is sheerly done to earn points because flexibility is viewed as difficult and a way to gain high levels in COP, but I don't find that spin beautiful at all. It's just plain ugly . . . the shoot the beaver spin should be banned permanently. I love what COP did for footwork sequences, but I abhor what it did to spins and spirals.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2009
When I watch videos under the 6.0 era, I see skaters holding their spins for 3 slow revolutions and then ending them. Or the 1 second spiral. Or the really easy footwork.
There's simple and elegant, and then there's simple because you have no incentive and get no reward for making it any better. We saw too much of the second under 6.0.
There's simple and elegant, and then there's simple because you have no incentive and get no reward for making it any better. We saw too much of the second under 6.0.
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2010
But that's a problem with the way the code is constructed, not the concept of levels and objective ranking of elements. I don't think flexibility should be as valued as high as it is now, because it has nothing to do with actual skating. The features should be things like change of edge, change of foot, jumps within spins, ability to spin in both directions, etc. But at the same time, I think women who have weak layback positions or can't do Biellmann's shouldn't be penalized for that, either, as long as the quality of spinning (speed, centering, maintaining the position, etc) are there.
If two skaters do a layback that's as pretty as Angela Nikodinov's, but one gets it centered faster, and then does change of foot and changes spinning direction at the same time, she should get more points for it. That's what you're taking away when you take away levels.
It's not a beauty contest. It's a skating contest.
If you take the beauty out of skating, then it becomes very boring.
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2010
If you don't find the actual sport of skating beautiful in and of itself (ignoring all the post-figures jumping beans who could not actually skate), why are you watching in the first place? There are beauty contests, there are pure forms of dance, etc etc. Well-executed skating, blades-on-ice skating, is beautiful.
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2010
Pretty much all of Lambiel's significant victories came under some variant of COP, though, so I'm not sure how true that is. I don't think if 6.0 had stayed in place, that he would have had the same degree of success. I think Joubert would have done much better, and Lambiel considerably worse. His spins might have been better, but I don't think he would have been rewarded for them (or his footwork) in the same way.
Because there are elements besides the aspects you listed that are beautiful and unique about figure skating and has been there since the sport started. Just because you find certain aspects beautiful doesn't mean everyone who enjoys skating thinks that way.