Who thinks like me that the ISU should require the 5 types of jumps in the FS

[ImaginaryPogue]

Require? No. I have no interest in seeing a double jump outside of the axel or as part of a combination. And truthfully, I don't think it helps the program overall to have all five triples. Kim's 2010 Olympic LP was gorgeous without the loop and I'm not convinced that Phaneuf's programs would benefit from a flip (though she would, obviously)

Reward? Absolutely. Mastery of all types of triples displays a unique, specific skill that should be rewarded. But only fully rotated, properly "edged" triple jumps. To give a bonus (the equivalent to the average of the BV of the triple jumps (which comes out to 4.94, so that might be too high) will encourage this. I think this alongside a proper evalutation of combinations (aka, a 3Lz+3T combo > 3lz solo + 3T solo) would definitely be beneficial/honest for jump/jump progress.

[Joesitz]

^^^^
Your key word: 'mastery' is what they should show and especially proper take offs so we can know the jumps which are be executed. No 'attempts' can be considered as mastery. I would love to have seen a Triple Toe Wally but no Lady can do that so that it is not on the list of base values. I bet Plushenko could.

[Mafke]

I still like my idea of points for triple jumps being measured by how many different triples the skater does. So that the first triple gets X number of points, the next different triple gets a little more, the next different triple a little more etc. This would reward skaters with more different jumps and recognize that the same jumps aren't equally difficult for all skaters.

[Olympia]

Require? No. I have no interest in seeing a double jump outside of the axel or as part of a combination. And truthfully, I don't think it helps the program overall to have all five triples. Kim's 2010 Olympic LP was gorgeous without the loop and I'm not convinced that Phaneuf's programs would benefit from a flip (though she would, obviously)

Reward? Absolutely. Mastery of all types of triples displays a unique, specific skill that should be rewarded. But only fully rotated, properly "edged" triple jumps. To give a bonus (the equivalent to the average of the BV of the triple jumps (which comes out to 4.94, so that might be too high) will encourage this. I think this alongside a proper evalutation of combinations (aka, a 3Lz+3T combo > 3lz solo + 3T solo) would definitely be beneficial/honest for jump/jump progress.

I think this statement is the one I'd go with. Skating has become quantitative enough! We're going to end up with a bunch of robots skating to a checklist. Pogue's approach will reward good technicians and careful learning but will leave wiggle room for skaters who bring something special to the feast but who may have a weak jump for some reason (such as an injury). I love a good all-around skater--one of my favorite tapes on YouTube is the collection of Arakawa's triple-triples, which use an impressive number of different jump combinations. But there are other heartstopping skaters such as Yamaguchi (no Salchow most of the time) whom I'd hate to do without.

[Krislite]

More required elements in the LP?

Given the current demands of CoP, I don't think you want to see skaters try their weakest jump in their programs. Their choreography and performance already suffer enough nowadays from all the rules and requirements.

Just pile on more nerve wracking requirements by forcing them to do their weakest jump. I think there's a reason only skaters like Rachael Flatt can consistently do all five non-Axel triples under the demands of CoP. Be careful what you wish for.

[Tonichelle]

No I don't think it should be a requirement, but I wouldn't mind seeing a reasonable bonus point or two added on if each jump was done correctly and cleanly in a program. No bonus points for attempts, just perfection.

[jaylee]

I think this is a great idea, but I think that it would be very hard to restrict skaters from repeating certain jumps, so the bonus for skaters attempting all jumps is more appropriate. Yes, the take-off is how a flip/lutz is defined, but I would rather see a skater at least go for the jump rather than omit it because they can't hold the correct edge for 1 more fraction of a second. This, along with the 2 double axel rule per program, would really encourage the younger skaters to get all of their triples, and reward skaters for taking the risk. Perhaps another bonus could be added if a skater completes a program without any wrong edge calls? This would also encourage the skaters to do the right technique on their flip/lutz jumps.

I agree that a bonus for attempting all the jumps, would be more appropriate for skaters. Not sure about having a tiered bonus structure factoring in edge calls, but that's something to be considered, along with whether or not a fall, underrotation/downgrade, landing error (step-out, two-footed landing) should also be considered in determining whether or not to count a triple jump attempt towards such a bonus.

However, I don't see the 2A limitation rule as playing much part in encouraging skaters to go for all of their triples, as evidenced by this season. After the rule change, there has been no noticeable increase in the number of skaters attempting the five basic triples, and skaters like Mirai and Yu-Na merely converted the 2A in one of their 2A combos/sequences to a 2T in combination with another jump instead of bringing back the 3S / 3Lo.

Having a third 2A was merely one option that skaters could use in a layout that omitted a triple, and eliminating that layout didn't change anything significant in regards to encouraging skaters to attempt five basic triples, because there are still many other layouts that they can use while omitting a triple, which were used at last year's worlds and this year's.

At 2010 Worlds, Akiko and Alena were the only two to complete all five basic triples (Alena got an edge call). It goes to three in terms of attempts if you count Rachael Flatt, since she planned for but doubled the intended backend 3T.

The number of skaters at 2011 Worlds who completed all five basic triples didn't increase after this rule, it remained at 2, Alena and Kanako (both getting edge calls). It goes to 4 in terms of attempts if one counts Mao since she was planning a 3S that she popped, and Kiira if one counts her double salchow and doubled lutz attempts. That's where it gets tricky, because if singles and doubles count as triple jump attempts for fulfilling a theoretical rule (bonus, requirement, whatever), then one would have to add Yu-Na with her single flip and intentional double loop.

Otherwise the result could be that a skater could get more credit for planning more than what they were able to execute in competition, versus someone who executes what they planned. Yu-Na didn't plan a 3Lo but she did successfully complete a 2Lo. Kiira planned a 3S but only landed a 2S. Situations like this make me think a bonus should only be for 5 successful clean triples (GOE of -1 or above) or for 6 successful clean take-offs even including singles/doubles.

The skaters that I enjoy the most these days is Mao Asada, Mirai Nagasu and Joannie Rochette because they tried to show that they are able to be the best figure skater cause they trying the 5 triple jumps in their program.

In the past six seasons, Mao Asada has attempted the five basic triples only in one season, this most recent one, and only at 2011 4CCs and 2011 Worlds. At both of her GP events and at Japan nationals, Mao never attempted the 3T. At 4CCs, where she did attempt all five triples, she UR the 3T and two-footed the 3S. At Worlds, she UR the 3T and popped the intended 3S into a single.

Joannie Rochette is a great example of a skater who does indeed have all 5 triples, as she consistently (and brilliantly) showed at Canadian nationals year after year, as well as numerous other competitions. Yet surprisingly, in her two biggest international achievements, 2010 Olympic bronze and 2009 Worlds silver, she actually did'nt manage to cleanly land all 5 types of triples. She had a huge step-out/turns on her only flip attempt in the FS at the Olympics, and at 09 Worlds, she doubled her one intended 3Lo in the FS. These are just two examples, but considering how it wasn't easy even for Rochette, a great skater fully capable of executing the 5 basic triples, to always land them all cleanly in competitions makes me think that a reward would be better than a requirement as you suggested. Otherwise it'll be a splatfest of epic proportions.

Except Mirai did not plan a salchow in her routine, either as skated at 4CCs or US Nationals:
US Nationals
http://www.usfsa.org/leaderboard/res...6/SEGM002.html
4CC's
http://www.isuresults.com/results/fc..._FS_Scores.pdf

Flatt, OTOH, does. Doing so did not make her LP more enjoyable, but she does deserve props for the effort, I think.

Mirai's salchow has been absent from her programs since 2009 Golden West, where she fell on it in the LP. Her 3Lo has gotten much stronger under Frank Carroll. I don't know what's keeping the 3S gone.

Someone at FSU did an in-depth look at the lutzes/flips for the top girls at US Nationals and I think of them all, Rachael had the cleanest take-offs.

Many of novice girls can do a combo like 2A-2T-2Lo.

So what does it say about the current reigning champion that her combos included a 2A/2T and a 2A/2lo/2lo?

[miki88]

I remember when there was Sasha Cohen, Irina slutkaya, Shizuka Arakawa, Michelle Kwan. And I think that those skaters make the past competition more interesting than today, because all the women incorporated the 5 types of triple jumps in their programs.

But you also have to remember edge rules weren't enforced back then. Nowadays, due to the rules, it's more rewarding to leave out your trouble jumps, if you have other ways to gain the points.

[Joesitz]

But you also have to remember edge rules weren't enforced back then. Nowadays, due to the rules, it's more rewarding to leave out your trouble jumps, if you have other ways to gain the points.

In my talks with judges of the 6.0 system, they were quite aware of what the definitions of a jump were as well as the definitions of all the elements. How they put numbers to them according to the gospel of CoP, is never explained.

I think this statement is the one I'd go with. Skating has become quantitative enough! We're going to end up with a bunch of robots skating to a checklist. Pogue's approach will reward good technicians and careful learning but will leave wiggle room for skaters who bring something special to the feast but who may have a weak jump for some reason (such as an injury). I love a good all-around skater--one of my favorite tapes on YouTube is the collection of Arakawa's triple-triples, which use an impressive number of different jump combinations. But there are other heartstopping skaters such as Yamaguchi (no Salchow most of the time) whom I'd hate to do without.

I don't like to single out a skater for faulty or missing elements.

Because there is more money in watching a mini LP and a full LP, for the sake of some artistry, there really is no test of skating ability (not to be confused with skating skills). I'm not sure if demanding 5 different jumps, and only in the LP would show us anything we don't already know. Perhaps we could force the issue on the SP and see how well the contenders execute their jumps in a tighter session?

For me, the LP or for a better ajective: the Free Skate should allow the skater to show off how well they can perform, execute elements, and sell their artistry to music. It would be a much better test of skills and performance abilities.

[Krislite]

I don't like to single out a skater for faulty or missing elements.

Because there is more money in watching a mini LP and a full LP, for the sake of some artistry, there really is no test of skating ability (not to be confused with skating skills). I'm not sure if demanding 5 different jumps, and only in the LP would show us anything we don't already know. Perhaps we could force the issue on the SP and see how well the contenders execute their jumps in a tighter session?

For me, the LP or for a better ajective: the Free Skate should allow the skater to show off how well they can perform, execute elements, and sell their artistry to music. It would be a much better test of skills and performance abilities.

I agree with this.

And the idea of giving bonuses to only clean 5 different triples sounds good in theory, but by itself I think it's highly flawed.

First of all, if the bonus applies only to "clean" 5 distinct triples, then it won't change a skater's incentive to include their problematic triple(s). Were they capable of performing all five triple jumps cleanly and consistently to begin with they would have done so already. It already costs skaters some base value points to substitute a double Axel for an omitted triple. For Yuna the cost is already considerable since she gives up not only the difference in Base Value between a 2Axel and a 3Loop, but she also gives up her 2Axel+3Toe combination. There is already a large opportunity cost to omitting a triple jump.

However, CoP is set-up such that the opportunity cost of leaving out a triple is less than the risk. Unlike the free skate under 6.0, each fallen/popped jump not only receives GOE penalties and deductions, it also costs the skater an entire jumping pass. There is no way to mitigate the risk of a failed triple jump elsewhere in the program.

A 5-triple bonus would only go well together with something like BoP's proposal to include optional slots in the free program. If you want skaters to take risks, give them a way to hedge against it.

[gkelly]

When I was thinking about this a couple years ago, my thoughts were

We shouldn't require every jump takeoff, and especially not attempted triples from every jump takeoff. Some skaters just can't do those jumps. Sometimes the reason a skater doesn't have a triple lutz, for example, is because her double lutz technique is weak. We can give her an incentive to work on the double lutz and include it in the program, but if she can't get two full revolutions from a clear outside edge takeoff, she isn't even going to earn the incentive and she'll have to give up a jumping pass that does showcase her skills.

In other cases, skaters leave out some takeoffs because of injuries. It may be only temporarily that they are able to compete with only the jumps they can do safely until the injury heals. Would you want to prevent them from competing at all? Look at, e.g., Surya Bonaly in 1998 or Carolina Kostner this year.

Right now the senior short program requires a minimum of two different triples plus double axel. There are many senior-level but not world-class skaters for whom that is the limit of their jumping ability. Or they might have three or four different triples to work with. But that's it. They're not going to get any more. They probably can't do triple-triple combinations either.

So for the ladies (and some ladies with that jump content are otherwise good enough for, say, a top 50 or even top 25 ranking), solo triple salchow, triple salchow combo, solo triple toe, triple toe combo, and double axel uses five jump passes. The skater will probably also want to repeat the double axel in a sixth jump pass, leaving only one more pass to include some sort of loop, flip, and lutz.
Maybe she can put a double loop at the end of one of her combos with a double axel or triple. Maybe she can do double lutz-half loop-double flip. Maybe she can put a triple toe on the back of one of those doubles and thus use it in her triple toe combination. But probably not.

Allowing ladies 8 jumping passes (and more than 4 minutes), as would meet Krislite's objection, would make it easier for a skater with two triples to fit in all takeoffs to earn a bonus and also maximize her scoring with her higher valued jumps.

How about just giving an incentive and let each skater figure out whether it fits her skills and stamina better to include all jump takeoffs at the risk of not earning the bonus after all, or to play to her strengths and forgo the potential bonus.

Should skaters plan to repeat the jumps they're most consistent with, or the highest valued jumps with which they're reasonably consistent, as is currently the case? Or should they plan to repeat the ones they're most likely to fail on, in order to give themselves a second chance to earn the bonus. That could make for a lot of messy programs.

My thought about reasonable reward/incentives would be the following:

*Bonus of 2.00 (a little more than one double jump) for including all six takeoffs as double or better, no edge calls and no GOEs less than -1 (because minor errors other than wrong edge shouldn't disqualify the attempt from counting toward the bonus).
*Bonus of 4.00 (a little less than one triple jump) for including all six takeoffs as triple or better, same caveats. For ladies and maybe junior men, that bonus can be defined to include double axels, triples required only for senior men.

(I'm also in favor of putting double walley and double inside axel into the Scale of Values and offering a 4.00? bonus for including eight different jump takeoffs as double or higher.)

The exact numbers are negotiable. The point is, skaters who for one reason or another won't be able to include all triples or even all doubles-or-triples in their free programs will give up a chance at the bonus and will also give up the point-earning potential of whatever triples they are not able to do, but they will still be able to put forward their own best skills and be rewarded appropriately. Skaters who can do all the jump takeoffs can be rewarded for that variety.

Actually, for the ladies, just giving them an extra jump pass and extra time to fit it in, along with the current limit of two double axels, would probably encourage many to include types of jumps that they have been leaving out. But if there's no official bonus for including different jump takeoffs, there should at least be some official encouragement to do so.

Judges can be advised to consider variety of jump takeoffs and jump approaches in the Choreography score. But it probably won't make more than a fraction of a point difference, even with the 2.0 and 1.6 free program PCS factors, because there are so many other considerations also taken account of under Choreography.