If you could change one thing about Figure Skating, what would it be? | Page 2 | Golden Skate

If you could change one thing about Figure Skating, what would it be?

hzhzhz123

Spectator
Joined
Feb 16, 2010
Creat more categories for international and national level competitions, such as jump only, spin only. Creat the world jump champions and the world spin Champions. Creat more opportunity for altheletes to success.
 

FSGMT

Record Breaker
Joined
Sep 10, 2012
Creat more categories for international and national level competitions, such as jump only, spin only. Creat the world jump champions and the world spin Champions. Creat more opportunity for altheletes to success.
So, one of the WC titles (spins, obviously!) would be a battle Czisny vs Lipnitskaya :laugh: (but czisny would obviously win!)
 

avalyn

Rinkside
Joined
Nov 12, 2012
I wish obtaining high levels wasn't so important in some areas, or that you could get as much as a level four for a simple element done really well. Can you even get a level four on a simple but beautiful layback spin done extremely well (and held long enough)? Or do you have to go to a haircutter or Biellmann? I'm a new figure skating fan and no expert but it seems like many skaters feel the Biellmann is necessary even if they can't do it well or if it causes them extreme pain/possibly back injury. I would also prefer spiral sequences (or not even a sequence, just one nice spiral) and footwork to match the music well than to force something level four that doesn't match. I guess I just wish things were freer (especially in the free skate like os168 said) instead of certain things practically being required in order to earn points -- and it does seem like 6.0 was better in that regard -- but maybe CoP can be tweaked to the point of being even better than 6.0, I don't know.
 
Last edited:

gkelly

Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
I wish obtaining high levels wasn't so important in some areas, or that you could get as much as a level four for a simple element done really well. Can you even get a level four on a simple but beautiful layback spin done extremely well (and held long enough)? Or do you have to go to a haircutter or Biellmann?

Level 4 requires 4 "features," which implies at least a certain degree of complexity.

The "done really well" part would be reflected in the Grade of Execution, not in the level.

Here are the possible levels for spins; I've bolded the ones that can apply to the typical forward layback:

1) Difficult variations (count as many times as performed with limitations specified below)
2) Change of foot executed by jump
3) Jump within a spin without changing feet
4) Difficult variation of flying entrance/Landing on the same foot as take-off or
changing foot on landing in a Flying Sit Spin
5) Backward entrance
6) Clear change of edge in sit (only from backward inside to forward outside), camel,
Layback and Biellmann position
7) All 3 basic positions on both feet
8) Both directions immediately following each other in sit or camel spin
9) Clear increase of speed in camel, sit, layback or Biellmann position
10) At least 8 rev. without changes in position/variation, foot or edge (camel, layback,
difficult variation of any basic position or for combinations only non-basic position)
Additional features for the Layback spin:
11) One clear change of position backwards-sideways or reverse, at least 3 rev. in each
position (counts also if the Layback spin is a part of any other spin)
12) Biellmann position after Layback spin (SP – after 8 revolutions in layback spin)


So that's 6 possible features, of which haircutter (difficult position -- feature 1) and Biellmann position (feature 12) are only 2. If you delete those, it would be possible to have a level 4 layback by holding one position for 8 revolutions, changing edge, increasing the speed (tech panels seem reluctant to award this feature), and changing from a backward to a sideways position or vice versa.

In order to get level 4 without there would have to be at least one change of position in the upper body to get the side-to-back feature and probably in the free leg position to get the increase of speed feature. If they could be done simultaneously, and if the change of edge can be smooth enough that it doesn't disrupt the rotation of the spin, then it would be possible to have a level 4 layback that doesn't look too busy.

Of course, if you can do three of those things in a backward layback, then you could also get credit for the backward entry feature and earn level 4.

I think the important thing -- and this is a change I definitely encourage -- is to make sure the values of the GOEs are high enough that it would be worth more to do a level 2 layback with +3 GOE than to do level 4 with +1 GOE.

Of course, the most points should go to the skaters who can do level 4 well enough to earn all +3s.

[/quote]but maybe CoP can be tweaked to the point of being even better than 6.0, I don't know.[/QUOTE]

I'm very interested in ways to tweak the existing system to achieve the goals you mention -- rewarding quality and giving more freedom in the free program. We've had some threads discussing those topics.
 

avalyn

Rinkside
Joined
Nov 12, 2012
Thanks for the welcome, and thanks gkelly for explaining! I thought if the layback was fast enough and in flawless position throughout (which is probably pretty difficult to do), it might could get a high level, but I see that more features are necessary. But I agree with this, it would be great to see some skaters try this approach more often and be rewarded:
I think the important thing -- and this is a change I definitely encourage -- is to make sure the values of the GOEs are high enough that it would be worth more to do a level 2 layback with +3 GOE than to do level 4 with +1 GOE.
 

Slowdive

On the Ice
Joined
Dec 27, 2010
Here are the possible levels for spins; I've bolded the ones that can apply to the typical forward layback:

Of course, if you can do three of those things in a backward layback, then you could also get credit for the backward entry feature and earn level 4.

I'm confused about forward and backward laybacks.
 

Kitt

Final Flight
Joined
Feb 1, 2007
Country
United-States
I totally miss the spiral. I am totally happy if I see someone do a decent one, even for half the length of the rink.
 

tommyk75

Rinkside
Joined
Jan 19, 2004
+1 on bringing back the 6.0 system. Diehards are wiling to put in the work to understand the system, but others simply won't, especially when results still end up wacky and ridiculous.

While at it, get rid of the ISU's death grip and make a proper Skating Tour open to everyone (getting rid of "Olympic division" skating) with solid sponsor and enough prize money for skaters to actually support themselves and want to keep skating instead of going off into acting/fashion design/singing/etc, etc.
 

gkelly

Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Thanks for the welcome, and thanks gkelly for explaining! I thought if the layback was fast enough and in flawless position throughout (which is probably pretty difficult to do), it might could get a high level, but I see that more features are necessary.

The way the system is set up,
Levels are based on adding extra difficulty -- always based on the number of features performed.

Grades of execution are based on quality.

So you're right that skaters can earn more points by spinning faster and with more attractive positions, but those extra points would come from the GOE, not from a higher level.

I'm confused about forward and backward laybacks.

A forward spin is one that rotates toward the leg on the ice. E.g., for a skater who rotates counterclockwise (toward the left), as most skaters do, a forward spin is on the left foot.

A backward spin rotates away from the leg on the ice. For a counterclockwise skater, that would be on the right foot, spinning to the left.

In general backspins tend to be more difficult, and especially in the layback position.

Almost all laybacks you've ever seen have been forward spins. This is especially true in the required short program layback, which doesn't allow a change of foot.

Occasionally skaters go into a laid-back position on the backspin foot as part of a combination spin.

Here's a rare attempt at a backward layback (layback position in a backspin to earn the "backward entry" feature as well as the change between sideways and layback feature.


If you happen to know ballet terminology, forward spin = en dedans/inside pirouette; backspin = en dehors/outside pirouette.
 
Last edited:

mskater93

Record Breaker
Joined
Oct 22, 2005
Also, "clear increase of speed" as a feature has been rarely rewarded, so you can probably cross that off the list...
 

drivingmissdaisy

Record Breaker
Joined
Feb 17, 2010
In regards to spins, I'd like to the judges use the full range of GOE to reward great spins and punish poorly executed ones. It is rare for skaters to get -GOE on spins, so the great spinners IMO are not rewarded enough relative to poor spinners.
 

gkelly

Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
In regards to spins, I'd like to the judges use the full range of GOE to reward great spins and punish poorly executed ones. It is rare for skaters to get -GOE on spins, so the great spinners IMO are not rewarded enough relative to poor spinners.

How do you handle spins that meet the minimum requirements for that kind of spin in terms of position and number of revolutions, and don't travel noticeably, but don't have any noticeable strong points? To me, that's an adequate spin, deserving of 0 GOE.

Then, what about spins that have several good qualities (bullet points), such as speed, number of revolutions, some good positions, centering in part, but then have one section that travels or one weak position or awkward change, etc.? Those will be a balance between pluses and minuses -- the minuses might take an otherwise +2 spin down to +1, or +1 down to 0. Of course if the spin was just adequate to begin with and then got worse (or started with a problem and then recovered to adequate), that would probably be -1.

And if there's a major error, even if some parts of the spin are good, then it should end up negative.

It's easy to focus on the negatives and ignore the good parts of a spin. Especially if you're used to watching good-to-great skaters. Look at the protocols for the bottom-finishing skaters at JGP, senior B, Four Continents, etc., let alone US regionals, and you'll see a lot more minuses for spins.

But I agree, there does need to be some way of making sure that the spins that are excellent throughout are rewarded above those that are good with flaws as well as distinguishing good-with-flaws from mediocre with flaws or outright bad.
 

drivingmissdaisy

Record Breaker
Joined
Feb 17, 2010
Then, what about spins that have several good qualities (bullet points), such as speed, number of revolutions, some good positions, centering in part, but then have one section that travels or one weak position or awkward change, etc.? Those will be a balance between pluses and minuses -- the minuses might take an otherwise +2 spin down to +1, or +1 down to 0. Of course if the spin was just adequate to begin with and then got worse (or started with a problem and then recovered to adequate), that would probably be -1.

What I'd like to see is having a good benchmark for a +3, like a good Czisny spin. She is usually well-centered, has attractive positions, is fast, and maintains speed throughout the spin. I think it would be fair to take off 1-2 points of GOE (from +3) based on the degree that each of those characteristics are lacking.
 

gkelly

Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
What I'd like to see is having a good benchmark for a +3, like a good Czisny spin. She is usually well-centered, has attractive positions, is fast, and maintains speed throughout the spin. I think it would be fair to take off 1-2 points of GOE (from +3) based on the degree that each of those characteristics are lacking.

In practice, that's pretty much what we get. It's pretty rare to see +3s on any element, especially from the whole judging panel, although it probably happens more often on spins than on other kinds of elements.

Those spins that have received all/mostly +3s can be used as examples for judges -- should the ISU put out a training video with examples? (And make it available to the skaters and other interested observers as well?)

But I don't know that it makes much sense to look at all spins in terms of the ultimate perfection and then think only in terms of subtraction. Most spins won't come close to perfection, so it makes more sense to look at where they were better (or worse) than adequate, with 0 rather than +3 as the benchmark.

What I do wonder is whether it would be officially acceptable to say that just doing something well (extra revolutions, centering, attractive positions) is worth one bullet point, but if it's OMG out of this world with drop-dead gorgeous positions throughout or 4-5 times as many revolutions as required a judge can award the same bullet point twice and end up, e.g., with +3 just for doing three things really really well rather than needing to do six things well.
 
Top