I was coming up with ideas - didn't say they were viable, but they were better than Speedy taking a long nap!!!
Remove axel requirement for ladies/men in the SP
I think that they should display live:
1. The technical panel's ranking of the skater's base value
2. judge's ranking based on GOE
3. The ranking of the program components
With lyrics, it should be allowed as we have to accept that there is a younger generation who we need to appeal to BUT there should be strict conditions and guidelines and if a skater uses songs with lyrics poorly, there should be a deduction im components and a madatory music violation deduction.
Maybe have a finer scale for awarding GOE to better differentiate outstanding elements, like a Lambiel spin versus a Chan spin.
Although, will that give the judges more power the manipulate scores?
I♥Yuna;888602 said:So basically, my suggestions for improvement are to re-evaluate exactly what the components are (ie,defintions ), identify concrete criteria for each component (boundaries for each criteria = minimal overlap with criteria of other components),
and most importantly, they need to create a new component to trap and contain the natural biases involved in the judging process (things such as taste in style, personality, music choice, and costumes -- this new component needs to function more like a bonus system, it needs to have a completely different way of being scored -- ie not a 10.0 scale -- and a vastly inferior factor compared to the rest of the components).
I'm actually doing a revision myself right now, to hilight the things that don't make sense to me, and offer what I feel is a more intuitive, logial list of components and criteria. In the meantime, I'd like to pose 3 questions (especially for anyone with a dance background):
1.) What do you think about the idea of "Choreography/Composition" as a single component vs. separating them into different components? (ie, flesh vs. bones)
2.) How does your understanding of "Choreography" and "Interpretation" compare with the isu definitions? Do you sense redundancy, or do you feel they are distinct?
3.) Does your understanding of "Composition" encompass things like "Transitions, Linking Footwork, and Movement", or do you see them as two distinct ideas?
Sorry to be off topic. I wanted someone to tell me if Carolina Kostner is allowed to have this jump layout:
3Z
2A 3T
3F 3T
3L
3F
3S
3S 2T 2L
Agree with more Johnny Weir. Sorry but I can't stand Tara, and neither for ice dance ever again. Had to use the utmost restraint to not throw things during the Olympic ice dance commentary. Never want to hear the word "energy" coming out of Tara's mouth again. Also agree with limiting the number of second half bonus jumps. Otherwise the programs are so unbalanced. Rotation criteria for jumps are fine as they are. Problem is the consistency of calls. Maybe have a finer scale for awarding GOE to better differentiate outstanding elements, like a Lambiel spin versus a Chan spin. Although, will that give the judges more power the manipulate scores? Or how about a judging panel like Rhythmic gymnastics? Don't remember exactly how many judges there are but each one is assigned to evaluate only one aspect of the performance because it's so detailed. Like one judge for spins, one for jumps, one for step sequences, etc.
Melon, I agree. I think a good replacement rule would be to replace the axel requirement with a loop requirement.You aren't even trying to be subtle.Remove axel requirement for ladies/men in the SP
I think a good replacement rule would be to replace the axel requirement with a loop requirement.
2014-18 Rule Changes, SP required elements:I can just imagine the backlash!
Oh, you were serious. That could be an actual discussion - right now the ISU requires the Axel for both SP and FS, probably because its forward edge takeoff is so unique among jumps. The 2A/3A option does give a huge advantage to a skater with a 3A vs a skater with a 2A, but the 3A among women is already an unusual case. Is there any other jump that was still so rare even 25 years after being first ratified in competition?I actually thought removing Axel requirement would be a good idea......
Wouldn't that remove all that fight about should X skater be the only skater allowed to do 3A instead of 2A thing??
X skater can do 3A 3-3 and solo 3, while others can do 3-3, 3, 3 or something.... Technically, the one with 3A should win the TES anyways ( when only jumps are counted).
I actually thought removing Axel requirement would be a good idea......
Wouldn't that remove all that fight about should X skater be the only skater allowed to do 3A instead of 2A thing??
X skater can do 3A 3-3 and solo 3, while others can do 3-3, 3, 3 or something.... Technically, the one with 3A should win the TES anyways ( when only jumps are counted).
plus this would greatly increase competitiveness especially for the ladies since they can do up to 4 triples in SP. It would be their choice to do a double axle.
2014-18 Rule Changes, SP required elements:
A combination of a triple Loop and a double Loop, a double Loop and a triple Loop, or two triple Loops
A double or triple Loop out of steps
A triple or quadruple Loop
A layback spin in attitude position (unpointed foot or lack of turned-out leg gets automatic -3 GOE and a 1 point deduction)
A Biellmann spin
A flying spin with required donut position
A spiral sequence, fan spiral mandatory
A footwork sequence
That way, the Axel requirement is removed! Just as Melon wanted.
I don't know how judges differentiate Choreograph and Interpretation. They to me sound like one and the same in reality even if they can be separated in theory. P/E are already evaluated in GOE. Skating Skills are presented in step sequences. I would have two categories in PCS: Interpretation and Transitions. They overlap each other somewhat, but at least some quantification is possible with transitions. That leaves only one really subjective category (Interpretation).I♥Yuna;888602 said:1.) What do you think about the idea of "Choreography/Composition" as a single component vs. separating them into different components? (ie, flesh vs. bones)
2.) How does your understanding of "Choreography" and "Interpretation" compare with the isu definitions? Do you sense redundancy, or do you feel they are distinct?
3.) Does your understanding of "Composition" encompass things like "Transitions, Linking Footwork, and Movement", or do you see them as two distinct ideas?
I don't know how judges differentiate Choreograph and Interpretation. They to me sound like one and the same in reality even if they can be separated in theory.
•Purpose (idea, concept, vision)
•Proportion (equal weight of parts)
•Unity (purposeful threading)
•Utilization of personal and public space
•Pattern and ice coverage
•Phrasing and form (movements and parts structured to match the
phrasing of the music)
•Originality of purpose, movement and design
•Shared responsibility of achieving purpose (Pair Skating and Ice Dancing)
P/E are already evaluated in GOE. Skating Skills are presented in step sequences.
Oh, you were serious. That could be an actual discussion - right now the ISU requires the Axel for both SP and FS, probably because its forward edge takeoff is so unique among jumps. The 2A/3A option does give a huge advantage to a skater with a 3A vs a skater with a 2A, but the 3A among women is already an unusual case. Is there any other jump that was still so rare even 25 years after being first ratified in competition?
If the Axel is removed as a required jump in the SP (unlikely but in the case that it is), then I think all 4 jumps in the SP should be required to be different, or there should be a requirement of at least one edge jump and at least one toe jump.
You're only thinking of the top echelons of Senior Ladies here. What about the lower level Junior women? You'd be seeing a lot of 2Lz-2T, 2L out of steps, 2F (instead of 2A). It'd discourage skaters from working on a 2A, and the newer ladies are struggling with their 2A as it is. (All three of the World Junior Medalists have had their problems with their shaky axel technique).
Not really because removing the Axel requirement doesn't mean skaters are limited to just triples. They can land 2A if they wanted to. My opinion was to remove only the requirement since that would increase the BV in SP (up to 4 triples vs 3), and bring more competition to the field.