ISU Communication 1861: Updated Rules for Singles and Pairs Skating

DDepardieu · Apr 28, 2014

I understand the flutz and lip regulations. But not counting elements that doesn't satisfy the SP requirements?! That is CRAZY. If this comes into action, even quad-single or triple-single would get zero mark. Then who would risk a quad-triple? Fewer and fewer skater would attempt the 3-3, because if you screw up one jump than you can just say goodbye to your podium. I'm really smelling regression.

CarneAsada · Apr 28, 2014

DDepardieu said:
I understand the flutz and lip regulations. But not counting elements that doesn't satisfy the SP requirements?! That is CRAZY. If this comes into action, even quad-single or triple-single would get zero mark. Then who would risk a quad-triple? Fewer and fewer skater would attempt the 3-3, because if you screw up one jump than you can just say goodbye to your podium. I'm really smelling regression.

That's something else I don't get. There's still the mandatory -3 GOE listed for "SP: One or more rev. less than required" yet now they also say in the SP jumps that have the wrong number of revolutions have no value? What's going on here? Another thing that I see is "jumps with less than 1.5 revs in the SP/FP will have no value" - so popped jumps or doubles that are << are also worthless now?

DDepardieu · Apr 28, 2014

CarneAsada said:
That's something else I don't get. There's still the mandatory -3 GOE listed for "SP: One or more rev. less than required" yet now they also say in the SP jumps that have the wrong number of revolutions have no value? What's going on here? Another thing that I see is "jumps with less than 1.5 revs in the SP/FP will have no value" - so popped jumps or doubles that are << are also worthless now?

I guess that's what's gonna happen. Oh boy is this really a certain thing.

urara · Apr 28, 2014

Mao can replace 3Lz with 2A, so I think this is not that big problem for her. She has still got five kinds of triples.

BTW, what will happen to combo like 3Lz-1lo-3S if jumps with less than 1.5 revs will have no value?

DDepardieu · Apr 28, 2014

urara said:
Mao can replace 3Lz with 2A, so I think this is not that big problem for her. She has still got five kinds of triples.

BTW, what will happen to combo like 3Lz-1lo-3S if jumps with less than 1.5 revs will have no value?

I guess the 1Lo would get nothing. But then are those 3lz and 3s going to be treated as single elements?

NMURA · Apr 28, 2014

They specify jumps of "wrong number of revs" will have no value. So for example the BV of a 3Lz-1T is dropped from 6.4 to 6.0 (treated as a 3Lz+combo). It still counts for something.

Brenda · Apr 28, 2014

DDepardieu said:
I understand the flutz and lip regulations. But not counting elements that doesn't satisfy the SP requirements?! That is CRAZY. If this comes into action, even quad-single or triple-single would get zero mark. Then who would risk a quad-triple? Fewer and fewer skater would attempt the 3-3, because if you screw up one jump than you can just say goodbye to your podium. I'm really smelling regression.

"In Short Program jumps which do not satisfy the requirements (wrong number of revolutions) will have no value; if a combination of two double jumps is not allowed (senior men and ladies, junior men), jump with a lesser value will not be counted."

Hmmm, because they used the example of a double-double rather than a triple-something or a quad-something, it's not completely clear whether "jump with a lesser value" refers to the double in relation to the intended triple, or the two doubles in relation to each other. My interpretation of the wording is that it refers to the latter. So it seems to be saying that in a double-double combination, the skater would only get credit for the higher-value double because quad-double and triple-double combinations are allowed. So if I'm interpreting the rule correctly, a quad-single and a triple-single would still get credit as a quad or a triple, just there would be no points for the single.

This is really confusing because in the case of the Zayak rule, if a jump cannot count for whatever reason, the entire jumping pass is lost and counts as 0, even if it's in combination with jumps that otherwise would have counted. But now in the new SP rule, you can still get credit for the half of the combo that does satisfy the rules?

Meoima · Apr 28, 2014

I suppose this rules prevent the veteran from going for another season, huh? At this rate, Mao, Caro, Dai...will likely to retire right away.

Sandpiper · Apr 28, 2014

Argh, this is so confusing. I really hope it doesn't mean quad-single would get zero points. That's too stupid to be true... right? Combos are ill-rewarded enough as is.

I hope it means that you get credit for the first half of the jumping pass. Even if that lowers the value of a quad-single, I think Zayaking shouldn't kill your podium chances immediately. Just repeating what I said on the Oda thread at this point, but...

Also:

How this shakes out is going to depend on the tech panel. How often is (e) vs (!) going to be used? My biggest fear is that the favorited skater's with either remain uncalled as they are now or just receive the (!) with minimal GOE deductions, also like now, whereas the unfavored will get absolutely destroyed by the tech panel with (e) calls.

I'm really worried about this too. With such a big difference in points (but fuzzy difference in action, as the debate on Adelina shows) between ! and e, it'll be a very easy method to hold someone up and punish someone else.

DDepardieu · Apr 28, 2014

Brenda said:
"In Short Program jumps which do not satisfy the requirements (wrong number of revolutions) will have no value; if a combination of two double jumps is not allowed (senior men and ladies, junior men), jump with a lesser value will not be counted."

Hmmm, because they used the example of a double-double rather than a triple-something or a quad-something, it's not completely clear whether "jump with a lesser value" refers to the double in relation to the intended triple, or the two doubles in relation to each other. My interpretation of the wording is that it refers to the latter. So it seems to be saying that in a double-double combination, the skater would only get credit for the higher-value double because quad-double and triple-double combinations are allowed. So if I'm interpreting the rule correctly, a quad-single and a triple-single would still get credit as a quad or a triple, just there would be no points for the single.

This is really confusing because in the case of the Zayak rule, if a jump cannot count for whatever reason, the entire jumping pass is lost and counts as 0, even if it's in combination with jumps that otherwise would have counted. But now in the new SP rule, you can still get credit for the half of the combo that does satisfy the rules?

Thank you for the input! I really hope you're right. god these rules are so confusing. is there any way we can make an enquiry directly to the ISU?

urara · Apr 28, 2014

DDepardieu said:
I guess the 1Lo would get nothing. But then are those 3lz and 3s going to be treated as single elements?

It's confusing, isn't it?
I thought this combo would be a new trend in both men and ladies.

Meoima · Apr 28, 2014

Sandpiper said:
I'm really worried about this too. With such a big difference in points (but fuzzy difference in action, as the debate on Adelina shows) between ! and e, it'll be a very easy method to hold someone up and punish someone else.

Yeah, personally I think they should start over with the PCS inflation, but it seems at this rate they will just throw out any PCS points they want. Now it's turn for the TES to get confusing.

DDepardieu · Apr 28, 2014

At this point, I'm scared of what would happen in June. NO MORE CONFUSION PLEASE. it's a hard knock life being a FS fan as it is. Geez can't believe I'm analyzing charts and numbers years after school.

Sandpiper · Apr 28, 2014

At this point, I'm not sure even the judges understand the rules. I guess the skaters can only get an early start to the next season, test out their programs, and watch where the marks fall.

gkelly · Apr 28, 2014

It looks like most of the changes will affect the technical panels -- and the way skaters and coaches plan their programs to earn the best possible TES.

It doesn't look as though there are many changes that affect what the judges do. A few changes to awarding GOEs. Also the new deduction for too many dance lifts in pair programs.

CanadianSkaterGuy · Apr 28, 2014

This stuff is really confusing.

The problem with these rules is that a lot of the marking is left to the discretion of the judges:
- whether an edge call is "e" or "!"
- whether a position is "aesthetic"
- whether a flying jump or whether a spin entrance is "difficult" enough to get a level
- So, what constitutes "difficult entrance" into a spin? Backwards entry is no longer considered that.

While I agree with edge calls getting deductions, a triple flutz is much harder to execute than a triple salchow. Thank god at least "intent" is considered.

These 50% and 70% deductions seem to be an attempt to get skaters to really clean up their technique instead of just do a flutz and take the minor hit in GOE. But to remove 30% of a jump's BV just because of a slight wrong edge versus a severe wrong edge is giving too much power to the tech specialist.

I feel especially bad for the guy who has to ring up the progressive score in the top left.

gkelly · Apr 28, 2014

CanadianSkaterGuy said:
This stuff is really confusing.

The problem with these rules is that a lot of the marking is left to the discretion of the judges:
- whether an edge call is "e" or "!"
- whether a position is "aesthetic"
- whether a flying jump or whether a spin entrance is "difficult" enough to get a level
- So, what constitutes "difficult entrance" into a spin? Backwards entry is no longer considered that.

Most of these are left to the discretion of the TECHNICAL PANEL.

Judges have no say in whether the call is e or !, so they will have less discretion than in 2013-14.

Judges have no say in any of the level calls, including whether a spin entrance, flying or otherwise, is "difficult."
Technical panels determine all the features to call the levels. Judges never even know which level was called (unless they read the published protocols after the fact).

The aesthetic quality of the spin positions has always been part of GOE judging, and now it will be more important highlighted for a few kinds of attempts at spin features. So yes, that is one of very few places where judges will have more responsibility.

While I agree with edge calls getting deductions, a triple flutz is much harder to execute than a triple salchow. Thank god at least "intent" is considered.

These 50% and 70% deductions seem to be an attempt to get skaters to really clean up their technique instead of just do a flutz and take the minor hit in GOE. But to remove 30% of a jump's BV just because of a slight wrong edge versus a severe wrong edge is giving too much power to the tech specialist.

Yes, and yes. This will give power to technical panels to have a significant effect on how many points skaters can earn for these jumps. It will be important for all technical specialists and controllers to work with similar understandings of what constitutes "severe" wrong edge and to apply that understanding consistently to all skaters.

I feel especially bad for the guy who has to ring up the progressive score in the top left.

Doesn't it just happen automatically when data from the scoring computer is received by a program that calculates the running totals?

YesWay · Apr 28, 2014

gkelly said:
This will give power to technical panels to have a significant effect on how many points skaters can earn for these jumps.

I find this worrying. If somebody wants to cheat... the technical panel is surely the easiest target? They have the power to remove or award huge swathes of points, before the judges even get a look in. And it might only need a single member of the tech panel, to rig a competition.

Increasing the tech panel's power and influence on scoring... when they are so few... sounds bad...

Meoima · Apr 28, 2014

YesWay said:
I find this worrying. If somebody wants to cheat... the technical panel is surely the easiest target? They have the power to remove or award huge swathes of points, before the judges even get a look in. And it might only need a single member of the tech panel, to rig a competition.
Increasing the tech panel's power and influence on scoring... when they are so few... sounds bad...

The judges only look at the tech panel's decision? Can they question back if they see some unreasonable calls?

Sandpiper · Apr 28, 2014

Well, I predict this will only make figure skating more confusing for casual fans, as favoured skaters with falls constantly win over unfavoured skaters who have jump errors but stay on their feet.

ISU Communication 1861: Updated Rules for Singles and Pairs Skating

DDepardieu

CarneAsada

DDepardieu

urara

DDepardieu

NMURA

Brenda

Meoima

Match Penalty

Sandpiper

DDepardieu

urara

Meoima

Match Penalty

DDepardieu

Sandpiper

gkelly

CanadianSkaterGuy

gkelly

YesWay

四年もかけて&#

Meoima

Match Penalty

Sandpiper

Similar threads

Connect with us

ISU Communication 1861: Updated Rules for Singles and Pairs Skating

Match Penalty

Match Penalty

&#22235;&#24180;&#12418;&#12363;&#12369;&#12390;&#

Match Penalty

Similar threads

四年もかけて&#