Artistry under CoP

Mathman · Sep 1, 2015

LiamForeman said:
I mean, Kwiatkowski can go clean, and you're left going "So what?".

Aw, she's my fave! Gave me an autographed picture once. :love:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOR4ab6Jf-o

LiamForeman · Sep 2, 2015

Mathman said:
Aw, she's my fave! Gave me an autographed picture once.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOR4ab6Jf-o

Thank you so much for posting this! I loved this program. It showed what she could do, and I suppose when you are into your art, you believe in it, and it shows. No such thing as a 'choreographer'. It's you out there. This was wonderful.

RABID · Sep 2, 2015

Meoima said:
What is artistry in FS under CoP? I find most criteria that relate to "artistry" are vague and the PCS is not artistry as a whole. I think even SS should belong to the technical side.

I think there has been no definition of artistry even during 6.0 era. People often say "this skater has better artistry" but what is "artistry" when you don't have deep edge and great speed on ice?

In most cases, do people often see "good upper body movements" as "good artistry"? But having good posture does not mean that skater is a great skater.

I find good commentators like good critics will often feel inspired to let their language fly in describing a performance that has grabbed them. That's usually where I get a lot of insight in regards to artistry. The prose of the of the review will sound more literary as if trying to match what the commentator just experienced watching. In regards to a great performance that is less about the art and more about something else the enthusiasm is there but less so the prose.

CanadianSkaterGuy · Sep 2, 2015

Blades of Passion said:
Well, that's not necessarily what would happen, but yes it was a possibility...and it happens just as much with CoP. The usage of "the second mark" has always been problematic but, again, at least in the 6.0 system judges could directly reward an amazing performance (or at least the best performance of the competition) and absolutely place it ahead if they think it was deserved. Because of this, the skating itself usually reflected the need to give a great performance.

Now we have Patrick Chan winning 2013 Worlds because the judges don't know how to use the numbers and/or are too afraid of marking outside a corridor. It's not a flaw in the idea of CoP itself, but rather a mistake in ISU rules and the judges themselves. In the old days they would have given Chan an average of 5.6 for tech and 5.8 for presentation and Dennis Ten 5.8 on tech and a mix of 5.7/5.8 on presentation and Ten would have won. There would have been no doubt. To do the same thing in CoP requires a much better understanding of math, but the judges mostly don't understand how it works. We just see a general notion of GOE/PCS, largely dictated by reputation and momentum, and thus skaters don't focus as much on the performance itself because that's no longer what is primarily being rewarded.

I think under 6.0 there is a more clear cut way to rank who you think should have won (relative scoring), whereas under CoP it's more about marking the program that's been shown and let the totals rank the skaters accordingly (absolute scoring). Certainly there is relative marking with PCS given to top tier skaters, and judges using the PCS spread to prop up their favourites. I think at 2013 Worlds, under 6.0 with politics in play, you'd still see a lot of judges giving Chan first place ordinals even with the errors given Ten was a "newbie" (as in he had yet to become a favourite and thus get treated as such). I'd say a judge could give Chan 5.5/5.8, and Ten a 5.7/5.6 or even 5.8/5.5 -- although with fair scoring it would have been 5.4/5.8 for Chan (maybe 5.5/5.8 given he did two clean quads and 4-3 at that... but a 5.6 is too generous for so many errors), and 5.7/5.7 for Ten, with the latter coming out ahead.

CanadianSkaterGuy · Sep 2, 2015

LiamForeman said:
I think under COP that artistry is DEAD. It has seriously taken an unfortunate toll on my enjoyment of skating. How I define artistry, is probably what Uncle Dick once said. Don't just skate to the music that is there, skate to what ISN'T there. It's a thing called nuance and musicality. I mean, Kwiatkowski can go clean, and you're left going "So what?". Blech. I am not a YunaBomber by any stretch but I remember her Olympic performance. I cannot remember even one thing about Sotnikova's program or music. There isn't any artistry awarded in skating anymore. Mao Asada is a gem, and so was that other Japanese skater who missed out on the Oly's because the powers that be insisted that Miki Ando go, hell or high water. Yukari Nakano. What a disgrace she didn't have her Olympic moment. It's hard staying a fan of skating, if you have any sense of music, dance or just good taste.

I'm confused. You just said that you remember Yu Na's Olympic performance - so that means artistry does exist under CoP (which is when she had her Olympic performances). I get that Sotnikova's program wasn't as artistic, but that doesn't deny the fact that Kim and Kostner and Mao were all able to have artistically brilliant CoP programs.

And to be fair, Asada didn't go to the Olympics because of age restrictions, not artistic limitations. Nakano was lovely to watch, but her basic skating wasn't the level of her superiors - unfortunately she placed 3rd at Japan Championships leading up to the 2006 Olympics (Japan only had 2 spots, which went to Miki and Shizuka... although the real disgrace wasn't Yukari missing out but Mao).

In 2010 Nakano was arguably robbed of going to Vancouver but Ando had stronger Grand Prix results -- two GP wins and a silver at the GPF, which was actually her best Grand Prix season ever. Nakano had a strong season with a GP silver/bronze, but Ando was a way more sensible choice to send to the 2010 Olympics (as we know, Nationals isn't the only criteria JSF uses to determine who goes to Worlds/Olympics).

Mathman · Sep 2, 2015

CanadianSkaterGuy said:
I think under 6.0 there is a more clear cut way to rank who you think should have won (relative scoring), whereas under CoP it's more about marking the program that's been shown and let the totals rank the skaters accordingly (absolute scoring). Certainly there is relative marking with PCS given to top tier skaters, and judges using the PCS spread to prop up their favourites. I think at 2013 Worlds, under 6.0 with politics in play, you'd still see a lot of judges giving Chan first place ordinals even with the errors given Ten was a "newbie" (as in he had yet to become a favourite and thus get treated as such). I'd say a judge could give Chan 5.5/5.8, and Ten a 5.7/5.6 or even 5.8/5.5 -- although with fair scoring it would have been 5.4/5.8 for Chan (maybe 5.5/5.8 given he did two clean quads and 4-3 at that... but a 5.6 is too generous for so many errors), and 5.7/5.7 for Ten, with the latter coming out ahead.

IMHO this is way overanalyzed. Under any scoring system Chan won the short program and Ten won the long program. Under 6.0 factored placements, Ten would have won overall. Under CoP add-up-the-points, Chan won overall. Nothing to do with who was more artistic, who had the bigger reputation, who made the most mistakes, or anything else. (Just my opinion, of course.)

Mathman · Sep 2, 2015

CanadianSkaterGuy said:
I'm confused. You just said that you remember Yu Na's Olympic performance - so that means artistry does exist under CoP (which is when she had her Olympic performances). I get that Sotnikova's program wasn't as artistic, but that doesn't deny the fact that Kim and Kostner and Mao were all able to have artistically brilliant CoP programs…

Still, I think that there has been an undeniable sea change in the construction of figure skating programs.

I think that today's skaters and their coaching and choreographing team begin by figuring out how to maximize point totals on the element side. This of course takes into account the technical strengths and weaknesses of the performer, but also the minutia of rules tweaking from the previous year.

After that they turn what is left of their focus to the program.

Maybe it was always like this, and I am remembering the past through rose-colored glasses. But the sad fact of human nature is that we will do anything for points. If you want someone to do something, offer that person ten points. If he or she balks, offer twenty. :yes:

CanadianSkaterGuy · Sep 2, 2015

Mathman said:
IMHO this is way overanalyzed. Under any scoring system Chan won the short program and Ten won the long program. Under 6.0 factored placements, Ten would have won overall. Under CoP add-up-the-points, Chan won overall. Nothing to do with who was more artistic, who had the bigger reputation, who made the most mistakes, or anything else. (Just my opinion, of course.)

My point was that under 6.0, the artistic mark could still be used as a means to hold down skaters who aren't as popular but who do well, and keep up skaters who do poorly. You would have to imagine though that under 6.0 you wouldn't get things like Chan winning 2013 Worlds or Hanyu being on the podium with 5 falls.

Mathman · Sep 2, 2015

CanadianSkaterGuy said:
My point was that under 6.0, the artistic mark could still be used as a means to hold down skaters who aren't as popular but who do well, and keep up skaters who do poorly. You would have to imagine though that under 6.0 you wouldn't get things like Chan winning 2013 Worlds or Hanyu being on the podium with 5 falls.

This point is kind of weird to me, because one would think that it ought to be the other way around. In 6.0 skating the judges might legitimately say, well, yeah, Hanyu fell five times, but come on, he is SO much better than anyone else that we should give him a break in the scoring anyway.

Instead, it is the Code of Points itself that gives him a break.

Anyway, on the subject of artistry, this is what I think. I believe that the ISU made a conscious effort to make figure skating more athletic and sports-like. And to make the scoring system more objective and sports-like. In this they have succeeded.

But you don't get something for nothing. What did figure skating sacrifice to become more athletic, objective, and sports-like?

CanadianSkaterGuy · Sep 2, 2015

Mathman said:
What did figure skating sacrifice to become more athletic, objective, and sports-like?

4 rotation spins, footwork sequences with a bracket or two as the only complexity, telegraphed jumps without transitional movements, the proverbial "breather" in every program.

gkelly · Sep 2, 2015

Of course the "breathers" were often artistic, in ways that didn't have much to do with skating skill and/or athleticism.

TheGrandSophy · Sep 2, 2015

I am going to posit a suggestion also that the small number of top draw choreographers being used is also a problem. If you are doing a lot of programmes for various skaters, you will obviously be spreading yourself thin when it comes to exciting musical themes, interesting moves, thoughtful ideas of ways to make transitions fit the music etc. You don't have as much time or as many ideas to expend on that skater's need for a programme that will hit the points requirement and yet be artistically powerful. Add on the fact that sometimes the choreographer ends up not being in tune with the skater or the skater's team changes the choreography to make jumps more stable... You end up with cookie-cutter programmes and perhaps one amazing programme where you can see the choreographer was really inspired each season. Now some really amazing choreographers or ones who are in a fruitful period maybe hit a few more out of the park each season, but as a general rule dilution of artistic vision leads to watered down artistry.

Mathman · Sep 2, 2015

TheGrandSophy said:
I am going to posit a suggestion also that the small number of top draw choreographers being used is also a problem. If you are doing a lot of programmes for various skaters, you will obviously be spreading yourself thin when it comes to exciting musical themes, interesting moves, thoughtful ideas of ways to make transitions fit the music etc. You don't have as much time or as many ideas to expend on that skater's need for a programme that will hit the points requirement and yet be artistically powerful. Add on the fact that sometimes the choreographer ends up not being in tune with the skater or the skater's team changes the choreography to make jumps more stable... You end up with cookie-cutter programmes and perhaps one amazing programme where you can see the choreographer was really inspired each season. Now some really amazing choreographers or ones who are in a fruitful period maybe hit a few more out of the park each season, but as a general rule dilution of artistic vision leads to watered down artistry.

That's a great point. There must be 1000 would-be choreographers out there who have at least one great idea and a few more pretty good ones, should the right skater come knocking. I know the USFSA has an annual contest for budding choreographers that always produces entertaining concepts. (IIRC last year's winning program was titled "Caffein" :laugh:

)

CanadianSkaterGuy said:
4 rotation spins, footwork sequences with a bracket or two as the only complexity, telegraphed jumps without transitional movements, the proverbial "breather" in every program.

I don't know, Guy. You seem dismissive of the interspersing of short spins, uncluttered footwork and straight-on "ta-da" jumps, but these can be elements of aesthetic pleasure and emotional satisfaction.

gkelly said:
Of course the "breathers" were often artistic, in ways that didn't have much to do with skating skill and/or athleticism.

I agree with this. To me, the fast-slow-fast format gave the program a structure like a musical composition. In fact, in music with this structure it is usually the second (slow) movement that contains the creative substance of the work, balancing the helter-skelter virtuosity of the opening fusillade and the closing dash to the goal line.

Not every program has to follow this plan, but the audience needs to catch its breath as well as the performer.

All of this can be waved away, of course, by saying, "It's a sport!" But that brings me back to the same position -- it is clear what we have gained, but there is no such thing as a free lunch.

Blades of Passion · Sep 2, 2015

CanadianSkaterGuy said:
I think at 2013 Worlds, under 6.0 with politics in play, you'd still see a lot of judges giving Chan first place ordinals even with the errors given Ten was a "newbie" (as in he had yet to become a favourite and thus get treated as such).

No. Look at 2004 Europeans where Plushenko messed up a lot (although still managed to do a Quad+Triple+Double combo, Triple Axel+Triple+Double combo, and another Triple Axel at the VERY end of the program -- quite an exciting recovery). Joubert clearly won the competition. A couple judges gave Plushenko first place ordinal still but the vast majority did not.

gkelly · Sep 2, 2015

Mathman · Sep 2, 2015

^ Wow, what a great list! :clap:

But I am still troubled. Many of these programs seem like 6.0 programs done in the CoP era. Tomas Verner's gem, for instance --

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VcSuqbRN4nY

-- the reason it is great is that Tomas paid no attention to the CoP rules, but instead did a bunch of cool cowboy stuff (like heel leads). He paid the price. The program lost, both in PCSs and overall, to Machida, Fernandez and Hanyu. Verner was 28 and had learned his skating style in the late 90s and early 2000s.

The two CoP kings are Hanyu (unrepresented on this list), but utterly dominant in terms of IJS, and Chan. Chan is represented by the uncharacteristic Elegy. The SP version is not nearly as good as the exhibition version of the year before. CoP-wise, in fact, Patrick took a small backward step when he decided to inject some "artistry" into his slam, bam, thank you ma'am footwork and blade wizardry.

Still, … :clap:

usethis2 · Sep 2, 2015

I reject the notion that artistry is something separate from athleticism in this sport. As a matter of fact, I would argue that skaters with strong technical merits and stamina can pull off complex and more artistic programs because they can actually pay attention to choreography and music while executing elements. They can also pull off difficult moves more effortlessly, which this sport values in general and adds to artistry.

Now, I do not deny that a technically weak program can nevertheless be moving and appear artistic, and those programs have been indeed dead under the IJS.

jenaj · Sep 2, 2015

RobinA said:
There is no artistry under CoP. CoP is about doing many difficult moves as quickly as possible, whether they fit the music or not. Every now and then someone manages to come up with an artful program that can pile of points but it's so rare it's not really worth waiting for anymore.

I agree with this, for the most part. A few skaters--mostly men--have been able to transcend the limits of COP. Those who come to mind: Takahashi, Jeremy Abbott when he is on, same with Adam Rippon, Jason Brown. (ETA--and some of those on gkelly's list, like Lambiel, Chan at times; would have to look at the rest.) Among the ladies, Mao at times, Akiko Suzuki, Carolina Kostner in the latter part of her career. And I don't think any of those ladies approach the artistry we saw from some of the 6.0 skaters like Kwan, Cohen, Lynn, Fleming, Chen, Baiul at times. The difference, I think, is that under 6.0 artistry, or "presentation" as it was called later, was rewarded. Under COP, it really is not.

Sam-Skwantch · Sep 2, 2015

I think artistry is far from dead and see it instead as a bit hindered. I'd give anything to see the StSeq ditch levels and have it judged like the ChSeq. Sure...some people can pack a StSeq with all sorts of steps and make it look good but I think if it were less about quantity and more about quality we'd see the levels of expressiveness increased tremendously across the board.

There are some aspects of CoP that I completely agree with though. I like the emphasis on transitions today and feel that CoP has it right in that regard. Especially directly following the elements. Excessive crossovers and full rink set ups for jumps would be graded negatively on my score sheet. And there really is something to be said of landing a jump and seamlessly weaving it directly back into the Choreography. I'm sure it was always rewarded under 6.0 but now it's actually spelled out for skaters and visible in their scores.

sses1 · Sep 2, 2015

Honestly, I blame the skaters/coaches/choreographers as much COP. Yes, the requirements are much more difficult than they were a decade ago and ugly movements get awarded by the judges just as often, but at the same time it doesn't mean you just forget how to skate, organize a program and interpret movement to music even if it's more challenging for you (but it really shouldn't be because skaters are raised in the system). Everyone's job is harder but I wished more people genuinely cared about producing quality work that doesn't just check off boxes. And no, I don't particularly miss things like the preverbal breather,telegraphing jumps and simple spins. The only disciple that's really suffered from COP in terms of artistry is pairs.

Artistry under CoP

Mathman

LiamForeman

William/Uilyam

RABID

CanadianSkaterGuy

CanadianSkaterGuy

Mathman

Mathman

CanadianSkaterGuy

Mathman

CanadianSkaterGuy

gkelly

TheGrandSophy

Mathman

Blades of Passion

Skating is Art, if you let it be

gkelly

Mathman

usethis2

jenaj

Sam-Skwantch

“I solemnly swear I’m up to no good”

sses1

Similar threads

Connect with us