But evenly distributed jumps is not a choreo concept either. Most pieces of music don't have a climax exactly every 30 seconds or so...sometimes I see evenly placed jumps having no connection to the music whatsoever, jumping whether the music is soft or strong. And people do evenly distributed jumps for TES reasons as well--it's too risky to backload all the jumps but they still want to get the bonus benefit on some jumps. No one with evenly distributed jumps ever puts their most difficult jumping pass at the very end. They always do it either 1) at the beginning, or 2) right after the halfway mark. They are also doing it for TES reasons.
New IJS System Improvements
- Thread starter bobbob
- Start date
But evenly distributed jumps is not a choreo concept either. Most pieces of music don't have a climax exactly every 30 seconds or so...sometimes I see evenly placed jumps having no connection to the music whatsoever, jumping whether the music is soft or strong. And people do evenly distributed jumps for TES reasons as well--it's too risky to backload all the jumps but they still want to get the bonus benefit on some jumps. No one with evenly distributed jumps ever puts their most difficult jumping pass at the very end. They always do it either 1) at the beginning, or 2) right after the halfway mark. They are also doing it for TES reasons.
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2015
Well I disagree with that. Some of the choreography requirements are unity and proportions. Programs with all jumps in one half of the performance are disjointed and create two completely opposite moods/impressions. They do not blend artistry and athleticism either, as the sport originally promises but display one after another in completely separate and impervious fashion with one half supposedly artistic (but usually lacking and insipid) and one half that is a jump drill.
Shoma does his two quads toes and his two triple-triple combos as the last jumping passes with the building music. I guess those are not his most difficult jumping passes but they are most significant in terms of points.
I think what you are talking about with the jumps placements on music and to enhance interpretation etc. would improve if the composition scores reflected that more, but they don't imo. They also supposedly affect the GOEs on the jumps.
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2013
A much bigger problem than backloading(It's not even a problem...) is when a piece of music starts off really slow with very quiet, peaceful music and a skater plants a quad at that spot. I don't get why all the complaints about backloading when something like this is far more offensive when it comes to musical interpretation.
Height matters because this is a sport.
Also this is a sport that really needs more people watching and tiny, barely rotated jumps are not exciting to watch.
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2014
Well, of course that FS programme is a choreographed thing. My point was that marks are not reflecting choreographer intentions and ideas but only skaters intentions and translation of it on the ice and with skates. Presenting it the way you did 1) it may seems that choreography itself suppose to be judged as a thing existing in its own different universe and not like something dependable only of skaters skating in some exact competition 2) by the same logic you can call SS also as choreographed skills. Cause the thing is - judges judge your SS only by seeing one exact programme. Even if Caro and Patrick have the best SS in the field their SS mark will be dependable only of how they present it in a 3 minutes on a competition day. The same case is with other marks, there is no such a difference between them.
Front and backloading are not a thing which is reflecting in marks per se (proportion and unity were never connected with placing of elements in time, only on ice - ISU provided explanation of that years before in their videos), its only matters which elements, skating abilities and performance abilities skaters can show in those kinds of programmes. That of course can change, but in my opinion only if FS competitions become boring to watch as a product of that one thing.
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2013
Judging by the Olympics, the majority of people actually don't care for the jumps very much. The biggest favorites were the ones who had the best artistic ability and connection to the audience.
To me, a jump's height is very unimportant in the grand scheme of things. If it's high enough to be rotated fully with proper technique, I really don't care a whole lot about how tiny it is.
There are a lot of rumors going around about the changes next season which seem to address the major issues this quad but one thing really bothers me. They are considering arm movements with crossovers as transitions. Like WTH?? So I guess will see tons of flapping and shoulder shimmy-shimmmy with less footworks but plenty of crossovers and two-foot skating. How is this even progressive??
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2015
Height and distance are criteria for good quality jumps. It's like everything, why care about projection then? why care about ice coverage or speed in general? Speed, height are what fills an arena and gives the most impression live, it is more difficult to do and more risky to do so it should be rewarded more. It is obviously more impactful and for people who keep whining that skating is a sport when others point out that PCS are not accurately judged, it is more physically demanding and closer to what other sports reward in terms of performance. When people see massive jumps, the obvious reaction is that they are just better than tiny jumps so they should be rewarded as such.
I don't think people don't care for the jumps, they don't want the artistry and the rest of the performance to be overlooked only to focus on jumps.
Baron Vladimir : yeah of course when i say choreography i don't say the concept of it but the skater's performance of it at the day of the competition.
- - - Updated - - -
Arms movements are already transitions. Whole body movements are transitions.
what they are implying is that putting more weight on arm movements and crossovers but decreasing actual footwork
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2014
^^^
Well, maybe if we can see where you read that... but like daphenaxa said body movements are already part of transitions. You dont need to have busy footwork like Zagitova to connect your elements (in that literal way) and get big TR scores. For example Caro had it because even without busy footwork her skating of the programme looks as a coherent one - there is no empty spaces, in every moment something is happening etc which is the point of transitions...
I remember someone said how TAT was talking about possibility of changing some rules and she called them 'Medvedevas rules'
. They are about 1) no such a bonus for backloading jumps 2) bonuses for different combos including 3-3-3 combos too
Well, maybe if we can see where you read that... but like daphenaxa said body movements are already part of transitions. You dont need to have busy footwork like Zagitova to connect your elements (in that literal way) and get big TR scores. For example Caro had it because even without busy footwork her skating of the programme looks as a coherent one - there is no empty spaces, in every moment something is happening etc which is the point of transitions...
I remember someone said how TAT was talking about possibility of changing some rules and she called them 'Medvedevas rules'
. They are about 1) no such a bonus for backloading jumps 2) bonuses for different combos including 3-3-3 combos too
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2017
The source was a bit confusing at times but what it seemed to me was that this info came from a training seminar for potential ISU judges and some common practices were being explained to the trainees, which included a mention that transitions involved more than footwork, including also full body movement (the reason why someone like Carolina Kostner can keep up with TR scores of the Russian ladies) as well as encouraging judges to watch practices. Regardless of whether these are good things or not, depending on who you ask, I don't think they're actual written rules or being given more weight in the future than what happens already, except maybe watching practices will be more encouraged.
The newer info from the source was about the -5/+5 GOE system, the penalties on falls and stepouts on jumps, PCS counting 'spreadability' in a program, 'ugly' tanos maybe getting a deduction, a possible 10% BV reduction on quads and the discussion on second half bonus.
Proportion is defined as each section having equal weight toward the aesthetic, and unity is defined as movements according to the music and having an underlying theme/meaning, not that jumps have to be spaced equally. What you're proposing would lead to all programs having the same layout (half the jumping passes, sequence, half the jumping passes, another sequence) regardless of the music or story. That wouldn't be interesting to watch or allow sufficient freedom for artistic expression IMO.
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2015
Yes and how are each section participating equal weight towards the aesthetic when the sections are so disproportionate? They don't participate equal weight to the performance that's the problem. If backloaded programs were accurately penalized for the lack of proportions and for the unability to express the music and the theme, there wouldn't be need to actually require a number of jumps in the 1st half, but it is not happening so then that's just what you need to do.
I don't think requiring that for example 2 jumping passes must be in the 1st half kills all creativity and makes the programs all the same. It actually still leaves a lot of liberty to put more in the 1st half or on the contrary to still backload 6 jumping passes which is still a lot. And if for some reason you want a concept with all your spins and footwork before the halfway point, i'm sure you can still do it and have the two jumps back to back just before the 2mins.
I just find it insincere to defend the backloading of all the jumps in the name of artistic freedom when none of the skaters doing it are doing it for artistic reasons and when the defense of those skaters have been "but they are just using the system, they are playing the game".
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2013
Even if that's the initial reason, that doesn't mean that the programs aren't choreographed to work with the backloading.
The backloading is what enables such programs even artistically. I can guarantee that if the bonus points were removed, no one would do programs such as those because it just wouldn't be worthwhile. One artistic possibility would be lost.
It depends what the aesthetic intention is. If the intention is to start calm and build in intensity, then all parts building up to and then exploding into the jumps would participate in telling the story.
My favorite backloaded program, conceived as a day in the life of an ocean wave:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZggZUftn0s
It would have been even better if he'd been able to save the triple axels for the end as well instead of needing to telegraph them at the beginning before the choreography really started.
A piece of music like Ravel's Bolero could also benefit by building up to the jumps rather than getting them out of the way during the less intense part of the music.
Again, some themes and some musical structures are more accurately expressed by backloading.
There are many ways in which a program can be structured in an unbalanced way apart from the timing of the jumps.
For example, I generally find two of three spins in a program right next to each other with only a few simple steps between them to be an unsatisfactory placement of elements. And yet the majority of ladies' freeskates at this year's Olympics did just that -- Zagitova was one of the few who spread her spins more evenly throughout the program.
Excellent jumps and perfunctory spins and steps would show a lack of balance. Excellent spins and overly simple or unsuccessful jumping shows a lack of balance. A program with no difficult steps and/or no full-body movements outside the step sequence/choreo sequence shows a lack of balance. A freeskate with no loops or salchows shows a lack of balance. A freeskate with no lutzes or flips shows a lack of balance. A program with all toe jumps at the ends of the ice and all edge jumps just outside the blue lines and all spins in the middle shows a lack of balance. A program with almost all jumps or all spins at the same end of the ice would show a lack of balance. A program with a circular step sequence and a circular spiral sequence at the same end of the ice would show a lack of balance. A program with almost elements in the middle of the ice that only rarely approaches the ends, or the rarely approaches the long boards, would show a lack of balance. A program in which all the elements are choreographed to face away from the judges would be unbalanced. A program in which all the elements are choreographed to face toward the judges would be unbalanced, but judges and fans watching on TV would be less likely to notice (and fans seated on the opposite side of the ice would notice and be annoyed).
But if a skater and choreographer have a good choreographic reason for choosing one of those unbalanced setups and make it work for the theme or story they want to convey, more power to them. No need for mandatory penalties. If a skater is only capable of maximizing her own points by executing one of those unbalanced setups but the program is well choreographed within her limitations, reward what she does well and not what she fails to do well or at all.
Four or five spins with some of them just holding a single position, and five or six jumping passes that include all takeoffs seems to me more balanced than three and eight, but that's what the "well-balanced program" rules currently mandate. I'd rather see a minimum and maximum for each type of element than just maximums for each, which are de facto minimums as well for anyone who wants to be competitive.
It's impossible and IMO undesirable to try to legislate what the ideal program layout should be and build in deductions to penalize deviations from your preconceptions. One size does not fit all. It's better to let judges each evaluate what each skater puts out on the ice, according to their own judgment, with guidelines to give them tools to evaluate how effective each layout actually is in performance.
"Spreading the jumps across the duration of the program is generally preferred to clumping them all together into one or two jumping sections" might be one such guideline. But it would not be the only guideline.
I think the reason there's so much talk about backloaded jumps as opposed to all the other kinds of unbalance lately is because there is a built-in reward for later jumps. But even if you took away the bonus entirely and articulated the guideline as "Spreading out jumps is better than clumping, and getting all or most of the jumps over with early often leads to anticlimactic program structure," backloading would still be an option but only rewarded in PCS and only if judges found the choreography effective.
Or maybe some judges would unofficially, maybe unconsciously, become more lenient with their GOEs for jumps later in the program.
All skaters are trying to maximize their element scores, balancing difficulty and likely success/GOE, and also balancing the technical content with the choreographic purpose and overall performance qualities, within the requirements and with the rewards available. The second half bonus is one such reward, which some skaters are better able to take advantage of than others.
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2009
ISU needs the judging to become professional
otherwise some of them will always find a way to manipulate the system
otherwise some of them will always find a way to manipulate the system
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2013
- Country
-
Sometimes I wonder if the ISU could adopt a system where recently retired skaters could tour with the GP as regular judges. It might cost a bit of extra money but it could attract attention. It would be an interesting way to keep them involved with the sport and a good PR team could probably sell tickets to post event talks where they could discuss the scoring and give fans and media a chance to interact with the former skaters.
FWIW: I don’t think the system needs fixed and a bit of a fun spirited touch to it would be welcomed.
FWIW: I don’t think the system needs fixed and a bit of a fun spirited touch to it would be welcomed.
Why not sell tickets to post-event talks with experienced judges and technical specialists rather than recently retired skating stars who are first learning themselves to analyze with unbiased eyes?
Some of the tech specialists might be well known former competitors. But they would be chosen for their ability to explain the scoring more than for their recent skating fame.
Selling tickets to meet-and-greet with current or recent stars would have a different purpose and likely attract different (albeit larger) groups of ticket buyers than selling tickets to a scoring explanation. Both could be possible, especially at big events like Worlds.
Some of the tech specialists might be well known former competitors. But they would be chosen for their ability to explain the scoring more than for their recent skating fame.
Selling tickets to meet-and-greet with current or recent stars would have a different purpose and likely attract different (albeit larger) groups of ticket buyers than selling tickets to a scoring explanation. Both could be possible, especially at big events like Worlds.
Similar threads
