Spins, spirals and the CoP

[Mathman]

After two years now of observing the New Judging System, I have come to think that the most important change from ordinal judging is this: spins and spirals are now counted as part of the technical side of the sport, whereas before they mostly contributed to the presentation side of the equation.

Under the 6.0 system, the only thing that really mattered in the technical score was the jumps. Every ladies' program was the same: you went 3Lz, 3F, 3Lo, 3S, 3T, 2A, and did a combo, maybe 3Lz/2T or 3F/2Lo or even a 3/3 if you were really feeling your oats. Most of these jumps were in the first half of the program before you got too tired. If you completed the revolutions, stayed on your feet, didn't touch a hand down, didn't two-foot or fall out of the landing, you got a good score on the first mark.

Then you were free to go to work on the second mark. If you could do a spiral like Nicole Bobek, or a layback like Angela Nikodinov, or an Ina Bower like Shizuka Arakawa, this gave you extra points on the artistic side of the score. These were the elements that set your program apart from your competitors'.

Now, spins, spirals, and footwork have joined the jump elements in terms of how they are scored. To get high marks you have to revolve x number of times with y changes of position and z changes of edges. So now all of the ladies' programs not only have identical jumps, they have pretty much identical spins and step sequences as well. The only thing left on the program component side are connecting elements (which most skaters blow off entirely) and such vaguely defined concepts as musicality and relating to the audience.

Is the sport better or worse for this sea change?

Mathman

 

[soogar]

I think it's better b/c it's forcing skaters to be all around skaters. It's almost like figures are coming back b/c to get the credit on the footwork, the skaters need to exaggerate and maintain the edges and not let up (and this was told to me by an ice dancer who competes under COP at the National level). I'm not crazy about the repetitive lifts for dance and spins for ladies, but that's just laziness on the choreographers' part. If you look at the rules, there is a lot of room for variation, but that takes a lot of time.

 

[nymkfan51]

MM, I don't disagree with the concept of COP, but I don't care for the results thus far. To me, more programs look the same now than they did with the 6.0 system.
It gets rather boring watching the same moves over and over and over again. As you said, it used to be just the jumps ... now you have to add spins, spirals and FW ... and what you end up with IMO, is another technical program ... just a bit longer than the short.
I believe we will not see the amazing programs we have seen in the past ... it will basically become just a skills contest set to music.
This may end up making some folks like it more, if you take out the presentation side of it. I'm sure the argument would be it is more like a sport this way. That may work, who knows.
I am just happy personally, that I got to see my favorite skater under the old sytstem, and have so many beautiful programs on tape to enjoy in the years to come. I am betting there won't be many in the future that I choose to keep on tape.

 

[Rgirl]

Great observation and comments, MM. Personally, I have mixed feelings about your question. In both International and National competition, dang if every lady's spiral sequence wasn't almost exactly the same, with variation coming only in the way in which the positions were executed. But I'm not sure that's a bad thing. For example, you could see that Alissa Czisny's amplitude was has high as Sasha's, but that Czisny's edges were much deeper. OTOH, and I think this is a matter of opinion, I thought Sasha's spirals were a bit more polished throughout the use of her entire body. Right now, I'm leaning towards, "I hope the skaters break out of this 'Everybody do basically the same spiral sequence' situation." However, the way things are now are not without their advantages.

There's a little more variation in spinning, especially among the men, but my guess would be this is because there's a greater range of flexibility among men, hence making some spin positions impossible for many top male skaters. I think everybody doing similar spins has advantages for comparison only given the fact most of the ladies use the Biellmann or some sort of catch-foot spin. So we see poor, medium, good, and great Biellmann's. Why not just make the Biellmann a requirement like so many jumps in the SP? I'm only half kidding.

The thing I think we lose with the spiral and spin sequences being so similar, mostly for the ladies since the men don't have to do a spiral in their SP and aren't expected to in their LP, though I love it when a man does one well, eg, Paul Wyie, is the variation in choreography. Spirals and spins used to be not only an element, whether it was counted as presentational or technical, but they also used to be part of the choreography.

I know I always bring this up, but it's because I thought it was so striking. One year Vanessa Gusmeroli of France had all her spins in sequence at the end of her LP "Legends of the Fall." I found it not only unusual and beautiful, but evocative of autumn and the leaves spinning to the ground as they fell. I guess Vanessa had more fun as a water skier (just kidding; I don't know) because she stopped skating in the late '90s(?) I think. But what makes me wistful is that with the COP, we'll probably never see a skater take that kind of chance again. I don't mean "do all the spins in a row," but something "outside the box," something that both surprises and thrills you.

OTOH, the sameness of the spins and spirals could just be a phase the skaters are going through. Irina, for example, is just using the Biellmann position for her spirals and because of her speed and edging, is getting huge scores for them. Yet I miss the variations Irina used to have in her spirals, which, because she lacked amplitude, she had to find other ways to make her spirals stand out. I LOVED many of the spirals she did. She would accelerate at times you would think were impossible! Even if Irina were not retiring this season, I don't think we'd ever see any other spiral from her besides the Biellman and, at least theoretically, I find that a loss. Who knows what exciting spins and spirals we're missing because so many skaters and their coaches and choreographers are thinking "points, points, points."

In my "Boy, Was I Ever Wrong!" thread, I said how I thought the COP would inspire greater creativity among the skaters because each skater would focus on his/her strengths in order to get points. At USN '06, the only skaters I saw that happen with were Stephanie Rosenthal and Matt Savoie. I don't know about Matt, maybe I just love his style, but I don't think I'm the only one who found Stephanie's programs particularly memorable.

So to answer you question Mathman: Ask me again in about three years. I'm not just being facetious. Just as at least some of us (okay, ONE of us, me, lol) didn't get that the COP would make the programs similar and repetitious, I just don't know what the next few years of competition is going to do to the programs, especially with the ladies, with whom there seems to be a substantial changing of the guard.

Also, we don't know what changes will be made to the COP. I seriously wonder now if the ISU will limit the number of catchfoot positions a skater can use. Six months ago I would have said, "Why?" Now I'm with Dick Button.

Don't mean to hedge your question. My honest answer is that I have mixed feelings. But keep asking!

Rgirl

 

[Andy]

I agree with MM. The skating has gotten more boring under COP. I too hope this will change over time, but I doubt it. There are only so many level 4 moves and everyone will do them to attain the most points. I miss the pure spins before COP. A lot of the spins now are ugly in my opinion. The constant change of edge and position takes away from a beautiful program. I am not a big fan of the Biellmann, but I am sure it will be in every program now.

I am afraid that if us real skating fans start to think the skating is more boring, then what will everyone else think. I hate to see skating lose any more fans. I took my first trip to Nationals this year and was disappointed to see how empty the stands were for most of the events. Even so, I had a great time!!

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

I remember a well know anti Kwan poster no longer on GS would insist that MK's change edge spiral was not difficult. She has since changed her tune.

But I think everyone thinks the Bielman spiral should not be done more than once and I would like it banned or at least marked down if more than one shows up. It is UGLY.

Joe

 

[Doggygirl]

Great question Mathman. There is a part of me that misses some of the "simple elegance" - you gave great examples of that.

On the other hand, I have certainly developed a much deeper appreciation for the sheer difficulty of the spins and spirals that attain high levels, and are done well. Watching the ones that are not done so well helps me appreciate the well done ones even more. As one example, I never gave a thought to changes of edges in spins. And of course we see plenty of bad examples of that these days - where the spin slows to a crawl. BUT...now I am more aware of watching for edge changes, and when I see one done while speed and centering is maintained, I enjoy that more than I ever would have before.

I'm also interested in watching these moves evolve over future years. The senior skaters in the top tier today didn't necessarily have a lot of motivation to work hard on these elements until recently. The younger skaters who are in the process of "growing up with COP" might bring us a whole new picture in future years. Of course that's just my wish and my optimism showing.

DG

 

[Doggygirl]

I remember a well know anti Kwan poster no longer on GS would insist that MK's change edge spiral was not difficult. She has since changed her tune.
Joe

:scratch: I have no idea who you are talking about, so I don't understand the relevance of this reference to a former poster??

DG

 

[hockeyfan228]

I think that because of a combination of Bobek, Kwan, and Cohen and seeing only 4-5 programs broadcasts on US TV has spoiled us into thinking that there was great variety in spins and spirals under 6.0. There actually wasn't, but to notice this took watching 30+ competitors on Eurosport or attending quali rounds at Worlds and Euros.

90% of the spirals before CoP were a combination of: forward spiral, back spiral, grab the foot (for about 1.5 seconds). Most were perfunctory, with flat back positions and flat edges. It wasn't CoP that convinced many NA and Japanese and a few European skaters to add a change of edge; it was Kwan. (Her CoE spiral is still the centerpiece of the film montages the ISU shows at international events.) The only thing that differentiated Slutskaya's spiral from the other Ladies at 2003 Euros was speed, but her posture, line, and extension was mediocre at best; she didn't have the back strength. Other Ladies had equal edges and better form, but speed trumped all. It wasn't even Slutskaya, though, who started the Biellman/open Biellman spiral trend: it was a feature of Arakawa's "Turandot" program. (Slutskaya always had them in her spins.)

If we look at the men pre-CoP, we saw lots of badly done sit-change-sit, and, if we were lucky, we got a nicely extended camel spin. Again, perfunctory, throw-away elements, including Yagudin's spins in his Olympic winning long program. Compare Joubert's and Lindemann's spins from 2004 to the last two seasons, and they are like night and day. They're not only more intricate, but have more speed and better form. Slutskaya has become stronger in spirals as well: she need more than the CoE Biellmann, and has a very nice transition from the side extension to a back spiral at the end of the sequence.

Watching 30+ programs you see exactly how similar they were under 6.0 and how similar they are under CoP. Skaters aim for success, whether to copy music or moves that other skaters use and have proved successful. The difference now is that the spins and spirals get credit, and a pre-defined fixed credit at that. Which means that to be an all-around skater, not a jump specialist in the hard jumps, all of the skills need to be honed. What is not happening, in my opinion, is that the simpler moves done extremely well aren't getting the GOE's they deserve. A superbly done simple element should get the same score as a mediocre mid-level element and a sub-par difficult element. (Not just my opinion -- it's encode in the Scale of Values.) I don't see this happening.

 

[Kwanford Wife]

I think that because of a combination of Bobek, Kwan, and Cohen and seeing only 4-5 programs broadcasts on US TV has spoiled us into thinking that there was great variety in spins and spirals under 6.0. There actually wasn't, but to notice this took watching 30+ competitors on Eurosport or attending quali rounds at Worlds and Euros.

90% of the spirals before CoP were a combination of: forward spiral, back spiral, grab the foot (for about 1.5 seconds). Most were perfunctory, with flat back positions and flat edges. It wasn't CoP that convinced many NA and Japanese and a few European skaters to add a change of edge; it was Kwan. (Her CoE spiral is still the centerpiece of the film montages the ISU shows at international events.) The only thing that differentiated Slutskaya's spiral from the other Ladies at 2003 Euros was speed, but her posture, line, and extension was mediocre at best; she didn't have the back strength. Other Ladies had equal edges and better form, but speed trumped all. It wasn't even Slutskaya, though, who started the Biellman/open Biellman spiral trend: it was a feature of Arakawa's "Turandot" program. (Slutskaya always had them in her spins.)

If we look at the men pre-CoP, we saw lots of badly done sit-change-sit, and, if we were lucky, we got a nicely extended camel spin. Again, perfunctory, throw-away elements, including Yagudin's spins in his Olympic winning long program. Compare Joubert's and Lindemann's spins from 2004 to the last two seasons, and they are like night and day. They're not only more intricate, but have more speed and better form. Slutskaya has become stronger in spirals as well: she need more than the CoE Biellmann, and has a very nice transition from the side extension to a back spiral at the end of the sequence.

Watching 30+ programs you see exactly how similar they were under 6.0 and how similar they are under CoP. Skaters aim for success, whether to copy music or moves that other skaters use and have proved successful. The difference now is that the spins and spirals get credit, and a pre-defined fixed credit at that. Which means that to be an all-around skater, not a jump specialist in the hard jumps, all of the skills need to be honed. What is not happening, in my opinion, is that the simpler moves done extremely well aren't getting the GOE's they deserve. A superbly done simple element should get the same score as a mediocre mid-level element and a sub-par difficult element. (Not just my opinion -- it's encode in the Scale of Values.) I don't see this happening.

Spot on!

 

[Doggygirl]

Great perspective Hockeyfan!

I always enjoy reading your posts - I find them very informative and I learn a lot from them. So many thanks for another good perspective on things.

DG

 

[Mathman]

What is not happening, in my opinion, is that the simpler moves done extremely well aren't getting the GOE's they deserve. A superbly done simple element should get the same score as a mediocre mid-level element and a sub-par difficult element. (Not just my opinion -- it's encoded in the Scale of Values.) I don't see this happening.

This is the next thing the ISU needs to work on in their judges' seminars. Quite right that the rules do spell out exactly what you need to do to get a +2 or a -1 GOE on a particular element. (Unfortunately, "looking really, really pretty while you are doing it" is not one of the criteria, LOL.)

But instead the judges seem to be so in awe of the most difficult elements that they automatically pile on the GOE, while for a simpler element they hardly ever give a score different from 0.

MM

 

[mzheng]

What is not happening, in my opinion, is that the simpler moves done extremely well aren't getting the GOE's they deserve. A superbly done simple element should get the same score as a mediocre mid-level element and a sub-par difficult element. (Not just my opinion -- it's encode in the Scale of Values.) I don't see this happening.

:agree:
It's there defined as in CoP, but not used by Judges.....I hate to see the beautyful classic Angela's layback get totally losted....even there are a few but they don't hold that classic position long enough for preciation, they are busy on change position, count 1, 2, 3,....change position, count 1, 2, 3.....change position, count 1, 2, 3, etc.

 

[Rgirl]

Hockeyfan,
Add me to the list of those who appreciate you perspective. Very well presented. I guess what strikes me about the spirals, mostly at USN '06 but also in quite a few programs internationally, is that they are the same positions, ie, arabesque change edge, Y-catch foot, leg to the front ("fan" position), and a Biellman. Perhaps what makes it seem like more "copying" is that the skaters are doing more positions, therefore it seems as if the spiral sequences have become more like each other than they did under 6.0.

Believe me, I trust your memory much more than mine. But I remember watching Joannie Rochette last year and her spiral sequence included a beautiful BOE (not sure about the edge) with her free leg directly to the side at 90 degrees while her arms were up and her upper body and arms bent somewhat to the side away from the free leg. Of course, Joannie didn't have the flexibility to do the positions I described above, except an arabesque change-edge. and perhaps one other position I can't remember. But it was so refreshing to see a different spiral sequence. But Joannie didn't get much of a score for her SstpS either and I understand from those who saw it live that her skating was quite slow.

To point out someone with the opposite physical capabilities, that is, great flexibility, Alissa Csizny has used it to do a SstpS sequence that is both different, fast, and with superb edges. She has a little problem with her leg going out to the side on her back arabesque, but that's easily fixable and it certainly doesn't seem to be hurting her scores.

I'd just like to see the skaters with exceptional flexibility try different positions and types of spirals, eg, slide spirals (Sasha made just the tiniest attempt at one at USN); the free leg to the side and the upper body and arms bent away from it, what I described with Joannie Rochette but with more speed and amplitude in both the free leg and upper body bending farther, and for everyone except Irina, Alissa, and Shizuka (don't know what Michelle is doing) increase speed and edges. But I'm getting OT in judging the spirals, but still, the commentators almost never mention it and IMO it's such an important part of a good to great SstpS. Irina didn't have the line but, man, her speed and edges are astounding (based on seeing her compete live).

But indeed you are right about spirals and spins being alike under 6.0. In fact, IIRC, spirals were just kind of a "maybe" move before Nancy Kerrigan popularized it with her catch-knee arabesque, hand over her eyes, held for a very long time--my guess would be 8 to 10 seconds. Then everybody copied that. After Nicole Bobek got a 180 degree "split" arabesque spiral, I even remember a piece about Michelle's training in which Lori Nichol made a point of saying Nicole's spiral really prompted Michelle to want more amplitude in her spirals, at which point they showed someone stretching Michelle into as much amplitude as possible in her arabesque. After Michelle did the change-edge spiral, that became "all the rage." And since Sasha started doing the "fan" spiral, you see it on almost all the ladies. Please surprise us, Michelle!

Now if they would only copy each other in great speed and depth of edges.

Please forgive me for basically making the argument about spirals to myself, but it often helps me develop questions and see different angles. Thanks for tolerating me in that--that's to everyone.

And thanks again to Hockeyfan. I know for sure I can't remember how many times you've presented an insightful perspective on a topic nobody else has and seen the truth behind sometimes superficial assumptions. You

Rgirl

 

[rain]

I think overall, while there are issues with "sameness" (I, for one, am absolutely in favour of some sort of Zayak rule for Beillman and catchfoot positions) things are better under COP. Mathman is absolutely correct in asserting that under 6.0 technical judging was largely based on jumps -and often based on simply tallying up jumps. This caused many, many an empty program. I remember them well, particularly after the intro of the quad into the everyday of men's competition. I saw lots of guys who basically couldn't spin and made a pretty perfunctory, halfhearted attempt at some footwork, then just skated around and jumped with some hand waving to try to inspire some kind of artistic mark. Footwork became slightly more popular when Yagudin started doing some zingers, and occasionally you'd get a great spinner recognized mostly by TV commentators, but on the whole, there wasn't a lot of creativity. Spins? They guys did a sit, a camel and a back scratch - pretty much it. It was awful.

COP has forced all of the skaters to add to their repertoire and has brought up the level of basic skating, IMO. Sure, there are problems as others in this thread have rightfully pointed out, such as doing multiple changes of position in spins and lots of one-foot work in footwork that just ends up looking ugly and messy and slow, but is being rewarded for difficulty over and above some really beautiful and well-executed classic positions.

I find ladies, mens, and dance all to be on the whole a lot more enjoyable to watch these days under COP - of course that's a broad generalization. I'm least interested in pairs and haven't seen much inspiring choreography since the inception of COP in this discipline - but I'm not sure if it's the fault of the new scoring system or a rather mediocre field of late. I lean towards the latter.

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

Hockeyfan knows her stuff. Our only disagreement is with the flutz (which I call a flip.)

Joe

 

[clairecloutier]

I generally like COP, but in particular, I like its effect on ice dance. Under the 6.0 system, I felt like ice dance was becoming too focused on lifts and dramatic posing, to the detriment of actual dance elements and footwork. Under 6.0, many dancers seemed to feature lifts extensively in their programs, even using them as the key element in establishing their persona and image with the audience and the judges. (Think, for example, of Anissina & Peizerat's famous lifts in which she held him in the air--and how the use of those lifts coincided with their rise to prominence starting at the 1998 Olympics.) Also, under 6.0, the general presentation quality in ice dance arguably started to go over the top, with some teams seemingly as focused on their dramatic facial expressions as on their footwork. (Just think of the melodramatic theatricalism of Anjelika Krylova or, to a lesser extent, Oksana Grishuk.)

Under 6.0, the lifts in ice dance were somewhat analogous to the triple jumps in singles skating. Like the triple jumps, lifts seemed to generally be getting too much credit and taking up too much time and energy, leading to programs which were often, choreographically, rather empty aside from the lifts.

Under COP, all this has changed, and the focus is now squarely back on dance elements and footwork. I personally appreciate this, because I love pure dance. And although some people complain that COP has led to all the dance programs looking alike, I still feel there's a lot of room for creativity and expression. Dubreuil & Lauzon's long program this year is a great example of a COP program that contains all the required elements, but is still lovely, original, and moving.