Ways IJS Could Improve

[lappo]

Ok, the goal should be to make it easier for skaters of course and to reward proper technique on jumps, so that we won't have endless discussion about those who lips/flutzes ecc ecc. It would actually be difficult to enact and your points are very valid. So maybe, more than a rule that require all the jumps, a bonus score for those who put all the kind of jumps (with correct takeoff) in the FS (maybe a higher bonus for all 5 triples and a less higher for 4triples/1 double, 3 triples / 2 doubles - maybe this bonus could be placed instead of the current second half bonus?). If you don't make it a requirement but a bonus, then fails could be considered as they are with the current rule?
Don't know, I'm not a technical expert, the idea comes out of the fact that the Zayak rule was born as a way to make skaters show a wider range of jumps but it has always seemed complicated to me and maybe a bonus for the whole set of jumps would do this and also allow skater to try more different combos.

 

[Shayuki]

I have many thoughts about TES. IMO it requires a complete reform and I have some ideas on that already. But I think it's more important to focus on PCS first.


In my opinion, the current PCS system doesn't work. The subcategories are completely meaningless. Everything seems to affect everything. It's just a single lump sum and nobody knows what exactly it comes from.

I think that the most simple solution would be to split PCS into two categories - artistic(choreo, interpretation etc.) and technical(skating skills, transitions etc.) and they'd get their separate scores. And hopefully wouldn't have anchoring. If the judges would STILL always give nearly identical scores on both without the ability to think of them as their separate entities, a more drastic measure would be to make skating skills and transitions a part of TES and have PCS only being about artistry.

I think that for the sport to make sense it'd be important for the PCS categories to be judged accurately rather than the judges just going "Oh I want to give her 9.6, let me see what I need to do so that I get that on average" instead of trying to accurately score every single PCS category.

 

[Ender]

They should improve by giving out PCS NOT based on TES.

 

[Hevari]

Maybe it would be nice to further revard a jump pass if it is a last element in the program (like Mai Mihara's last year SP or Yuna Shiraiwa's this year's FS). It's very rare and looks kinda special...

 

[zebobes]

I had a new idea for adjusting the second half jump bonuses. What if the ten percent bonus was removed, and the change was that second half jump GOE was upgraded? For example, 2A jump GOE ranges from -1.5 to +1.5; if in the second half, it would be changed to -2.1 to +2.1. That way, higher quality second half jumps would be rewarded, and jumps that fail would receive a larger negative GOE.

Triple jumps would get upgraded to -4.0 to +3.0. Quads would get upgraded to whatever Quad axels receive... I don't remember off the top of my head.

Would this become too punitive for skaters who implode in the second half?

 

[gkelly]

Yes, I think so.

We know that it's harder to land jumps in the second half.

So how about leaving the negative GOEs the same and increasing the positive ones?

But even that wouldn't account for the greater difficulty of landing a 0 GOE jump in the second half compared to the same jump of the same quality in the first half.

 

[bobbob]

No second half bonuses, but the composition PCS mark is reflected by the jump distribution. (and is hurt if the skater does all in the second half OR all in the first half)

At the end of the day, we are judging the quality of what the skater puts out on the ice...not how much effort he/she put into it...so why should it matter what time a jump is done?

 

[Step Sequence4]

I think for second half bonuses a logical sulotion may be to say you can get the bonus on a certain number of jumps in the second half only, (ex:4), and I think there should be a special bonus (similar to 2nd half bonus but smaller like +0.5 of a point of something) with a rule in place where you can do MAX: 1 Tano, 1 Rippon & 1 Jump with an original arm variation other than tano or Rippon, and I think quad base value for men’s only however, should be lowered. Idk if PCS could ever be systemed to everyone’s liking as it’s just so subjective.

 

[eriecold]

I would start with something simple as "mandatory GOE" being placed in the computer, so no judge can give a +2 (it would give instead the max allowed by the mandatory rule) in elements that have been called out by the tech panel.

Also, I'd give points individually for the combos. It's harder to do a 3T after another 3T than it is to do it after a 2A, yet it is just given the value of a 3T in combination. It would be more appropriate to give a specific BV to a 3T3T based on the dificulty of the element as a whole than to give it according to each jump's value inside the combo. That would encourage more 3/3 jumps in ladies, specially.

And lastly, what about new elements? there should be a provision for a "free element" in the FS that allows the skater to do literally anything, either old or new, to promote new things. Seems like, since the insertion of the IJS, we're not innovating and only making existing elements more refined (which, in and on itself is good, but the sport should evolve in all aspects)

 

[penguin]

Gosh, adding more rules and conditions to IJS would just making the system worse, I think, even if they are made with all the right intentions.

I think to improve skating scoring, IJS needs to be simplified, not given more rules. Not quite as simplistic as 6.0, but a step or two less complicated than the current code of points.

I feel like a lot of suggestions for improving scoring want to eliminate huge leads and bring scores closer together... but for a sport, we should welcome people who can outscore the rest of the pack. Sometimes it'll be because someone is leagues better than the rest, and sometimes it'll be because someone's smarter about gaming the system to their advantage. I think both should be allowed.

 

[Seren]

There are really only two things I would like to see.

1. Limit the number of jumps in the second half. The bonus was meant to discourage front loading. Backloading everything isn't any better.

2. Judge the PCS categories as separate. Ashley deserves high marks for interpretation but not transitions or skating skills. Alina deserves high PCS for skating skills but not for having a well balanced program. PCS is lumped together so tightly- there are skaters who deserve high marks across the board but also skaters who deserve high marks in some categories but lower in others.

 

[gkelly]

It's harder to do a 3T after another 3T than it is to do it after a 2A

That is arguably not true.

Both 2A+3T and 3T+3T were first seen in the early 1980s. 3T+3T then became more common during the rest of the 6.0 era. Was that because it was actually easier for the skaters to accomplish the 3T+3T successfully or because skaters thought a "triple-triple" would impress judges more than a "double-triple" combination? After triple-triple combinations became allowed in the short program (1989 for men, 1997 for women), there might have been reason for skaters to master a combination they could use in both programs, but that wouldn't explain why 2A+3T never became common before that.

I don't know the answer. I'll defer to skaters who have actually tried both combinations, preferably several different skaters male and female to account for individual differences.

But I've heard it argued that doing two jumps with the same rhythm is easier than doing an edge jump followed by a toe jump.

I suspect "similar trajectory" might actually be more relevant than "similar rhythm." The axel as an edge jump tends to be performed on a somewhat smaller curve than most toe loops, which are often approached from almost a straight line. I think it's easier to achieve a landing of the first jump that better approximates that shallower/straighter curve into the second jump if the first jump is a toe jump than an axel.

That's probably also why 3S+3T and 3Lo+3T are much rarer than 3F+3T and 3Lz+3T -- they're worth less under IJS, but as combinations they probably aren't actually easier, because of the curvier landings of the edge jumps making it harder to put a good 3T afterward.


I think the reason we saw 2A+3T become common among women in the IJS era has less to do with it being easier than 3T+3T and more to do with the well-balanced program limits. Only two triples can be repeated. Only seven jump passes total are allowed. The program must contain at least one axel-type jump. For a skater who wants to do seven triples and doesn't have a triple axel, doing a 2A+3T combination allows her to repeat lutz and flip (or loop) without having to repeat the toe loop. Doing 3T+3T would mean she'd only be allowed to repeat one of the higher value triples.

We still almost never see 2A+3T from the men.