What skating "used to be"

[skylark]

When I became a figure skating fan back in 2001, I loved the step sequences. To me, it was always the highlight of a program. For the ladies, there was also the spiral sequence. Those were the moments that made me a fan and made me re-watch a program a thousand times. Nowadays the step sequences may be more difficult, but to me it looks like the skaters are just turning and turning endlessly and rarely express the character of the music.

Yes! And the spirals used to highlight something in the music, so that skater and audiences could revel in what the program was about.

The choreo sequences are even more disappointing, because the skaters have the freedom to do whatever they want, but it seems like they can't think outside the box anymore. Or they don't want to, because they will get the same points anyway.

That's it, exactly, in a nutshell ... my disappointment with some of the skating in recent years. Everyone is striving to get the greatest number of points, which ends in everyone doing many of the same elements with as many transitions as possible packed in. My particular pet peeve is pairs lifts, which I love so much when they're done well. But sometimes the changes in lift positions, while racking up the points, don't do much to show the beauty of the lifts and sometimes detract.

 

[Amei]

When I became a figure skating fan back in 2001, I loved the step sequences. To me, it was always the highlight of a program. For the ladies, there was also the spiral sequence. Those were the moments that made me a fan and made me re-watch a program a thousand times. Nowadays the step sequences may be more difficult, but to me it looks like the skaters are just turning and turning endlessly and rarely express the character of the music. The choreo sequences are even more disappointing, because the skaters have the freedom to do whatever they want, but it seems like they can't think outside the box anymore. Or they don't want to, because they will get the same points anyway.

I think that can be said about any era of skating, you have skaters that can perform/express music where you can tell they actively listen to their music and there are skaters that have been handed their choreography and its very clear their brain is going down the checklist of items - wave hand here, kick leg there, and someone could put on the macarena song and they wouldn't think to change a movement or an expression.

 

[Sharon Whitlock]

Now that the IJS has kind of "settled in" (although there is still a lot of tweaking going on), and once again, "creative" elements are getting some points (as opposed to when IJS first came out and creative elements were generally not done because they didn't earn any points, and the big jumps and spins did)--I think that singles, pairs, dance, and synchro are becoming more enjoyable to watch. It was awful when IJS first started and the sport became a technical showcase that didn't really need any music, since all the programs looked alike.

We have to keep in mind that most people who watch figure skating on TV know little to nothing about what a perfect jump or spin should look like or how the points are assigned--what they're interested is the emotional impact of the program, which usually comes from the interplay of athleticism and artistry.

Now we can say, "Who cares what the public likes! The sport is the sport, and we love it!" Well, that's really special--but unless we are donating millions to U.S. Figure Skating, our understanding of and love for the sport does not keep our skaters well-funded. It's the sponsors that donate the big bucks to fund all the training needed to create champions, and of course, to pay for the development of good Learn To Skate programs, and the development of new disciplines like synchronized skating.

So I think it would be good if the sport would return to a two-program format with a technical program and an artistic program. We have lost so much of our audience and several of our really big-money sponsors, and I think that bringing back that artistic program would lure the public back, which would lure the big buck sponsors back.

I know--yes, the skating purist cringes over the thought of catering to "big money". But someone has to pay the Zamboni driver--and all the other expenses that get racked up on the way to the Olympics (or the Regionals, Sectionals, National, Worlds--or even the local SnowMan Classic or Penguin Play Day or Adult Dance weekend.

And frankly, if we just emphasize the technical elements that rack up big points--then why bother to waste time with music? Just let skaters get out there and work it--give a singles skater/pair/team four minutes to rack up as many points as possible, no music necessary, and perhaps only allow an element to be repeated three times. So the program consists of three triple axels, three quad lutzes, three quad flips, three quad loops, three quad sows, three multilevel spins, and a minute of tortuous footwork--but if it earns hundreds of points--cool. Actually, yuck, IMO, but that's kind of what we see now from some skaters. Like I said, Yuck. No wonder people flip the station and watch endless American Ninja episodes instead of current figure skating.

Do you all remember when figure skating was ranked as one of the Top Three television sports (I believe Foot ball was #1, Figure Skating was #2, and Baseball was #3).

 

[gkelly]

So I think it would be good if the sport would return to a two-program format with a technical program and an artistic program. We have lost so much of our audience and several of our really big-money sponsors, and I think that bringing back that artistic program would lure the public back, which would lure the big buck sponsors back.

The sport of figure skating, at the Olympic-eligible, world championship level and all lesser events leading up to them, NEVER consisted of a technical program and an artistic program. There were a number of pro competitions in the late 20th century that used that breakdown, but never ISU competition.

And some languages have always referred to the sport in general as "artistic skating" (to distinguish it from speedskating).

For singles, originally the competition was divided between compulsory figures and freeskating (to music for most of its history). Freeskating meaning that skaters could choose which technical elements to include, eventually with some requirements and/or restrictions.

In the later decades of the 20th century, the value of compulsory figures relative to freeskating declined, with shifts in the numerical weighting of the competition parts and reductions in the number of figures skated in competition, and a short technical program was introduced (known at various times as "short program" or "technical program" or briefly "original program"). Execution of specific required elements, with much stricter requirements and restrictions, is what distinguished this program from the freeskate phase of competition.

Eventually the figures were removed from competition entirely, leaving only the short program and freeskate.

Pairs never had a compulsory figures competition phase, so the short technical program was introduced there about a decade before it was in singles.

The 6.0 scores for the short program have long (always?) been named "required elements" and "presentation."

Ice dance has been different in several ways. That could be a different discussion.

In 6.0 judging, the names of the scores for freeskating were "technical merit" and, at various times over the years, "manner of performance," "artistic impression," "composition and style," "presentation."

So during the times when half the score included the word "artistic," there was a sense --among skaters and judges and commentators as well as the general public -- that approximately half the score of the final phase of competition was based on artistry.

But technical merit was always a major part of the freeskating score, and until the late 1980s it was the tiebreaker for individual judges to rank two or more skaters to whom they awarded the same total of the two marks.

And then in the mid-1990s the ISU decided that "artistic impression" was a misleading name and changed the name of the second mark in freeskating to "presentation" to match that in the short program.

But even for those few years ca. early 1990s, when "artistic impression" was the name of the second mark in the freeskate and it was the tiebreaker for within-judge ties, it was the freeskate that was where the envelope was being pushed in terms of technical content because of the specific requirements and restrictions in the short/"technical" program. E.g., quads were not allowed in short programs at the time, and for most of that time women were only allowed (but not always required) to include one triple.

There has recently (a decade and a half into the IJS era) been some talk of restructuring competition into a "technical program" and an "artistic program." Last I heard was that the two programs would be the same length, and I understood that the technical program would have more elements and I think more weight on the Technical Elements Score, and the artistic program would have fewer elements and more weight on Program Components.

We'll have to see exactly what the specific proposal consists of, and whether the ISU does indeed decide to adopt this restructuring.

If they do, it will be an entirely new direction for ISU skating, not going "back" to anything they ever did before, but probably influenced by the popularity of pro competition formats from in the 1980s and 90s.

 

[lariko]

During the past couple of seasons we've seen great strides in the sport of figure skating - particularly in terms of technical and jump content. These feats are pushing the envelope of human limitation. However, this has lead to a lot of criticism and I've heard many people say that skating "isn't what it used to be"


But what does that mean for you? And why? What makes those days so special?

Is it the days of the 6.0 system, the great skating skills of Michelle Kwan and Sasha Cohen or, maybe you're a newer fan and these recent strides are all you've seen from this sport?

Both my mom and myself watched figure skating in the remote past. I have vague memories, since I was a kid, but the way mom put it, ‘everyone watched pairs, nobody cared for men’ but she distinctively remembers being impressed out of her mind by Nepela’s jumps. I only pretty much remember Rodnina.

I watched 2014 Olympics, and while Lipnitskaya blew me away I didn’t get hooked. Then I looked it up like a year later, and she was done. So… I kindda forgot about it.

i watched 2018 Olympics, and what impressed me was Uno, Zagitova and that I could actually understand the rules. Before, they just rose those cards in the end, and it was all confusing. Now I had the running score and those boxes that ticked off as the skate progressed. I could pose who was winning and why.

I kindda started following the season, then they mentioned Trusova, and I looked at Juniors because of her, and that’s when I got truly hooked. It appeals to me when girls can outscore boys. It just does. Because of it, and because of it being more based on technical, I like juniors more than seniors.

I brought mom to Kelowna in 2019. She saw Hanyu and Trusova, and was hooked. Both of us like the jumps the most, although we like spins too. Mom says she can appreciate musicality. I say that I appreciate character interpretation. But overall, quiet and smooth rarely gets me.

we kindda try to understand the whole ‘skater’s skater’ thing, but overall I like fast and furious as much as the super-glide, and prefer performances that project energy to the audience. Heck, I run to my collection of such programs. Once in a while an unusual choreography or particular soulfulness can get through to me.
we both try to watch ice dance lately (pandemic, eh?) but she does slightly better with it than I do. For me it mostly snooze fest and I tune out even on the top 6.

from past greats, only Plushenko truly seriously impressed me. Neither I really like the shows very much. I kindda have to have the competition to be invested. I love the open drama of the competition, but not the behind the closed doors mudslinging. I really liked seeing the competition at the stadium. That actually surprised me, because I am not one for crowds. But too much of fan participation is too much for me, like I would avoid events with Hanyu if possible for that reason.

 

[Ic3Rabbit]

The sport of figure skating, at the Olympic-eligible, world championship level and all lesser events leading up to them, NEVER consisted of a technical program and an artistic program. There were a number of pro competitions in the late 20th century that used that breakdown, but never ISU competition.

And some languages have always referred to the sport in general as "artistic skating" (to distinguish it from speedskating).

For singles, originally the competition was divided between compulsory figures and freeskating (to music for most of its history). Freeskating meaning that skaters could choose which technical elements to include, eventually with some requirements and/or restrictions.

In the later decades of the 20th century, the value of compulsory figures relative to freeskating declined, with shifts in the numerical weighting of the competition parts and reductions in the number of figures skated in competition, and a short technical program was introduced (known at various times as "short program" or "technical program" or briefly "original program"). Execution of elements, with much stricter requirements and restrictions, is what distinguished this program from the freeskate phase of competition.

Eventually the figures were removed from competition entirely, leaving only the short program and freeskate.

Pairs never had a compulsory figures competition phase, so the short technical program was introduced there about a decade before it was in singles.

The 6.0 scores for the short program have long (always?) been named "required elements" and "presentation."

Ice dance has been different in several ways. That could be a different discussion.

In 6.0 judging, the names of the scores for freeskating were "technical merit" and, at various times over the years, "manner of performance," "artistic impression," "composition and style," "presentation."

So during the times when half the score included the word "artistic," there was a sense --among skaters and judges and commentators as well as the general public -- that approximately half the score of the final phase of competition was based on artistry.

But technical merit was always a major part of the freeskating score, and until the late 1980s it was the tiebreaker for individual judges to rank two or more skaters to whom they awarded the same total of the two marks.

And then in the mid-1990s the ISU decided that "artistic impression" was a misleading name and changed the name of the second mark in freeskating to "presentation" to match that in the short program.

But even for those few years ca. early 1990s, when "artistic impression" was the name of the second mark in the freeskate and it was the tiebreaker for within-judge ties, it was the freeskate that was where the envelope was being pushed in terms of technical content because of the specific requirements and restrictions in the short/"technical" program. E.g., quads were not allowed in short programs at the time, and for most of that time women were only allowed (but not always required) to include one triple.

There has recently (a decade and a half into the IJS era) been some talk of restructuring competition into a "technical program" and an "artistic program." Last I heard was that the two programs would be the same length, and I understood that the technical program would have more elements and I think more weight on the Technical Elements Score, and the artistic program would have fewer elements and more weight on Program Components.

We'll have to see exactly what the specific proposal consists of, and whether the ISU does indeed decide to adopt this restructuring.

If they do, it will be an entirely new direction for ISU skating, not going "back" to anything they ever did before, but probably influenced by the popularity of pro competition formats from in the 1980s and 90s.

All of the above! You saved me alot of typing!

I also want to point out to @Sharon Whitlock that very few skaters at the elite level get "sponsors" to pay for training expenses, many are out there sacrificing so much to continue in the sport. There have been discussions here multiple times which I have contributed the skater information that many of our parents have double and triple mortgaged their homes and more in order to allow us to continue competing at the highest levels and to even get there in the first place. It's not all..."oh a sponsors going to pay my way the whole way at a certain point." You don't get automatically assigned a sponsor when you reach a certain level in skating.

 

[Sharon Whitlock]

All of the above! You saved me alot of typing!

I also want to point out to @Sharon Whitlock that very few skaters at the elite level get "sponsors" to pay for training expenses, many are out there sacrificing so much to continue in the sport. There have been discussions here multiple times which I have contributed the skater information that many of our parents have double and triple mortgaged their homes and more in order to allow us to continue competing at the highest levels and to even get there in the first place. It's not all..."oh a sponsors going to pay my way the whole way at a certain point." You don't get automatically assigned a sponsor when you reach a certain level in skating.

Forgive my lack of clarity. I know that individual skaters/pairs/dance teams do not get "sponsors", although sometimes, local people or companies help alleviate expenses for an individual skater who grew up in their town.

But the sport itself benefits from sponsors, both individuals and corporations, who make contributions to U.S. Figure Skating , and U.S. Figure Skating utilizes these donations in appropriate ways. Currently those sponsors include companies like Consumer Cellular, Toyota, Geico, Noom, etc. I can't list by name any individual sponsors, but I think that there are more than we know. And of course, many of us in all likelihood donate to U.S. Figure Skating--so we are sponsors, too, most of us on a small scale!

That's what I meant when I said "sponsors"--sponsors of U.S. FIgure Skating, not sponsors of individuals, pairs, or teams. Again, apologies for the lack of clarity.

And corporate sponsors, generally don't donate purely out of love for the sport--they donate because it's good PR for their company. And that's why it's important that the sport attract a lot of fans who will tune in to the broadcast--the company sponsors, who donate big bucks, want lots of people to see their commercials and see their logo along the boards, and perhaps, hopefully, buy their product. If the sport declines in popularity, sadly the corporate sponsors often bow out and look for another, more popular sport to support with sponsorship monies.

 

[Ic3Rabbit]

Forgive my lack of clarity. I know that individual skaters/pairs/dance teams do not get "sponsors", although sometimes, local people or companies help alleviate expenses for an individual skater who grew up in their town.

But the sport itself benefits from sponsors, both individuals and corporations, who make contributions to U.S. Figure Skating , and U.S. Figure Skating utilizes these donations in appropriate ways. Currently those sponsors include companies like Consumer Cellular, Toyota, Geico, Noom, etc. I can't list by name any individual sponsors, but I think that there are more than we know. And of course, many of us in all likelihood donate to U.S. Figure Skating--so we are sponsors, too, most of us on a small scale!

That's what I meant when I said "sponsors"--sponsors of U.S. FIgure Skating, not sponsors of individuals, pairs, or teams. Again, apologies for the lack of clarity.

And corporate sponsors, generally don't donate purely out of love for the sport--they donate because it's good PR for their company. And that's why it's important that the sport attract a lot of fans who will tune in to the broadcast--the company sponsors, who donate big bucks, want lots of people to see their commercials and see their logo along the boards, and perhaps, hopefully, buy their product. If the sport declines in popularity, sadly the corporate sponsors often bow out and look for another, more popular sport to support with sponsorship monies.

You aren't telling me anything I don't know already, seriously. I've lived and breathed this sport from the inside of it for many many years now.
But thanks for making the info clear for others who didn't know.

 

[Sharon Whitlock]

The sport of figure skating, at the Olympic-eligible, world championship level and all lesser events leading up to them, NEVER consisted of a technical program and an artistic program. There were a number of pro competitions in the late 20th century that used that breakdown, but never ISU competition.

Again, forgive lack of clarity. That's what I get for posting as I'm trying to get out the door early in the A.M. for work!

Of course you're right, the programs were not called "the technical program" and "the artistic program" in the official "handbook."

But because of the set number of required elements in the Short, we all considered it a "technical" program.

And because of the greater freedom allowed/encouraged in the Long (and yes, there were and still are required elements in these programs), we all called it an "artistic" program.

When I say, "we all," I'm referring to coaches, parents, and skaters--not elite, but local.

All my life, I've heard coaches use different names for the two programs, in the same sentence even. My point was to express my personal opinion, for what it's worth (not much, probably) that the sport would possibly attract a larger television audience if skaters/teams performed a "Technical" and an "Artistic" program. (I don't think it would matter, except to the skater, which one is The Long Program.)

Hope this makes more sense to you.

 

[el henry]

Forgive my lack of clarity. I know that individual skaters/pairs/dance teams do not get "sponsors", although sometimes, local people or companies help alleviate expenses for an individual skater who grew up in their town.

But the sport itself benefits from sponsors, both individuals and corporations, who make contributions to U.S. Figure Skating , and U.S. Figure Skating utilizes these donations in appropriate ways. Currently those sponsors include companies like Consumer Cellular, Toyota, Geico, Noom, etc. I can't list by name any individual sponsors, but I think that there are more than we know. And of course, many of us in all likelihood donate to U.S. Figure Skating--so we are sponsors, too, most of us on a small scale!

That's what I meant when I said "sponsors"--sponsors of U.S. FIgure Skating, not sponsors of individuals, pairs, or teams. Again, apologies for the lack of clarity.

And corporate sponsors, generally don't donate purely out of love for the sport--they donate because it's good PR for their company. And that's why it's important that the sport attract a lot of fans who will tune in to the broadcast--the company sponsors, who donate big bucks, want lots of people to see their commercials and see their logo along the boards, and perhaps, hopefully, buy their product. If the sport declines in popularity, sadly the corporate sponsors often bow out and look for another, more popular sport to support with sponsorship monies.

Thank you for explaining, @Sharon Whitlock . I believe you indicated in another thread what it had cost to put your skaters on the ice many years ago on an elite synchro team, and of course for elite singles it would cost (as you acknowledged) so much more. I happen to agree that the sport in the US needs a broader reach to achieve financial support to go beyond only 1) families of means fielding elite skaters or 2) families willing to make difficult financial sacrifices to field elite skaters.

I started watching Wide World of Sports on a black and white TV with my mother. Skaters like Janet Lynn and Toller attracted me then and of course skaters like Jason attract me now.

But from my point of view it's almost impossible to decide whether skating can be "what it used to be" in terms of popularity because we have no hard data as to what devoted fans, casual fans or Joe Schmo actually wants. I know what I like and I know what my friends like, but what if that's different from what you or your friends like? Or what Susie down the street and her friends like? What do we do, count friends?

Ok, in that case, everyone else wins

 

[Sharon Whitlock]

I think looking at the ratings for television broadcasts of figure skating competitions is a fairly good indicator of what people want to see in the sport. The broadcasts aren't particularly well-watched and ratings tend to be much lower than in the past, which leads me to believe that people aren't finding what they want to see in figure skating.

Now I realize that there are a ton more options for people than there were back in the days of Wide World of Sports and 3 networks, or even in the days when cable ruled. I'm sure a lot of people nowdays are watching those made for TV serials (e.g., The Chosen, or The Mandalorean, or in my case, Schitt's Creek-love it!) A lot of folks just leave HGTV or Food Network on constantly. And a lot of young people are online, either gaming or texting or just checking out everything that sounds interesting.

But there are still broadcast network shows that attract a respectably large percentage of Americans. I'm pretty certain a lot of people tune in to watch NFL and NHL, and I think ??? that American Ninja Warrior and The Masked Singer attract a decent crowd. I happen to love Masked Singer, BTW.

I'm troubled that a sport that once was rated in the Top Three television sports is now kinda...crickets. I don't know anyone who watches figure skating anymore other than rink people. Regular folks have no idea even who Jason Chen is, but I can guarantee that EVERYONE knew about (and watched) the Battle of the Brians, or anything that Katarina Witt was in.

JMO--I think people are looking for drama, and although to figure skating fans, there is plenty of drama wondering who will skate clean , earn the points and a medal, a lot of casual viewers don't find the sport itself dramatic, and do NOT understand the IJS. People are looking for "the thrill of victory, the agony of defeat", scandals, romance, beauty, elegance, grace--stuff that isn't the "norm" in their lives. I honestly think more viewers would rather watch a Paul Wylie spread-eagle than a Nathan Chen Quad-Fest.

And of course, American are looking for MEDALS, and at this time in skating history, the women just aren't winning them at the Big Competitions.

Again, JMO, for what they're worth.

 

[Amei]

I think looking at the ratings for television broadcasts of figure skating competitions is a fairly good indicator of what people want to see in the sport. The broadcasts aren't particularly well-watched and ratings tend to be much lower than in the past, which leads me to believe that people aren't finding what they want to see in figure skating.

Now I realize that there are a ton more options for people than there were back in the days of Wide World of Sports and 3 networks, or even in the days when cable ruled. I'm sure a lot of people nowdays are watching those made for TV serials (e.g., The Chosen, or The Mandalorean, or in my case, Schitt's Creek-love it!) A lot of folks just leave HGTV or Food Network on constantly. And a lot of young people are online, either gaming or texting or just checking out everything that sounds interesting.

But there are still broadcast network shows that attract a respectably large percentage of Americans. I'm pretty certain a lot of people tune in to watch NFL and NHL, and I think ??? that American Ninja Warrior and The Masked Singer attract a decent crowd. I happen to love Masked Singer, BTW.

I'm troubled that a sport that once was rated in the Top Three television sports is now kinda...crickets. I don't know anyone who watches figure skating anymore other than rink people. Regular folks have no idea even who Jason Chen is, but I can guarantee that EVERYONE knew about (and watched) the Battle of the Brians, or anything that Katarina Witt was in.

JMO--I think people are looking for drama, and although to figure skating fans, there is plenty of drama wondering who will skate clean , earn the points and a medal, a lot of casual viewers don't find the sport itself dramatic, and do NOT understand the IJS. People are looking for "the thrill of victory, the agony of defeat", scandals, romance, beauty, elegance, grace--stuff that isn't the "norm" in their lives. I honestly think more viewers would rather watch a Paul Wylie spread-eagle than a Nathan Chen Quad-Fest.

And of course, American are looking for MEDALS, and at this time in skating history, the women just aren't winning them at the Big Competitions.

Again, JMO, for what they're worth.

Working under the assumption we are talking about the US: Ratings are hard to gauge because they put figure skating in really bad timeslots, US ladies nationals was done on a Friday night - generally perceived as a bad timeslot. But the last couple of years US sports in general have seen a decline in TV ratings, and that includes during 2020 when more people were pretty much forced to be home and you would think it would have translated into at least equal or higher ratings; the NFL saw a 7% drop in ratings and hit their lowest ratings since 2017, since 2019 NBA ratings have dropped 25%.

I don't think the ratings are indicative that people would rather see Paul Wylie spread-eagle vs. a Nathan Chen quad-fest; there wasn't really any doubt who was going to win, Nathan's margin of victory the last 3 nationals: 2019 = 58.21 points, 2020 = 37.29 points; 2021 = 30.9 points, now while Chen fans were probably delighted, that doesn't exactly make for great TV viewing.

 

[Ic3Rabbit]

I think looking at the ratings for television broadcasts of figure skating competitions is a fairly good indicator of what people want to see in the sport. The broadcasts aren't particularly well-watched and ratings tend to be much lower than in the past, which leads me to believe that people aren't finding what they want to see in figure skating.

Now I realize that there are a ton more options for people than there were back in the days of Wide World of Sports and 3 networks, or even in the days when cable ruled. I'm sure a lot of people nowdays are watching those made for TV serials (e.g., The Chosen, or The Mandalorean, or in my case, Schitt's Creek-love it!) A lot of folks just leave HGTV or Food Network on constantly. And a lot of young people are online, either gaming or texting or just checking out everything that sounds interesting.

But there are still broadcast network shows that attract a respectably large percentage of Americans. I'm pretty certain a lot of people tune in to watch NFL and NHL, and I think ??? that American Ninja Warrior and The Masked Singer attract a decent crowd. I happen to love Masked Singer, BTW.

I'm troubled that a sport that once was rated in the Top Three television sports is now kinda...crickets. I don't know anyone who watches figure skating anymore other than rink people. Regular folks have no idea even who Jason Chen is, but I can guarantee that EVERYONE knew about (and watched) the Battle of the Brians, or anything that Katarina Witt was in.

JMO--I think people are looking for drama, and although to figure skating fans, there is plenty of drama wondering who will skate clean , earn the points and a medal, a lot of casual viewers don't find the sport itself dramatic, and do NOT understand the IJS. People are looking for "the thrill of victory, the agony of defeat", scandals, romance, beauty, elegance, grace--stuff that isn't the "norm" in their lives. I honestly think more viewers would rather watch a Paul Wylie spread-eagle than a Nathan Chen Quad-Fest.

And of course, American are looking for MEDALS, and at this time in skating history, the women just aren't winning them at the Big Competitions.

Again, JMO, for what they're worth.

I know Jason Brown, Nathan Chen even, but Jason Chen?!?!

 

[el henry]

I'm troubled that a sport that once was rated in the Top Three television sports is now kinda...crickets. I don't know anyone who watches figure skating anymore other than rink people. Regular folks have no idea even who Jason Chen is, but I can guarantee that EVERYONE knew about (and watched) the Battle of the Brians, or anything that Katarina Witt was in.

I'm pretty sure you mean Nathan Chen, although a combination of Jason and Nathan would be quite the skater!

 

[4everchan]

and here I was like OMG ... who is Jason Chen? I have been on this board non-stop and I have missed Jason Chen. Does he have a fan fest ? I wonder if he is coming out this month too?

Just joining the fun

 

[el henry]

and here I was like OMG ... who is Jason Chen? I have been on this board non-stop and I have missed Jason Chen. I wonder if he is coming out this month too?

Well if Jason Chen does come out, you can be sure some pearl clutchers may be unhappy about it

And I am saying this in good fun, because heaven knows I have made some typos in my time, particularly with longer posts. The edit function is my friend

 

[4everchan]

Well if Jason Chen does come out, you can be sure some pearl clutchers may be unhappy about it

And I am saying this in good fun, because heaven knows I have made some typos in my time, particularly with longer posts. The edit function is my friend

we then have ONE common friend LOL

 

[Mathman]

I'm troubled that a sport that once was rated in the Top Three television sports is now kinda...crickets.

I hate to sound like a passimist, but I think it's just cultural drift, and that we really can't do anything much about it. Peop[le like what they like and dpon't like what they don't like. In the U.S. there used to be a lot of cowboy shows on TV. Now, not so much. Beuatty contests used to be popular. Now they just seem sleezy. In the 1960s pro basketball was so nothing that the Detroit Pistons (my team) would )sometimes just open the doors to the areana on game day and let anyone come in for free who wanted -- whjo would pay to watch someone else play a game of basketball?

What do viewers want from figure skating? Do viewers get a trhill from watching someone jum[p while weighted down by heavy boots? Do people want to watch dancing on ice -- why ice?

Anyway, I am intrigued by the two-program format proposal. A little something for everyone.

 

[Ic3Rabbit]

I hate to sound like a passimist, but I think it's just cultural drift, and that we really can't do anything much about it. Peop[le like what they like and dpon't like what they don't like. In the U.S. there used to be a lot of cowboy shows on TV. Now, not so much. Beuatty contests used to be popular. Now they just seem sleezy. In the 1960s pro basketball was so nothing that the Detroit Pistons (my team would )sometimes just open the doors to the areana on game day and let anyone come in for free who wanted -- whjo would pay to watch someone else play a game of basketball?

What do viewers want from figure skating? Do viewers get a trhill from watching someone jum[p while weighted down by heavy boots? Do people want to watch dancing on ice -- why ice?

Anyway, I am intrigued by the two-program format proposal. A little something for everyone.

As in Warren Beatty contests? LOL And boots aren't that heavy anymore.

I seriously think it's a combo of no one wanting to listen to Tara and Johnny be catty and talk through every performance about themselves and the weird scheduling that skating barely does get from NBC. Most of the time it's a 10minute highlight of something that happened two days ago while they could be watching a live ice dance or whatever discipline happens to be on live at that moment, that NBC doesn't want to show.

 

[Mathman]

As in Warren Beatty contests? LOL And boots aren't that heavy anymore.

I seriously think it's a combo of no one wanting to listen to Tara and Johnny be catty and talk through every performance about themselves and the weird scheduling that skating barely does get from NBC. Most of the time it's a 10minute highlight of something that happened two days ago while they could be watching a live ice dance or whatever discipline happens to be on live at that moment, that NBC doesn't want to show.

To me, it's a question of which is the cause an which is the effect. Has skating lost popularity as a spectator sport because it is not promoted properly by the television networks? Or do the televiaion networks ignore skating because it is not popular any more?

As for catty and annoying announcers, the football commentating team of Howard Cosell and Don Meredith was on the air for many years, yet people still tuned in for the Super Bowl.