The Case for Handwork: Balancing Art and Sport in Figure Skating

[Mathman]

i am old enough to remember Brian Boitano's spread eagles. The difference nowadays is that skaters rarely do a "long lasting" spread eagle. Jun does a long Ina Bauer... but many skaters use these moves as transitions or even in and out of their jumps. It's become a fancy entry or exit transition more often... So I can see why you think there are less "iconic" spread eagles but there are plenty of them happening.

Sostenuto. I'm a big fan. Plus, look at all the musical passages that cry out for a long sustained glinding edge.

I guess this is regarded as an elementary skill and that elite skaters have bigger fish to fry. But so many programs seem to just tease a spiral or a speadeagle, but then renege on their promise as they dash off to the next section of the choreography.

 

[4everchan]

Sostenuto. I'm a big fan. Plus, look at all the musical passages that cry out for a long sustained glinding edge.

I guess this is regarded as an elementary skill and that elite skaters have bigger fish to fry. But so many programs seem to just tease a spiral or a speadeagle, but then renege on their promise as they dash off to the next section of the choreography.

this goes back to what Patrick was saying... the number of quads nowadays doesn't allow for much time for choreography because of the time they take for setting them up (especially moves that don't give points). As a matter of fact, most of the prolonged moves we see now, like Ina Bauers, Spirals, Hydro blades etc are included in the Choreo Seq... so what's left in between? That's why I mentioned taking away one jumping pass.

 

[TallyT]

this goes back to what Patrick was saying... the number of quads nowadays doesn't allow for much time for choreography because of the time they take for setting them up (especially moves that don't give points). As a matter of fact, most of the prolonged moves we see now, like Ina Bauers, Spirals, Hydro blades etc are included in the Choreo Seq... so what's left in between? That's why I mentioned taking away one jumping pass.

But instead, they cut the time (for the FS at least). makes perfect sense

 

[gkelly]

But instead, they cut the time (for the FS at least). makes perfect sense

They did both (cutting the time and removing one jumping pass at the same time) if you're talking about the change in the men's FS a couple years ago.

When the men's FS was 4:30 ± 10, there were 8 jumping passes. When the time was reduced to 4:00 ± 10, the number of jumping passes was reduced to 7. So the men's and women's singles free skates now have the same duration and the same number of elements, specifically jump elements.

Of course, one jump* generally doesn't take a full 30 seconds to set up and execute, unless that jump is among the most difficult.
So the effect is that the men do have a little less time for connecting moves in the 4-minute program than they used to have in the 4:30 program with one more jump.

(*They're still allowed 3 combinations/sequences, so the jump that was cut would have been a solo jump.)

 

[4everchan]

They did both (cutting the time and removing one jumping pass at the same time) if you're talking about the change in the men's FS a couple years ago.

When the men's FS was 4:30 ± 10, there were 8 jumping passes. When the time was reduced to 4:00 ± 10, the number of jumping passes was reduced to 7. So the men's and women's singles free skates now have the same duration and the same number of elements, specifically jump elements.

Of course, one jump* generally doesn't take a full 30 seconds to set up and execute, unless that jump is among the most difficult.
So the effect is that the men do have a little less time for connecting moves in the 4-minute program than they used to have in the 4:30 program with one more jump.

(*They're still allowed 3 combinations/sequences, so the jump that was cut would have been a solo jump.)

looking at many of the programs' construction, the first 2 minutes = jump jump jump jump... then, they do a non-jump element to make sure that they reach the half time then the choreography can start, for the last 2 minutes of the program but must include the last 3 jumps too So in that sense, yes, the first two minutes are a jump drill for most skaters.

 

[Blades of Passion]

"I think that figure skating, because it is a performance sport you have to have subjective judging. You can not pretend that a number can judge a performance."
"From my experience the only way to evaluate art is in one simple question… HOW DID IT MAKE YOU FEEL?"

This is a call for more subjective judging. A call for more "how did it make you feel?"
And that, in my opinion, is totally the wrong way. From my point of view we still have too much! subjective judging. We don't need more of that in figure skating, but less.

We don't have too much subjective judging, we have too much BAD judging, with a lack of actual viewpoint and real analysis, a lack of properly evaluating the GOE and PCS in relation to what a top score in each of those categories should be, and a failure to properly separate the skaters in those scores. We also have codified bad judging, because if I am on a panel with 8 idiots, then I am the one who gets punished for my scores being "outside the corridor" while they heinously overscore everything to hell and abuse the mathematic principles the system is supposed to run on. (there was a recent rule change that tried to improve the corridor, but it still exists to some degree)

Figure skating needs subjectivity, and it needs emotional, creative, entertainment impact to be one of the most important aspects of the sport. That's what makes it interesting.

Most things in life are inherently subjective. We ask 10 different doctors their subjective opinion on the best way to treat a disease, and trust in the most thorough or common answers given by that subjective panel, because they are the people who are best informed on the topic.

Figure skating will never be a simple race or simple measurement of how many times the ball hits inside the net. Trying to turn it into that is a destruction of its essence. What needs to be focused on is the quality of the judging and removing the political and nationalistic judging. The sport still exists in a system where judges are appointed only by the individual federations, not by an independent organization whose job is to determine who the best judges are, to continually review and educate.

 

[icewhite]

We don't have too much subjective judging, we have too much BAD judging, with a lack of actual viewpoint and real analysis, a lack of properly evaluating the GOE and PCS in relation to what a top score in each of those categories should be, and a failure to properly separate the skaters in those scores. We also have codified bad judging, because if I am on a panel with 8 idiots, then I am the one who gets punished for my scores being "outside the corridor" while they heinously overscore everything to hell and abuse the mathematic principles the system is supposed to run on. (there was a recent rule change that tried to improve the corridor, but it still exists to some degree)

Figure skating needs subjectivity, and it needs emotional, creative, entertainment impact to be one of the most important aspects of the sport. That's what makes it interesting.

Most things in life are inherently subjective. We ask 10 different doctors their subjective opinion on the best way to treat a disease, and trust in the most thorough or common answers given by that subjective panel, because they are the people who are best informed on the topic.

Figure skating will never be a simple race or simple measurement of how many times the ball hits inside the net. Trying to turn it into that is a destruction of its essence. What needs to be focused on is the quality of the judging and removing the political and nationalistic judging. The sport still exists in a system where judges are appointed only by the individual federations, not by an independent organization whose job is to determine who the best judges are, to continually review and educate.

Don't have the time to answer this properly now, but in general I agree, the biggest problem is wrong judging. Especially the thing with being punished for being outside of the corridor if a judge is the only one doing it correctly...
I don't agree with subjectivity being needed, though. Which are the aspects in figure skating where you feel it is?
Personally I think that when we really can't decide what is better from a sportive perspective (like: who has the better costume, whose music choice is better, what is better: lots of sudden, very skilled and clean stops and turns or fluent gliding with exquisite use of edges) it should either not be taken into account - or have the same value if it can be considered equally difficult on a sportive/technical level.

 

[Magill]

We don't have too much subjective judging, we have too much BAD judging, with a lack of actual viewpoint and real analysis, a lack of properly evaluating the GOE and PCS in relation to what a top score in each of those categories should be, and a failure to properly separate the skaters in those scores. We also have codified bad judging, because if I am on a panel with 8 idiots, then I am the one who gets punished for my scores being "outside the corridor" while they heinously overscore everything to hell and abuse the mathematic principles the system is supposed to run on. (there was a recent rule change that tried to improve the corridor, but it still exists to some degree)

Figure skating needs subjectivity, and it needs emotional, creative, entertainment impact to be one of the most important aspects of the sport. That's what makes it interesting.

Most things in life are inherently subjective. We ask 10 different doctors their subjective opinion on the best way to treat a disease, and trust in the most thorough or common answers given by that subjective panel, because they are the people who are best informed on the topic.

Figure skating will never be a simple race or simple measurement of how many times the ball hits inside the net. Trying to turn it into that is a destruction of its essence. What needs to be focused on is the quality of the judging and removing the political and nationalistic judging. The sport still exists in a system where judges are appointed only by the individual federations, not by an independent organization whose job is to determine who the best judges are, to continually review and educate.

As much as I agree with much of what you say, I do not think emotional engagement and entertainment impact are or should be regarded as judging criteria for an Olympic sport. And, unlike art, we should be able to judge sport in a pretty fair and objective manner. Right now It is not judged this way. I would love to elaborate but I seem not to be able to find time to go into details for this. I hope I am, maybe in a few days time. Let me just say now it is not just my opinion as a disagreeing fan. The way FS is judged would not stand against any more or less modern objective assessment criteria regarding both its use of technology and the way the judging panel is selected and proceeds. Sorry to say that.
The more I know about how it is judged, the more shocked I am. I know is sounds like a heresy to many of you but although there is an element of subjectivity in judging many sports, it must not be a totally subjective exercise. Allowing too much unwarranted and unchecked subjectivity into this process opens the doors wide to bias, corruption and other unwanted interventions. I am not saying they take place or not - and this is not the question. Just the very fact there are no built-in safeguards against them is enough to question the whole process. You talk about BAD judging. But why it is BAD? Because judges are incompetent, or because they are not equipped with proper tools that would allow them to judge "better", or because they are biased, or because they are corrupted, or simply because they are not really independent and professional? Or maybe because the whole system is outdated and built upon subjective appointment and no external valuation to start with? Each of these causes would need different solution to heal.
In our more and more computerized world, the audiences grow more and more demanding as regards objective awarding criteria. I am pretty sure in the long run FS will have to adapt to these demands or see audiences moving away. It will hold out as a show for sure, because it is beautiful and entertaining, but then no need for any judging panel, the audiences just vote with their credit cards, don't they? And it seems this process might have started and become visible already by now.

 

[el henry]

...
In our more and more computerized world, the audiences grow more and more demanding as regards objective awarding criteria. .....

I am afraid I disagree with this assessment.

We do live in a computerized world, and I realize I am an extreme outlier for example with not even wanting a score box.

But I do not believe that figure skating is losing audiences because it does not have more "objective" scoring criteria, and I certainly don't believe that younger people are not watching figure skating as a sport because it is not "objective". I believe quite the opposite, that because figure skating does not emphasize that which makes it unique and separates it from the "numbers game" sports, it is losing audiences, young and old.

But that's just me, based on young folks I know, the "Me and all my friends" argument. Anyone else's "Me and all my friends" argument has just as much to back it up. We'll never know until we have objective studies, there isn't enough money for objective studies, and the vicious circle continues.

 

[Magill]

I am afraid I disagree with this assessment.

We do live in a computerized world, and I realize I am an extreme outlier for example with not even wanting a score box.

But I do not believe that figure skating is losing audiences because it does not have more "objective" scoring criteria, and I certainly don't believe that younger people are not watching figure skating as a sport because it is not "objective". I believe quite the opposite, that because figure skating does not emphasize that which makes it unique and separates it from the "numbers game" sports, it is losing audiences, young and old.

But that's just me, based on young folks I know, the "Me and all my friends" argument. Anyone else's "Me and all my friends" argument has just as much to back it up. We'll never know until we have objective studies, there isn't enough money for objective studies, and the vicious circle continues.

When people neither understand, nor agree with the scoring it is an obvious "putting-off" factor. That's why transparency and objectivity helps. In many walks of life, actually.

 

[icewhite]

I am afraid I disagree with this assessment.

We do live in a computerized world, and I realize I am an extreme outlier for example with not even wanting a score box.

But I do not believe that figure skating is losing audiences because it does not have more "objective" scoring criteria, and I certainly don't believe that younger people are not watching figure skating as a sport because it is not "objective". I believe quite the opposite, that because figure skating does not emphasize that which makes it unique and separates it from the "numbers game" sports, it is losing audiences, young and old.

But that's just me, based on young folks I know, the "Me and all my friends" argument. Anyone else's "Me and all my friends" argument has just as much to back it up. We'll never know until we have objective studies, there isn't enough money for objective studies, and the vicious circle continues.

Well, I do know some opinions from people who don't watch it, don't like it, and it's not about the scoring in the first place (although I think more objective and understandable judging would definitely help) but about the whole look of it: the costumes, the music, the glitter, the extreme/fake smiles, plus the whiteness, the very young competitors...) Too often it looks like a burlesque show, a beauty pageant, a circus show to appeal to many people.

 

[eppen]

This was an entertaining thread, indeed. And throught provoking... I have never regarded FS as an art - it is IMO a sport with a very significant artistic side, but it is still a sport. The content of the programs are defined by rules and what needs to be done to do well in a competition - this has probably always been the same since the beginning of figure skating as a sport. If it was art, you could do whatever you wanted to do to express the emotions, ideas etc. you would wish to express.

In recent years I have learned a lot about the history of figure skating and it is interesting to watch the videos of the periods before the 1970s. I think that in some ways, FS was in its purest form back then - the emphasis was very on what happened on the ice, the blade and how to use it. The other part were the tricks, the jumps and spins, of course. But I would not ever think those performances could be considered art in any way. They were more like gymnastics has always seemed to me - the emphasis is on tricks and setting them up, the presentation manneristic. Would you think of those FS programs in the 1940s, 1950s, 1960s as art?

This began to change in the mid-1960s when women started to raise their arms above shoulder level and add movement and movement styles from dance, classical ballet, modern dance, popular dance styles, etc. Janet Lynn was the bomb who had the art, but not the skill - she could not win with her artistic free skating because she could not make it in the compulsory figures. Her main rival, Trixie Schuba, was the opposite, all skill, little art.

The ISU at that time kind of decided that the art was better and the importance of the compulsories started to get diminished little by little. Interpretation of music became more and more important as a way to construct a skating program, themes were introduced about that time also.

Tech difficulty in the form of complex jumps was introduced definitely in the 1980s and 1990s - 3A first, quads more slowly, but by the late 1990s, they were there already as some of the most important elements for a wanna-be elite male skater (all triples and 3+3 combos for women).

The turn of the millennium saw a super fast and strong leap forward in the quads that the early IJS completely cut down until the next big change of rules in 2010. I recently read an interview of an early IJS skater (I wish I could remember who it was, a man, not a top skater) who praised the IJS for not only emphasizing the jumps like the late 6.0 did. That you could get rewarded for the other bits, the steps and the spins and the performance... Allowing the 2nd quad to the short and changes in scoring quads lead to the current situation within about a decade. The strictness of the early IJS limited the jumps, but that was changed to encourage risk-taking and technical development. Remains to be seen what the ISU sees as the appropriate change next.

Personally I don't think the complex jumps take away any of the charm of the sport. I love the way the best skaters are able to weave together the cutting edge technical difficulty with good to excellent skating skills and all other elements - and make me feel with their interpretation of the music, sometimes even with great characters and storylines. And I also often enjoy the skaters who are not quite up there technically, but can do the interpretation part just perfectly.

E

 

[Magill]

Well, I do know some opinions from people who don't watch it, don't like it, and it's not about the scoring in the first place (although I think more objective and understandable judging would definitely help) but about the whole look of it: the costumes, the music, the glitter, the extreme/fake smiles, plus the whiteness, the very young competitors...) Too often it looks like a burlesque show, a beauty pageant, a circus show to appeal to many people.

Well, yeah, but I am under the impression the point is now not how to win new fans (that's always many-factored enterprise) but how not to keep losing them (which in theory should be easier but - as we see - is not necessarily so).

 

[el henry]

When people neither understand, nor agree with the scoring it is an obvious "putting-off" factor. That's why transparency and objectivity helps. In many walks of life, actually.

I agree about transparency in all walks of life.

But what is objectivity? (I am not being a smart aleck, I mean it as a question). Three revolutions measured by the quarter inch, speed quantified, etc. etc.? That is not figure skating. When we introduce that to figure skating, it is an obvious "putting off" factor.

Figure skating appeals, as a sport, to those who want the costumes, the artistry, the step sequences, the choreo. Which all as of necessity must have an element of subjectivity. Take away that and replace it with measurements and the sport will lose what few adherents it has now.

At least that is obvious to me.

 

[el henry]

Sorry for the double post (and sorry, @4everchan, for introducing this sport again ETA: in case it is not clear, I am laughing at myself, never at another poster)

Many of my fellow NFL Eagles fans are never, ever, ever going to watch figure skating. You could take away every glitz and feather, you could measure every jump to the smallest of measurements, they are never going to watch. People skating on ice to music? Give me some guys running into each other and throwing and catching balls, please.

The sport could be "butched up" and "objectified" from now until next Thursday and they will never watch.

So why try to attract people who can't be attracted?

 

[icewhite]

Sorry for the double post (and sorry, @4everchan, for introducing this sport again)

Many of my fellow NFL Eagles fans are never, ever, ever going to watch figure skating. You could take away every glitz and feather, you could measure every jump to the smallest of measurements, they are never going to watch. People skating on ice to music? Give me some guys running into each other and throwing and catching balls, please.

The sport could be "butched up" and "objectified" from now until next Thursday and they will never watch.

So why try to attract people who can't be attracted?

Okay, I might open a new thread for this discussion since it's so off topic, but I feel we are talking a bit past each other.

 

[el henry]

Okay, I might open a new thread for this discussion since it's so off topic, but I feel we are talking a bit past each other.

Sorry for the off topic, you are right.

 

[4everchan]

Sorry for the double post (and sorry, @4everchan, for introducing this sport again ETA: in case it is not clear, I am laughing at myself, never at another poster)

Many of my fellow NFL Eagles fans are never, ever, ever going to watch figure skating. You could take away every glitz and feather, you could measure every jump to the smallest of measurements, they are never going to watch. People skating on ice to music? Give me some guys running into each other and throwing and catching balls, please.

The sport could be "butched up" and "objectified" from now until next Thursday and they will never watch.

So why try to attract people who can't be attracted?

NFL fans : They can watch Crashed ice which is racing on skates, and then, they will see some of the tricks these skaters do...and from there, they can learn to appreciate figure skating.

 

[CrazyKittenLady]

Three revolutions measured by the quarter inch, speed quantified, etc. etc.? That is not figure skating. When we introduce that to figure skating, it is an obvious "putting off" factor.

Figure skating appeals, as a sport, appeals to those who want the costumes, the artistry, the step sequences, the choreo. Which all as of necessity must have an element of subjectivity. Take away that and replace it with measurements and the sport will lose what few adherents it has now.

At least that is obvious to me.

Hmm, it wouldn't be off putting to me as a fan. On the contrary, I would welcome a more objective evaluation system for jumps that measures rotation, distance covered, speed, and height and does away with the GOE which are such an easy instrument to manipulate scores. Like it or not, jumps are an integral part of the sport of figure skating, no point in pretending otherwise. Their correct evaluation however does not have to come at the expense of costumes, choreo, or artistry at all. I don't really see the issue or connection here.

If you personally don't care about a rotation more or less and rather focus on the artistic side that's great, but stating it does not appeal to figure skating fans straight up invalidates a huge part of the current fandom. Just look at the pages and pages of discussions about pre- or under-rotations in the competition threads.

 

[el henry]

Hmm, it wouldn't be off putting to me as a fan. On the contrary, I would welcome a more objective evaluation system for jumps that measures rotation, distance covered, speed, and height and does away with the GOE which are such an easy instrument to manipulate scores. Like it or not, jumps are an integral part of the sport of figure skating, no point in pretending otherwise. Their correct evaluation however does not have to come at the expense of costumes, choreo, or artistry at all. I don't really see the issue or connection here.

If you personally don't care about a rotation more or less and rather focus on the artistic side that's great, but stating it does not appeal to figure skating fans straight up invalidates a huge part of the current fandom. Just look at the pages and pages of discussions about pre- or under-rotations in the competition threads.

I respect your opinion and of course many fans care about jumps. Believe it or not, I love a gorgeous jump. Jason's 3F is a thing of absolute beauty. Han Yan's 3A, bellissimo. What Dick Button called jumps: the "tricks". But rotating four times just to rotate four times, without concern for the program or the structure of the jump, under the guise of objective measurements ? Meh, for me.

And does a huge number of the current fandom care for jumps more than the other elements? My argument would be that a huge number do not care. But the fact is that we just don't know.

Personally I don't think social media (YouTube views, Board discussions, etc) is a valid metric, but even if it were: are the same persons concerned about URs? How concerned are they? Are they buying tickets to skating events? How many people are concerned about artistry? How many post about that? How many pages and pages and pages about music does figure skating social media have? Do we add that up and compare to the other categories.

When I say "me and all my friends", I cannot emphasize enough, I include myself in that category. Where are the real studies? We don't have them. If we did, I could reconsider. Sadly, I don't think we ever will.

But it does make for good discussions.