ISU proposals: Jumps, spin for 2024-25

[4everchan]

A fall is a fall. Complete rotations are cmplete rotations. Superior height and distance are superior height and distance. Innovative steps on entry are innovative steps on entry. Good air position and musical timing... let me think now, is that good air positions and musical timing?

We can immagine a dofferent scoring philosophy, but in the meantime, for better or worse, the idea of the IJS is to reward everything good that the skater does, while penalizing everything that they do badly.

Actually, I coud go either way on this question. I think the ISU is of two (or motre) minds as well -- hence the continal tickering woth thre minutia of the rules.

It is not like the ISU has never invalidated elements before. May I remind you that a spin without the proper positions can be invalid..or for instance, a skater can land a beautiful triple jump and get zero for it thanks to the zayak rule... So what's nicer... A fall on a quad jump or a beautiful triple, yet one of them could get zero points. Happened to my son at Nationals when he turned his planned quad into a triple....but had already done a triple toe in his combo...

 

[Mathman]

It is not like the ISU has never invalidated elements before.

Like I said, the IU does not know its own mind on this issue,

So what's nicer... A fall on a quad jump or a beautiful triple,

A beautiful triple is nicer than a fall on a quad. For that matter, a beautiful double is nice, too, as is immediately obvious, for instance, from performances by John Curry or Robin Cousins from the 1970s and 80s. The ISU does notseem to know its own mind oin these issues.

 

[gkelly]

Back in 6.0 days, according to the rulebook elements with falls and jumps "landed on two feet" were supposed to earn no credit. This guideline, as written, would apply primarily to free skates.

Of course there was no way of knowing exactly how each judge considered various types of failed jump attempts, since all the scores for all the elements and many aspects of the skating skills were all boiled down into one mark.

In the short program, the deductions for various errors were more specific, closer to the negative GOE guidelines in IJS:

Singles Short Program Deductions

Note that the penalty is lower for landing only one jump in a combo on two feet, or for falling on the second jump.

"Less than required revolutions" is the same deduction as a fall on a solo jump -- and the same for one jump in a combo as for falling on the second jump of the combo. (Presumably, if both jumps were less than required, e.g., a single-single combination, the 0.4 deduction would apply.)

And the penalty for omitting an element altogether is higher than the penalty for a fall.

I'm not aware of specific written guidelines about how to set the base mark for a short program -- i.e., the starting mark for Required Elements before taking the deductions. But surely the difficulty of the jumps attempted was one of the considerations.

E.g., a short program with a 3Lz+3T combination would start with a higher base value than a program with a 3T+2T combination. Then if they both had the same error (e.g., a fall) with the same deduction, the former program would end up with a higher Required Elements score both before and after the deduction.

Because the short program is about required elements, and there are minimum revolutions required for the short program jumps, there has always been more reward for actually going for at least the required difficulty than in skipping an element or watering it down to less than what was required.

To the casual viewer, an easy program with no blatantly disruptive errors looks "nicer" than a harder program with an obvious error or two. But even in 6.0 free skates a clean program with 4 triples and a bunch of doubles, for example, might lose to a program with 5 clean triples and 2 failed attempts. Or maybe not. A lot depended on everything else about the program, not just the jump count or the visible error count.

In a short program, a program where the skater at least attempted all the required elements would generally fare better than one in which the skater completely omitted an element or singled jumps that were required to be at least double or triple.

 

[icewhite]

For me it's not even so much about the disruption of a program by a fall - some skaters fall very gracefully and get up in one movement... but the yolo strategy seems made to bring results that are kind of... random.
Among the Russian men it's the worst for me. So many men going for Lutzes and Flips when they already have huge problems of landing easier layouts. For me as a viewer that feels a bit like gambling - you might land it all at the right time and then you and your coach are the heroes. There are also international girls who cannot even land their 3-3s, but are seriously training quads. I want the skaters to mostly present what they are really capable of, plus take a little risk on maybe one jump or jumping passage, I think I don't want it to be a common strategy to gamble on their 5% chance of getting it all done at the right event.

 

[Mathman]

But even in 6.0 free skates a clean program with 4 triples and a bunch of doubles, for example, might lose to a program with 5 clean triples and 2 failed attempts .Or maybe not.

The glory and the curse of ordinal judging. The judges might like your program, appreciating the things you did well and not coming down too hard on the mistakes -- or they might not.

 

[Mathman]

I want the skaters to mostly present what they are really capable of, plus take a little risk on maybe one jump or jumping passage, I think I don't want it to be a common strategy to gamble on their 5% chance of getting it all done at the right event.

In this I think you got your druthers. I think that is how most coaches and skaters approach their work. Plan a program that emphasizes what you can do well, then throw in a riskier element or two that pushes the envelope. If you keep on attempting a jump on which you have a 70% chance of success, maybe you can get that up to 80% if you put it out there a few times.

 

[Baron Vladimir]

I would actually propose a minus 2 on falls on quads... (minus one on triples) because falls on quads give too many points already....

Not really, fall on 4T worth 4.75, minus 1 for the fall, minus 0,25 in PE and in the end you get 3,5 points only in general. 3T is worthy 4,2 points in base value, plus possible positive GOE, plus possible points in performance, so more than 5 points in general... Same story is with the other type of jumps, if you comparing quads and triples... So, I really don't see a problem here - at the end of the day you still did your work in the air with rotations, as figure skating is not only a blade to ice sport, but spatial type of sport too...

 

[4everchan]

If I were to play pieces that are only 70% or even 80% ready, I'd be out of business. I won't play anything in public until I have an almost perfect chance of success. How do musicians get there.? They do run throughs for instance for colleagues or during informal settings. You don't yolo a Chopin sonata on stage to see if you'll land on the right keys.

 

[4everchan]

Not really, fall on 4T worth 4.75, minus 1 for the fall, minus 0,25 in PE and you get 3,5 points only in general. 3T is worthy 4,2 points in base value, plus possible positive GOE, plus possible points in performance, so more than 5 points in general... Same story is with the other type jumps, if you comparing quads in triples... So, I really don't see a problem here - at the end of the day you still did your work in the air with rotations, as figure skating is not only a blade to ice sport, but spatial type of sport too...

Still. Too many points. We don't have to agree on this

 

[Baron Vladimir]

Still. Too many points. We don't have to agree on this

3.5 points on a fall of 4T is not too many points, comparing to 5 points of landed 3T. Don't argue with me
However, i would give some points to mistakenly repeated/Zayaked jumps, maybe with REP or a new ZAY sign after it (or with a spins too - just erase zero points for 'invalid' elements, if they at the end of the day look as an element for the casual viewers), but i would certainly not encourage skaters to repeat one type of a jump, or one spin, or one choreo they know the best to perform during the whole programme.

 

[gkelly]

If I were to play pieces that are only 70% or even 80% ready, I'd be out of business. I won't play anything in public until I have an almost perfect chance of success. How do musicians get there.? They do run throughs for instance for colleagues or during informal settings. You don't yolo a Chopin sonata on stage to see if you'll land on the right keys.

And when skaters perform in art-focused ice theatre-type shows, or even in arena tours, they are less likely to attempt elements they can't complete successfully.

Competition is not primarily about who can skate the most aesthetically pleasing, error-free performance. It's about who can demonstrate the best collection of a variety of difficult skating skills. The spins and step sequences in competition also tend to be more technically challenging and therefore more error prone in competition than in artistic shows.

Although sometimes they do, because in some contexts skating audiences are excited to see stars attempting their signature moves, even if those moves are risky.

And of course, the very nature of the medium introduces the possibility of errors provoked by flaws in the ice surface, which are inevitable and beyond the individual skaters' control.

So falls and other disruptive errors are also possible in shows where skaters are only executing skills they never miss in practice. Even crossovers. Ice is slippery.

If there were a sport of executing top-difficulty sonatas on an instrument with greased keys, there would be a lot more errors than those same musicians would make in shows where they can choose repertoire they're comfortable with and not have to worry about slippery equipment.

 

[4everchan]

And when skaters perform in art-focused ice theatre-type shows, or even in arena tours, they are less likely to attempt elements they can't complete successfully.

Competition is not primarily about who can skate the most aesthetically pleasing, error-free performance. It's about who can demonstrate the best collection of a variety of difficult skating skills. The spins and step sequences in competition also tend to be more technically challenging and therefore more error prone in competition than in artistic shows.

And of course, the very nature of the medium introduces the possibility of errors provoked by flaws in the ice surface, which are inevitable and beyond the individual skaters' control.

If there were a sport of executing top-difficulty sonatas on an instrument with greased keys, there would be a lot more errors than those same musicians would make in shows where they can choose repertoire they're comfortable with and not have to worry about slippery equipment.

We do the same for competitions, in terms of technical accuracy..Less risk taking may be expressed with less originality in the interpretation but never in less precision. As a matter of fact, you gotta be cleaner even for competitions. And pianos are very different from one another... Keys are slippery btw... especially when sweaty
..But anyway..happy to leave it there.

 

[icewhite]

In this I think you got your druthers. I think that is how most coaches and skaters approach their work. Plan a program that emphasizes what you can do well, then throw in a riskier element or two that pushes the envelope. If you keep on attempting a jump on which you have a 70% chance of success, maybe you can get that up to 80% if you put it out there a few times.

Well, I exaggerated of course in my post above, and I also didn't differentiate between falls and URs, but for many skaters 70% clean would be amazing for a few of their jumps. Too often for my taste their success rates (if we call a clean jump a success) on at least two of their jumps is below 50%. I love some of these skaters and I know they are often under the pressure to do this because of internal competition, or they were once able to do them better and are fighting to get them back, but I would prefer a scoring system that does not encourage to take several jumps into your programs which you are more likely to fail in some way than to land cleanly. It's also cool if a skater does otherwise have great jumps and is now fighting for "the next step", but that's not what I mean. I mean skaters that regularly have very messy skates but are still putting (several) quads in which they are less likely to land clean because points wise it's worth it.
I know Kondratiuk has had severe back issues, but if you look for instance at his skating scores charts and his jump layouts (and also the way he jumps) and also the jump layouts from other skaters from that camp (Fedorov ), this is just a messy strategy which nonetheless payed off for Kondratiuk and hence is pursued further and not just by him.

 

[Mathman]

If I were to play pieces that are only 70% or even 80% ready, I'd be out of business. I won't play anything in public until I have an almost perfect chance of success.

Sports is a different sort of enterprise. A basketball player has to shoot the ball when an opening presents iteself, even if he has less than a 50% chance that it will go in.

In hockey, less than 9% of shots on goal are successful (7051 out of 80,117 in last years NHL season). Still, the players continue to whack away at the puck -- and to celebrate every one of those 7051 goals.

 

[4everchan]

Sports is a different sort of enterprise. A basketball player has to shoot the ball when an opening presents iteself, even if he has less than a 50% chance that it will go in.

In hockey, less than 9% of shots on goal are successful (7051 out of 80,117 in last years NHL season). Still, the players continue to whack away at the puck -- and to celebrate every one of those 7051 goals.

Hehe. So then let's not pretend anymore that figure skating is art

I am not looking for perfection really.. just . Less. Falls. So less points on risky elements and more commitment on the steps and spins and presentation. Should be win win

 

[gkelly]

Hehe. So then let's not pretend anymore that figure skating is art

I would never claim that competitive skating is art.

Sometimes a rare skater is able to transcend the demands of competitive sport to create something that could qualify as art as well. But that's not the primary intention.

(Unless a new sport -- or maybe I should just say a new competitive discipline -- of "artistic skating" is invented in which artistic coherence takes precedence over athleticism and technique, but as of now that doesn't exist, at least not in the standard ISU disciplines.)

I am not looking for perfection really.. just . Less. Falls. So less points on risky elements and more commitment on the steps and spins and presentation. Should be win win

I too want to see more value placed on blade-to-ice skills or on different kinds of jump difficulty in addition to number of rotations in the air.

But I expect the competitive sport to value pushing the technical envelope in all those skills. And therefore I expect perfect performances to be the exception in competitive skating, not the norm.

Even in ice dance, mistakes happen.

In show skating, I would expect more emphasis on clean performance and on artistic/entertainment value, with risky skills the exception rather than the norm. But still there will be occasional freak falls. And if the show is being filmed for later broadcast, there will be retakes.

I can enjoy both, but I don't expect elite athletic competition to be about playing it safe.

 

[Jumping_Bean]

So then let's not pretend anymore that figure skating is art

Figure skating is both a sport and an art - And that also means that it cannot completely fulfill either definition to its fullest when they contradict each other.

This is the same in other similar disciplines like rhythmic gymnastics, and achieving a balance between art and sports is the purpose and aim of a good code of points. It's the reason why the CoP in RG and the judging system in FS are constantly discussed and readjusted.

 

[4everchan]

I would never claim that competitive skating is art.

Sometimes a rare skater is able to transcend the demands of competitive sport to create something that could qualify as art as well. But that's not the primary intention.

(Unless a new sport -- or maybe I should just day a new competitive discipline -- of "artistic skating" is invented in which artistic coherence takes precedence over athleticism and technique, but as of now that doesn't exist, at least not in the standard ISU disciplines.)


I too want to see more value placed on blade-to-ice skills or on different kinds of jump difficulty in addition to number of rotations in the air.

But I expect the competitive sport to value pushing the technical envelope in all those skills. And therefore I expect perfect performances to be the exception in competitive skating, not the norm.

Even in ice dance, mistakes happen.

In show skating, I would expect more emphasis on clean performance and on artistic/entertainment value, with risky skills the exception rather than the norm. But still there will be occasional freak falls. And if the show is being filmed for later broadcast, there will be retakes.

I can enjoy both, but I don't expect elite athletic competition to be about playing it safe.

I am fine with everything you say really. The only thing I would add is, fine, it is a competition and athletes want to risk things to get the big rewards... Fair enough, but if they do not land their jumps then, can we please penalized them a bit more...

 

[4everchan]

Figure skating is both a sport and an art - And that also means that it cannot completely fulfill either definition to its fullest when they contradict each other.

This is the same in other similar disciplines like rhythmic gymnastics, and achieving a balance between art and sports is the purpose and aim of a good code of points. It's the reason why the CoP in RG and the judging system in FS are constantly discussed and readjusted.

We had a long thread about this
I was being being cheeky. I believe competitive skating is sport.

 

[Mathman]

Hehe. So then let's not pretend anymore that figure skating is art

Can you meet me halfway and agree that figure skating also is not logical? Not that it is illogical. Rather, the opinions that we express are outside the boundaries of logical inference and dispassionate rules of argumentation.