ISU releases official agenda with proposals for 2024: age limits, jump limits and more

[TallyT]

I think that there is no harm in speculating aboiut "what we might expect." What else is there to talk about until we see what actually happens? That way we can enjoy watching to see whether it worked out the way we expected, or whether the new season is full of surprises.

Agreed, after all even though the programs will change in line with the new rules, we won't know how until each skater has their first competition, so speculation is harmless. Though they will change, each skater will do so in accordance with their own strengths and weaknesses - it's not one size fits all - so there's some avenue for guesswork there.

@Arigato brings up a good point about record comparisons being invalid. Nothing new there, the same has applied to ice dance when the requirements change, but sometimes people don't get that.

Which is as I understand it? why when there's a massive change as in 2018, the records are set as historic.

 

[Mathman]

@Arigato brings up a good point about record comparisons being invalid. Nothing new there, the same has applied to ice dance when the requirements change, but sometimes people don't get that.

Peggy Fleming scored 1970.5 points at the 1968 Olympics. A record that will never be broken by man or woman.

 

[Mathman]

Reminds me of when a certain skating organization claimed their skater beat Shoma Uno's record ...

Don't you just hate those "certain skating organizations." They are always up to no good.

 

[sisinka]

Or we could look at it like this. Here are the number of TES points that the top 4 got for their quads, versus how many points they got for all other technical elements combined, including spins, footwaork and lesser jumps (such as a paltry triple Axel combo).

Malinin: quads 94, everything else 43
Fa: quads 57, everything else 59
Kagiyama: quads 47. everything else 64
Britschgi 26, everything else 68

Well, at least Fa was well-balanced between quads and everything else on the tech side.

I would suggest not to use this mathematics. Because when you compare “quad“ points versus “non quad“ points – Ilia had only one jump with triples, while Adam had three and Yuma four – so it is logical that Adam’s and Yuma’s “non quad“ points will be much higher than Ilia’s and in the same moment well balanced Adam’s points against not that well balanced Yuma’s points are caused with the fact that Yuma had one less quad = one more triple jump in his Free Program.

So taken from your calculation in post above – with one more quad jump Yuma would get from 47 points for quad jumps to let’s say more than 57 points…while 64 points would drop because of one less triple jump to let’s say 57 points.

So using your original strategy of balanced program I tried to compare points for Jumps versus points for Spins versus points for Step Sequences versus Skating Skills at World Championships 2024 – Free Skate:

Points for Jumps:

- Ilia – 115.95
- Adam – 94.64
- Yuma - 86.40
- Lukas – 71.78

Points for Spins (took first six only):

- Jason – 14.56
- Yuma – 13.61
- Lukas - 12.89
- Shoma – 12.67
- Ilia – 12.04
- Adam – 11.62

Points for Step Sequence and Choreographic Sequence:

- Jason – 11.15
- Yuma – 10.68
- Adam – 10.57
- Shoma – 10.49
- Lukas – 9.93
- Ilia – 9.19

Skating Skills:

- Yuma – 9.46
- Jason – 9.29
- Adam – 9.25
- Ilia - 9.07
- Shoma was below but in reality he is above, but I do understand that points dropped because of mistakes.

In non jumping elements Ilia is in top 5-7 (I expect Deniss Vasiljevs having higher score for spins and Step Sequences), while in jumping elements he is far the best. Ilia and Adam are the only ones whose every jump element went over 10 points (base value + GOE), Ilia’s jump element with lowest points got 12.61 points.

I am glad Ilia finished World Championships at high note skating clean and getting deserved gold…but frankly ISU should be thankfull to his ability to skate clean. Because if you look at scores…

Ilia got 227.79 points for Free Program, Adam got 206.90 points – without backflip it would be 208.90 points, Yuma got 203.30 points – clean second triple axel would give him around 209.30 points. Shoma’s Personal Best is 204.47 from GPF 2022.

This score means that Ilia had more than 18 points reserve…so Ilia would win even if:
1) he would fall once / twice in a jump element
2) he would completely “forget“ or miss to execute one jump element
3) fall on all three spins

I do believe that ISU wants well balanced programs (they write it in rules ) and Ilia’s superior jump technique and range of quad jumps and great quality of execution of all quad jumps is creating this gap in points…so I will not be surprised if number of jumps will be indeed decreased.

Taking one jump element from Free Program was discussed much longer, but I do believe that Ilia’s win supported this decision.

Which supports @lariko 's opinion that ONLY six jump elements in Free Program is a step against Ilia (not first planned, but it will end like this), because it will give him one less possibility to surpass his skating friends and get incredibly high score.

Pure theory - having one less jump element men will likely sacrifice jump element with the lowest points - looking at Free Program at World Championships 2024:

- Ilia - quad salchow - 12.61
- Adam - second triple axel - 10.86
- Lukas - triple lutz - 7.84
- Yuma - triple flip - 7.50 (not counting points for fall on triple axel)
- Jason - double axel (it was single at World Championships) - base value for double axel with bonus for the second half of program 3.63 + GOE let's say 1.00 - 4.63
- Shoma - didn't skate clean so it is even bigger theory - the last jump was probably meant to be quad salchow - so the lowest points in his jump elements would be 1) triple axel (base value 8.00) OR 2) quad salchow (base value with bonus for the second half of program 10.67) + GOE - so he could get over 10.50 for triple axel and over 12.50 points for quad salchow.

The rest of the field at World Championships 2024 in Free Program - their lowest points in jump element (if landed cleanly) - it would be triple flip / lutz / loop - so points let's say from 5.50 to 7.50.

Losing one jump element with the lowest points - means that Ilia will lose additionally more than 5 points comparing to men losing triple flip / lutz. Adam will additionally lose more than 3 points comparing to men with triple flip / lutz.

So you can clearly see that mainly Ilia's but also Adam's loss and theoretically Shoma's loss will be bigger if one jump element will disappear. Which is a disadvantage for them.

On the other hand Yuma, Lukas and mainly Jason (and all non quad skaters) AND all other skaters will have the advantage of missing one jump element... an element which was increasing point gap between top three jumpers and them.

It is no disaster of course. Ilia and Adam will keep improving in non jump elements. For all three Shoma including it will no way prevent them from winning competitions IF they will skate clean programs.

If Yuma decides to make his jumping content more difficult including second quad flip or quad loop / lutz - he will be in the same position like those above.

BUT THE PRESSURE on top jumpers will be even bigger...
1) because their superior ability to gain extremely high points for jumping elements will be reduced.
2) because there is a HUGE difference in difficulty of skating clean program with triple jumps OR with quad / triple jumps

Talk about the fact that quad jump versus triple jump - the first mentioned is much more physically / energetically / mentally demanding and it is so easy to make mistake and fall...well, we don't need to argue about it. And with less jump elements, every mistake in quad jump (triple as well) will cost them more. And talking about quad jump, it is so demanding jump that NOBODY is able to land it every time.

So we can get surprising results in the future, NOT because other skaters would be that much better in spins and steps, but because they would risk less with smaller number of quad jumps. Which may lead to reduce number of quad jumps (like it happened in 2009 / 2010, not sure with years, but I think somebody mentioned it here)...so ISU will react and increase base value of quad jumps again.

I do agree with @4everchan that it is speculation as we don't know how will skaters plan their content based on new rules - only time will show. In the same moment I do agree with @Mathman that speculations are OK. Because frankly these ISU and Skating Federation's suggestions for changes come exactly from analyses of past few season's programs and outcomes are created from current scheme of programs. If ISU and Federations follow this path I think it is fine that @Mathman is doing the same.

 

[AxelLover]

As did your icon Denis Ten, who I consider to be one of the most beautiful skaters ever. He remains one of the most balanced skaters as well. RIP Denis - may your legacy continue to inspire others.

God I miss his skating, he was one of a kind. Of course that can be said about any skater, but in his case I feel it extremely deeply. I also wish we had the chance to see him develop as a choreographer. It's just so sad. I hope his family is as OK as possible.

Anyway, as for reinventing the "overall great free skate with two good quads", Denis did that in 2015 and there had already been other skaters doing so in 2013 and 2014. So Patrick really deserves the credit here as he was the first one (doing it in 2011).

 

[Mathman]

<whole post>

To me the main takeaway of this analysis is that the jump points are widely spread out while all other categories are bunched together. This means that among the top men the biggest jumpers can never be overtaken by the best spinners, the skaters with the best skating skills or most elegant choreography, etc.

If the ISU thinks that this is out of balance, I think that the only remedy is to compactify scores on the jump side. I do not really see any way to spread out the component scores, for instance, because one continuous scale must serve for all skating competituons from beginners to Olympians. But we could simply lower the values of all jumps across the board. It would still be th case that the skater who has (and delivers) everything will win going away, but that's as it shoud be.

On the other hand, it would provide more options for skaters eager to improve their results, Suppose a triple Lutz got 4 points and a quad toe 5,5. So one possibility would be for a skater to work hard on his quad and beat his rivals by 1.5 points. Or he could work on presentation or skating skills and try to get his 8.5s up to 8.75. and win by 2.5 points. Or he could concentrate on spins and footwork to make up the gap.

As is, with one extra quad worth 10 points, there is really no viable alternative for someone aspiring to the world championship than to do 3 quads instead of only 2, or 5 instead of 4.

 

[Mathman]

Anyway, as for reinventing the "overall great free skate with two good quads", Denis did that in 2015 and there had already been other skaters doing so in 2013 and 2014. So Patrick really deserves the credit here as he was the first one (doing it in 2011).

I remember that 2011 world championship so vividly. I had the nerve to post on Golden Skate that I hoped Ryan Bradley, who also planned two quads, might make the top ten.

What'd I say that for? I had just insulted the whole country of Canada and Queen Elizabeth into the bargain by mentioning any other skater than Patrick.

In the event, Bradley was not successful on his second quad and dropped to 13th, which served me right!

 

[lariko]

I would suggest not to use this mathematics. Because when you compare “quad“ points versus “non quad“ points – Ilia had only one jump with triples, while Adam had three and Yuma four – so it is logical that Adam’s and Yuma’s “non quad“ points will be much higher than Ilia’s and in the same moment well balanced Adam’s points against not that well balanced Yuma’s points are caused with the fact that Yuma had one less quad = one more triple jump in his Free Program.

So taken from your calculation in post above – with one more quad jump Yuma would get from 47 points for quad jumps to let’s say more than 57 points…while 64 points would drop because of one less triple jump to let’s say 57 points.

So using your original strategy of balanced program I tried to compare points for Jumps versus points for Spins versus points for Step Sequences versus Skating Skills at World Championships 2024 – Free Skate:

Points for Jumps:

- Ilia – 115.95
- Adam – 94.64
- Yuma - 86.40
- Lukas – 71.78

Points for Spins (took first six only):

- Jason – 14.56
- Yuma – 13.61
- Lukas - 12.89
- Shoma – 12.67
- Ilia – 12.04
- Adam – 11.62

Points for Step Sequence and Choreographic Sequence:

- Jason – 11.15
- Yuma – 10.68
- Adam – 10.57
- Shoma – 10.49
- Lukas – 9.93
- Ilia – 9.19

Skating Skills:

- Yuma – 9.46
- Jason – 9.29
- Adam – 9.25
- Ilia - 9.07
- Shoma was below but in reality he is above, but I do understand that points dropped because of mistakes.

In non jumping elements Ilia is in top 5-7 (I expect Deniss Vasiljevs having higher score for spins and Step Sequences), while in jumping elements he is far the best. Ilia and Adam are the only ones whose every jump element went over 10 points (base value + GOE), Ilia’s jump element with lowest points got 12.61 points.

I am glad Ilia finished World Championships at high note skating clean and getting deserved gold…but frankly ISU should be thankfull to his ability to skate clean. Because if you look at scores…

Ilia got 227.79 points for Free Program, Adam got 206.90 points – without backflip it would be 208.90 points, Yuma got 203.30 points – clean second triple axel would give him around 209.30 points. Shoma’s Personal Best is 204.47 from GPF 2022.

This score means that Ilia had more than 18 points reserve…so Ilia would win even if:
1) he would fall once / twice in a jump element
2) he would completely “forget“ or miss to execute one jump element
3) fall on all three spins

I do believe that ISU wants well balanced programs (they write it in rules ) and Ilia’s superior jump technique and range of quad jumps and great quality of execution of all quad jumps is creating this gap in points…so I will not be surprised if number of jumps will be indeed decreased.

Taking one jump element from Free Program was discussed much longer, but I do believe that Ilia’s win supported this decision.

Which supports @lariko 's opinion that ONLY six jump elements in Free Program is a step against Ilia (not first planned, but it will end like this), because it will give him one less possibility to surpass his skating friends and get incredibly high score.

Pure theory - having one less jump element men will likely sacrifice jump element with the lowest points - looking at Free Program at World Championships 2024:

- Ilia - quad salchow - 12.61
- Adam - second triple axel - 10.86
- Lukas - triple lutz - 7.84
- Yuma - triple flip - 7.50 (not counting points for fall on triple axel)
- Jason - double axel (it was single at World Championships) - base value for double axel with bonus for the second half of program 3.63 + GOE let's say 1.00 - 4.63
- Shoma - didn't skate clean so it is even bigger theory - the last jump was probably meant to be quad salchow - so the lowest points in his jump elements would be 1) triple axel (base value 8.00) OR 2) quad salchow (base value with bonus for the second half of program 10.67) + GOE - so he could get over 10.50 for triple axel and over 12.50 points for quad salchow.

The rest of the field at World Championships 2024 in Free Program - their lowest points in jump element (if landed cleanly) - it would be triple flip / lutz / loop - so points let's say from 5.50 to 7.50.

Losing one jump element with the lowest points - means that Ilia will lose additionally more than 5 points comparing to men losing triple flip / lutz. Adam will additionally lose more than 3 points comparing to men with triple flip / lutz.

So you can clearly see that mainly Ilia's but also Adam's loss and theoretically Shoma's loss will be bigger if one jump element will disappear. Which is a disadvantage for them.

On the other hand Yuma, Lukas and mainly Jason (and all non quad skaters) AND all other skaters will have the advantage of missing one jump element... an element which was increasing point gap between top three jumpers and them.

It is no disaster of course. Ilia and Adam will keep improving in non jump elements. For all three Shoma including it will no way prevent them from winning competitions IF they will skate clean programs.

If Yuma decides to make his jumping content more difficult including second quad flip or quad loop / lutz - he will be in the same position like those above.

BUT THE PRESSURE on top jumpers will be even bigger...
1) because their superior ability to gain extremely high points for jumping elements will be reduced.
2) because there is a HUGE difference in difficulty of skating clean program with triple jumps OR with quad / triple jumps

Talk about the fact that quad jump versus triple jump - the first mentioned is much more physically / energetically / mentally demanding and it is so easy to make mistake and fall...well, we don't need to argue about it. And with less jump elements, every mistake in quad jump (triple as well) will cost them more. And talking about quad jump, it is so demanding jump that NOBODY is able to land it every time.

So we can get surprising results in the future, NOT because other skaters would be that much better in spins and steps, but because they would risk less with smaller number of quad jumps. Which may lead to reduce number of quad jumps (like it happened in 2009 / 2010, not sure with years, but I think somebody mentioned it here)...so ISU will react and increase base value of quad jumps again.

I do agree with @4everchan that it is speculation as we don't know how will skaters plan their content based on new rules - only time will show. In the same moment I do agree with @Mathman that speculations are OK. Because frankly these ISU and Skating Federation's suggestions for changes come exactly from analyses of past few season's programs and outcomes are created from current scheme of programs. If ISU and Federations follow this path I think it is fine that @Mathman is doing the same.

And this is exactly what I see. In general principle, it is Malinin vs Brown ruling.

My biggest problem with it, in principal, favors mediocrity versus jaw dropping excellence, particularly when taken together with PCS and GoE changes of the last three years. It the third step in pulling up the skaters with 0 to 2 quads by the ears, and, additionally, it makes ultra-c undesirable in women's skating if the technical panel tends to over-reward lower level jumps and over-penalize high level jumps as they were all season in women.

Will they achieve clean skates if they keep adjusting rules? Sort of. There is always a chance of a fall or a pop. If the rule passes on making a pop preferable to a fall, then we will see almost clean skates with pops.

Is a competition with aall clean skates and who knows how awarded ranks worth watching? Frankly, for me--no. I had seen it with junior women this year at JGPF and it was boring. They all jumped the same content and all twirled prettily. Why one got higher PCS than another was mystifying...but not in a good way. About the only thing that set them apart was music choice, but even there, sorry to say, there wasn't any significant difference.

Personally, I don't feel that tranquility is a great goal to pursue with competitions that go for many, many hours. 30 skaters uneventfully gliding through their routines to Hallelujah and Ave Maria, with the skater who skated for most years winning because their PCSs was 9.5 average versus 9.2 average as carefully fudged in the backroom...eww.

 

[TallyT]

And this is exactly what I see. In general principle, it is Malinin vs Brown ruling.

My biggest problem with it, in principal, favors mediocrity versus jaw dropping excellence, particularly when taken together with PCS and GoE changes of the last three years. It the third step in pulling up the skaters with 0 to 2 quads by the ears, and, additionally, it makes ultra-c undesirable in women's skating if the technical panel tends to over-reward lower level jumps and over-penalize high level jumps as they were all season in women.

Humpty-Dumptying a bit here, aren't you?

 

[Jeanie19]

I'm okay for the 6 jump rule... Only if the following happens:
Unless you have a clear edge on both Lutz and Flip, only one can be used and I expect every skater except a handful will get the edge call. And 3 jump series are allowed without the. Euler.

 

[icewhite]

I'm okay for the 6 jump rule... Only if the following happens:
Unless you have a clear edge on both Lutz and Flip, only one can be used and I expect every skater except a handful will get the edge call. And 3 jump series are allowed without the. Euler.

Sounds good.
But I would also, especially with 6 jump passages, like an incentive for skaters to have more different jumps and less repetitions.
For instance if I know and have seen that Kaori can do a 3F+3T I don't really need an additional 3F+2T... If I've seen Lorine's 3Lo+2A+2T I don't feel the need to see the single 3Lo in addition. For the men, I don't need the single 4T if I've already seen the 4T+3T... and so on.
I know it's about stamina, but I'd rather see the energy go into something else, whether a different jump or whatever.
And also I'd like to give the skaters the choice to do either another jump of a certain maximal bv or another step sequence with certain different requirements or another choreo sequence.

 

[Jeanie19]

Sounds good.
But I would also, especially with 6 jump passages, like an incentive for skaters to have more different jumps and less repetitions.
For instance if I know and have seen that Kaori can do a 3F+3T I don't really need an additional 3F+2T... If I've seen Lorine's 3Lo+2A+2T I don't feel the need to see the single 3Lo in addition. For the men, I don't need the single 4T if I've already seen the 4T+3T... and so on.
I know it's about stamina, but I'd rather see the energy go into something else, whether a different jump or whatever.
And also I'd like to give the skaters the choice to do either another jump of a certain maximal bv or another step sequence with certain different requirements or another choreo sequence.

I would like skaters to feel free to skate their favorite jumps without being judged for not having multiple Lutz and Flip. More 3S and 3loop. And I would like to see more variety 3S3loop2loop, etc. Clean and variety skates please.

 

[icewhite]

And this is exactly what I see. In general principle, it is Malinin vs Brown ruling.

My biggest problem with it, in principal, favors mediocrity versus jaw dropping excellence, particularly when taken together with PCS and GoE changes of the last three years. It the third step in pulling up the skaters with 0 to 2 quads by the ears, and, additionally, it makes ultra-c undesirable in women's skating if the technical panel tends to over-reward lower level jumps and over-penalize high level jumps as they were all season in women.

Will they achieve clean skates if they keep adjusting rules? Sort of. There is always a chance of a fall or a pop. If the rule passes on making a pop preferable to a fall, then we will see almost clean skates with pops.

Is a competition with aall clean skates and who knows how awarded ranks worth watching? Frankly, for me--no. I had seen it with junior women this year at JGPF and it was boring. They all jumped the same content and all twirled prettily. Why one got higher PCS than another was mystifying...but not in a good way. About the only thing that set them apart was music choice, but even there, sorry to say, there wasn't any significant difference.

Personally, I don't feel that tranquility is a great goal to pursue with competitions that go for many, many hours. 30 skaters uneventfully gliding through their routines to Hallelujah and Ave Maria, with the skater who skated for most years winning because their PCSs was 9.5 average versus 9.2 average as carefully fudged in the backroom...eww.

I feel like it might be better to take Malinin and especially Brown out of the equation. Brown is often used as the example of an "artistic" skater, but really he is such an outlier. Imo with him everything comes together: he has a certain age and built a certain reputation because he has had many clean or almost clean programs over the years. He's from one of the two most powerful feds. He's from a powerful coaching camp. His style and choices hit a nerve for many viewers who like figure skating. Although there is some bias against his sexual orientation he has a very outgoing, engaging personality, is always sweet and smiling. So he's a fan favourite. All of his elements are of very high quality.

Not every skater who skates beautifully but lacks the jumps gets this treatment. Vasiljevs is another one who is very popular with fans and judges. But for me that's the topic of reputation, powerplay and judging inconsistency, and although it seems you think it can be overcome with looking at jumps only I don't think that's possible in figure skating, because 1) then it's just not figure skating anymore, 2) there are also problems with the execution of jumps, calls, "grey zones". Judging jumps is not clear cut either. In the case of Malinin there's nothing to argue about. His jumps are almost all textbook. But as you know that's not always the case.

I suppose you know I'm always complaining about the women's programs, but that's just another problem. I don't think death by program boredom should be replaced by death by jumping boredom.

 

[lariko]

I feel like it might be better to take Malinin and especially Brown out of the equation. Brown is often used as the example of an "artistic" skater, but really he is such an outlier. Imo with him everything comes together: he has a certain age and built a certain reputation because he has had many clean or almost clean programs over the years. He's from one of the two most powerful feds. He's from a powerful coaching camp. His style and choices hit a nerve for many viewers who like figure skating. Although there is some bias against his sexual orientation he has a very outgoing, engaging personality, is always sweet and smiling. So he's a fan favourite. All of his elements are of very high quality.

Not every skater who skates beautifully but lacks the jumps gets this treatment. Vasiljevs is another one who is very popular with fans and judges. But for me that's the topic of reputation, powerplay and judging inconsistency, and although it seems you think it can be overcome with looking at jumps only I don't think that's possible in figure skating, because 1) then it's just not figure skating anymore, 2) there are also problems with the execution of jumps, calls, "grey zones". Judging jumps is not clear cut either. In the case of Malinin there's nothing to argue about. His jumps are almost all textbook. But as you know that's not always the case.

I suppose you know I'm always complaining about the women's programs, but that's just another problem. I don't think death by program boredom should be replaced by death by jumping boredom.

Why should we take them out of equation when the equation is trying to minimize one and maximize the other?

I saw Brown live in competition, and how should I put it...his 'everything else' is not as different from other skaters as people pretend it is. Skaters like Vasiljevs and Selevko that were just as good, Kagiyama and Cha were frankly better at 'everything else', Bridghchi is by far more fun to watch. As for Brown's mannerisms, I just don't like it. He, like, plasters that smile on, like he's on the verge of giggling all the time. In the modern world, I prefer something deeper and more sincere than that saccharine, pseudo-boyish cuteness Brown sells at age 30 or whatever he is. I mean, if there is this absolute necessity to see the same skater for 20 years, endlessly, shouldn't they at least evolve their personality from age 13 to something more grown-up to justify watching them for 20 years?

 

[TallyT]

Why should we take them out of equation when the equation is trying to minimize one and maximize the other?

I saw Brown live in competition, and how should I put it...his 'everything else' is not as different from other skaters as people pretend it is. Skaters like Vasiljevs and Selevko that were just as good, Kagiyama and Cha were frankly better at 'everything else', Bridghchi is by far more fun to watch. As for Brown's mannerisms, I just don't like it. He, like, plasters that smile on, like he's on the verge of giggling all the time. In the modern world, I prefer something deeper and more sincere than that saccharine, pseudo-boyish cuteness Brown sells at age 30 or whatever he is. I mean, if there is this absolute necessity to see the same skater for 20 years, endlessly, shouldn't they at least evolve their personality from age 13 to something more grown-up to justify watching them for 20 years?

When someone descends to personal abuse, that's a clear sign they know their argument is worthless.

 

[icewhite]

Why should we take them out of equation when the equation is trying to minimize one and maximize the other?

I saw Brown live in competition, and how should I put it...his 'everything else' is not as different from other skaters as people pretend it is. Skaters like Vasiljevs and Selevko that were just as good, Kagiyama and Cha were frankly better at 'everything else', Bridghchi is by far more fun to watch. As for Brown's mannerisms, I just don't like it. He, like, plasters that smile on, like he's on the verge of giggling all the time. In the modern world, I prefer something deeper and more sincere than that saccharine, pseudo-boyish cuteness Brown sells at age 30 or whatever he is. I mean, if there is this absolute necessity to see the same skater for 20 years, endlessly, shouldn't they at least evolve their personality from age 13 to something more grown-up to justify watching them for 20 years?

Look, I'm not the biggest Brown fan. I think he's an amazing skater, yet, by now, overscored. In my eyes, he deserves very high PCS, but not the 10s they give him, expecially not when he's not at his best and especially not in comparison to some other skaters who should but do not get the same marks.

Yet, what you think about his personality should not have anything to do with the scoring. How is "I don't like his personality/smiling" an argument in the discussion of rules or scoring?

I think he should be taken out of the equation because he's an outlier and cannot be "used" when talking about how we rate or should rate jumps and other aspects.

 

[gkelly]

If the ISU thinks that this is out of balance, I think that the only remedy is to compactify scores on the jump side. I do not really see any way to spread out the component scores, for instance, because one continuous scale must serve for all skating competituons from beginners to Olympians.

Possible way to spread out the component scores:

Increase the program component factors so that the maximum score (10s on all components) would add up to more than 100 for a men's free skate, more than 80 for a women's or pair's free skate.

Remember that the component factors (or at least their intended totals) were set at a time when the top male jumpers might have been attempting two 4T and one 4S, or vice versa, and the rest triples likely including two 3A; and the top female jumpers were attempting 7 triples and a 2A or two, with very rare attempts at 3A or that one junior 4S of Miki Ando's.

In the decades that followed, jump content has increased, and also top skaters have show the ability to earn level 4 on spins and steps fairly consistently. Therefore free skate TES well above 100 for men, and well above 80 for quad-jumping women, have become the norm.

And, yes, on the other side skaters have also figured out how to better fulfill the PCS criteria and judges have become more willing to award PCS in the 9s.

Since the TES has gone up, if the intention is for PCS to more or less balance the TES, it would only make sense to raise the maximum PCS to approximately equal the maximum TES, as was closer to the case 20 years ago.

It may or may not be the same skaters earning the top TES and top PCS. Any skater who can excel in both can win. But a balance that allows an exceptional skater/performer with just "good" jump content (difficulty+quality) to compete on an even playing field with a skater who has exceptional jump content but just "good" skating and performance would do much to rebalance the values of the sport with jump content still important but no longer as overwhelming as has recently been the case.

When there were still 5 components, I would have said just change the FS factors from 2.0 and 1.6 per component to 2.4 and 2.0, respectively. Or even make them the same for both sexes, if we want to embrace quads as possible elements from women but also accept that the best female skaters may not be the best jumpers in terms of number of rotations.

Now that we're down to 3 components, the math is a little more complicated. Still, I would like to see the maximum total PCS points available be closer to the maximum TES expected at the top.

The current proposals to remove one jump pass and make one spin choreographic will lower the maximum expected TES, but there will still be a gap that I would still like to see closed by raising the max PCS. Exact factoring to be determined.

I also wouldn't mind if the SS component had a larger factor than CO and PE, if we want to emphasize the technical aspect of the sport.

With larger factors, however, every decision to give one skater, e.g., 9.0 vs. 9.25 for another skater makes a larger difference if the component factor is, say, 3.0 (under an increased 3-component scheme) vs. the 2.0 it was under the original 5-component factoring.

So if they were going to keep 3 components and also increase the factors, I'd like to see judges given the option to award component scores with increments of 0.1 or at least 0.2 instead of the current 0.25.

And, of course, if components are to be worth more, there need to be even stronger guidelines and training to help judges use the component scores more consistently and more reflectively of real differences among top skaters not directly related to types of elements completed.

A squeaky clean performance with strong commitment and charisma might deserve top scores in PE regardless of number of quads or for that matter regardless of how well the skater fulfills the CO and SS criteria. What it takes to earn top scores in CO and SS needs to be well defined on their own merits with difficulty of the technical content having only a negligible impact on those scores.

Janet Lynn's or John Curry's performances should still be able to earn top PCS, without today's jump content.

 

[4everchan]

I think that there is no harm in speculating aboiut "what we might expect." What else is there to talk about until we see what actually happens? That way we can enjoy watching to see whether it worked out the way we expected, or whether the new season is full of surprises.

I didn't say it was harmful... just irrelevant.... I will give you an example... Michelle Kwan wouldn't be world champion if she had to compete under the new rules and the kids who do quads. Is that useful?

 

[icewhite]

Possible way to spread out the component scores:

Increase the program component factors so that the maximum score (10s on all components) would add up to more than 100 for a men's free skate, more than 80 for a women's or pair's free skate.

Remember that the component factors (or at least their intended totals) were set at a time when the top male jumpers might have been attempting two 4T and one 4S, or vice versa, and the rest triples likely including two 3A; and the top female jumpers were attempting 7 triples and a 2A or two, with very rare attempts at 3A or that one junior 4S of Miki Ando's.

In the decades that followed, jump content has increased, and also top skaters have show the ability to earn level 4 on spins and steps fairly consistently. Therefore free skate TES well above 100 for men, and well above 80 for quad-jumping women, have become the norm.

And, yes, on the other side skaters have also figured out how to better fulfill the PCS criteria and judges have become more willing to award PCS in the 9s.

Since the TES has gone up, if the intention is for PCS to more or less balance the TES, it would only make sense to raise the maximum PCS to approximately equal the maximum TES, as was closer to the case 20 years ago.

It may or may not be the same skaters earning the top TES and top PCS. Any skater who can excel in both can win. But a balance that allows an exceptional skater/performer with just "good" jump content (difficulty+quality) to compete on an even playing field with a skater who has exceptional jump content but just "good" skating and performance would do much to rebalance the values of the sport with jump content still important but no longer as overwhelming as has recently been the case.

When there were still 5 components, I would have said just change the FS factors from 2.0 and 1.6 per component to 2.4 and 2.0, respectively. Or even make them the same for both sexes, if we want to embrace quads as possible elements from women but also accept that the best female skaters may not be the best jumpers in terms of number of rotations.

Now that we're down to 3 components, the math is a little more complicated. Still, I would like to see the maximum total PCS points available be closer to the maximum TES expected at the top.

The current proposals to remove one jump pass and make one spin choreographic will lower the maximum expected TES, but there will still be a gap that I would still like to see closed by raising the max PCS. Exact factoring to be determined.

I also wouldn't mind if the SS component had a larger factor than CO and PE, if we want to emphasize the technical aspect of the sport.

With larger factors, however, every decision to give one skater, e.g., 9.0 vs. 9.25 for another skater makes a larger difference if the component factor is, say, 3.0 (under an increased 3-component scheme) vs. the 2.0 it was under the original 5-component factoring.

So if they were going to keep 3 components and also increase the factors, I'd like to see judges given the option to award component scores with increments of 0.1 or at least 0.2 instead of the current 0.25.

And, of course, if components are to be worth more, there need to be even stronger guidelines and training to help judges use the component scores more consistently and more reflectively of real differences among top skaters not directly related to types of elements completed.

A squeaky clean performance with strong commitment and charisma might deserve top scores in PE regardless of number of quads or for that matter regardless of how well the skater fulfills the CO and SS criteria. What it takes to earn top scores in CO and SS needs to be well defined on their own merits with difficulty of the technical content having only a negligible impact on those scores.

Janet Lynn's or John Curry's performances should still be able to earn top PCS, without today's jump content.

I think it's quite impressive (in a negative way) that the change from 3 to 5 components has not really made any change at all.
You might just as well reduce it to one because that's more or less what the judges are still doing. Not what they should be doing, though.
I think the focus really actually needs to be on improving the judging, not the scoring system, if we are talking about skaters getting or not getting the result we feel they deserve.

 

[Mathman]

Possible way to spread out the component scores:

Increase the program component factors so that the maximum score (10s on all components) would add up to more than 100 for a men's free skate, more than 80 for a women's or pair's free skate.

I am somewhat hestitant about that solution because the reasoning applies only to the very top of the top skaters. For a more representative sample, we could look at look at the bottom ten at Worlds instead of the top ten -- elite skaters all -- and ask whether the TES and PCS are too high or two low for "perfect balance."

Men: TES > PCS: Lee, Daniliants, Kim, Chiu. Egaadze
PCS>TES: Nordeback, Sadovsky, Pulkinen. Economides, Fangripani

Women: TES>PCS: ,Joos, Schild
PCS>TES: Pelkonen, Gomez, Ting, Landerbaur., Taljegard, Petrokina,Schizas, Pinzcaone.

This gives a different picture tfrom considering Malinin, Fa and Kagiyama. Granted, I have never heard of most of the skaters on these lists (my bad), but that's the point. If anything the ladies' PCS factoring should be reduced.