JGP: Are triples and quads worth it?

[Anna K.]

I remember opinions from years ago, right before IJS was invented. One of pro-IJS arguments was that the results of FS competitions had become so predictable that it was no more a sport, just elite performers coming up to receive confirmation of their status and ranking, always the same. IJS was supposed to change that and bring unpredictability back. Accordingly, the “pointiest” elements under IJS became jumps – not because jumps characterize good skating but because skaters make mistakes on jumps most often. Even the best athlete could slip and miss the coveted medal. So, this was supposed to make figure skating a true sport with previously unknown result of the competition, which kind of worked for a while because punishment for a failed jump was really severe under early IJS. Wonderful skaters suffered, but that’s sport.

Today, we are living with the second-generation IJS. Skaters are given the BV of even failed jumps because, if jumps are so good and make figure skating a sport, skaters should be encouraged to attempt more jumps and more complicated jumps. This is what skaters do, to a degree that it makes their programs unwatchable at times and has adverse effects on their health.

Maybe I’m simply getting older, but I’m starting to appreciate seeing clean programs instead. So, I really enjoyed the performance of JGP competitor Hannah Dabees even though there were no triples and no quads:




She’s charming, she skates well, she looks different. She’s clearly a show material. I actually enjoyed her jumps. Nice axis, I thought, with that, she’s capable to pursue triple jumps required for senior carrier. Which would happen on condition that she starves herself half-dead to improve rotation speed and has ice time to force her body through enormous number of run-throughs, not without injuries in the process. Which means, she could do it just like everybody does. But is it worth it? Honestly, I think it’s not.

Now, tell me please about the other side of the coin. Persuade me that the hard work done by skaters who triple and quad themselves has not been in vain and has true worth in it.

 

[rabidline]

I think difficult jumps are worth it when the skaters can land it. It's simple math, at this point. And I think it's a very reasonable thing to do for elite skaters to figure out how they can get the most points. That's the only thing I expect the top skaters to do as competitors: find a way to win or to get as high as possible with their own abilities according to the rules.

But to be quite honest- I don't care much about skaters, especially those who are older, who don't know when to stop or pace themselves. Yes, they should try to find a way to score as high as possible, but a fool's errand is a fool's errand and has stopped many promising careers. It's why I enjoyed seeing skaters who took breaks from the competition circuit to heal both physically and mentally. It's a new era: sacrificing everything you have and more in order to win is so out of date, in my opinion.

Personally I also enjoy watching skaters with no difficult 3As or quads but I watch then with zero expectations of scores and medals, which makes for a pleasant surprise when everything aligns and they do win things.

I have been a Kaori Sakamoto fan since 2018 and I saw her made a lot of mistakes in her SP at Lombardia Trophy. Regardless of her not having a 3A or quad, I enjoyed watching her and looked forward every year to see what programs she is doing, because I love the way she skates. But back then I wasn't expecting anything- not scores or even medals. I know she was not even the top skater of her own country at that point, and she didn't have the 3A or a quad to make up the difference of points with a reigning OGM or other skaters who had a longer senior career and therefore a bigger PCS. So I was content as a fan to root for her the way she is, and I didn't mind her scores or her finishing off the podium. At that time, Kaori winning 2018 Nationals felt like the top of the world- she got lucky, but she skated clean and put herself out there in a position to win! I thought.

As the story goes, we know Kaori ended up not having to starve herself or land a 3A or a quad to be a 3-time World Champion. Personally, I'm very happy as a fan. And it made me think that continuing to enjoy good performances by good skaters, whether they have quads or 3As or not is the way to go for me to enjoy skating.

 

[gkelly]

Let's imagine a competition phase (or separate discipline) for singles skaters that includes no jumps at all or only permits single and double jumps.

Hopefully judges would be trained/more willing to reward great performance qualities separately from technical ability. Certainly completely separately from ability to rotate in the air since that would not be part of this competition.

There would be skaters, especially at junior level when they're still developing their skill sets, whose strengths lie in basic skating skills and non-jump technical elements but who haven't (yet?) learned to perform well for audiences.

And there would be other skaters who perform very well for their skill level, and who can win the hearts of fans with their performances.
But some of those skaters -- especially those who started later or have less access to ice time and good coaching -- would still have lower technical ability -- slower skating, shallower edges, less difficulty in their turns and edge work and field moves and/or less security and cleanliness on those skills if they do attempt more difficulty, and often the same for spin content and quality.

The skaters who are most charming, charismatic, musical, creative, or with beautiful body lines might win the hearts of more fans and should earn a higher proportion of their points in the areas of Performance and often Composition.

But it will be the skaters who can do all that along with best technical skills in skating and non-jump elements who will win the most medals.

And in decisions between those who excel only at performance but not technical skills, or those who excel technically but have not (yet?) learned to perform well for audiences, the better technique will still likely come out ahead more often than not.

Just look at ice dance. You've probably seen lower ranked teams that you enjoy more than some of the higher ranked teams. Those higher teams are not earning higher scores based on jumps, but based on stronger skating.

The medal contenders will tend to excel in all those areas, both technical and performance-oriented. Although not always in the same proportion as their closest rivals.

 

[Diana Delafield]

Let's imagine a competition phase (or separate discipline) for singles skaters that includes no jumps at all or only permits single and double jumps.

Hopefully judges would be trained/more willing to reward great performance qualities separately from technical ability. Certainly completely separately from ability to rotate in the air since that would not be part of this competition.

There would be skaters, especially at junior level when they're still developing their skill sets, whose strengths lie in basic skating skills and non-jump technical elements but who haven't (yet?) learned to perform well for audiences.

And there would be other skaters who perform very well for their skill level, and who can win the hearts of fans with their performances.
But some of those skaters -- especially those who started later or have less access to ice time and good coaching -- would still have lower technical ability -- slower skating, shallower edges, less difficulty in their turns and edge work and field moves and/or less security and cleanliness on those skills if they do attempt more difficulty, and often the same for spin content and quality.

But as long as this is a sport that rewards technical skills

The skaters who are most charming, charismatic, musical, creative, or with beautiful body lines might win the hearts of more fans and should earn a higher proportion of their points in the areas of Performance and often Composition.

But it will be the skaters who can do all that along with best technical skills in skating and non-jump elements who will win the most medals.

And in decisions between those who excel only at performance but not skills, or those who excel technically but have not (yet?) learned to perform well for audiences, the better technique will still likely come out ahead more often than not.

Just look at ice dance. You've probably seen lower ranked teams that you enjoy more than some of the higher ranked teams. Those higher teams are not earning higher scores based on jumps, but based on stronger skating.

The medal contenders will tend to excel in all those areas, both technical and performance-oriented. Although not always in the same proportion as their closest rivals.

That would describe the new(ish) solo dance category, which I hope will develop into an event at the big competitions along with singles/pairs/dance, as synchro is becoming.

 

[moonkat]

I think great jumps are worth it. Skaters who jump from the legs can have the rest of their body free to move. I notice a lot of skaters' spines do not noticeably move even in between elements and in step sequences. Top ice dancer move every part of of their bodies well, so it isn't as if locking in the spine is the gold standard of performance.

 

[cailuj365]

I mean, let's not get too carried away and take out triples from singles' high-level, international JGP competition. 3A or quads from junior ladies though... Hmm.

To limit this to juniors ladies, I will just say that it feels weird right now to see 3As and quads from girls who are 16 and less and showing off these complicated jumps at the junior level for 2-3 years, but then there's no certainty that they can maintain these jumps by the time they get to senior ranks due to body changes, injuries, etc. At first glance, when you're looking at the protocols, it looks like the technical content from the top junior ladies is more difficult than senior ladies, and that's a weird message/direction for the discipline and for the sport.

But perhaps, this new generation of junior ladies will keep these very difficult elements as they progress to senior while also showing growth in artistic maturity and skating skills. Evolution of training techniques may allow that to happen, and perhaps they can stay healthy. I'd like to see what happens in 4 years. If none of these junior ladies are keeping 3A or quads in seniors and are all just getting injured and retiring early, then I don't know what the point of the 3A or 4s in junior ladies is. I want to see the sport look like it's growing in both technical and component elements as skaters go from junior to senior competition.

 

[Mathematician]

Which would happen on condition that she starves herself half-dead to improve rotation speed and has ice time to force her body through enormous number of run-throughs, not without injuries in the process.

We're really invoking the starvation talking point for triples? Is this really the level of discussion we consider ourselves on?

Yea, triple jumps, enemy of the sport. You see something new every day on this earth.

 

[TallyT]

Now, tell me please about the other side of the coin. Persuade me that the hard work done by skaters who triple and quad themselves has not been in vain and has true worth in it.

The hard work on all three sides - jumping, skating skills and presentation/artistry - should all be worth it.

 

[4everchan]

I believe in experience and technique. Eventually, teens will keep their big jumps after puberty. I also believe it's important to learn the big tricks when it's easier (for young women, before puberty, and for young men, after as they do get stronger and quads get easier later for men).

My only wish is that coaches still focused on skating skills and style, two things that will stay with a skater 4ever See what I did there

 

[Skating91]

The judges already have way too much power in arranging results, at least with complex jumps it is the skater taking the bias and influence away from the judges.

At some point it ceases to be a sport and probably removed from the Olympics.

Over the weekend, in the junior women's comp we saw Inga Gurgenidze again held back by the judges, tempering the GOE on everything, low PCS, as always harsh with any kind of less than perfect landing or quick to ding her with an edge call. But then predictably we get to the last group and there was a Korean skater she had about five suspect landings that included q's and underrotations but only two q's, big GOE for very low jumps, there was a clear lutz taking off from the wrong edge but merely a not clear edge, whereas Inga had a legitimate not clear edge but they give her a wrong edge.

I also watched some of Budapest, there was a comeback skater, had q's, underrotations or downgrades on 5 of the 12 jumping passes, the program had many empty spots where it was moving the arms to the beat of the music presumably to conserve energy, unpolished program, yet highest PCS of the event, high GOE on everything. It was extraordinary. But I watched Denis Ten tournament, there was a comeback skater there she gets much lower PCS for more polished programs even though still works in progress, just one problem (an underrotation) out of 12 jumping passes (rather than 5/12) so more polished programs with virtually no mistakes (BV of 89.21 for the Budapest skater vs 92.84 for the Denis Ten skater as well), but still the skater from the Denis Ten tournament receives a lower overall score. Quite extraordinary. I heard that skaters have to build their reputation again, but apparently not.

It must be psychologically devastating.

To summarise, there is already too much bias and power in the hands of judges.

I find that if I look at the free skate scores for the women and if in the last group the PCS outstrips the TES it should necessitate further examination for bias. It seems skaters from a couple of nations regularly benefit from this kind of phenomenon. In fact, this is something I might look into.

A lot of people sneer at the quad era, but back then we had females with TES outstripping PCS by up to 30-35 points. In that era, we had females taking the decision out of the judges hands. When PCS is higher than TES in the free skate and skaters a winning medals due to this at big championship events, the judges (and those federations who always coincidentally benefit) clearly have far, far too much influence over results. We have seen some skaters win medals at the world championships in the past three seasons with free skate PCS higher TES. This would have been unheard of in the years prior to the 2022 world championships.

That's a flaw in the scoring system when the judges subjective PCS is contributing more to the score than what the skater objectively earned via TES (and of course a skater with outsized PCS will also be getting powerful GOE as well).

 

[TallyT]

The judges already have way too much power in arranging results, at least with complex jumps it is the skater taking the bias and influence away from the judges.

At some point it ceases to be a sport and probably removed from the Olympics.

Over the weekend, in the junior women's comp we saw Inga Gurgenidze again held back by the judges, tempering the GOE on everything, low PCS, as always harsh with any kind of less than perfect landing or quick to ding her with an edge call. But then predictably we get to the last group and there was a Korean skater she had about five suspect landings that included q's and underrotations but only two q's, big GOE for very low jumps, there was a clear lutz taking off from the wrong edge but merely a not clear edge, whereas Inga had a legitimate not clear edge but they give her a wrong edge.

I also watched some of Budapest, there was a comeback skater, had q's, underrotations or downgrades on 5 of the 12 jumping passes, the program had many empty spots where it was moving the arms to the beat of the music presumably to conserve energy, unpolished program, yet highest PCS of the event, high GOE on everything. It was extraordinary. But I watched Denis Ten tournament, there was a comeback skater there she gets much lower PCS for more polished programs even though still works in progress, just one problem (an underrotation) out of 12 jumping passes (rather than 5/12) so more polished programs with virtually no mistakes (BV of 89.21 for the Budapest skater vs 92.84 for the Denis Ten skater as well), but still the skater from the Denis Ten tournament receives a lower overall score. Quite extraordinary. I heard that skaters have to build their reputation again, but apparently not.

It must be psychologically devastating.

To summarise, there is already too much bias and power in the hands of judges.

I find that if I look at the free skate scores for the women and if in the last group the PCS outstrips the TES it should necessitate further examination for bias. It seems skaters from a couple of nations regularly benefit from this kind of phenomenon. In fact, this is something I might look into.

A lot of people sneer at the quad era, but back then we had females with TES outstripping PCS by up to 30-35 points. In that era, we had females taking the decision out of the judges hands. When PCS is higher than TES in the free skate and skaters a winning medals due to this at big championship events, the judges (and those federations who always coincidentally benefit) clearly have far, far too much influence over results. We have seen some skaters win medals at the world championships in the past three seasons with free skate PCS higher TES. This would have been unheard of in the years prior to the 2022 world championships.

That's a flaw in the scoring system when the judges subjective PCS is contributing more to the score than what the skater objectively earned via TES (and of course a skater with outsized PCS will also be getting powerful GOE as well).

Oh for...

Some skaters have always been favoured by judges whether by dinging edges or ignoring under-rotation or skiting PCS or whever. Other skaters have always been pushed down (check with Wakaba or Mai). That has nothing to do with the question the OP put forward.

 

[Mathematician]

Oh for...

Some skaters have always been favoured by judges whether by dinging edges or ignoring under-rotation or skiting PCS or whever. Other skaters have always been pushed down (check with Wakaba or Mai). That has nothing to do with the question the OP put forward.

Not interested in the overscoring debate itself but the topic presented in the thread is absolutely relevant to that issue.

If we have two skaters of equal artistry and blade control, but one is able to maintain that also with ultra-c while the other isnt, then that skater deserves to be rewarded. If we eliminate ultra-c and both skate clean then the judges have massive power over who wins, but if we allow ultra-c then the girl who can jump them will be outskating judges' bias in any case and we have improved odds of fair outcomes (and if she falls she loses, which is also fair; more talent, more reward, yet more risk; best case scenario competitively and we all understand this of course). One girl has given more to the sport and achieved superior general mastery; allowing the former scenario is a competitive injustice. So he is making the point that a wider range of technique lowers the consequence of judges' bias. Then if we apply the delusional suggestion of the thread in removing triples too (thank God nobody else here seems to even entertain that) we might as well forget any competitive scoring and just turn the whole discipline into a performing art cause judge's PCS gifts will determine 90% of results between two clean skates. Point is allowing more technique will allow talented athletes more opportunity to cement their deserved rewards. Of course bias will still play a role but were talking about minimization. If two similar girls get wonky placements then thats life, but if a girl spamming triple axels like that Japanese junior gets bricked out of podium because shes forced away from ultra-c thats unforgivable. She deserves her accolades for such incredibly advanced mastery that others havent achieved. We can talk about the separate topic in the morality of "overtraining" juniors (well, you guys can, I'm not interested, I mean the topic is open for contemplation) but from a strictly competitive perspective allowing as much tech as possible is 100% ideal and correlates with the impact of biased judges.

 

[elbkup]

It is gratifying this topic continues every season. Whenever a skater takes the ice I am in total awe knowing I could never accomplish what they have achieved; this is always my starting point. What thrills one fan will never be the same for another but we all love competition don’t we? Do numbers matter? Sure. Perfect TES elements? Of course. But.. PCS is where elegance lies and should never bolster or cover poor technique though, as noted, it often is, seeping the joy and magic from a given performance. PCS is intended to create Heaven out of sheer grit, grunt and determination. When equally matched TES/PCS is sublime, what I look for and admire. The work that goes into triples, quads ARE worth the effort for all skaters who wish to do the work, push those limits; let them go as far as they can, do what they will when they are able to do so.. hopefully with expert guidance and care.

 

[TallyT]

Not interested in the overscoring debate itself but the topic presented in the thread is absolutely relevant to that issue.

If we have two skaters of equal artistry and blade control,

Which we don't.

but one is able to maintain that also with ultra-c while the other isnt, then that skater deserves to be rewarded. If we eliminate ultra-c and both skate clean then the judges have massive power over who wins, but if we allow ultra-c then the girl who can jump them will be outskating judges' bias in any case and we have improved odds of fair outcomes (and if she falls she loses, which is also fair; more talent, more reward, yet more risk; best case scenario competitively and we all understand this of course). One girl has given more to the sport and achieved superior general mastery; allowing the former scenario is a competitive injustice. So he is making the point that a wider range of technique lowers the consequence of judges' bias. Then if we apply the delusional suggestion of the thread in removing triples too (thank God nobody else here seems to even entertain that) we might as well forget any competitive scoring and just turn the whole discipline into a performing art cause judge's PCS gifts will determine 90% of results between two clean skates. Point is allowing more technique will allow talented athletes more opportunity to cement their deserved rewards. Of course bias will still play a role but were talking about minimization. If two similar girls get wonky placements then thats life, but if a girl spamming triple axels like that Japanese junior gets bricked out of podium because shes forced away from ultra-c thats unforgivable. She deserves her accolades for such incredibly advanced mastery that others havent achieved. We can talk about the separate topic in the morality of "overtraining" juniors (well, you guys can, I'm not interested, I mean the topic is open for contemplation) but from a strictly competitive perspective allowing as much tech as possible is 100% ideal and correlates with the impact of biased judges.

And if we have someone with quads but dodgy SS and crap presentation and someone else with no quads, just . triples and great SS and presentation, the former should not be given the high PCS he/she is not entitled to. But Trusova was (and she's not the only one, but the most egregious).

{Where's the beating a dead horse emoji?}

 

[Skating91]

Which we don't.


And if we have someone with quads but dodgy SS and crap presentation and someone else with no quads, just . triples and great SS and presentation, the former should not be given the high PCS he/she is not entitled to. But Trusova was (and she's not the only one, but the most egregious).

{Where's the beating a dead horse emoji?}

And people with high PCS but getting receiving high GOE on cheated jumps (that are only triples) should conversely not received inflated GOE because his PCS his high (I'm happy to provide examples from the world championships last year the 5th place finisher in the men's was a great example of this).

I think if I went through an tallied female skaters finishing in the top 6 at major events that in that past 5 years have PCS that outstrips TES in free skates, they would overwhelmingly come from US (some Canada but they struggle finish in the top 6 these days), Japan, select few in western Europe. I'm not saying it is the case, I am yet to investigate it properly, but it is my hunch and suspicion. It would be incredible right if I plucked these countries out of the air and the data backed it up. One thing I have learned watching this sport, there are few coincidences.

This could mean a few things. Something unfair such as these federations having too much influence and the judges are intimidated. Also a disproportionate number of judges come from western Europe/western countries so maybe there is a bias to towards skaters from western Europe even if they come from small feds. There is an understanding among everyone who wants to be invited to officiate next season that this is good for the ISU brand.

If it doesn't mean that and we assume there is no bias, then it means countries like the US have coaches that are the absolute best in the world teaching presentation, composition, skating skills, but little advantage at all in teaching jumps and spins (maybe a disadvantage in this). Which would be strange because the rest of the world has gone down the path of teach all components and elements while the US neglects one aspect (probably the most important). This is doing their skaters a disservice.

We see now that triple axels are a regular occurrence in junior female tournaments. It just goes to show it was all just about technique, it's well within the capabilities of a female athlete (assuming they have the athletic prowess not everyone can dunk like Lebron and some should not even attempt to dunk at all). One country or coach was ahead of the pack, a few years later everyone else is catching on. Many have even surpassed this school in the proficiency of triple axels. Even with the lifting of the age limit, where the intention was to delay or stop the jumping of ultra-c, the world is pushing forward. You need a triple axel to win in female juniors now.

 

[Mathematician]

Which we don't.

Two skaters with competitively comparable artistry and blade control within judges' error margin, thats the only requirement to validate the relevancy of the two points. I'll be more specific next time then.

And if we have someone with quads but dodgy SS and crap presentation and someone else with no quads, just . triples and great SS and presentation, the former should not be given the high PCS he/she is not entitled to. But Trusova was (and she's not the only one, but the most egregious).

{Where's the beating a dead horse emoji?}

You claimed two issues were disconnected, I explained how they are relevant to each other. Thats it. Any further engagement on specifics of how or why factors might affect the sport differently, positively or negatively, is just necessarily demonstrating how the two questions are indeed related hahaha.

Inflated PCS and the forever scapegoated "disaster artist" Mrs. Ignatova. There is a good reason my first sentence in the quoted post preemptively mentions how little I care about arguing overscored athletes themselves. Beating a dead horse is right!! Judges' poor practical understanding of PCS doesnt negate the theoretical framework regarding ultra-c and its competitive use. But, again, if it somehow did then thats still elucidating the relevancy of the two topics Skating91 connected anyways!! Well, you can take up those specific scoring grievances with him. In fact in hindsight I assume you probably actually meant to quote his post there instead of mine cause I am genuinely confused.

 

[Anna K.]

Where's the beating a dead horse emoji?

Here:

I kept it on hand when I started this thread

But I must say there were expressed interesting points earlier in discussion. I have plans to return to these after you are done with the poor animal

 

[TallyT]

Here:

I kept it on hand when I started this thread

But I must say there were expressed interesting points earlier in discussion. I have plans to return to these after you are done with the poor animal

Please do! I was happily reading them.

 

[Anna K.]

Let's imagine a competition phase (or separate discipline) for singles skaters that includes no jumps at all or only permits single and double jumps.

Hopefully judges would be trained/more willing to reward great performance qualities separately from technical ability. Certainly completely separately from ability to rotate in the air since that would not be part of this competition.

There would be skaters, especially at junior level when they're still developing their skill sets, whose strengths lie in basic skating skills and non-jump technical elements but who haven't (yet?) learned to perform well for audiences.

And there would be other skaters who perform very well for their skill level, and who can win the hearts of fans with their performances.
But some of those skaters -- especially those who started later or have less access to ice time and good coaching -- would still have lower technical ability -- slower skating, shallower edges, less difficulty in their turns and edge work and field moves and/or less security and cleanliness on those skills if they do attempt more difficulty, and often the same for spin content and quality.

The skaters who are most charming, charismatic, musical, creative, or with beautiful body lines might win the hearts of more fans and should earn a higher proportion of their points in the areas of Performance and often Composition.

But it will be the skaters who can do all that along with best technical skills in skating and non-jump elements who will win the most medals.

And in decisions between those who excel only at performance but not technical skills, or those who excel technically but have not (yet?) learned to perform well for audiences, the better technique will still likely come out ahead more often than not.

Just look at ice dance. You've probably seen lower ranked teams that you enjoy more than some of the higher ranked teams. Those higher teams are not earning higher scores based on jumps, but based on stronger skating.

The medal contenders will tend to excel in all those areas, both technical and performance-oriented. Although not always in the same proportion as their closest rivals.

In fact, there is no need to imagine: figure skating has such a long history that everything imaginable has been (or still is) done already. Yes, there can be different types of competition within figure skating. To name one, this sport started as a competition in skating figures.
What if figures were brought back as part of, let's say, novice competitions (since junior competitions are televised and figures are not "showy")? It is a proven way how to develop skating skills and can be easily practiced in small rinks.

It is gratifying this topic continues every season.

I quite like the idea of returning to this topic every year because every year adds to the experience (it's no coincidence that I started OP with an insight in the history of JIS ).

 

[gkelly]

What if figures were brought back as part of, let's say, novice competitions (since junior competitions are televised and figures are not "showy")? It is a proven way how to develop skating skills and can be easily practiced in small rinks.

If you're only using figures in novice and lower competitions, then from the point of view of junior and senior competitions, they would be training techniques, not skills that are directly measured in junior/senior competition. (Unless the rules for short or long programs were changed to include an element that directly uses those skills, similar to how the Rhythm Dance uses established pattern dances or pieces thereof.)

Most skaters at those levels compete only within their own countries, not internationally. Developmental/training approaches and rules for lower level domestic competition are the purview of the individual skating federations, not the ISU, and vary depending on the needs and priorities of those federations. The ISU can offer guidance for new federations developing their programs from scratch, but the larger federations would not welcome lower-level rules designed for small federations to be imposed on all their skaters (or vice versa).

The skills developed by school figures are definitely relevant to developing skills used in freeskating programs, but actually skating slowly on connected circles with specific turns placed at specific points of those circles is not and never has been part of freeskating programs.

What I'm talking about is how freestyle-relevant skating skills are scored in the context of freeskating programs. (Including short programs.)
I.e., the use of edges of various sizes and a variety of combinations of turns and other means of changing from one edge to another, performed at speed and in ever-changing directions and configurations, with variety and creativity in how different edge skills are combined with each other and other skills.

All those things are already part of freeskating programs. In singles programs, which is what we're talking about here, the number/variety of difficult turns are assessed by the technical panel in determining step sequence levels. The judges notice and reward the quality of those turns in the step sequences, and they also notice and evaluate the stroking, variety and difficulty of turns and other edge skills, and the quality thereof throughout the program as a whole and specifically in free skate choreo sequences.

It is much easier to judge these qualities accurately when seated rinkside, harder from the top of the arena, and hardest on video. The camera angles and video editing techniques used by broadcasters with their own biases can also significantly influence a viewer's impression of the skating quality.
A lot of the time what looks good on video was not so impressive live, or vice versa, especially when it comes to skating skills.

The main point I was trying to make in my earlier post was that all these qualities of what happens throughout the program, especially between the jumps and spins, are probably the biggest driver of results. Moreso than "artistry" per se as covered by the Performance component, and often even more than the number of rotations in the air.

In an athletic competition, skaters with strong performance abilities but mediocre skating skills at best would not deserve to win over those with strong skating but weaker performance, even if the jump content is equalized.

In an art-on-ice contest, the opposite may be true. But the ISU is not in the business of producing those.

I quite like the idea of returning to this topic every year because every year adds to the experience (it's no coincidence that I started OP with an insight in the history of JIS ).

IJS stands for International Judging System.
How is this phrase rendered in your language that you end up abbreviating it as JIS?