Does the IJS incentivize boring programs?

[labgoat]

I don't because I don't know how to find them. I did not follow FS during 6.0 era. If I look at a historic scoreboard, the names say nothing to me. I don't know if a skater ended up in the middle/on the bottom because the program was unremarkable or because he/she fell or something. I searched some names on YouTube but there were videos.

However, I think that it would be interesting to see something that was regarded as "unremarkable" back then - just for comparison. Do you have any links to videos that you could bring up as examples?

Hi Anna K!
During the pandemic, I itemized all of the videos for major historical competitions from the outdoor pond days to the present. A great deal of the links still work, however things come and go from the internet every day making it nearly impossible to keep all the links working. There is still plenty to give you a taste of the different eras of skating. All the events are catalogued in skate order whenever possible, so you can rewatch the events as they unfolded - no spoilers. It can be fun to watch and see if you saw it the way the judges did. They can be found in the Fan Fest area under General and all begin with the word rewatch in the title. Some larger collections open with a table so you can quickly use it to find an event without endless scrolling. I hope you enjoy it!

General

www.goldenskate.com

Years 1900-1990 include figures and are the 6.0 era
Years 1991-1998 do not include figures and are 6.0 era also
Years 1999-2003 are pre-ijs, a slow introduction of the point system
Years 2004-present are ijs

The title of each event contains a link (hopefully still working) to the results so you could look at the results and find the link to any skater who is listed with a blue link.

 

[Anna K.]

Hi Anna K!
During the pandemic, I itemized all of the videos for major historical competitions from the outdoor pond days to the present. A great deal of the links still work, however things come and go from the internet every day making it nearly impossible to keep all the links working. There is still plenty to give you a taste of the different eras of skating. All the events are catalogued in skate order whenever possible, so you can rewatch the events as they unfolded - no spoilers. It can be fun to watch and see if you saw it the way the judges did. They can be found in the Fan Fest area under General and all begin with the word rewatch in the title. Some larger collections open with a table so you can quickly use it to find an event without endless scrolling. I hope you enjoy it!

General

www.goldenskate.com

Years 1900-1990 include figures and are the 6.0 era
Years 1991-1998 do not include figures and are 6.0 era also
Years 1999-2003 are pre-ijs, a slow introduction of the point system
Years 2004-present are ijs

The title of each event contains a link (hopefully still working) to the results so you could look at the results and find the link to any skater who is listed with a blue link.

Hi labgoat!
Thank you for your work and commitment! This is a huge resource that requires some time to browse and I am a bit overwhelmed right now because I have a bunch of suggestions already. So I guess I'll leave this for later when/if I have some larger chunk of spare time. It's great to have it in the Fan Fests forum though. Thank you very much!

 

[Anna K.]

Well, as an example, here's the final group of the women's free skate from 1999 Europeans: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eqr0wnh6jek

Which includes that year's eventual world champion, and one other program that I found particularly memorable at the time.

How do you feel the program composition compares to what we see today in terms of audience interest?

I think I got what you meant. I watched 1 1/2 programs and it was boring to death. There was nothing but jumps, jumps, jumps in Julia's program and Soldatova didn't bring in any interesting content either. Then I scrolled forwards to Vanessa Gusmerolli - her program was watchable. Even though her skills didn't impress, there was a story going on and I'd say that it was moderately entertaining.

Overall, these programs are from the era that directly preceded IJS and hence they have the same program structure that was later reflected by and defined as IJS TES requirements. Interestingly, when I started watching skating shortly after the invention of IJS, our commentator (a professional judge) referred to programs like Julia's as "juniorish skating" and explained that PCS was there to prevent jumps-only programs from winning in the senior category and provide that skaters work on the artistic side of their performances.
In a way, it worked. Today, we have junior girls that are way more accomplished artistically compared to what they were in Julia's day. I'm saying this as someone who has seen all JGP Women competitions from beginning to the end this season. But is it enough to be relevant as a genre of modern entertainment? The JGP events' empty seats in the audience say that it isn't.

 

[Mathman]

Today, we have junior girls that are way more accomplished artistically compared to what they were in Julia's day. I'm saying this as someone who has seen all JGP Women competitions from beginning to the end this season. But is it enough to be relevant as a genre of modern entertainment? The JGP events' empty seats in the audience say that it isn't.

Even the senior challenger series struggles to fill seats.

I will say, though, that for me, the most entertaining figure skating events I have attended in person are local club shows. The audience is mostly parents and family members of the performers. and typically there are only a few skaters who have attained the junior level. But I marvel at the skill of the novices and even intermediates, while the group numbers featuring troops of beginners warn my heart.

 

[formersk8ter]

I don't blame boring programs on IJS.

I DO blame boring programs on uncreative choreographers, coaches and skaters.

Nearly half (in my opinion) of music used for skating programs these days is AWFUL. A monochromatic ballad, while perhaps pleasant to listen to, offers nothing to interpret. NOTHING. At best, you get a decent skater who moves prettily, but there is ZERO interpretation because -- again -- there is nothing to interpret.

However... a lot of skaters have managed great programs under IJS: Nathan Chen's Philip Glass and Elton John programs come to mind. I like what Ilia's been coming up with. As much as I love Jason Brown, I don't feel like he's had a really good long program since Riverdance all those years ago. For the past several years, it's been basically the same program set to different music. No real "signature" programs. Jason is so creative and moves so beautifully, I'd love to see that creativity set to some really good music.

 

[TallyT]

'Boring' is after all a fairly subjective thing and we all have different criteria for what it means (there are skaters mentioned in this thread - which in the interests of not kerfuffling I will NOT name - whose appearance is a good excuse for me to go and watch mould grow. There are others not named who would be on my 'could distract me during a majorly unpleasant medical procedure' level of gripping. I'm sure others have similar.

I will say that the IJS has periods where this or that discipline has produced skaters I find creative and brilliant. At the minute, the way the points are allocated and the judges who allocate them are not exactly encouraging... but that could change. Maybe. In the meantime, I can watch the ones I like rather than love, and still have fun.

 

[gkelly]

But is it enough to be relevant as a genre of modern entertainment? The JGP events' empty seats in the audience say that it isn't.

Is competitive figure skating attempting to be relevant as a genre of modern entertainment?

Insofar as sports are entertainment... If people will fill seats to watch speedskating (the ISU's other purview), they can certainly be expected to watch figure skating. But do they?

Would we want to compare interest in figure skating with interest in tennis or swimming or gymnastics (to use other individual sports, since there's a whole different dynamic with the popularity of team sports)? There are certainly reasons why some viewers might prefer figure skating to those sports (e.g., the artistic value), but other viewers might be directly turned off by those aspects of figure skating as making it more subjective/less reliable as a pure sporting event. Or they just don't relate to skating as much because they have played tennis and swum themselves, maybe even participated in gymnastics or know people who have, but unless there's a rink nearby, or frequently frozen natural ice, they may never have gotten on the ice themselves, much less trained the sport of controlling edges.

Would it make more sense to compare figure skating's appeal as entertainment to various genres of dance performance? Or circus or other forms of movement-based spectacle? If so, how do we judge the popularity? By tickets sold? Of course live dance performances are usually in smaller venues.
And for audiences who like that performance/artistic side, the competition context and the focus on difficult tricks that often go wrong may be a turnoff. But there isn't a central organization promoting skating-as-performance in the same way that the ISU promotes skating-as-sport.

As for JGP... Are there any sports where junior-level events consistently draw large paying audiences?

 

[Anna K.]

About boring programs in the 6,0 era, Dick Button as commentator was often outspoken about particular performances by particularly skaters (sometimes using ungallant language on the ladies who, in his opinion, didn't measure up.) One was Angela Nikodinov, whose skating he once described as a "refrigerator break" -- and this was before she even took the ice. He later tried to clean it up by explaining that although she had beautiful positions. especially her classic layback. her style was on the category "ooo so pretty" but lacked pizzazz.

Here she is a couple of years later after working on performing. She had the bad timing of having to compete against Michelle Kwan, a riveting performer, for U.S. National honors, and then later with the exquisite but inconsistent Sasha Cohen.

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

www.youtube.com

Internationally, Button regarded Tatiana Malinina (Ilia Malinin's mother) as a solid jumper but with little of interest going on in between.

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

www.youtube.com

Actually, both of thse performances are fine and, as for me, held my attention throughout.

I can see Dick's point (no pun intended). For one, if I had a personal ice show or worked as a casting director of one, then I would look for the cast that can communicate with the audience.
What do I mean by “communicate”?
I mean, when there is a story/theme chosen for a program, it pings the expectancy of the audience and the dialogue has started. In the case of The Sleeping Beauty, it’s a popular story, so the dialogue will start with the synopsis that audience already knows without saying, like:

Skater [takes her starting position]: Hi, I’m Aurora! I was cursed by a fairy and slept for hundred years until my Prince Charming woke me up.
Audience: Really? So, what was it like?

If this is a skater with a strong storytelling ability, like Gracie Gold, then you’ll see something like this:

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

www.youtube.com

Skater: It was like a drama, a big drama. The fairy cursed me and it was shocking to discover that I had to sleep an eternity frozen alive at my gentle age of sixteen. It was appalling. I was desperate. Then, I felt something through the curse of my sleep. What was this sudden sweetness? Was it magic? Was it love? Yes, it was! My Prince Charming found me. I was all beaming. I was happy. My life was given back to me and it was filled with love. I felt like I had wings. What, a fall? Who cares, I am running towards the love of my life, I’m flying to it in a spiral!
Audience: Oh, Aurora! There is so much that you’ve been through. We feel for you from the bottom of our hearts!
Casting director in the stands: Cast! Cast, cast, CAST!


Then, what happens when we have Angela’s program:

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

www.youtube.com

Skater [takes starting position]: Hi, I’m Aurora, I’m beautiful and I'm sleeping.
Audience: All right, what's next?
Skater [starts moving]: I woke up!
Audience: And then?
Skater: And then there is my double axel. Did you see how I landed it? It’s awesome!
Audience: But how about Aurora?
Skater: Uhm, Aurora… Aurora had ballet hands here and there. See?
Audience: Oh, whatever. Nice hands!
Casting director in the stands: Next!!


To be fair, if I was a casting director for The Sleeping Beauty on ice, I would hire Angela but not for a leading role. As we know, Aurora fell asleep with her whole palace. Angela would look great as a statuesque maid frozen in the background and it’s even better if a background maid can throw a culminating double axel when the whole palace wakes up. But that's the entire range of her show potential as much as I could conclude from this program of hers.

 

[Isk]

I think I got what you meant. I watched 1 1/2 programs and it was boring to death. There was nothing but jumps, jumps, jumps in Julia's program and Soldatova didn't bring in any interesting content either. Then I scrolled forwards to Vanessa Gusmerolli - her program was watchable. Even though her skills didn't impress, there was a story going on and I'd say that it was moderately entertaining.

Overall, these programs are from the era that directly preceded IJS and hence they have the same program structure that was later reflected by and defined as IJS TES requirements. Interestingly, when I started watching skating shortly after the invention of IJS, our commentator (a professional judge) referred to programs like Julia's as "juniorish skating" and explained that PCS was there to prevent jumps-only programs from winning in the senior category and provide that skaters work on the artistic side of their performances.
In a way, it worked. Today, we have junior girls that are way more accomplished artistically compared to what they were in Julia's day. I'm saying this as someone who has seen all JGP Women competitions from beginning to the end this season. But is it enough to be relevant as a genre of modern entertainment? The JGP events' empty seats in the audience say that it isn't.

Of course you if watch Soldatova, although she wasn't weak technically, you might just as well judge about figure skating by watching Trixi Schuba. But if you search for Janet Lynn, it's a different story. I've been thinking the other day that I would not want to go back to 6.0. Despite IJS's flaws, or rather its inability to address the inherent judging issues, I am so spoilt by numbers nowadays, that something like 5.8 is not going to satisfy me now without an explanation. Still I wonder if one can take the best from both of them.

 

[gkelly]

you might just as well judge about figure skating by watching Trixi Schuba. But if you search for Janet Lynn, it's a different story.

That could probably be said about most eras. One or more exceptional free skaters in a given era were captivating and memorable, but ho true was that throughout the field as a whole at the time?

And how much did that kind of audience interest affect the final results? Or have technical (e.g., school figures, jumps) and athletic (jumps) content typically outweigh the artistic content? Such that any particularly artistic skaters who didn't measure technically/athletically never got near the podium and were less likely to be seen by the public during their competitive careers?

I've been thinking the other day that I would not want to go back to 6.0. Despite IJS's flaws, or rather its inability to address the inherent judging issues, I am so spoilt by numbers nowadays, that something like 5.8 is not going to satisfy me now without an explanation. Still I wonder if one can take the best from both of them.

What do you think was the best of the 6.0 system? How might the best qualities from that system be incentivized within the context of IJS?

 

[jgg220]

I asked Google what causes boredom according to science. Here is the AI overview:
"Boredom in the brain is often a symptom of insufficient mental stimulation, meaning there's a mismatch between the desired and actual cognitive engagement with a task or situation. The prefrontal cortex doesn't have a worthwhile "problem" to solve, leading to a subjective feeling of dissatisfaction or lack of motivation. This can stem from factors like repetitive, monotonous tasks, a lack of novel experiences, or a lack of control over one's environment, prompting the brain's dopamine network to seek more stimulating, rewarding activities."

I'm betting now that this quote replaces Ilia's free program voiceovers before Milan. I can already hear it in his sonorous vocal tones.

 

[Isk]

1. That could probably be said about most eras. One or more exceptional free skaters in a given era were captivating and memorable, but ho true was that throughout the field as a whole at the time?

2. And how much did that kind of audience interest affect the final results? Or have technical (e.g., school figures, jumps) and athletic (jumps) content typically outweigh the artistic content? Such that any particularly artistic skaters who didn't measure technically/athletically never got near the podium and were less likely to be seen by the public during their competitive careers?

3. What do you think was the best of the 6.0 system? How might the best qualities from that system be incentivized within the context of IJS?

1. Of course you are right. We tend to remember the best and forget the rest. Some of us (e.g. myself) didn't watch complete events, in some countries TV only showed their country people and the final flight or two, so we didn't get to see everyone. There was usually someone interesting, or it appeared so.

2. Early on school figures weighed a lot in the final standing. Sometimes someone who was strong in them and not so strong in freestyle won, and someone who was good in freestyle and whom the public admired lost because they placed low in figures, and it was an awkward situation. So they reduced the weight of figures gradually, eventually eliminated them completely. It freed up training time, people started to spend more time on jumps. Brian Orser once mentioned that figures helped train small muscles, nowadays in Cricket club they do pilates for this.

3. We've discussed this in "Good for you ISU" thread, I don't want to be repetitive, or it'll be boring.

 

[BlissfulSynergy]

It's not that IJS 'incentivizes' boring programs. It's just that the point-gathering numbers game and the overdone rule requirements have led to less room for creativity. Choreographers help a lot, but programs end up with predictable layout patterns. The lengthy spin revolution requirements are boring to watch. The ISU just has no clue. It might help if they would simply go back to allowing athletes more creative leeway with free programs. 'Free the free programs!'

I don't have definitive answers for resolution because the competitive structure and scoring system have been ill-constructed and problematic for far too long for easy fixes. The ISU seems to think annual reviews and new regulations can serve as quick fixes. The whole competitive structure and the IJS scoring system need to be carefully examined and beneficially reworked. There needs to be a well-thought out, unrushed and purposeful planned approach that seeks to hear from many voices within the sport of figure skating. Plus, they should get assistance from outside sports management experts as well.

The sport of figure skating needs financial investment support, and they need to allow those with actual advanced knowledge of figure skating to be more hands-on involved with figure skating operations. Let speedskaters butt out of managing figure skating and take care of the sport they know more about. These are two separate sports. Trying to combine the two sports' operations, and trying to get me, as a figure skating fan, to care about and watch speedskating, outside of casual watching during the Olympics, is useless. I resent the way the ISU tries to combine the two sports (e.g., on YouTube, to prop up more figure skating fan interest in speedskating).

 

[Mathman]

I can see Dick's point (no pun intended). For one, if I had a personal ice show or worked as a casting director of one, then I would look for the cast that can communicate with the audience.
What do I mean by “communicate”?
I mean, when there is a story/theme chosen for a program, it pings the expectancy of the audience and the dialogue has started...

Well, I have to say that YOU are a great story-teller! Your post is a very entertaining story about two figure skaters taking on the role of Sleeping Beauty. Someone should make e a movie about it.

I do have to say, though, that for myself, I don't usually pay much attention to what story in being told, and in fact I am seldom aware from the skating that any story at all is lurking in the background. To me, the reason why Gracie Gold's performance was exciting and Angela Nikodinov's less so was that Gracie skated with speed and attack from the opening bell.

I frankly would rather see a program that matched the musical phasing than one that mimed or suggested a story. Different Strokes for different folks, I guess.

 

[TallyT]

Would we want to compare interest in figure skating with interest in tennis or swimming or gymnastics (to use other individual sports, since there's a whole different dynamic with the popularity of team sports)?

I think figure skating if it was purely sport would still be in a different category from these - or speed skating or many non-aesthetic sports - because to be blunt, the technical jumping whizzbangery that is all important these days is much harder for average fans to judge, almost arcane: a quad and a good 3A/triple looks very much alike to the average person (though some jumpers do look wonderful in the air and landing, others simply... efficient. This is not helpful since it is not affected by 3 or 4, and does not always and clearly reflect in the score). The more aesthetic elements like spins and Ina Bauers and hydroblades etc are what where average person can say "yes, that one looks better!"

Viewers have to be told that Ilia Malinin (and this is not a swipe at him, he's just the current exemplar) is the best jumper and what his other qualities good or bad are. They can see for themselves how Serena Williams or Roger Federer won, or Usain Bolt or whoever is the fastest swimmer is at the minute.

I'm not saying a pure, unadored physical sport of skating isn't possible, but it would need to be very very different and in my opinion (because it is so much harder for ordinary folk) way less popular.

 

[BlissfulSynergy]

What do you think was the best of the 6.0 system? How might the best qualities from that system be incentivized within the context of IJS?

The problems are not simply a matter of IJS vs 6.0. The endemic problems go much deeper than that surface-level comparison. A broader and detailed understanding of the sport's history and of the everchanging history of figure skating scoring as a whole would be helpful for every ISU fs decisionmaker to understand. There are no quick fixes that will resolve current problems. The ISU tends to try and employ quick fixes that only lead to more problems, as the recent age eligibility changes have demonstrated.

The ISU might benefit by considering thoughtful and informed suggestions by knowledgeable fans such as Thomas Vu and Tony Wheeler of the Skating Session podcast. These guys have been figure skating fans since grade school. Moreover, they both have an expert knowledge of the figure skating rulebook. They know it inside out, as they both dedicatedly read the figure skating rulebook for fun!

 

[Mathman]

I think that the discussion about Trixie Schuba, figures versus free skating, is one-of-a-kind that is hard to generalize. In compulsory figures Schuba was arguably the best ever in ladies figure skating history, without peer or rival. Her free skating ... wasn't

Figures:

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

www.youtube.com

Free Skating (the music is Man of La Mancha)

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

www.youtube.com

Which is boring and which exhilarating?

 

[Anna K.]

I frankly would rather see a program that matched the musical phasing than one that mimed or suggested a story. Different Strokes for different folks, I guess.

Different yet same.
Story is not something that is written down. Story is in our brain when we discover correlations and make sense.

So for you, the story is musical phrasing and you are simply preferring music to literature or theatre; or, maybe you are preferring mathematics to all three For somebody who sees figure skating as a sport, a story is when an athlete recovers from an injury and wins a golden medal. That's what keeps the brain engaged as opposed to boredom.

As for theatre as a genre, you are of course right. It works for some and for some it doesn't. Music also doesn't work for everyone.

 

[RobinA]

I saw this video about gymnastics titled "12 skills on the beam that we don't see anymore." The narrator makes the point that "code of points" scoring has pushed every performer to do the same elements with the same connecting moves as every other, Obviously, if you get more points for THIS and fewer points for THAT -- well, it is pretty clear what will happen.

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

www.youtube.com

In figure skating, gliding moves like spirals for women and spread-eagles for men have been degraded to the point where they face extinction. Spinning has been pushed farther into the background, and the triumphant one-position, one-edge scratch spin that that used to be the closing climax of a program -- well, that's a level 1. It is worth 1.00 points, or up tp 1.50 points for +5 GOE. A delayed Axel? 1.10 points.

On the other hand, skaters, coaches and choreographers have managed to come up with some satisfying programs in the IJS era despite such restrictions on creativity.

What do you alll think? Is there any particular old-timey move that you would like to see make a comeback?

I saw this video about gymnastics titled "12 skills on the beam that we don't see anymore." The narrator makes the point that "code of points" scoring has pushed every performer to do the same elements with the same connecting moves as every other, Obviously, if you get more points for THIS and fewer points for THAT -- well, it is pretty clear what will happen.

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

www.youtube.com

In figure skating, gliding moves like spirals for women and spread-eagles for men have been degraded to the point where they face extinction. Spinning has been pushed farther into the background, and the triumphant one-position, one-edge scratch spin that that used to be the closing climax of a program -- well, that's a level 1. It is worth 1.00 points, or up tp 1.50 points for +5 GOE. A delayed Axel? 1.10 points.

On the other hand, skaters, coaches and choreographers have managed to come up with some satisfying programs in the IJS era despite such restrictions on creativity.

What do you alll think? Is there any particular old-timey move that you would like to see make a comeback?

Funny you should ask. I’m sitting here watching the Ladies Short from Cup of China and thinking how bored I am. I’m not sure it incentivizes boring programs, but it sure does cause boring programs. I’m not totally convinced there can’t be a CoP winning program that isn’t a total bloody bore, I’ve seen a few, but it doesn’t happen often. What I can’t blame on CoP, is the hideous music so far this season.

 

[Mathman]

^ In general, though, I think that the whole Code of Points thing pushes skaters toward sameness. If you get 5 points for THIS and 4 points for THAT, then more and more skaters will be tempted to do THIS instead of THAT.

However, the same situation obtained with 6.0. Once "everyone" started doing a triple Axel (men), well, then everyone else had to do a triple Axel to jeep up. Then they started doing two. I guess this is the nature of all sports.

My hat is off to those skaters, coaches and choreographers in every era who manage interesting content year after year despite changes in the rules.