Should quads per program be limited to balance artistry?

[Chantilly]

I voted yes.
For me it's also about being tired of seeing splat fests.
And I also think we need to protect these athletes more.
Quads are very damaging to the joints on the body.
I think 3/quads a program is plenty.
And like others I feel that footwork and spins should have greater value and be given proper GOE's.

 

[TontoK]

The problem with this question is that everyone has an opinion on how things should be, and the way things should be depend on what the individual likes.

I'm fine if we eliminate quads in the ladies event altogether. Triple axels, too. I like the MIchelle Kwan type of lady skater.

For men, I want all the quads all the time. I like it when there's a daredevil aspect to a men's program, a fearless approach. I don't care if they splat. Get up, rub some dirt on it, and try again.

Do I care that my preferences are not consistent between the two? Not one bit. I like what I like, and so long as we're talking about configuring the rules to suit our tastes, then my opinion is as good as anyone's.

 

[Arigato]

Ilia is not artsy by any definition of the word good or bad.

Really? Imagine that.

 

[Arigato]

Put the men's FS back to 4:30.

 

[Mathman]

Shoma was first man to do a 4F. Ilia was that artsy type who did the first 4A.

I'm still not getting it. Shoma Uno was a skater who had both high tech content and also "artistic" sensibilities. Ilia Malinin is a quad monster whose presentation and blade to ice skills are fine but not remarkable. Boyang Jin had a wonderful quad Lutz, struggled on program components. Charlotte Oelschlagel had a unique spiral but no quads at all.

Is there supposed to be a moral to this story?

 

[Mathman]

I'm fine if we eliminate quads in the ladies event altogether. Triple axels, too. I like the MIchelle Kwan type of lady skater.

Why eliminate anything? Michelle Kwan was my lady. But Midori Ito was cool, too. Alexandra Trusova did her thing. Let each competitor look the other in the eye and say, "You got yours, I got mine. Bring it on!"

https://res.cloudinary.com/usopc-prod/image/upload/v1686058237/TeamUSA%20Assets/Migration/Lipinski_Kwan_021723_1440x810_Updated.jpg

 

[TallyT]

Why eliminate anything? Michelle Kwan was my lady. But Midori Ito was cool, too. Alexandra Trusova did her thing. Let each competitor look the other in the eye and say, "You got yours, I got mine. Bring it on!"

Which involves making the value of different aspects of the sport more equitable, yes. The best of the best would then work on them all.

 

[Arigato]

Shoma Uno was a skater who had both high tech content and also "artistic" sensibilities.

Then describe him that way to begin with. Then it's accurate. But to simply call a skater like Shoma "artsy" is laughable. Actually, it still leaves out his superb PCS. And PCS is not to be confused with "artsy."

 

[TontoK]

Why eliminate anything? Michelle Kwan was my lady. But Midori Ito was cool, too. Alexandra Trusova did her thing. Let each competitor look the other in the eye and say, "You got yours, I got mine. Bring it on!"

But that's the title of the thread and the whole point of the discussion. "Limiting", which I 've interpreted as "eliminating." And if we're going that undesirable route, then why not do things my way?

I suppose I could get onboard with changing the program requirements. Six jumping passes instead of seven, for instance. I could DEFINITELY get on board with revaluing spins and footwork. I'm good with changing the bullet points for features (honestly, the past few weeks, I've seen more ugly L4 spins I can remember) I'm even supportive of using AI to evaluate jump rotations. We could re-weigh the Components. I'm not a fossil, I'm open to change.

But limiting? No,

 

[Magill]

My main problem with revaluing non-jumps elements and PCS is that it would not change much unless the judging standards would be changed too which is way way more difficult. Now big jumpers tend to get higher scores on everything else, too, whether they deserve it or not. If this does not change, revaluing things would not bring about the desired effects but just increase the gap between the selected few jumpers and the rest of the field. That's why I'd prefer limiting the number of jumps/ rotations to start with.
Another reason is that too many jumps just make programs boring. and yes, they mostly demand lengthy preparations. This time could be used to entertain the audience more effectively.

 

[4everchan]

Then describe him that way to begin with. Then it's accurate. But to simply call a skater like Shoma "artsy" is laughable. Actually, it still leaves out his superb PCS. And PCS is not to be confused with "artsy."

I agree.
I'm not okay with some of the comments that are reductive of some of the great full package skaters. Saying Patrick just couldn't do more quads when he learned his salchow in his mid twenties is dismissive in my opinion.

Also comparing now and mid 2010s is ridiculous.

I agree also with your point that they need to give skaters more time. They shorten programs all the time but they don't really cut required elements. It's terrible in pairs.

 

[withwings]

...unfortunately, for some particular people pro-quads has become more political agenda than anything else since time of Eteri and it does not matter how masterfully they think they cover it

 

[Mathman]

But to simply call a skater like Shoma "artsy" is laughable.

Artsy: Characterized by showing artistry or artistic talent. (Miriam Webster, definition 1)

It also has a slangy implication of making a pretentious but shallow show of interest in the arts, but I would never say such a thing about a figure skater.

A person can have artistic talent and artistic sensibilities and also have other virtues. like being able to jump a quad flip. Uno is a whiz at video games, but I do not feel obliged to list every one of his many talents. His "artistry" (as the term is used in figure skating circles generally and in the title of this thread) is at a higher level than Boyang Jin's -- that's all. Is that really so controversial a statement?

 

[Magill]

I agree.
I'm not okay with some of the comments that are reductive of some of the great full package skaters. Saying Patrick just couldn't do more quads when he learned his salchow in his mid twenties is dismissive in my opinion.

Also comparing now and mid 2010s is ridiculous.

I do not think it is dismissive at all, it is just true and for reasons you have mentioned which are rational and understandable. It does not take away anything from his other qualities. But pretending it was just some "free choice" he made sounds pretentious, especially that his claim than more than two quads create some magic barrier killing artistry was proven not true in real life. Yuzuru, Javier and Shoma are probably best rounded skaters of all time, with iconic programs considered masterpieces by judges, experts and the public, and widely loved as reaching this perfect balance between athleticism and artistry, and these programs had more than two quads.

 

[4everchan]

Not including Patrick in the list of best rounded skaters is a choice.

 

[Magill]

Not including Patrick in the list of best rounded skaters is a choice.

Yes, it is a choice. It does not take away from his skating skills. But for the time when he competed, he was not among the best rounded.

 

[4everchan]

Yes, it is a choice. It does not take away from his skating skills. But for the time when he competed, he was not among the best rounded.

He certainly was . History speaks for itself. His quads were textbook and steady. The younger skaters brought more quads fair enough but at his peak he was the best in both artistry and technique.

 

[4everchan]

Anyway, the thread was about a specific question. That question started to haunt figure skating fans and media exactly at the crossroads when young guns brought quad Lutz and flip or pretty much a full arsenal. It wasn't brought up when guys were only doing salchows and toes. So in that sense, whether some fans like Chan or not, he had a fair point and that's why I shared it.

 

[Magill]

He certainly was . History speaks for itself. His quads were textbook and steady. The younger skaters brought more quads fair enough but at his peak he was the best in both artistry and technique.

So we have different opinions. Some people somehow manage to omit Yuzuru Hanyu from any "best" list they ever quote while his position in history is way way more "certain" and solidified that Patrick's, lol. Now, that is a choice. So let's just agree to disagree

 

[Mathman]

.... at his peak Chan was the best in both artistry and technique.

That's why he won three world championships. Because he was at his peak and the best. Who would disagree with that? It's right there in the public record.

But... nothing is forever. Uneasy lies the head that wears the crown. The next generation comes gunning for the top gun, and off we go for another round.

Added in proof: Even Michelle Kwan won only five World championships and then had to move over. and soon to move on. I'm not angry at anyone -- well maybe a little.