- Joined
- Nov 21, 2023
Change the multiplier for the PCS so that the maximum score for PCS matches more closely the maximum technical score that is currently possible.
Should quads per program be limited to balance artistry?
- Thread starter gsk8
- Start date
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2015
I don't disagree with that
. quite the contrary. 
and now, the best jumper is Ilia Malinin and there will be another one later on, or maybe another skater with similar jumping skills but better skating. It's sport. I have been watching for long enough to be comfortable with that idea. There is no GOAT in my vocabulary... because well, some could argue that in tennis, it was Sampras or Agassi but then it became Roger, Rafa or Nole... and now, we are looking at Alcaraz and Sinner. There is a never ending renewal. At this point in time though, the sport is looking for a better balance. It's very tiring to see so many quad attempts that are just very badly landed and very little effort in choreography. The sport needs a new direction to recuperate that balance. That's my opinion of course, and I see that the poll is 50-50... I am hardcore : I'd be fine with cutting the number of quads but not in a restrictive way, if you have all quads, you should be able to include them all... but cutting a jumping pass, and adding BV to other elements, or adding non jumping elements or choreographic elements, refactoring PCS, removing the quad bonus in the PCS ... all of these measures could help.
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2015
I am all for that too... the only issue is that it won't work out if there is not a larger spectrum in the PCS... putting the majority of skaters between 73 and 83 will not help much.
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2018
No need to limit quads.
What I want for every single jump, whether quads, triples, doubles or even eulers that has clumsy disguised off-balance exits, ugly pops, step-outs, turnouts, slips and/or falls to be valued zero. Nil. Nada. Sorry, try again next time.
They are all ugly, and if beauty is the goal, they should be punished completely and severely without mercy.
What I want for every single jump, whether quads, triples, doubles or even eulers that has clumsy disguised off-balance exits, ugly pops, step-outs, turnouts, slips and/or falls to be valued zero. Nil. Nada. Sorry, try again next time.
They are all ugly, and if beauty is the goal, they should be punished completely and severely without mercy.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
Yeah, that's a big problem. The IJS rules must provide a single scale for the entire range of competitions from beginners on up. It can't possibly be true tthat the majority of skaters fall between 73 and 83 -- more likely the majority are between 5 and 10. If you can get a 73, you are one of the best skaters in the world. Any attempt to spread out the tiny handful of skaters that we see in the Grand Prix or ISU championships will necessarily throw the balance off for everyone else.
In fact, I have looked at a few actual numbers and noticed that at the lower levels the situation of TES being higher than PCS is reversed. Taking the whole shebang at once, the current factors are actually pretty good in making the TES and the PCS even out on the average.
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2015
but isn't that the issue ? the issue is that the best skaters in the world all get 73-83 or so in PCS... but then, the TES has a lot more variance. Wouldn't we need, let's say the top 25 skaters in the world to have a better PCS variance because the number 1 in TES has maybe 50 points higher TES than the number 25.. while the number 1 PCS skater in the world would have maybe 10-15 points advantage over the number 25th.
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2015
I would agree in the SP. A jump in the negative GOE is 0 points. (we could be more lenient and say -2 or above is okay.. -3 and below = invalid element)
In the LP, I'd go with this : popped or fall = 0.
There are many sports where a failed landing = 0.
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2020
Falls are not the main problem for me. Jump drills and resulting empty and boring programs are. Even when skated without falls or interruptive mistakes, they are yawn, yawn, anyway.
Current scoring makes such jump drills the most effective way to win, and win big. Falls zeroing an attempt would not change it, just like fall deductions did not. In fact, with or without causal link, it became worse now. Skaters would just further focus on jump training and execution to make sure they don't fall and further minimize on everything else to avoid distraction and "wasting" energy, especially when these other elements are scored in align with jumping power anyway. Could make results less predictable but not necessarily push better rounded skaters and programs, rather give even more advantage to the best jumpers.
Zero points for negative GOE would, OTOH, create another tempting way to very effectively dump rivalling or non-favoured skaters . Even now GOE is much debatable and debated. After such a change a questionable GOE would result in much greater harm, and most probably would lead to even more heated discussions. Would it improve anything? In my opinion, no.
Current scoring makes such jump drills the most effective way to win, and win big. Falls zeroing an attempt would not change it, just like fall deductions did not. In fact, with or without causal link, it became worse now. Skaters would just further focus on jump training and execution to make sure they don't fall and further minimize on everything else to avoid distraction and "wasting" energy, especially when these other elements are scored in align with jumping power anyway. Could make results less predictable but not necessarily push better rounded skaters and programs, rather give even more advantage to the best jumpers.
Zero points for negative GOE would, OTOH, create another tempting way to very effectively dump rivalling or non-favoured skaters . Even now GOE is much debatable and debated. After such a change a questionable GOE would result in much greater harm, and most probably would lead to even more heated discussions. Would it improve anything? In my opinion, no.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2018
While I can see a possible case for more penalties for falls, making them worth no points at all would I suggest have frozen or even regressed the sport way back at the start of IJS and we would have almost no quads, even less 3As (even among the men) and precious few triples even being attempted because it would not be worth even trying. I assume - albeit without proof - that the fairly mild penalties were always meant to encourage skaters to try harder and higher (and before anyone says it, no they would not practice till perfect and therefore always only jump perfect ones, we all know that our skating gods do not allow that.)
I am not any more keen on a stultified anti-jump sport than I am at the anti-everything-except-jump one.
I am not any more keen on a stultified anti-jump sport than I am at the anti-everything-except-jump one.
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 15, 2024
You have my pierogi - though I wouldn't punish popped so harshly, I'd give the jump some points if it's 1 rotation short. Though it would require change or rules about planned program content.
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2019
Really? Use Malinin's tech for PCS multiplier? The current multiplier is already based on a tech scores that are higher than what a lot of skaters add to their programs. The idea was always that a mid-pack skater will have TES and PCSs roughly the same. The men who have content that matches the women's should get women's PCSs multiplier, because it is already unfair that women who on average demonstrate better PCSs have lower scores due to a lower multiplier. Boosting men's multiplier to mask the influence of outstanding tech is a disrespect to achieving outstanding results in TES. When PCSs are genuinely low they correctly lower the skater's total score.
See Rukhin's result in Magintogorsk -- I specifically bring Russian example because Russians love high tech more than the internationals and tend to slightly over-reward it. Rukhin ends up in 11th out of 12 with 4 attempted quads (4Lz, 4Lo, 4F and 4T, plus one 3A). But he has truly low PCSs -5s and 6s- and most of his jumps are flawed. His score places him correctly in the end (as heartbreaking as it is for all of us who root for the guy). Also, everyone who thinks Malinin should have 6s in his scores, Rukhin's skate is what 5 and 6 looks like with lots of tech.
Here is the link to protocols:
chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://fsrussia.ru/results/2526/1etap/M__Scores.pdf
here is the link to competition if you want to find his skate:
Anyway, IJS works just fine and with careful monitoring for corruption it works even better. There is zero need for a giant change when skaters just found a way to balance tech and artistry. What we have a need of is more strong skaters who can work with it and bring back the pre-2022 gorgeousness and competitiveness of single skating.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
Yes! And they should be!
However, I personally would love to see one or two other elements take the place of a jump or two. Twizzles?
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2015
I think the problem is not about limiting the number of quads as it is "give the skaters what they deserve". I mean, when a skater lands a quad, even if it is not the most beautiful quad, judges are more prone to give that jump high GOEs of +4 or +5 than they are with, to say, a greatly executed 3 Lutz. Ilia's capability in terms of jumps is amazing. Does his quads automatically deserve high GOEs because they are quads and because he lands 6 per program and because he is incredibly consistent? I'd say no. Most of the times I'm left amazed by his performances and at the same time with a sour aftertaste because with the GOEs and PCS judges give him he is practically unreachable by everyone even with 1 or 2 mistakes. But the problem is not just Ilia's and is not just quads. Why do skaters who lands quads also gains more GOEs on spins and steps than skaters who are far better in those departments?
For start, I'd agree that Steps and Spins should have a higher BV than what they have now. But even then, the problem is once again on the judges' hand to start give skaters what they deserve on each single element. I'd love to see different Technical Panels for Jumps, Steps and Spins. I'd also love separate judging panels for TES and PCS.
I think that we will never ever be completely satisfied by scoring in a sport that is scored subjectively. There were polemics in Vancouver, there were in Nice 2012, there were in London 2013, there were in Helsinki 2017, in Saitama 2019, in Stockholm 2021, in Beijing 2022, and on, and on, and on. But I'd love to see that skaters with great spins, skaters with great steps, skaters with great artistry, rewarded for what they bring on the ice regardless if their starting order is 1 or 24 and regardless if they have huge BV or not.
For start, I'd agree that Steps and Spins should have a higher BV than what they have now. But even then, the problem is once again on the judges' hand to start give skaters what they deserve on each single element. I'd love to see different Technical Panels for Jumps, Steps and Spins. I'd also love separate judging panels for TES and PCS.
I think that we will never ever be completely satisfied by scoring in a sport that is scored subjectively. There were polemics in Vancouver, there were in Nice 2012, there were in London 2013, there were in Helsinki 2017, in Saitama 2019, in Stockholm 2021, in Beijing 2022, and on, and on, and on. But I'd love to see that skaters with great spins, skaters with great steps, skaters with great artistry, rewarded for what they bring on the ice regardless if their starting order is 1 or 24 and regardless if they have huge BV or not.
- Joined
- May 15, 2024
sure, but real twizzles, not travelling spinsYes! And they should be!
However, I personally would love to see one or two other elements take the place of a jump or two. Twizzles?
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2016
I'd bring back the rule about one quad being allowed in the SP at least with a solo jump having necessary linking steps before and I'd give more value to non-jump elements. But I don't think those changes (or yours) would lead to an improvement in artistry.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2019
I have tried to find the post suggesting to reward more the Step Sequence to answer it, as to me it makes sense because this element is technically difficult, in a way different from jumps and spins, for Ballet reference it would be the Bournonville/Danish school variation, it lasts a long time... BUT a few months ago, I stumbled upon a relatively recent list of ten highest scoring Step Sequences in Men, of course none by Yuzuru Hanyu, and most wrongly given a Level 4; then lately I stumbled upon a less recent (last Olympic cycle) list of the ten highest scored Step Sequences for Women, most of which by a very young skater which had been pointed to have a Level 1 Step Sequence scored as Level 4 with high Grade of Execution... Wrong scoring in jumps is something, but I'm afraid it's worse for Step Sequences, which I believe can make a public's favourite but also is treated, scoring-wise, just as a mean to achieve a desired score irrespective of its real qualities or faults.Yes! And they should be!
However, I personally would love to see one or two other elements take the place of a jump or two. Twizzles?
I wouldn't want that to allow even worse scoring, as did the +5/-5 in Grades of Execution, which were supposed to reward quality of jumps and did the reverse! So, I would like it only when automated help to scoring gives its level and most of the determinants of its Grade of Execution.
Twizzles? They're more and more frequent in Singles programs, perhaps thanks to this little mushroom who had his first Sit one at 13 and went on to collect different Twizzles to the point of having perhaps the biggest collection of them, and most impressive from my viewpoint, even when compared to Ice Dancers? The blogger proposed to include Twizzles in Step Sequences, by the way:
https://ameblo.jp/sssarah/entry-12533638800.html
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2013
Why is everyone picking on the jumps, when spins are such an inviting target?
Overall, the quality of spins is terrible. Really, really bad.
Of the current men, Jason Brown and Roman Sadovsky have the best spins, and everyone else's are OK. At best. Depending on where Keegan Messing is with his comeback, he had good spins, too.
Overall, the quality of spins is terrible. Really, really bad.
Of the current men, Jason Brown and Roman Sadovsky have the best spins, and everyone else's are OK. At best. Depending on where Keegan Messing is with his comeback, he had good spins, too.
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2013
Nah. Not to sound like a broken record, but we need a choreographic jump element so we can resurrect the delayed single axel.Yes! And they should be!
However, I personally would love to see one or two other elements take the place of a jump or two. Twizzles?
Yuzuru Hanyu's fans should be LIVID that he was never able to include that element in a competitive program. His was spectacular.
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2018
Same.
Give zeros to every spin that has stumbles, slips, strugglebus and/or non-aesthetic positions, significantly slower speed, and traveling. And those laughable "illusions" .
