Questions About Skating Skills | Kailani Craine and Nicole Schott | Golden Skate

Questions About Skating Skills | Kailani Craine and Nicole Schott

B

Bluediamonds09

Medalist
Joined
Sep 8, 2016
In the off season, I have been watching past events (2018 Olympics, 2016 Worlds, 2022 Olympics, etc.). And I realize I just don't understand what good skating skills are. I have been leaving comments under the videos of various YouTube skating channels for years, asking, "Can you explain what good SS are, with video examples?" Questions like that. I usually don't receive any reply, but I also understand that I am asking A LOT for a channel to risk a copyright claim just to show me video examples. However, I really don't understand what makes a skater receive a level 4 step sequence instead of a level 3; why certain skaters who look like Bambi receive high marks for SS; what type of bodywork and correct edges equate to good skating.

Skating is subjective. I appreciate skating who move across the ice with ease. Joannie Rochette, Nicole Schott, Jenni Saarinen, Emmi Peltonen. But of course, not all of these women were appreciated by the judges. Was I seeing something different, or do I just not understand what good skating skills are? The GOAT for me is Sasha Cohen. But I've seen many comments say that Sasha had shallow edges and no speed. I don't see that, but I don't know what to look for. All I see is a skater who knew how to make a moment, who knew how to emphasize every good quality she had, who never looked like Bambi , lost and about to topple over.

I watched Nicole Schott's Olympic short program and Kailani Craine's 2017 skate canada short program. I was appalled by their low PCS, particularly for skating skills. I must not understand what the IJS requires, right? But the commentator for Nicole said, "Enough bodywork, and the edges are correct enough for a level 3 or 4." Also, the commentator said, "Really good series of turns in and out of that step sequence, you could see the curves in and out of those brackets and rockers." (Mind you, I don't know what brackets and rockers are.) She seemed to be praising her. So....why the low scores? Were her edges "shallow", something I don't understand? And Kailani embodied the character of that program, and the spins were to die for. Why did she not even reach 55 points?

I am hoping someone can help me understand skating skills and step sequences. And for a civilized conversation about it.
 
Bluediamonds09 said:
In the off season, I have been watching past events (2018 Olympics, 2016 Worlds, 2022 Olympics, etc.). And I realize I just don't understand what good skating skills are. I have been leaving comments under the videos of various YouTube skating channels for years, asking, "Can you explain what good SS are, with video examples?" Questions like that. I usually don't receive any reply, but I also understand that I am asking A LOT for a channel to risk a copyright claim just to show me video examples. However, I really don't understand what makes a skater receive a level 4 step sequence instead of a level 3; why certain skaters who look like Bambi receive high marks for SS; what type of bodywork and correct edges equate to good skating.

Skating is subjective. I appreciate skating who move across the ice with ease. Joannie Rochette, Nicole Schott, Jenni Saarinen, Emmi Peltonen. But of course, not all of these women were appreciated by the judges. Was I seeing something different, or do I just not understand what good skating skills are? The GOAT for me is Sasha Cohen. But I've seen many comments say that Sasha had shallow edges and no speed. I don't see that, but I don't know what to look for. All I see is a skater who knew how to make a moment, who knew how to emphasize every good quality she had, who never looked like Bambi , lost and about to topple over.

I watched Nicole Schott's Olympic short program and Kailani Craine's 2017 skate canada short program. I was appalled by their low PCS, particularly for skating skills. I must not understand what the IJS requires, right? But the commentator for Nicole said, "Enough bodywork, and the edges are correct enough for a level 3 or 4." Also, the commentator said, "Really good series of turns in and out of that step sequence, you could see the curves in and out of those brackets and rockers." (Mind you, I don't know what brackets and rockers are.) She seemed to be praising her. So....why the low scores? Were her edges "shallow", something I don't understand? And Kailani embodied the character of that program, and the spins were to die for. Why did she not even reach 55 points?

I am hoping someone can help me understand skating skills and step sequences. And for a civilized conversation about it.
Click to expand...
To begin with, a Skater can do a Level 4 Step Sequence with average Skating Skills, in the latest ISU Levels and GOEs Communication it's in the first page after the introduction:
A Skater with below-average Skating Skills (under 5) may not be able to achieve this, though; but at an International level, I don't know who hasn't.
To the opposite, a Skater with, even exceptional Skating Skills may stumble on a step in the Step Sequence, sometimes because they make it a sort of rest between Elements more difficult on them, or because they choose an extremely difficult Step Sequence, or because they've placed it by the end of their Program and they're exhausted, I suppose that there may be other reasons (I remember of one Free Skate disaster explained by Nobunari Oda); then, they will get a Level 3.I also remember a Skater who had decent Skating Skills but lacked Balance and would never have the body movements on 1/3 of the Step Sequence, it was also a case for a Level 3 (but he would always be awarded a Level 4).
The evaluation of Skating Skills is summed up in Page 19 (last page) of the same document.
 
I'd love to hear from @gkelly on this, but let me put in my perspective first.

I'd say Sasha Cohen's skating skills were indeed weak at the beginning of her senior career. You can see it when she was at 2000 Junior worlds (she'd won silver at US Nationals as a senior mind you), as an example. Quite slow, and IIRC even though she hit fantastic positions on her spirals, those spirals were wobbly sometimes.

Compare that with the end of her career, and she's significantly faster, and her edges on her spirals are quite a lot more stable.

The reason people said she wasn't good is because *in comparison* to some others - especially Kwan who she was constantly compared with - she was indeed not "good". However, she was decent, and not completely "edgeless" as she's described on various social media.
 
yfan1 said:
I'd love to hear from @gkelly on this, but let me put in my perspective first.

I'd say Sasha Cohen's skating skills were indeed weak at the beginning of her senior career. You can see it when she was at 2000 Junior worlds (she'd won silver at US Nationals as a senior mind you), as an example. Quite slow, and IIRC even though she hit fantastic positions on her spirals, those spirals were wobbly sometimes.

Compare that with the end of her career, and she's significantly faster, and her edges on her spirals are quite a lot more stable.

The reason people said she wasn't good is because *in comparison* to some others - especially Kwan who she was constantly compared with - she was indeed not "good". However, she was decent, and not completely "edgeless" as she's described on various social media.
Click to expand...
I haven't read "edgeless" but I did read "flat skating" and I think that most of the time she was? But I'm not an expert. I think that you're right in that the stability of the edge is important, not only the depth, and hers, at least by the end of her career, seemed excellent.

This makes me think that one sometimes read, this Skater had a good Step Sequence, so they ought to have a high mark in Skating Skills; but the Step Sequence is an Element and scored as such, with a (now) 4.1 Base Value for a Level 4 and a Grade of Execution; if the rest of the program is full of ugly crossovers (Sasha Cohen's have always been beautiful, I'm not speaking about her) then the Skater doesn't demonstrate Skating Skills.
 
DizzyFrenchie said:
I haven't read "edgeless" but I did read "flat skating" and I think that most of the time she was? But I'm not an expert. I think that you're right in that the stability of the edge is important, not only the depth, and hers, at least by the end of her career, seemed excellent.

This makes me think that one sometimes read, this Skater had a good Step Sequence, so they ought to have a high mark in Skating Skills; but the Step Sequence is an Element and scored as such, with a (now) 4.1 Base Value for a Level 4 and a Grade of Execution; if the rest of the program is full of ugly crossovers (Sasha Cohen's have always been beautiful, I'm not speaking about her) then the Skater doesn't demonstrate Skating Skills.
Click to expand...

Regardless of the actual skating skills quality displayed by the skater there's also that unfornunate reputation/clout thing and judges hardly ever historically giving proper high components for the deserving skaters if their technical content isn't up to par. If there was a big gap between PCS against TES with PCS being superior it was usually the case of a skater who already had some major international success but just made many technical mistakes on the day. Neither Schott or Crane were very-top skaters so they didn't get it and I agree with you that they were wuzrobbed on that, especially Schott who for me deserves at least 8s all around for her individual components towards the end of her career.. And then having the right coach and representing specific federations would give you the benefits in different eras. I won't go into greater detail as I don't know what to stir the shit but you might suspect what cases I might be alluding to.
 
Last edited:
Ares said:
Regardless of the actual skating skills quality displayed by the skater there's also that unfornate reputation/clout thing and judges hardly ever historically giving proper high components for the deserving skaters if their technical content isn't up to par. Neither Schott or Crane were very-top skaters but I agree with you that they were wuzrobbed on that, especially Schott.
Click to expand...
In the reverse, I have in mind a program which wasn't suiting at all a Skater, usually excellent in Skating Skills, in this particular program they were subpar but he got still 9s all along the season.
 
Here's a document that describes in more detail what's being judged in the Skating Skills component:


See page 8.

The latest version of the summary chart with the different colors is also available on the last page of the ISU communication DizzyFrenchie linked in post #2.

How well the skater has mastered the technical skills of skating and how well they display those skills would not be directly related to how well the program "suits" the skater choreographically. There might be differences in how well a skater skates from one performance to the next, for physical or mental reasons, that would affect the quality of the skating on that day.

Whether or not a skater achieves level 4 on a step sequence is directly related to how well the skater executes all the necessary technical features to achieve that level, and how the technical panel calls them. In some cases, a single missed turn in one of the one-foot clusters of difficult turns could disqualify the element from two of the features, even if the technical quality of the rest of the sequence is excellent. So it is certainly possible to deserve 9s for skating skills and only earn level 2 or 3 for the step sequence that day.

The judges who award the GOEs and the program components, don't know what level the tech panel called for the sequence, so if it looked good to them they might still give high GOEs and high PCS.

Or if the skater managed to execute enough of the correct turns to qualify for level 4 even with only mediocre quality, yes, it would be possible to earn the level from the tech panel but lower GOE and lower PCS from the judges.

In general skaters with higher skill levels are more likely to get credit for all the turns they attempt, but occasionally they do not, for instance due to a momentary mental lapse or a bad patch of ice.
 
There’s also the issue that some of the components of skating skills don’t always translate well on video - chief example being skating speed and ice coverage. Camera work can make a skater look faster or slower in the video; ice coverage is quite hard to judge without a consistent wide angle or with the video switching cameras frequently. At least that’s what surprised me the most when I started watching events live.
 
yfan1 said:
I'd say Sasha Cohen's skating skills were indeed weak at the beginning of her senior career. You can see it when she was at 2000 Junior worlds (she'd won silver at US Nationals as a senior mind you), as an example. Quite slow, and IIRC even though she hit fantastic positions on her spirals, those spirals were wobbly sometimes.

Compare that with the end of her career, and she's significantly faster, and her edges on her spirals are quite a lot more stable.
Click to expand...
I think you mean evolution because all the athletes improve their technique through time , I never heard about edgeless but that was bored. I think isn't that , some figure skaters focus more on be absolutely technical and forgets artistry and others focus a balance between both worlds

brblja said:
There’s also the issue that some of the components of skating skills don’t always translate well on video - chief example being skating speed and ice coverage. Camera work can make a skater look faster or slower in the video; ice coverage is quite hard to judge without a consistent wide angle or with the video switching cameras frequently. At least that’s what surprised me the most when I started watching events live.
Click to expand...
What we see in video on tv is very different that TS sees and the video on itself is from another angles and video frame rate that is as crystal clear as a Bohemian glass in addition to the angles we see on tv normally , would compare with the VAR on soccer, maybe in other languages like must translate faster for immediate comprehension some terms are forgotten or bad translated
 
brblja said:
There’s also the issue that some of the components of skating skills don’t always translate well on video - chief example being skating speed and ice coverage. Camera work can make a skater look faster or slower in the video; ice coverage is quite hard to judge without a consistent wide angle or with the video switching cameras frequently. At least that’s what surprised me the most when I started watching events live.
Click to expand...
That is very true!

For fans who have watched only on video and struggle to see differences between skating quality of skaters who are earning very different Skating Skills component scores, I would recommend watching some live skating, at almost any level. If you can attend a competition with multiple events at different skill levels, you should see a difference how lower level skaters move across the ice compared to higher level, even if they're doing similar technical elements. And between the weakest and strongest skaters in large events. JGPs are good opportunities to see differences in a large event on video, but it's much more obvious live and up close.

Even if you can just get to a local rink to watch a practice session with different levels, even if none of them are elite, you should be able to see differences between beginners and skaters who are further along the developmental path.

These large differences in skill level should be clear when they're right in front of you. Soon you might be able to see differences between, e.g., pretty good seniors earning 6s and elite seniors earning 8 and 9s.

The finer distinctions among skaters in an overall general similar category would take more study. That's what judges are always working on as they work their way up the judging ranks.
 
gkelly said:
When you're listening live.

On video, you're at the mercy of the sound mixing etc
Click to expand...
I think the scratchy sounds of poor skating are pretty apparent usually, although they may be exaggerated, yeah.

For particularly good skating skill, a skater tends to have quiet acceleration - THAT would be very hard to notice on TV. Sometimes though, great edge work also creates this very deep rumble across the ice.
 
yfan1 said:
I think the scratchy sounds of poor skating are pretty apparent usually, although they may be exaggerated, yeah.

For particularly good skating skill, a skater tends to have quiet acceleration - THAT would be very hard to notice on TV. Sometimes though, great edge work also creates this very deep rumble across the ice.
Click to expand...
I have long thought so then wondered if there couldn't be also a blade model factor. I'd like to have opinions on it! For Skaters themselves, a beautiful blade sound must be so much more soothing than a scratchy one!
 
Bluediamonds09 said:
In the off season, I have been watching past events (2018 Olympics, 2016 Worlds, 2022 Olympics, etc.). And I realize I just don't understand what good skating skills are. I have been leaving comments under the videos of various YouTube skating channels for years, asking, "Can you explain what good SS are, with video examples?" Questions like that. I usually don't receive any reply, but I also understand that I am asking A LOT for a channel to risk a copyright claim just to show me video examples. However, I really don't understand what makes a skater receive a level 4 step sequence instead of a level 3; why certain skaters who look like Bambi receive high marks for SS; what type of bodywork and correct edges equate to good skating.

Skating is subjective. I appreciate skating who move across the ice with ease. Joannie Rochette, Nicole Schott, Jenni Saarinen, Emmi Peltonen. But of course, not all of these women were appreciated by the judges. Was I seeing something different, or do I just not understand what good skating skills are? The GOAT for me is Sasha Cohen. But I've seen many comments say that Sasha had shallow edges and no speed. I don't see that, but I don't know what to look for. All I see is a skater who knew how to make a moment, who knew how to emphasize every good quality she had, who never looked like Bambi , lost and about to topple over.

I watched Nicole Schott's Olympic short program and Kailani Craine's 2017 skate canada short program. I was appalled by their low PCS, particularly for skating skills. I must not understand what the IJS requires, right? But the commentator for Nicole said, "Enough bodywork, and the edges are correct enough for a level 3 or 4." Also, the commentator said, "Really good series of turns in and out of that step sequence, you could see the curves in and out of those brackets and rockers." (Mind you, I don't know what brackets and rockers are.) She seemed to be praising her. So....why the low scores? Were her edges "shallow", something I don't understand? And Kailani embodied the character of that program, and the spins were to die for. Why did she not even reach 55 points?

I am hoping someone can help me understand skating skills and step sequences. And for a civilized conversation about it.
Click to expand...

Replace AUS with RUS and Kailani clearing 57 points.

Really unfortunate how skaters who execute the requirements are held back on GOE just because of where they hail from. Crane and Schott actually had some decent programs but never got the Fed support.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

gsk8
Do Rhythm Dances actually test skating skills enough?
2
Replies
22
Views
2K
bckabck
bckabck
A
Skaters who improved their Skating Skills program component over time
2 3
Replies
55
Views
7K
Mista Ekko
M
ra7_78
Nicole Bobek's new book
Replies
10
Views
3K
Take2cnsdr
T
F
Question about Lutz technique in Japan
Replies
11
Views
2K
drivingmissdaisy
D
F
What has changed for the better in figure skating?
2 3
Replies
52
Views
2K
DizzyFrenchie
DizzyFrenchie
Back
Top