The Death of Figure Skating as Art

[LittleLotte29]

os168, thank you so much Your post is really great. I love sample four

I personally think that some of PCS features should be changed, but first of all, the current ones should be respected. They are not. The system maybe isn't entirely perfect, there is so much to change yet, but what we have now is sufficient to have objective and just judging. There are criteria: what we reward for choreography, skating skills, And - even if it is in case of TES (usually) - it is not in case of PCS. Programme which is nice, created to well-known music and impressive but based on crossovers and waving is scored higher than the complicated one, based on intricate footwork and unusual elements.

 

[OS]

os186, would you like to discuss some objective qualities of the program components, especially PE, CH, and IN, that can justify specific scores, so that judges, skaters, and fans can get more on the same page about what's being rewarded?

I do think that there will always be some differences of opinions based on life experience (e.g., familiarity with certain musical styles and the history specific pieces), which of the several criteria for each component individual judges/viewers consider most important, even where each viewer happens to be sitting (or camera angles for videos). But it's definitely better if everyone has a common understanding about what should and shouldn't be rewarded.

I think the COP frame work is actually fine as it is, but it is the standard of judging that is inconsistent between competitions to have caused mistrust among those who compete as well as the general public. If the judges can not seem to agree among themselves, so what do you expect from the general public? The public has no choice but to use 'art is subjective' as the only plausible explanation.

The consequence is that it affect the whole approach to skating programs, going back to the most conservative and familiar route. It comes down to compromises of how much skaters are comfortable risking when majority of the skaters aim is to medal due to the pressure of funding. I don't think skaters of today are any less artistically talented or creative than skaters of yesterday, but the difference is they are not offered the right conditions to develop the artistic aspect of the sport when the subjectivity of the sport means they might not get reward for the effort but can still manage to get high PCS somehow through other mean not necessarily to do with what went on the ice.

I recall I wrote a long whinge post a long time ago around 2011/12 that specifically requested for a separate judging panel for PCS, especially PE, CH and IN requires a expertise that can take years to develop and need to be marked consistently at a high standard, before the PCS category can be trusted. I have also suggested a re-calibration process between different competitions to iron out any inconsistent subjectivity in PCS, instead of creating false momentum bench marking which is only possible with strong federation pulling. Judges need to be held accountable for their opinions and justify their decisions. The decisions may not be always agreeable, but it protect the skaters and the sport since I find it really unfair it is usually skaters at the brunt of the hate when it is the judging that is clearly failing the sport.

 

[yyyskate]

MathMan, to reply you, yes Yuna is one of the richest athletes, because she is truly special and once in a generation talent, role model, star etc... and because of her, lots of young girls in korea pick up figure skating, even outside korea. however, korean family knows that, if their kids want to become the next Yuna, they has to be much better than kids from skating power countries (which is extremely difficult, and not worth the investment), and that frustration is shared among many families of skating small countries. A lot of kids in South Korea took up figure skating, is just because, they wanna move beautifully on ice like Yuna, and they discovered that figure skating could be so beautiful through Yuna. Although the frustration (such as how Yuna was treated), they still cannot resist the beauty of the sports because of Yuna.
I wont argue with Yuna haters, every body is entitled to their preference, but every win of Yuna's is legit, whenever in doubt, she never wins.

 

[Mathman]

Telling people the focus on artistry is greater isnt going to make them think "oh, well now I HAVE to watch!".

Telling people that Patrick Chan does three Mohawks and a Choctaw leading into his triple Lutz will not make people "HAVE to watch" either. Telling people than Max Aaron is going to attempt 3 quadruple jumps and might land two of them, that is not going to make anyone HAVE to watch.

But I think that we can profitably ask, back when skating was more popular, what was popular about it? Why did people flock to see Janet Lynn compete? It wasn't the height of her double Lutz that drew them in.

The next Michelle Kwan? Why was the first Michelle Kwan so popular? Yes, she did seven triple jumps in her long program and won first place ordinals from the judges. But the fans did not come to count her triple jumps. Michelle Kwan -- and skating -- were popular because her performances were esthetically and emotionally satisfying. I think it would be a big mistake to throw that out to appease the CoP bean-counters.

+1

in fact, it might even drive some casual viewers away, since they would then be affirmed in their view that it is not a sport, rather, a performing art caving to the demands of the arrogant art snobs.

It is not the arrogant art snobs that are the problem, it is the arrogant skating establishment types. (For one thing, there are not many high class art snobs around, and for another, their impact on figure skating is null.) It is the figure skating snobs that berate audiences and lecture them on what they ought to want to watch. "Look, he did a quad! How can you not want to pay $75 to watch it, you ignoramus."

The people will tell us what they like. They liked Janet Lynn (the highest paid female athlete in the world in the mid-seventies). They liked Michelle Kwan. Figure skating would be well advised to ask, what was it about those skaters' performances that drew audiences in?

Or maybe we don't want to ask that question...

You think most sports fans watch downhill skiing outside of the Olympics? Bobsled? Moguls?

Exactly. These are pure sport. Is it our goal to make figure skating more like pure sport of cross country snow-shoeing?

In my opinion we are on the wrong path if we try to make figure skating "more like other sports." If it is "other sports" that people want, there are plenty to choose from. Do you want to see someone jump high? Go to a track meet. Do you want to see someone jump high while wearing ice skates? Why would anyone do something so silly?

Instead of making skating more like other sports we should be vigorously promoting what makes figure skating different from other sports. What do you get out of watching figure skating that you don't get from watching baseball or horse racing? If the answer is nothing, then we don't need figure skating in the first place. (As a spectator sport, that is. As a participatory and recreational sport, yes, it's great.)

 

[gkelly]

I recall I wrote a long whinge post a long time ago around 2011/12 that specifically requested for a separate judging panel for PCS, especially PE, CH and IN requires a expertise that can take years to develop and need to be marked consistently at a high standard, before the PCS category can be trusted.

I'm interested in how such training might work.

And, if there were to be a separate judging panel for these components, whether it would be feasible and desirable to training volunteer judges with extensive experience in theory and practice of visual and performing arts but who had no previous knowledge of skating except perhaps as fans.

I have also suggested a re-calibration process between different competitions to iron out any inconsistent subjectivity in PCS, instead of creating false momentum bench marking which is only possible with strong federation pulling. Judges need to be held accountable for their opinions and justify their decisions.

How could this best be accomplished?

 

[Mathman]

MathMan, to reply you, yes Yuna is one of the richest athletes, because she is truly special and once in a generation talent, role model, star etc... and because of her, lots of young girls in korea pick up figure skating, even outside korea. however, korean family knows that, if their kids want to become the next Yuna, they has to be much better than kids from skating power countries (which is extremely difficult, and not worth the investment), and that frustration is shared among many families of skating small countries. A lot of kids in South Korea took up figure skating, is just because, they wanna move beautifully on ice like Yuna, and they discovered that figure skating could be so beautiful through Yuna. Although the frustration (such as how Yuna was treated), they still cannot resist the beauty of the sports because of Yuna.
I wont argue with Yuna haters, every body is entitled to their preference, but every win of Yuna's is legit, whenever in doubt, she never wins.

Hey, Yyy, you are the last person on this board that I would want to argue with. Yuna is my second favorite skater of all time, next to Michelle Kwan. Yuna's struggles and disadvantages make her achievements all the more astonishing.

 

[ice coverage]

... It is not the arrogant art snobs that are the problem, it is the arrogant skating establishment types. (For one thing, there are not many such people (high class art snobs) around, and for another, their impact on figure skating is null.) It is the figure skating snobs that berate audiences and lecture them on what they ought to want to watch. "Look, he did a quad! How can you not want to pay $75 to watch it, you ignoramus." ...

The arrogrant art snobs in this thread are just as guilty of giving lectures on what others ought to want to watch. (Not referring to you, MM.)

 

[OS]

I'm interested in how such training might work.

Instead of 7 judges, 4 on TES. 3 on PCS. Technical Judge remain at 3. The idea is each judge became a specialist.

And, if there were to be a separate judging panel for these components, whether it would be feasible and desirable to training volunteer judges with extensive experience in theory and practice of visual and performing arts but who had no previous knowledge of skating except perhaps as fans.

I am sure in a sport that features music and choreography, there're already a wide pool of talent to choose from with those with skating experience. Or they can train judges from minor skating federation from mixed culture to further remove subjectivity from judging. The calibration process work like a external audit. If there PCS are over marked at one. competition. After the audit, they simply republish the recaliberate the result to a bench marked competition. They do that at the end of all competitions except the World Championship. It helps the judges to mediate among themselves, and constantly monitor their personal subjectivity.

However, since it removes false momentum, it removes advantages of strong federation home events and friendly events, I doubt ISU ever go for it due to the protests. The only way for it to work then, is simply remove Anonymity and have an accountable session at the end of each competition where a judging panel spokesperson can say a few words about the competition result. This actually gives an opportunity for them to say a few encouraging words about a skater, a performance, areas to improve on, and the chance to address any doubts and issues that may arise from controversial decision.

Art will always be controversial, but at least the issues are tackled then and there instead of seeding uncertainty and mistrust. A valid art competition of any type is only as credible as the quality, the objectivity and the credential of its judges after all.

 

[Mathman]

The arrogrant art snobs in this thread are just as guilty of giving lectures on what others ought to want to watch. (Not referring to you, MM.)

True, but no one listens to the arrogant art snobs, so it doesn't matter what they say. But the arrogant figure skating experts, they do control the direction of the sport.

(The only thing I dread is that now gkelly is going to chime in and demolish everything I just said. )

 

[CanadianSkaterGuy]

But I think that we can profitably ask, back when skating was more popular, what was popular about it? Why did people flock to see Janet Lynn compete? It wasn't the height of her double Lutz that drew them in.

The next Michelle Kwan? Why was the first Michelle Kwan so popular? Yes, she did seven triple jumps in her long program and won first place ordinals from the judges. But the fans did not come to count her triple jumps. Michelle Kwan -- and skating -- were popular because her performances were esthetically and emotionally satisfying. I think it would be a big mistake to throw that out to appease the Cop bean-counters.

Here's the question though. If every other skater was skating under the same parameters as Kwan and Lynn, how come all those skaters didn't tailor their programs and level of artistry to match Kwan and Lynn?... the obvious answer being, there is only one Kwan and one Lynn. The artistic rules/parameters of the system were the same for everyone but Kwan/Lynn benefited the most because artistry/expression was something inherent to them. Kwan wasn't any less artistic under CoP... but she was less exciting to watch because her technical level dropped (same with Stojko in his latter years).

When it comes to Janet Lynn, she's from a completely different era of skating... if you had 20 Janet Lynns competing today do you think the sport would be more popular or less popular to the current masses? I respect the past, but it's not something that we need to re-visit as some paradigm. I'll take Kim over Lynn any day, in terms of who I would enjoy watching more (before people clutch their pearls, I'm sure many agree with me, as I'm sure many disagree).

Exactly. These are pure sport. Is it our goal to make figure skating more like pure sport of cross country snow-shoeing?

In my opinion we are on the wrong path if we try to make figure skating "more like other sports." If it is "other sports" that people want, there are plenty to choose from. Do you want to see someone jump high? Go to a track meet. Do you want to see someone jump high while wearing ice skates? Why would anyone do something so silly?

Instead of making skating more like other sports we should be vigorously promoting what makes figure skating different from other sports. What do you get out of watching figure skating that you don't get from watching baseball or horse racing? If the answer is nothing, then we don't need figure skating in the first place.

Every sport has something unique about it that makes it worth watching and by no means am I trying to make figure skating "like" another sport. But, sports are defined by athletic performance, for skating to be taken seriously the athletic aspect always has to be the major criteria. Yes, the artistic component is what makes it unique, but it might not be as interesting to the masses as the athletic component. While certain skaters are watched for their artistry (like Kwan), a figure skating COMPETITION is watched fundamentally for its athletic merit.

As an example, Kwan's programs from 2005 Worlds LP is much more artistic than her 1995 Worlds LP, but the masses will digest the less-artistic 1995 LP as an ambitious, clean performance, whereas the 2005 LP is not as palatable even if it's fundamentally more artistic. Why? Because the key factor for people watching sports is athletic performance. In exhibitions or pro-programs, people cared less about elements and more about the artistic abilities of skaters.

 

[OS]

True, but no one listens to the arrogant art snobs

Haha how true, but you'd find it is usually the arrogant snobs who passionately defending the art, fund in the art, invest in the art, feed the art world and keep all the art/artist alive

 

[gkelly]

Speaking as a (hopefully not too arrogant) figure skating snob , but speaking only for myself, I can't tell people what they should want to watch. But I can talk about what the sport should want to reward, at least in broad terms.

Casual fans are often most interested in skaters' charisma; musical expression on an obvious level (which may also include subtlety); attractiveness including body line; impressive-looking tricks including big jumps-fast spins-many pair moves; and whether or not they fell down or made other obvious mistakes.

In person, speed makes a difference even to casual viewers. On video it's nearly invisible.

Off-ice human interest stories also do a lot to keep fans' interests but have nothing to do with how they deserve to score or place in competition.


Casual fans usually couldn't care less about or even recognize what edge a skater is on and how s/he gets from one edge to the next.
And yet that is the fundamental basis of the sport. It may be snobbish from the point of view of a fan but I think it is necessary from the point of view of sport to keep edge-based skills as the most important determinants of results.

So I have to resist any argument that the sport should put more emphasis on qualities that are more about pleasing fans than on demonstrating skating expertise. E.g., I don't think a musical and charismatic performance full of two-foot skating and two-foot jump landings should outscore an otherwise well-skated but introverted performance with great edge work and mostly high-quality and high-difficulty elements but one or two obvious mistakes, even if a casual viewer might think the opposite.

However, I do think that, all else being equal, it is appropriate to reward qualities such as greater connection between movement and music, superior carriage and body line, even thematic coherence to the choreography and connection to the audience.

There's plenty of room for discussion over just how to weight each of these criteria compared with the technical content.

And I always advocate score presentation, commentary, etc., that allow fans to access as much information as possible about the reasons behind scores and placements, without being bombarded with too much information when they're just watching to enjoy the skating.

 

[CanadianSkaterGuy]

The reality is that no matter what system you're under or what parameters you're under, or what artistic freedom skaters have, the vast majority of programs done by all competitors won't be up to the artistic standards of BoP or anyone who thinks we need more Casablancas or Lyra Angelicas for the sport to be watchable.

 

[ice coverage]

True, but no one listens to the arrogant art snobs, so it doesn't matter what they say. But the arrogant figure skating experts, they do control the direction of the sport. ...

Even if arrogant art snobs do not control the direction of skating, their sneering is hurtful to the sport because it pushes away those who simply want to enjoy the skating of today. Why would any potential fans start paying more attention to skating if the art snobs make them feel unwelcome?

Speaking as a (hopefully not too arrogant) figure skating snob , but speaking only for myself, I can't tell people what they should want to watch. But I can talk about what the sport should want to reward, at least in broad terms. ...

LOL, gkelly. You are neither arrogant nor snobby, as far as I am concerned. Have never detected any hint of a superiority complex from you. Only generosity in sharing your deep knowledge to help others better understand and appreciate the sport.

... I recall I wrote a long whinge post a long time ago around 2011/12 that specifically requested for a separate judging panel for PCS, especially PE, CH and IN requires a expertise that can take years to develop and need to be marked consistently at a high standard, before the PCS category can be trusted. ...

Do you think that the upcoming judging experiment at Nebelhorn this year could be a baby step toward your vision?

http://www.goldenskate.com/forum/sh...belhorn-Trophy&p=958339&viewfull=1#post958339​

BC Summerskate this year experimented with a separate judging panel for PCS for Pre-Novice Women U14 groups.

http://www.goldenskate.com/forum/sh...s-among-judges&p=970311&viewfull=1#post970311​

 

[Mathman]

As an example, Kwan's programs from 2005 Worlds LP is much more artistic than her 1995 Worlds LP,…

I was about to challenge this claim, but you made me go back and watch the 2005 performance. Thank you, thank you, thank you. Yeah, she fell on her triple Salchow, she couldn't get into her back spiral position, and she two-footed the second Lutz. The old gal's not fifteen any more.

Still…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bgYMR6B8s8I

 

[yyyskate]

Mathman, not you, I am referring posters who says Yuna is overrated, over-scored, in nearly every post, whenever there is a chance....... I will not reply, discuss or argue with them.

 

[OS]

Do you think that the upcoming judging experiment at Nebelhorn this year could be a baby step toward your vision?

http://www.goldenskate.com/forum/sh...belhorn-Trophy&p=958339&viewfull=1#post958339​

BC Summerskate this year experimented with a separate judging panel for PCS for Pre-Novice Women U14 groups.

http://www.goldenskate.com/forum/sh...s-among-judges&p=970311&viewfull=1#post970311​

Very cool! Yes.

Although I have to add, as much as I blame the judging, I believe 95% of judges are really trying their best to be fair and should be commended. Problem is when the stakes are highest, when the judges faces the most pressures, it exposes the chance to give in to temptation, human error, or surrender to peer or political pressure. Power corrupts, especially at the top. I doubt figure skating is that different to the rest of the world.

 

[dorispulaski]

I'm interested in how such training might work.

...

How could this best be accomplished?

I'd like to see singles and pairs have explicit guidelines for scoring PCS, as there are for dance. In fact, I am shocked that only general guidelines exist for the other 3 disciplines. Without a layout of what is a One and what is a Ten, it has to be difficult to give meaningful PCS training to judges.

The relevant ISU Communication is 1677.
http://isu.sportcentric.net/db//files/serve.php?id=2635

with some updates in Communication 1686
http://www.usfsa.org/Content/ISU Comm 1686.pdf

 

[gkelly]

I think that would be useful.

Of course, when the guidelines say "average" or "above average" or "good," judges need to have similar ideas of what the standard for "average" is.

Maybe showing videos of retired skaters at different levels as part of the training? But what skater wants to be used as an example of less than average? Even if they're not identified by name and the training videos are not made public.

 

[CanadianSkaterGuy]

Very cool! Yes.

Although I have to add, as much as I blame the judging, I believe 95% of judges are really trying their best to be fair and should be commended. Problem is when the stakes are highest, when the judges faces the most pressures, it exposes the chance to give in to temptation, human error, or surrender to peer or political pressure. Power corrupts, especially at the top. I doubt figure skating is that different to the rest of the world.

More than prioritizing artistic freedom, priority should be given to making judging TRANSPARENT. The huge factor in people being skeptical about the sport is judging and if we can't even get that transparent, then how do we instil faith that skaters are being fairly assessed? You can bet if transparent judging makes its way into figure skating more than one judge will be taking a "pay" cut, but at least everything will be out in the open.