What has changed for the better in figure skating?

[CanadianSkaterGuy]

Yeah to me it's more that awkward positions are overrewarded. I'd far rather see a gorgeous standard camel than one with a sloppy free leg - but in the system they're both rewarded the same, and then the judges score it same on GOE as well.

There's no difference between a classic attitude layback versus a layback with a dropped leg either for a level (neither is considered a 'difficult' variation), and judges barely differentiate between the GOE too.

With some better rules and implementation of rules, there's no reason to not keep the more flexible positions. In fact the standard camel and classic layback both require a greater deal of flexibility than some other positions that are considered 'difficult'.

Main thing about spins is that they last too long. Steps too. I think we can make the spins shorter by requiring only three level features (max level 3), though.

Oh the worst is the side leaning spin - you can’t even call some of those a difficult position - it’s basically rotating enough before the skater grabs the catch foot and pulls it up into a level 4 biellmann. An attitude layback is rare but I also think it’s better than some laybacks that were held for three or four rotations and that’s about it. YMMV

 

[Arigato]

Alysa winning Breakthrough Athlete of the Year at the ESPY Awards tonight. If that's not better for the sport, I don't what is.

 

[yfan1]

An attitude layback is rare but I also think it’s better than some laybacks that were held for three or four rotations and that’s about it. YMMV

Well it's more that I miss spins like these:



It's a short, to the point spin, which I believe would be called FSSp1 nowadays, and be awarded 1 GOE.

In fact all her spins would only be classified as Level 1s or Level Bs in this program, even though the quality of the positions she's hitting (outside the layback) is actually hard. I do wish we could return to a bit more freedom in spins and steps, at least for the free program - it wouldn't even be that hard to limit max level achieved to level 3 for the steps and level 2 for spins in the free program.

I do not know which laybacks were held only for 3 revs? Do you have examples?

 

[gkelly]

Well now there will be one spin with complete freedom in the freeskate (choreo spin)

 

[DizzyFrenchie]

Well now there will be one spin with complete freedom in the freeskate (choreo spin)

Is it really completely free? Because, having not seen any Base Value assigned to it, I had assumed that it would have that of a Spin chosen in the list, but for instance in this List the Combination Spin don't describe which Basic Positions have to be reached so there maybe was part of the leeway for the Choreographic Spin?

 

[gkelly]

Is it really completely free? Because, having not seen any Base Value assigned to it, I had assumed that it would have that of a Spin chosen in the list, but for instance in this List the Combination Spin don't describe which Basic Positions have to be reached so there maybe was part of the leeway for the Choreographic Spin?

Here's the definition of the Choreographic Spin from ISU Communication 2788. See especially the part I bolded:

Choreographic Spin (Rule 612 Single Skating)
A Choreographic Spin is a spin which enhances the choreography of the program and
matches the music.
A Choreographic Spin must have a minimum of 3 consecutive revolutions executed on one
or two blades, with any basic or non-basic positions allowed. Change of foot is optional and
can be done several times during the spin. The Technical Panel identifies the Choreographic
Spin and it will be confirmed once the 3 consecutive revolutions have been completed. If the
Choreographic Spin cannot be identifiable to the panel, the third performed spin will be
considered as the Choreographic Spin (Choreographic Spin confirmed). This element has a
fixed base value and will be evaluated by the judges in GOE only.
The positions in the Choreographic spin will not be considered as used in the other spins of
the program.

So basically, if it goes around at least 3 revolutions in a row, it meets the requirement and will
get the same base value as all the other choreographic spins. But it would have to do more
than that, technically and/or choreographically, to earn high GOEs from the judges.

In case you're interested, here are the positive GOE bullet points for this element:

1) element matches the music and reflects the concept/character of the program
2) creativity
3) effortless throughout
4) a highlight of the program
5) good controlled position(s) matching the music
6) intentional use of speed matching the music

The boldface here is the ISU's, not mine. The two bolded bullet points must be met for a judge to award +4 or +5 for this element. So a technically excellent spin that could have earned max GOE as a regular technical element but has no relation to the concept of the program or no creativity cannot earn higher than +3.

 

[DizzyFrenchie]

Here's the definition of the Choreographic Spin from ISU Communication 2788. See especially the part I bolded:



So basically, if it goes around at least 3 revolutions in a row, it meets the requirement and will
get the same base value as all the other choreographic spins. But it would have to do more
than that, technically and/or choreographically, to earn high GOEs from the judges.

In case you're interested, here are the positive GOE bullet points for this element:



The boldface here is the ISU's, not mine. The two bolded bullet points must be met for a judge to award +4 or +5 for this element. So a technically excellent spin that could have earned max GOE as a regular technical element but has no relation to the concept of the program or no creativity cannot earn higher than +3.

Yes, I've read this too, but I saw no specific Choreographic Spin Base Value in the list of Spins (neither in the Scale of Values nor in the Communication n°2788), which made me deduce that they would still have a category from those already in the list.

 

[Mathman]

Well it's more that I miss spins like these:



It's a short, to the point spin, which I believe would be called FSSp1 nowadays, and be awarded 1 GOE.

In fact all her spins would only be classified as Level 1s or Level Bs in this program, even though the quality of the positions she's hitting (outside the layback) is actually hard. I do wish we could return to a bit more freedom in spins and steps, at least for the free program - it wouldn't even be that hard to limit max level achieved to level 3 for the steps and level 2 for spins in the free program.

I do not know which laybacks were held only for 3 revs? Do you have examples?

I agree that those spins were "to the point" and very effective. Also the "simple" upright scratch spin that skaters often ended their programs with, to rousing applause, back in the day.

Here is Dorothy Hamill at the 1985 World Pros.

- 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

Not enough CoP points.

 

[gkelly]

The choreographic elements are listed on the last page of the Scale of Values, after the pair elements:

https://isu-d8g8b4b7ece7aphs.a03.azurefd.net/isudamcontainer/CMS/Corporate-Site/Governance/Transparency/ISU-Communications/2786-SinglesPairs-SOV-2026-27-updated-26-05-08-1778227839-8725.pdf

 

[Mathman]

The choreographic elements are listed on the last page of the Scale of Values, after the pair elements:

https://isu-d8g8b4b7ece7aphs.a03.azurefd.net/isudamcontainer/CMS/Corporate-Site/Governance/Transparency/ISU-Communications/2786-SinglesPairs-SOV-2026-27-updated-26-05-08-1778227839-8725.pdf

I do have to say that whenever I am confronted with the latest Scale of Value document my first thought is, "Good Grief -- they've got to be kidding." Thirteen pages with fifty or so lines per page down by 11 entries across.

I Googled "what is the most popular spectator sport globally and why?" Google AI overview informed me, in part: "Soccer (Association Football) is the most popular sport globally..."

For the "why" part, three factors were listed, one of them being: "Simple rules. The core objectives are easy to grasp allowing casual viewers to immediately follow the action without a steep learning curve."

 

[4everchan]

I do have to say that whenever I am confronted with the latest Scale of Value document my first thought is, "Good Grief -- they've got to be kidding." Thirteen pages with fifty or so lines per page down by 11 entries across.

I Googled "what is the most popular spectator sport globally and why?" Google AI overview informed me, in part: "Soccer (Association Football) is the most popular sport globally..."

For the "why" part, three factors were listed, one of them being: "Simple rules. The core objectives are easy to grasp allowing casual viewers to immediately follow the action without a steep learning curve."

yes they need video replays for pretty much everything because only then can people understand the offside position

I love football so I am just being catty but here's the deal

I was watching some ice dance in 6.0 era. skaters had absolutely no idea what their scores meant...

I was also watching some juniors today and they could react positively or negatively to their scores because they know what they can get with their current base value and execution.

can you imagine training so hard to get scores that are meaningless ?

then I thought about how meagan Duhamel was computing her scores so easily. this has got to be the best thing that happened : skaters able to understand their scores (even if at times, they can still be puzzling)

 

[CanadianSkaterGuy]

Well it's more that I miss spins like these:



It's a short, to the point spin, which I believe would be called FSSp1 nowadays, and be awarded 1 GOE.

In fact all her spins would only be classified as Level 1s or Level Bs in this program, even though the quality of the positions she's hitting (outside the layback) is actually hard. I do wish we could return to a bit more freedom in spins and steps, at least for the free program - it wouldn't even be that hard to limit max level achieved to level 3 for the steps and level 2 for spins in the free program.

I do not know which laybacks were held only for 3 revs? Do you have examples?

Here’s an example from Jill Trenary’s LP where the layback in the opening spin (around 0:35) is hardly held - and the actual layback in her spin at 2:40 is barely held. Her spins were hella weak in this program. https://youtu.be/1OARRbzXAAs?si=pn5GG0Bgp5NBgou2

I know in 80s and 90s free programs there would be some very short spins (especially if the skater was not a great spinner) since there were no minimum rotation requirements like in the short program. To match the music sometimes they were short but usually I’d wish they were held.

I know in a couple of Kwan’s combo spins, her camel spin position wouldn’t be credited under today’s 2-minimum-rotations for a position to count.

Baiul’s death drop flying sit at 3:30 is an example where the sit position is hardly held: https://youtu.be/p_fvrG3f0fI?si=bbSdcY4ozwBu37vw

Kerrigan’s barely held flying spit at 4:40 is another example: https://youtu.be/N72aUAlZaj4?si=EwO2inoTIoOqXpZ9

 

[DizzyFrenchie]

The choreographic elements are listed on the last page of the Scale of Values, after the pair elements:

https://isu-d8g8b4b7ece7aphs.a03.azurefd.net/isudamcontainer/CMS/Corporate-Site/Governance/Transparency/ISU-Communications/2786-SinglesPairs-SOV-2026-27-updated-26-05-08-1778227839-8725.pdf

Oh thank youuuu! This completely clears the matter! So it's 3.50 and the Choreographic Sequence has been risen to 3.50 too! I had just neglected to read what seems to be Pairs matters because I'm not learning Pairs scoring in detail yet.

 

[yfan1]

Here’s an example from Jill Trenary’s LP where the layback in the opening spin (around 0:35) is hardly held - and the actual layback in her spin at 2:40 is barely held. Her spins were hella weak in this program. https://youtu.be/1OARRbzXAAs?si=pn5GG0Bgp5NBgou2

I was expecting something else.

I don't mind holding a position for a short period of time if it suits choreography. This is more like a Change foot spin, although I'm not sure if it ever qualified as a combo spin (it wouldn't now, seeing how all three basic positions are needed).

I know in 80s and 90s free programs there would be some very short spins (especially if the skater was not a great spinner) since there were no minimum rotation requirements like in the short program. To match the music sometimes they were short but usually I’d wish they were held.

As stated, I'm fine with there being no minimum rotation requirements. At least in a free program, anyway.

Kerrigan’s barely held flying spit at 4:40 is another example: https://youtu.be/N72aUAlZaj4?si=EwO2inoTIoOqXpZ9

Kerrigan's flying sit is what I expect choreographic spins to be. It's that long entry into the spin that also should be counting for the GOE.

I also hope to see double butterfly entries.

I sincerely hope that moving after the sit to gain back a bit of glide and then doing a scratch spin doesn't automatically discount the scratch spin with our latest new element.

 

[Mathman]

Oh thank youuuu! This completely clears the matter! So it's 3.50 and the Choreographic Sequence has been risen to 3.50 too!

The trouble with the scoring of the choreographic elements is that almost everybody gets the base value automatically, so that's a wash in the competitive result.. So the skaters are fighting only for a few extra GOE points (plus whatever impact the elements have on PCS.)

The difference between a choreo spin with +4 GOE and one with 0 GOE is only 2 points. Will his be enough for the competitors to fully invest in the element?

 

[gkelly]

The difference between a choreo spin with +4 GOE and one with 0 GOE is only 2 points. Will his be enough for the competitors to fully invest in the element?

Probably not. But if a skater is really interested in choreography, showcasing that during the choreo elements can theoretically earn them not only the higher GOE but also higher scores for Composition and Performance components. We haven't seen enough choreo spins yet to see who will be able to make a real statement there, vs. who just uses it for a rest element. Or showcases good technical spinning skills that don't particularly support the music or a theme, which theoretically should fall somewhere between in terms of scoring the element.

 

[jenaj]

For women, nothing except rewarding skaters who try harder jumps. Artistry and creativity are devalued. Points for spin and step levels are known only to judges and choreographers, except for maybe a few super fans. Certainly not to the audience. And the levels don't make spins or steps better or value them properly. What would Yagudin's step sequence at the 2002 Olympics have gotten? Or Sasha Cohen's or Angela Nikodinov's layback? Sasha's forward scratch spin would get no points. Also, will we ever see a beautiful extended spiral or spiral sequence again?

ETA: I do like having the protocols.

 

[DizzyFrenchie]

The trouble with the scoring of the choreographic elements is that almost everybody gets the base value automatically, so that's a wash in the competitive result So the skaters are fighting only for a few extra GOE points (plus whatever impact the elements have on PCS.)

The difference between a choreo spin with +4 GOE and one with 0 GOE is only 2 points. Will his be enough for the competitors to fully invest in the element?

For me the trouble is that a few Skater have actually, or have had, Spins that were really reflecting the program. They were not rewarded, as far as I know. I'm afraid that the GOE in the Choreographic Spin with follow the same "unrule"?

 

[gkelly]

For women, nothing except rewarding skaters who try harder jumps.

Do you mean that rewarding skaters who try harder jumps is the only thing that has changed for the better?
Or are you not answering the thread title question but complaining about the fact that nothing counts but jumps?
Or something else?

Artistry and creativity are devalued. Points for spin and step levels are known only to judges and choreographers, except for maybe a few super fans. Certainly not to the audience.

I think you're saying this is something that has not changed for the better/has changed for the worse.

Aside from the judges (and tech panel) and choroegraphers, and super fans, the coaches and skaters certainly know what the points are. That's why they try the features -- to get the levels and get the points.

And the levels don't make spins or steps better or value them properly.

Fair enough.

What would Yagudin's step sequence at the 2002 Olympics have gotten?

Most pre-IJS step sequences would earn level B or level 1 in IJS. Depends which year's IJS rules you're using. A sequence that would have anticipated the exact features and number/variety of turns to earn level 2 or higher would have been extremely rare.

Some of the pre-IJS step sequences would work better as choreographic sequences under the current rules.

Or Sasha Cohen's or Angela Nikodinov's layback? Sasha's forward scratch spin would get no points. Also, will we ever see a beautiful extended spiral or spiral sequence again?

ETA: I do like having the protocols.

Me too. And so, I'm sure, do most skaters.

It would be nice if TV/streaming broadcasts would inform viewers where to find the protocols -- just mention the link somewhere, at the end of the event maybe.
Most fans who aren't already diehards wouldn't bother to look. But knowing such information exists would make it seem less like a secret.

And fans who do want to learn more would be able to go straight from early experiences watching to the information itself, rather than having to find discussion forums with knowledgeable fans like this one, or try to search online without knowing where to start.

For me the trouble is that a few Skater have actually, or have had, Spins that were really reflecting the program. They were not rewarded, as far as I know.

During IJS/now? Or back in 6.0 days?

In short programs, spins that don't meet certain minimum criteria were and are penalized.

In free skates, the criteria were looser under 6.0.

Spins that especially stood out for great quality or difficulty or originality or choreographic value could be rewarded under either system, but with 6.0 there's no way of knowing how much a spin or all the spins in a program did or didn't affect the judges' overall marks.
And with 6.0, there would have been less impetus for judges to make fine distinctions between "meets the minimum criteria" and "meets the criteria and exceeds them in some ways, but doesn't stand out as spectacular." With both levels and GOEs, positive and negative, in the mix, there is more room for judges to reflect differences among various aspects of spins that fall between the deficient and the excellent ends of the spectrum.

I'm afraid that the GOE in the Choreographic Spin with follow the same "unrule"?

We shall see.
If it's an "unrule" (unwritten), it will probably vary across judges.

 

[Mathman]

What would Yagudin's step sequence at the 2002 Olympics have gotten?

Most pre-IJS step sequences would earn level B or level 1 in IJS.

I think that this is the number one example of the sport/entertainment dichotomy that has always informed figure skating. Yes, Yagudin's "simple" footwork wound be a level one under IJS. Yet in real time it was a show-stopping marvel and still wins honors in polls asking, "What one figure skating segment would you show to prospective fans to induce them to take an interest in the sport?"