Article by Janet Lynn

gkelly said:

You can try to make the final phase worth more, and I suggested several ways in which that can be done. But you can never get rid of the possibility that a lackluster performance will win the title.

Whether you carry over factored placements or total scores, sometimes the only people who have a good day were too far behind in the short program to catch up with a good long. The only way to guarantee that will never be the case would be to throw out the short program results entirely. Which would throw out almost all incentive for good skaters to push themselves in the SP -- all they need to do is enough to qualify. And maybe earn a good skate order for the LP if that's the only reward.

Sometimes everyone has a bad day in the long program. So even if only the long program counts, you still might end up with the least-bad skater winning and feeling sheepish.

Click to expand...

As I see it, the problem with the current system is that it not only allows but encourages situations like Brezina's in Skate America.

Leading by 9 points after the short, his team told him to take the quad out of his LP and play it safe. By playing it safe he faltered on other elements as well and limped to the finish line, negating a brilliant performance by Van der Perren.

As you say, in every scoring system there will be contests where we have to give the prize to the least bad performance, or that are unsatisfying in other ways. But of all the systems that have been tried and proposed, I think the old factored placement idea was an effective compromise.

Under 6.0 factored placements, in general the skater had to give two excellent performances to win. You had to skate well in the short program or your goose was cooked. Then you had to skate for the championship in the LP. You couldn't rest on your laurels of two days before. Among the top three, you win the long, you win the gold.

Again, no matter what, some contests are going to be duds. But I can't think of a better system in terms of making both stages of the competition equally crucial from a sporting point of few and equally exciting for the audience.

seniorita said:

So a skater should be judged
I) on the quality of his choreography,
II) or on the quality he has been performing and how he is committed to the choreography he has been given- even if the choreo itself is not good?

Examples,. Song who obviously didnt afford a Lori Nichol kind of choreographer so far but looks really engaged in his sp or Leonova programs who have a bad choreography but she is really commited to it.

Click to expand...

I believe you can find my answer already in the rest of the paragraph you quoted. Unfortunately we couldn't tell what Song was capable of choreographically because his choreography was not optimal. So he could only be judged on what he actually showed us.

Song has been promised to get expert choreographed programs, which he's earned with his recent showing. Lori Nichol can't take on every skater who wants her service, and Brian Orser can't take on every young one seeking a good coach. (It was highly unusual for a legendary coach like Ozzie Colson to take on a little kid like Patrick Chan.) However, neither the choreographer nor the coach receives marks on the skater's performance. Only the one who performs the complete program on competition ice does.

Janet Lynn said, "Earning points is the goal, not learning how to skate...If a skater has never seen or practiced basic bending, pushing and gliding on one foot, or if a proper edge, turn or cross-over escapes them, no worries. Just keep conquering those triples by age 9 to earn more points!"

I'm confused and need expert opinions: Is it true as she stated that the skating skills have suffered in general as a trend under COP (not talking about particular individuals but in general as a trend)? I thought it is the opposite.

I think she's wrong to blame it on CoP. Especially since the sme argument has been made since 1992 when they did away with figures.

Tonichelle said:

I think she's wrong to blame it on CoP. Especially since the sme argument has been made since 1992 when they did away with figures.

Click to expand...

There are no new complaints under the sun:

"What is happening to our young people? They disrespect their elders, they disobey their parents. They ignore the law. They riot in the streets inflamed with wild notions. Their morals are decaying. What is to become of them?" - Plato

"I see no hope for the future of our people if they are dependent on frivolous youth of today, for certainly all youth are reckless beyond words... When I was young, we were taught to be discreet and respectful of elders, but the present youth are exceedingly wise [disrespectful] and impatient of restraint" - Hesiod, 8th century BC

There are similar quotes through the ages.

eta. Contrarily I want to give kudos to today's youths. For years now I have predicted and seen the inevitability of a revolution, the question being whether it would be bloodless as I hoped. So far the Occupy movement has been very promising and I am extremely impressed with the students' reaction to the casually brutal pepper spraying of peaceful young people. :thumbsup: They really shamed the adult bullies and abusers of authority and force. After all the criticism I had for the US, I heartily applaud the American youths for their peaceful demands of much needed systemic changes.

^ Ancient Greek were wise
I know the ideal is the perfect collaboration of the athlete and choreographer but I dont know how it should be judged a great execution of a bad designed choreography.

seniorita said:

I dont know how it should be judged a great execution of a bad designed choreography.

Click to expand...

Score it the same as a bad execution of a well-designed choreography. Just kidding.

Thanks for posting this article. Janet Lynn an eloquent advocate for her point of view. I do find it a bit curious how she criticizes the current judging/marking system - which awards points for both technical and artistic content. When Janet was competing, she was "handicapped" as compulsory school figures were a major component of the overall score, and as figures were the weakest aspect of her skating, she always had to work herself up in the standings with her excellent free skating. I would think Janet, of all people, would approve or at least partially approve of the current system, which does reward you for completing complex technical and artistic elements.

I do agree with her concerning figure skating's decline in popularity, at least in the US. For so many years, Americans could expect to see American skaters (particularly the women) on the podium at the Olympics, and for all of the World championships. We were a bit proprietary in our view of the Olympic medals - they were "ours". Now, figure skating is truly a global sport, and the US women have not kept up with the top skaters from South Korea, Japan, Canada, and other countries. We were so used to seeing/hearing our National Anthem played at the Olympic and World medal ceremonies, and now it may never happen again. It's not that we're sore sports, but we're just not terribly interested in attending and/or watching competitions in which Americans finish out of the medals, make lots of mistakes, and are clearly not the best in the field.

My two cents, of course.

seniorita said:

I know the ideal is the perfect collaboration of the athlete and choreographer but I dont know how it should be judged a great execution of a bad designed choreography.

Click to expand...

Worked for Oksana Baiul.

But I think that result caused the ISU to educate judges to look more closely at the program construction.

seniorita said:

I know the ideal is the perfect collaboration of the athlete and choreographer but I dont know how it should be judged a great execution of a bad designed choreography.

Click to expand...

This is something I've always wondered about. I remember reading an interview with Michal Brezina a couple seasons back when he was a fresh new upstart and he was saying how he'd always wanted to work with big-name choreographers in North America, but he couldn't afford their price tags (obviously things have changed now).

Then I felt bad for all the times I had criticized Michal's choreography previously.

Fairness of the Game: Everyone is entitled to seek counsel from a lawyer (choreographer).

Reality of the Game: The privilege afford a good lawyer (choreographer); the poor get the inexperienced.

Is it "fair"? Oh, yeh. It is so-called "justice".

skatinginbc said:

Fairness of the Game: Everyone is entitled to seek counsel from a lawyer (choreographer).

Reality of the Game: The privilege afford a good lawyer (choreographer); the poor get the inexperienced.

Is it "fair"? Oh, yeh. It is so-called "justice".

Click to expand...

It's the fact of life.

Them that has, gets.

The NIV Bible says: Whoever has will be given more; whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him.

In skating, it's more about what one has in talents than money, which will also come with talents to buy better training and choreography.

eta. The judicial system is not about justice. It's about the laws and money. A poor person can still retain an expensive lawyer with a good case and especially with huge potential awards.

The best choreographers will not like to choreograph for poor skaters and a good lawyer is likely not keen on a losing case. Professionals with good reputations are very discerning about what and whom they take on. When one is in high demands, high fees is a way to screen out potential seekers of their services. In skating, federations in turn will only invest in their best skaters and help with choregraphy costs.