What Do You All Think About CoP Now?

Thank you for the detailed reply and counter-proposals. I will definitely think more about your points this weekend.

I did have in mind fall deductions only, not time/costume/illegal move deductions!

Mathman said:

Maybe that is what I have been struggling to say all this time, without success. 6.0 is easier to enjoy.

Click to expand...

The problem is that millions of fans insist on judging too, based on their enjoyment, and with absolute conviction.

eta: Here's a good basic figure skating tutorial blog:

People are utterly mystified by the scoring because they really don't think of it as sport-- they think of it as art, and everyone knows, as the old joke says that with art, you don't have to understand it, you just have to know what you like.

Click to expand...

SkateFiguring said:

The problem is that millions of fans insist on judging too, based on their enjoyment, and with absolute conviction.

eta: Here's a good basic figure skating tutorial blog:

Click to expand...

I generally watch skating with a group of FSU and ISU Board posters. We attend every competition we can get to, and when we can't go, we get together to watch on TV. We call our TV get-togethers "Not Going To . . . " parties. As soon as a program ends, we start discussing what we liked and didn't like, and what the marks should be. It's amazing how close we generally are. We were doing this by the beginning of the second season of CoP, sometimes having competitions to see who can get the closest. I have to say it was a whole lot easier to learn to score under than it was under 6.0.

SkateFiguring said:

The problem is that millions of fans insist on judging too, based on their enjoyment, and with absolute conviction.

Click to expand...

...and the bigger problem is that they aren't watching the sport anymore or putting any money towards it. When they disagreed with scores in the past, they kept watching. Now they just don't care.

gkelly said:

Well, they're doing well in relation to the field they're competing against. If they have to compete against skaters with stronger jump content and also stronger everything else, they wouldn't do so well.

I'm sure Yamaguchi with her 1992 skills packaged into a program designed to meet the 2012 rules could place quite well in the current field. (Not sure she could have medaled at 2010 Olympics, but probably a final group contender, comparable to Flatt's and Nagasu's results. The field is usually strongest in Olympic years.)

Baiul is probably not a good comparison. Yes, she could do five different triples but she had trouble with landing on one foot and on executing combinations, and she didn't really show (or have?) the skills to earn high levels in steps or high GOEs in spins. I think her PCS would have been all over the place, probably highest in Interp, or P/E for a good performance.

Click to expand...

The level in Ladies skating is lower nowadays then 20 years ago in relation to jumps. Even Elizabeth Manley could do 4 different triples (including a very good Lutz). Many Ladies that place themselves in the top 10 at Worlds have max 4 or even 3 different triples. I don't blame COP for the fall in quality, but it encourages competitors to omitt the jump they are not solid at. In the past was different. Kristi couldn't do the Salchow, but she always tried it, even if she landed it only once or twice successfully in competition. Other examples: Fontana and Liashenko always included all the triples, even if they rarely could land the Loop.
Now, thanks to COP, the girls omitt from the program the jump they are weak at. IMO there should be a 2.00 point deduction if you don't do all the 6 different jumps. You can't do a triple Salchow, OK do a double one.

gio said:

The level in Ladies skating is lower nowadays then 20 years ago in relation to jumps. Even Elizabeth Manley could do 4 different triples (including a very good Lutz).

Click to expand...

But she didn't repeat any, so she only had 4 triples in the program -- which was a lot for the time, but not likely to win medals today.

There were other young jumpers in the 1980s, some of whom made it into medal contention in the early 90s ("20 years ago") who were doing 5-6-7 triples including the harder ones, with Ito at the head of that trend.

It seems that in the 80s skaters tended not to include jumps that were likely to end up underrotated or worse (although sometimes they did anyway and got some credit for the attempts). By the 90s, with figures out of the picture and jumps suddenly much more important, there were more attempts at harder triples and at 7-triple programs (planned if not executed) and also more failures and underrotations that were only mildly penalized. It seemed that attempting all the jumps and coming close was necessary to be taken seriously in the 90s -- and the skaters who succeeded or came closest to doing so were usually the ones who got the medals.

However, most of those 7-triple programs used 7 jump passes to fit them in and also included a double axel or two, for a total of 8 jump passes or maybe 9.

Once the IJS came in, there were [strike]two[/strike] three rules that made it less valuable for ladies to include all the triples and to repeat two of them:

*An axel jump is required, and only 7 jump passes are allowed. So it's impossible to fit 7 triples and a double axel into 7 jump passes without including a combination or sequence that contains two triples or a triple and a double axel. (And the sequences don't earn full base value.) The best jumpers can plan and often execute a 3-3 combo or 2A+3T or something of the sort. The just pretty-good jumpers risk downgrades, falls, etc., if they attempt those kinds of combos, so strategically it makes more sense for them include only 6 triples and a double axel in 7 jump passes, with a better chance of positive GOE and full credit for rotation.

*At the beginning of the IJS, any triple underrotated by 90 degrees or more was downgraded to the value of a double, with negative GOE. It would be more valuable just to do a double on purpose. This is especially true of combinations, where the second jump is often underrotated. Under 6.0, the fact of trying a 3-3 combo and standing up on one foot was rewarded. Under early IJS, without full rotation it was worth less than a clean 3-2 combo. Similarly, just attempting a triple that gives the skater trouble and is more likely than not to end up with a downgrade and -GOE is poor strategy, unlike under 6.0 where the attempt could be made without giving up anything else (except perhaps transitions) because the total number of jump passes was unlimited.

In the last couple years the 70% base value for jumps underrotated 90-180 degrees has somewhat mitigated this effect.

*Under 6.0, wrong-edge takeoffs on lutzes may have been penalized, but in long programs the penalties were invisible. Wrong edges on flip takeoffs seemed rarely to be noticed or to have any effect on the scoring. Under IJS, there are clear penalties for these errors. So skaters who habitually change edges on one of these jump takeoffs and consistently earn -GOE have less incentive to do that jump than to use that spot for a repeated lower-value triple or another double axel that can earn positive GOE.

Many Ladies that place themselves in the top 10 at Worlds have max 4 or even 3 different triples.

Click to expand...

This was also true in 1992, starting to change in 1993 and 94. I'm not sure if there was ever any year in which every lady in the Worlds top 10 attempted 5 different kinds of triples. But the medalists usually did before the rules mentioned above and other ways to earn points under IJS made it less necessary.

I don't blame COP for the fall in quality,

Click to expand...

Is it really a fall in quality? I'd say it's more a fall in quantity or difficulty. But for the most part the jumps the skaters are leaving out are the ones that would be lower quality.

IMO there should be a 2.00 point deduction if you don't do all the 6 different jumps. You can't do a triple Salchow, OK do a double one.

Click to expand...

Yeah, we've talked about this sometimes, more often in terms of bonuses for skaters who do include all 6 takeoffs.

Would you want to make the rule something like, instead of requiring "an" axel jump of some sort, to require at least one jump from each of the 6 major takeoffs? With a deduction for leaving one out?

Or maybe lose all credit for the last jumping pass if it doesn't include whatever takeoff(s) haven't been attempted yet? That could often be a harsher penalty than a 2.0 deduction. But that's what happens now if a skater doesn't include any axel.

Since skaters do sometimes pop jumps, would it be acceptable to avoid the deduction if the skater attempted a takeoff once but ended up with a sloppy single? At least the intention to comply was demonstrated.

Another interesting dynamic is that >10 American women are attempting all 5 triples and are not doing all that much better that the European ladies with lower technical content (with the exception of Alyssa). Maybe the US coaches are also stuck in the 6.0 mindset and letting their skaters get away with weaker spins and program component aspects.

I can't imagine Oksana, Kristi, or Elizabeth Manley (who I'm less familiar with) skating their programs today. Or any of the women in the golden age of the early 90's, including Tonya, Nancy or Tara. Someone with their hair in a pony tail, a fur collar, dancing to show tunes? Or Jurassic Park? Or Neil Diamond Muzak? Never!

Today, they'd all have their hair in a bun, wear tasteful costumes (OK, Nancy and Kristi were usually good with that) and skate to the quiet, soft symphony. And none of them would be as good.

Something has sucked the life out of figure skating and I wonder if the COP doesn't have something to do with it. With such emphasis on edges, changes of position, one-footed footwork, etc. I wonder if it's leaving the skaters less time to portray a character or relate to the audience. Or maybe these cookie-cutter ballets are the only ones that get good PCS's? Either way, there's a joy that's missing from the sport, and a lack of originality. Yu-Na--who I was never a big fan of, but I have to give her her props--could portray a character and rack up the points, but really, she's the only one, with maybe Daisuke coming in #2.

Poodlepal said:

I can't imagine Oksana, Kristi, or Elizabeth Manley (who I'm less familiar with) skating their programs today. Or any of the women in the golden age of the early 90's, including Tonya, Nancy or Tara. Someone with their hair in a pony tail, a fur collar, dancing to show tunes? Or Jurassic Park? Or Neil Diamond Muzak? Never!

Today, they'd all have their hair in a bun, wear tasteful costumes (OK, Nancy and Kristi were usually good with that) and skate to the quiet, soft symphony. And none of them would be as good.

Click to expand...

Did you watch Euros?

Carolina Kostner's LP costume is beautifully made, and it's not at all the usual thing; added to that, she's made some interesting music choices over the years, too. Kiira Korpi's bringing the 30s glamour with her LP look, and she's picked some interesting music over the years, too. Meanwhile, Viktoria Helgesson is skating to Sunset Boulevard and looks to be channeling Norma Desmond with fur cuffs (faux, I hope). Further down the ranks, check out what the French ladies have been wearing - Silete's costume for the LP is really unique, and Meite's is, um, eye-catching.

I don't think tasteful is the first word that comes to mind regarding Ksenia Makarova's LP, and there's Lenovoa's tarty (and kind of fun) pirate SP.

And it's not just the Euro ladies: was Yu-Na's Bond Girl a soft, quiet program? Or Miki's Cleopatra? Or Mao's Bells of Moscow?

So yeah, nobody brings these kinds of voids, but it's not as dull as you suggest.

Poodlepal said:

I can't imagine Oksana, Kristi, or Elizabeth Manley (who I'm less familiar with) skating their programs today. Or any of the women in the golden age of the early 90's, including Tonya, Nancy or Tara. Someone with their hair in a pony tail, a fur collar, dancing to show tunes? Or Jurassic Park? Or Neil Diamond Muzak? Never!

Click to expand...

You have mentioned one in each era except 93/94. Manley - retired after 1988, Kristi retired after 1992, Oksana, Harding and Kerrigan were gone in 1994. Tara was 1997/98. Some "golden era".

Dragonlady said:

You have mentioned one in each era except 93/94. Manley - retired after 1988, Kristi retired after 1992, Oksana, Harding and Kerrigan were gone in 1994. Tara was 1997/98. Some "golden era".

Click to expand...

Well, Oksana was exactly 1993/94, the only two years she medaled internationally, and that was when Harding and Kerrigan were as well, yes? Or have I misunderstood the point? Poodlepal's description of someone in a ponytail with a fur collar, skating to show tunes, seemed to be Oksana in her long program.

I don't understand what hairstyles or costume styles have to do with one judging system vs. another.

Dragonlady said:

You have mentioned one in each era except 93/94. Manley - retired after 1988, Kristi retired after 1992, Oksana, Harding and Kerrigan were gone in 1994. Tara was 1997/98. Some "golden era".

Click to expand...

I don't know about whether skaters were actually better back then compared with now. But it was the "Golden Age of Skating" in the sense that skating programs were shown on TV all winter long, skaters performed to full houses, the ISU was flush with money from the $20,000,000 contract with ABC television in the U.S., the women's event at the Olympics set the all-time record for most television viewers (bigger than the Super Bowl, bigger than the World Cup).

In those days if you were a figure skating queen, at least figure skating was something worth being queen of.

Now Japan seems to be holding up the banner all by itself.

^^^^^
Exactly my point. During the 90's--even before T & N, during the Kristi era, when it first began to be broadcast at night (at least the ladies' event)--it seems like there was more variety in the programs. Someone brought up that the jump levels seemed to be higher then, where more ladies would complete 7 triples, or all of the triples, not just their favorites, whatever. I think that the showmanship quality was higher then, as well, with more diversity of music styles, which led to more diversity of costumes and hairdos. I'm wondering the COP rewards heavier, more serious skating pieces, or if those pieces are considered better interpreted/more musical/whatever. I don't know, it's just a thought. For years I blamed Michelle, who seems to be the trendsetter in this type of soft, somber skating program. But maybe the scoring system has something to do with it. (There are some exceptions, though. Tangos still hang around, and YuNa's programs in 2010 were not heavy).

Of course, maybe it has nothing to do with the scoring system, or maybe I'm remembering the past with rose glasses! Just a thought.

Excellent analysis gkelly, as always!!
Yes, you are right, I should have said a fall in difficulty not quality. Less difficult programs, jumps wise, are being performed. I see a fall in quality in edge control, however, which in turns doesn't help performing true Lutzes and Flips. This problem will be solved someday in the future, considering the strict "e" calls? Maybe a rule to include all the 6 take-off would really help skaters master the proper technique.

gkelly said:

Would you want to make the rule something like, instead of requiring "an" axel jump of some sort, to require at least one jump from each of the 6 major takeoffs? With a deduction for leaving one out?
Or maybe lose all credit for the last jumping pass if it doesn't include whatever takeoff(s) haven't been attempted yet? That could often be a harsher penalty than a 2.0 deduction. But that's what happens now if a skater doesn't include any axel.
Since skaters do sometimes pop jumps, would it be acceptable to avoid the deduction if the skater attempted a takeoff once but ended up with a sloppy single? At least the intention to comply was demonstrated.

Click to expand...

Il like your idea to require at least one jump from each of the 6 major takeoffs with a deduction for leaving one out, but the deduction would be avoided if the skater attempted a takeoff ended up with a sloppy single. At least the intention was demonstrated. The other way (not counting the last jumping pass) would be harsh, but sometimes you need to be harsh to make people respect the rules!

Poodlepal said:

^^^^^
Exactly my point. During the 90's--even before T & N, during the Kristi era, when it first began to be broadcast at night (at least the ladies' event)--it seems like there was more variety in the programs. Someone brought up that the jump levels seemed to be higher then, where more ladies would complete 7 triples, or all of the triples, not just their favorites, whatever. I think that the showmanship quality was higher then, as well, with more diversity of music styles, which led to more diversity of costumes and hairdos. I'm wondering the COP rewards heavier, more serious skating pieces, or if those pieces are considered better interpreted/more musical/whatever. I don't know, it's just a thought. For years I blamed Michelle, who seems to be the trendsetter in this type of soft, somber skating program. But maybe the scoring system has something to do with it. (There are some exceptions, though. Tangos still hang around, and YuNa's programs in 2010 were not heavy).

Of course, maybe it has nothing to do with the scoring system, or maybe I'm remembering the past with rose glasses! Just a thought.

Click to expand...

I know what you mean, but IMO it doesn't have anything to do with COP. The trend of using more soft music and to do more sophisticated and serious programs started before COP. It is a trend (I've discussed music trends in FS with the use of disco music in the 80s, new age/ethno music in the 90s, and soft classical pieces nowadays). Every trend has many exception, in the past and in the present. And about tango I wouldn't call it an exception, since in the last 5 years there was a real tango craze for figure skating programs, that is starting to loose its presense now.
IMO COP rewards original programs (in the peformance/execution, interpretation and choreography marks). It depends on the skater and choreographer. In general European skaters tend to be more original, but also more kitschy. American and Asian skaters tend to be more sophisticated. In the 80s and 90s American skaters did less serious, more powerful and funny programs. But it really depends on the skater, coach and choreographer.

Dragonlady said:

I generally watch skating with a group of FSU and ISU Board posters. We attend every competition we can get to, and when we can't go, we get together to watch on TV. We call our TV get-togethers "Not Going To . . . " parties. As soon as a program ends, we start discussing what we liked and didn't like, and what the marks should be. It's amazing how close we generally are. We were doing this by the beginning of the second season of CoP, sometimes having competitions to see who can get the closest. I have to say it was a whole lot easier to learn to score under than it was under 6.0.

Click to expand...

Sounds like great fun. But I do not think that very many fans, whether passionate, casual, or once-every-four years, do that.

I watch figure skating alone. No one is interested in it in my extended circle.:scowl:

Bluebonnet said:

I watch figure skating alone. No one is interested in it in my extended circle.:scowl:

Click to expand...

We found one another on the boards. Living in a big city like Toronto, there are a lot of board members. We started meeting other posters from out of town for lunches or dinner, when they came to Toronto and then we started going to competitions together and finally watching them on TV together. I have to say my family is very grateful during the big events which Canadian TV broadcasts from top to bottom (thank you CBC), not to be stuck watching 8 to 10 hours of figure skating per day. Plus there's the fun of sharing the event with people who can argue the tiniest detail of technique and scoring. And there's always lots of good food and drink.

We go to Thornhill every summer and the Challenge when it's in Mississauga. In some years the "Not Going To Skate Canada" party is cancelled because we're all going to Skate Canada.

When Jeff Buttle won Worlds, we had all met at one poster's condo for mimosa's, homemade blueberry pancakes (made during the ice cut), breakfast pastries and skating. We sat through Jeff's program biting our nails and hoping he could go relatively clean and win a medal, any medal. By the time Jeff finished his freeskate, we were all on our feet, jumping up and down, hugging one another and laughing and crying with joy. We didn't need to see the scores to know he'd won. It's one of my all-time favourite skating memories.

^^^Wow! Lucky you! What a fun!

On the contrary, football fans are everywhere, men and women, young and old. I'll watch superbowl with some this coming weekend.

Spelling mistake: it's SuperBOWL not SuperBALL. Anyway, I think CoP is good, it brings the scoring of figure skating into the modern era. Sports with artistic content need a scoring system that attempts to balance both objective and subjective judgments. It's a tough thing to do. Gymnastics also faces the same judging challenges although in a more limited way.

I don't think the decline in the North American figure skating TV audience has anything to do with CoP. The variety of sports and other sports content on TV and the Internet today dwarfs what was available just 10 years ago. The fragmenting of the sports audience due to all these choices is the main culprit in the dramatic drop in TV skating coverage. My guess is that figure skating fans will mostly have to watch competitions online, the audience just won't be there for "old school" TV coverage anymore except maybe for the Olympics.