SP and FS replaced by Technical and Artistic programs?

gkelly said:

It also depends how you define "balance." Some would argue that the sport is currently unbalanced away from its fundamentals and that more weight needs to be placed on blade-to-ice skills compared to in-air rotational skills, more weight on quality and less on quantity.

Click to expand...

It can be addressed by changing PCS system. For example removing SS from PCS and making it it's own category with much more weight. Where Total Score=TES+PCS+SS. It will be less change to the system still than introducing new types of programs.

Maybe the same skaters who also excel at the technical side. Maybe former jump experts who had to scale back on jump content because of injury or natural body maturation changes that don't favor in-air rotation but continue to improve in skating and com

It won't be the skaters who skate easier programs with lower skill levels that we most often see in the lower ranks internationally (or nationally, as the case may be). Those skaters will only be able to make a mark in the "artistic" program if they can focus their training on actually improving their basic skating and the quality of the (possibly easier) jumps and spins they include to the point that they can use these skills for maximum aesthetic impact.

I would not find top-quality skating and presentation by top-quality skaters to top-quality choreography to be a snoozefest.

Click to expand...

Even if all of that will be like you said - I don't see why it should be better than what we have now and what exactly it should address that we are supposedly lacking? Also too much maybe's - don't you think? Going to such serious change without exact knowledge of what is gonna happen as well as without urgent need for that change in the first place - leaves the impression ISU just wants the change for the sake of the change - i.e. reckless and stupid move.

Fans who are only interested in quantity might be less interested. But if the ISU wants to expand its audience, then rewarding the use of excellent technical skills for artistic purposes will attract audiences who may not care about the difference between a toe loop and a lutz or between a triple and a quad.

Click to expand...

I see it otherwise. It will shrink its audience and it's not going to attract new people too. Figure Skating always have rather little pool of fans, already divided between 4 categories (ladies, men, pairs, dance) and 2 age groups (seniors, juniors). As a result we often have rather modest number of spectators in a particular event. If we are going to fracture pool of fans further - the result can be catastrophic. It's a bad, bad idea.

Mathman said:

But I can't dismiss Elucidus' point that a talent like Hanyu, who can do a quad Lutz AND use his technical skills for artistic purposes is greatly to be admired, alike by the elite cognoscenti and the great unwashed masses. :yes:

Click to expand...

It reminds me what I forgot to add. Let's take Hanyu for example. He will be successfull in both new programs no doubt - as it was before. Still, I can't help but feel that new system will be limiting his abilities in each program - putting the ceiling on a scores he can achieve - for the sake of more weaker skaters. In technical program he won't be able to get as much points for his artistry - basically forcing him to turn his program in a quadfest with simplified little embellishments. In artistry program he won't be able to show his full tech potential - limiting his performance to less number of hard elements even if he can show much more. As a result his programs will become more one-sided, more boring, with much less gap between him and other skaters. It's a loss for both him and its fans.
As a sport figure skating should have a goal to show and provide way for talented skaters to realize their full potential in one performance - bringing perfect symbiosis of technique and artistry in its excellence. The limit should be only sky Suggested changes directly opposes that ideal - putting the limits on everything for the sake of some bureaucracy gains. I see it like that.

Elucidus said:

It can be addressed by changing PCS system. For example removing SS from PCS and making it it's own category with much more weight. Where Total Score=TES+PCS+SS. It will be less change to the system still than introducing new types of programs.

Click to expand...

I think it should be SS&TR together as the Program Technique Score (worth about 25% of the segment total, and Presentation/choreography/interpretation together as Program Performance Score (also worth 25% of the total). Leave out the word "art."

Element scores would total 50% (that would be the goal), including GOEs, with an expected split of about 75-25 between base value and GOE. (This is about the split at present if you get +3 GOE (23% of total for the element).

I think that part of the problem is that people think of TES as tech and PCS as art. This is incorrect. TES is the score you get for individual elements (however techy or artful those elements are) and PCSs are what you get for the program as a whole (again, including both technical and performance considerations).

Going to such serious change without exact knowledge of what is gonna happen as well as without urgent need for that change in the first place - leaves the impression ISU just wants the change for the sake of the change - i.e. reckless and stupid move.

Click to expand...

I disagree that there is anything reckless or precipitous about the ISU's reflections. Far from rushing in where angels fear to tread, they are continuing a sober and thoughtful discussion that has been going on for decades. In fact, we can think of the IJS itself as a response to the balancing act that figure skating not only tolerates, but embraces.

I wouldn't say that the need is urgent or that it is change for the sake of change. For one thing, the iSU is initiating discussion years in advance of when any actual changes would be put into effect. Plus, we don't really know yet what the actual proposal will be. We might discover that we are getting all worked up over nothing much.

My own view is, the scoring system has drifted somewhat from the ideal "balanced program" concept. I have no issue with people who want to explore a new tack that promises a better wind. (Haul anchor and raise the Blue Peter!)

Elucidus said:

It can be addressed by changing PCS system. For example removing SS from PCS and making it it's own category with much more weight. Where Total Score=TES+PCS+SS. It will be less change to the system still than introducing new types of programs.

Click to expand...

That might be a good approach.

Also too much maybe's - don't you think?

Click to expand...

Yes, on both sides. Everything that you're objecting to is also still a maybe.

I see it otherwise. It will shrink its audience and it's not going to attract new people too.

Click to expand...

May I ask where you're located and what your general age range is? (Feel free not to answer if you don't feel comfortable)

Speaking as a middle-aged American... It seems that in the US skating fandom peaked in the 1990s and then has declined for a variety of different reasons. Two of those reasons, especially with older long-time fans, is probably a sense that IJS skating is less aesthetically satisfying and the focus on technical details rather than overall impression gives less opportunity for fans to value their own opinions of the skating. I don't know if introducing a program where overall impression counts for more will bring back fans who lost interest with the introduction of IJS, or attract younger fans with the same interests. But going further and further down a road where messy programs full of quads and complicated spins and many brief but few sustained transition moves will always trump well-constructed full of high-quality triples and held-out moves is not going to win those fans (or win them back, as the case may be).

Meanwhile, of course, skating continues to gain fans in Japan and Russia and Korea.

Newer fans are now used to the IJS and don't have as fond feelings for the way things used to be. If what they love now gets taken away they might lose interest. But if what they love continues to exist and also new opportunities get added and attract fans who have been less interested in what they've seen lately, that should be a win for the sport.

Figure Skating always have rather little pool of fans, already divided between 4 categories (ladies, men, pairs, dance) and 2 age groups (seniors, juniors). As a result we often have rather modest number of spectators in a particular event.

Click to expand...

Junior events have always been low on spectators. They exist for the skaters, not for the fans. It's great that the JGP coverage on youtube, and mostly unofficial coverage of other showcases for junior skaters, has allowed a contingent of diehard fans to follow the sport at a lower level. But that's not where the casual audience is going to be grown.

It reminds me what I forgot to add. Let's take Hanyu for example. He will be successfull in both new programs no doubt - as it was before. Still, I can't help but feel that new system will be limiting his abilities in each program - putting the ceiling on a scores he can achieve - for the sake of more weaker skaters. In technical program he won't be able to get as much points for his artistry - basically forcing him to turn his program in a quadfest with simplified little embellishments. In artistry program he won't be able to show his full tech potential - limiting his performance to less number of hard elements even if he can show much more. As a result his programs will become more one-sided, more boring, with much less gap between him and other skaters. It's a loss for both him and its fans.

Click to expand...

Maybe.

As a sport figure skating should have a goal to show and provide way for talented skaters to realize their full potential in one performance - bringing perfect symbiosis of technique and artistry in its excellence. The limit should be only sky

Click to expand...

OK, here's another proposal that I have floated a couple of times over the years. I don't think this is the way the ISU is thinking currently, but it could be another approach to address some of the same issues:

Get rid of the short program and replace it with
1) a jump contest where top jumpers are encouraged to push the limits of what is humanly possible in the air using ice and skates, and average to good jumpers are encouraged to push their own limits, without distractions of performance (I would also add other kinds of jump difficulty to the scale of value that could add difficulty in other ways besides adding more revolutions -- or in combination with adding more revolutions for the very most talented jumpers)
2) a spin contest where top spinners can push the limits of what is humanly possible beyond the current caps on point-earning opportunities, and average to good spinners can push their own limits
3) a skating-skills-and-interpretation program where difficult spins and jumps would either not be allowed or would earn no TES points, with the focus on PCS -- essentially, solo ice dance

Offer separate medals for each and allow specialists who excel in only one or two of those areas to showcase their areas of excellence and bring home medals in those areas.

Then allow any individual skater who has competed in at least two or three of those events and earned a specified minimum combined score to qualify for the all-around "well-balanced" program event. Or make the well-balanced program its own event with its own qualifying stream. This would be the most prestigious medal that would go to the skaters with no glaring weaknesses. But depending how "well-balanced" is defined you might have no way for skaters without the hardest jumps even to qualify to enter.

The way I envision something like that working, there would be more total skaters participating in the championships, which to my mind would be a good thing for the sport but would require more ice time and officials' time and accommodations and therefore may not be practicable for financial and logistical reasons.

Suggested changes directly opposes that ideal - putting the limits on everything for the sake of some bureaucracy gains. I see it like that.

Click to expand...

Maybe. We don't know the details yet. We've only speculated.

Bumping up an old thread, but I'm starting to get into poker which has limited and nolimited versions which made me think of a new name for an idea I've had for a while. The last quadless men's world's medalist was Patrick Chan in 2010 which was the same year Evan Lysacek won the Olympic championships without a quad. We're entering an era where you probably need a 3A or quad to win the ladies gold medal and soon one of those will be needed for any medal at Worlds/Olympics.

There really should be a tech limit version of figure skating. With the limited versions being no quads for men and no quads or triple axels for ladies.

I think it'd be very interesting if during the world championships there would be a little concurrent subcompetition for the tech limit champion. The top team or teams should be able to submit a 4th skater to participate in the subcompetition. It could make the earlier flight of skaters more interesting to watch.

So it's interesting to look back at the men and who would win such a competition.

2019 - #23 Julian Zhi Jie Yee | Matteo Rizzo and Jason Brown might have lowered their tech content to contend for the subcompetition though... especially if Brown was given a 4th US spot.
2018 - #6 Deniss Vasiljevs | Jason Brown skipped worlds... but if there had been a 4th spot available for the competition then he probably would have showed up. Honorable mention to Misha Ge who had a good performance here too.
2017 - #12 Misha Ge | Jason Brown did a quad but would he have if there was a quadless subcompetition and he could have been the 4th guy? Deniss Vasiljevs was #14
2016 - #14 Deniss Vasiljevs | He would have edged out #15 Misha Ge and #16 Jork Hendrickx... but #6 Adam Rippon could have easily took his quad out which he did at the Olympics especially if he had been given a special 4th spot.
2015 - #4 Jason Brown | #6 Misha Ge #8 Adam Rippon #11 Joshua Farris did a quad but he was not really comfortable with it
2014 - #7 Han Yan | #12 Nam Nguyen #13 Ivan Righini ... Jeremy Abbott was #5 and I could see him competing in this type of format... but the US only had 2 spots that year.
2013 - #11 Peter Liebers | Perhaps someone above him would have lowered their tech content to compete
2012 - #10 Samuel Contesti | #13 Adam Rippon had a downgraded 4S... he could have easily took it out if the opportunity to win a tech limited subcompetition was there... but US only had 2 spots that year.
2011 - #7 Florent Amodio | #11 Ross Miner


Doing this might help extend careers and reduce some from pursuing quads they can't really do. And doing this would give more recognition to the more artistically inclined skaters while still keeping them to a technical standard.

I have to say, the sport is more exciting now than it's been in a long time for me. I don't think we need to replace the SP or the LP with anything else.

NaVi said:

There really should be a tech limit version of figure skating.

Click to expand...

I don't know. We have to be careful that we don't just come up with an "A" team competition and a "B" team competition, with the "B" team consisting of players that are not good enough to make the "A" team.

Like in intramural school basketball, you might have a team for people under 5'10" for recreation, and then the real team for serious competition against other schools.

Very interesting proposal, thank you for for putting it forward.

I’m not one who is excited by “progress” as defined only by revolutions in the air, and many of the comps now, particularly ladies, bore me to tears. So I don’t watch them

but I think I agree with Mathman. It might be just another way to denigrate the athleticism of spins, skating skills, step sequence and artistry, by calling it a “B” Team.

I wish I knew how to restore the value of those components as equal to revolutions in the air:yes:

drivingmissdaisy said:

I have to say, the sport is more exciting now than it's been in a long time for me. I don't think we need to replace the SP or the LP with anything else.

Click to expand...

Agree. The other day I was watching the performances of all the ladies winners in the Olympic Games since 1988, and it's obvious that in general, this sport has developed so much, and the programs have become more and more mature both technically and artistically.

Mathman said:

I don't know. We have to be careful that we don't just come up with an "A" team competition and a "B" team competition, with the "B" team consisting of players that are not good enough to make the "A" team.

Click to expand...

Well, you could argue that this is already happening, it's just happening within the same competition. It's only very, very select few who gain PCS advantages without high TES; PCS is effectively sorting skaters into "elite medal contenders with high-level jump content and consistency" and "the rest".

(This is not a dig against Nathan at all, by the way. It's pretty much the same for all top men of the last 8 years or so.)

I don't think you could define it as allowing 4th competitors from a country, considering that most countries don't have the option to send even 3. Or 2, for that matter. Would every federation be allowed to send an extra competitor? That would almost double the size of the event. Or only the few federations that already have 3 (and maybe 2) entries, in effect making the rich richer?

Although having a separate medal for skaters who compete within the main competition would be more efficient in terms of ice time than having a separate competition, there could be other ways to achieve that time savings and also reward the top skater(s) who are best at everything except rotating 4 times in the air.

If that is the prime goal, then your plan of awarding a medal to the highest scoring skater who doesn't attempt a quad would give skaters without reliable quads a strategic option of not attempting any and aiming for the tech-limited medal would work as a possible approach.

(And same for triple axels in the ladies' event.)

gkelly said:

I don't think you could define it as allowing 4th competitors from a country, considering that most countries don't have the option to send even 3. Or 2, for that matter. Would every federation be allowed to send an extra competitor? That would almost double the size of the event. Or only the few federations that already have 3 (and maybe 2) entries, in effect making the rich richer?

Click to expand...

Allowing a 4th isn't strictly necessary but I think it'd be nice since it's the good male skaters without quads from big skating countries who are most apt to be left out. If a team has 3 skaters and they're all attempting quads for men or 3A/quads in ladies then I think they should be able to send a 4th if there were such a subcompetition. It is making the "rich richer" but many are already calling for that and it's a pretty steep requirement to pass. It would just be 1 or 2 extra skaters.

If I were the ISU I would approach it like this.

First, there is no particular reason why the short program is short and the long program long. Two three-minute programs of equal weight would not be a controversial change.

Second, the ISU does not need to advertise whatever proposals they come up with as something radical and controversial. The heart of the judging system has always been the "balanced program" which rewards many different kinds of skills over demonstrating one skill over and over. Lately the balance has drifted a little off center -- maybe a slight course correction would be beneficial.

The free program has 12 elements, 7 jumps and 5 "everything else." Furthermore, the base value for the jumps threatens to swamp the "everything else" essentially into irrelevancy.

The short program has 7 elements, with a limit of three jumping passes. It would not be too revolutionary a change to expand the SP to, say, ten elements in three minutes, keeping the limit of three jumping passes the same. This would allow specialists in skating skills, footwork and spins to be competitive point-wise with the big quad jumpers, and also allow more innovation in what counts as a scored element. You wouldn't have to name it the "artistic program" if that language offends the "It's a sport" fans -- call it the blade skills program. Jumps would still be the biggest single point-getters.

They wouldn't have to make any changes in the relative weight of the PCS. The judges could take it upon themselves to place more emphasis on whether the highlight elements contribute to the overall choreography and interpretation, etc. -- but they should do that anyway.

My concern is that introducing "artistic" programs ISU will further drive down the number of boys entering figure skating in Russia.

[email protected] said:

My concern is that introducing "artistic" programs ISU will further drive down the number of boys entering figure skating in Russia.

Click to expand...

I don’t understand this. There was a lovely artistic Russian Junior a few years back, Ilia Skirda, I have not seen him, perhaps he would have been able to continue skating with a different emphasis?

I would hate to think that there remain anywhere in this world outdated and sexist versions of the kinds of sports that “men” do? Figure skating has had to contend with that for 50 years, and more revolutions in the air doesn’t overcome that childish thinking, unfortunately

[email protected] said:

My concern is that introducing "artistic" programs ISU will further drive down the number of boys entering figure skating in Russia.

Click to expand...

I can't comment on Russia, but as for the United States, it seems like the figure skating establishment could make a greater effort to celebrate dancing. Dancing is a macho activity. "I can break-dance or clog-dance more vigorously than you, you wimp!"

Look at the sport of basketball (aka the black ballet). It is incredible than men that big can move with such grace and control.

In the Pacific Northwest town that I grew up in, the local Indian tribe held an annual potlatch (gift-giving festival), guests welcome. The highlight of the ceremonies was the Eagle Feather Dance. All the strong young men would dance around in an ever-tightening circle with an eagle feather in the center. Traditionally, to be eligible to dance you had to have killed a tribal enemy in hand-to-hand combat. (In modern times, the requirement is that you served in the armed forces.) Finally the toughest brave glared down the others and grabbed the feather.

el henry said:

I don’t understand this. There was a lovely artistic Russian Junior a few years back, Ilia Skirda, I have not seen him, perhaps he would have been able to continue skating with a different emphasis?

I would hate to think that there remain anywhere in this world outdated and sexist versions of the kinds of sports that “men” do? Figure skating has had to contend with that for 50 years, and more revolutions in the air doesn’t overcome that childish thinking, unfortunately

Click to expand...

Figure skating is still contending with it. Sometimes it honestly feels more entrenched in the U.S./Canada than elsewhere.

drivingmissdaisy said:

I have to say, the sport is more exciting now than it's been in a long time for me. I don't think we need to replace the SP or the LP with anything else.

Click to expand...

Exactly. Fans are on the edge of their seats. The medals are up for grabs. Skaters are throwing caution to the wind in a win-or-die-trying quest for glory.

This is sport.

The wider public is not interested is a Battle of the Pretty Spins. What a ratings loser.

theharleyquinn said:

Figure skating is still contending with it. Sometimes it honestly feels more entrenched in the U.S./Canada than elsewhere.

Click to expand...

Agreed. Although I hate to think that it exists anywhere, such unfortunate childish attitudes remain in the part of the world that I know best, the USA; I did not mean that we were rid of them:noshake: I meant to say, we would be best rid of them :yes:

I have said this before, and I'll say it again: any attempt to attract self-described "men's men" to figure skating by de-emphasizing its artistic qualities will fail. :disapp: My other sports fandom is the NFL, specifically the Eagles. I have tried to interest my fellow Eagles fans in figure skating. Look, manly men doing manly quad type things. And black workout clothes and no sequins. (Not that I believe that happy hoo-hah, but hey, go with the flow)

They couldn't care less. Guys who skate to music do not interest them. No many how many revolutions they do in the air. And it's a fool's game to try. Their loss

Me, I'm for whatever will reward the intrinsic athleticism of non-jump elements. If I knew the answer, I'd implement it. I'm not that smart.

TontoK said:

Exactly. Fans are on the edge of their seats.

Click to expand...

Fans are on the edge of their seats. But there are a lot fewer of them than there were in the days of Dorothy Hamill.

el henry said:

Any attempt to attract self-described "men's men" to figure skating by de-emphasizing its artistic qualities will fail.

Click to expand...

The reason it will fail is that somehow or other, "manly" has become equated with "clunky, graceless, awkward, bull-in-a-china-shop." (Not talking about the Eagles, of course.)

Here is U.S. man's-man cowboy actor John Wayne dancing the jitterbug.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GaObXQBLO2w