FFKKR proposes to allow quadruple jumps in the short program for women

4everchan said:

I am fine with quads in sp but after the olympics. Not before. Such a rule needs to be included at the beginning of a cycle. Also, if Russia wants quads in the sp for ladies, they should expect that quads like twist and throws be included in the pairs sp as well, and at a decent base value. I find it a bit hypocritical that some Russians are so outspoken about quads in pairs, about how it is dangerous, too acrobatic etc and thus bv is lowered down, and then, there is a big " give us quads movement". I am xertainly not getting it.

Click to expand...

I don't know which russians are you talking about tbh (they aren't a monolithic group that share the same opinion). Some casual fans? Possibly there are some, but I'm not sure whether those are the same people who want quads allowed in female singles SP.
Athletes themselves? T/M among many russian pairs have expressed their frustration about the ban of quadtw/th multiple times. Russian pairs want to be able to do more technical content.

nussnacker said:

I don't know which russians are you talking about tbh (they aren't a monolithic group that share the same opinion). Some casual fans? Possibly there are some, but I'm not sure whether those are the same people who want quads allowed in female singles SP.
Athletes themselves? T/M among many russian pairs have expressed their frustration about the ban of quadtw/th multiple times. Russian pairs want to be able to do more technical content.

Click to expand...

i was refering to max + federation among others. and yes... i agree... russia is a vast country made of many different people with different opinions... but here, it's the federation i was mentioning, in both cases... first they don't like quads for pairs, then they like them for girls... strangely, first when they were talking about pairs, their best athletes were against quads.... but now, the fed's best female athletes are the only ones with quads, so suddenly, those are good???

i don't think the fed ever cared about T/M... otherwise... well..yeah...

so i repeat... not talking about individuals here but about the fed... because these news are coming from the fed itself

I think that we are beating up on straw men on this thread. Does anyone actually disagree with the principle that quads should be allowed in the ladies' short program?

Some posters, notably genekelly and myself, have responded to the question, "Why are the short program rules the way they are" and have provided a historical perspective. This is not taking sides on the question of how it ought to be now and in the future.

Mathman said:

I think that we are beating up on straw men on this thread. Does anyone actually disagree with the principle that quads should be allowed in the ladies' short program?

Click to expand...

I disagree that quads should be allowed in the ladies short program at least for a few Olympic cycles. Not a single woman within the standard deviation of female height has landed a quad yet. There should be no rush whatsoever to allow quads in the short program. The current system is not only fine but it makes for better and more exciting free skate competition than if quads were allowed in the short program. There is absolutely nothing unfair about not allowing quads in the short program... everyone is free to learn a triple axel and if people really took the time to calculate they'd see that someone with a triple axel does not have really that much of an advantage over someone with a quad.

NaVi said:

I disagree that quads should be allowed in the ladies short program at least for a few Olympic cycles. Not a single woman within the standard deviation of female height has landed a quad yet. There should be no rush whatsoever to allow quads in the short program. The current system is not only fine but it makes for better and more exciting free skate competition than if quads were allowed in the short program. There is absolutely nothing unfair about not allowing quads in the short program... everyone is free to learn a triple axel and if people really took the time to calculate they'd see that someone with a triple axel does not have really that much of an advantage over someone with a quad.

Click to expand...

There is something unfair, they're allowed in the FS, so why not the SP?

Men are also allowed to do quads in their SP, so why can't ladies?

Doesn't matter that fewer ladies are doing them. Some are anx I am all for ladies pushing the technical boundaries, why not encourage them rather than holding them back?

Mathman said:

I think that we are beating up on straw men on this thread. Does anyone actually disagree with the principle that quads should be allowed in the ladies' short program?

Some posters, notably genekelly and myself, have responded to the question, "Why are the short program rules the way they are" and have provided a historical perspective. This is not taking sides on the question of how it ought to be now and in the future.

Click to expand...

I mean, I disagree in principle with allowing quads in the ladies short program, or triple axels, and also quads in the Men’s short program (but not 3As). There’s no point in even *having* the short program anymore, if the same full range of jumps as in the free skate is allowed and their BV can so easily override execution. The steps don’t even have to conform to a pattern anymore in the SP, the spin requirements are barely different between the two programs, both require an Axel, and they both give the same relative weight to every component, so they’re almost redundant. The Men’s SP with quads basically already is redundant.

I think the short program should include artificial caps in difficulty, to ensure that execution is emphasized. I would say that’s the whole point of the short program— skaters shouldn’t be able to get a free pass on mediocre execution of triples in the SP by doing a quad instead and letting BV reign. There’s already wiggle room by letting them decide to do harder triples and harder combinations, and now in letting those automatically come with higher GOE points.

Mishaminion said:

There is something unfair, they're allowed in the FS, so why not the SP?

Men are also allowed to do quads in their SP, so why can't ladies?

Doesn't matter that fewer ladies are doing them. Some are anx I am all for ladies pushing the technical boundaries, why not encourage them rather than holding them back?

Click to expand...

Someone without a triple axel but with a quad can push their own personal technical boundary and learn a triple axel. Like I said, if you really sit down and do the calculations then someone with a triple axel does not really much advantage over someone with a quad... especially if the one doing the triple axel only manages a 3A+2T and the one doing a quad is doing +3Lo combinations. And those with only a triple axel are not winning yet. Rika is currently not doing a Lutz now and Young You is not doing two 3A in the LP.

I also completely disagree with the notion that a competition that is "technically capped" on jumps is not a competition. In fact, a competition that is capped would allow other attributes have greater consideration. I am supportive of giving out medals at worlds to men without quads and women without a 3A or a quad. It would make the earlier rounds more interesting.

https://www.goldenskate.com/forum/s...tic-programs&p=2477989&viewfull=1#post2477989

This is silly

Why cap a competitive sport?

Do you also think we should cap how fast sprinters should run because some are better at it than others?

If people can't keep up with the quads and 3As either learn them or it is tough $%#&
Same as how ladies by the early 90s with only doubles couldn't compete with the triples.

Mishaminion said:

This is silly

Why cap a competitive sport?

Do you also think we should cap how fast sprinters should run because some are better at it than others?

If people can't keep up with the quads and 3As either leaen them or it is tough.
Same as how ladies by the pesky 90s with only doubles couldn't compete with the triples.

Click to expand...

Figure skating is not a race. Why have an offside rule in hockey and soccer? We shouldn't be telling players where they can stand or who they can pass to.

There are no standards except those set by the figure skating community itself... and part of the consideration in crafting those rules are things like the quality of the events for the audience and encouraging parental investment(which could be harmed if the physical archetype of a figure skater becomes too narrow).

NaVi said:

Figure skating is not a race. Why have an offside rule in hockey and soccer? We shouldn't be telling players where they can stand or who they can pass to.

There are no standards except those set by the figure skating community itself... and part of the consideration in crafting those rules are things like the quality of the events for the audience and encouraging parental investment(which could be harmed if the archetype of a figure skater becomes too narrow).

Click to expand...

There are rules and then there are deliberate attempts to hold certain athletes back.

Theres a huge difference.

Having rules that do not allow skaters to just cram as many jumps in as possible or limiting repetitions of jumps makes sense or all skaters could just go around landing 12+ triple lutzes if they wanted to. And who would want to see that?

But trying to put a cap on the sport to prevent technical progress is very unfair. And that is what I feel your arguement is, trying to put a cap on those who can do the quads and 3As. They are doing them within thr rules so it isn't a problem.

I argue only that there is no reason anymore not to allow quads in ladies SP. Why not change it? Because more and more skaters are doing them now

cohen-esque said:

There’s no point in even *having* the short program anymore,...

Click to expand...

I think that is what the whole discussion is ultimately coming down to. There really is no point in having a short program anymore. Its only virtue is that it is short. For better or for worse, the old-timey point about the short program serving a different purpose than the long has been swept away by the tide of history.

To me, that should provide impetus to the proposal of having two different kinds of programs. Don't call them the Technical Program and the Artistic Program, though -- those words are lightning rods for criticism. We should use the more neutral terms "Esthetic Gem Program" and "Jumpity-jump-jump-jump Program." :yes:

I will say this about short programs though. Whether quads, triple Axels, etc. are allowed or not, you better land your jumps in the SP. One fall or pop and you are down in fifth place instead of leading. In the long you have the luxury of making many mistakes and still scoring well just by sheer mass of base value.

But still by having two programs adds more suspense and a second chance to correct your possible errors. Plus to demonstrate versatility in music interpretations and so on... and the feeling that this a tournament rather than a one-off.

zounger said:

But still by having two programs adds more suspense and a second chance to correct your possible errors. Plus to demonstrate versatility in music interpretations and so on... and the feeling that this a tournament rather than a one-off.

Click to expand...

Then it should be two programs of equal length but of different character. I feel skaters who can do well in a short program are penalized by the fact that someone could bomb in the short but hustle to make up the difference in the long. Have both count equally and then the pressure will be on to be consistent. I think for ladies you can't include quads at this time without allowing other skaters the ability to do more triples to make up the difference.

A skater that can't put two clean programs together back to back shouldn't be winning.

NaVi said:

Figure skating is not a race. Why have an offside rule in hockey and soccer? We shouldn't be telling players where they can stand or who they can pass to.

There are no standards except those set by the figure skating community itself... and part of the consideration in crafting those rules are things like the quality of the events for the audience and encouraging parental investment(which could be harmed if the physical archetype of a figure skater becomes too narrow).

Click to expand...

Restricting the quads is not like overlooking offsides or icings, it's more like prohibiting more than one goal in the first half of the match. There is no reason for that, if men can have quads in SP and if ladies can do 3A, why ladies can't do quad in SP as well. In prohiobiting it there's no guarding of some hidden value, it's just an obsolete rule. If anyone is free to learn 3A, than anyone is free to learn a quad. It's completely equal right.

The true reason why some people fight agains it is they simply don't like quads, for whatever reason, and that is not worth of any support.

tothepointe said:

Then it should be two programs of equal length but of different character. I feel skaters who can do well in a short program are penalized by the fact that someone could bomb in the short but hustle to make up the difference in the long. Have both count equally and then the pressure will be on to be consistent. I think for ladies you can't include quads at this time without allowing other skaters the ability to do more triples to make up the difference.

A skater that can't put two clean programs together back to back shouldn't be winning.

Click to expand...

The position of the short program as being first make it still quite different from the free. To make a solid start, good buffer for the free etc. There are skaters who do better in the SP and those who do better in the free. And in this there is still a chance for versatility. Don't forget that there are different rules in the SP, like doubles or 2-2 combos are not allowed etc., because it is more focused on the technical part of the skating. And if it is focused on technical side, than it is curious why the most demanding elements are not allowed.

NaVi said:

Someone without a triple axel but with a quad can push their own personal technical boundary and learn a triple axel. Like I said, if you really sit down and do the calculations then someone with a triple axel does not really much advantage over someone with a quad... especially if the one doing the triple axel only manages a 3A+2T and the one doing a quad is doing +3Lo combinations. And those with only a triple axel are not winning yet. Rika is currently not doing a Lutz now and Young You is not doing two 3A in the LP.

I also completely disagree with the notion that a competition that is "technically capped" on jumps is not a competition. In fact, a competition that is capped would allow other attributes have greater consideration. I am supportive of giving out medals at worlds to men without quads and women without a 3A or a quad. It would make the earlier rounds more interesting.

https://www.goldenskate.com/forum/s...tic-programs&p=2477989&viewfull=1#post2477989

Click to expand...

But you could say the same thing about a person with a 3A. They can "push their technical boundaries" and learn a quad. And just because the ones with just a triple axel "aren't winning yet" doesn't mean the rule isn't unfair. Why would we make rules based on results... that seems messed up to me. Anyways, there's no reason to allow a triple axel and not a quad. If you want the short program to be a test of skills that everyone can do, fine, but then you have to disallow the 3A. Otherwise, you have to allow both.

Mishaminion said:

There is something unfair, they're allowed in the FS, so why not the SP?

Click to expand...

As already mentioned earlier in this thread, there are MANY elements that are allowed in the FS and not in the short program.

That's why the free program is called the free program (even though it's not all that free any more either and there are also skills that aren't allowed there either), and why the short program has REQUIRED ELEMENTS.

Historically, there were times when 20+ skaters were capable of doing 5 or 6 different triples in their freeskates and were only allowed to do ONE triple in the short program.

Currently there are several men who can do 3, 4, or 5 different quads but they're only allowed to do TWO quads in the SP.

Mishaminion said:

This is silly

Why cap a competitive sport?

Click to expand...

There is more to the sport of Figure SKATING than rotating in the air.

One reason for capping the amount of in-air rotation that skaters are allowed is to make sure that jump rotation alone is not the only skill that determines results of SKATING competitions.

The total number of jumps in both programs is also capped, for similar reasons. So are the number of times skaters are allowed to repeat the same jump -- because officials do not want skaters to build up points by doing the same skill over and over again. They want to see a variety of jumping skills as well as a variety of non-jump skills that also contribute to the overall results.

Also, remember, the current rules were not written to hold down skaters who are doing advanced content in 2019. They were written to reflect what the average skaters and what the most advanced skaters were doing as of 2010 (the time of the most recent SP rule changes).

Until now there was no reason to change those rules, not even in summer 2018 which was the last time rule changes of that nature could have been made.

Now there is reason, because more and more ladies are attempting more difficult jump content than they were 2 years ago.

Undoubtedly there will be rule changes at the next ISU Congress.

It's hardly "unfair" that the 2010 or 2018 Congresses did not predict the future.

Also, if you're so worried about not allowing (or not rewarding) skills that only a few skaters could do, why not allow level 5 spins, and 5 different spins in the freeskate if any skaters have mastered enough spin features that they could earn top levels in 5 different spins?

Some skaters could do step sequences all on 1 foot that fill the whole ice and that include all the step sequence features except for variety of steps. Why not reward that?

Some skaters could do double walleys and double inside axels? Why not give points for those? If you gave even more points for triples from those takeoffs, a few skaters would probably master them.

Some skaters could do triple jumps in both directions. Why not reward that?

Some skaters could do true jump combinations with 4 or 5 or more triples in a row. Why not allow those?

Some could do jump sequences with difficult edge changes or turns but no steps (no putting the other foot down) between the two jumps. Why not allow/reward that skill?

Some skaters could fill the ice by doing spirals on three different edges of the same foot without putting the other foot down. Why not reward that?

Some skaters could skate two perfect circles on one foot with difficult turns then do it again on the other foot right on top of the first circles, and then do it twice more on each foot, with barely millimeters between the circles. Why not reward that?

Some could draw much more complex patterns than circles and could trace those almost perfectly.

Some skaters can do backflips and other gymnastic moves on the ice. Why are those not allowed?

There is a lot more to figure skating than turning 4 times in the air. Some things that skaters can do on the ice earn lots of points, others are allowed by not well rewarded, others are not allowed at all.

Rules for free programs are supposed to allow pushing the envelope, although there are certain directions the ISU doesn't want to see the sport headed.

Rules for short programs are supposed to require skaters to demonstrate specific skills.

As long as the purposes of the programs are different, the rules will be different.

Mathman said:

To me, that should provide impetus to the proposal of having two different kinds of programs. Don't call them the Technical Program and the Artistic Program, though -- those words are lightning rods for criticism. We should use the more neutral terms "Esthetic Gem Program" and "Jumpity-jump-jump-jump Program." :yes:

Click to expand...

Or the Difficulty program and the Quality program.

I do think that a difficulty-focused technical program should also reward difficult techniques on the ice as well as in the air.

But if people really want a program that's all about jump rotation, then how about a Jump program and a Skating program?

flanker said:

The position of the short program as being first make it still quite different from the free. To make a solid start, good buffer for the free etc. There are skaters who do better in the SP and those who do better in the free. And in this there is still a chance for versatility. Don't forget that there are different rules in the SP, like doubles or 2-2 combos are not allowed etc., because it is more focused on the technical part of the skating. And if it is focused on technical side, than it is curious why the most demanding elements are not allowed.

Click to expand...

So let's say there's a Technical program that allows 5, 6, or 7 jump elements including combinations, with any number of rotations, as well as other difficult technical skills, and another kind of program that de-emphasizes difficulty and emphasizes quality and variety/creativity? Which would make a more appropriate first phase of competition and which a more appropriate final round?

Maybe different competitions could switch off the order.

I don't think a quint is possible tbh. A quad axel---maybe. I do think the women should be allowed to do quads in both programs.

There is more to skating then just jumps but what is the problem with allowing quads in the SP?

3-3 is, the 3A is allowed to replace the 2A, the only real restriction I see is no quad.

It is allowed for men

There is no place in today's world for allowing men such a thing and not ladies. Especially when more and more ladies are doing them.

I don't care if there is more to skating than just the jumps, the argument has nothing to do with any other aspect of skating other than the quad jump.

The only reason I can see to not allow it is to try to restrict talented ladies who can do quads in the hope that more "artistic" skaters still have a chance.