Meaning everyone has to do the exact same elements, and if the required elements happen to be things you're not as good at as harder elements that aren't required, tough luck?
Or have a specific number of jump elements, spin elements, step sequences, that are required, and you get to choose what you skills you use to fill those slots? That's more or less what's already the case.
What if you're in the process of rocking/skidding off of the correct edge at the same time that you're in the process of leaving the ice?
Where do you draw the line between doing the jump badly and not doing it at all?
Should doing a jump so badly that it doesn't count give/take away the exact same points as standing still or doing simple strokes and not attempting a jump at all? How about falling on a difficult jump vs. falling on an easy jump or other element vs. falling on a crossover?
Again, where and how to draw the line?
There are rules for when an attempt at an element counts to block a box and when not, some of which have changed over the years.
How should the rules balance reward for attempting difficult elements with penalties for failure?
There doesn't seem to be a simple way to achieve all goals that will account for all situations and please all stakeholders. So should the compromises aim to balance out different priorities? Or ignore the needs of one side entirely and cater to the opposite extreme?
This is not so much about ISU rules as about media communication. But the ISU could help by offering or mandating methods of reporting scores to spectators in the arena that give more information in real time, and encouraging media outlets to adopt those reporting methods in broadcasts of the events.
The scoreticker in the upper left corner of the videos for some events the last few years could be a beginning. This could also be done on the Jumbotron in arenas that have them, although most spectators on site would rather watch the ice below them than the video above.
Maybe flash the score for each element as soon as the element and enough judges' GOEs are entered into the computer. Probably there wouldn't be room to include the code and the base value and the GOE and the running total so far on the screen. So choose choose any one or two of the above. What's been chosen so far is the running total -- would something like "3T 5.2" (because it had somewhat positive GOE) be more useful than seeing a total increase by 5.2?
After the program, and after the scores are finalized, show a list of elements, base values, GOEs, and totals on the screen for several seconds while the announcer reads out only the total element score.
Then show a list of the averages for the five separate program components, for the several seconds it takes for the announcer to read the total program component score.
Of course TV, and even in-arena video, would rather show the skater's human reaction to the scores than the list of numbers, and many fans would prefer to watch skaters' faces than lists of numbers at that time as well. Maybe a split screen would work.
Then announce the total segment score, the ranking in the free program only if this is a free skate, then the total combined score and the final ranking. This could be as is now, with the scores on the bottom of the screen with video on the skater's face.
There wouldn't be time to analyze all the broken down scores in real time, but it would be clearer where the totals are coming from. New fans would know what they could go look up online if they're interested in analyzing. Avid fans who already like to consult protocols afterward would have some of their questions answered right away if they look for the score(s) they're interested as soon as the lists of scores are presented on screen.
And then, as now, if there are confusing or potentially controversial results, commentators can be free to break down for viewers where each skater gained or lost important points.
)
, so I imagine the outrage would not have been as big overall. In fact, I don't think there was ENOUGH outrage over that result.
