2015-16 SOV Tables for Singles and Pairs released

[amyyk3]

This is what I'm thinking, too...and kinda hoping

Really? I don't think so. I think we'll be seeing even more 2-3 (and 4 in some cases) quad programs next season.

 

[karne]

Now, I'm hardly a technical expert, but isn't much easier to land a fully-rotated quad--or a fully rotated anything--rather than a UR jump? The blade likes to go backwards, not forwards or on a curve. I don't see anyone in their right mind wanting to UR a quad, because it makes other mistakes more likely (shaky landing, two foot, even falling).

Maybe chronic underrotators (e.g. Mirai Nagasu) would find it easier to land hooked jumps due to long years of habit. But since we're talking quads, we're talking the men's field... The only person I can think of who lands less rotated quads better than somewhat-rotated ones is Adam Rippon (who can land either clean 4Lz<< or 4Lz< with a step-out... but neither option will be helped much by the new rules, so I don't see what's the problem?) Jason Brown's quad at 4CC would receive no benefit at all; not only was it <<, the landing was also two-footed and messy and received terrible GOE.

Some people do find it easier to land an UR jump than rotate it. Usually these are exponents of the hooked landing, like Nagasu, or Rippon's 4Lz<<.

Usually, however, you are right, and the UR makes a skater more prone to making other mistakes. But if a skater has developed a habit of URing a jump, they may see it as more to their benefit to just continue with what they are comfortable with (assuming they are able to complete the UR'd jump without other errors, like Rippon's 4Lz<<).

 

[Skater Boy]

If Liza can do that layout without under-rotating, falling or singling any of her jump passes herself, I suppose she will beat a lutzless-Mao, jump-wise (only). :yes: (On any given day, she would not be able to beat Mao's spins, step sequence and PCS.)

I'm sooo excited to have Mao back in competition!! We don't know how her practices are going, but the fact that her team decided to have her participate in GP must mean that she is doing well. I have high hopes! And I can't wait to see her in action.

The new scoring system (or amendments) will make things interesting nevertheless. I hope the general public let alone the people on this board will embrace not only Mao's return but V and T, Chan, Savchenko, Kaetlyn Osmond,

 

[xibsuarz]

Really? I don't think so. I think we'll be seeing even more 2-3 (and 4 in some cases) quad programs next season.

Completely off topic but, Goodness me who's going for 4 quads this season in a single program? The only one I can think of is Boyang.

 

[Blades of Passion]

Fernandez is the only guy who has successfully done 3 Quads in a program these past years and he has only managed it a couple times. Will be quite a shock if someone does 4.

Also, back on the topic of "planning" a clean underrotated quad, it's easier to plan a double-footed landing on a jump. That would have gotten you 8.3 points before the rule update (assuming the judges give -2 GOE rather than -3). Now it will get you 7.9 points, as compared to 8.0 for a theoretical underrotated 0 GOE Quad. Still too much in the former case, but more accurate at least.

 

[padme21]

I don't like the rule change at all. This is exactly what I feared would happen. Looks to me like the ISU wants to even out the playing field between skaters who have quads and skaters who don't. Why reward a UR quad more than a fully rotated quad with a fall. It makes no sense! Also I believe this will hurt skaters like Nagasu who are constantly UR jumps and don't even seem to realize that they UR at all. With this new rule change of UR gets less penalty how will skaters like her ever learn to jump properly. And also if you're going to go after the quad why not go after the triples and doubles too it's only fair why only target the quads? End Rant

 

[Sam-Skwantch]

I don't like the rule change at all. This is exactly what I feared would happen. Looks to me like the ISU wants to even out the playing field between skaters who have quads and skaters who don't. Why reward a UR quad more than a fully rotated quad with a fall. It makes no sense! Also I believe this will hurt skaters like Nagasu who are constantly UR jumps and don't even seem to realize that they UR at all. With this new rule change of UR gets less penalty how will skaters like her ever learn to jump properly. And also if you're going to go after the quad why not go after the triples and doubles too it's only fair why only target the quads? End Rant

Nice rant. I am prone to them myself from time to time

I don't disagree as a whole and understand what your saying but if you are going to throw around terms like "jump properly" then I think it needs to be understood that there are some out there , like myself, that think step one (and most important!) is actually landing the jump. By that I mean maybe we inheritly have a scale of values all our own that reflect what is most important to us when judging jumps. At least in our minds. Mine would be like this.

1) Proper Landing
2)Full Rotation
3) Proper Take off (edges/pre rotation)
4) air positioning / posture
5) ease of flow
6)height

So obviously a fall is the most disruptive thing that can happen IMHO and I'd like the score to reflect that.

 

[gmyers]

What was leading to elimination of quads in men's skating was the harsh urs rules so maybe this wont be as bad as that.

 

[Mathman]

...there are some out there , like myself, that think step one (and most important!) is actually landing the jump.

I am sort of in that camp myself. When spectators pay money to see world champions skate, and they can't stay on their feet, it gives the impression that maybe they're not so good at ice skating after all.

 

[padme21]

But figure skating isn't just for the spectators. It's for the actual skaters too. I don't think they should change the rules just because some casual fans who don't understand figure skating will be happy. If fans want to see skating that will please them they should go to an ice show.

 

[karne]

Step 1: Correct edge/takeoff technique.
Step 2: Rotate the jump.
Step 3: Land the jump.
Step 4: ????
Step 5: Profit


I don't dispute that a fall should get the harshest penalty, but I LOATHE arguments that we should be gentler and softer towards those with BAD TECHNIQUE. Can we please stop with the pussyfooting around? UNDER-ROTATION AND WRONG EDGE IS BAD TECHNIQUE. The ISU should NOT be encouraging it and it SHOULD be punished harshly.

 

[andromache]

I take the rule change as a way to further penalize falls in comparison to URs. I don't see it as much of a case of overrewarding URs but appropriately rewarding staying on your feet and not disrupting the performance in comparison to throwing a jump that you know you'll be able to rotate but probably won't land.

Ideally, we could keep the scores the same as last year, if falls were being appropriately penalized in PCS. But since there's no real way to regulate PCS scores as there are with TES scores, this seems like an appropriate substitute.

I hate seeing falls being so rewarded. It's made many of the top men's programs over the past few un-rewatchable for me. I understand that that's my own personal preference but I'm not going to complain if the score changes make skaters reflect on whether or not they should be attempting such high difficulty that they can't stay on their feet. It might lead to slowing the evolution of the jump-aspects of the sport, but it improves the performance quality--which is indeed a vital part of figure skating.

 

[sc8]

I agree...more deduction for a fall, perhaps -3 or -5, and greater penalty for bad technique. Under rotation I still think should be GOae, unless more than quarter turn, then reduce to triple (if originally quad) and double (if originally triple). I'd prefer good technique be rewarded!

 

[shiroKJ]

I agree...more deduction for a fall, perhaps -3 or -5, and greater penalty for bad technique. Under rotation I still think should be GOae, unless more than quarter turn, then reduce to triple (if originally quad) and double (if originally triple). I'd prefer good technique be rewarded!

I get maybe -2 or -3 but -5? How does that make any sense at all? 2A/3T/3S are only worth 3-4 points and 3Lo/3F are only worth about 5 points.

So what you want to see is 90-95% of skaters doing only doubles and easy triples? Talk about bringing FS back to the dark ages....no one (even more so than now) is going to take it seriously as a sport lol

 

[Ice Dance]

I don't see it as much of a case of overrewarding URs but appropriately rewarding staying on your feet and not disrupting the performance in comparison to throwing a jump that you know you'll be able to rotate but probably won't land.

I hate seeing falls being so rewarded. It's made many of the top men's programs over the past few un-rewatchable for me. I'm not going to complain if the score changes make skaters reflect on whether or not they should be attempting such high difficulty that they can't stay on their feet. It might lead to slowing the evolution of the jump-aspects of the sport, but it improves the performance quality--which is indeed a vital part of figure skating.

Well said. Honestly, I think the top guys we have now are so competitive, they're gonna go for the hard stuff. They've risen to the top this way, and I just don't see them backing down now. But I would sure like to know that the one who hits can get the credit for it in the performance. Instead of having to worry about how many falls it's going to take for someone ranked a whole one or two spots above him to lose a placement. All that said, I don't find it any more enjoyable to watch Patrick hit his quads and fall on his triple axle.

 

[el henry]

But figure skating isn't just for the spectators. It's for the actual skaters too. I don't think they should change the rules just because some casual fans who don't understand figure skating will be happy. If fans want to see skating that will please them they should go to an ice show.

Without casual fans, you won't have a sport. Figure Skating should not be available only to learned initiates, or it will surely die.
That said, can't we punish falls enough to avoid splatfests *and* reward good technique. And I will readily admit that I do not know if the scoring changes do that.

 

[Interspectator]

Reading everyone's comments above, it shows me that we all love the sport and care about fairness. But our viewpoints are quite different.
And also that no matter WHAT changes are made to the scoring system, there will be a chunk of folks who will think it's a bad idea and another chunk who will think it's not extreme enough.

The only rule change I can see getting a majority support from FS fans is a loosening of the Zayak rule, which hasn't happened.

If the ISU can't please anyone, do they think they may as well please themselves and thus make the rules changes on a rotating darts board method?

 

[gkelly]

Without casual fans, you won't have a sport.

Without casual fans, you won't have a spectator sport. You won't have a sport with outside funding.

But as long as there are people who want to skate and who want to compete against each other, there will be a sport.

 

[Blades of Passion]

But figure skating isn't just for the spectators. It's for the actual skaters too. I don't think they should change the rules just because some casual fans who don't understand figure skating will be happy. If fans want to see skating that will please them they should go to an ice show.

Backward thinking.

There isn't any skater who has ever existed that thinks they deserve a ton of credit for a fall.

"Fans" aren't some single-definition group of people who just want to see skaters frolicking around at ice shows. People want to see the adrenaline, difficulty, excitement, and artistic fulfillment of great competitive programs.

 

[MaxSwagg]

For skating skills, performance, maybe choreography (or I guess if you want to be very strict, every component), decrease the component by 0.50/fall. Two falls, the most you can be given for those components is 9.00. Surely a code could be written into the software that would allow this, that way it would actually be adhered to.