2018-2019 Season - New rules

[Elucidus]

No, that would be a bad idea, IMO. PCS are a joke, but even now we see programs with just jumps and crossovers in between winning titles. What would happen if PCS were made insignificant? I personally want to see programs with actual choreography, transitions etc.

I disagree. The judges may have misused the component scores but that does not mean they have no value, decreasing their value will definitely make it a jumping competition. When PC is used as it should you get huge improvement in performance like what happened with Boyang. He was given correct feedback by the judges through his low PCs and he is now a much better skater thanks to that.

PC should always matter even if only to few skaters because those are the special ones who want to give a complete performance and improve all skills equally and should be rewarded for it. If PCs were devalued those skaters will be pushed into improving jumps only because they want to be competitive.

I disagree. Let's take a women field for example. Most skaters there have very similar set of jumps, very close TES scores - and each point is really matters. Sometimes especially after SP first 10 or so skaters are in 65-70 range and differs from each other just by mere couple of points. What one can do to outscore others with similar TES scores and elements? Right - work on artistry. To win - you have to be consistent with jumps AND be artistic. What's bad with it?
In men while I agree that there is much more difference between TES due to big dispersion between diffent skaters having many quads, few quads or only triples - what's wrong with it? Even now, with huge PCS oversoring to so called "artistic" skaters - they can't be competitive anyway - only technicians are really can be expected to be on podium. Nathan, Shoma, Boyang, Yuzuru, Fernandez are all really technical skaters despite some of them having artistic qualities as well. Anyway even those of them who aren't excel in artistry - are getting similar pcs due to equalization with high TES. So, in the end I think men skating gotta be about TES anyway - this is fundamental difference between men and women skating and I don't see this as something bad, really. On the contrary it seems quite natural.

Making it irrelevant will only push programs in a bad direction and the manipulation will just move to GOE, which will be more significant than ever.

Also, why is the solution to the judges misusing PC is to punish the skaters who worked hard on it while the judges can just move on to misuse GOE or whatever other tools offered to them by the ISU ?

Ok, DECREASE GOE's values then. To -1/+1 range.
1) 0.5 factor to PCS
2) -3 or -5 deduction on each fall
3) -1 GOE to stepouts, scratchy landings, +0 to most elements, +1 to difficult and great execution
4) BV and UR penalties stays same as they were before
...
Profit. Fair sport. Problems solved. Skaters winning by their current skate - not by reputation, nationality or judges bias. PCS still matters, but main focus is on stable, technical and clean skate. New skaters/dark horses has equivalent chances to win. What's wrong with it?

(Also considering the fact that men and women reach very different numbers in TES, having the coefficient the same for both disciplines would make it more significant for ladies. Thought who knows how TES will look like after the rule change )

Well, considering recent quads revolution made by Trusova in women skating - it's not really the case now. If you are gonna get rid of extra jump and half minute in men skating - why wouldn't do all steps to equalize them fully? I think - like women receiving usually lower TES scores - men gotta receive lower pcs scores as well.. Tbh, I never considered most usual splatfests in men skating as something worthy pcs higher than 60+ anyway )

 

[MajaHled]

I disagree. Let's take a women field for example. Most skaters there have very similar set of jumps, very close TES scores - and each point is really matters. Sometimes especially after SP first 10 or so skaters are in 65-70 range and differs from each other just by mere couple of points. What one can do to outscore others with similar TES scores and elements? Right - work on artistry. To win - you have to be consistent with jumps AND be artistic. What's bad with it?
In men while I agree that there is much more difference between TES due to big dispersion between diffent skaters having many quads, few quads or only triples - what's wrong with it? Even now, with huge PCS oversoring to so called "artistic" skaters - they can't be competitive anyway - only technicians are really can be expected to be on podium. Nathan, Shoma, Boyang, Yuzuru, Fernandez are all really technical skaters despite some of them having artistic qualities as well. Anyway even those of them who aren't excel in artistry - are getting similar pcs due to equalization with high TES. So, in the end I think men skating gotta be about TES anyway - this is fundamental difference between men and women skating and I don't see this as something bad, really. On the contrary it seems quite natural.



Ok, DECREASE GOE's values then. To -1/+1 range.
1) 0.5 factor to PCS
2) -3 or -5 deduction on each fall
3) -1 GOE to stepouts, scratchy landings, +0 to most elements, +1 to difficult and great execution
4) BV and UR penalties stays same as they were before
...
Profit. Fair sport. Problems solved. Skaters winning by their current skate - not by reputation, nationality or judges bias. PCS still matters, but main focus is on stable, technical and clean skate. New skaters/dark horses has equivalent chances to win. What's wrong with it?


Well, considering recent quads revolution made by Trusova in women skating - it's not really the case now. If you are gonna get rid of extra jump and half minute in men skating - why wouldn't do all steps to equalize them fully? I think - like women receiving usually lower TES scores - men gotta receive lower pcs scores as well.. Tbh, I never considered most usual splatfests in men skating as something worthy pcs higher than 60+ anyway )

OK, I guess we just have different views on what we want FS to look like. Of course, to be competitive, skaters need the tech and need to have difficult jumps etc. but the artistic side is still important to me. What I want to see are skaters like Hanyu who are technical AND artistic. If we effectively made PCS irrelevant or less relevant, no one would strive to be like that anymore and we'd get jumping competitions. Maybe that's what you want. I definitely don't.

And limiting GOE range would also lead to skaters jumping just for pure base value without any real quality in the elements executed. And I also don't want to see that.

Even so there would still be room for manipulation. Tech calls, for example. That's a big problem even now and would become even more magnified.

And the coefficient is there to make TES have the same weight as PCS. It will still take a while before ladies get to the level of jumps guys have. In men, having 3A is a necessity to be even a little competitive, in ladies it's still something not many do. So the two disciplines would require different things. In ladies, PCS would still have more significance compared to the highest TES achieved.

But ultimately my beef with this solution is that it's not really a solution. Judges will still do all they can to manipulate, it would just limit them in that, but the tendency would still be there. A real solution would be to effectively discourage judges from scoring with bias. But that's just as unlikely to happed as reduced PCS and GOE range, so I rest my case. No more point discussing it now, I think.

ETA: I also forgot to add, PCS are hardly artistic score, like half of it is very technical (SS, TR, to a degree CO). And I would hate to see all skaters with bad SS, tbh, as well as empty programs, which, while also uninteresting, are ultimately easier.

 

[BillNeal]

Unless you have all judges from Antarctica, some degree of judging bias will exist

 

[MajaHled]

Unless you have all judges from Antarctica, some degree of judging bias will exist

I didn't mean just national bias, I meant also going GOE-happy on quads just because they're quads, PSC rising with TES and stuff. And sure, some degree will exist, but not to the extend where two judges on the Olympic games in the same panel both score completely ludicrously. I'd like to think that could be avoided.

 

[gkelly]

I would want Skating Skills to remain highly relevant to the outcome of a skating competition. For me personally, that's the first thing I look at, and elements second.

I would want quality in elements to remain important and not just difficulty.

I would want difficulty of the program construction including non-element moves to remain important.

All of that is technical but much of it is qualitative and therefore can only be scored but subjective assessment. Subjective does not necessarily mean biased. But it does mean that sometimes other people's assessments are not going to agree with yours, or with each other's. That's exactly why there are multiple judges on the panels.

I also love it when skaters are able to show mastery of technique by timing moves the music and to transcend the technique by doing something creative/artistic with individual elements, connections between elements, relation to the nuances of the music, and conception and execution of the program as a whole.

It's harder to do those things than not to do them, so on some level they do reward technique.

But again, plenty of room for difference of opinion. Which is not a bad thing. Unless only one person's opinion gets to count.

 

[BillNeal]

I didn't mean just national bias, I meant also going GOE-happy on quads just because they're quads, PSC rising with TES and stuff. And sure, some degree will exist, but not to the extend where two judges on the Olympic games in the same panel both score completely ludicrously. I'd like to think that could be avoided.

I agree the leniency in how GOEs are given is a problem these days and it's not just on quads. In ladies, you can see that the GOE given for triple-triples or even jumps that should get an edge call but didn't (I hardly ever see anything more than !), so judges are allowed to assign those high GOEs. Anyway, a decade ago, judges shied away from giving GOEs over 2 or PCS over 8's. However, it seems that with the handing out of free GOEs, they are trying to raise the ceiling on them. So, how long can they sustain this new SOV, until they do a -7 to +7 scale?

 

[charlotte14]

Unless you have all judges from Antarctica, some degree of judging bias will exist

All judges should be from countries without medal contenders... might be useful.

 

[Harriet]

All judges should be from countries without medal contenders... might be useful.

Or without any skaters represented in a given discipline. It wouldn't be hard. I did a quick check with the Ladies' Singles from Worlds this year: there were 28 federations with skaters represented in the SP and 44 without, and even if not all of those 44 federations have judges qualified for Worlds, it's hard to believe that fewer than 9 do!

 

[MajaHled]

All judges should be from countries without medal contenders... might be useful.

I don't think that would work though. Big feds have influence over small feds and if the only way to manipulate results was to manipulate smaller fed judges into it, they'd find a way. A big problem is that feds get to pick which judges to send, so if a judge wants to be sent to ISU competitions, they need to do as their fed tells them. But I can't think if a way to avoid that though since judges not being affiliated with feds is not an option.

 

[Elucidus]

https://www.sovsport.ru/others/figu...tema-ocenok-ob-ektivna-no-sudi-obychnye-ljudi
new interesting interview from Lakernik

important new points:
-all changes are not final - they will be finalized at end of April and voted for at ISU congress in early June and therefore some of them can be not approved
-new congress will be after 2 years where new changes may be implemented - but only a few and minor one's to patch up something in current rules slightly - since there is unwritten rule "do not change much before Olympics"
-one spin in pair skating fp will be cut - therefore sp and fp will have only one spin each
-there aren't any propositions or plans to change age of participation in seniors for ladies

Important for me points I marked as bold

 

[lavoix]

Decreasing the time for all programs will be a bit crappy. Not a fan of this idea.

 

[Tutto]

Decreasing the time for all programs will be a bit crappy. Not a fan of this idea.

? Lakernik said that only Pairs and Men long programs will be shortened by 30 sec.
Also he says that the reason is that men especially appear to be exhausted by the end of LP. I thought it made sense but then Kolyada in his recent interview said that in his opinion it would be much harder as only one jump is out but the whole 30 sec less to do the rest of the elements so it would be more intense requiring in fact more stamina from skaters and he's personally going to work on it. I haven't thought about like that. What do you think?

Edit: just was thinking that it seems to be unfair on skaters to wait till the beginning of June for the changes to be finalised. Normally many would have the programs ready by that time...

 

[lavoix]

Well, why decrease the men program by 30 seconds and take out only one jump? It doesn't take more than 6 seconds to prepare for a jump, execute the jump, and transition out of it.

Same for pairs, I feel like they would be taking an essential component out of the routine. Do spins in the FP really take 30 seconds?!

 

[SnowWhite]

Well, why decrease the men program by 30 seconds and take out only one jump? It doesn't take more than 6 seconds to prepare for a jump, execute the jump, and transition out of it.

Same for pairs, I feel like they would be taking an essential component out of the routine. Do spins in the FP really take 30 seconds?!

I timed the one in Meagan and Eric's LP at the Olympics, and got ~20 seconds. I guess with transition in and out, it should make up most of the cut time.

 

[lovaticcanada]

Quick question, when you refer to spin, is it the pair combination spin, or the side by side spin.

I took a quick look at Julianne and Charlie's FS from nationals, and both of them were roughly 20 seconds as well. I didn't realize spins were that long.

 

[lavoix]

Quick question, when you refer to spin, is it the pair combination spin, or the side by side spin.

I took a quick look at Julianne and Charlie's FS from nationals, and both of them were roughly 20 seconds as well. I didn't realize spins were that long.

Doesn't matter which spin they take out, they will take out a spin and then theoretically the ISU should give the choice of what spin to use in the FP to each pair.

 

[Li'Kitsu]

? Lakernik said that only Pairs and Men long programs will be shortened by 30 sec.
Also he says that the reason is that men especially appear to be exhausted by the end of LP. I thought it made sense but then Kolyada in his recent interview said that in his opinion it would be much harder as only one jump is out but the whole 30 sec less to do the rest of the elements so it would be more intense requiring in fact more stamina from skaters and he's personally going to work on it. I haven't thought about like that. What do you think?

Edit: just was thinking that it seems to be unfair on skaters to wait till the beginning of June for the changes to be finalised. Normally many would have the programs ready by that time...

Yes, it's only Men and Pairs. And Brian Orser has made similar remarks to Mika, that infact only cutting one jump (1/13 of the technical elements) but 30 seconds (1/9 of the overall program time) will make the programs harder to execute for the men. It basically gives them less of a break to recover a bit between their elements, and will especially be difficult for those who take a lot of time normally to set up their jumps. Nobodies jump + set up and all takes 30 seconds, so the rest of the elements have to be squeezed together more. Which is majorily why I don't like the idea.

And also agreed that deciding this pretty late isn't exactly helpful for the skaters. But I guess at least everyone has the same disadvantage there...

 

[SnowWhite]

Quick question, when you refer to spin, is it the pair combination spin, or the side by side spin.

I took a quick look at Julianne and Charlie's FS from nationals, and both of them were roughly 20 seconds as well. I didn't realize spins were that long.

When I did it, it was the combo spin

 

[gkelly]

Doesn't matter which spin they take out, they will take out a spin and then theoretically the ISU should give the choice of what spin to use in the FP to each pair.

Or they will alternate whether pair spin or side-by-side spin is required in the short program each year, and the free skate would allow whichever isn't in the short that year

 

[lavoix]

Or they will alternate whether pair spin or side-by-side spin is required in the short program each year, and the free skate would allow whichever isn't in the short that year

Fair enough. I still prefer 4 minute programs, otherwise it will reduce the artistry aspect and everything will just become more rushed.