Analysis on element "efficiency"

[Alex Fedorov]

Why does there have to be a quad attempt or a triple axel attempt to declare a competition "good" or "great"! This is the part of figure skating that is really a turnoff to me these days where the whole sport isn't considered and only the jumps are important. To me (and of course everyone is entitled to their opinion) that's like saying a diving competition wasn't good because the water was too wet. I think ALL the elements should be considered and how they're executed makes the competition successful. Again - JMO. We've all seen competitions where the skaters were more consistent - that's for sure - but the medal winners earned their medals.

As you can see, the tables with statistical data I provided did not include the elements of ultra-c (there is no information there about the double axel too, but for a different reason). I refused to analyze in this direction, if only because everything is pretty obvious here.

However, since you asked such a question, I can say that the presence of ultra-si elements is also a kind of indicator. This is the most obvious sign of development, of moving forward. And as you can see, even in the absence of Russia, Japanese skaters are trying to succeed in this direction.

 

[4everchan]

I think it is difficult to compare last and this season. Many skaters are taking the opportunity to jump the +2A combo and perform instead a 2nd 3T a 2nd 2F in their free program. If 7 triple are the maximum they have to jump doubles anyway than why risk to mess a 3+3 combo ? This option changed completely the "jump strategy" in the free program and it is perhaps the reason that the "veterans" kept their 3+3 combinations. In addition to that this season the "poor take off" especially of Flip and Lutz should get more negativ GOE than during the last seasons.
In addition to that the total number of triple attempts increased over the years. I think this is not a sign of regression

Totally agree... it's difficult to run stats (and apply meaning to them other than just numbers) from season to season when the rules keep changing, thus the strategies too. It happens a lot in ice dance.. it did happen with the pairs after 2018... I think skaters are just realizing how power the +2a is (for instance Shoma doing 3a+2a+2a for a huge BV). When there are new opportunities, it takes time for athletes to adapt. I find the 3 jumps series with the +2a very fun to watch.. and I'd be happy if they replaced the Euler series (but that's another topic)

 

[Alex Fedorov]

In addition to that this season the "poor take off" especially of Flip and Lutz should get more negativ GOE than during the last seasons.

I'll try to check your assumption using the protocols of the last Skate America (at that time the new rules were already in effect).

1. Haein Lee, short program: 3F! - the GOE is indeed reduced, but the score is still higher than the base value of the element, in my statistics this attempt was recognized as successful.
2. Yeonjeong Park, short program - 3F!q F - again a "poor takeoff", but the jump is also accompanied by a quarter underrotation and a fall, which, of course, had a much stronger effect on the judges' scores. Attempt was recognized as unsuccessful.
3. Haein Lee, free skating, 3F!< - underrotation on 1/2, big mistake, unsuccessful attempt.
4. Gracie Gold, free skating, 3F! << - underrotation on full turn, unsuccesful attempt
5. Ahsun Yun, free skating, 3F! q - "poor takeoff" + quater underrotation, unsuccessful attempt.
6. Yeonjeong Park, free skating, 1F instead 3F, unsuccessful attempt.
7. Marilena Kitromilis, free skating, 3F! q F - quarter underrotation and fall, unsuccesful attempt.
8. Nicole Schott, free skating, 3F got negative GOE without remarks.

Thus, it cannot be argued that the increased attention of the judges to the "poor takeoff" was the reason for the failures in the attempts to perform the 3F. The main problems, like the year before, are underrotation and falls. The new rules about combinations here were all the more irrelevant.

 

[gkelly]

Are you able to do similar statistical analyses for spins, step sequences, and PCS?

 

[el henry]

Also can we see similar statistics for the men, including jumps, spins, step sequences and PCS? I realize it is a lot of work, (or at least it looks like it), so I understand if you cannot.

For me, such numbers would help me see how all skaters are moving the sport forward with spins, step sequences and PCS as well as jumps, since "ultra" elements (I don't quite know what they are, I've never used that term in my skating analyses) should of course include more than jumps.

(Although of course once we have the statistics, we then have analysis. Oy, so much work ).

 

[yesterday]

Where's @eppen ? Might be an interesting thread for them.

 

[ladyjane]

Alex, just like me, there are many people liking the statistics even if we don't agree on everything and there are many who don't like to focus on jumps only (and I'm the first to agree on that), so I just want to say I really like the thread. And I agree with @el henry also. I'm not really a follower of the women, but the pairs or the men? Yummie!

 

[Alex Fedorov]

Are you able to do similar statistical analyses for spins, step sequences, and PCS?

First - statistics for the sequence of steps with the calculation of the average level (overall average level and average level at each Grand Prix stage):

Table StSq2021WR-2022

Here I also introduced the criterion "efficiency", but this is more of a kind of experimental value. What is meant here is that the goal of each skater is to get level 4 in a sequence of steps. Receiving any other level is considered a failed attempt. Efficiency of 38.68% - this means that exactly this proportion of attempts to complete a sequence of steps turned out to be successful.

In general, as I expected, the change in the average level of the sequence of steps over the year turned out to be small. The decrease is still noticeable, but this can probably be attributed to changes in the rules.

Now - statistics on CCoSp:

Table CCoSp2021WR-2022

Efficiency is calculated in the same way as for the sequence of steps, but with one addition: if CCoSp4 is marked as V, then such an attempt is also considered unsuccessful. This is not shown in the table, but in 2021 there was one such case, and in 2022 there were two cases.

Here again we see a slight decrease in the average level on the background of a fairly significant increase in the number of cases of spins of level 2 and 3. In addition, the number of mistakes has increased.

 

[4everchan]

So then, according to spins and steps efficiency rates which are also decreasing, are we seeing a typical first year of an olympic cycle where skaters are not peaking comparatively to the previous year, which was the olympic year... So it's not just the jumps, but everything?

In any case, that's simply what I was suggesting in my first post in this thread. The sport is not regressing. The athletes are building up (new comers), or rebuilding (veterans) after the big year.

 

[lilimum]

In spins there was a major change of rules this season. The elemination of the windmill and 2 x all three position as features and the definition of 6 features that have to be successful shown to get level 4 forced many skaters out of their comfort zone. Me personally like this change, I never saw so much creativity in spins like this year, especially the french men, e.g. Luc is changing direction in his camel spin and I just love the spins of Kevin. One side efffect is the new added difficult exit this brings so much fun to the training of younger skaters because they love sliding elements

 

[streams4dreams]

This is such a cool thread, thanks Alex for summarizing so much data! I completely agree that the numbers are not what moves me in a program, but it is a sport, so it is interesting to see how the level of competition is scored through the years. If I were teaching a data science class, I'd make it a project assignment to write an ISU API, digitize all of the scores from the pdf protocols and store them in a database ready for analysis

Because I too now have questions that would require a lot more data collection... For example, the rule changes will obviously affect the scores because the skaters are learning new elements / layouts, but I wonder if there is a 4-year "grade inflation" cycle that culminates at the Olympics? I could imagine judges being more generous with the levels and GOEs at the end of the Olympic cycle, but to test this hypothesis we'd need all of this information for the full cycle.

 

[Jontor]

Just a sidenote.

If we look at the SB list and compare it to last year, we find that at place 154 is now Karolina Bialas with 130.14 points. Last year she was 155 with 130.43.
So essentially same score, same placement.

But last year she had 21 women from Russia and Belarus above her, so that would mean that she should be at least 20 places higher this year, right? But she's not. So that suggests that the overall standard is actually higher this year.

But then, if we look at the top 24, it's a different story. Last year's #24 scored 206.01. This year #24 has a score of 190.52 (for now). The season isn't over yet and the Championships tend to give PBs, so the score of 190 will probably be improved. But I don't think to last year's level, as that means that 16 women need to better their SBs significantly.

Conclusion. The standard is lower at the top (for obvious reasons), but the overall skating has actually improved.

 

[Alex Fedorov]

So then, according to spins and steps efficiency rates which are also decreasing, are we seeing a typical first year of an olympic cycle where skaters are not peaking comparatively to the previous year, which was the olympic year... So it's not just the jumps, but everything?

In any case, that's simply what I was suggesting in my first post in this thread. The sport is not regressing. The athletes are building up (new comers), or rebuilding (veterans) after the big year.

That is, if the statistics on spins and sequence of steps also deteriorated, this should be evidence of overall progress? Interesting logic. I won’t clutter up the thread with additional tables, I’ll just say that in 2018 the statistics on the sequence of steps also worsened a little, but the statistics on the CCoSp, on the contrary, became better. In addition, hypothetical fatigue from the Olympics does not apply to all skaters participating in the Grand Prix.

 

[Alex Fedorov]

Since it was suggested here that the statistics for 3F and 3Lz could be affected by the change in the attitude of the judges to the "poor takeoff", it makes sense to give statistics of mistakes on these two elements in 2021 and 2022:

Table Mistakes2021-22

Here, NR columns contain information about the number of unsuccessful attempts that were not accompanied by judges remarks + the number of unsuccessful attempts when a double or single jump was obtained instead of a triple jump.

Absend of remarks on a failed attempt usually means a bad landing. As an example, 3Lz performed by Isabeau Levito at the first stage of the Grand Prix in 2022:



Jump on 0:51.

Unfortunately, in 2021, there are no fall marks in the direct description of the element in the protocols - only at the end of the protocol, where it says about deduction. Therefore, one should not think that in 2021 skaters did not fall while performing 3Lz and 3F - this is simply a lack of accurate data.

 

[Alex Fedorov]

It is necessary to clarify that the mark "!" did not always turn the attempt into a failure. I recorded only three such cases in 2022 and five in 2021. In other cases, either the score did not decrease below the base value of the element, or simultaneously with the "!" other marks were put in the protocol - "q", "<" or even "F".

 

[eppen]

Oh, I loved this! Thanks sooooo much for tagging me @yesterday, I might have missed this otherwise not having had much time for the forum this year...

The comparison to men called for in some posts is perhaps not that relevant since Russian men are not excelling in the same manner as their women are - their absence has not been too tangible IMO. I took a quick look at the number and quality of the quads 2021-2 and 2022-3 (my criteria are the same as Axel's = 0.00 or positive GOE means a good jump):

2021-2 239 attempts of which 130 were with positive GOE = 54%
2022-3 234 attempts of which 117 were with positive GOE = 50%

(ADD: My original figures included the juniors, now corrected to only seniors - I had just added a new column into my spreadsheet and forgot about it... On a side note, the absence of Russian junior men was notable in GP quads as in 2021-2 there were 37 of them even without Japanese skaters, now only 16. Half [= 18] of last season's junior quads were by Russians and this year the Japanese skaters produced 8 quads. This season, Russian junior men have attempted 104 quads and the rest of the world 58.)

Last season was massive when it comes to quads in men's skating: over 1720 attempts when the previous record was over 1240 for the 2017-8 season. The numbers peak regulary for the Olympic seasons (everybody and their uncle Bob are trying quads) and then slump a little bit the following season and this is also happening now. The quality, or efficiency as Alex calls it, is about the same.

Alex's statistics gave almost a physical form to what my gut feeling has been watching the Sr GP series this fall. A step back in time or step back to "normal". "Normal", since women's figure skating has been stagnated technically since the 1990s when having all triples (except 3A) and at least one triple-triple became a norm. That is a very long time for not having much technical improvement in a competetive sport. And it remains to be seen whether the trend started by the Russian skaters only 4-5 years ago will continue. It is remarkable that the statistics compiled for the two past seasons could be easily compared to seasons in the early IJS as if nothing had changed in almost 30 years.

What I am kind of curious about is why women's figure skating is not developing technically? The triples were conquered already in the 1980s and there have been some who have been dabbling with 3As and quads over the years, but these have been few and far between until recently. And even now it seems that it could turn out to be a passing phase. The obvious comparison can be made to the men who since the 1980s have been able to push forward. These days the 3A is necessary just about from the junior stage and quads have now become a common element at every level of competition from domestic juniors to international top seniors. And the guys also have all the other elements, spins and steps, in addition to the difficult jump content.

Considering that for every boy that starts to skate there are probably hundreds of girls who start to skate, this is amazing in my opinion. Why are there so very few technically talented women figure skaters? Is is just that the girls/women are not encouraged to excel technically?

What I am curious about also is what happens to women's jumps over their careers. My gut feeling is that many start their senior careers with a full set and then start losing both quantity and quality (but numbers might prove me wrong). I don't even have to go for the 3As and the quads in this aspect as this seems to happen to triples for many. The comparison to men in this respect is again interesting as guys seem to be able to learn new quads successfully even in their 20s whereas for women that is extremely rare, basically non-existent (Tuk comes to mind, but is there anyone else ever?).

Thinking of the development of training methods etc. I would imagine that they would have come up with way to maintain triples and even the more difficult jumps when girls grow up to be women. I am sure there are other ways to do it than just extreme weight control... (However, there are now some tiny boy jumping beans who might grow up to be 6 feet tall and then lose at least part of the jumping ability they had as a youngster, but even these guys can manage some of the so called ultra-c material.)

E

 

[lilimum]

The problem with girl's figure skating is that everybody thinks the only "successful" training method is: try to delay puberty as much as possible, reduce the weight as much as possible and give a shit on clean jumping technique without taking care of mental and physical health of the girls. When this girl are older, they can*t do anymore because their bodies are not strong enough (or even worse the skater has to retire due to health problems). Let*s see how the very young boys showing at the moment Ulta-C will develop when their are older.
Federations and ISU should install measurements to protect the skaters - most of them are minors. In athletics for example there are no competitions in triple jumps for unter kids unter 16 becuase this has such a high impact on the bones and joints - or the ski jumper need a minimun BMI, a rule created after the number of ski jumper with anorexia increased. One step in the right direction it the increase of age to compete in seniors. Only if the acutal appoach is not successful any more, coaches would rethink their methods an hopefully support very talented girl to have a longer carrer that only 1-2 seasons

 

[gkelly]

Alex's statistics gave almost a physical form to what my gut feeling has been watching the Sr GP series this fall. A step back in time or step back to "normal". "Normal", since women's figure skating has been stagnated technically since the 1990s when having all triples (except 3A) and at least one triple-triple became a norm.

During the 1990s this became the norm for medal contenders, but for most of the decade most senior women were not doing triple-triples and it wasn't until the middle of the decade that attempting 5 different takeoffs became common.

I haven't done a statistical analysis, but if you want I can find my notes from a few 1990s events to let you know what the attempted jump content consisted of throughout the field.

That is a very long time for not having much technical improvement in a competetive sport. And it remains to be seen whether the trend started by the Russian skaters only 4-5 years ago will continue. It is remarkable that the statistics compiled for the two past seasons could be easily compared to seasons in the early IJS as if nothing had changed in almost 30 years.

What has changed is not so much what the very top contenders are attempting (Midori Ito, for example, was far ahead of her time jumpwise and only a few could try to keep up with her), but rather in how many skaters are now attempting what only the strongest jumpers could do 30 years ago.

Considering that for every boy that starts to skate there are probably hundreds of girls who start to skate, this is amazing in my opinion. Why are there so very few technically talented women figure skaters? Is is just that the girls/women are not encouraged to excel technically?

Adult women's body types are less conducive to quick rotation, and to a lesser degree high jumping, than men's or younger teenagers'.

There are exceptions, of course, but the average female skater is going to have a harder time mastering 3 or more rotations in the air than the average male skater, given comparable technique.

Women do tend to find it easier than men, on average, to excel at many spin techniques.

This is true based on average body types. That being the case, the rules and expectations have also tended to encourage greater jump content from men than from women and to expect more spin flexibility, speed, and aesthetic positioning from women.

So some women will focus more on what comes easier to their bodies, and what they're most interested in, and also on what averages, their coaches, the rules at the time, and cultural gender ideologies tell them are more important for them to work on in their training.

Because the scoring has tended to reward jump content so highly compared to other skills, both post-figures era 6.0 scoring and IJS, women probably have to devote a higher proportion of their training time to mastering triples than men do in order to maximize their points. They need to get the 3-rev triples solid before they can think about adding 3A or quads.

But I take exception to the suggestion that girls/women are "not encouraged to excel technically." There is a lot more to technical excellence than number of revolutions in the air.

 

[eppen]

@gkelly - those are all familiar arguments to me about body proportions etc. But I am still asking why are women not pushing the boundaries when it comes to jumps? Because surely there are ways to get over those physical problems - the first 3A jumpers in women were Midori Ito and Tonya Harding (who were technically excellent jumpers), tiny, but also grown-ups when they did most of their jumps (the same goes for Tuk, btw). Only later, the juniors have taken over the hard stuff (Bonaly was 16 when she started going for quads, Ando ofc, and now the Russians and others).

In the same time when the triples have penetrated the women's field from top to the bottom, the men have done the same with quads - and done it with the triples as well. Men tend to be able to get better technically - jumps, skating, spins - over their careers (after usually being pretty bad in everything except jumps) whereas women tend to come out with top difficulty which then often starts to go away. They might get better at skating skills sometimes, but not necessarily even in that.

The jumps have been the focal point for skating success at least from the 1980s onwards. The other elements were IMO fairly irrelevant when judging in 6.0 was concerned - there were no realy criteria for spin or steps difficulty (apart from maybe number of revolutions and length of the sequence). Getting jumps clean or not was the decding factor. The early quadsters and those who did not try at all were arguing for doing or not doing quads just by that: it was important to get the jumps done, but as clean as possible which meant little risk taking.

The IJS has been blamed for putting the jumps to the center but it just made the old principles visible in numbers. It also made risk taking worthwhile, but even that started to get appreciated already in the late 1990s. I have seen skaters comment on the early days of IJS that it was great that other elements were also appreciated, that it was just not all about the jumps!

IJS made the other elements also more easily judged by creating specific criteria for them. The spins and steps obviously measure skills, but the way most top skaters can relatively easily get level 4s in spins and most get level 3 or 4 in steps indicates IMO that they are not very good measures of skills or technical development. Most skaters can get to the max too easily. That is not to say that development has not happened in these because ofc the 1990s skaters probably would have to work pretty hard to get the current step sequences and spins done. But this has happened through the entire field and as as said the top levels can be reached seemingly quite easily.

One day I will get into collecting the data of what happens to women's jumps over their careers...

E

 

[gkelly]

@gkelly - those are all familiar arguments to me about body proportions etc. But I am still asking why are women not pushing the boundaries when it comes to jumps? Because surely there are ways to get over those physical problems - the first 3A jumpers in women were Midori Ito and Tonya Harding (who were technically excellent jumpers), tiny, but also grown-ups when they did most of their jumps (the same goes for Tuk, btw). Only later, the juniors have taken over the hard stuff (Bonaly was 16 when she started going for quads, Ando ofc, and now the Russians and others).

Ito was the first woman to land a 3-3 combo in (junior) competition -- at age 12. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7a1tCxqch0

She was also attempting 3A in competition at age 15 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6hKKVQ4gyc&t=1m54s (not successful, but she did land one in the exhibition at that NHK), although it was another 4 years before she did it successfully in competition.

I think it was pretty common in the 6.0 era for younger skaters to be pushing the jump content if they were able, in juniors or early senior years, because they were less likely to make a mark against more experienced seniors on the strength of school figures or freestyle skating skills and presentation. (How much that may have been due to actual differences and how much to reputation is up for debate.)

Should we look for more examples?

In the same time when the triples have penetrated the women's field from top to the bottom, the men have done the same with quads - and done it with the triples as well. Men tend to be able to get better technically - jumps, skating, spins - over their careers (after usually being pretty bad in everything except jumps) whereas women tend to come out with top difficulty which then often starts to go away. They might get better at skating skills sometimes, but not necessarily even in that.

The jumps have been the focal point for skating success at least from the 1980s onwards.

In the 1980s, school figures still counted for a lot. Once figures were gone in the 1990s, jump difficulty became more important, although not always the determining factor.

The other elements were IMO fairly irrelevant when judging in 6.0 was concerned - there were no realy criteria for spin or steps difficulty (apart from maybe number of revolutions and length of the sequence).

That is true.

But basic skating and presentation were important, which is why the "cleanest" program or the one with the hardest jumps did not always win.

One day I will get into collecting the data of what happens to women's jumps over their careers...

That should be interesting!