Communication No. 2089 - Season 2017-2018

[xeyra]

Scale of Values, Levels of Difficulty and Guidelines for marking Grade of Execution, season 2017/18
2017-2018 Season.pdf
2016-2017 Season.pdf (for reference)

MAIN CHANGES:

• Combination of 3 turns on each foot in the step sequence: “Only the first combination attempted on each foot can be counted.”
• GOE bullet point for solo jump preceded by steps in the singles SP: “Difficult” steps/movements changed to “creative, interesting, original” steps/movements.
• GOE bullet point for twist lifts: “No scratching of the blade on the ice” changed to “Clear controlled catch”.
• “SP: Jump element not according to requirements final GOE must be -3”
• “Unbalanced number of revolutions in change foot spin” should receive -1 GOE
• “Program Components: As a guideline the score ten (10) should not be awarded for any of the components in a program containing a Fall or Serious error.”
• “Step sequence pattern: It must be visible and identifiable and should be performed by using almost the full ice surface (e.g. straight line, serpentine, circle, oval or similar shape) either in it’s length from short barrier to short barrier or twice in its width from long barrier to long barrier.”

Source

I haven't seen this here yet, I don't know what the usual proceeding is to bring these news up to the forum, so I apologize if I'm overstepping or posting in the wrong area of the forum.

 

[sarama]

GOE bullet point for solo jump preceded by steps in the singles SP: “Difficult” steps/movements changed to “creative, interesting, original” steps/movements.
“SP: Jump element not according to requirements final GOE must be -3”

I think the general idea behind this is to punish the solo jumps without the required preceding steps. Hopefully it will work, because it's quite unacceptable how many skaters get away with ignoring this rule.

“Program Components: As a guideline the score ten (10) should not be awarded for any of the components in a program containing a Fall or Serious error.”

This rule makes me laugh. It should be kind of obvious, but especially in dance it happens so maybe they are right to write it down.

 

[moriel]

“Program Components: As a guideline the score ten (10) should not be awarded for any of the components in a program containing a Fall or Serious error.”
Cool, I like now that its written.

 

[gkelly]

I think the general idea behind this is to punish the solo jumps without the required preceding steps. Hopefully it will work, because it's quite unacceptable how many skaters get away with ignoring this rule.

There are already separate reductions for this:

SP: No required preceding steps/movements -3
SP: Break between required steps/movements & jump/only 1 step/movement preceding jump -1 to -2

Those haven't changed.

I'm pretty sure that the "not according to requirements final GOE must be -3" wording is meant to apply to a SP jump combination that has only one jump that counts/meets the requirements: i.e., if the second jump is nonexistent, or if one of the jumps counts because it is at least double, but the other jump gets no points because it is single, or double where at least triple is required

 

[xeyra]

This probably shows my ignorance, but the new wording makes me wonder what exactly the difference between bullets 1 and 2 for the solo jump in the SP is now.

1) unexpected / creative / difficult entry
2) clear recognizable (creative, interesting, original for jump preceded by steps/movements of
the Short Program) steps/free skating movements immediately preceding element

I could understand back when wording mentioned difficult steps into the solo jump in the SP, since difficulty wouldn't necessarily mean it was creative or unexpected, so the two bullets didn't overlap. But with the new wording, I'm finding it hard to differentiate the bullets now.

 

[sarama]

There are already separate reductions for this:

SP: No required preceding steps/movements -3
SP: Break between required steps/movements & jump/only 1 step/movement preceding jump -1 to -2

Those haven't changed.

I'm pretty sure that the "not according to requirements final GOE must be -3" wording is meant to apply to a SP jump combination that has only one jump that counts/meets the requirements: i.e., if the second jump is nonexistent, or if one of the jumps counts because it is at least double, but the other jump gets no points because it is single, or double where at least triple is required

You are right, but since the existing penalization for lack of steps is never applied, I think they are trying to reinforce the concept. I could be wrong, but I really hope they are trying to address the issue.

 

[Ic3Rabbit]

Scale of Values, Levels of Difficulty and Guidelines for marking Grade of Execution, season 2017/18
2017-2018 Season.pdf
2016-2017 Season.pdf (for reference)



I haven't seen this here yet, I don't know what the usual proceeding is to bring these news up to the forum, so I apologize if I'm overstepping or posting in the wrong area of the forum.

:gclap: can I just say...FINALLY!!

 

[QuadThrow]

“Program Components: As a guideline the score ten (10) should not be awarded for any of the components in a program containing a Fall or Serious error.”
Cool, I like now that its written.

Well. What is a serious error? Stepout? Double footed? Missing a revolution at a jump? I do not hope so.

 

[Interspectator]

Scale of Values, Levels of Difficulty and Guidelines for marking Grade of Execution, season 2017/18
2017-2018 Season.pdf
2016-2017 Season.pdf (for reference)



I haven't seen this here yet, I don't know what the usual proceeding is to bring these news up to the forum, so I apologize if I'm overstepping or posting in the wrong area of the forum.

“Program Components: As a guideline the score ten (10) should not be awarded for any of the components in a program containing a Fall or Serious error.”

I'm especially happy about this rule change. This makes things clearer and there won't be 10's like we saw last season for programs with falls etc...but how to gauge 'serious errors'? step out? hand down? hmmm...

 

[Sam-Skwantch]

I'm especially happy about this rule change. This makes things clearer and there won't be 10's like we saw last season for programs with falls etc...but how to gauge 'serious errors'? step out? hand down? hmmm...

But...the fact that it needs to be "communicated" as official rule is really mind bottling []

 

[4everchan]

so happy about the no 10s given out for programs with pops or falls..

can anyone point out elements that went through a update in scale value... i just browsed quickly and it seemed to me that it was all the same at least for jumps and throws????

 

[4everchan]

But...the fact that it needs to be "communicated" as official rule is really mind bottling []

mind bottling is what I am doing right now.... thirsty thursday

but if you had seen the PCS thread from earlier this year, we had a huge discussion about so many flawed programs getting 10s.... seriously... it's about time they put it down in writing.

 

[gravy]

so happy about the no 10s given out for programs with pops or falls..

can anyone point out elements that went through a update in scale value... i just browsed quickly and it seemed to me that it was all the same at least for jumps and throws????

Agreed re: giving perfect 10s to imperfect programs. Hopefully we don't have an NCAA gymnastics scenario where the judges award impossibly high PCS to an imperfect program and then are forced to award 10s because the program that came after it was better and must reflect that fact... my ultimate nightmare.

And I cross referenced the SoV for all the elements to the communication released before last season and nothing has changed. Surprise, surprise. :dev2:

 

[Crossover]

But...the fact that it needs to be "communicated" as official rule is really mind bottling []

Well, I bet 9.75 will be used for technically flawed performances instead.

 

[4everchan]

Well, I bet 9.75 will be used for technically flawed performances instead.

i still call that progress... at least, if would mean that there's a chance a slight difference between a clean and great program and some other weirdly rewarded flawed skates.

on .25 at a time... we will change the world.