Components from 5 to 3: has the change achieved its objectives?

[Blades of Passion]

Nothing has changed, the judging is still not accurately reflecting the artistic qualities of the programs. There isn't enough separation in the scores and judges don't even know what great artistry is supposed to look like. Most footwork and spins in programs these days are not musical and lack a greater choreographic purpose, including programs from skaters like Jason Brown who are supposed to be "artistic greats". Jason does not deserve high 9's in composition/performance, his programs ever since going to the Cricket Club are worse artistically than they were in the past, and they were never perfect to begin with, thanks to the CoP system making it impossible to have perfect choreography and musical interpretation, if you want to hit the level requirements.

A judge should be asking themselves constantly in a performance "is this movement interpreting the music? does it look good?" Every time the answer is no, the component score should drop. First they have to actually understand what qualifies though, and to what degree. It's not just in the choreography and musicality, it's also the way the skaters perform these days. There is so much less attention to creating a mood, to holding a good body line at all times, and to performing for the audience. In the past, when the presentation mark directly determined placement, skaters were incentivized to be constantly making sure all their moves look good, and for the program to have emotional depth or entertainment value. Now that is an afterthought. Instead they are constantly thinking about the compulsory turns and "difficult variations" they must hit. It doesn't come from the soul.

A further problem is the Program Component score itself is not worth enough compared to the technical elements. This sport is supposed to be an equal balance of technical elements vs performance, and that's inherently impossible now, since quad-filled programs greatly outweigh the maximum score that can be given in PCS.

It especially doesn't help that jumps are judged completely wrong. Whippy, pre-rotated jumps with mediocre amplitude are given rotation credit and high GOE, while big jumps with real explosive quality off the ice and more room to breathe in the air are given underrotations and low GOE. It's completely backwards to the physical mechanics of what is actually being performed, and to the visual appeal. Unclean landings are not punished enough in the score and jumps are able to get too much extra credit from the GOE. Even jumps that deserve a +4 or +5 GOE (which is VERY few) are getting too much credit. Even if you do one of the best jumps ever, the bonus points you get there shouldn't completely negate what is lost from a fall on another jump.

That whole word "artistry" - for PCS is already so wrong.

Artistry is mostly what PCS is supposed to be about.

I wish the components would have gone from 5 to 4, just removing Transitions and placing further emphases on Performance, Choreography, and Interpretation. Losing the Interpretation mark is disastrous; one of the biggest focuses of judging should be the musicality and emotional depth of a program. This generic "composition" component does not convey what is supposed to matter most.

 

[kolyadafan2002]

I wish the components would have gone from 5 to 4, just removing Transitions and placing further emphases on Performance, Choreography, and Interpretation. Losing the Interpretation mark is disastrous; one of the biggest focuses of judging should be the musicality and emotional depth of a program. This generic "composition" component does not convey what is supposed to matter most.

Skating skills/transitions are extremely important, but they are prioritising the wrong things. It should be about quality of everything, rather than number. The perfection within a transition, not number. The power and effortless of an individual push, the glide.

Lots of skaters get high SS marks for posing. Like rodina said, this is flexibility, not choreography. I prefer the soft knees, the fast glide, the effortless movement over the blade.

For me, a well done crossroll is an excellent transition. Or a change of edge. Everything well done can be really good. Nowadays most people don't do anything well, and it leaves a jerky, cluttered feeling.

 

[Blades of Passion]

The transitions component was unnecessary because it should already being getting judged within the other components, and because transitions already impact the GOE of elements. Putting it as a standalone component is double-dipping, and inherently leads to quantity over quality, because including more transitions is something that can always be directly measured, and that's hard to ignore. We can argue the transitions aren't being executed that well and have no artistic relevance in the program, but if the transitions component exists, the counter-argument of "then lets see you do this many transitions" is always going to be there, and that leads to an arms race in including pointless transitions in programs.

 

[icewhite]

Nothing has changed, the judging is still not accurately reflecting the artistic qualities of the programs. There isn't enough separation in the scores and judges don't even know what great artistry is supposed to look like. Most footwork and spins in programs these days are not musical and lack a greater choreographic purpose, including programs from skaters like Jason Brown who are supposed to be "artistic greats". Jason does not deserve high 9's in composition/performance, his programs ever since going to the Cricket Club are worse artistically than they were in the past, and they were never perfect to begin with, thanks to the CoP system making it impossible to have perfect choreography and musical interpretation, if you want to hit the level requirements.

A judge should be asking themselves constantly in a performance "is this movement interpreting the music? does it look good?" Every time the answer is no, the component score should drop. First they have to actually understand what qualifies though, and to what degree. It's not just in the choreography and musicality, it's also the way the skaters perform these days. There is so much less attention to creating a mood, to holding a good body line at all times, and to performing for the audience. In the past, when the presentation mark directly determined placement, skaters were incentivized to be constantly making sure all their moves look good, and for the program to have emotional depth or entertainment value. Now that is an afterthought. Instead they are constantly thinking about the compulsory turns and "difficult variations" they must hit. It doesn't come from the soul.

A further problem is the Program Component score itself is not worth enough compared to the technical elements. This sport is supposed to be an equal balance of technical elements vs performance, and that's inherently impossible now, since quad-filled programs greatly outweigh the maximum score that can be given in PCS.

It especially doesn't help that jumps are judged completely wrong. Whippy, pre-rotated jumps with mediocre amplitude are given rotation credit and high GOE, while big jumps with real explosive quality off the ice and more room to breathe in the air are given underrotations and low GOE. It's completely backwards to the physical mechanics of what is actually being performed, and to the visual appeal. Unclean landings are not punished enough in the score and jumps are able to get too much extra credit from the GOE. Even jumps that deserve a +4 or +5 GOE (which is VERY few) are getting too much credit. Even if you do one of the best jumps ever, the bonus points you get there shouldn't completely negate what is lost from a fall on another jump.



Artistry is mostly what PCS is supposed to be about.

I wish the components would have gone from 5 to 4, just removing Transitions and placing further emphases on Performance, Choreography, and Interpretation. Losing the Interpretation mark is disastrous; one of the biggest focuses of judging should be the musicality and emotional depth of a program. This generic "composition" component does not convey what is supposed to matter most.

You're still struggling with the IJS system?
I like the system very much and think it's great in theory, the execution - not so much. And it got worse with time. Every change there has been seems to have made the system rather worse than better.
I think it's good to have a system that sees this sport as a sport. We can talk about prerotations and everything that is wrong, yes, things are often done for superficial effect now and don't stand if looked at closer, but I think it's good to come from judging technique, not "emotional depth", because although I see what you mean one gets into an area that gets overflown with subjectivity. Those books that move me deeply and are so well-crafted - I can't believe other people don't feel the same about them. But they just read them and feel like "well, this one's okay".
No, I don't think an Olympic sport should focus on judging emotional depth. Judging musicality is fine in a sport up to a certain point - as long as it is about timing, rhythm, variation and such. If there is a perceptable change in the music it should be conveyed and not "skated over". But if it becomes about questions of "is the intention of the music adequately displayed"... we get into discussions what the intention even was and how we would like it done.

I very much enjoy art and I don't want to miss the creative and beautiful side of figure skating. But we should not center the judging of a sport around it. That's for theatre prices or maybe a show program competition.

The transitions component was unnecessary because it should already being getting judged within the other components, and because transitions already impact the GOE of elements. Putting it as a standalone component is double-dipping, and inherently leads to quantity over quality, because including more transitions is something that can always be directly measured, and that's hard to ignore. We can argue the transitions aren't being executed that well and have no artistic relevance in the program, but if the transitions component exists, the counter-argument of "then lets see you do this many transitions" is always going to be there, and that leads to an arms race in including pointless transitions in programs.

And in my line of thinking I don't fear an "arms race" in regards to transitions. Both should be looked at, amount and quality. If it's quantity over quality of course that's bad. But if you have more transitions of very high quality - well done, skater. After all it's a sport first.

 

[4everchan]

You're still struggling with the IJS system?
I like the system very much and think it's great in theory, the execution - not so much. And it got worse with time. Every change there has been seems to have made the system rather worse than better.
I think it's good to have a system that sees this sport as a sport. We can talk about prerotations and everything that is wrong, yes, things are often done for superficial effect now and don't stand if looked at closer, but I think it's good to come from judging technique, not "emotional depth", because although I see what you mean one gets into an area that gets overflown with subjectivity. Those books that move me deeply and are so well-crafted - I can't believe other people don't feel the same about them. But they just read them and feel like "well, this one's okay".
No, I don't think an Olympic sport should focus on judging emotional depth. Judging musicality is fine in a sport up to a certain point - as long as it is about timing, rhythm, variation and such. If there is a perceptable change in the music it should be conveyed and not "skated over". But if it becomes about questions of "is the intention of the music adequately displayed"... we get into discussions what the intention even was and how we would like it done.

I very much enjoy art and I don't want to miss the creative and beautiful side of figure skating. But we should not center the judging of a sport around it. That's for theatre prices or maybe a show program competition.



And in my line of thinking I don't fear an "arms race" in regards to transitions. Both should be looked at, amount and quality. If it's quantity over quality of course that's bad. But if you have more transitions of very high quality - well done, skater. After all it's a sport first.

whole post : I more than enjoy art, it pays the bills for me... and yet, i agree entirely with everything you are saying. Figure skating, if it's going to remain an Olympic sport and receive relevant funding, needs to be judged as a sport first and foremost. I get goosebumps watching a swimmer race to a world record... and I can get all emotional when a goal is scored... and I do get emotional when a skater performs their elements with quality and ease... much more than when they sort of connect with the idea of a program....

 

[Blades of Passion]

I think it's good to come from judging technique, not "emotional depth", because although I see what you mean one gets into an area that gets overflown with subjectivity. Those books that move me deeply and are so well-crafted - I can't believe other people don't feel the same about them. But they just read them and feel like "well, this one's okay". No, I don't think an Olympic sport should focus on judging emotional depth.

This runs completely contrary to how the sport operated for decades and to what gives it the most audience and participant appeal. The combination of technical and artistic is what makes skating so unique and enjoyable. You get to express yourself, get rewarded for creativity and performance, and glide around and fly through in the air, in a way that's impossible anywhere else. It doesn't matter that there is subjectivity in judging artistry. What's important is the artistry exists, and flourishes.

Great programs will always endure, thanks to the internet, and skaters who display masterful performance and artistry will always be rewarded by the audience. The problem is, the skaters are not incentivized to reach that level. Everyone wants to get the best competition result they can, and since performance and artistry is worth much less now, it is not developed to the degree that it used to be.

The PCS are always going to be highly subjective no matter what, let's not pretend otherwise. Trying to reduce artistry for the sake of supposed "fairness" has not helped anything, it's only hurt. Skating is now less interesting as a whole, and less understandable to a typical viewer, and competition results are not any more accurate. If anything the competition results are less accurate now, and there have still been many outright scandals.

There are hundreds of other sports out there with no artistic component. Skating is supposed to be different, and there needs to be a sport that exists with an equal blend of both technical and performance. "That's for theatre or show programs" is a fallacious statement, theatre does not have an athletic component, and show programs are less athletic and not judged.

Figure skating, if it's going to remain an Olympic sport and receive relevant funding, needs to be judged as a sport first and foremost.

This isn't true, figure skating will absolutely remain an Olympic sport if the PCS were judged better for artistry, and were more equal in value to technical elements, and if there was more freedom in the programs (less restrictive footwork and spin requirements, more option of which elements to include in a free program).

It's always been judged "as a sport first and foremost" anyway. Landing the jumps. Sport. Figure skating has arguably become less "sport-like" than ever with the current judging system, thanks to falls and other errors receiving so many points.

 

[lariko]

I am not really fond of the Composition component, because imo the only way to judge it fairly would have been if all skaters skated the same exact choreo, so it would be visible who manages to keep more choreo elements when competing. I'd rather they called it Transitions, so it was clear that the expectation is to evaluate endurance as ability to comprehensively fill the spaces between elements with upper body movements and changes in body position. I am pretty sure we'll see high scores on that one even for skaters who don't do much between elements save for one or two pretty signature moves and coach's name that give them aura of 'artistism'

 

[Mathman]

The Choreography now Composition component has always included words such as "intentional" or "purpose" in the definition.

Telling a story is one kind of purpose, appreciated and rewarded when present, but not the only one expected or allowed.

If we think in terms of other artforms, "composition" in space as well as over time are relevant not only to theatre but also to dance, live music performance, and visual art, as well as to figure skating. And the compositional principles involved are often more abstract in these other artforms.

One could argue that the use of the body in space is more relevant to skating than is storytelling, in terms of demonstrating mastery of the technique.

I think that "telling a story" casts a broader net than just, "Look, I'm Jack, I'm climbing a beanstalk now." Michelle Kwan once said that in her Lyra Angelica program she was telling a story -- the title of the story was "Michelle Kwan skating. "Filling space with movement" -- to me, that can be thought of as telling a story, too, kind of. Evgenia Medvedeva is an example of a skater whose programs were too much based on miming a literal story.

On the other hand, Julia Lipnitskaya's Schindler's List, outstanding as that progem was -- did her actual skating really have anything to do with the movie/book/historical events, or did she just wear a red coat?

 

[Mathman]

Basic Skating

• Mastery in use of figure skating blade
• Patrick Chan Four Seasons, Carolina Kostner Piano Concerto No 23, ...

Thanks for including reference to specific skaters and programs to support your points.

 

[Mathman]

No I don't think so. Judges still have the mentality to compare skaters with each other - just like in the 6.0 era..

I agree with this, but I think it is true in every sport and human endeavor and that there is nothing we can do about it. Even in a sport like the hundred yard dash where times are measured to the hundredth of a second and without human input -- still, when we watch, what we see and what we care about is, "this guy came in first, that guy second, and the other guy third."

When we vote for President the only question is "who won," not "how many electoral votes did someone get."

 

[Blades of Passion]

On the other hand, Julia Lipnitskaya's Schindler's List, outstanding as that progem was -- did her actual skating really have anything to do with the movie/book/historical events, or did she just wear a red coat?

The start of the program very much conveys the context of the story, Julia's facial expression in particular is perfect (which the program also ends with). The rest of the program is not as specific, but I think that's a good direction to go - use a few moments to be literal and then have everything else be emotional intent. Julia had enough sensitivity to carry the feeling throughout, despite some Eteri-isms trying to distract. Music itself isn't literal anyway (when there aren't lyrics, and even then maybe not), it's an emotional expression and intellectual abstraction. The music to Schindler's List wouldn't be directly associated with the holocaust if it had been used for another movie, but it would always be sorrowful and an appropriate expression of that idea regardless.

 

[4everchan]

The music to Schindler's List wouldn't be directly associated with the holocaust if it had been used for another movie

You got this backwards. It's not about taking the piece of music and assigning it to another movie so its origins are no longer perceptible...

The music of the soundtrack was inspired by Jewish musical idioms. Perlman himself, the violinist who did perform the theme said that John Williams's soundscape evoked the Jewish music of central Europe. Also, let's not forget about Fiddler on the roof. The choice of the solo violin for the main theme is not a coincidence here. It does reference a strong cultural association very known by people of many cultures. There are also some Jewish folk songs that are quite well-known included in the movie. (Oyfn Pripetshik). There are also clarinet solos played in Klezmer style in the movie, performed by an expert in Klezmer music, Feidman.

I will stop the musicology class here, though considering the number of figure skaters who have used Schindler's List's soundtrack for their programs, I guess it is worth the time to write/read about it.

 

[Mathman]

I will stop the musicology class here,,,,

Don't stop, professor. This is why I check in with Golden Skate every day. I never know what I might learn.

Your post, though, shows the impossible task facing figure skating choreographers. How does a skater do a triple Lutz in the style of aJewish folks song as opposed to a Cuban Habenera?

 

[yelyoh]

I think I will miss the "Transitions" component. This was the only one of the five that could actually be evaluated in a somewhat quantitative and objective manner. How many distinct recognizable transitional moves did a skater do, and of what difficulty and quality. I think that this is the reason why Transitions always received the lowest marks of the five, usually about 0.5 points lower than the other four -- the judges could back up their opinions with demponstrable facts, rather than rely solely on artistic judgment (although they still had to evaluate the extent to which the transitions imformed the program as a whole.)

As for "composition" -- this is primarily the work of the choreographer, not the skater. Trying to jjudge how well the skater is able tp carry out the artistic intent of the choreogrphy is tricky. As is, "Did the skater succeed in matching his/her performance to the requirements of the music." This pair of components are is not really very different from 6.0 ordinal judging -- whose performance did you like the best, who was second best, etc.

Hi Mathman nice to see you around. Good post. For years I've been saying they should have two separate panels - one for tech and the other for PCS. That might result in a more accurate reflection of what the skater actually put out there on both counts. And judges could just concentrate on whatever aspects they were charged with. Even with the 6.0 system skaters with big jumps and no choreo whatsoever where given huge scores for the "performances" that were not reflective of what their programs actually looked like beyond the jumps. It has gotten better but there are still blind spots in the judges assessments. The PCS are better than the old system but still impressionistic.

 

[4everchan]

Don't stop, professor. This is why I check in with Golden Skate every day. I never know what I might learn.

Your post, though, shows the impossible task facing figure skating choreographers. How does a skater do a triple Lutz in the style of aJewish folks song as opposed to a Cuban Habenera?

In my opinion, a skater doesn't have to literally portray the story, though they should be aware of the context of the pieces they are using. Emotional connection is enough for me. But saying that a piece of music could just fit any other movie or ignoring its contextual origins is too far a stretch for me. With the amount of young women skating on greatest hits of opera, let's be thankful they don't all die on center ice... because many of the characters they portray do die on center stage in the operas

Specifically, many choreographers cleverly choose musical highlights to put the big jumps. Does a triple lutz relate to the storyline? Perhaps not... but it certainly can relate to the intensity of a particular musical moment.

 

[icewhite]

I think a sport should have rules as tight and clear as possible. It's not like other sports fail to do this sometimes as well, but each should make the best effort, and figure skating clearly doesn't. It deliberatly leaves rules open for interpretation so that everybody can see in them what they want to see. That's a failure, imo.

 

[el henry]

Figure Skating will never ever ever ever (cue Taylor Swift) be an “objectively” scored sport.

Efforts to make the sport “objective” by an emphasis on counting revolutions in the air and number of spins detract from the sport and detract from viewership (of course that is the ”me and all my friends and all the young people I know argument” but that’s all anyone has )

Emphasis on revolutions and numbers and measurements no more makes figure skating more of a “sport” than me wearing the Eagles jersey bearing the number one makes me Jalen Hurts.

What does that have to do with the change in scoring? Can‘t really say.

 

[4everchan]

Figure Skating will never ever ever ever (cue Taylor Swift) be an “objectively” scored sport.

Efforts to make the sport “objective” by an emphasis on counting revolutions in the air and number of spins detract from the sport and detract from viewership (of course that is the ”me and all my friends and all the young people I know argument” but that’s all anyone has )

That no more makes figure skating more of a “sport” than me wearing the Eagles jersey bearing the number one makes me Jalen Hurts.

What does that have to do with the change in scoring? Can‘t really say.

jumps and spins were always part of the sport... right now, some would argue that because the content managed by skaters is much higher, the components scores must be adjusted/factored to get even with the technical score...

For instance, if a skater manages a bunch of quads and his tech score can reach 130... why wouldn't a very good skater be able to earn 130 in PCS? It's capped at 100 (men). So that's a change in the scoring that would recognize the multifaceted nature of the sport. I am sure you would be happy about this too

The problem is that I'd be cautious with such a change because PCS judging contains already so much subjectivity... (GOE on elements too but it's more clearly defined with bullets)... So there is a balancing act with recognizing great skating (components) without making the sport more and more subjective.

Some people have suggested, the use of technology to have some part of the score based on actual date like speed, ice coverage, height of jumps, amplitude of jumps (distance traveled) etc. It would be interesting, imho, to see what kind of data could be measured and utilized efficiently to reward the best skaters.

 

[icewhite]

jumps and spins were always part of the sport... right now, some would argue that because the content managed by skaters is much higher, the components scores must be adjusted/factored to get even with the technical score...

For instance, if a skater manages a bunch of quads and his tech score can reach 130... why wouldn't a very good skater be able to earn 130 in PCS? It's capped at 100 (men). So that's a change in the scoring that would recognize the multifaceted nature of the sport. I am sure you would be happy about this too

The problem is that I'd be cautious with such a change because PCS judging contains already so much subjectivity... (GOE on elements too but it's more clearly defined with bullets)... So there is a balancing act with recognizing great skating (components) without making the sport more and more subjective.

Some people have suggested, the use of technology to have some part of the score based on actual date like speed, ice coverage, height of jumps, amplitude of jumps (distance traveled) etc. It would be interesting, imho, to see what kind of data could be measured and utilized efficiently to reward the best skaters.

Actually I think that AI today already, and certainly in a few years, can judge much, much more. I don't know how much this really is a money issue. I suppose the interest to develop the programs isn't there in the first place. I mean, I have a teenager who likes to play computer games... and when I see what's possible to do today in that area...

Figure Skating will never ever ever ever (cue Taylor Swift) be an “objectively” scored sport.

Efforts to make the sport “objective” by an emphasis on counting revolutions in the air and number of spins detract from the sport and detract from viewership (of course that is the ”me and all my friends and all the young people I know argument” but that’s all anyone has )

Emphasis on revolutions and numbers and measurements no more makes figure skating more of a “sport” than me wearing the Eagles jersey bearing the number one makes me Jalen Hurts.

What does that have to do with the change in scoring? Can‘t really say.

The big mistake that people make is to think that "objective" only means something like "counting".
I compare it to describing a room by only naming it's measurements and the size and position of the furniture - you can do that, but it will only get you a very limited idea of what that room actually looks like.
Now you can enter other rather easily quantifiable factors, like the colours of the walls, the furniture etc. by their colour codes, and take all the small things like pencils etc. into the equation.
A lot of what this room actually looks like will still be missing - the light, the fall of the light through the window during a certain time of day etc. To put this into numbers is a lot more difficult - but it's actually not impossible. See video games. There will always be something missing, like personal memories that you may have regarding this room or such, but... yes, it's possible to actually describe this room in numbers much, much more detailed than one would think in the first moment.
The same goes for movements in figure skating. It is possible to objectively judge a lot, lot more than just revolutions, counting changes of turns or positions and such.

The problem is not the focus on numbers, but that "numbers" is interpreted in an incredibly simple way in judging and everything that does not fall into this very easy category is considered "subjective", "not quantifiable", something aetheric that nobody can really get their hands on.

 

[Diana Delafield]

In my opinion, a skater doesn't have to literally portray the story, though they should be aware of the context of the pieces they are using. Emotional connection is enough for me. But saying that a piece of music could just fit any other movie or ignoring its contextual origins is too far a stretch for me. With the amount of young women skating on greatest hits of opera, let's be thankful they don't all die on center ice... because many of the characters they portray do die on center stage in the operas

Specifically, many choreographers cleverly choose musical highlights to put the big jumps. Does a triple lutz relate to the storyline? Perhaps not... but it certainly can relate to the intensity of a particular musical moment.

I mentioned in another post that a favourite program for my partner and me was the overture to Man of La Mancha. I suppose it's hackneyed for today's skaters, but it's a gift to any pair who has to come up with their own choreography in a hurry for some reason. There are other versions available, but in the original cast album's performance a pair's choreography is practically spelled out. In the first 30 seconds there are obvious climaxes for your twist lift and sbs jumps. At 1:05 there's a section for a nice spiral sequence. At 1:40, start your footwork sequence. 2:19, fit in a lift with changes of position. Your throw goes at 2:45, and your death spiral at 3:00. Around 3:33, your combination spin..... Add other ingredients as desired.

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

youtu.be