- Joined
- Aug 18, 2010
I would first recommend going back to the larger negative GOE increments for triple axels and quads (-3 = 4.5 points off) that were in place ca. 2010. That would affect only those skaters who are benefitting from the high values for rotating those jumps without successful completion and wouldn't trickle down to skaters who are doing only doubles and easier triples.
I don't think it's fair this way. It's to punish the most advanced skaters more than the less skilled skaters. I think it might hurt the sport side of the skating.
An additional possibility would be to prorate the fall deduction somehow, so that a first fall would have a smaller deduction and each subsequent fall in the same program would lose more points. But if you make it 1.0 for a first offense, 2.0 for the second, 3.0 for the third, etc., that would have disproportionate effect at the lower skill levels compared to the quad jumpers who earn most of the complaints for winning with falls. On the other hand, if you make it 0.5 for a first fall, 1.0 for the second, 1.5 for the third, etc., that would actually result in less penalty than now for elite seniors who fall once or twice, although it would probably be more appropriate for average novice level and below, where most jumps are doubles.
This method is what I've always been thinking of. What if we give -1 fall deduction for the first fall, -1.5 for the second, and -2 for the third, and so on? Will that be OK for both high level and low level skaters?
I've always suggested falls be punished with a defined percentage reduction per fall from either total TES value or TSS value. This would make a skater weigh the risk/reward factor of the entire content of the program AND if they used a percentage deduction of TSS, it would show a punishment to both marks for a fall (this is an area that a lot of people feel things AREN'T being considered with a multiple fall program by judges due to the need for corridor marking to keep from coming under scrutiny - how can you have a high PE mark around your "normal clean program score" if you just fell three times? You didn't EXECUTE well but you just got a 9.25 for PE! What were they going to give you for PE if you didn't fall? 12 on a 10 point scale?)
This would also make the punishment less painful at the lower levels (like at the Juvenile level when the winning program is around 45 points total where a 1 point deduction is 2.2% of the total score versus a Senior Men's FS worth around 200 points where it would be 0.5% of the total score) and encourage risk/reward throughout.
Could you please elaborate it? Thanks!
Last edited: