Does anyone have fun ideas for rule changes? Mine would be to reduce choreo moves in ice dance. There are too many, and the GOE to BV ratio is very not proportional, and from a spectator's point of view they're hard to identify. Sometimes I see a choreo move and wonder if it will be called a choreo twizzle or a choreo spin move. Also, why does choreo sliding move exist? Sliding is cool but it does not utilize any edges! And if the sliding is done while spinning why couldn't it count as a choreo spin move as well? These moves are good as a part of the char stsq but does not have to be scored as an element of its own I think. But I am no ice dance expert, it's hard to compare teams now that ice dance elements have become too broad.
If you could change one rule in any discipline
- Thread starter DiStSq4
- Start date
I think it can count as a choreo spin move if they both rotate continuously for 3 rotations, and have at least one foot on the ice. If it is a two-knee-slide, then it is a slide regardless of rotation. Communication No. 2797 has more detailed information about choreo elements.
Lifts don't necessarily utilise edges, and for the lifted partner (usually the women) they never utilise edges. For the lifted partner, you can do straight-line lifts and lifts on edges. Likewise with sliding on knees, vs touching the ice on edges etc.
I personally want choreo elements reduced/removed for two reasons: It gives a technical score for something PCS should account for, and it reduces creative freedom in choreography with the number of restrictions (leading to many programs looking similar).
In terms of rule changes, I'd like to see a return to two different step sequences in the FD (style A and style B), and RD replacing CDE/choreo with a Pst (so PD and Pst) to weight technical higher on RD.
I actually think the opposite. It's hard to compare teams because they're all choosing different lift types, different step sequences, and different choreo elements. I too want the choreo elements removed.
I agree on the two different step sequences. More technical things to judge on, and every team is doing it so it can be compared to more directly.
On singles, I'd like to see more jump combination variations. For some reasons the handbook list both of this as allowed combinations instead of sequences: (1) Listed jump + 1Eu + three turn on the same foot + Axel type jump and (2) Listed jump + one intended change of edge + Listed jump in the other rotational direction.
While I understand the second one is a special case for bidirectional jump combinations, when will the first one be a better choice than the usual Axel sequence? In the previous rules it gives advantage of doing two Axels as a second jump in both a sequence and a combination, but in the current rules only one Euler combination or sequence is permitted, so it's either one or they're combined altogether.
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2003
One of the step sequences should be performed over 50% of the time in close holds.
The explicit timing requirement should be a separate scoring component , at least in the rhythm dance, again. I am tired of teams who sacrifice keeping time to rocketing around the rink like misguided missiles.
The explicit timing requirement should be a separate scoring component , at least in the rhythm dance, again. I am tired of teams who sacrifice keeping time to rocketing around the rink like misguided missiles.
Last edited:
Style A used to have a requirement for 100% in hold in the FD (apart from twizzles) iirc, and had a mandatory one-foot turns section in hold. I think having one style A and one style B (current gen) is a good balance - as they both demonstrate different skillsets.
ALSO pls allow retrogressions in step sequences again, I can't bear to continue to watch flat edges because people aren't allowed to go back on themselves.
I just keep watching 2010 and 2014. 2010 had no choreo scored elements, and still everybody had incredible choreography, moves, hydroblades, assisted jumps etc. 2014 had one choreo element (lift) iirc. The maximum points for that choreo element was around 1.3 at near maximum GOE, and a StSq4 was 8points BV.
2018 had two choreo elements around 3points of value each including GOE (6points of choreo elements), and two steq sequences (8.6BV each for lvl4).
2026 had three choreo elements, with top couples getting 5points each including GOE (15points of choreo elements),without an increase in scores for the step sequences....
My rule change for each discipline:
Ice dance: no more choreo elements. Any spinning/sliding/etc should be included in character stsq. Addition of mandatory step sequence in hold. Maybe another synchronized element other than twizzle, like synchronized hydroblading, something similar to Bourne/Kraatz 1995 exhibition.
Singles: bonus for +3Lo and +Eu+3F combo. Lower the value of sequences, but not as low as pre-2018. More creative jump combinations. The handbook list both of this as allowed combinations instead of sequences: (1) Listed jump + 1Eu + three turn on the same foot + Axel type jump and (2) Listed jump + one intended change of edge + Listed jump in the other rotational direction. But I don't see anyone competing at GP/Worlds/Europeans/4CC utilizing them
Pair: bonus for twist and throws in the second half.
Does anyone have idea for other disciplines?
Ice dance: no more choreo elements. Any spinning/sliding/etc should be included in character stsq. Addition of mandatory step sequence in hold. Maybe another synchronized element other than twizzle, like synchronized hydroblading, something similar to Bourne/Kraatz 1995 exhibition.
Singles: bonus for +3Lo and +Eu+3F combo. Lower the value of sequences, but not as low as pre-2018. More creative jump combinations. The handbook list both of this as allowed combinations instead of sequences: (1) Listed jump + 1Eu + three turn on the same foot + Axel type jump and (2) Listed jump + one intended change of edge + Listed jump in the other rotational direction. But I don't see anyone competing at GP/Worlds/Europeans/4CC utilizing them
Pair: bonus for twist and throws in the second half.
Does anyone have idea for other disciplines?
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2003
Peggy Fleming used to do a 1 1/2 flip on purpose.
I like these.
If the values for doing those kinds of combos are worth more than doing a standard combination with the same number of revolutions, that would reward the difficulty with an appropriate number of points, I think more skaters would add those skills to their repertoire. They won't if the element is risky and only possible with doubles (or single axel) as the final jump because they're more likely to lose points for lower base value or lower quality than they are to gain points for creativity.
It was already decided in the 1980s, with the introduction of the Zayak rule, that toe walley and toe loop would count as the same jump because there wasn't real difference in the way skaters were executing them especially as triples.
Walley wasn't included in the IJS scale of values because it is pretty much always performed as a single jump, which the ISU evidently wanted to keep as a transitional move that wouldn't block a jump box.
Personally, I think they could leave the single walley as an unlisted jump but add doubles and triples to the scale of values. If base value is commensurate with the difficulty, skaters would have an incentive to learn them
Those could also be added. They have pretty much always been done as singles and were not common in the pre-IJS television, pre-triple jump era -- I can't speak to earlier eras as I haven't seen many early performances and don't remember reading much about them. Inside axels were done but almost always as singles.
So again, I think the best approach would be to leave the singles as unlisted elements and add the doubles and triples to the scale of values, with appropriate base values.
I.e., doubles worth at least as much as a double axel, and triples (which we may not see for decades) at least as much as a triple axel.
Yes, I have read about those going back to the 1930s when double jumps were still cutting edge especially for women, and seen them in other 1960s/early 70s jump sequences.
Ice Dance: Bring back the compulsories. IDC about the rest. Boring, tedious discipline.
Singles: Bring back footwork into solo jump requirement for the SP. Limit maximum level achieved in LP for spins and steps to 2. Bring back patterns for step sequences. Ideally, increase time of LP back to 4:30 for men. KEEP the 6 jump pass rule and not counting Euler as a jump in three jump combos. Increase weighting of +Loop combos, decrease for +Axel sequences. Incentivize classic positions for camel, layback, and sit. Double count certain level features in spins.
Pairs: Same as above for steps and spins, but I feel this is least affected by rule changes beyond the LP time.
Singles: Bring back footwork into solo jump requirement for the SP. Limit maximum level achieved in LP for spins and steps to 2. Bring back patterns for step sequences. Ideally, increase time of LP back to 4:30 for men. KEEP the 6 jump pass rule and not counting Euler as a jump in three jump combos. Increase weighting of +Loop combos, decrease for +Axel sequences. Incentivize classic positions for camel, layback, and sit. Double count certain level features in spins.
Pairs: Same as above for steps and spins, but I feel this is least affected by rule changes beyond the LP time.
Actually Julie Lynn Holmes used to do double inside axels. I don't think triple inside axel is that impossible at all. I mean, we're in a year where quad axel is a thing. A triple inside axel would have a significant effect in short program standing. Say in Women's, the maximum combination one could go for with a 3A is: 3A, 3F, 3Lz+3Lo. If someone can do both triple axel and triple inside axel their maximum combination would be: 3A, 3 inside axel, 3Lz+3Lo. Assuming triple inside axel is worth the same as triple axel that's more than 2.5 points boost in base value from a 3F.
If the rules stayed the same as previous quad (3 combinations / 2 combinations + 1 sequence) then someone capable of doing triple axel and triple inside axel could do +triple axel and +triple inside axel in a program, because the current rule deems a three turn on the same foot after a jump keeps the jump a combination rather than a sequence.
On the topic of weird jumping pass, Jill Trenary used to do 1A+3S. In a more recent attempt of landing on the backward inside edge, Artur Dmitriev Jr used to do 3Lz+3F, landing the 3Lz on the left backward inside edge.
I agree with keeping 6 jump pass, however may I propose: keep 3 combinations. So the 6 jump pass is 3 solo jumps and 3 combinations. The current rule of 2 combinations devalue a +3Lo combination by a lot. Anna Scherbakova could do three 3-3s even with only quad because she had 3F+3T, 3Lz+3Lo, 3F+Eu+3S, still being able to repeat the 3Lz later on.
Similar threads
