ISU proposal - Rule 108 - age limitations

[Mathematician]

Let's imagine Ilia Malinin did not exist and the Russians were allowed to compete internationally. Then Arseny Fedotov and Lev Lazarev would have had good chances to win the last world championships - at age 14.
I think if the boys were as pushed to train and train and train to get the most out of their bodies before puberty hits them fully, they would also peak much earlier. But since puberty with a higher fat percentage and more birth friendly hips is not such a Damokles' sword over their head they are given much more time to develop - although the Eteri boys like Arseniy and Lev are also pushed a lot very early. But even Eteri gives boys more time and even trains adult men.
Our societal expectations have a lot to do with sexual development. But sexual development is not completely parallel to general physical development.

And yes, in pairs we can see that women like Stellato-Dudek and Aliona Savchenko are doing just fine. Most of the girls that end their career early do so because injuries are prevaling (which would be less if they were training less and with a focus on a later career) and the financial benefits of continuing aren't big. Not because their body in general is not made to skate well into their twenties. Yes, there is a time when girls jump quads much easier, but most girls never jump quads anyway and pairs girls don't. Extreme flexibility usually vanishes, but the flexibility that all the adult skaters have is absolutely enough to do great level 4 spins, so it's not like that's hindering them.



They mostly develop earlier sexually (and their brains).
Girls develop their strength never as much as boys (on average of course) but they develop pretty much the same as boys until age 13. Then the boys take off and gain much more strength until they are about 18, with the biggest leap around age 13/14. Girls just as well continue to develop their strength until ~age 18. They are not plateauing or something at age 13.
The window for learning complex new movements fast seems to close at roughly the same age for both, about 12-14.
That could be used as an argument that in a sport where the boys are the lifters and the girls are lifted you have to train these movements early.
But we can see that the necessary movements for pairs skating are not too complex for older skaters to learn, since we see many successfully switching to pairs later.
((Also I want to get rid of that anyway, but that's a completely different topic and I'll leave it out here.))

My main point however is that the additional strength a boy gains after 16 is not necessary to lift somebody safely. They are not doing weightlifting with way over 100 kilos. And a 17 year old boy on average is stronger than a 35 year old.

I want to say that girls are not developing much earlier in all areas and that men are not developing as late as one would think seeing these age rules. What we see in girls'/boys' ages in skating is often the result of our expectations and according training and sorting.

Hm I dont have all the statistics on those things and I do agree with most of what you're saying. But I really think its pretty common for young girls to be stronger than guys their age, there is definitely an advance in muscular development though I'm not sure how much it would affect skating cause like you said pairs lifts arent actually that demanding in terms of raw power. I am definitely 100% sure though an average 35 year old is stronger than a 17 year old. Hard to know exactly what you mean by strength but if both are untrained the 35 year old should easily outlift the kid and also the tendon strength is not even comparable. As for things like dexterity and speed the kid will easily win out though surely.

This is why ultra-c should just be banned for women, so that junior girls or senior women with that body shape who are at an extreme disadvantage have more chance of staying in the sport.

What? No way man. Muravieva or Kostornaia 3As are beauty. While Trusova's quads excited even the most austere and bias international viewers. Bazyluk's talent makes lebron seem as a random street baller - literally a wonder of history to see her skate. Genetic advantage is the name of every sport and physical endeavour in general. And artistry doesnt absolve this matter because look at ballerinas. Trying to penalize genetic gift would kill anything of the like on the spot with zero redemption.

 

[Mathematician]

I think the ISU age rules make no sense - why kids with up to 6 years difference in age have to be in the same competition?I would like to apply similar rules like in track and field, each age level below seniors consists of two birth years and skaters of one age level below are allowed to compete in a higher level. e.g. Junior is of 17/18 years old 15/16 years old are allowed. Advanced Novice is 15/16 years, 13/14 years are allowed, Intermediate 13/14 11/12 are allowed. that means maximal 4 years difference in age, what is still a lot. Parallel to that each federation should organize their local competitions with similar age groups with lower requirements to support the sport in the country. Something that e.g. the Spanish fed is doing very well.

Not enough elite athletes in our sport for that to work well

 

[lilimum]

Not enough elite athletes in our sport for that to work well

for seniors this would change nothing (with this year age adjustment to 17 years): I would take out the 13 and14 years out of juniors competitions, At JWC and JGP have been in every event more that 30 skaters so I think there are enough juniors. For younger one I would propose continental competitons as the most important event. like European, American or Asian championships for advanced novice. I think this would even bring more skaters to international competitions.
And the number of B events should be reduced or internationally better coordinated. It must be very frustrating if senior mens are travelling internationally and than they even don*t get points for the world ranking because one or two competitors have withdrawn.

 

[gkelly]

This is another reason why I would just ban ultra-c for women at every age level.

Or, offer few opportunities to include these elements and more opportunities to earn points on other elements, so that in-air rotations alone cannot build up enough of a lead to outweigh the strengths of other top skaters who can do everything else well except rotate more than 3 times in the air.

Keeping quads out of the women's SP and reducing the total number of jumps in the FS are a start.

Right now the ISU seems to be leaning more toward introducing choreo elements. If so, then the guidelines for the choreo sequence and the choreo spin (if adopted) need to be clarified and enforced enough so that there is a significant point difference between an excellent and a just-adequate example.

The other approach could be to introduce additional kinds of jump difficulty and additional kinds of leveled on-ice skills to allow skaters who excel in those skills to earn more points in those areas. If any such additional element types could earn more than a triple jump, then skaters who excel on the ice more than in the air could replace one of their triples with a different kind of element that might bring them closer to the point total of a jumper who replaces a triple with a quad.

GOEs for non-jump elements regardless of level may need wider ranges so that excellent examples can build up leads on those elements.

And Program Component guidelines also need to be clarified and enforced so that skaters with empty programs between their quads can't earn 9s just for landing those quads, and skaters with excellent skating skills and program construction but easier jumps can earn those scores.

Of course, any skater who can do all the other stuff very well and also land a couple of quads will be able to beat skaters who can only do one or the other. But the point-earning opportunities need to be balanced so that excellent everything-else and no quads will generally beat quads with just average everything else.

 

[lilimum]

But figure skating is still a sport. I like when women can do Ultra-C, but I have problems with adults without responsiblity pushing young kids to master this elements in a very young age. For everything else than jumping there is solo dance, what become more and more popular at least in Europe

 

[Skating91]

Or, offer few opportunities to include these elements and more opportunities to earn points on other elements, so that in-air rotations alone cannot build up enough of a lead to outweigh the strengths of other top skaters who can do everything else well except rotate more than 3 times in the air.

Keeping quads out of the women's SP and reducing the total number of jumps in the FS are a start.

If it's legal in the free skate, then it should be allowed in the short program.

For women, it's either harmful or not. If it's dangerous it needs to be banned from both programs, or allowed in both if deemed acceptable.

For men I think jumping a quad is like a woman jumping a triple lutz. Women play 3 sets, men 5 in major tennis. Same deal.

And Program Component guidelines also need to be clarified and enforced so that skaters with empty programs between their quads can't earn 9s just for landing those quads, and skaters with excellent skating skills and program construction but easier jumps can earn those scores.

I think the bigger problem at the moment are skaters deemed to be deserving of high PCS receiving massive GOE for elements such as cheated jumps. It's a big problem. I'm happy to post proof if you are interested. In fact, I think skaters who are accused of having empty programs are punished quite harshly.

I don't think skaters are the problem, it's dishonest judging. Are there any skaters with no choreography earning 9's just because they landed a quad? Ilia was attempting the most difficult content in history by far, and executing close to flawlessly, so skating skills should get a very high score. Plus he has some great programs. I can't think of who else you would be talking about with quads. I don't think he has empty programs but I read what haters say.

 

[el henry]

But figure skating is still a sport. I like when women can do Ultra-C, but I have problems with adults without responsiblity pushing young kids to master this elements in a very young age. For everything else than jumping there is solo dance, what become more and more popular at least in Europe

A sport where difficult athletic elements such as spins, blade to ice skills, and choreo are just as "sporting" as jumps.

It would be good if even more balance was obtained in scoring to encourage the mastery of those other difficult elements as well as jumps.

 

[gkelly]

If it's legal in the free skate, then it should be allowed in the short program.

There are plenty of elements that are legal in the free skate but not in the short program:
three-jump combinations
jump sequences
flying combination spin
combination spin with no change of foot
any spin with more than one change of foot
choreo sequence (for a base value, as opposed to just a sequence of connecting moves)
etc.

Also there are required minimum rotations for SP jump elements so that, e.g., a single axel gets no credit in a SP but can in a free skate, or a double-double combination (except for junior women).

A quad-quad combination would be legal in a free skate but not a senior men's short program. Same for, e.g., a single-anything combination, or anything-single combination. I still want rules that reward and encourage one-foot axel into quad salchow. But only in a free skate.

At junior level, quads are allowed in free skates but not in short program for either men or women.

In pairs, some kinds of elements are required/allowed in one program but not in the other.

For women, it's either harmful or not. If it's dangerous it needs to be banned from both programs, or allowed in both if deemed acceptable.

For men I think jumping a quad is like a woman jumping a triple lutz. Women play 3 sets, men 5 in major tennis. Same deal.

I don't think the issue is so much about whether it's harmful, but whether it is something that all skaters in that event should be expected to accomplish. Short programs are about required elements.

Some skaters have bodies that allow them to learn quads. (For women, often only for a narrow time window and then they lose that ability as their bodies continue to mature.) Overtraining such elements can lead to injuries regardless of whether the skater is ultimately able to master the element or not.
Men tend to train more quads than women do, and therefore men tend to have more quad-related injuries than women do. Does that mean that quads should be banned for everyone?

More skaters train triples than quads. Therefore more skaters have triple-related injuries than quad-related injuries. Should triples therefore be banned?

Some skaters have bodies that allow them to learn Biellmann spins. Others do not. Extreme flexibility moves like this can lead to injuries, especially if overtrained by skaters whose bodies are not built for it. Does this mean that Biellmann spins and other extreme spin positions should be banned? Should they be banned for men only (but perhaps allowed for younger boys for whom flexibility still comes more easily if trained properly)?

Some skaters have bodies that allow them to learn spread eagles. Others do not. Training spread eagles can lead to injuries for skaters whose bodies are not built for them. Fortunately, because they don't have point values, skaters who have trouble learning them stop trying as soon as it becomes evident that there is more physical risk than scoring reward in their trying to master them, and they move on to learning other kinds of field moves.

As is, these flexibility moves are allowed for all levels and disciplines, but they are not required for any.

Quads are allowed in junior and senior singles free skates for both sexes, but only in senior men's short programs.

I don't think skaters are the problem, it's dishonest judging. Are there any skaters with no choreography earning 9's just because they landed a quad?

Well, "no choreography" is admittedly hyperbole. But I had Trusova in mind.

 

[Skating91]

There are plenty of elements that are legal in the free skate but not in the short program:
three-jump combinations
jump sequences
flying combination spin
combination spin with no change of foot
any spin with more than one change of foot
choreo sequence (for a base value, as opposed to just a sequence of connecting moves)
etc.

Men are allowed a quad in the short program. There's no justification for not allowing it in the short program for women if health and protection for the skaters is a concern. It makes no sense at all.

Also there are required minimum rotations for SP jump elements so that, e.g., a single axel gets no credit in a SP but can in a free skate, or a double-double combination (except for junior women).

A quad-quad combination would be legal in a free skate but not a senior men's short program. Same for, e.g., a single-anything combination, or anything-single combination. I still want rules that reward and encourage one-foot axel into quad salchow. But only in a free skate.

At junior level, quads are allowed in free skates but not in short program for either men or women.

In pairs, some kinds of elements are required/allowed in one program but not in the other.




I don't think the issue is so much about whether it's harmful, but whether it is something that all skaters in that event should be expected to accomplish. Short programs are about required elements.

Some skaters have bodies that allow them to learn quads. (For women, often only for a narrow time window and then they lose that ability as their bodies continue to mature.) Overtraining such elements can lead to injuries regardless of whether the skater is ultimately able to master the element or not.
Men tend to train more quads than women do, and therefore men tend to have more quad-related injuries than women do. Does that mean that quads should be banned for everyone?

I think they should be banned for junior and senior females. It will lead to longer careers. If not harmful, then women should be allowed to perform them in the short program.

 

[gkelly]

Men are allowed a quad in the short program. There's no justification for not allowing it in the short program for women if health and protection for the skaters is a concern. It makes no sense at all.

Short program rules are not so much about health and safety but about what a significant number of skaters in that event can be expected to accomplish, and about balancing the range of skills that are rewarded.

This has been true throughout the history of short programs.

E.g., there was a long period of time when women were only permitted to do one triple jump in the short program but were allowed to do seven in the free skate if they were able.

The short program is very much not about allowing skaters who have outlier skills in one area to build up a large lead based on those skills. Which is much more of a concern with IJS than was true under 6.0.

 

[Mathman]

E.g., there was a long period of time when women were only permitted to do one triple jump in the short program but were allowed to do seven in the free skate if they were able.

To me, short programs generally are much more enjoyable to watch. Comparabtively speaking, the choreography is more coherent, the variety of skills presented more impressive, and the whole thing just comes together like a finely-trown Pewabic vase. Many long programs seem more like obstacle courses.

Or maybe I just don't have the required attention span.

 

[gkelly]

Many long programs seem more like obstacle courses.

That could be a valid program theme.

 

[midori green]

And yes, in pairs we can see that women like Stellato-Dudek and Aliona Savchenko are doing just fine. Most of the girls that end their career early do so because injuries are prevaling (which would be less if they were training less and with a focus on a later career) and the financial benefits of continuing aren't big. Not because their body in general is not made to skate well into their twenties.

It seems worth noting that Deanna Stellato  did end her career early due to injury. She is unique in her return at at a much older age.

 

[CaroLiza_fan]

It seems worth noting that Deanna Stellato  did end her career early due to injury. She is unique in her return at at a much older age.

Erm, Zoe Jones (GBR), born January 1980.

December 2001: Successfully retained her British Senior Ladies title, aged 21.
Early 2002: Retired due to a dispute with the Fed, aged 22.
May 2014: Came back to competition as an Adult Skater, aged 34.
August 2015: Returned to competing in Senior Ladies, aged 35.
August 2016: Started competing in Senior Pairs, aged 36.
March 2021: Retired for second time, aged 41.​

Deanna Stellato (USA), born June 1983.

November 2000: Got injured competing at Skate Canada, aged 17.
Early 2001: Retired due to injuries, aged 17.
December 2016: Came back to competition in Senior Pairs, aged 33.
April 2019: Partner retired due to injuries.
Summer 2019: Started skating with new partner, and switched to representing his country, Canada. Deanna now aged 36.
March 2024: Became World Champion in Senior Pairs, aged 40.​

Admittedly, Deanna was away from competition for longer (16 years, as opposed to 12 for Zoe). But, her return after a long hiatus is not unique. Deanna and Zoe both deserve to be admired.

CaroLiza_fan

 

[Skating91]

Short program rules are not so much about health and safety but about what a significant number of skaters in that event can be expected to accomplish..

Then triple axels should not be allowed? In the world championships (these are the best skaters on the planet) there was not a single attempt in the short program, then only two attempts in the free skate (Yoshida got a q, Amber should have got a q and was almost a backwards jump where she was skidding on the front take off foot as well).

The gap from a triple axel to quad toe is only 1.5 points the gap from triple lutz to triple axel is 2.1 points. Makes no sense does it?

Unless there is another reason why triple axels (which only two people at world championships even attempted) are allowed but not quads. Can't be about what a significant number of skaters in the the event can be expected to accomplish. I wonder what that reason could be?

I would be fine with the triple axel being outlawed from the short program or same rules as juniors where they are forced to jump the 2A solo.

 

[icewhite]

It seems worth noting that Deanna Stellato  did end her career early due to injury. She is unique in her return at at a much older age.

Hm, not sure, you saying worth noting probably means you are making an argument, but I don't really get it.
Sure she hasn't gone the typical way... But I would still say she's one of many pairs' women who show that you can be competitive in your 30s even if you haven't learned pairs' lifts at age 10.

 

[gkelly]

Then triple axels should not be allowed? In the world championships (these are the best skaters on the planet) there was not a single attempt in the short program, then only two attempts in the free skate (Yoshida got a q, Amber should have got a q and was almost a backwards jump where she was skidding on the front take off foot as well).

The gap from a triple axel to quad toe is only 1.5 points the gap from triple lutz to triple axel is 2.1 points. Makes no sense does it?

Unless there is another reason why triple axels (which only two people at world championships even attempted) are allowed but not quads. Can't be about what a significant number of skaters in the the event can be expected to accomplish. I wonder what that reason could be?

I would be fine with the triple axel being outlawed from the short program or same rules as juniors where they are forced to jump the 2A solo.

Since the mid-1970s, the rules for the women's jump combination have allowed any triple jump in combination with a double jump (or, since 1997, in combination with a triple jump). We did see attempts at 3A+2T in women's competition during the 1991-92 season. So there would be no way to outlaw that except to rewrite the rules to specify that the women's SP jump combination could include any triples except triple axel.

There needs to be a solo axel. Whether the women's rules allow a choice between 3A and 2A is a decision I expected to wait until there was a history of multiple skaters performing 3A in free skates.

There were some skaters attempting 3A in free skates in the early 2000s, mostly Japanese as well as Ludmila Nelidina, and into the later 00s. But by the time the rule changed ca. 2010, the only skater actively attempting them was Mao Asada. And Asada had sometimes attempted them in her SP combination, including back in juniors in 2005.

Perhaps at the time of the rule change the ISU was aware of young skaters such as Elizaveta Tuktamysheva performing them in practice and expected them to become more common soon.

But the timing of the rule change did make it seem as though it was designed to benefit just the one skater who was actively performing them at the time. I was surprised they made that change as early as they did.

For juniors, the SP solo jump is always lutz, flip, or loop, so the only place junior women can include the 3A would be in the combination. For seniors, though, the solo jump is now a free choice of triple, so that's another place senior women could include it even if they were still required to perform a 2A as the required axel jump.

It was several years later that several women started including quads in their free skate, again most of them from one country and most of them on the younger side, not always old enough for senior competition. Perhaps the ISU realized they had been hasty in introducing the 3A as an option for the required axel in the senior women's SP and wanted at least to wait for quads to become more established by senior-aged skaters from a variety of federations before considering adding it as an option to the SP.

Remember men had been attempting quads occasionally during the 1980s, the first successful ones in 1988, but no quads were allowed in the men's SP until 1999 season (the same year that men were given the option of triple or double for the required axel).

 

[midori green]

Hm, not sure, you saying worth noting probably means you are making an argument, but I don't really get it.
Sure she hasn't gone the typical way... But I would still say she's one of many pairs' women who show that you can be competitive in your 30s even if you haven't learned pairs' lifts at age 10.

I've seen posts using Deanna as the example of longevity or the opposite of the teenagers that have to quit young due to injury. My point is that she WAS in that group of teenagers that had to quit early due to injury. Taking nothing away from her accomplishments since her return, I just don't think she's an example of "See? Some teenagers retire early due to injury, but Deanna's still skating at 40."

Basically, I don't think we shoul be using her as evidence for or against age rules aimed primarily at protecting teenagers based on her current status without recalling her earlier career. She's an amazing example of learning a new discipline later and being competitive at an older age. She's just not a great example against teens who have to retire early due to injury.

 

[midori green]

Erm, Zoe Jones (GBR), born January 1980.

December 2001: Successfully retained her British Senior Ladies title, aged 21.​

Early 2002: Retired due to a dispute with the Fed, aged 22.​

May 2014: Came back to competition as an Adult Skater, aged 34.​

August 2015: Returned to competing in Senior Ladies, aged 35.​

August 2016: Started competing in Senior Pairs, aged 36.​

March 2021: Retired for second time, aged 41.​

Deanna Stellato (USA), born June 1983.

November 2000: Got injured competing at Skate Canada, aged 17.​

Early 2001: Retired due to injuries, aged 17.​

December 2016: Came back to competition in Senior Pairs, aged 33.​

April 2019: Partner retired due to injuries.​

Summer 2019: Started skating with new partner, and switched to representing his country, Canada. Deanna now aged 36.​

March 2024: Became World Champion in Senior Pairs, aged 40.​

Admittedly, Deanna was away from competition for longer (16 years, as opposed to 12 for Zoe). But, her return after a long hiatus is not unique. Deanna and Zoe both deserve to be admired.

CaroLiza_fan

So they're both unique, as in not what we typically see. Perhaps I should have used the term "rare." That wasn't really my point, though. With Deanna returning successfully, she's become a symbol of longevity...different from all the teenagers that retire early from overuse injuries. My point was that we shouldn't forget that she  was one of those teens. She didn't do something spectacular to make it through that stage.

What's spectacular about her is her return, her ability to restore her skills, learn a new discipline, and compete at an elite level. She proves it can be done at an older age, but she's not really an example of how to keep teens from having career-ending injuries.

 

[Mathman]

The short program (technical program) , by intention, was created as part of the move away from compulsory figures. In figures, every skater traced exactly the same patterns and then the judges decided who did it best. Free skating meant free – do whatever you can. The Zayak rules, and the later “balanced program” rules under the IJS, came in to prevent competitors from just concentrating on one skill repeated over and over. The triple Axel did pose a dilemma – at one time the riles permitted and encouraged a skater to do a double Axel for the required “Axel type jump” and then a triple Axel/double toe for the required combination, thus loading up on Axels contrary to the spirit of what the short program was all about.

As years went by the distinction between the two programs became increasingly blurred – raising the question of why there is a short program at all. The best justification seems to be so that skaters (and audiences?) won’t get too bored during the season just preparing and refining one program over and over.

To me what’s cool about the short program is that it gives performers and choreographers an opportunity to present the two programs as a complementary pair, perhaps contrasting a lyrical style in one with a razzmatazz contrasting theme in the other.