News ISU Updates World Standings Point Distribution

[gsk8]

https://www.goldenskate.com/isu-updates-world-standings-point-distribution/

The ISU has published Communication No. 2812, updating the World Standings point distribution for single skating, pair skating, and ice dance beginning with the 2026–27 season.

While the overall World Standings methodology remains unchanged, the new communication revises the value of several competitions and introduces World Standings points for the new Grand Prix Semi-Final beginning in the 2027–28 season.

Some of the key changes include:

• World Championships / Olympic Winter Games winner: 1300 points (+100)
• Grand Prix Final winner: 1000 points (+200)
• Grand Prix winner: 500 points (+100)
• World Junior Championships winner: 600 points (+100)
• Grand Prix Semi-Final added (750 points to the winner beginning in 2027–28)
• Senior International Competition winner: 200 points (down from 250)

The communication does not change how World Standings are calculated. The three-season rolling system, season weighting, and limits on counted results all remain the same.

What do you think of the revised point distribution? Do you like the increased emphasis on the Grand Prix series and major championships? What are your thoughts?

 

[Jeanie19]

I don't like the senior international points are lowered. These events are what give skaters a chance to show their skills and climb in the world ranking.

 

[4everchan]

I don't like the senior international points are lowered. These events are what give skaters a chance to show their skills and climb in the world ranking.

Yes, that's a valid point. However, some skaters would participate in all possible point getting competitions and create a "fake" world ranking to boost their starting order (especially in ice dance). Considering that most of these events do not happen in North America, I felt some skaters from some nations were disadvantaged. I like that WC are majored but I do not like now that GPF is worth more than winning 4CC or Euros. If I recall correctly 4CC/Euros 1st placed skaters earn 850 points... Now, even the winner of a semi finalist at GPF earns almost the same. I am afraid that adding that semi-finals for GP will add a toll on the skaters with longer first half of the season and with Nationals, also close to 4CC, we may see the top skaters skip 4CC more often, not just in Olympic years.

So to me, the ISU is correcting something and creating another problem doing so. Classic.

 

[Jontor]

This whole system is strange to start with. You can show up to Challengers that have not great competition or to senior B's and get points for just showing up. It awards the mediocre skaters that have the money to travel a lot and to compete a lot. There are a lot of skaters that are ranked too high on this World Standing List just because they "show up".

 

[NanaPat]

This whole system is strange to start with. You can show up to Challengers that have not great competition or to senior B's and get points for just showing up. It awards the mediocre skaters that have the money to travel a lot and to compete a lot. There are a lot of skaters that are ranked too high on this World Standing List just because they "show up".

I agree with you (and with @4everchan). And I think that a small lowering of the points for these competitions does little to correct the problem. I think it would be appropriate to only allow points for one (currently 2) of the "other comps" per season and two (currently 4) over the total time period. For a less drastic change, they could allow two per season but only 2 or 3 over the total time period.

Note that the number of "other" competitions attended can have a huge effect in the lower rankings, but it can also cause skaters in the upper ranks who do a lot of "other" competitions to rise a place or two above those who don't. It is widely believed that even one or two places later in the start order at major competitions can have a big effect on scores, especially if it puts skaters in a different starting group.

 

[CaroLiza_fan]

Mmmm. Never knew how the World Standings were calculated before. But, now that I see the changes, it begs a lot of questions.

How on Earth is winning the GP Final worth more than winning Europeans?! For goodness sake, there are only 6 entries in the GP Final, compared to 30 or 40 something at Europeans. By winning Europeans, you have to beat far more people, so it is a bigger achievement. Therefore, the GP Final should be the lowest scoring of the Senior Majors.

Similarly, how on Earth is the Olympics worth the same as Senior Worlds?! The IOC limits the Olympics to fewer entries (don't get me started again on how unfair that is), so it should be worth fewer points than Senior Worlds.

And for that matter, how on Earth is Junior Worlds worth less than all the Senior Majors?! For goodness sake, it is a World Championship. It should be worth the same as Senior Worlds.

Similarly, the Junior GP Final has the same format as the Senior GP Final, so they should be worth the same.

As for the regular GP's, I would argue that that Junior GP's should be worth more than the Senior GP's, because there are more entries in the Juniors. (Which is why I prefer the Junior GP's to the Senior GP's. There aren't enough entries in the Senior GP's for me to get excited about them).

And where did the Grand Prix Semi-Final come out of? How is it going to work?

Oh, I do wonder what planet the people at the ISU are living on.

CaroLiza_fan

 

[4everchan]

Mmmm. Never knew how the World Standings were calculated before. But, now that I see the changes, it begs a lot of questions.

How on Earth is winning the GP Final worth more than winning Europeans?! For goodness sake, there are only 6 entries in the GP Final, compared to 30 or 40 something at Europeans. By winning Europeans, you have to beat far more people, so it is a bigger achievement. Therefore, the GP Final should be the lowest scoring of the Senior Majors.

Similarly, how on Earth is the Olympics worth the same as Senior Worlds?! The IOC limits the Olympics to fewer entries (don't get me started again on how unfair that is), so it should be worth fewer points than Senior Worlds.

And for that matter, how on Earth is Junior Worlds worth less than all the Senior Majors?! For goodness sake, it is a World Championship. It should be worth the same as Senior Worlds.

Similarly, the Junior GP Final has the same format as the Senior GP Final, so they should be worth the same.

As for the regular GP's, I would argue that that Junior GP's should be worth more than the Senior GP's, because there are more entries in the Juniors. (Which is why I prefer the Junior GP's to the Senior GP's. There aren't enough entries in the Senior GP's for me to get excited about them).

And where did the Grand Prix Semi-Final come out of? How is it going to work?

Oh, I do wonder what planet the people at the ISU are living on.

CaroLiza_fan

I agree with many of your points except for junior world ranking points. There are two valid reasons why the junior points are lower
1) they only compete with age eligible skaters, and are in a developmental stage. To give them the same points as senior would be detrimental to them as it would place them much higher on the world ranking list and would bring some of them in the picture for Grand Prix assignments when they are not ready. Competing with a field much stronger is not necessarily a great idea in early stages.
2) It would be unfair to the senior skaters who do compete hard for these points and are not at the very top. Juniors would pass them for Grand Prix selection based on results on the JGP and JWC events. It makes no sense.

Right now, the number of points awarded for junior events still allows the very top junior skaters to make their move up towards the senior rankings when they are transitioning... but come on... if you gave them the same points as seniors, that means that the top junior skater may be ranked number 1 in the world which wouldn't be fair to the "real" senior number one in the world... but also would be ridiculous if that number one junior skater isn't even age eligible to compete with the seniors. Mao Shimada comes to mind.

I am 100% fine with the juniors ranking points where they are...

I agree with that there is too much emphasis on GP and especially GPF. This is actually an "invitational" series so for me, it's always been less valuable... and definitely less valuable than Euros and even 4CC titles. Some fans LOVE GPF and the ISU is probably interested in boosting this event because its format is conducive to broadcasting... but wow... way too many points for the top 6 skaters there.

 

[SmileHappy34]

Updated points system. It okay
I think they changed yrs ago

I also think k they went back to 2000 to 2002 grand prix and semi final.
Dropped due to scores they didn't need them. Based on scores of competitors

They dropped international challenge from 5 to top 3

Added some points
.I printed up someplace have it in a bix under figure skating.

It good. Want to keep challenger relevant and grand prix
It only too bad the junior dont habr sen final as they didn't back in 2000.

It make think they went back in time and added points to what was the semifinal grand prix then when they didn't have world standing or points.
Now added them.

 

[SmileHappy34]

Mmmm. Never knew how the World Standings were calculated before. But, now that I see the changes, it begs a lot of questions.

How on Earth is winning the GP Final worth more than winning Europeans?! For goodness sake, there are only 6 entries in the GP Final, compared to 30 or 40 something at Europeans. By winning Europeans, you have to beat far more people, so it is a bigger achievement. Therefore, the GP Final should be the lowest scoring of the Senior Majors.

Similarly, how on Earth is the Olympics worth the same as Senior Worlds?! The IOC limits the Olympics to fewer entries (don't get me started again on how unfair that is), so it should be worth fewer points than Senior Worlds.

And for that matter, how on Earth is Junior Worlds worth less than all the Senior Majors?! For goodness sake, it is a World Championship. It should be worth the same as Senior Worlds.

Similarly, the Junior GP Final has the same format as the Senior GP Final, so they should be worth the same.

As for the regular GP's, I would argue that that Junior GP's should be worth more than the Senior GP's, because there are more entries in the Juniors. (Which is why I prefer the Junior GP's to the Senior GP's. There aren't enough entries in the Senior GP's for me to get excited about them).

And where did the Grand Prix Semi-Final come out of? How is it going to work?

Oh, I do wonder what planet the people at the ISU are living on.

CaroLiza_fan

The junior world points use to be worth more.
I thought jgpe was worth a bit more

 

[NanaPat]

Mmmm. Never knew how the World Standings were calculated before. But, now that I see the changes, it begs a lot of questions.

How on Earth is winning the GP Final worth more than winning Europeans?! For goodness sake, there are only 6 entries in the GP Final, compared to 30 or 40 something at Europeans. By winning Europeans, you have to beat far more people, so it is a bigger achievement. Therefore, the GP Final should be the lowest scoring of the Senior Majors.

Similarly, how on Earth is the Olympics worth the same as Senior Worlds?! The IOC limits the Olympics to fewer entries (don't get me started again on how unfair that is), so it should be worth fewer points than Senior Worlds.

And for that matter, how on Earth is Junior Worlds worth less than all the Senior Majors?! For goodness sake, it is a World Championship. It should be worth the same as Senior Worlds.

Similarly, the Junior GP Final has the same format as the Senior GP Final, so they should be worth the same.

As for the regular GP's, I would argue that that Junior GP's should be worth more than the Senior GP's, because there are more entries in the Juniors. (Which is why I prefer the Junior GP's to the Senior GP's. There aren't enough entries in the Senior GP's for me to get excited about them).

And where did the Grand Prix Semi-Final come out of? How is it going to work?

Oh, I do wonder what planet the people at the ISU are living on.

CaroLiza_fan

You have to consider not only the number of skaters involved, but the caliber of the skaters. Most of the skaters who are excluded from the Olympics are lesser-ranked and would be unlikely to affect the standings of the top 24 in any way. Only skaters excluded because of citizenship are likely to have any effect at all. And in an Olympic year, many of the top Olympic skaters skip Worlds, making competition less fierce at Worlds. Having Olympics and Worlds equal seems fair to me. Also, only one of (Olympics, Worlds, EC/4CC) are counted in the standings total.

As far a GPF goes, the skaters involved not only had to compete against 6 others at the final, but up to 24 others at the GP events. And except for some host picks, the caliber of the GP participants is quite high.

 

[DizzyFrenchie]

Yes, that's a valid point. However, some skaters would participate in all possible point getting competitions and create a "fake" world ranking to boost their starting order (especially in ice dance). Considering that most of these events do not happen in North America, I felt some skaters from some nations were disadvantaged. I like that WC are majored but I do not like now that GPF is worth more than winning 4CC or Euros. If I recall correctly 4CC/Euros 1st placed skaters earn 850 points... Now, even the winner of a semi finalist at GPF earns almost the same. I am afraid that adding that semi-finals for GP will add a toll on the skaters with longer first half of the season and with Nationals, also close to 4CC, we may see the top skaters skip 4CC more often, not just in Olympic years.

So to me, the ISU is correcting something and creating another problem doing so. Classic.

Only two International Competition results can be counted in the World Rankings? So, whether one wins two or five of them changes nothing to one's World Ranking. Lowering to 200 while Grand Prix victories are raised to 500 seems wrong to me. In the new scale, a 9th place at a Grand Prix (if points are attributed beyond 8th) will be rewarded 215 points, more than an International Competition victory! In the previous system, a Grand Prix participant needed a 6th place to get more World Standing points than an International Competition winner. Given that some athletes are excluded from the Grand Prix circuit with a higher level than some who are included, and that Grand Prix participants can also earn points in International Competitions, I think that the change accentuates an inequality.
The only solution in my opinion, would be, given that this year I think that there are more Challenger competitions than in previous years (which I like), and that these are more accessible, athletes would be given an option to have their Challenger points placed in the Grand Prix category instead of the International Competition category (or if it would be done automatically if the result is more favourable to the Skater or Team).

 

[CaroLiza_fan]

I agree with many of your points except for junior world ranking points. There are two valid reasons why the junior points are lower
1) they only compete with age eligible skaters, and are in a developmental stage. To give them the same points as senior would be detrimental to them as it would place them much higher on the world ranking list and would bring some of them in the picture for Grand Prix assignments when they are not ready. Competing with a field much stronger is not necessarily a great idea in early stages.
2) It would be unfair to the senior skaters who do compete hard for these points and are not at the very top. Juniors would pass them for Grand Prix selection based on results on the JGP and JWC events. It makes no sense.

Right now, the number of points awarded for junior events still allows the very top junior skaters to make their move up towards the senior rankings when they are transitioning... but come on... if you gave them the same points as seniors, that means that the top junior skater may be ranked number 1 in the world which wouldn't be fair to the "real" senior number one in the world... but also would be ridiculous if that number one junior skater isn't even age eligible to compete with the seniors. Mao Shimada comes to mind.

I am 100% fine with the juniors ranking points where they are...

Good points.

And something I thought of when reading your comment there now that I hadn't thought of when I originally wrote my post.

The Junior programmes are shorter than the Senior programmes, and have fewer elements.

So, yeah, on reflection the points for Junior events should probably be lower than their equivalent Senior events. But not too much. Maybe 100 points less. For example, we could have:

1. Senior Worlds - 1,300
2. Junior Worlds - 1,200
3. Olympics - 1,100
4. Euros / 4 Continents - 1,000
5. Senior GP Final - 850
6. Junior GP Final - 750
7. Regular Senior GP's - 500
8. Regular Junior GP's - 400
9. All other Senior competitions - 350
10. All other Junior competitions - 250

I know some people will find it controversial that I would put the Challengers in with the other Senior B's, and say that they should be worth more points to make them more attractive to enter. But, being able to get Season's Best / Personal Best Scores at them should be sufficient to make the Challengers more attractive.

I agree with thet there is too much emphasis on GP and especially GPF. This is actually an "invitational" series so for me, it's always been less valuable... and definitely less valuable than Euros and even 4CC titles. Some fans LOVE GPF and the ISU is probably interested in boosting this event because its format is conducive to broadcasting... but wow... way too many points for the top 6 skaters there.

I thoroughly agree.

Although we don't know yet what format these Semi-Finals are going to take, I'm not keen on them. If the ISU wanted to expand the GP Series, they would have been better off adding two more "regular" Senior GP's, so that either all skaters could get a second slot, or so that more skaters could get a single slot. Not adding an extra layer between the regular GP's and the Final.

You have to consider not only the number of skaters involved, but the caliber of the skaters. Most of the skaters who are excluded from the Olympics are lesser-ranked and would be unlikely to affect the standings of the top 24 in any way. Only skaters excluded because of citizenship are likely to have any effect at all. And in an Olympic year, many of the top Olympic skaters skip Worlds, making competition less fierce at Worlds. Having Olympics and Worlds equal seems fair to me.

But it is the lesser-ranked skaters and skaters from small Feds that I like! They are more interesting than the top skaters. And I don't like the way that they miss out because of the more limited number of slots.

For me, because of there being a limit on the number of slots, I see the Olympics in a similar way as @4everchan sees the Senior GP Series. They are a glorified invitational event. And, hence, they should not be worth as much as open events like Senior Worlds or Junior Worlds.

Also, only one of (Olympics, Worlds, EC/4CC) are counted in the standings total.

Ah, I didn't realise that. Thank you for pointing that out.

As far a GPF goes, the skaters involved not only had to compete against 6 others at the final, but up to 24 others at the GP events. And except for some host picks, the caliber of the GP participants is quite high.

Nah, you're not going to change my mind. I want to see competitions with more entries, and more varied participants.

Personally, I would love to see more participants in the regular Senior GP's (16 in each category), and more going through to the GP Final (8 in each category). But I know it won't happen because, as @4everchan said, the current format is good for the TV broadcasters.

The TV broadcasters are having too much influence in too many sports nowadays...

CaroLiza_fan

 

[Artemisa]

So, basically, it favors those who participate in the GP over those in other competitions... I think it disadvantages athletes from smaller federations (and, in the short term, AIN athletes). If the Senior GP had more participants, or if there were spots that could be earned in specific competitions, I might agree... but the European or Four Continents champion shouldn't have fewer points than a GP winner.

 

[4everchan]

Only two International Competition results can be counted in the World Rankings? So, whether one wins two or five of them changes nothing to one's World Ranking. Lowering to 200 while Grand Prix victories are raised to 500 seems wrong to me. In the new scale, a 9th place at a Grand Prix (if points are attributed beyond 8th) will be rewarded 215 points, more than an International Competition victory! In the previous system, a Grand Prix participant needed a 6th place to get more World Standing points than an International Competition winner. Given that some athletes are excluded from the Grand Prix circuit with a higher level than some who are included, and that Grand Prix participants can also earn points in International Competitions, I think that the change accentuates an inequality.
The only solution in my opinion, would be, given that this year I think that there are more Challenger competitions than in previous years (which I like), and that these are more accessible, athletes would be given an option to have their Challenger points placed in the Grand Prix category instead of the International Competition category (or if it would be done automatically if the result is more favourable to the Skater or Team).

It's only 2 indeed for these lower level competitions. Two more than some skaters can manage because of costs and proximity so in the end it matters.

I would prefer to raise the small competitions rankings points but limit it to one per year that is counting for skaters participating in GP and two for skating who aren't selected for GP.

The issue really comes from a few dance teams, making sure they make as many events count to fabricate a world ranking above their actual placements to get better starting orders. It's frankly upsetting.

 

[4everchan]

Personally, I would love to see more participants in the regular Senior GP's (16 in each category), and more going through to the GP Final (8 in each category). But I know it won't happen because, as @4everchan said, the current format is good for the TV broadcasters.

The TV broadcasters are having too much influence in too many sports nowadays...

CaroLiza_fan

Well. just to clarify here, I don't see the Olympics as invitational because skaters need to qualify at the previous world championships.... and to do so, they need to place really high. While on GP, there are skaters who are selected while others aren't depending on host picks and costs...

For instance, a competition in western Canada : most likely Skate Canada will prefer inviting a guy like USA's Liam Kapeikis who trains in the Vancouver region rather than one equivalent European skater.

Olympics are a smaller pool but the athletes who qualify do not get " easy passes" like some on GP do. It's very far from invitational.

Of course, one can argue that GPF is the cream of the cream from who competed.. and in the end, it's the best skaters who qualify but it's not necessarily true. Every year there are surprises with how things unfold at other GPs and tiebreakers and what not... and skaters who actually decide not to take part yet are part of the elite... etc. So to me, GPF should be less important than Euros and 4CC because of that.

 

[Jeanie19]

Well. just to clarify here, I don't see the Olympics as invitational because skaters need to qualify at the previous world championships.... and to do so, they need to place really high. While on GP, there are skaters who are selected while others aren't depending on host picks and costs...

For instance, a competition in western Canada : most likely Skate Canada will prefer inviting a guy like USA's Liam Kapeikis who trains in the Vancouver region rather than one equivalent European skater.

Olympics are a smaller pool but the athletes who qualify do not get " easy passes" like some on GP do. It's very far from invitational.

Of course, one can argue that GPF is the cream of the cream from who competed.. and in the end, it's the best skaters who qualify but it's not necessarily true. Every year there are surprises with how things unfold at other GPs and tiebreakers and what not... and skaters who actually decide not to take part yet are part of the elite... etc. So to me, GPF should be less important than Euros and 4CC because of that.

Grand Prix events are usually not stacked equally. This year Grand Prix France is not stacked in men, but really a tough event for women. So it is the luck of the draw. So the top six at the Grand Prix Final are rarely the top 6 at Worlds.

 

[lariko]

GP provides double-dips for the same person wins a stage, wins semi-final and the final. I am okay with GP getting lots of ranking because it's less dependent on how deep the national pool is. But, I mean, if someone can win everything, all power to them to get huge rank.

 

[CaroLiza_fan]

Well. just to clarify here, I don't see the Olympics as invitational because skaters need to qualify at the previous world championships.... and to do so, they need to place really high. While on GP, there are skaters who are selected while others aren't depending on host picks and costs...

For instance, a competition in western Canada : most likely Skate Canada will prefer inviting a guy like USA's Liam Kapeikis who trains in the Vancouver region rather than one equivalent European skater.

Olympics are a smaller pool but the athletes who qualify do not get " easy passes" like some on GP do. It's very far from invitational.

Don't worry, I realise you don't feel like that about the Olympics. I was just using your feelings about the Senior GP Series as an analogy for my feelings about the Olympics.

And I admit that I was pushing it to the extreme by calling the Olympics an "invitational" event. But, you know how strongly I feel that the Olympics should run to the same open format as Worlds, and that the IOC should not be able to limit the number of entries for non-sport-related reasons. It is unfair on the lower ranked skaters who do meet the minimum TES requirements, but miss out for purely economic reasons.

I know a lot of people (including myself) have been saying this in the Synchro9 thread, but I do worry about whether further slot reductions are coming. Because I don't think ditching the Nordic Combined would remove enough people to cover those being added with Synchro9.

But, this is all getting too off topic for this thread.

Of course, one can argue that GPF is the cream of the cream from who competed.. and in the end, it's the best skaters who qualify but it's not necessarily true. Every year there are surprises with how things unfold at other GPs and tiebreakers and what not... and skaters who actually decide not to take part yet are part of the elite... etc. So to me, GPF should be less important than Euros and 4CC because of that.

I agree.

CaroLiza_fan

 

[DizzyFrenchie]

It's only 2 indeed for these lower level competitions. Two more than some skaters can manage because of costs and proximity so in the end it matters.

I would prefer to raise the small competitions rankings points but limit it to one per year that is counting for skaters participating in GP and two for skating who aren't selected for GP.

The issue really comes from a dance teams, making sure they make as many events count to fabricate a world ranking above their actual placements to get better starting orders. It's frankly upsetting.

Skaters who can't manage two lower level competitions, how could they manage Grand Prix trophies which can send them anywhere in the World, and the cursus honorum to get a Grand Prix? Your own argument goes against what you propose.

 

[4everchan]

Skaters who can't manage two lower level competitions, how could they manage Grand Prix trophies which can send them anywhere in the World, and the cursus honorum to get a Grand Prix? Your own argument goes against what you propose.

You do not follow these threads enough to understand that some federations are not sending their skaters to challengers and senior Bs because of costs. That's the big difference between GPs and other smaller events : In GPs, the hosts pay to invite skaters, so some skaters, i.e. Canadian skaters can get invited to GPs but won't get their own federation to pay for a challenger event, even less so, two of them...
while a team in Europe may run around the circuit racking up points simply by taking a cheap flight across the border. There are many skaters who have VISA issues as well and have to be very creative in where they can compete. The reality is that those smaller competitions are centralized in mostly one part of the world.

So no, my own argument is not going against what I propose at all. I am not surprised you wouldn't be apprised of this particularity of challengers and senior bs considering you are from the part of the world where they are easy access