gkelly, I would think that if one did a 2a and without any steps in between, did a 3s in the reverse direction, it would be called a combination rather than a sequence? There would be no bonus for it vs. a normal combination though.
For a jump combination, the takeoff of the second jump needs to be the landing edge of the first jump.
Single axel-triple salchow is not unknown landing on the back inside edge of the axel takeoff foot (i.e., one-foot axel). Used to be a signature move for Jill Trenary. It is a true combination. Both jumps rotate in the same direction.
I'd love to see someone try it with a double axel into triple salchow, but it would be that much more difficult than normal 2A+3T with practically no additional base value, so there's currently no incentive to try.
To reverse direction between, say, clockwise 2A and counterclockwise 3S, the skater would need to land the axel on the left back
outside edge curving CW and then change edge to back
inside to change direction to CCW and takeoff for the salchow. That would invalidate it being called as a combination. I think that under the current rules the edge change would even invalidate it as a sequence. Maybe if they used a hop with a <1/8 rotation in the air to change curve it would count as a sequence.
Or at least change it so it is not held against you. If you are not going to reward a more difficult jump, don't have it count on your jump total. Even if it was just treated as choreography, it would still give skaters creative choices. It could really help to make the programs a bit more varied and interesting. It seems it could at least get credit for difficult or unexpected entry.
I wonder if there are "purists" out there that just don't like the idea. Maybe are so accustomed to one or the other they find the idea of mixing them indecent somehow.
I don't think purists dislike the idea of skaters doing jumps in both directions. But pretending that a listed jump (toe loop, salchow, loop, flip, lutz, or axel with at least single rotation) didn't exist would be a problem. After all, as Mathman mentioned Sonja Henie used to rotate her (single) lutzes in the opposite direction from her other (single) jumps, and I know I've seen at least one other skater from the same era who did the same. It's possible that some skater would actually prefer to do double lutz in the opposite direction from their other doubles (and not have a triple lutz at all). It wouldn't be fair not to give that skater credit for their double lutz.
It would also put an extra burden on the tech panel to keep track of which direction each skater rotates so they could add an extra code to a jump in the opposite direction. If the skater does it well enough, and the jump is in isolation not right next to other rotational elements, it might not register with the tech panel or judges that that was an opposite-direction jump for that skater.
Skaters who have shown off jumps in both directions have tended to put them right next to each other, one after the other, in what would be considered a jump sequence under the looser 6.0 meaning of the word.
I'd like to see IJS rules adapted to allow for and reward that option, with a looser but not too-loose definition of jump sequence than is currently in effect, and a bonus for a jump sequence that rotates both directions.
Same for spins -- some can spin in some positions at least as easily in the opposite direction, and a few rare skaters have spun in one direction and jumped in the other.
So for a skater to get credit for spinning in both directions, they need to put the two directions close to each other to make sure the judges notice. Under IJS, to get credit for the "change of direction" feature in spins, the two directions need to be part of the same spin -- not even a sequence of spins with a step in between.
Further back thread is some video clips of people doing just that. If I find them ill repost them later
. 
)
