- Joined
- Mar 14, 2007
That group of skaters are still competing regularly and being watched by many, judging from the threads. And I do skip it.
Should quads per program be limited to balance artistry?
- Thread starter gsk8
- Start date
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2007
No one really cares about spins from a judging stand point. Sonja Hilmer has, in my opinion, the best spins of the US women and some of the best in the world. Yet she’s barely sneaking into US Nationals.
She takes one whole practice session a Day and just does spins.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
To me, the bottom line is that there is no reason to treat a quadruple jump as some sort of two-headed monster that requires special treatment in the rules. If we think that we need a better balance between jumping and other aspects of figure skating, Ok, that's a legitimate position to advocate for (or against).
Yuma came in almost 22 points behind Shaidorov at 2025 Worlds skating a FS program you just called "crap" and "trash." A program, by the way, that included a history-making 3A+1Eu+4S with a base value of a whopping 18.30 and GOE of +3.33 giving him a grand total of 21.53 for his first element, alone. I applaud that guy for not only pulling off that combo, but getting that great GOE doing it. That was impressive. What was Yuma's grand total for the first element in his FS at 2025 Worlds? 2.01. No, that was not typed incorrectly. He got 10 times less than Shaidorov.
Sour grapes won't make the judges do your bidding.
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2019
Not with the rest of the skaters, creating the wholistic, robust competition that can be attended live -- something we had enjoyed prior to the removal. Removing any other large group of skaters across all four disciplines would have created the same woeful shortfall with the same detrimental consequences as we are suffering at the moment. If there is a threat to artistry, it comes from exclusion of talent, not from inclusion of quads.
Last edited:
No, because in addition to saying the maximum number of times the same triple jump could be repeated was 2, it also said that only 2 different triples could be repeated. So if there are 6 different takeoffs/kinds of triples and only 2 of them can be executed twice, that means the maximum number of allowable triples is 8.
Of course there were few skaters, especially women, who were doing all the different kinds of triples in 1982-83, but over the course of the 1980s more and more men (plus Midori Ito by the end of the decade) were attempting that content.
Yes, the number of triples one could repeat was limited to 2 different kinds.
When quads were first added to the rule (late 90s IIRC), it was permitted to repeat 2 different triples OR 2 different quads (hardly anyone did that in the 1990s but several guys were attempting both 4T and 4S in the early 2000s) or 1 of each.
More recently, it was forbidden to repeat 2 different quads, so repeated jumps can now be 2 different triples or 1 quad and 1 triple.
It was not uncommon in the later years of 6.0 for women to include 8 jumping passes if they were capable of 5 different triples. Repeat two of them, put the repeats in combination with 2T or similar easy way to make it a combination, and also include a double axel as a separate jumping pass.
Once the number of jump passes in the women's FS was reduced to 7 with the introduction of IJS, that gave an incentive for more women to include triple-triple combos in their free skates, in order to be able to include 7 triples total plus a double axel. 2A+3T combinations also started to become more common in the early years of IJS, as a slightly easier way to fit 7 triples plus a 2A into 7 jumping passes total.
Jump sequences (the definition of which has changed several times over the last 20+ years of IJS) were also an option, but for most of that time sequences only received 80% of base value, so not often worth doing.
A bit messy these days because of all the quads?
We are coming up on the Grand Prix Final in Nagoya, Japan. Eight years ago the 2017 Grand Prix Final was also held in Nagoya, Japan. And eight years ago was a Men's Free Skate that was pure slop. The men at the press conference were Shoma Uno, Nathan Chen, and Mikhail Kolyada. A journalist asked:
"This question to all three skaters . . . as I was watching your performances today, I did see that all of you included multiple quads in your free program, but it seemed quite difficult to make clean jumps, succeed in all the quads, and to have a perfected program. So, now, eyeing the Olympics, I'd like to ask your whether you're thinking of dropping the difficulty level of your jumps and focusing more on perfecting your program, or would you like to still continue to have multiple quads?"
Before I continue, below is a link to the Men's FS scores so all can see just how bad it really was. Uno attempted 5 quads, had one fall, and successfully completed only 2 of the 5 with positive GOE. Chen attempted 6 quads, had one fall, and successfully completed only 2 of the 6 with positive GOE. Kolyada attempted 3 quads, had 2 falls, and successfully completed only 1 of the 3 with positive GOE.
Back to the press conference, it was Kolyada's smirk and answer that struck me as absurd and misleading:
"I think quads are quite important and when you compare it to the situation ten years ago, the jumps that we're doing today would have been thought impossible to do. And even though we may have errors and fall, and blew some scores, I think it's important to make the effort. Also I think everyone will agree with me that with triple jumps it will be easier to do, but having quads in the program makes the program more attractive."
Yagudin and Plushenko were doing quads much earlier than 10 years before Kolyada made that statement in 2017 and I would bet my bottom dollar neither of those superb skaters thought any quads would be "impossible" as Kolyada claimed, no doubt to make himself look better. Plushenko did a 4S more than 20 years ago, the very same quad Kolyada failed to execute successfully at Nagoya.
The quad debate has been going on for many years and is certainly not a recent development involving any one skater, by any stretch of the imagination. The messiness, shall we say, was there for all to see in Nagoya eight years ago. But let's hope that eight years later, the upcoming Grand Prix Final in Nagoya is far more successful for all the men involved, and far more enjoyable for those around the world to watch.
We are coming up on the Grand Prix Final in Nagoya, Japan. Eight years ago the 2017 Grand Prix Final was also held in Nagoya, Japan. And eight years ago was a Men's Free Skate that was pure slop. The men at the press conference were Shoma Uno, Nathan Chen, and Mikhail Kolyada. A journalist asked:
"This question to all three skaters . . . as I was watching your performances today, I did see that all of you included multiple quads in your free program, but it seemed quite difficult to make clean jumps, succeed in all the quads, and to have a perfected program. So, now, eyeing the Olympics, I'd like to ask your whether you're thinking of dropping the difficulty level of your jumps and focusing more on perfecting your program, or would you like to still continue to have multiple quads?"
Before I continue, below is a link to the Men's FS scores so all can see just how bad it really was. Uno attempted 5 quads, had one fall, and successfully completed only 2 of the 5 with positive GOE. Chen attempted 6 quads, had one fall, and successfully completed only 2 of the 6 with positive GOE. Kolyada attempted 3 quads, had 2 falls, and successfully completed only 1 of the 3 with positive GOE.
Back to the press conference, it was Kolyada's smirk and answer that struck me as absurd and misleading:
"I think quads are quite important and when you compare it to the situation ten years ago, the jumps that we're doing today would have been thought impossible to do. And even though we may have errors and fall, and blew some scores, I think it's important to make the effort. Also I think everyone will agree with me that with triple jumps it will be easier to do, but having quads in the program makes the program more attractive."
Yagudin and Plushenko were doing quads much earlier than 10 years before Kolyada made that statement in 2017 and I would bet my bottom dollar neither of those superb skaters thought any quads would be "impossible" as Kolyada claimed, no doubt to make himself look better. Plushenko did a 4S more than 20 years ago, the very same quad Kolyada failed to execute successfully at Nagoya.
The quad debate has been going on for many years and is certainly not a recent development involving any one skater, by any stretch of the imagination. The messiness, shall we say, was there for all to see in Nagoya eight years ago. But let's hope that eight years later, the upcoming Grand Prix Final in Nagoya is far more successful for all the men involved, and far more enjoyable for those around the world to watch.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
My favorite post on this thread.
Since the tread title contrasts "quads" with "artistry." I think that we should also mention this:
Under 6.0 the two marks were roughly "what you did" and "how elegantly you did it." The IJS is set up completely different. Now the division is between points garnered for individual elements (TES) versus points awarded for the program as a whole (PCS). There are many areas of overlap -- after all, the elements" are part of the program and the "program" consists in part of a succession of elements.
GOEs, for instance, reward both "what you do" and "how elegantly you do it."
Last edited:
I think Kolyada was probably referring to quad lutz, flip, and loop, which were almost never attempted during Yagudin's era (certainly not by Yagudin).
Plushenko stayed in longer, and he did attempt quad lutz at least once in competition but never successfully.
Plushenko did have some very messy programs early in his career when chasing quads (mainly toe loops).
That's pretty normal whenever the technical bar is being pushed.
The question is whether we want to see programs where the focus is on pushing the limits on jump content with everything else, often including actual success on those cutting-edge jumps, taking a back seat to pushing the limits. Or whether we want well-rounded programs that include top-difficulty jumps only so far as they enhance the overall performance quality of the program. Or somewhere in between.
Of course it depends who "we" are. Some viewers live for the jump difficulty, some for jump quality, some for overall program quality, and various combinations thereof.
Personally I'd love to see a competition phase that encourages skaters to attempt jump content that doesn't fit seamlessly into a well-balanced free skate, and another phase that prioritizes balance of skills with, perhaps, fewer total jumps but no limit on difficulty (but significant penalties for messy failures).
I can think of different ways this could be structured.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2007
I certainly hope it’s better than Finlandia. That was a disaster for almost all skaters.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
Michelle Kwan
1995 Worlds: 2A, 2A+2T, 3F, 3Lz, 3T+2T, 3S, 3Lo, 3Lz+2T, 3T (nine jumping passes)
1996 Worlds: 3Lz+2T, 3T+2T, 3F, 2A, 3Lo, 3S, 3z, 3T (eight)
1998 Olympics: 3Lz+2T, 3Lo+half-loop+2T (?), 3F, 2A, 3L. 3S, 3Lz, 3T (eight)
1998 World pro: 3Lz+2T, 3T+2T, 3Lo, 3F, 2A, 3S, 3Lz, 3T (eight)
Later she got her triple-triple together and replaced the last triple toe with a split jump.
2000 Worlds: 3Lo, 3Lz+2T, 3T+3T, 3S, 3F, 2A, 3Lz (seven)
2001 Worlds: 3Lo, 3T+3T, 3Lz+2T, 3S, 3F, 2A, 3Lz (seven).
Last edited:
Let's just call programs with history-making jumps perfect and give them 10s for PCS. What's the point of this thread then?
You have to put it in context. Coming from Kolyada this is indeed misleading considering how poorly he skated, but not from Uno considering how well he skated the same program with 2 quads in the 2015 GPF.
2001 GPF winner, 2nd free skate: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BGdi7JyhviQ (men did two FPs, which was brutal, but actually helped Yagudin win)
2017 GPF winner: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pl5suoAq_WQ
Maybe Uno's FS is not the most difficult in transition content and he did take one break mid-program, but he attempted 5 quads and 2 3As.
Here is what a 2-quad program looked like in 2013 GPF: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GmHxoaLmfBs, it didn't win. Transitions in and out of every element including the two quads and the 3A, no telegraphing, difficult turns, many changes of direction, multidimensional skating, no pauses, a lot of knee work. We can argue what's more difficult - staccato steps or blocks of difficult turns and hops at the end of the program, I actually don't know. But, comparing the above, I would say a 1-2 quad program in 2013 was more difficult than the same in 2002 and more watchable than a 5 quad program in 2017.
The winner of the 2009 GPF, Nobunari Oda, didn't attempt any quads.
What I am trying to say is that the quality of transitions and non-jumps among the top men was steadily falling towards 2002 as the result of chasing 2 quads. Timothy Goebel could do 3 quads, he was very talented this way, but far from the best skater, and he didn't win. Some men could do one quad on a good day, most could do none. The difficulty of transitions and non-jumps rose as the result of IJS introduction and stayed this way until about 2016. During this period men lost quads and found them again. Between 2010 and 2014 they came back to about the 2002 jumping level but with a much higher difficulty of non-jumps and transitions. So it's not quite correct to say that what Yaguding and Pluschenko did was the same level of difficulty as what Hanyu and Chan did. Then the quality of non-jumps fell again as a result of men chasing more quads, and this is what is being discussed here. Reality is that many men skate messy whereas they might skate better if they did fewer quads. Question is how to make it possible.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2020
Just a little correction - Shoma did not win GPF 2017, Nathan did.
Two of the top men of that time were out of this GPF at all - injured Yuzuru Hanyu, the reigning then WC, and Javier Fernandez - which was also mentioned during this press conference regarding the level of competition.
But your whole post makes me wonder - how important in the decline in the quality of men programmes was the reduction of Components from 5 to 3 and in particular the removal of Transitions as a separate component with a separate score? It was criticized straight away and while I do not think there was one single cause of the decline, it surely helped to change programs into jump drills along with the removal of one step sequence and the cut in length. These were surely designed to help accommodate more quads into the programs without losing stamina, whether intentionally or not (though I think, intentionally). Does anyone even consider withdrawing from these "reforms" as they proved to be so bad for the program quality in the long run?
Last edited:
As far as I remember, the rationale for program length reduction was to cut expenses, like TV wanted them shorter. But at WC we have 24 men in the FS. 24*1/2 = 12 minutes. The total time savings of an almost week-long event is 12 minutes, makes no sense.
As far as I remember the rationale for 3 PCS instead of 5 was to make things easier for the judges. But they also added -5 to +5 in GOE. Makes no sense.
Your explanation seems as good as ISU's.
I remember Orser saying that -30 seconds and -1 jump = -5 seconds for jumps and - 25 seconds for choreography.
They now want to remove another jump, so it will be -10 seconds for jumps and -20 seconds for choreography compared to pre-2018.
Interesting that PCS score doesn't seem to include posture.
Thanks for the correction!
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2015
I agree with this, but also, why keep the Transitions as a component when empty programs were given high 8s and 9s in that department? To take GPF 2017 as an example that is being discussed here, Shoma got 8.96 in TR, Nathan 8.61, Kolyada 8.75, for programs that we can all quite agree were pretty empty. Until judges won't start to differentiate the score in PCS as they should, and to differentiate the TES from the PCS, and to differentiate a great jumper from a great skater and a great spinner, all of these considerations will be, unfortunately, useless and frustrating.
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2013
I'm not sure how this argument of Yuma vs Shaidorov at World's free skate got started.
Shaidorov won that battle handily, and he should have. Yuma, while the superior overall skater generally, was not good at all that night.
And if the PCS is an argument you'd like to have - even with that very flawed performance, Yuma still won the PCS against Shaidorov by about 5 points. So, the superior technical performance did not beat the "artistic" skater in that area on that night. And frankly, if anything, Yuma was the one who was overscored, at least in Presentation.
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2019
This change was controversial not only as what it was, but also as how it was "voted" at the 2022 ISU Phuket Congress, which was streamed live: the previous day, ISU threw a party; given the general behaviour by the end of the party, the beverage were probably not alcohol-free. The next morning, ia speaker announced that the delegates were first to vote on consensual matters, and only later in the day, on more divisive questions (the reduction of the number of Components was of course one). One can imagine the relief of headache-stricken delegates. But in fact, the organisers made up "question packages" which had to be voted altogether, and these "packages" had each some pretty straightforward question plus a last question which was a controversial one. This is how the reduction to three of the number of Components was "voted", if anyone dares to call that a vote. Now, I suppose that a fraud complaint would have involved a trial in Thailand, something maybe not familiar to most Federations, in a country which had its own problems.
Very cynically, I would say that judges didn't know how to handle five Components and would give a Presentation score randomly split between the Components boxes, so it might have been an interesting experiment to have only three in some local competitions? Three years after the general implementation of this decision of ISU officials, we can see that judges still can't manage three Components, and give a Presentation score randomly split between these three.
By the way, for those who don't know, Yuzuru Hanyu said that he had decided to leave Competitive Figure Skating between Tour A and Tour B of 2022 Fantasy on Ice. Tour A was between May 27th to June 5th, and Tour B from June 17th to 26th. The Phuket Congress was from June 6th to 10th. Here was Yuzuru Hanyu's (then unbeknownst to the public) farewell to Competitive Figure Skating, I think that the words are eloquent:
- YouTube
Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
www.youtube.com
Sorry, this video can't be watched embedded. Here it's the second program:
9.2K views · 529 reactions | Yuzuru Hanyu, Fantasy On Ice 2022 Credit: YT 유즈zip | Figure Skating Moments
Yuzuru Hanyu, Fantasy On Ice 2022 Credit: YT 유즈zip
www.facebook.com
The -5 to +5 change took place a couple years before the change from 5 to 3 components, so they were not necessarily related in terms of reasoning.
Also, GOE decisions are quick during the program (with the possibility of changing decisions after the program, especially after seeing finalized tech panel calls), whereas PCS decisions require some thought during the program but the decision time is mostly after the program, so reducing the number may save some time per program waiting for judges to decide on and input those scores.
Skating Skills includes "Clarity of edges, steps, turns, movements and body control," so especially good or bad posture could be reflected there.
Personally, I would have preferred to keep the 5 components and to improve guidance on how to separate them. But what's done is done.
For now, difficulty of blade work transitions can be reflected under "Variety of edges, steps, turns, movements and directions" under Skating Skills (and quality of the blade and body work under the Clarity bullet point I quoted earlier), and choreographic aspects of the transitions can be reflected in "Multidimensional movements and use of space" (e.g., use of whole body and high and low movements) and in "Connections between and within the elements" under Composition. And of course, as always, transitions directly in and out of elements can be reflected in the GOEs for those elements.
