Should quads per program be limited to balance artistry?

[Mathman]

By the way, on the subject of why hasn't Ilia Malinin been promoted and advertised in the U.S.leading up to the Olympics Games,I just saw an ad for the Olympics played at halftime at the NFL Sunday night football game. The ad featured U.S. athletes competing in different sports, and to represent figure skating they went with ... Alysa Liu. Not Malinin, not Chock and Bates.

Well of course they chose Liu. She's perky, she's vivacious, she's pretty -- just what Americans expect and want from a figure skating champion.

 

[4everchan]

By the way, on the subject of why hasn't Ilia Malinin been promoted and advertised in the U.S.leading up to the Olympics Games,I just saw an ad for the Olympics played at halftime at the NFL Sunday night football game. The ad featured U.S. athletes competing in different sports, and to represent figure skating they went with ... Alyssa Liu. Not Malinin, not Chock and Bates.

Well of course they chose Liu. She's perky, she's vivacious, she's pretty -- just what Americans expect and want from a figure skating champion.

Chock is just as pretty and perky and vivacious and also a champion. My feeling is that the American public is still hooked on women's figure skating so the once in every four year fans will react more to Liu than anyone else. I call that basic marketing.

 

[TallyT]

Alyssa Liu. Not Malinin, not Chock and Bates.

Well of course they chose Liu. She's perky, she's vivacious, she's pretty -- just what Americans expect and want from a figure skating champion.

Exactly. Alyssa is extremely pretty in the all-American way that Michelle and Gracie were, she's charming and well-spoken, a hot possibility in the discipline-that-counts-in-the-US women, and has a great backstory (which the others lack and no, on the ice that doesn't matter but for the media it so does).

And it's been a long time since a US woman has been on the Olympic podium, let alone on top of it.

 

[TallyT]

I ask this in completely good faith, because I don't understand.

What has the ISU done to alienate Hanyu? Why do you feel unwelcome? We disagree on some things, but I disagree with many on some ponit or another, and I like you very much. I know I'm not the ISU... but I'm not nobody either.

Well for a start, when they changed the scoring rules it was specifically (and this is from the mouth of Lakernik, you can look it up in this very forum's archives) because Yuzuru was doing too well, skating too brilliantly and scoring too high. Funny that...

Anyway, talking of a return for him is as pointless as it was for Yuna. They both have their own worlds now. So back to the current - as I said - messy state of play because what happened, happened and what will happen... well, did you see Finlandia?

 

[Arigato]

Yuzu was given 4.43 GOE on a 4S and 4.21 GOE on a 4T+3T at 2020 4CC. Had the GOE scoring not been expanded, Yuzu's scores would have been confined to a max +3.00 GOE.

 

[Blades of Passion]

From all the guys you are mentioning, Yagudin and Lambiel (and well his 3axel was pretty much non-existing) are the only ones I would put in the same category. Plushenko, Goebel and Joubert didn't have great skating skills and Takahashi was not too consistent with his quads.

Skating skills is not artistry. It's a technical base that should be used in order to create good flow, which can help to build artistry. Plushenko and Joubert did have very good skating skills, they just didn't always make use of it (and Plushenko was almost always a captivating performer regardless). Goebel lacked great skating skills, but his American in Paris was very charming and showcased some difficult transitions. Patrick never did spread eagle or hydroblade into 3A.

 

[DizzyFrenchie]

That's not "damage" -- that's the nature of the sport. It has always been technical first -- whatever technical content was important at the time -- with artistry as a welcome extra.

It's a sport, not an art contest.

If you are among the section of the audience who enjoys the artistic aspect most, your favorite skaters would naturally be the ones who care about and put a lot of effort into developing artistic performances. But this has always been a minority of competitors. Those who do a good job with both technique and artistry have won the most medals and become the most beloved skaters in all eras.


What do you think is "right" and "wrong"? I think what you consider "right" is what you like best. Obviously, the same is true for all of us who have opinions about what direction we think the rules should emphasize.

Different fans, and many skaters and officials, have different opinions about what is most right to emphasize.

I'm not talking only about jumps.

The sport as sport is always going to emphasize technique, and many of the fundamental techniques that make skating skating are difficult for non-skaters to appreciate when watching on video.

Professional skating has always tended to emphasize entertainment value, and the ISU has been making changes over the decades to welcome aspects of show skating into the competitive arena. Flashy tricks, including big jumps, are definitely part of what audiences find entertaining, as well as costumes (not judged) and musical interpretation and beautiful body line and movement, etc.

But different participants and definitely different fans and casual viewers will have different opinions about which of those aspects are right or wrong to emphasize or even to include in an Olympic-track sport at all.

Are you saying that only jumps are what makes Figure Skating athletic???? In my understanding, the Elements score and about 90% of the Components score is a complex, but measurable assessment of athletic performance. Only about 10% of the Components score (Maybe less) rests on more artistic consideration, which can still be assessed but more roughly. I do prefer a skater who's good in all these criteria over someone who has only part of it, but that's also valuing athleticism.
And it's a fact too that artistic and entertainment readiness come with athletic performance. What I reproach current judging is to fail to abide by the rules which are there to assess this athletic performance. To give scores with huge discrepancies with what is skated, with always the same skaters being overscored and the same being underscored. Some very few, admirable skaters go on pursuing real Figure Skating, that is, deserving scores they won't wholly get without any hope of victory because less good skates will be awarded higher scores and medal, but even them, who skate for the sake of the Sport, are demotivated and their mental health is at risk or affected! I'm sure that even them don't skate at their best because of this. And a majority of developing skaters who should have developed the whole array of athletic performance, are discouraged from doing so. We've had witnesses here, and I've known others, whose coach told that cheating jump entry was the right technique — I think that it's understandable that they believe their coach over rules, technical guides and so on. And they don't progress, and we don't have the pool of skaters who would have developed real good skating, foundation to artistry and to entertainment ability. The public is way more demanding now than it used to be, and a skater lacking technique (which, once again, doesn't limit itself to a number of jump rotations on the paper) will not get a LASTING impression on the viewer, beyond a "oh, nice" by a small part of uninformed viewers passing by (and there won't be that many passing by, by the way, if Figure Skating organisations go on damaging the sport and the athletes' abilities).
How do you think that a skater awarded 9s in Components while deserving 6s for technical, athletic reasons, would have "done" on this ADO music, Tweet which gathered nearly 3 million views yesterday before probably being reported by toxic antis and deleted? Do you think that they would have impressed a JPop fan, used to watch professional dancers, and their followers who reposted and were reposted? Even the most gifted are not encouraged to get the proper technique by this disdain for the rules. (I'm not saying that this is the only wrong thing in Figure Skating today, it's just the most influent on "show-worthiness".)
Yes, there is much damage done, in the level of many skaters who ought to have become better, many of whom ought to have become able to participate in shows needing high level technique, and even those who go on honing these skills without hope of getting better scores, are still refrained in their progression.

 

[DizzyFrenchie]

Yuzu was given 4.43 GOE on a 4S and 4.21 GOE on a 4T+3T at 2020 4CC. Had the GOE scoring not been expanded, Yuzu's scores would have been confined to a max +3.00 GOE.

That's how the +5/-5 was "sold" to his fans. What was observed though, is that with a very few exceptions (you may notice that in this precise competition there was no favourite to make win against him; yet it's generally thought that this last World Record of his was still underscored by over two points), while his jumps kept improving, his +3s from the +3/-3 era rarely became +5s or even +4s; instead, other skaters were rewarded with high Grades of Execution, ignoring even caps. It was perhaps even more egregious in Spins, Step Sequences and Choreographic Sequences than in Jumps. Overall, in the +5/-5 era he was skating better yet scored lower.

 

[Mathman]

Hanyu set world record after world record after word record under the -5/+5 version, while continuing to produce performances of widely acclaimed quality and impact.

It is really quite a stretch to imagine that the scoring system was somehow rigged against him. If that was anyone's intent, the 'riggers" fell flat on their faces and Yuzuru got the last laugh.

 

[gkelly]

Are you saying that only jumps are what makes Figure Skating athletic????

Not at all.

In my understanding, the Elements score and about 90% of the Components score is a complex, but measurable assessment of athletic performance. Only about 10% of the Components score (Maybe less) rests on more artistic consideration, which can still be assessed but more roughly. I do prefer a skater who's good in all these criteria over someone who has only part of it, but that's also valuing athleticism.

Fair enough.

And it's a fact too that artistic and entertainment readiness come with athletic performance.

It is true that audiences can be entertained by athletic feats. As well as by artistic performance that can be better achieved with a better technical skill set.

E.g., you can't do a complex step sequence with meaningful body movement and timing to the music if don't have a wide variety of steps in turns in your repertoire and the ability to execute them securely and with fine control over variations of timing and body positions.

What I reproach current judging is to fail to abide by the rules which are there to assess this athletic performance. To give scores with huge discrepancies with what is skated, with always the same skaters being overscored and the same being underscored.

Are they failing to abide by the rules? Or is it possible your understanding of the rules is different from how the judges have been trained to understand and apply them?

Some very few, admirable skaters go on pursuing real Figure Skating,

Are you saying that everyone except a few skaters who do what you think is most important are doing fake figure skating?

that is, deserving scores they won't wholly get without any hope of victory because less good skates will be awarded higher scores and medal, but even them, who skate for the sake of the Sport, are demotivated and their mental health is at risk or affected! I'm sure that even them don't skate at their best because of this. And a majority of developing skaters who should have developed the whole array of athletic performance, are discouraged from doing so.

The majority of developing skaters do not have the physical gifts to develop "the whole array of athletic performance." Or they don't have the resources (proximity to an ice rink, access to dedicated figure skating ice time, access to top coaches, the money and time in the rest of their lives to afford these and other benefits to enhance their athletic development).

There are many reasons why most developing skaters will never land a clean triple jump, let alone triple axels and quads. It's not that they are being discouraged from trying or from doing it correctly, but more that coaches may recognize the realistic limits on what their bodies will be able to achieve with the training resources available to them.

We've had witnesses here, and I've known others, whose coach told that cheating jump entry was the right technique — I think that it's understandable that they believe their coach over rules, technical guides and so on. And they don't progress, and we don't have the pool of skaters who would have developed real good skating, foundation to artistry and to entertainment ability.

These are two different things.

1) Jump technique. It has always been the case, since long before IJS, that difficult jumps are too difficult for most skaters to achieve perfectly.

What might have been considered bad technique when applied to single and double jumps 60 years ago became recognized as necessary technique for adding more revolutions.

Some coaches are able to teach techniques that allow more skaters to develop closer-to-perfect takeoffs and landings most of the time; other coaches who rarely get to work with elite-track skaters but who have ambitious students who do want to attempt triples may teach them the best techniques they themselves are aware of.

2) "real good skating, foundation to artistry and to entertainment ability" is not directly related to jump technique. There are plenty of skaters with good-enough jump technique to include triples in their programs, even with frequent underrotations, but who excel at artistry/entertainment. As well as plenty of strong jumpers who consider artistry and entertainment as unimportant.

And a precious small minority who excel at all aspects.

But that has as much to do with the skaters' own interests and talents and the resources available to them as it does to what you might consider bad coaching.

The public is way more demanding now than it used to be, and a skater lacking technique (which, once again, doesn't limit itself to a number of jump rotations on the paper) will not get a LASTING impression on the viewer, beyond a "oh, nice" by a small part of uninformed viewers passing by

Oh, I don't know. There are many uninformed viewers who watch the Olympics but don't watch figure skating otherwise. And most of those infrequent viewers get lasting positive impressions of skaters who 1) land the most/hardest jumps and win medals as a result or 2) captivate the viewers with personality on the ice (and perhaps off the ice with an interesting backstory).

The majority of people who watch skating during the Olympics or if they just happen to come across it in passing know and care nothing about jump technique and even less about basic skating technique.

If something about the sport in general or about specific skaters gets them intrigued to become committed fans, then they may make an effort to learn.

So those now-committed fans who bother to read rules and protocols and watch slow-motion replays etc. become more demanding, as you say. But not until after they already got hooked on watching skating.

Which "public" are you talking about? Those who are already strong skating fans, or casual viewers that the ISU would like to attract to become more committed viewers?

How do you think that a skater awarded 9s in Components while deserving 6s for technical, athletic reasons, would have "done" on this ADO music, Tweet which gathered nearly 3 million views yesterday before probably being reported by toxic antis and deleted?
Do you think that they would have impressed a JPop fan, used to watch professional dancers, and their followers who reposted and were reposted? Even the most gifted are not encouraged to get the proper technique by this disdain for the rules. (I'm not saying that this is the only wrong thing in Figure Skating today, it's just the most influent on "show-worthiness".)

I have no idea what you're talking about.

 

[Mathman]

Anyway, talking of a return for him is as pointless as it was for Yuna. They both have their own worlds now.

Yuna Kim didn't even want to come back for the 2014 Olympics, but they made her do it anyway.

 

[TontoK]

Well for a start, when they changed the scoring rules it was specifically (and this is from the mouth of Lakernik, you can look it up in this very forum's archives) because Yuzuru was doing too well, skating too brilliantly and scoring too high. Funny that...

Anyway, talking of a return for him is as pointless as it was for Yuna. They both have their own worlds now. So back to the current - as I said - messy state of play because what happened, happened and what will happen... well, did you see Finlandia?

My interpretation of Lakernik's comments in that interview is that they were FULL of praise for Hanyu. Basically stating that he had "broken" the system with his brilliant performances, specifically citing several near perfect performances (and I mean "really perfect with +3 GOE on nearly every element and almost no room left on components" and not the "perfect programs" often gushed when skaters manage to not fall down).

I imagine Lakernik was acknowledging that the then-current system did not envision a skater maxing out on EVERYTHING... there would always be some room for growth. And yet Hanyu had done that on several occasions, so there wasn't room to reward any future improvements.

Regardless of how anyone interpreted all that, I don't see it as trying to undermine Hanyu's dominance, merely to face facts and give him even MORE room for score improvement. And, as @Mathman pointed out previously, he did just that.

 

[DizzyFrenchie]

"Not at all."



"Fair enough."


"It is true that audiences can be entertained by athletic feats. As well as by artistic performance that can be better achieved with a better technical skill set."

E.g., you can't do a complex step sequence with meaningful body movement and timing to the music if don't have a wide variety of steps in turns in your repertoire and the ability to execute them securely and with fine control over variations of timing and body positions.
In fact, a good deal artistry can be achieved with less Skating Skills, flat edges and all, and admirable spirals, postures, moves in the field, on some music styles... and one saw a lot in the past, because they hadn't had sufficient training to do more, poor ice and heavy boots, but I think that nowadays people want more to dwell in. At least, this is a phenomenon I see in Piano and Ballet, where in the past, people could achieve success with "good wiring", great artistic sense and reasonable practice but now, with this one won't be admired beyond a set of friends, while people who would have been acclaimed as great technicians struggle to merely get in the most renowned schools. I don't know HOW the public sees it, but we can see that they do.

Are they failing to abide by the rules? Or is it possible your understanding of the rules is different from how the judges have been trained to understand and apply them?
English isn't my first language but I think that I can understand approximately what is meant and roughly what I see — and they even have an official translation in French, but to be honest I don't even have the whole vocabulary in French because I can't skate, so I've never trained in France to learn it, and most of what I see and read is in English. Do you think that we may enter in details of scoring "inaccuracies"?

Are you saying that everyone except a few skaters who do what you think is most important are doing fake figure skating?
Certainly not! I'm really sorry if I gave you this impression.

The majority of developing skaters do not have the physical gifts to develop "the whole array of athletic performance." Or they don't have the resources (proximity to an ice rink, access to dedicated figure skating ice time, access to top coaches, the money and time in the rest of their lives to afford these and other benefits to enhance their athletic development).

(Wow! The quote cut itself!)
I didn't write it, but I know that only few can get everything; but I think it affects all.
First, those who can (it's different in North America, where lots of money is needed, and in Western and Eastern Europe, where mid- and upper-middle-class can get the best coaches, with a caveat: there's no integrated elite Figure Skating school as there is in Ballet, with full boarding, regular school with specific topics added including Anatomy and Ballet History, side teachings such as Pantomine and Character Dance, Nutritionist, Physiotherapy and all, in France means have been provided in a number of Sports including Figure Skating but the Federations don't seem to have managed to get the thing; I must say, French Gymnastics have been harrowingly worse in the last decade). Their coaches, from a certain level (because I don't think that scoring is as botched at lower levels, maybe lacking accuracy sometimes but that's more manageable?) know how scoring is, and are less likely to try to develop them into complete skaters with full, fine command of their skates and bodies. Yet both are exerting a lot, but in an unfavourable environment.

There are many reasons why most developing skaters will never land a clean triple jump, let alone triple axels and quads. It's not that they are being discouraged from trying or from doing it correctly, but more that coaches may recognize


These are two different things.

1) Jump technique. It has always been the case, since long before IJS, that difficult jumps are too difficult for most skaters to achieve perfectly.

What might have been considered bad technique when applied to single and double jumps 60 years ago became recognized as necessary technique for adding more revolutions.

Some coaches are able to teach techniques that allow more skaters to develop closer-to-perfect takeoffs and landings most of the time; other coaches who rarely get to work with elite-track skaters but who have ambitious students who do want to attempt triples may teach them the best techniques they themselves are aware of.

I believe that it would benefit everybody to learn clean technique, even at the expense of a (fake) rotation? I think that in any case, underrotation management is very useful because even the best skaters happen to underrotate sometimes, being on one occasional jump, or conjoncturally because of new boots or a growth spurt, or simply when learning jumps, so I don't think that it's necessary for a coach to believe that their student will achieve a full rotation on their Triple Jump to teach them, but I can't understand why sticking to wrong take-off technique. If a coach can't teach proper take-offs because they've never been taught them, there's recycling courses (that's where a wealthy Federation comes handy too), there's inviting jump coaches, Summer camps, and so on.

2) "real good skating, foundation to artistry and to entertainment ability" is not directly related to jump technique. There are plenty of skaters with good-enough jump technique to include triples in their programs, even with frequent underrotations, but who excel at artistry/entertainment. As well as plenty of strong jumpers consider artistry and entertainment as unimportant

If strong jumpers ignore the rest of the athletic performance they're required to show in their skates, it's fine, Figure Skating is for everybody; the thing is, they just ought to receive the scores they deserve, which is the sum of all the points gathered in all athletic/technical performance required in a "well balanced program" including a very little bit of artistic consideration; if (I'm taking a fictional extreme) their Skating Sills remain the same as Intermediate Novices scored 2 in Components, then they must get 2s even with lots of Triple or Quadruple jump, and if an absolutely wonderful skater can't jump Triples, it's a pity that they can't even access Senior International Competitions (there is no Skating Skills assessment to access them, on the reverse). Some have proposed to have pure jumping competitions, I think that there have been in Russia? But with so many little groups of people wanting so many new disciplines in Figure Skating, and still no Paralympic Skating, I don't know if it would be a wise immediate decision. Maybe if, in the future, Figure Skating becomes as popular as Soccer?

And a precious small minority who excel at all aspects.

But that has as much to do with the skaters own interests and talents and the resources available to them as it does to what you might consider bad coaching.

I don't think I'm qualified to tell what is good or bad coaching, at all. Except that sexual abuse, or even tracting(?) a student by their ponytail, or systematically denigrating a student, is bad coaching everywhere; and I don't think that cheating take-offs ought to be taught? Without calling those who do it "bad coaches" (there's also the problem of teaching to glide in early classes in Russia).

Oh, I don't know. There are many uninformed viewers who watch the Olympics but don't watch figure skating otherwise. And most of those infrequent viewers get lasting positive impressions of skaters who 1) land the most/hardest jumps and win medals as a result or 2) captivate the viewers with personality on the ice (and perhaps off the ice with an interesting backstory).

I think that they're one category, those enthusiasted by what commenters hyped. But narratives are more and more viewed with some defiance perhaps? (This isn't something I've mentioned though.) But for enthusiasm over mere words, Figure Skating has strong concurrence everywhere. I think that there's more and more consciousness in Marketing, that brands now have to deliver something.

The majority of people who watch skating during the Olympics or if they just happen to come across it in passing know and care nothing about jump technique and even less about basic skating technique.

True! Most won't dwell in, whatever. Now, if they're shown more impressive skating, there will be a higher proportion who will go further; and for those who go further, technique will matter.

If something about the sport in general or about specific skaters gets them intrigued to become committed fans, then they may make an effort to learn.

So those now-committed fans who bother to read rules and protocols and watch slow-motion replays etc. become more demanding, as you say. But not until after they already got hooked on watching skating.

This!

Which "public" are you talking about? Those who are already strong skating fans, or casual viewers that the ISU would like to attract to become more committed viewers?


I have no idea what you're talking about.

(Thank you for your detailed reply! I replied you inside the quote, because I'm a dummy who can't multi-quote as you did. )

I'm really sorry, I meant to embed a post, which had been deleted since yesterday, and without which the end of my latest post was really obscure. This brave fan posted both a screen capture of the deleted viral post (which was from a JPop fan who didn't know Yuzuru Hanyu I think), and the whole program of which the original posted had included an excerpt, I hope that it won't be deleted too soon:

https://x.com/starfishh127/status/1995444256035504488?ref_url=

 

[Mathman]

My interpretation of Lakernik's comments in that interview is that they were FULL of praise for Hanyu. Basically stating that he had "broken" the system with his brilliant performances...

That was certainly my understanding. too, of Lakernik's explanations. Like when gymnast Nadia Comanici got perfect 10s at the 1976 Olympics, that was the beginning of the end of the scoring system then in place -- the sport had outpaced the scoring system.

I think the same problem exists in ice dance. When all the top competitors automatically get 9.50s and above in components, the scoring system is unable to serve it's function of determining a winner.

 

[gkelly]

E.g., you can't do a complex step sequence with meaningful body movement and timing to the music if don't have a wide variety of steps in turns in your repertoire and the ability to execute them securely and with fine control over variations of timing and body positions.
In fact, a good deal artistry can be achieved with less Skating Skills, flat edges and all, and admirable spirals, postures, moves in the field, on some music styles... and one saw a lot in the past, because they hadn't had sufficient training to do more, poor ice and heavy boots, but I think that nowadays people want more to dwell in. At least, this is a phenomenon I see in Piano and Ballet, where in the past, people could achieve success with "good wiring", great artistic sense and reasonable practice but now, with this one won't be admired beyond a set of friends, while people who would have been acclaimed as great technicians struggle to merely get in the most renowned schools. I don't know HOW the public sees it, but we can see that they do.

Are they failing to abide by the rules? Or is it possible your understanding of the rules is different from how the judges have been trained to understand and apply them?
English isn't my first language but I think that I can understand approximately what is meant and roughly what I see — and they even have an official translation in French, but to be honest I don't even have the whole vocabulary in French because I can't skate, so I've never trained in France to learn it, and most of what I see and read is in English. Do you think that we may enter in details of scoring "inaccuracies"?

First, those who can (it's different in North America, where lots of money is needed, and in Western and Eastern Europe, where mid- and upper-middle-class can get the best coaches,

My reference point is the US. If yours is France, we'll have different perspectives. And conditions in Russia or Japan would would be different from both.
So none of us should try to overgeneralize.

I believe that it would benefit everybody to learn clean technique, even at the expense of a (fake) rotation? I think that in any case, underrotation management is very useful because even the best skaters happen to underrotate sometimes, being on one occasional jump, or conjoncturally because of new boots or a growth spurt, or simply when learning jumps, so I don't think that it's necessary for a coach to believe that their student will achieve a full rotation on their Triple Jump to teach them, but I can't understand why sticking to wrong take-off technique. If a coach can't teach proper take-offs because they've never been taught them, there's recycling courses (that's where a wealthy Federation comes handy too), there's inviting jump coaches, Summer camps, and so on.

Yes, ambitious skaters who struggle to master correct takeoffs and landings of jumps they need to compete at higher levels will either switch coaches entirely or enlist input from jump specialists to augment whatever other positives they're getting from their original coaches.

To the extent they can afford to.

If strong jumpers ignore the rest of the athletic performance they're required to show in their skates, it's fine, Figure Skating is for everybody; the thing is, they just ought to receive the scores they deserve, which is the sum of all the points gathered in all athletic/technical performance required in a "well balanced program" including a very little bit of artistic consideration; if (I'm taking a fictional extreme) their Skating Sills remain the same as Intermediate Novices scored 2 in Components, then they must get 2s even with lots of Triple or Quadruple jump,

Definitely an extreme example. I don't think I've ever seen skaters who deserve Skating Skills scores in the 2s land clean triples, let alone quads.
Some triples from skaters with SS in the 3s on occasion.

Presentation is another story. It's definitely possible to have senior-level skating skills but not be able to perform well, at least on any given occasion.

In which case it would be appropriate for the PR score to be significantly lower than the SS.

But how much lower?
Take a solid technical skater who's only focused on executing the technical elements while ignoring the music and the audience and compare them to a weaker technical skater with the same presentation problems. Should they earn the same PR score?

and if an absolutely wonderful skater can't jump Triples, it's a pity that they can't even access Senior International Competitions (there is no Skating Skills assessment to access them, on the reverse).

In the US, skaters need to pass tests on skating skills and singles/freestyle skills before they're allowed to compete at senior level in domestic competitions. And of course they need to do well in domestic competitions to get offered international opportunities in a country with such a deep field.

International-caliber skaters have no difficulty passing these tests. Even many skaters who do not have it in them to reach international levels, because of jumping talent or other reasons, may be able to pass them. But not just anyone who can land some double jumps and who is over 17 can enter senior competitions.

The hardest skills required to compete at senior level are double axel and two different triple jumps, to meet the short program requirements. Low levels on spins and steps can still meet the requirements and avoid GOE reductions. But weaker seniors may not be able to achieve higher levels or high GOEs on these elements. And may max out at skating skills worthy of 3s and 4s. Which won't get them anywhere in a federation with a deep field. But for skaters from small developing federations, they may be the best their country has to offer.

I think that they're one category, those enthusiasted by what commenters hyped.

And of course TV commentators (at least in the US, and some other countries as well) tend to focus on the medal chances of the home country skaters, which brings the commentators' and network producers' biases into the information and opinions that audiences get access to.

But narratives are more and more viewed with some defiance perhaps?

Yes, audiences can like what they like regardless of what the commentators tell them. And may come to dislike a skater who just doesn't turn them on but their told they're supposed to get excited about, whereas they'd remain neutral about those skaters without what they consider excessive hype.

(This isn't something I've mentioned though.) But for enthusiasm over mere words, Figure Skating has strong concurrence everywhere. I think that there's more and more consciousness in Marketing, that brands now have to deliver something.

The ISU may pay some attention to what kind of music, what kind of movement styles, what kind of elements tend to be popular with general audiences. Which can influence rules about what music and what elements are legal or illegal, encouraged or discouraged in the rules.
But this all has to happen in the context of rules supporting the relative measurement of all kinds of technical skating skills, those audiences appreciate and also those that don't come across well on video.
Outside of competition rules, marketing will usually focus on skaters who have already achieved significant medals or who are viewed as being likely to contend for medals at the upcoming big events. With more focus on local/home country skaters when it comes to domestic media.

I'm really sorry, I meant to embed a post, which had been deleted since yesterday, and without which the end of my latest post was really obscure. This brave fan posted both a screen capture of the deleted viral post (which was from a JPop fan who didn't know Yuzuru Hanyu I think), and the whole program of which the original posted had included an excerpt, I hope that it won't be deleted too soon:

https://x.com/starfishh127/status/1995444256035504488?ref_url=

I still don't know what your point is here.
It's a fun show program by a popular recent champion skater, without much jumping or even all that much skating. It doesn't really have anything to do with whether or how many quads the ISU should allowe/encourage in competitive programs.
Except perhaps to point out that there's a lot more scope for entertaining performance on ice when an accomplished skater can focus on just using the skills that support the artistic vision of that particular program, without worrying about required elements or well-balanced technical content.

 

[lariko]

I think the same problem exists in ice dance. When all the top competitors automatically get 9.50s and above in components, the scoring system is unable to serve it's function of determining a winner.

Then they looked at the levels this year, point by point, and everyone got super-cranky (we are creating art here, buttercup, how can you expect us to do what the lowbie skaters have to do?). This ID reviews was roughly equivalent of q, < and << use in individual skating in the last 2 or so seasons.

 

[Isk]

From all the guys you are mentioning, Yagudin and Lambiel (and well his 3axel was pretty much non-existing) are the only ones I would put in the same category. Plushenko, Goebel and Joubert didn't have great skating skills and Takahashi was not too consistent with his quads.

Anyway, it's Tracy Wilson who said that. So you can argue that with her

Well, she is Canadian. She is proud of the Canadian guy. To tell the truth there were this dude too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkRvngb4FiY, but he was # 57 in his federation. The program is very musical, you just watch and never mind the elements, unlike with some skaters nowadays you just watch the elements and never mind the program.
There were also Tomasz Verner, Jeremy Abbott, many guys could skate and do 4T but they were inconsistent and many opted out. Patrick's 4T were reliable, and once he got it, he started doing not one but two in the FP and one in the SP.

 

[4everchan]

Well, she is Canadian. She is proud of the Canadian guy. To tell the truth there were this dude too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkRvngb4FiY, but he was # 57 in his federation. The program is very musical, you just watch and never mind the elements, unlike with some skaters nowadays you just watch the elements and never mind the program.
There were also Tomasz Verner, Jeremy Abbott, many guys could skate and do 4T but they were inconsistent and many opted out. Patrick's 4T were reliable, and once he got it, he started doing two in the FP and one in the SP.

I loved Takahiko Kozuka.
I think Tracy Wison, regardless of nationality - don't forget she coached/saw the next two world champions at TCC, and some others will still view Patrick as the guy who did it all regularly and consistently (landing quads and having great skating skills and programs) because it happened right after the 2010 Olympics when the guy with no quads won over a guy with quads but not so much fabulous skating. So that new era, from 2011-2014 is when the leading man was Patrick Chan and he was the one who led a group of skaters to reach a new level of skating. Yes, others emerged and surpassed Patrick but in 2011-2013, with his three consecutive world championship golds with reliable quads, and his "best ever scores" he was the one people were looking at. It changed in the next cycle when so many skaters developed "exotic" quads but that's another story.

I brought up Patrick earlier in this thread because he, himself, did mention that 2-3 quads were the maximum to still have a program. I still agree with that, and I don't care about the cynical posts that say that he said it because he couldn't do more. We see it nowadays with the skaters doing more quads, most of them spend the first half of the programs on two feet, skating from one end of the rink to the other, jumping a big quad, and then repeat... Once all of these jumps are completed, then, the best ones get more lively and bring some flair In the steps and choreo sequences... but by then, there's already been 2:30 minutes of bland skating.

I brought up that comment because I sincerely miss having 4 minutes of choreography where jumps are better integrated to the programs. However, I recognize that it's much harder to do with quads. So in that sense, my answer, after all these posts, is still the same. I do wish that better balanced programs were rewarded, programs with choreography all across the LP's length, not just at the end. Programs who do not look all the same during the first 4 jumping passes. I miss that because I love figure skating and to me, this is where I agree with @Mathman, there should be a better focus on what blades do on the ice, because that's the unique part of the sport we love.

See, I have absolutely no problems with the SPs. I am fine with the 3 jumping passes in there. It's with the LP that I find there is a lack of balance.

 

[Arigato]

That's how the +5/-5 was "sold" to his fans. What was observed though, is that with a very few exceptions (you may notice that in this precise competition there was no favourite to make win against him; yet it's generally thought that this last World Record of his was still underscored by over two points), while his jumps kept improving, his +3s from the +3/-3 era rarely became +5s or even +4s; instead, other skaters were rewarded with high Grades of Execution, ignoring even caps. It was perhaps even more egregious in Spins, Step Sequences and Choreographic Sequences than in Jumps. Overall, in the +5/-5 era he was skating better yet scored lower.

 

[Isk]

So to be honest the wish to limit quads was a hidden wish slow down Ilia and to give others a chance to beat him. In my opinion as long as someone who is 9th in tech ends up 4 in total because of PCS there seems to be something wrong in the other direction... but that's just my way of thinking.
I think limiting quads is so not helping the sport at all. In tennis they had Steffi Graf or Roger Federer who won everything there was to win and they didn't change the rules to give weaker players a chance but they celebrated the best players ever who promoted the sport a lot. Now we have a skater who does jumps that have been called impossible for decades and people who were never interested in figureskating come to see the boy who does this. He makes the sport popular again, brings more audience and this will bring sponsors and in the end help a lot of other skaters too. This happened in Germany with Skijumping. There were Martin Schmidt and Sven Hannawald who blew the scores like crazy and they became teenstars and pulled sponsors into the sport like never before. All events were sold out and they were celebrated like boygroup stars. In a sport that never got a lot of attention before. If this can happen in Figureskating don't stop it! It will give other skaters the chance to do their sport without financial difficulties and imagine what could happen if a lot more skaters can focus on their sport without the worry about money. Even the ones who depend on artistry scores more than on tech scores will benefit of this.
Quads or maybe in future quints will bring some kind of halfpipe image to the sport... yes that's hard for old fans to acept but it can make the sport popular again. So my opinion is: Don't slow Ilia down. Let him do the craziest things and make the sport popular

One dude is not going to save the sport. His skating is just 4 minutes of extreme craziness and before this there are 4 hours of boring unwatchable struggling. We also need skaters from the last two groups to be like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnAHrxR_CTs, or this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jpxiy3gza_I.
Maybe a dude doesn't do a quad but he does spectacular triples and watchable in-betweens, what's wrong with this? They have to have a chance. There needs to be a realistic possibility for guys like this to be on the podium from time to time. On a good day they might even do a quad.