First off, I want to apologize for taking the "Jeff's Injury" thread off topic; and turning it into a discussion about judging panels bonusing good jumpers. I was about to add yet another dimension to that discussion, when I thought perhaps a separate thread was more appropriate.
I would like to know if anyone has given any thought on what should be done with the Short Program under today's marking system? Recently I've been involved in a few conversations with former and current skaters, former and current coaches and several former and current judges. We've been talking about the evolution of skating and the marking systems. A growing number of people have begun to question the value the "Short Program," they're questioning its purpose in today's skating climate.
Originally the technical/short program was exactly what it said, a brief program skated with 8 pre-determined elements, performed by each competitor within the catagory. The purpose was to provide the judges with a format that would produce a fair way of evaluating each skater's skill set, apples vs apples or axels vs axels.
There is no suggestion the Short Program fails in its purpose, but given the choreographic direction the Long Program has taken, it seems to many the Long Program now provides the judges with exactly the same evaluation opportunity. Under CoP every skater is of course chasing points ... he who ends with the biggest total wins. Plain and simple. As a result however, the majority of competitors now either do, or try to perform, exactly the same elements ... same spiral sequence, same spins, same jumps, and pretty much the same footwork sequences. If its a particularily good competition, these higher scoring elements will be performed in differing orders, but they still boil down to an array of the same elements/skills. Understandably, everyone is trying to max out on Level 4 elements, afterall, why do a gorgeous layback spin and get 1.80 points when you can do a beillman spin for more points?
I'll quit here ... your thoughts?
I would like to know if anyone has given any thought on what should be done with the Short Program under today's marking system? Recently I've been involved in a few conversations with former and current skaters, former and current coaches and several former and current judges. We've been talking about the evolution of skating and the marking systems. A growing number of people have begun to question the value the "Short Program," they're questioning its purpose in today's skating climate.
Originally the technical/short program was exactly what it said, a brief program skated with 8 pre-determined elements, performed by each competitor within the catagory. The purpose was to provide the judges with a format that would produce a fair way of evaluating each skater's skill set, apples vs apples or axels vs axels.
There is no suggestion the Short Program fails in its purpose, but given the choreographic direction the Long Program has taken, it seems to many the Long Program now provides the judges with exactly the same evaluation opportunity. Under CoP every skater is of course chasing points ... he who ends with the biggest total wins. Plain and simple. As a result however, the majority of competitors now either do, or try to perform, exactly the same elements ... same spiral sequence, same spins, same jumps, and pretty much the same footwork sequences. If its a particularily good competition, these higher scoring elements will be performed in differing orders, but they still boil down to an array of the same elements/skills. Understandably, everyone is trying to max out on Level 4 elements, afterall, why do a gorgeous layback spin and get 1.80 points when you can do a beillman spin for more points?
I'll quit here ... your thoughts?