Should the ISU have separate scoring systems for men and women?

[Mathman]

Someone here thinks 3Lz-3T isn't as hard or high-risked as 3A? Let me just say, one user actually counted ones that were landed and ratified in the Men's in Vancouver. Surprisinly, one more 3A was completed. I know this doesn't say it all, but it seems that some skaters are more comfortable with doing 3A than 3-3.

Yes, that is the whole point of the question raised on this thread. For men, the triple Axel is no big deal and there is no reason to raise the base value. Triple Axels and triple-triples are about equally common.

But for ladies, the situation is much different. Hence the question: should we have a different set of base values for ladies than for men?

If the idea is to give the greatest number of points for the hardest tricks, a triple Axel is much harder for a lady than a quad is for a man (if we judge by how many men can do quads.) Maybe a ladies' triple Axel should be worth as much as a men's quad?

 

[Mathman]

I think you have an interesting point about the triple axels - keep base value the same for women, but maybe raise it for men.

That seems backwards to me. Why raise it for men, when it is an easy jump for men?

But it is a hard jump for ladies, so maybe it would make sense to give the ladies more credit for doing such a hard element.

What I don't get is why PCS have different values for men and women...

The judges give the same marks, but the total PCSs have different multiplying factors for men and ladies. The reason for this is that the ISU wants the TESs to come out about the same as the PCSs, to keep everything in balance.

Since a man is expected to score about 25% higher than a lady in TES, they raise the value of the PCSs by 25%, too.

(Not saying I agree with this rule, just explaining how they do it now.)

 

[#1Kerryfan]

That seems backwards to me. Why raise it for men, when it is an easy jump for men?

But it is a hard jump for ladies, so maybe it would make sense to give the ladies more credit for doing such a hard element.



The judges give the same marks, but the total PCSs have different multiplying factors for men and ladies. The reason for this is that the ISU wants the TESs to come out about the same as the PCSs, to keep everything in balance.

Since a man is expected to score about 25% higher than a lady in TES, they raise the value of the PCSs by 25%, too.

(Not saying I agree with this rule, just explaining how they do it now.)

Oops! With the triple axel I meant keep it the same for men and raise it for women! I'll fix that.

And I meant the multiplying factors. Sorry about the errors, I'm tired. Lol.

 

[Basics]

Again, the base value for 3A could be raised a little more but not to the extent of quad's. But if they are to have different sets of base value of jumps for men and women, the base value of toe jumps (except 3T) could be raised as well, since most men are comfortable with doing them with correct edges but ladies are not.

My point is one huge jump, whether it is 3A or 4T, should not decide the game, a skater with a complete set of triple jumps (even without 3A or 3-3/ 4T for men) should be rewarded more. like giving them additional +5 extra points. +5 may sound a lot, but if you consider a number of skaters who can actually do that, it's reasonable. This way, it encourages more skaters to try new jumps or harder jumps for them, and even harder ones (3A or 4T) are just bonus.

 

[Lilith11]

Again, the base value for 3A could be raised a little more but not to the extent of quad's. But if they are to have different sets of base value of jumps for men and women, the base value of toe jumps (except 3T) could be raised as well, since most men are comfortable with doing them with correct edges but ladies are not.

My point is one huge jump, whether it is 3A or 4T, should not decide the game, a skater with a complete set of triple jumps (even without 3A or 3-3/ 4T for men) should be rewarded more. like giving them additional +5 bonus points. +5 may sound a lot, but if you consider a number of skaters who can actually do that, it's reasonable. This way, it encourages more skaters to try new jumps or harder jumps for them, and even harder ones (3A or 4T) are just bonus.

ITA. I mean, how many female skaters actually do a full set of triples? A triple axel is an amazing accomplishment, but it shouldn't overshadow everything else. It's not a jumping contest; it's figure skating.

 

[janetfan]

What if they were to limit the double jumps the way they do the triple jumps? One solo 2A and if a second is done then it would have to be in combination. Same with the 2Loop and 2T.

Wouldn't that encourage more variety in the triples?

If a skater has a great 2A - the points they get for it with plus GOE make 3Sal and 3 Loop an unnecessary risk if the jump is problematic.

 

[Basics]

What if they were to limit the double jumps the way they do the triple jumps? One solo 2A and if a second is done then it would have to be in combination. Same with the 2Loop and 2T.

Wouldn't that encourage more variety in the triples?

If a skater has a great 2A - the points they get for it with plus GOE make 3Sal and 3 Loop an unnecessary risk if the jump is problematic.

You mean limit the each jump to twice even if it is a double jump?

I have no problem with that, but some skaters who do not have a good variety of triple jumps will might have a hard time just competing. (maybe I'm wrong, I don't have a good knowledge of Zayak rule)

 

[miki88]

I have no problem with that, but some skaters who do not have a good variety of triple jumps will might have a hard time just competing. (maybe I'm wrong, I don't have a good knowledge of Zayak rule)

I think they will just be forced to do all the jumps, with flutzes, lips, or whatever. I think every elite skater knows how to do the jumps. It's just a matter of how well they do them.

 

[Mathman]

...a skater with a complete set of triple jumps (even without 3A or 3-3/ 4T for men) should be rewarded more. like giving them additional +5 extra points. +5 may sound a lot, but if you consider a number of skaters who can actually do that, it's reasonable. This way, it encourages more skaters to try new jumps or harder jumps for them, and even harder ones (3A or 4T) are just bonus.

That is the beauty of the Newjump replacing the two old jumps.

The perfectly balanced ladies program would go something like this.

3A if you have it, otherwise 2A
3Newjump+3T if you can, otherwise 3Newjump+2T
3Lo+2Lo
3S
3Newjump
3Lo if it is a good jump for you, otherwise 3T
2A+2T+2T

Every skater would have to at least take a shot at all the different jumps.

The way it is now, a skater can do

3Lz+3T
3Lz
3F+2T
3F
2A+2T+2T
2A
2A

That is a 41.4-point program (plus second-half bonuses) The Newjump rule would make such a lop-sided program impossible.

 

[Mathman]

What if they were to limit the double jumps the way they do the triple jumps? One solo 2A and if a second is done then it would have to be in combination. Same with the 2Loop and 2T.

Wouldn't that encourage more variety in the triples?

I think the reason they allow three double Axels is so as NOT to discourage triple-triples. If you do two triple-triples, or (like Kevin van der Perren) a triple-triple-triple, then you are Zayacked out when you get to your last two or three jumping passes. You would get just as many points by doing a 3Lz and a 3T separately as to do them in combination.

But wih the extra 2A option, you can do a triple-triple and at least grab an extra 3.5 points for the double Axel in the extra jumping pass that you saved.

It still might be a good idea though, You could always do a double Lutz with your extra pass.

 

[bekalc]

That is the beauty of the Newjump replacing the two old jumps.

Well it certainly isn't beautiful for the girls who have put their time and effort into learning a true 3lutz and a true 3flip. Give me the edge rules!

 

[janetfan]

Why not just limit the number of 2A's, 2T's and 2Loops ?
Combining the Lutz and Flip feels like we are losing a jump. Isn't that part of the point - to be rewarded for doing more jumps?

 

[bekalc]

Why not just limit the number of 2A's, 2T's and 2Loops ?
Combining the Lutz and Flip feels like we are losing a jump. Isn't that part of the point - to be rewarded for doing more jumps?

We would be losing a jump. They are two seperate jumps, the edge isn't the only thing that makes them a different jump.

 

[Mathman]

Well it certainly isn't beautiful for the girls who have put their time and effort into learning a true 3lutz and a true 3flip. Give me the edge rules!

Not at all. They could do 3Newjump with clear unmistakable outside edge (+1 GOE) and get 6.5 points, then do a 3Newjump with inside edge and get 5.5 points, and impress the judges in skating skills.

What they couldn't do is 2 triple Lutzes, 2 triple filps, no loop and no Salchow. The ladies that put in the time to learn edge jumps deserve credit, too.

 

[bekalc]

Not at all. They could do 3Newjump with clear unmistakable outside edge (+1 GOE) and get 6.5 points, then do a 3Newjump with inside edge and get 5.5 points, and impress the judges in skating skills.

What they couldn't do is 2 triple Lutzes, 2 triple filps, no loop and no Salchow. The ladies that put in the time to learn edge jumps deserve credit, too.

Mathman how many women do you see doing 2 3lutzs, 2 3flips and no 3loop or no 3sal. Yes, Yu-na leaves out the 3loop, but she normally attempts the 3sal.... Mao normally attempts the 3loop, even if she leaves out the 3sal. I would really like you to tell me the lady that has a 3lutz and a 3flip, but doesn't attempt the 3sal and the 3loop.

Most of the women can do a 3sal and a 3loop, what most of the women cannot do is a real 3lutz and a real 3flip. Which tells me in actuality the 3lutz and the 3flip should be worth more.

Ksensia Marakava has the 3lutz now in practice to the point that she's doing a 3lutz/3toe. I have a feeling that her 3lutz is a true 3lutz, which is probably why it took her so long to get it. But according to you that should just mean nothing. Maybe since the 3sal, and the 3loop are both edge jumps we should just let the women choose either or for that one too.

And GOE is so subjective and people can get it for all kinds of different things. So someone with a beautiful 3flutz, can still get tons of credit, in your system. Your throwing away all the hard work people like Rochette, Flatt, Yu-na, Miki Ando all did to get true 3lutzs and a true 3flips. In general the success of Lepisto tells me the jumps should be worth more, raise the value for all of the triples. Also add bonus points for having all of them with no edge calls. That would add the value for having the edge jumps. In general though most of the women competiting have all the edge jumps. Most don't have a true 3lutz or a true 3flip.

 

[gmyers]

Instead of merging two old jumps how about just a new Flutz? It would have a negative conotation though. "this jump arose from frequent mistakes on the lutz."

There is just a major hesitation to make any jump such a point getter that one element could potentially win an event. The downside of that is there is no longer any incentive whatsoever for jump advancement.

 

[ImaginaryPogue]

Wait, who does two triple flips and two triple lutzes?

 

[prettykeys]

Is there any reason why there could not be different rules for men’s skating than for women’s? In gymnastics, for instance, women do not do the high bar or rings. These strength apparatuses are just more appropriate to men’s gymnastics than to women’s.

In Gymnastics, women uniquely do the balance beam, uneven bars, and the thing on the floor with the ribbons/hula hoops...men uniquely do the pommel horse, parallel bars, and rings (maybe something else I'm forgetting). In Figure Skating, men generally do more technically difficult jumps and steps, where women uniquely get points under the ISJ for doing a spiral. I think these activities are indeed "more appropriate" for men and women to compete in.

1. Raise the base value for triple Axels.
...
But then, in order to preserve the idea of a “balanced program,” we would have to raise the values of spins and footwork, and also give more weight to program components. Competitively, nothing would change except that everyone would get a few extra points across the board.

No, there is a very basic but significant change you are proposing. This is the equivalent of keeping the current point system for the 3Axel and the spirals, steps, PCS, etc. intact, but making every other jump's base value worth ~0.5 points less. Is there any particular reason why you want to downgrade the relative worth of all the jumps (except the 3A)?

2. Combine the flip and the Lutz into a new jump called the “left foot take-off toe-pick assisted” jump.

The LFTOTPA (or RFTOTPA for clockwise jumpers ) could go off either the inside edge or the outside edge, skater’s preference. A clear, deep outside edge is a feature for +1 GOE.

Pro: This would eliminate all these judgment calls about “e” and “!” and whether judges must follow the tech specialist's call or score by their own real-time eyes, etc. It would also prevent (via the Zayak rules) skaters from omitting the edge jumps (loop and Salchow).

Con: This is a cop-out. If you can’t do a proper Lutz and a proper flip, go home and work on them until you can.

It sounds kinda crappy (explained below), but it's not a horrendous idea. Sure, as you said, they already did it for the 3ToeLoop. However, sometimes the way people do 3Loops and 3Salchows look similar to me, too. So if we're going to do that, might as well apply the same principle to the 3Loop/Salchow.

Now most women's programs will have:
3Toe (your pick of ToeLoop or Walley)
3SalLoop (your pick of Salchow or Loop, Loop +1 GoE)
3Flutz (your pick of Flip or Lutz, Lutz +1 GoE)
2A

Cool...3 different types of triples. Sounds like a backwards step to me.

I think it's "crappy" because if we want skaters to train demonstrate different skills (in this case, edge control in jumping), we should maintain the difference between a 3F and a 3Lz. I've heard half the reason the flutzing and the lipping became so common is because judges started to not be so picky about identifying and penalizing this type of cheating.

A better option mentioned elsewhere in this thread is something like a +5 point bonus for doing five different triple jumps--that's pretty nice, it's like getting credit for doing an extra imagined triple jump.

That, on its own, would also add further incentive to possibly doing a 3Axel without needing to raise its base value--a girl could substitute it for any other triple jump she may have trouble with (e.g. 3Lz), and in the process, she is doing a jump that is worth more. I do not think a higher base value at this time is merited or justified. You never see a 2.2 difference of base value for any other half-rotation's difference. 2Lz to 2A is 1.6 difference. 3A to 4T is 1.6 difference. The difference between a hypothetical 4Lz and a 4A is 1.5 LOL!

In general, I don't like the idea of different base values between men and women. A couple reasons include consistency/simplicity of the judging system; and also for the implication that women are physically inferior in terms of athleticism. I realize that the reality does point in that direction, but if a woman can do a 3Axel, she should be given credit for it along the same lines as a male's 3Axel, no "female bonus".

I don't even like the principle of different PCS factors between the men and women (1.0 vs. 0.8 in the SP, 2.0 vs.1.6 for the LP) because although I understand the reasoning behind it, I think it would have been better to make it factored against the actual TES a skater gets. Something like (TES x 0.5) + (raw PCS x 0.5) = Total Score. That way, the factoring correlates automatically to the TES instead of the fixed/absolute/embedded factoring.

I think GoE's also need to be factored to the element they are referring to...but related to this topic are the standards to which they are applied. e.g. "good height & speed" for a woman doing a jump may be different for "good height & speed" for a man. Should we make it absolute, or relative to the respective sexes?

 

[rtureck]

2). And I fail to understand your blindness to it.

I too fail to see your "blindness". LOL

I don't think that the 3A value should be increased because it already is quite substantial; it's already, as Mathman stated, 2.2 points higher than the triple lutz.

I don't necessarily advocate for higher base value for the 3a.

Furthermore, like I stated BEFORE, these are competitors who want to win. And for a competitor, that desire to win can easily translate into over-extention. You're placing too much faith in human reason and logic; people oftentimes don't know their own limits. And even if they do, considering how our media goes on about how "limits are made to be pushed/broken," and their competitve streak, I have a feeling that they would continue practicing, in which they run the risk of incurring a serious injury that could possibly end their skating careers. I mean, Yu-na for example; back in 2006, she was overtraining herself, doing jump after jump even if she fell multiple times. Was she pushing the limit? Yes. Was it healthy? Helluva no.

Then we have to agree to disagree, b/c injury and pushing limits IMO is the nature of sports. Lysacek has 2 broken toes and Dice had knee surgery last yr. If some skaters overtrain and get injured, they take full responsibility of their decision. I do support more research into the equipment e.g. their skates to prevent injuries. The sports should not be held back b/c of that. Actually you also advocate not raising the base value until a female skater has consistently land the jump in competition. Have I misunderstood you. If I haven't then I think it is very unfair to the first female skater who is willing ot take risk and be a pioneer.

Plus, you fail to address the fact that harder does not always necessarily equate better. Look at the Men's Long at the Olympics; so many splats from men who were doing things they couldn't handle, such as quads. Plus, we do not need people to start taking on the attitude that 3A= winner.

LOL harder does not necessarily always equate better but sometimes it may. No one is taking the attitude that 3a=winner. But FS is a sport and skaters should be advancing the sports and in terms of jumps for the ladies the next jump advancement is the 3a. Back in the days of Dorothy they were only doing 2z. EVen if the ladies are not advancing to more 3a in their programs, they certainly should have a full set of triples like in Tara and MK's time.

 

[Mathman]

Now most women's programs will have:

3Toe (your pick of ToeLoop or Walley)
3SalLoop (your pick of Salchow or Loop, Loop +1 GoE)
3Flutz (your pick of Flip or Lutz, Lutz +1 GoE)
2A

Cool...3 different types of triples. Sounds like a backwards step to me.

But the loop and the Salchow are very different jumps, never mind edges. As I understand it, the Salchow takes off from the opposite leg from the landing leg, and the loop takes off from the same leg as the landing leg (both from back inside edges.)

I guess the idea behind this proposal is that there are four main types of jump, besides Axels and setting aside edges for the moment. (By the way, even though the jump definitions say you are supposed to land on the right outside edge, there is no penalty under the IJS for landing on the inside edge, for any jump.) For a counterclockwise skater (corrected as per gkelly's post below) I think it goes something like this:

Toe-loop/Wally: Right foot take-off, toepick assisted

Loop: Right foot take-off, no toe pick.

Flip/Lutz: Left foot take-off, toe pick assisted

Salchow/toeless Lutz: Left foot take-off, no toe pick (extra GOE for a toeless triple Lutz, which I don't think anyone can do.)

don't even like the principle of different PCS factors between the men and women (1.0 vs. 0.8 in the SP, 2.0 vs.1.6 for the LP) because although I understand the reasoning behind it, I think it would have been better to make it factored against the actual TES a skater gets. Something like (TES x 0.5) + (raw PCS x 0.5) = Total Score. That way, the factoring correlates automatically to the TES instead of the fixed/absolute/embedded factoring.

I think your suggestion does the opposite oif its intention. A male champion typically might get 85 TES and 80 PCS (8's across the board.)

A ladies' champion might get 65 TES and 80 PCS (8's across the board.)

By your suggested method the man's total score is 82.5, weighted 52%/48% in favor of TES. The lady's total scpre is 72.5, weighted 45%/55%.) This would codify the principle, ladies are pretty, men are athletic.

I do not think a higher base value at this time is merited or justified. You never see a 2.2 difference of base value for any other half-rotation's difference. 2Lz to 2A is 1.6 difference. 3A to 4T is 1.6 difference. The difference between a hypothetical 4Lz and a 4A is 1.5 LOL!

I look at it this way. According to the ISU scale of values, the 2A is grouped with the triple jumps as a baby triple, rather than a super single. Likewise, the 3A is grouped with the quads, not the triples.

The gap between the highest double rotation jump (2Lz = 1.9) and the "baby triple" (2A = 3.5) is a whopping 84%.

In contrast, there is only a 37% increase between the triple Lutz and the triple Axel. If the 84% rule were applied consistently, the proper value for the 3A would be 11.0 points. :yes: (Just saying...)