SP and FS replaced by Technical and Artistic programs?

[Mathman]

Realistically speaking, if this type of model was the 2-minute technical program, skaters will still try to distinguish themselves by adding in artistry for a subjective bonus because at a given top tier of skaters, the skills will be similar. I personally believe jumps can be artistic. They were in this program. And I wouldn't trust the judges to not preference the technical program with an artistic flair more even though they probably have no mandated basis to do so given the theoretical purpose of this competition segment.

I agree. This "program" (the last half of her 2018 free skate) was by no means lacking in artistry even though it had 7 jumping passes in two minutes. But I would expect that the judges would have a mandate to reward artistic flair, whatever title ("technical program") the segment carries.

 

[moonvine]

nooooooooo you can't change the short programme and free skate!!!! What are they thinking???? Short programme and free skate forever!!!!

But it isn’t a free skate anymore. There are way too many requirements to make it free in any way. It is a long program.

 

[Mathman]

At least as far back as a 2016 IceNetwork article (by Hersh, IIRC?), Lakernik had spoken about the idea of an artistic program and a technical program.

To tell the truth, I think the seeds were planted back in the 1970s when the short program (then called the "technical program") came into being. Over the years the long program became more and more "technical" (at least more and more jumpy) while the short program pretty much held to its original concept. Now the long program is the technical one, with skaters basically doing as many hard jumps as they have stamina for, while the short programs tend to produce the more satisfying program concepts.

In any case, I would not fear that Alexander Lakernik, of all people, will promote anything that diminishes the overall value of big tricks.

 

[el henry]

That's a nice example. Ah, Jason! He's smooth when there's barely any challenge. And what a stark contrast with his LP: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ipSYfIyqII Suddenly, everything is not so pretty anymore. Edges aren't as deep, skating is much more laboured and smile isn't as omnipresent.

.....

At first I thought you were serious when you said “Love is a B****” is hardly a challenging program, but then I realized you must be joking, so thank you for the laugh

The giveaway was “omnipresent smile”, because Jason has not had an omnipresent smile in any program on the GP circuit since Juke (2015). A serious criticism of Jason’s skating would not refer to an element that he has not incorporated in the
past four years.

And of course, I used Love Is a B**** because it has been universally highly scored and would be an uncontroversial choice for a program containing artistry. Like the Spanish judge at Worlds giving Jason a 10 for interpretation. Cross cultural:agree:

I’m afraid that I do not agree that jumping is “objective”. I do not agree that jumping is the highest or best measure of athleticism. So as such, I do not see any move to reduce the jumps just a little teeny bit as some sort of assault on athleticism or sport. And it sure as heck isn’t making galas into competitive programs and of course, if you go by me and all my friends, it will increase the viewership and popularity of skating worldwide.

But that’s just me, and others have other opinions. Since we don’t have an independent worldwide polling company we’ll never know which opinions are right and which are wrong. That’s what makes it cool:cool14:

 

[Mathman]

A program of two triples and one 3-3 isn't challenging for a top tier male skater at the WC.

Well, that's the whole question. Does "challenging" mean "quads" or are there other things to take into account? Wouldn't it be cool if today's skaters could master the technique of spinning like Stephane Lambiel?

 

[yume]

Well, that's the whole question. Does "challenging" mean "quads" or are there other things to take into account? Wouldn't it be cool if today's skaters could master the technique of spinning like Stephane Lambiel?

What is the points gap you would give between Jason's spins and Lambiel's?
And what is the points gap you would give between Jason's 3lz and Boyang's 4lz?

 

[Elucidus]

Without seeing the actual proposed changes I can’t comment on whether or not it I think it will be beneficial to the sport.

However, I am thrilled that the ISU recognizes that there needs to be a change and that the current system is not working correctly.

Is it? Maybe it's not perfect - but I would say it is working correctly enough. What it needs - is slow evolution - not revolution. And dividing fs to two opposite sides - is definitely a revolution.

Just as mentioned upthread, when school figures were a large percentage of your score, and skaters like Janet Lynn were not getting on the podium, it was clear a change needed to be made. Figure skating does not shy away from making changes. The old 6.0 system was a joke. When the wrong skaters are consistently getting on the podium and/or the sport is losing popularity, it makes sense to shake things up. The ISU obviously feels there is an imbalance and I agree. However, I would not want them to discourage skaters from pushing and advancing the sport.

Interesting. Implying now there are wrong skaters on the podiums too? Ok, so enlighten us - what skaters should be "right" then in your opinion and why?

 

[Reddi]

Well, that's the whole question. Does "challenging" mean "quads" or are there other things to take into account? Wouldn't it be cool if today's skaters could master the technique of spinning like Stephane Lambiel?

Are we really having an argument about jumps (especially quads) being by far the most physically demanding and risky element that takes the longest time to master and puts the highest strain on the athlete and therefore affecting the execution of the program from start to finish?

 

[cohen-esque]

Are we really having an argument about jumps (especially quads) being by far the most physically demanding and risky element that takes the longest time to master and puts the highest strain on the athlete and therefore affects the execution of the program from start to finish?

In seniors, anyway. In lower levels the spins can in fact be more difficult and bigger point getters than the single jumps and eeked-out doubles.

People should keep in mind that every skater in the world isn’t Olympic final flight material and not every competition is on the Senior Level.

 

[Elucidus]

Are we really having an argument about jumps (especially quads) being by far the most physically demanding and risky element that takes the longest time to master and puts the highest strain on the athlete and therefore affecting the execution of the program from start to finish?

:cool2:
Yeah, I am sure artistic program advocates here (you all know their names) really wants that Jason Brown's spins would cost like 15 points each - but they are too shy to say it directly

 

[Mathman]

What is the points gap you would give between Jason's spins and Lambiel's?

And what is the points gap you would give between Jason's 3lz and Boyang's 4lz?

Well, you got me there.

When the CoP first came out in 2002-2003 their first shot at scoring jumps was approximately this. The easiest triple jump was arbitrarily pegged at 4.0, then it went up through 0.5 increments for Salchow (4.5), Loop (5.0), Flip (5.5) and Lutz (6.0), with double Axel at 3.5. Each extra revolution approximately tripled the score. (So a double toe would be about 1.3 and a quad toe around 12.*

Over the years they tweaked the relative values (bringing the toe and Sal closer together and also the loop and the flip), but the main thing was that when skaters started doing multiple quads, the ISU had to back off from the "multiply by 3" rule of thumb because this put the value of quads through the roof and obliterated the contributions of anything else. (GOEs were a little stingier, too.)

For spins, I think that the ISU faced a quandary. Just "doing a spin" (or a spiral) without reference to quality was not much to score. They came up with "levels" which rewarded contortionist changes of positions, etc., but I don't think they ever achieved a point system for non-jump elements that they are truly satisfied with. Many skaters (Michelle Kwan was one) lacked the flexibility to do the highest level spins, so they tried to compensate by accepting lower levels but making up for it by concentrating of quality as reflected in the GOEs. But it never worked out to the skater's favor to sacrifice base value or levels for quality. This fact was welcomed by the "it's a sport" fans, but not by everyone.

Although the ISU has acknowledged the dilemma and has chipped away around the edges (for instance by making GOEs a percentage of base value in recent revisions and by restricting repeated quads), I believe that the problem has never been seriously addressed. Quadruple jumps count so much more than anything else that there is no (competitive) reason for a skater to do anything more that just rotate in the air as many times as he can in 4 minutes. If you waste your time on anything else, well, you are just wasting your time.

Some people are happy with this. "It's a sport" and the name of the sport is "rotating many times in the air while being weighted down by ice skates on your feet." Fans who hope for more come smack up against the question that you ask: how should the the scoring go if we wanted good spins, for instance, to be scored higher than bad ones, with enough of a scoring gap to make a difference. If I knew, I would run for ISU president.

----------

* By the way, when they did test scoring of old programs with the CoP, they found that quads were so over-valued that Timothy Goebel won the 2002 Olympics ahead of Yagudin and Plushenko. Points, schmoints, this was clearly wrong, so they hastily reduced the relative value of quads even before the first actual IJS competition.

 

[yume]

Maybe ISU should remind itself why from 2008 to 2012, 3-2s combos became the standard while in 2006-2007 and 2007-2008 seasons, most top ladies had a 3-3.
Harsher penalty forunderotation (in bonus punishing pre-rotation), strict tech panels would decrease the number of quad attempts drastically. And ISU wouldn't be panicking and wouldn't consider such changes.

 

[yume]

Well, you got me there.

When the CoP first came out in 2002-2003 their first shot at scoring jumps was approximately this. The easiest triple jump was arbitrarily pegged at 4.0, then it went up through 0.5 increments for Salchow (4.5), Loop (5.0), Flip (5.5) and Lutz (6.0), with double Axel at 3.5. Each extra revolution approximately tripled the score. (So a double toe would be about 1.3 and a quad toe around 12.*

Over the years they tweaked the relative values (bringing the toe and Sal closer together and also the loop and the flip), but the main thing was that when skaters started doing multiple quads, the ISU had to back off from the "multiply by 3" rule of thumb because this put the value of quads through the roof and obliterated the contributions of anything else. (GOEs were a little stingier, too.)

For spins, I think that the ISU faced a quandary. Just "doing a spin" (or a spiral) without reference to quality was not much to score. They came up with "levels" which rewarded contortionist changes of positions, etc., but I don't think they ever achieved a point system for non-jump elements that they are truly satisfied with. Many skaters (Michelle Kwan was one) lacked the flexibility to do the highest level spins, so they tried to compensate by accepting lower levels but making up for it by concentrating of quality as reflected in the GOEs. But it never worked out to the skater's favor to sacrifice base value or levels for quality. This fact was welcomed by the "it's a sport" fans, but not by everyone.

Although the ISU has acknowledged the dilemma and has chipped away around the edges (for instance by making GOEs a percentage of base value in recent revisions and by restricting repeated quads), I believe that the problem has never been seriously addressed. Quadruple jumps count so much more than anything else that there is no (competitive) reason for a skater to do anything more that just rotate in the air as many times as he can in 4 minutes. If you waste your time on anything else, well, you are just wasting your time.

Some people are happy with this. "It's a sport" and the name of the sport is "rotating many times in the air while being weighted down by ice skates on your feet." Fans who hope for more come smack up against the question that you ask: how should the the scoring go if we wanted good spins, for instance, to be scored higher than bad ones, with enough of a scoring gap to make a difference. If I knew, I would run for ISU president.

----------

* By the way, when they did test scoring of old programs with the CoP, they found that quads were so over-valued that Timothy Goebel won the 2002 Olympics ahead of Yagudin and Plushenko. Points, schmoints, this was clearly wrong, so they hastily reduced the relative value of quads even before the first actual IJS competition.

So quads could have worth more. Interesting.
Maybe non-jump elements should worth more. Maybe they should make non-quadsters win. Maybe a fantastic spin should be only 1 point behind a quad. Would it be right? I don't know.
I watch sport because i want to see atheticism, and i want to see athleticism rewarded. I know that spins and steps are athletic but not as jumps. Jason's SP was maybe challenging, but not as challenging as two quads SPs. And that's in part why he was 2nd at worlds.
Alina Kabaeva (oly champ in rythmic gymnastics) said in a documentary that she can't stand to watch individual events of rythmic gymnastics anymore. Because it became more dance than anything else. I fear i will have the same reaction watching an "artistic program". Or a technical program that has 3 triples because doing spins worth more.

 

[karne]

Again: you cannot have an "artistic program" requirement when figure skating officials and fandom have collectively decided that one, narrow, snobby brand of artistry is the only definition of artistry, and that anyone different, anyone who does not meet those requirements, is treated with disdain and contempt and worse, branded and reduced to the ignominy of seeing their PCS never rise, even as skaters who aren't even half as fast, or have decent edges, are pushed above you because they are better-placed to meet that one definition.

And forget it if you have good jump technique but don't meet that snobby definition. You'll be branded for life, scorned, forgotten, and labelled a "jumper" as though that is the worst insult.

 

[yume]

Again: you cannot have an "artistic program" requirement when figure skating officials and fandom have collectively decided that one, narrow, snobby brand of artistry is the only definition of artistry, and that anyone different, anyone who does not meet those requirements, is treated with disdain and contempt and worse, branded and reduced to the ignominy of seeing their PCS never rise, even as skaters who aren't even half as fast, or have decent edges, are pushed above you because they are better-placed to meet that one definition.

And forget it if you have good jump technique but don't meet that snobby definition. You'll be branded for life, scorned, forgotten, and labelled a "jumper" as though that is the worst insult.

 

[el henry]

So quads could have worth more. Interesting.
Maybe non-jump elements should worth more. Maybe they should make non-quadsters win. Maybe a fantastic spin should be only 1 point behind a quad. Would it be right? I don't know.
I watch sport because i want to see atheticism, and i want to see athleticism rewarded. I know that spins and steps are athletic but not as jumps. Jason's SP was maybe challenging, but not as challenging as two quads SPs. And that's in part why he was 2nd at worlds.
Alina Kabaeva (oly champ in rythmic gymnastics) said in a documentary that she can't stand to watch individual events of rythmic gymnastics anymore. Because it became more dance than anything else. I fear i will have the same reaction watching an "artistic program". Or a technical program that has 3 triples because doing spins worth more.

Jason’s SP was more challenging than many programs with two quads I could name. But won’t

That’s why figure skating is a judged sport. Otherwise we’d just line em up and jump quads.

And since it seems to be the rage these days, I’ll go ahead and say it. I watch the sport because I want to see the type of athleticism that Jason demonstrates rewarded, and not the lack of athleticism I see in jump da jump jump programs. And I know I stopped watching when it looked like it was all jump da jump jump, and came back only when I saw skaters like Jason.

There are others like me. There are others who like seeing more jumps. And which style has more adherents?

Who knows? :think: I sure don’t

 

[yume]

Jason’s SP was more challenging than many programs with two quads I could name. But won’t

That’s why figure skating is a judged sport. Otherwise we’d just line em up and jump quads.

And my opinion is that it wasn't.
That's why FS is a judged sport. There can be many and different opinions.

 

[el henry]

And my opinion is that it wasn't.
That's why FS is a judged sport. There can be many and different opinions.

On this we agree. :thumbsup:I’m not trying to make everyone agree with me, that would be a pretty boring world. I am trying to say that there is not one way to look at athleticism and not one way to look at judging.

And I realize folks who have not met me IRL will just need to trust me here, but I think I am about as far from elite and snobby as you can get. I just like what I like. Don’t we all?

 

[Mrs. P]

I do think people underestimate how difficult it is to do something that looks “simple.” Yes Jason can’t do multiple quads but I’d argue the opposite that few can do the transitions and moves Jason can do in his programs.

If people could rack up the points in GOE Jason does for those transitions and moves in and out of his jumps, they would. Just like I’m sure Jason would put in a quad in his SP if he could.

I think this proposal is a bad idea, though. It basically gives the ISU an out from what they should be doing — actually judging under the current system properly.

 

[tothepointe]

Sounds like a great way to decimate most of the fans the sport has gained over the last few quads.

It's lost more fans that it's gained with it's emphasis on the technical.