I don't see how their PCS are close to Uno and Kolyada for example while those two even made multiple mistakes.
SP and FS replaced by Technical and Artistic programs?
- Thread starter Lunalovesskating
- Start date
The question is ultimately can they execute Jason’s programs as is? There hasn’t been an opportunity for them to do so. The answer is unknown.
Here’s a real life example: I can run five miles in about 50 minutes , but can I get through a 50-min Pilates workout doing the exact positions and moves to the same level of executional proficiency as the instructor? Absolutely not because I do not have the flexibility or strength (although I’m working on it). The Pilates workout is harder to me, although some would argue the five mile run is physically more taxing.
Last edited:
One thing I dispute is that for there to be a "competition" that the jumps can't be capped in difficulty... which often an unacknowledged subtext to these types of discussions. Capping the type of jumps is one way to make the programs more focused on "artistry"... and completely valid IMO though that alone is not enough. The jump technical aspect would still dominate but it would prevent someone from getting buried in it.
You could have a 4 minute program with 5 jump passes with no combo or 4 with a combo/sequence that disallows quads and the 3A for ladies.... and allows more freedom for spinning and steps etc... and call that the artistic program.
And then you could have a 4 minute program that is pretty much our current "free skate" and call that the technical program.
You could have a 4 minute program with 5 jump passes with no combo or 4 with a combo/sequence that disallows quads and the 3A for ladies.... and allows more freedom for spinning and steps etc... and call that the artistic program.
And then you could have a 4 minute program that is pretty much our current "free skate" and call that the technical program.
- Joined
- May 9, 2019
As multiple posters have pointed out, the naming of the proposed replacing programs is unfortunate, leading one inevitably to ask what is "technical" and what is "artistic". Are complicated steps with musical interpretation and emotion expression artistic or technical? Are spirals held on strong edges or outstanding flexibility a demonstration of physical capabilities or artistry? Techniques and artistry are just difficult to separate and naming two different competitive segments after them is just confusing (let alone the ever hotly contested question of how you're gonna judge artistry. My short answer is you can't and you shouldn't). What I want to see as a fan is the complete package: two programs, each with jumps, spins, steps, musicality, and thoughtful interpretation, appropriately judged. (How to make these two programs distinct from each other is not my business)
As a side note, jumps are not just rotations in the air. They are derivatives from strong skating. One need to get to the right point in the rink with the right amount speed and a right, solid edge before one can take off to do the designated number of rotations. Not to say all quadsters have amazing (or should we say, eyes-pleasing) skating skills or something like that, but jumps are a manifestation of more than one aspect of athleticism of this sport.
As a side note, jumps are not just rotations in the air. They are derivatives from strong skating. One need to get to the right point in the rink with the right amount speed and a right, solid edge before one can take off to do the designated number of rotations. Not to say all quadsters have amazing (or should we say, eyes-pleasing) skating skills or something like that, but jumps are a manifestation of more than one aspect of athleticism of this sport.
I said "with comparable skating skills."
I think for most judges, skating skills come first and are the most important determinant of the other program components, whether that should be true or not. And then jump content and federation politics may also play a part, whether they should or not.
But look at Vasiljevs and Ge vs. Tomono and Aliev and Aaron and Tanaka. Federation support and quads didn't buy those latter skaters much advantage, if any, vs. quadless skaters. I'll say especially Aliev because he did have a slight advantage over them in SS and other components, but not as much as you'd expect if quads and strong federations were the deciding factor.
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2017
Not a good idea. Opens it to too much subjectivity. Skaters from small federations will never be able to win a major title this way.
Figure skating is already known for results being 'fixed' due to the subjectivity.
Figure skating is already known for results being 'fixed' due to the subjectivity.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
A little bit off topic here, but to me these little mini-spirals look better when men do them than ladies. I wish ladies would do more extended spirals where they hold the position longer.
Same with camel spins and spread eagles. To me, these are manish moves that enhance a man's program. But for ladies nothing beats a layback spin and an ina Bauer.
I know, I know, that's sexist. Women gymnasts should do the high bar and the rings.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
I agree with this. We already have an "artistic program" which we call the short program. Jason Brown's version got second place at Worlds, for instance (although he had no chance to catch Nathan Chen no matter how much "artistry" he exudes.)
Then there is the technical program, which we now call the LP and is mostly just jump, jump, jump.
The ISU can have its cake and eat it, too. Just rename the SP the artistic program and the LP the technical [program and keep on with business as usual. Everyone is happy. :yes:
I think that Deniss had better skating skills than Tanaka and Aaron who were not clean. Tomono was basically unknown from judges and got in the competition thanks to two withdrawals. So not suprising to see him with pcs below 80 despite delivering a clean LP with two quads. For Aliev it's surprising but i guess that bombing the short and skating the LP earlier didn't do him favors.
I find it difficult to hold a spiral when it's a transition into jump. Though more ladies can do the effort to hold them like Kostornaya's spiral into 3lo or her Ina Bauer before her 2A.
In choreo sequence though, i hate attempt of spirals (that's how i call 1s spiral).
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
I used to think that quads took a long time to master, but now I can see that I was wrong. Thirteen-year-olds can do them.
As for the complaint that having an "artistic program" reduces figure skating to -- ugh -- ice dance or -- double ugh -- pairs, it is interesting how these cycles go. Historically Russia dominated the disciplines of ice dance and pairs, and didn't pay much attention to singles. Then in the early 2000s they suddenly got some outstanding men. Now their ladies -- especially the junior ladies -- are ruling the roost and all of a sudden pairs, dance and men are cast aside: who cares anything about those boring disciplines.
In the U,S., the only thing fans ever cared about is ladies. Then we hit a dry spell of ladies talent, while simultaneously developing some good ice dancers. Now ice dancing is actually quite popular among U.S. skating fans. Men -- is there even such a thing as mens figure skating? But now we have Nathan Chen quadding it up and the men's discipline is surging, compared to ladies.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2013
Actually, I disagree. I do not think he is fairly rewarded for what he does. In the SP at Worlds, which seems to be the example, he should have had the highest PCS, but he was only third - behind a flawed Hanyu and Chen. That was a crime in and of itself.
But it doesn't always work. Brendan Kerry has done a lot of very hard work to improve both jumps and artistry. And yet, when he went clean in the SP at 2017 Worlds, foot-perfect and stunning, he was still placed behind Kevin Reynolds and sloppy UR quads, even though Brendan's quad had been clean.
But little country scoring is not a matter for this thread, and it will happen regardless. Getting a quad does not automatically boost a little country skater. It is much harder than that.
People call this simple, but it's really not. It's a minefield.
First, do you have it only at Senior level? Junior level? All international events? If it's all International events then the countries that use Nationals to help decide must surely implement the same system, and that's fine for the big countries, but what about the little countries for whom scraping up a Nationals panel is hard enough as it is? And then what? Surely you can't have a separate system at Nationals to what you use in the qualifiers. So the qualifiers need to use it, too. And on it goes, right down to the club roots where they can barely scrape up half a panel and it kills competitions at that tiny level.
You seem to be equating artistry with transitions, and claiming that Jason's high marks are solely due to transitions. Neither of these statements is correct. You can throw the kitchen sink of transitions into a program and still not be artistic. (I will be lynched for this but: I have often thought Chan made that error.) Jason's high marks have very little to do with his transitions, but more to do with his power, flow, edging, glide, the fluid beautiful way he moves, the expressions of his face, the way he gives himself over to his music.
Funny you should mention Max, and Worlds 2018 (to which I assume this refers). Max is a prime example of skater who was slapped with the "jumper" tag and whose PCS was anchored as a result, no matter what he did - and oh, the howling when he broke 81! But, consider that at Worlds 2018, while Max had a slightly wobbly start to his FS, the finish was strong and powerful, and he skated with a lightness, joy and delight that was unlike any of his other performances - and yet, he was still barely a single point ahead of Zhou on PCS, who fell multiple times with sloppy jumps and no speed. But Zhou meets the snobby definition of an "artistic skater" - long limbs, serious music, spreadeagles - and so the judges were more than happy to push up his PCS where it was not deserved.
If I want to watch something very athletic, I watch mens gymnastics. If I want to watch something very artistic, I watch ballet. If I want to watch something thats a mix between artistic and athletic, I watch figure skating. Seperating the programs into one that is purely elements and one that is purely interpretation/choreography removes the mixture that draws me to figure skating in the first place.
As i said in a previous post, i think HE's well and fairly scored for his skating. He gets the points he deserves. It's other skaters who get overscored and finish with higher pcs than him. Imo, he got exactly the PCS he deserved.
That's why i took Rizzo as an example. Getting a quad didn't make him get similar PCS than Brown in SP, he was almost 6 point behind. And being cleaner, landing all his jumps but quad cleanly in the free didn't stop judges to give him PCS almost 7 points behind Brown who did more mistakes.
No. I talked about his transitions in the debate about challenging program, and especially jump difficulty. I didn't talked about artistry. Transitions are not the definition of artistry.
I mention Max because gkelly took him as an example as a skater from big fed who got less pcs than a skater from small fed while the two as similar skills in his/her opinion. And i explained why imo it wasn't surprising. If he got underscored compared to skaters who bombed that's a shame and that is what happen when you are not among the chosen ones of your fed.
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2019
Turns out the proposal is actually to change the ratios in the end!
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2014
Mathman, regardless of whether your perception is sexist (not gonna go there right now
), I think you're kind of missing the point, at least as to this particular poster's comments. Jason's spirals - short and long - work because they always have a raison d'être and are choreographed and executed to the music (as opposed to programs criticized as heavy on transitions, including those oh so brief spirals, not because the music calls for it, but simply as a way to get higher PCS). The truth is, a lot of people criticized Jason for "sticking his leg up" too much in this particular program, but apparently the poster you responded to either doesn't know that or is ignoring it because it doesn't fit her agenda.It's not a simple matter of what's popular, though. The complaints that quadless or artistic programs are like "ice dance" or "pairs" show disrespect for those disciplines in their entirety, as well as for quadless "artistic" men.
I have no problem with people who only find programs with quads exciting, but I do really object when they dismiss programs without them as technically deficient.
When you ask people why they think jumps are the hardest elements in figure skating, you usually get some variation of "it's obvious" or "look how many points they're awarded" or "look how few people are doing quads - they must be harder." But as far as I know, when the ISU assigned points to various technical elements, it wasn't based on objective, scientific studies weighting the relative difficulty of learning or executing those elements. And when those values have been adjusted, it hasn't been because some study came out and said, well, a 4Z isn't actually as hard as we thought it was, so let's give it fewer points.
I'd also say that in my experience, sometimes things that seem simple are often extremely technically demanding, but if they're not spectacular, people dismiss them as "easy" or unimportant. I suppose that's not surprising coming from people who haven't skated and don't know how hard certain things are, but I don't think there's any excuse for judges who award high PCS and GOE in lockstep with high base value, ignoring poor edges, poor choreo, bent-over landings, etc., because, well, "quads!" or"4Z!" In my opinion, that's pretty much everything that's wrong with the current judging system. JMO.
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2017
https://rsport.ria.ru/20190826/1557921557.html
New clarifications from Lakernik:
1) changes (if approved) will be adopted only after 2022
2) if now ratio between TES and PCS is presumably 50:50 - then in technical program weight of PCS will be 40%, in artistic program - 60%
3) in artistic program complexity will take a back seat. Skaters in that programs will do jumps, spins etc. too - but amount of elements will be less and their weight will be significantly lower
New clarifications from Lakernik:
1) changes (if approved) will be adopted only after 2022
2) if now ratio between TES and PCS is presumably 50:50 - then in technical program weight of PCS will be 40%, in artistic program - 60%
3) in artistic program complexity will take a back seat. Skaters in that programs will do jumps, spins etc. too - but amount of elements will be less and their weight will be significantly lower
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2019
+ if the changes will be accepted, they come in effect only after Oly 22.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
To tell the truth this 4Lz phenomenon is utterly baffling to me. Only a few years ago we thought that a 4Lz was beyond the physical capabilities of the human body. Now all of a sudden little girls barely teenagers are throwing them off right and left, nothing to it. Want to see that with an intricate entry and arms over the head? OK.
Alysa Liu can do a 4Lz, but she can't do a 4T or a 4S -- too hard. (?)
As for points, people will do ANYTHING for points. If you offer someone 10 points he might say, nuts to you , that's too hard. Solution? Give him 20. He'll be in the harness the next day.
In general, though, I don't think there is anything much that the ISU can do about it. What is easy for one skater is hard for another. In fact the one thing that the IJS does do is provide a variety of ways to score points so each skater can design his program to maximize his strengths.
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2014
I am semi-okay with this - for example, I like the idea of level-free spins and steps, with more of an emphasis on the beauty of those elements/how well they go with the music, rather than on complexity/difficulty for the heck of it.
I am less okay with changing the weights of TES/PCS. PCS are way too pre-determined. I'm not suggesting that the scores are fixed, per se, but we know reputation matters a lot in PCS, and there's not enough differentiation between the different PCS categories. I don't think we should weigh PCS more heavily unless they start to evaluate them more accurately and fairly.
