Technical value of jumps - your take?

[Ares]

Do you think that Base Values reflect accurately difficulty of jumps? As we know, those numbers attributed to them were changing in the course of time, IIRC the only major jump is triple lutz who kept its initial BV = 6,0. Triple flip was at some point in the past downgraded with BV being lowered from 5,5 to 5,3 making it artificially from now bit easier in theory or less important, and only bit more difficult than triple loop / rittberger which BV was elevated by 0,1 p - making only 0,2 p difference vs 0,5 which is significant difference and surely made some difference for many skaters, mostly ladies who prefer putting rittberger instead of flip in their SP unlike they would do in the past.

The other jumps also went through inflation, salchows, toe-loops, all quadruples and triple axel. I genuinely like only change for Triple Axel with BV getting from 7,5 to 8,5 Quads getting boost (with asterisk of possible -4 GOE) I also agree with. I'd like to see Throw Quads getting some boost though, but maybe ISU thinks that it would encourage too many teams to risk with their health (I mean ladies' health).

How in your imaginary COP jumps would get scored? You're welcome to include here your views on jump combinations, possibilities to encourage skaters to do some original and more difficult ones too. I am sad that we virtually don't see anymore combinations like 4T-3T-2T / 3T (?) / 3lo or 3-3-3 in Men (the last who made such in ISU competition was Kevin Van Der Perren iirc), or at least 3-3-2 for ladies

Do you think they (jumps) weigh too much, and other skating technical elements should get more recognition with their BV (spins, step sequences, choreo sequences, etc.)

 

[mcq]

For combo jumps. Just a suggestion. Maybe the second and third jump attached should get different BV (like bonus BV) than the BV of the jump itself. And different value if the jump preceding has more revolution. Assigning different BV for every combo would be too taxing but this system does not really require that.

e.g
BV of 3T = 4.3
3T attached after a jump with single rev : 2.5% BV bonus ~ 4.4
3T attached after a jump with double rev : 5% BV bonus ~ 4.5
3T attached after a jump with triple rev : 10% BV bonus ~ 4.73
3T attached after a jump with quad rev : 15% BV bonus ~ 4.95

For the third jump in a combo ~ 5%, 10%, 15%, 20% something like that
(I am just pulling random number as an example, of course ISU and skater should know best how to assign extra bonus points in consideration with difficulty, this is just to give an illustration)

This will encourage people to do harder combos. Like a 3t-4t combo would get higher BV than a 4t-3t combo for example, or benefit ladies who prefer to do 2 3-3s instead of 2 2a-3t (with the current system, the total BV of these two would still be the same), and encourage more interesting combos (like 3-3-3, 4-3-3, 4-4 or even 4-Lo-4 lol).

About other elements should be getting higher BV, I don't know. The BV should represent the difficulty so I think it is fine as it is. I kind of disagree if BV of a spin, say, should get the same BV as a quad for example. But maybe an increase to 4~5 pts (or even 6 pts) should still be acceptable for me.

 

[pETEs (Sasha Fan)]

*I think "levels" should apply to jumps too... for example, jumping a combo in opposite directions (i.e. a Lz+Lz or a F+Lz) and "delaying" the jumps Lussi style should be a Level 4!

*The use of Toe-Loop as the second jump in a combo more than once should be declared invalid!

*Telegraphing should be severely punished: surprise jumps Kurt Browning-like or unlikely entries (à la Slutskaya 2005-06 2A), should be generously rewarded.

*Arms in "innovative" positions, i.e. Sasha Cohen's "birdcage" inside scratch spin position; Nancy Kerrigan's hands-on-hips 2T, or simply both arms swinging to the sides, à la Chinese classical dance, could be rewarded: more than two "'Tanoes" or "Rippons" would mean a mandatory 1.00 point deduction!

*The same could apply for leg positions, since the Axel is 'inspired'/transferred from the ballet jump called "saut de Basque", skaters could try for another type of beautiful position, other than "the backspin on air"; "cross-foot" spin position could apply! However, "Nakanoes" would be severely punished! xP

*Jumps other than 'vertical' multirotational twists, could be rewarded, as variations on the "split" jumps, 540 kick variations, and even the controversial 'backflips".

*New boot design should be tested and approved, providing something lighter, flexible without being dangerous and with sharper blades, being aesthetically more pleasant, and allowing skaters to jump higher (the multi-rotational and the other type of jumps) and skate with any section of their feet (toes, obliques, heels). The chunky, un-evolved 100 years freezed ISU boots could be incinerated.

*Finally, those boots should come with the technology to measure speed, force impressed, absolute and relative height (according to the skaters size and weight), to provide for more technical objectivity!

 

[CanadianSkaterGuy]

I know it's not quite jumps, but the values of throws in pairs definitely needs to be worth more given the risk and compared to the triple vs quad points seen for those jumps in singles.

 

[QuadThrow]

This is the most important topic you can discuss about and most of the suggentions really make sense.

But we should be careful that the system does not become too compilcated and too mathematical. What could be more intuitive for a combination than adding the BV of all jumps?

The ISU pushed the 3T last year. 4.30 seems to be quite high for this jump. IMO 5.50 for the flip was better.

Giving levels for jumps sound very interesting... I am concerned that the technical commitee gets too much power. That is the biggest problem in Ice Dance. Almost everything is decided by the levels.

The discussion about rising the BV for quad throws is very old. Some people think that this forces injuries. And to be honest: This is a really good argument. In additon the physical height difference between pairs has grown in pairs the last years. I love pairs so much and I feel a bit helpless how we can change the system to make pairs more attractive. Maybe it would be a good idea to ditch one spin and to get the step sequence back into the FP.

 

[Ares]

This is the most important topic you can discuss about and most of the suggentions really make sense.

But we should be careful that the system does not become to compilcated and too mathematical. What could be more intuitive for a combination than adding the BV of all jumps?

The ISU pushed the 3T last year. 4.30 seems to be quite high for this jump. IMO 5.50 for the flip was better.

Giving levels for jumps sound very interesting... I am concerned that the technical commitee gets to much power. That is the biggest problem in Ice Dance. Almost everything is decided by the levels.

The discussion about rising the BV for quad throws is very old. Some people think that this forces injuries. And to be honest: This is a really good argument. In additon the physical height difference between pairs has grown in pairs the last years. I love pairs to much and I feel a bit helpless how we can change the system to make pairs more attractive. Maybe it would be a good idea to dirch one spin and to get the step sequence back into the FP.

Yes - adding levels to jumps could cause some problems and spark controversies. We already have some with levels distributed to twists in pairs but I like the idea there. It encourages some variations that otherwise would appear rarely.

 

[drivingmissdaisy]

For the sake of discussion, can someone post a link that lists the jump base values?

 

[gkelly]

Scale of Values

 

[andromache]

Quad throws and quad twists need a boost in BV.

Combos need to be rewarded by not only adding together the BVs of the jumps, but also by using some sort of multiplier to encourage skaters to do more difficult combos, like a 3Lz-3T should be worth more than a single 3Lz and 3T, obviously.

Broader range of GOE. If Evgenia can get +2s and +3s (which I'm not arguing), jumps like Liza T.'s should have a chance to get a +5. And make GOE worth more. IMO, the current scale of values doesn't reward quality and punish poor quality enough.

Don't let the Zayak rule invalidate entire combos - only the part of the combo that was repeated.

Don't any more rules limiting tanos and other such nonsense - the system is complex enough as it is.

 

[drivingmissdaisy]

I feel like quad base values need a much bigger spread. Triples range between 4.3 and 8.5 (a difference of 4.2), while quads range between 10.3 and 15 (a 4.7 difference). The difference between a 3Lz and 3A is actually greater than the difference between 4Lz and 4A, which makes absolutely no sense at all.

 

[gkelly]

Combos need to be rewarded by not only adding together the BVs of the jumps, but also by using some sort of multiplier to encourage skaters to do more difficult combos, like a 3Lz-3T should be worth more than a single 3Lz and 3T, obviously.

I agree. The trick is to how to implement it so as not to overcomplicate the scoring and to satisfy the different people who focus on different aspects of what makes a combination more difficult.

Broader range of GOE. If Evgenia can get +2s and +3s (which I'm not arguing), jumps like Liza T.'s should have a chance to get a +5. And make GOE worth more. IMO, the current scale of values doesn't reward quality and punish poor quality enough.

Supposedly there has been some talk about expanding the GOE range, but the details haven't been made public yet. We'll hear about it after 2018.

Don't let the Zayak rule invalidate entire combos - only the part of the combo that was repeated.

That took effect this year, thank goodness.

Don't any more rules limiting tanos and other such nonsense - the system is complex enough as it is.

If there were to be a rule limiting how many times certain kinds of jump variations could be rewarded, they would probably have to be features called by the tech panel rather than GOE bullet points assessed by individual judges separately. So that would complicate the system at least somewhat.

Then you'd have the debate over what should become a feature vs. what should remain a GOE bullet, which features should be limited vs. which should be rewarded every time, which similar features count as the same vs. which count as separate features, etc.

 

[Mathman]

About giving more points for a combo, I am not sure that this is necessary. You already get extra points because a 3-3 combo allows you to squeeze in an extra triple overall. In the ladies' short program for instance you can do three triples and a double Axel.

In the LP, if you do, say, a 3Lz+2T, you still get the points for the double jump for free because you (an elite lady) would not do that double jump at all if it were not part of the combo.

I think the present base values are OK, but I am not sure that the sport gains anything from the constant tweaking. Is the sport of figure skating better because a triple flip is worth 5.3 points instead of 5.5? Could anyone explain to a fan or audience member why a triple flip is exactly 88 1/3 % as difficult to perform as a triple Lutz, rather than 91 2/3 % like it was in 2004?

The original thinking, that here are the five jumps in order of difficulty, T,S,Lo,F,Lz, so we will give them 4.0, 4.5, 5.0, 5,5 and 6.0 -- well, that's kind of arbitrary, but it is something that lay people can understand, in the same way that they understand that in American football you get 3 points for a field goal and 6 points for a touchdown.

 

[karne]

I think the issue is less about the base value itself and more about the punishment (or lack thereof) for mistakes. You shouldn't be winning National titles with a fall when other skaters are practically clean (and make only one single mistake - and a minor one at that). You shouldn't be falling five times and winning medals. You shouldn't be falling and scoring a 98. You shouldn't be falling and scoring 92 PCS (but that's another matter).

<, <<, e, and ! all need to be more harshly punished, as do falls.

 

[Mathman]

I feel like quad base values need a much bigger spread. Triples range between 4.3 and 8.5 (a difference of 4.2), while quads range between 10.3 and 15 (a 4.7 difference). The difference between a 3Lz and 3A is actually greater than the difference between 4Lz and 4A, which makes absolutely no sense at all.

In my system an extra revolution triples the value of a jump.

Single T or S = 0.5, double = 1.5, triple = 4.5, quad = 13.5

Single Lo or F = 0.6, double = 1.8, triple = 5.4, triple = 16.2 (multiply the first row by 1.2 -- 1/5th higher))

Single Lz = 0.7, double = 2.1, triple = 6.3, quad = 18.9 (multiply the second row by 1.1667 -- 1/6th higher))

Single A = 1.2, double = 3.6, triple = 10.8, quad = 32.4 (multiply the third row by 1.73 (this is the square root of three, to account for the extra half-revolution ))

Now we have a system based on sensible mathematical principles, not a hodge-podge of guesses and value judgements.

 

[mcq]

About giving more points for a combo, I am not sure that this is necessary. You already get extra points because a 3-3 combo allows you to squeeze in an extra triple overall. In the ladies' short program for instance you can do three triples and a double Axel.

In the LP, if you do, say, a 3Lz+2T, you still get the points for the double jump for free because you (an elite lady) would not do that double jump at all if it were not part of the combo.

But there are cases like this :
Skater A with layout : 3Lz3T 3F 2A /// 3Lz3T2T 3Lo 3S 2A2T
Skater B with layout : 2A3T 3Lz 3F /// 2A3T 3Lz2T2T 3Lo 3S
These 2 skaters would have the same jump base value, but the first layout is harder than the second layout, which in my opinion is not really fair. Skaters like wakaba higuchi and medvedeva who do 2 3-3s actually have no benefit point-wise compared to those who decide to do 1 3-3 and 1 2-3 or even 2 2-3s.

 

[Miller]

3Lo as 2nd part of combo +10% i.e. +10% 1st half, +20 2nd half. Encourage more of this difficult (for men and women) combo.

triple-triple-triple +10% last part (presumably 3T). Similarly.

Men only - treat 3T as double jump re Zayak rule. You always get men doing quad-2T and 3A-2T jumps when you can see they could easily do a 3T at the end but don't because of the Zayak rule. Extend to ladies if and when becomes clear Triple Axel Barrier is too much and everybody but everybody is doing 7 Triples and 2 Double Axels. At that point would be 8 triple and 3 triple-triple routines possible.

Zayak combinations i.e. no 2 times 2A-3T for example.

 

[gkelly]

3Lo as 2nd part of combo +10% i.e. +10% 1st half, +20 2nd half. Encourage more of this difficult (for men and women) combo.

In that case, I would also want to reward 3S or 3F as a second (but not third) part of a combo. I.e., in something-half loop-3S, all jumps get regular base value. But in 1A+3S or 2S+3S with the first jump landing on the opposite foot, the 3S gets a bonus.

triple-triple-triple +10% last part (presumably 3T). Similarly.

OK. Actually, what's more likely is that the second jump will be 3T and the third one will be 3Lo. So then the last 3Lo would get two bonuses. Maybe it would make more sense just to add a flat 1.00 bonus to any three-jump combo in which all three jumps are at least triple and none are downgraded.

Men only - treat 3T as double jump re Zayak rule. You always get men doing quad-2T and 3A-2T jumps when you can see they could easily do a 3T at the end but don't because of the Zayak rule. Extend to ladies if and when becomes clear Triple Axel Barrier is too much and everybody but everybody is doing 7 Triples and 2 Double Axels. At that point would be 8 triple and 3 triple-triple routines possible.

There are two provisions of the Zayak rule: only 2 jumps (of 3 or more revolutions) can be repeated, and each of those repeated jumps can only be performed twice.

Which are you planning to exempt the 3T from, or both?

Are you saying it would be OK to do three or more triple toes in the same program? Because I could see that getting easily abused by skaters who can't do all the harder triples (or any quads). That would especially be true when you're trying to encourage top female jumpers to do more 3-3 combos, but a below-average senior lady jumper could do layouts like 3T+2T, 3S+2T, 2A+2T, 3T, 3T, 3S, 2A.

It would also mean that a good jumper who puts in three triple-triple combinations just by putting 3T at the end of all of them (e.g., the three combinations being 3A+3T, 3Lz+3T, and 3F+3T+2T) would not be showing a variety of combination skills. If they want to do three triple-triples, let them learn to put a loop or salchow at the end of one.

Or that it would be OK to do two 3T without penalty even if two other triples or quads were also repeated?

I.e., you can repeat 2 different jumps with 3 or more revolutions -- or 3 different jumps with 3 or more revolutions if and only if one of the repeated jumps is 3T and both 3Ts are in combination? That provision would probably be harder to abuse.

Zayak combinations i.e. no 2 times 2A-3T for example.

What would be the penalty? Would it also apply to combinations with 2T as the second jump, which might happen by accident?

 

[andromache]

Zayak combinations i.e. no 2 times 2A-3T for example.

Why?

Especially if the goal is to incentivize more difficult combos...why not allow someone to do two 3Lz-3Lo in a program if they want?

 

[gkelly]

They could get the points for the difficult combos, but if judges don't like the lack of variety they can take that into account in the Composition score.

 

[Miller]

First 2 suggestions are to try to get people to do things that could be done e.g. Evgenia Medvedeva at recent Russian Nationals, but there's not quite enough incentive. Just a bit more variety that's all. Triple toe loop, no more than 2 as per Double Axels etc. so no 3 times, but yes you do get men holding back when they could do 3Ts, but have already done one. Fair point re repeated combos, 70%?, the skater knows what their doing and would know the risk of say trying a 3Lz-3T and 3Lz-2T in the same routine, plus don't like the idea of a skater just essentially learning one difficult combo, would rather it be more to show their variety.

3Lo at end of triple-triple-triple, yes could be 2 bonuses if in 2nd half. Funnily enough 30% bonus would make value 6.63, value 1.02 higher than current 5.61. 10% extra for 3S, 3F after e.g. one foot 2S, yes, why not. If skaters could comfortably do something, but they're not, it's probably because there's not enough incentive. Hence incentivise hopefully just enough and get more variety.