"The Prometheus: Why Patrick Chan Means More for Figure Skating History Than Plushenko"

[CanadianSkaterGuy]

Maybe this belongs in the "Stupid Questions" thread but here goes:

An earlier post mentioned that 25 quads under CoP is more impressive than under 6.0. Explanation, please?

Thanks much!

CoP has much more demanding requirements than the 6.0 system. It regards things like more intricate choreography, more complex footwork sequences, spins with greater rotations and positions, less two footed skating, less telegraphing and more difficult entries into jumps, etc. These all tire out skaters much more than if they were stroking around reeling off jumps. Generally, CoP programs are viewed as much harder than their predecessors. However, this added intricacy/difficulty is a bit controversial in that it diminishes programs artistically as there's less time to interpret as more time and energy is expended on difficulty. Quads of course are much more difficult these days in their reduced setup time ... you can see that many skaters will telegraph their quads less and often include footwork before, whereas under 6.0 skaters would motor around the ice and you could see quads coming from a mile away.

 

[Buttercup]

Quads of course are much more difficult these days in their reduced setup time ... you can see that many skaters will telegraph their quads less and often include footwork before, whereas under 6.0 skaters would motor around the ice and you could see quads coming from a mile away.

I don't see particularly short setup times into most quads - including Chan's. Fernandez does tend to have shorter setups for his 4S than most skaters do into their quads.

Don't get me started on all the skaters who do solo quads as their out-of-steps jump in the SP, with no steps whatsoever leading into it. And the judges still give them +GOEs! If you can't do a quad out of steps, do a 4-3. Bummed about no second half bonus for your combo? Deal with it.

I agree. A quad fall as a strategic move or transitions leading to poor quality elements does diminish a program. There's a fine balance between attempting difficulty and throwing yourself in the air. What I'm basically saying is that programs should have some level of risk, but it should be a calculated risk. Obviously skaters shouldn't attempt things they are incapable of, but on the other hand they shouldn't be doing programs that they are easily capable of.

I also agree that a spin with fast, centred aesthetic positions is a lot better than a spin that's attempting to get 5 position changes or hold a position for 8 revolutions (the WORST are the upright "butt" spins held in that position, like what are they thinking!), or a step sequence that's simply attempting to get all the difficulty crammed in there. There's certainly a lot of changes that need to be made but it's getting there.

Some skaters also like to push themselves, like Chan with many transitions or Hanyu with difficult entries. Personally, as a skater, I know that I'm far more cognizant of transitions and I actually am striving to be more creative with my jump entries than as a teen when I used to usually stroke into them (as pre-CoP jumps/choreo tended to be).

I think you can see the differences between skaters even on stroking, as basic as it might seem. Think of Elena Berezhnaya; wasn't that gorgeous? Of course she did more than just stroking, but sometimes I like seeing a simpler movement that reflects the character of the music and not another transition.

That said, I am not opposed to skaters putting more effort into transitions and linking movements. However, skating skills and TR are the more objective, easily quantified components. That means that it's a better return for a skater's (time) investment) to focus on that - but that means that the more subjective components, IN and P&E, are given less focus and less weight, and a lot of programs these days reflect this. I think we can all agree that a skater will usually get good marks on the latter two if they have strong skating skills (and good jumps), even if their IN and P&E isn't all that great. The same is not true in the other direction - your interpretation and performance can be top-notch, but if your tech isn't as strong, good luck getting out of the sevens (if that). To give an example from another discipline, nobody will persuade me that Hurtado/Diaz did not give one of the best performances in Sochi, even if technically they are not there yet. Now look at their IN mark. How is that right?

How can we ensure that skaters develop not just their technical skills and difficulty but also their abilities as performers who truly interpret the music? Skating can't survive on TR alone. The artistic side shouldn't be relegated to second-best status, it's not a cherry on top or secondary to the technical. Yet to me, it often feels that way these days, especially in the men's event where everyone is so busy on cramming in the tech.

This is why I'd rather watch the ladies. You actually see a lot more style and range of performances than you do in the men's competition.

 

[moviechick]

Attempts =\= cleanly landed though.

Neither Hanyu not Chan had 2 clean quads in the FS, and those are their opening jumping passes just as most did it under 6.0. The highest number of clean quads among medalists is still 2002 by a mile.

 

[skatedreamer]

CoP has much more demanding requirements than the 6.0 system. It regards things like more intricate choreography, more complex footwork sequences, spins with greater rotations and positions, less two footed skating, less telegraphing and more difficult entries into jumps, etc. These all tire out skaters much more than if they were stroking around reeling off jumps. Generally, CoP programs are viewed as much harder than their predecessors. However, this added intricacy/difficulty is a bit controversial in that it diminishes programs artistically as there's less time to interpret as more time and energy is expended on difficulty. Quads of course are much more difficult these days in their reduced setup time ... you can see that many skaters will telegraph their quads less and often include footwork before, whereas under 6.0 skaters would motor around the ice and you could see quads coming from a mile away.

:thumbsup: Aha...that's very clear. Also, the intricacy/difficulty thing is reminding me about a few things I thought about re: Adelina's LP but no time for that now. Thanks again!

 

[Alba]

I also agree that a spin with fast, centred aesthetic positions is a lot better than a spin that's attempting to get 5 position changes or hold a position for 8 revolutions (the WORST are the upright "butt" spins held in that position, like what are they thinking!), or a step sequence that's simply attempting to get all the difficulty crammed in there. There's certainly a lot of changes that need to be made but it's getting there.

Or a "simple" lift in Pairs. We hardly see them now.

 

[CanadianSkaterGuy]

Or a "simple" lift in Pairs. We hardly see them now.

I actually prefer the renewed intricacy in lifts versus something like Totmianina/Marinin who had the most basic, boring lifts. Now you get lifts in both directions, out of lunges, with reverse holds, etc. A lot more creativity there. Even looking at twists and death spirals, they're a lot harder (although some death spirals look painfully laboured when pairs try to get that extra rotation in).

I don't see particularly short setup times into most quads - including Chan's. Fernandez does tend to have shorter setups for his 4S than most skaters do into their quads. .

Many more guys are taking shorter or at least more difficult setups in their quad. Chan's 2nd quad for example has a rocker leading up to it, Hanyu's 4T has a choctaw prior to it, Fernandez has a series of turns before his 4S. Obviously some guys still have power stroking into their quads and triple axels, but now that more difficult entries are being rewarded we are seeing more creativity.

In 6.0 you wouldn't be deducted for simply stroking into a quad, but you wouldn't be rewarded for doing a quad or triple axel with a tricky entry. So why risk losing the speed for the sake of a more difficult entry that won't be rewarded anyways. So in that sense, CoP is great, and athletes like Hanyu and Chan are responsible for pushing the field (and themselves) to attempt more creativity.

 

[Alba]

I actually prefer the renewed intricacy in lifts versus something like Totmianina/Marinin who had the most basic, boring lifts. Now you get lifts in both directions, out of lunges, with reverse holds, etc. A lot more creativity there. Even looking at twists and death spirals, they're a lot harder (although some death spirals look painfully laboured when pairs try to get that extra rotation in).

Actually I heard that a "simple" lift it's quite difficult, because of the balance and power you need, and I loved that T&M lift tbh.
However, my point is that I don't like to see couples try so hard to do a new intricate lift, and as you said some painfully laboured death spirals, when some of them clearly are not able to them properly, but they might be much better in doing a simple lift, for example.
All this because of the system.

To quote Sonia Bianchetti: " The appeal of figure skating, as we all know, was its beauty, its art. This is what made it unique. AND IT IS LOST! The skaters now have been turned into robots, struggling to fit everything in and especially trying to get the highest "level" for each element, no matter how ugly the result may be.

A level 1 skating move might be the best way to express a phrase of music, but it has become a poor competitive choice. Instead of good choreography, we now see just repetitions of the same elements in the short and the free programs, or positions held long enough for the eye to process. "

 

[Alba]

While watching the skating and the marking at the Lombardia Trophy, though, I could not refrain from making some considerations on the inadequacy of the present rules especially for lower-level events, both for the skaters and the judges.

I was really suffering seeing most of these youngsters falling down in the absurd attempt to execute difficult double jumps and double-double jump combinations far beyond their capabilities, or executing complicated spins with no speed but a lot of travelling.

Not to speak of the quality of skating! With very few exceptions, the quality really suffered because basic skating, gliding on the ice, was simply neglected. The skaters just cannot skate. And this is due to the fact that the national and international regulations impose too many difficult jumps and jump combinations, overly difficult and complicated spins, in both short and free programs. And this is wrong. The main purpose of these events should be to create a solid technical basis that will allow the young skaters to evolve and slowly reach higher levels. Exactly as it happens in primary and secondary school, where the children, before being asked to write a poem, are taught to write and read, to learn grammar and syntax. Without these bases, nobody can expect any of these children, as gifted as they may be, to one day write The Divine Comedy. The same applies to our sport.

It would seem logical that the skaters be taught first to execute in the best possible way all the basic elements: solo jumps with a proper takeoff and good landing on long backward edges, and upright, sit and camel spins, without changing foot or positions, or grabbing the free leg after half a turn in a painful attempt to get some more points. This would push quality over poorly executed features.

http://www.soniabianchetti.com/writings_challenge.html

 

[Buttercup]

Many more guys are taking shorter or at least more difficult setups in their quad. Chan's 2nd quad for example has a rocker leading up to it, Hanyu's 4T has a choctaw prior to it, Fernandez has a series of turns before his 4S. Obviously some guys still have power stroking into their quads and triple axels, but now that more difficult entries are being rewarded we are seeing more creativity.

In 6.0 you wouldn't be deducted for simply stroking into a quad, but you wouldn't be rewarded for doing a quad or triple axel with a tricky entry. So why risk losing the speed for the sake of a more difficult entry that won't be rewarded anyways. So in that sense, CoP is great, and athletes like Hanyu and Chan are responsible for pushing the field (and themselves) to attempt more creativity.

In 6.0 you'd be rewarded for landing a clean quad, while the IJS rewards the tricky entry even if it screwed up the jump. I don't see how that's much of an improvement. That's the problem I mentioned earlier of rewarding difficulty over execution instead of alongside execution. It's an easy fix, BTW: just add more things to the list of what must result in -GOE and not just reduced GOE.

I remember when Chan first added a 4T to his programs, he tried some tricky setups and eventually gave up because the jump was not working - a change that I applauded, BTW, because it allowed him to get it right. Even if he now sometimes does a rocker before the jump, that's one move and not immediately before he takes off. As I wrote earlier, if anyone does deserve credit in this area, it's Fernandez, who really upped the ante technically more than Chan did and before Hanyu added extra difficulty to his programs. And unlike them, he has two consistent quads (obviously, he does not have their skating skills).

I don't particularly care whether someone does a choctaw before a quad, because I care about how the jump looks, and not so much how the jump entry looks. It's not a feature of the IJS that I much care for, or the transitions out of jumps instead of holding a running edge with good extension on the free leg, or the difficult air position, which leads to 'Tano and Rippon arms (they can't be that difficult if every other skater can do them!). This is a good quad, and so is this one. I'm not inclined to look what steps led into them; there are plenty of opportunities in a program to have rockers and choctaws and mohawks, not nearly as many to get the most difficult jumps right.

Re lifts, I think most of the difficult ones look awful even when they are well executed. Do I need to see someone with divine positions like Tatiana Volosozhar hit ugly ones? Why should I want guys wobbling on one foot or Stefania Berton upside down or Morgan Cipres going down to one knee and barely holding up Vanessa James? Just because something difficult can be done doesn't mean it should be done.

 

[Mathman]

^ This.