What rule changes would you like to see next season? | Golden Skate

What rule changes would you like to see next season?

Jontor

Medalist
Joined
Jan 18, 2018
Country
Sweden
After every Olympic cycle there seem to be some rule changes. What changes to you think are going to happen?

I expect more definitions on jumps and rotations. But I am torn about this. One of the things I don't like is when I see a good skate, and then when the scores come up the tech has magically gone down with 10 points. This is not audience friendly and the ISU should know this. It is in the ISU's interest to make this sport more popular and that includes making it understandable for the audience. I have watched several competitions with "non"-FS fans and they are just confused when this happens. And it is safe to say they lost their interest immediately because it is too complicated. Maybe a simple solution is that whenever there is a questionmark on an edge or UR this shows in the scorebox? And the tech goes down with it? I've seen national Russian competitions where they already are doing this. It would be much better if we have increased scores instead, if the tech panel after reviewing changes their mind.

Step Sequences:
I really hope there will be some change in the basics here. Now, you have certain turns and things to do to get a level 4. But imo it kills the creativeness of step seq's and it makes them look generic and boring. Gone are the days when you can just go full crazy with your steps, it used to be a crowd pleasing moment.
Instead I want a more difficulty based level system, and then you can judge the steps and turns in the GOEs.

Spins:
Same here with spins. I want a change in the basics here. There is a lot of slow, simple, ugly, awfully done spins out there that gets level 4, just because they hold a position for X turns. And then they get +GOE as well! Again, it kills the creativity imo. I remember the mother of all spins, Lucinda Ruh, who used to have some variations where she constantly changed position in a wonderful way. That would never get level 4 now.
 

gliese

Final Flight
Joined
Oct 31, 2020
Country
United-States
There is a lot of slow, simple, ugly, awfully done spins out there that gets level 4, just because they hold a position for X turns.
The levels indicate the difficulty of the spin, though. The GOE is what indicates the execution hence its name, grade of execution. Certain level bullets correlate with higher GOEs (increasing speed comes to mind) and others are correlated with lower GOEs (spinning both directions comes to mind).
 

alexocfp

Medalist
Joined
Nov 28, 2020
Country
United-States
I got 2:

Let the skaters choose which elements they want to perform in the SP and FS without any component being mandatory. You want to jump 12 quads? Go for it.

Second, ban the word “artistry” it’s a sport so your job is to score as many points as you can. Haha
 

gliese

Final Flight
Joined
Oct 31, 2020
Country
United-States
I really hope there will be some change in the basics here. Now, you have certain turns and things to do to get a level 4. But imo it kills the creativeness of step seq's and it makes them look generic and boring. Gone are the days when you can just go full crazy with your steps, it used to be a crowd pleasing moment.
Instead I want a more difficulty based level system, and then you can judge the steps and turns in the GOEs.
I also want to add that the level system here is again difficulty based. The amount of difficult turns and whether they are performed in harder or easier ways is what determines the level. The GOE, again, reflects the execution.
 

Jontor

Medalist
Joined
Jan 18, 2018
Country
Sweden
The levels indicate the difficulty of the spin, though. The GOE is what indicates the execution hence its name, grade of execution. Certain level bullets correlate with higher GOEs (increasing speed comes to mind) and others are correlated with lower GOEs (spinning both directions comes to mind).
I disagree. Without looking up the rules (the ISU page is a disaster to find things) I have the impression it is not about difficulty in the spins, it's about holding positions. Which in itself of course is difficult, but that's not my point.
 

alexocfp

Medalist
Joined
Nov 28, 2020
Country
United-States
I got 2:

Let the skaters choose which elements they want to perform in the SP and FS without any component being mandatory. You want to jump 12 quads? Go for it.

Second, ban the word “artistry” it’s a sport so your job is to score as many points as you can. Haha
Got a third of I’m allowed:

Allow the skaters a maximum of 3 minutes and 4 minutes in the 2 programs. And if you get your components done in less time, you can turn that saved time into bonus points. If your can perform your free skate in a minute, you get 180 seconds turned into points. Let’s say 1 point for every 5 seconds under. Haha

I’m full of reforms, let me run the ISU. Haha
 

Jeanie19

Record Breaker
Joined
Oct 20, 2017
Country
United-States
I got 2:

Let the skaters choose which elements they want to perform in the SP and FS without any component being mandatory. You want to jump 12 quads? Go for it.

Second, ban the word “artistry” it’s a sport so your job is to score as many points as you can. Haha
I agree with this to a point. There are 3 jumps, one in combination in the short, one has to be a 2A or 3A. keep 3 jumps, but if someone wants to do a 3F, 3Lo and a combo 3lutz, 3 toe .. Fine
There are 7 jump elements in the long, keep this. But if someone does 3F, 3T, 3T combo give them the points.
There is no variety anymore because the short has one backloaded jump as a bonus, and the free has 3. Everyone is doing 4 jumps in a row, then after the halfway. 3.

I think artists should be rewarded , but it's so subjective, I have no clue how to make the judging fair.
 

gliese

Final Flight
Joined
Oct 31, 2020
Country
United-States
I disagree. Without looking up the rules (the ISU page is a disaster to find things) I have the impression it is not about difficulty in the spins, it's about holding positions. Which in itself of course is difficult, but that's not my point.
As a skater who has 4 level 4 spins in my current programs. There is more than just holding positions. My 16 features are (short program) difficult entry, sit forward, eight rotations, sit back, camel sideways, sit sideways, non basic, upright straight and (long program) camel upright, sit sideways, non basic, upright straight, layback side, layback, eight rotations, spinning both directions.

Notice how eight rotations only makes up one eighth of my features? And if I was at a higher level and had 6 level 4 spins instead of 4, it would make up one twelfth of my features. Features that I am personally not doing but have done in the past include jumping on one foot, changing feet with a jump, difficult exit, camel forward, illusions, difficult fly (no flying spins this year because of an injury), edge switch, and biellmann (replaced with spinning both directions again because of an injury).
 

Zora

On the Ice
Joined
Feb 16, 2010
There need to be some serious rule changes to make the men's discipline watchable again with an emphasis on clean skating, that's my biggest wish. It's a mess right now.

I would also get rid of the choreo sequence, hardly anyone uses it well. I'd prefer a choice between a second step sequence or a spiral sequence with levels.

(And I would ban vocals again... 🤣)
 

gliese

Final Flight
Joined
Oct 31, 2020
Country
United-States
Allow the skaters a maximum of 3 minutes and 4 minutes in the 2 programs. And if you get your components done in less time, you can turn that saved time into bonus points. If your can perform your free skate in a minute, you get 180 seconds turned into points. Let’s say 1 point for every 5 seconds under. Haha
I've got another, once they're done they can sprint around the rink. Every lap after the maximum time before the skater passes out from exhaustion is a point. #stamina.
 

katymay

Medalist
Joined
Mar 7, 2006
I would like to see a higher base value for spins. I would like to scrap Step Seq. in favor of "footwork", (or Step Seq).
Instead of judges being appointed by nation, I would like to see judges appointed as "Gold level" judges, judges in which an audit determines that they judge without national bias and or/inflated GOE/PCS scores. I would like to see the judges judged, with the best of them appointed to high level competitions, and the rest filling in as needed.
 

Chantilly

Rinkside
Joined
Oct 30, 2015
They need to change the requirements to get a level 4 in dance lifts.

It seems like almost everyone gets a level 4.

Ice dancers should be able to take advantage of the 10 point bonus with their footwork and twizzles or something.

Maybe someone can explain regarding the rules/levels etc, but I think difficult entrances, features and exits in jumps should count with the levels and not the GOE.

I feel that that may help balance out the jumping beans with the more well rounded skaters who have stronger skating skills.
 

anonymoose_au

Insert weird opinion here
Record Breaker
Joined
Feb 22, 2014
Country
Australia
TBH...I almost think we should go back to 6.0.

There's so much arguing over the scores, especially between competitions. The IJS was meant to be quantitive where skaters are not compared to each other but rather the notion of a perfect jump, spin, step sequence etc. But lets face it, the judges DO compare skaters in competition, it's why PCS and GOE is so wonky.

How many times do you hear people say "The placements are right, but the scores aren't."?

6.0 was at least honest in saying it's a comparison between skaters at a particular competition.

Or at the very least revamp PCS and drum it into the judges that it's entirety possible to get a 5 in transitions and a 10 in performance.
 

JustSomeGuy

Rinkside
Joined
May 20, 2021
I disagree. Without looking up the rules (the ISU page is a disaster to find things) I have the impression it is not about difficulty in the spins, it's about holding positions. Which in itself of course is difficult, but that's not my point.
I shouldn't need to say this, but... READ. THE. DAMN. CODE. The ISU communication you're looking for is here: https://www.isu.org/figure-skating/rules/fsk-communications/24665-isu-communication-2334/file

Spins have 11 possible level features (13 for a layback), only one of which is holding the same position for 8 revolutions. The reason so many skaters use the same level features is simply that some of them are easier than others, and there's really no benefit to using a harder feature if you can get a level 4 with easier ones. Now, this said, if the ISU wanted to split the level features for spins into tiers one, two and three depending on the difficulty, and have, say, a tier three feature be worth X2 tier one features to encourage use of more difficult features, I wouldn't complain. However, this would make judging a lot more complicated, so I doubt that's going to happen.

Now, what I would actually like to see:

1. A couple more level features added for step sequences, so that skaters can pick and choose which features to use based on their strengths in order to get a level 4 the same way that they can with spins (and so that a few will ditch the "Use of body movements for at least 1/3 of the pattern" feature)
2. An increase in base value for level 3 and 4 spins and step sequences - the difference in base value between triple and quadruple jumps is large enough that doing a triple when your opponent does a quad can take you off of the podium, but the difference between a level 3 and 4 spin or steps is negligible, and there should be a bigger point gap between each level.
3. An increase in PCS factoring, particularly for the ladies, since average/median TES has increased significantly since it was set
4. More clearly defined PCS bullets, more akin to GOE bullets
5. Level 5 spins and steps please, since some lunatics are now talking about quints and all
 

Jontor

Medalist
Joined
Jan 18, 2018
Country
Sweden
I shouldn't need to say this, but... READ. THE. DAMN. CODE. The ISU communication you're looking for is here: https://www.isu.org/figure-skating/rules/fsk-communications/24665-isu-communication-2334/file

Spins have 11 possible level features (13 for a layback), only one of which is holding the same position for 8 revolutions. The reason so many skaters use the same level features is simply that some of them are easier than others, and there's really no benefit to using a harder feature if you can get a level 4 with easier ones. Now, this said, if the ISU wanted to split the level features for spins into tiers one, two and three depending on the difficulty, and have, say, a tier three feature be worth X2 tier one features to encourage use of more difficult features, I wouldn't complain. However, this would make judging a lot more complicated, so I doubt that's going to happen.

Now, what I would actually like to see:

1. A couple more level features added for step sequences, so that skaters can pick and choose which features to use based on their strengths in order to get a level 4 the same way that they can with spins (and so that a few will ditch the "Use of body movements for at least 1/3 of the pattern" feature)
2. An increase in base value for level 3 and 4 spins and step sequences - the difference in base value between triple and quadruple jumps is large enough that doing a triple when your opponent does a quad can take you off of the podium, but the difference between a level 3 and 4 spin or steps is negligible, and there should be a bigger point gap between each level.
3. An increase in PCS factoring, particularly for the ladies, since average/median TES has increased significantly since it was set
4. More clearly defined PCS bullets, more akin to GOE bullets
5. Level 5 spins and steps please, since some lunatics are now talking about quints and all
I stand corrected.
 
Top