Jump to content

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, sallycinnamon said:

In the artistic program, the level of difficulty of the elements would not be taken into account, only the base value of the elements and the quality of those [GOE].

> the level of difficulty of the elements would not be taken into account

> the base value of the elements and the quality of those [GOE]

 

so which one is it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, sallycinnamon said:

 

It's the latter. Lakernik talked about it in this interview, I translate the relevant part:

 

 

These are just ideas so we we'll see what the final decision will be but at least - as of now -  it's the direction they aim for.

Interesting. Thanks!

 

I don't really like the idea of element difficulty not mattering at all in the artistic program. I think the distribution of points should change to emphasize execution over difficulty, but tbh quads are more visually impressive and breathtaking than triples, all else being equal. Like if I were designing the point system for the artistic program, Yuzu's quads would score more than Jason's triples, but Jason's triples would score more than Nathan's quads. On the flip side, I hope the technical program wouldn't deemphasize artistry too much, because honestly watching hours of jumpfests just seems kind of boring. Plus skating skills are technical as much as they are artistic.

 

I do like having fewer jumps/spins in the artistic program, as the number of elements required seriously impacts the choreo, especially in the FS. Letting skaters breath a little will give us more interesting programs.

 

I agree with the sentiment that it doesn't matter very much how much the ISU changes the rules though, if the judges themselves aren't well trained. I'll take a wait-and-see on this one though--there *is* a problem with scoring right now overvaluing the purely technical aspects of figure skating and undervaluing the artistic, so I can't say there's no problem to be solved. Plus, it's pretty unlikely to affect Yuzu either way, since I can't imagine the odds of him continuing on past Beijing are that high.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, yuzuangel said:

> the level of difficulty of the elements would not be taken into account

> the base value of the elements and the quality of those [GOE]

 

so which one is it

 

I think he was talking about spin and StSq levels when he mentioned difficulty, he did say BV and GOE would count. 

 

26 minutes ago, shanshani said:

Interesting. Thanks!

 

I don't really like the idea of element difficulty not mattering at all in the artistic program. I think the distribution of points should change to emphasize execution over difficulty, but tbh quads are more visually impressive and breathtaking than triples, all else being equal. Like if I were designing the point system for the artistic program, Yuzu's quads would score more than Jason's triples, but Jason's triples would score more than Nathan's quads. On the flip side, I hope the technical program wouldn't deemphasize artistry too much, because honestly watching hours of jumpfests just seems kind of boring. Plus skating skills are technical as much as they are artistic.

 

I do like having fewer jumps/spins in the artistic program, as the number of elements required seriously impacts the choreo, especially in the FS. Letting skaters breath a little will give us more interesting programs.

 

I agree with the sentiment that it doesn't matter very much how much the ISU changes the rules though, if the judges themselves aren't well trained. I'll take a wait-and-see on this one though--there *is* a problem with scoring right now overvaluing the purely technical aspects of figure skating and undervaluing the artistic, so I can't say there's no problem to be solved. Plus, it's pretty unlikely to affect Yuzu either way, since I can't imagine the odds of him continuing on past Beijing are that high.

 

With less spins and jumps, and no levels, artistic program could have more interesting spins or step sequences but if they continue the judging like it is now, skaters would risk adding their most difficult jumps anyway, if that'd be the only way they could get more points. In the end of the day, BV would count the most and we know where that could lead if they don't apply GOEs and the components fairly.

What really counts is how well the judges are trained and how objective they are while they doing their job -  accountability of the judges is also very important and if that doesn't change in the next years then I don't think there'll be any major changes in judging, no matter what the rules are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "only artistic" program competition will always be extremely controversial. It has not even started yet, it is just a possibility, but I can already envision it. Nathan and Yuzuru had almost the same scores for PCS at Worlds 2019. They will always make champion the one they want. Ughhhh. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 時間前, SparkleSaladさんが言いました:

Seems they're discussing splitting FS into technical and artistic programs after the Beijing Olympics again. :facepalm:

 

 

 

 

The article also says ISU is thinking figure skating will be more attractive if they increase the number of medal, so they are trying to give gold medal for each technical winner, FS winner, and overall winner. The author also implies the low popularity of figure skating in North America while the competitions and ice shows in Japan are always full house.

 

I take this article as, in short, if the skaters from North America get more medals, figure skating will be more popular and attractive as a sport :laughing:

(or I may be misreading...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Wouldn't mind a technical program and an artistic program. Seems like they want more freedom in the free -- which is actually just a really long short program currently -- and I am for that.

2. Don't care about the judging, it's never been right, and even with this format, we'd need a few years before we get back the emphasis on basics and body line, so the presentation marks will be phoney anyway.

3. Would be skipping the technical program with their nonsense about levels and their non-stop efforts towards creating an abomination. It's simply not real figure skating currently that's going on in either the short or the long, and that's what this technical program will be.

4. Goodness knows what the skaters will be doing with their freedom, what kind of music and elements they'll be using, but I do *like* that they might have it, and have the fun they might have during practices.

5. Will tune out NBC if this happens, and if I'm still watching, because of certain reasons.

6. LOL, they discussed this and yet nothing about fixing the combo bonuses, and correcting the definitions for jump edges and rotations. Nice job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand. Where will actual skating skills be judged, then? Will the technical programme have a figures section? Or are skating skills, the ability to do complex skills with blades on the ice, just completely irrelevant under this new proposed scheme? You know the artistic programme will peak with sexy ballet arms during crossovers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, WinForPooh said:

I don't understand. Where will actual skating skills be judged, then? Will the technical programme have a figures section? Or are skating skills, the ability to do complex skills with blades on the ice, just completely irrelevant under this new proposed scheme? You know the artistic programme will peak with sexy ballet arms during crossovers. 

I don't think they've said there won't be footwork sections in the SP?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, hoodie axel said:

I don't think they've said there won't be footwork sections in the SP?

 

But it'll be the same step sequence thing we have now, isn't it? And so far the change in the SP has been to take one technical requirement - the steps before solo jump - out of it, so if that's an indication of the direction in which this is going, it'll be more of a 'can you land this jump' thing, won't it? If levels on step sequence and spins aren't as important in the artistic programme, then they should become more important in the technical programme.  :/ This just sounds like a jump programme and a mime programme, really. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, WinForPooh said:

If levels on step sequence and spins aren't as important in the artistic programme, then they should become more important in the technical programme. 

Well, they might. In a way, this seems like they might want to go back to a 6.0-esque system with the technical programme and the free programme. I don't mind that. The judges weren't blind enough to not know what steps before a jump were back then, and they had to complete a proper pattern of footwork (two for men; one + a proper pattern for the spiral for women) + they were some spin requirements, too. In the FP, I don't think there were any "required" spin positions or footwork elements (in the sense that they could pick to do whatever spin positions they wanted, for instance... and I remember a few programs where there wasn't a real footwork section at all), those existed for the sake of good choregraphy and interpretation and for having a technical advantage over the competitors.

 

I don't think 6.0 is the ideal system, in that it had several judging flaws, and also didn't give proper credit to spins and footwork (I think those were all just a part of the "base mark"), and in those ways CoP is better. But we do need to get to an ideal CoP (we aren't even close), and 6.0 did have some good ideas (TP + FP, and also the fact that +3Lo and "difficult" combos were given automatic credit by the judges instead of going off what's loaded into their computers). A combination of the two might not be an entirely terrible idea, along with fixes to how rotation and edges are defined (6.0 wasn't the best at this either). I do worry about just how much they'll be screwing up the execution, however.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, hoodie axel said:

Well, they might. In a way, this seems like they might want to go back to a 6.0-esque system with the technical programme and the free programme. I don't mind that. The judges weren't blind enough to not know what steps before a jump were back then, and they had to complete a proper pattern of footwork (two for men; one + a proper pattern for the spiral for women) + they were some spin requirements, too. In the FP, I don't think there were any "required" spin positions or footwork elements (in the sense that they could pick to do whatever spin positions they wanted, for instance... and I remember a few programs where there wasn't a real footwork section at all), those existed for the sake of good choregraphy and interpretation and for having a technical advantage over the competitors.

 

I don't think 6.0 is the ideal system, in that it had several judging flaws, and also didn't give proper credit to spins and footwork (I think those were all just a part of the "base mark"), and in those ways CoP is better. But we do need to get to an ideal CoP (we aren't even close), and 6.0 did have some good ideas (TP + FP, and also the fact that +3Lo and "difficult" combos were given automatic credit by the judges instead of going off what's loaded into their computers). A combination of the two might not be an entirely terrible idea, along with fixes to how rotation and edges are defined (6.0 wasn't the best at this either). I do worry about just how much they'll be screwing up the execution, however.

 

That's the thing. I don't trust the execution of any system of rules tbh and at this point, looking at the changes they've been making to the rules, I also don't think that they're headed in the direction of making technical requirements about all technical aspects of skating. If it is, I can see the possibilities but all the signs seem to be headed to a figure skating world where technical elements=landing jumps and artistry=waving arms about and being balletic for a given and restricted definition of balletic and miming. :/ Maybe I'm being overly pessimistic. 

 

Tbh I think the part of the 6.0 they want to go back to is doing whatever they want without anybody pointing to clearly written rules that say they shouldn't have done it. :P Not the technical requirement part. It's the lack of accountability. Not that there is now but I bet the loud 'discourse' has reached their ears and might be unpleasant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, WinForPooh said:

 

That's the thing. I don't trust the execution of any system of rules tbh and at this point, looking at the changes they've been making to the rules, I also don't think that they're headed in the direction of making technical requirements about all technical aspects of skating. If it is, I can see the possibilities but all the signs seem to be headed to a figure skating world where technical elements=landing jumps and artistry=waving arms about and being balletic for a given and restricted definition of balletic and miming. :/ Maybe I'm being overly pessimistic. 

 

Tbh I think the part of the 6.0 they want to go back to is doing whatever they want without anybody pointing to clearly written rules that say they shouldn't have done it. :P Not the technical requirement part. It's the lack of accountability. Not that there is now but I bet the loud 'discourse' has reached their ears and might be unpleasant.

I get that. At the end of the day, the more I think about it, even ignoring the judging and everything else, I feel more and more that FS just shouldn't be a sport. I guess, it's hard to leave the foundations it was built upon, and try to break it into a legit art form (as much as we talk about artistry in FS, I would say there have been maybe 9 or 10 interpretations and choreographies that I'd consider legitimate attempts at art, at least in singles), and to establish it as something as deserving of recognition as dance, establishing conservatories and schools...

 

But I do think it's an entire fools' errand currently. If we really want to talk about "art", we aren't exactly going into a ballet and seeing people doing triple tours when a double  tour would do, they just do whatever fits the music, but this wouldn't earn them points if it were quanitfied. If we talk about "sport", well, then it really calls into question about what kind of restrictions we must place on the technical content to be achieved to make sure the "artistic" qualities aren't entirely washed out (because to earn a tech advantage, someone would do a triple-triple, instead of a triple-double even though the latter fits music better, for instance). It's kind of useless. Athletes *want* technical advantages. Athletes who want to be artists *want* to skate to the music. But, as the sport goes through its natural paces (more quads, quad-quads, quints etc), all of this isn't possible. So the question really, to me, becomes "what do the *athletes* want, and what do the *audiences* want?".

 

I'd be fine with Ice Gymnastics, and Ice Skating, one a sport, the other an art :shrug: Just like someone who trains in ballet would have a good foundation for gymnastics, someone who trains in Ice Skating would be great at Ice Gymnastics. And after their sports career ends, they can go practice their art form. But IDK if it'll ever happen, what others think, and if anyone would invest time into making it into this and marketing it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, hoodie axel said:

I get that. At the end of the day, the more I think about it, even ignoring the judging and everything else, I feel more and more that FS just shouldn't be a sport. I guess, it's hard to leave the foundations it was built upon, and try to break it into a legit art form (as much as we talk about artistry in FS, I would say there have been maybe 9 or 10 interpretations and choreographies that I'd consider legitimate attempts at art, at least in singles), and to establish it as something as deserving of recognition as dance, establishing conservatories and schools...

 

But I do think it's an entire fools' errand currently. If we really want to talk about "art", we aren't exactly going into a ballet and seeing people doing triple tours when a double or a single tour would do, they just do whatever fits the music, but this wouldn't earn them points if it were quanitfied. If we talk about "sport", well, then it really calls into question about what kind of restrictions we must place on the technical content to be achieved to make sure the "artistic" qualities aren't entirely washed out (because to earn a tech advantage, someone would do a triple-triple, instead of a triple-double even though the latter fits music better, for instance). It's kind of useless. Athletes *want* technical advantages. Athletes who want to be artists *want* to skate to the music. But, as the sport goes through its natural paces (more quads, quad-quads, quints etc), all of this isn't possible. So the question really, to me, becomes "what do the *athletes* want, and what do the *audiences* want?".

 

I'd be fine with Ice Gymnastics, and Ice Skating, one a sport, the other an art :shrug: Just like someone who trains in ballet would have a good foundation for gymnastics, someone who trains in Ice Skating would be great at Ice Gymnastics. And after their sports career ends, they can go practice their art form.

 

I don't have any solutions. :lol: I would be happier if I saw rule changes that increased the points value of step sequences and spins drastically, and made step sequence and spin level 4 requirements stricter, that's one thing I would like so that at least the different technical skills within the sport itself aren't valued with such wild imbalance. Each level four spin worth 14 points and two step sequences each worth 14 points for a level 4? I don't see why that's preposterous, if there are people who can jump quads but can't spin properly, why're they nailed on medal contenders unlike those who have only triples but can spin skillfully? PChan skating skills kind of step sequence, or Yuzu's quicksilver LGC step sequence, should be worth as much as a quad for me, easily. If those who can quad don't have those skills, I want their BVs to reflect that. 

 

If we look at gymnastics, you can't be bad at one thing and win the all-round. You can be not the best at one thing and win the all-round, but you can't be bad at it. Beam isn't wildly undervalued compared to floor routine even if the floor routine is more spectacular in general. You can be excellent at vault or uneven bars and get only that one medal. But if skating got split into segments like that, I would miss seeing a beautifully constructed free programme that has the hardest skills and still is art. We'd never get a H&L 2017 Worlds skate again and that would be a huge loss, I don't think I want to give that up either. 

 

lol Like I said, I don't have solutions. :D 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...