PDA

View Full Version : 2010 ISU Congress Agenda is online - discuss!



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Rock2
05-02-2010, 09:02 PM
So I tried to pour through this thread and I'm not seeing a lot of discussion about the apparent big rule of taking an element out of the short program across most disciplines. I wonder why this rule is brought in...?
Maybe to leave more room for artistry and entertainment? That also means the subjective mark becomes worth slightly more relative to tech. Boooo....

I miss the days of the occasional specific mandatory element e.g. a loop combo in the short or a back outside death spiral...watching the Russians almost kill themselves trying to do it. Ah those were the days... Promoted well-rounded skating, though
.
I'd like them to select a mandatory jump in the SP in singles like they've done in juniors. The more well-rounded skaters would do better in the long run. I like rules like this...Dancers have to be well rounded to handle the different dances. What about singles skaters?

OlieRow
05-02-2010, 09:22 PM
After thinking about it a little more, I understand where you guys are coming from and maybe the minimum score is a good thing. I think where I'm getting hung up is that with some of the cuts, especially with the reduction in the number qualifying for the free skate, it seems like the ISU doesn't really care about skaters outside of the bigger federations. It's probably making me overreact...

HisWeirness
05-02-2010, 09:24 PM
#20 is a speed skating proposal, not figure skating.
It's actually a proposal to amend the ISU Constitution (to apply to all ISU disciplines). Proposal #20 was just proposed by the USA speed skating federation and not USFSA.


Any ISU rule or provision of competition that will be enforced by the ISU that affects any Skater, a Skater’s results, a Skater’s placement or the conduct of any ISU event must be communicated through an official ISU publication and properly distributed to the Member at least 21 days in advance of such rule or provision being enforced.

Reason: There must be advance notice of any rule or procedure change that affects the Skater. The Skater’s mission is
to skate as fast as possible. The Skater should not be focused on any new rule or procedural change without appropriate
advanced warning and time to assimilate the new information.

Council Recommendation:The Council is not in favor of this proposal and refer to its Restructuring Proposal (new Art. 18./1.s) as well as the proposal of USA Figure related to Art. 17.1.q)



So after this a combination gets a 1.1 bonus, but a sequence still gets a 20% penalty :confused:

If nothing else, sequences add to more interesting programs, and because many first jumps in combination lack flow out and the second (or second and third) jump(s) lack speed and flow and look tacked on, sequences very often look more powerful and more evenly performed. (But get no respect.)
Proposals 183 and 266
About the 1.1 factor for combos, you also have to see that they are proposing to have the half loop jump count as a Loop (1Lo) (proposal 266) so some jump sequences could be now called as jump combinations instead if the half loop is used (if I am reading it correctly). So a 3T-half loop-3S sequence (in 2009-10) could be called as a 3T-1Lo-3S combo (in 2010-11), and get the 1.1 factor instead of 0.8.

Old
3T + half loop + 3S = (4.0 + 0 + 4.5) x 0.8 = 6.8 [called as jump sequence, NOT combination]
3T+3T = 4.0 + 4.0 = 8.0 [called as jump combination]
3T+3Lo = 4.0 + 5.0 = 9.0 [called as jump combination]

Proposed
3T+ half loop (listed as loop when used in combos/seqs) + 3S = (4.0 + 0.5 + 4.5) x 1.1 = 9.9 [called as jump combination]
3T+3T = (4.0 + 4.0) x 1.1 = 8.8 [called as jump combination]
3T+3Lo = (4.0 + 5.0) x 1.1 = 9.9 [called as jump combination]

Proposal 266. Modify new Rule 510 (requirements to elements of Single and Pairs skating)


Jump Combinations
In a jump combination the landing foot of a jump is the take off foot of the next jump. A three turn on one foot between the jumps without touching the ice with the free foot (or even with a touch, but no weight transfer) keeps the element in the frame of this definition allowing still to call it a combination (with an error).

If the jumps are connected with a non-listed jump, the element is called as a jump sequence. However half-loop when used in combinations/sequences is considered as a listed jump with the Value of a Loop.

Reason: to increase the variety of difficult three-jump-combinations.

(the change proposed is underlined above)

gkelly
05-02-2010, 09:51 PM
I miss the days of the occasional specific mandatory element e.g. a loop combo in the short or a back outside death spiral...watching the Russians almost kill themselves trying to do it. Ah those were the days... Promoted well-rounded skating, though

Senior pairs still have required lifts and death spirals each year. They were hand-to-hand hold and backward outside, respectively, in 2010, and will come around again in the rotation for the 2013 season.

Go back and watch this year's pairs SPs if you find required BODS amusing.


I'd like them to select a mandatory jump in the SP in singles like they've done in juniors. The more well-rounded skaters would do better in the long run. I like rules like this...Dancers have to be well rounded to handle the different dances. What about singles skaters?

Juniors have the choice of doing double or triple of the specified takeoff (rotates among loop, flip, or lutz).

Should the same be true for seniors? That would represent a step backward in jump difficulty, since they are currently required to do a triple (or quad, for the men) as the solo jump.

Or would you want to require all senior skaters to attempt a different specified triple each year? Expect a lot of splats, edge calls, and underrotations from senior ladies throughout the standings including some medal contenders, and from the lowest ranked senior men.

Or the skaters who know they just can't do that specific triple will do a double on purpose and take the lower base mark and -3 GOE. At least that earns almost a point and doesn't waste energy. Better than falling on a downgraded triple attempt, which nets negative points after the fall deduction.

skatefan
05-02-2010, 09:52 PM
Gah, my brain hurts after trawling through that :lol: I was surprised that there was no mention of the use of 'lifting aids' ie the belt which one dance couple used this season, unless I missed it. I thought there might have been a ban on their use.

Thinking of the minimum points requirement, although the scores are not too high, it will be more difficult to achieve in future because there is one less element in the short.

allezfred
05-02-2010, 10:02 PM
Bin Yao could have learned just as much by going to a competition and watching every practice and competition segment.

And the award for dumbest post of the year so far goes to....

Ziggy
05-02-2010, 10:58 PM
I read fiction, not legalese!

Haha, fair enough. :D


Bin Yao may well have been inspired by his miserable outing at Worlds. But if he was as mentally strong as he seems to be, he could have been just as inspired by coming in last at one of the Senior B's -- and at least at a Senior B he'd have a better chance of getting to skate his LP.

You really need to understand that no other events are like ISU Championships. It's a completely different experience.

Those are the only events which are televised, which are seen as really important and where you perform to a huge crowd (GPs arguably are that too but the skaters we are talking about are not going to get a chance to perform at those).

This kind of experience cannot be emulated and gained through simply observing it as a spectator. You have to live it, experience it first hand yourself.

And it's not something I made up on my own. I personally know a number of skaters and coaches and this is how they feel about it.

caseyedwards
05-02-2010, 11:08 PM
So I tried to pour through this thread and I'm not seeing a lot of discussion about the apparent big rule of taking an element out of the short program across most disciplines. I wonder why this rule is brought in...?
Maybe to leave more room for artistry and entertainment? That also means the subjective mark becomes worth slightly more relative to tech. Boooo....
s?

If this is true it certainly goes with the women being allowed to do triple axels and the men two quads. I knew there must be a tradeoff-if you increase a technical element there must be something for non tech pushers.

Ziggy
05-02-2010, 11:15 PM
I am expecting the majority of the federations (especially South Korean :D) to vote against the 3axel rule. They have nothing to gain by it, it'll just serve to increase the distance between their skaters and Mao.

jtpc
05-02-2010, 11:25 PM
That would mean Nationals the year before the Olympics determines the potential Olympic team, and the Olympic team is determined at Worlds before the Olympics if a country qualifies Olympic spots at the prior Worlds. This doesn't address whether a skater who qualifies through the Olympic qualifier in the fall before the Olympics earns the spot for him/her/their self/ves.

In view of the fact that the number of entries to Championships is limited under these proposals, there are actually more guaranteed spots in the Olympics (24 for singles, 16 for Pairs, 19 for Dance than for Championships (20 for singles, 12 for pairs, 12/15 for dance in Euros/4C's or Worlds) and more overall spots in the Olympics than for Euros and 4C's (30 vs. 28 for singles, 20 vs. 18 for pairs, 24 vs. 20 for dance). Why doesn't the proposal just require all of the slots to go to specific skaters vs. countries?
After reading the part of the rationale for Austria's proposal (#213) that said, the right to participate in the Olympics should be a privilege of the athletes and not their member associations, I thought that part sounded good. But, I'm not sure how applicable the proposal is to all countries. So Austria is proposing the formula that decides whether you send 2 or 3 teams to the next year's championship gets deleted and for dance let's say, if you are in the top 19 at World's in 2013 you automatically qualify for the Sochi Olympics. Am I interpreting that right?

What about countries who have many competitive teams and who typically use a national championship to determine an Olympic team and not the results from a previous World championship. That 2nd team who finishes in the top 19 from Worlds 2013 (and who qualifies for the Olympics under this proposal?) might not get the 2nd spot at the next national championship that traditionally decided the Olympic team.

As an example, I guess what they're saying is a skater/team from a smaller country may earn 2 spots for the following year, but that 2nd skater/team could be quite inferior and shouldn't get to automatically go because another skater/team earned that spot for them the previous year.

I can see that, but wouldn't that be hard to apply across the board...especially for countries with many elite competitive skaters? There are cases where a country may only have 2 skaters/teams at a World championship, but their results might qualify them for 3 skaters/teams next year...and that 3rd skater/team could still be quite good. Even though that 3rd skater/team wasn't physically at the previous World championship to qualify for next year's, they could still be good enough to beat a fair number of the top 19 who were. :lol: Not sure if I'm interpreting that right, but we'll see what happens in June I guess!

TalentedButHumble
05-02-2010, 11:38 PM
My head also spins (for a minimum six, or is it eight, revolutions) at all these items. So, echoing myself and others - could someone elaborate if the following three singles-related items are being addressed? (And excusez-moi if I'm misunderstanding any of it.)

1. Giving credit for completing a full set of jumps.
So most of the top women (Joannie's the exception?) don't do all jumps. And now you're going to reward Mao for just doing her big jump in the SP, without forcing her to do another jump she's not good at?

This is such a step backward IMHO.

Where are all the people who used to nitpick about flutzing? Is it fair that now a skater can just leave it out, rather than have to attempt it correctly. (And yes, I know that leaving it out means you have to come up with something else that will add the points you lose for not havng a Lutz or flip or loop. But that "cheat" has worked for several top women.)

2. Related: A downplay of the ongoing idiocy/ obssession re: practically undetectable URs (and seemingly inconsistent application of penalties). This has been my biggest bugaboo since CoP started.

3. In a somewhat contradictory vein: More credit for those who do try the 3As and especially the quads. :D

And re: items that definitely are on the agenda:
4. I'd like even *more* credit for jump combos, especially combos involving the most difficult jumps.

5. Finally, will the changes re: spins and spirals make for more individuality and creativity, getting away from certain of the ugly spin combos and the same old spiral positions?

gkelly
05-02-2010, 11:47 PM
I can see that, but wouldn't that be hard to apply across the board...especially for countries with many elite competitive skaters? There are cases where a country may only have 2 skaters/teams at a World championship, but their results might qualify them for 3 skaters/teams next year...and that 3rd skater/team could still be quite good. Even though that 3rd skater/team wasn't physically at the previous World championship to qualify for next year's, they could still be good enough to beat a fair number of the top 19 who were. :lol: Not sure if I'm interpreting that right, but we'll see what happens in June I guess!

Maybe they weren't at the previous year's Worlds because they were too young the year before. Making the previous year's Worlds a personal qualification for Olympics would make the effective minimum age for Olympics to be 15 as of the July 1 a year and a half earlier, i.e., the youngest skaters who could qualify for Olympics would be 16 1/2, not 15 1/2, in February.

E.g., we know that Mao Asada was too young for 2006 Olympics (but did compete on the senior Grand Prix and win the final that year).

If qualification for Olympics was based on the previous year's Worlds, then Kimmie Meissner would have lost two opportunities by not being old enough for 2005 Worlds -- 2005 Worlds itself, and also 2006 Olympics.

Or would there be a second-chance qualifier in the fall that skaters could enter to earn their own right to compete at Olympics? If so, could countries with deep fields send all their potential Olympic team members who hadn't gone to the previous Worlds?

If they do want individuals to qualify, it would make more sense to use ISU rankings/seasons best lists than one previous competitions.

Ziggy
05-02-2010, 11:53 PM
2. Related: A downplay of the ongoing idiocy/ obssession re: practically undetectable URs (and seemingly inconsistent application of penalties). This has been my biggest bugaboo since CoP started.

People keep repeating that but is there any proof for it?

There always will be borderline cases. And those will be controversial. But the only example of that I can think of is maybe Glebova's 3t/3t< at Euros last year (IIRC).

Other than that, I can't think of any downgrades where it wasn't clear the underrotation was larger than 1/4 (obviously in slo-mo).

In fact, skaters still do get away with cheating without any penalty, in most cases, because judges are not applying the GOE deductions to cheated (but not downgraded) jumps.

barbk
05-03-2010, 12:13 AM
Haha, fair enough. :D



You really need to understand that no other events are like ISU Championships. It's a completely different experience.

Those are the only events which are televised, which are seen as really important and where you perform to a huge crowd (GPs arguably are that too but the skaters we are talking about are not going to get a chance to perform at those).

This kind of experience cannot be emulated and gained through simply observing it as a spectator. You have to live it, experience it first hand yourself.

And it's not something I made up on my own. I personally know a number of skaters and coaches and this is how they feel about it.

I've been to Worlds, and back when they did have qualifying rounds, you could have shot a gun into the stands with a remarkably low chance of hitting anyone unless you aimed at the judges. So much for the crowds. And the only time the TV cameras were on were when particularly prominent skaters were skating -- and in the proposals up for review, it is unlikely that any of the prominent skaters would even be skating in qualifying. Given the ISU's recent behavior (with the earlier groups skating) I wouldn't be surprised to see them close qualifying so that spectators aren't allowed in at all, or even holding it in a secondary rink.

I concur with the importance of the ISU encouraging more pairs teams -- I just think that there are a number of more effective ways to do so: funded clinics for skaters and coaches, travel & fee support for skaters to do summer training at pairs centers, international judge visits and workshops for skaters and coaches, and travel support for pairs skaters to enter Senior Bs. Each of these efforts would provide systematic support for improved pairs results -- and I think more success than going to worlds and bombing.

Asli
05-03-2010, 12:33 AM
I concur with the importance of the ISU encouraging more pairs teams -- I just think that there are a number of more effective ways to do so: funded clinics for skaters and coaches, travel & fee support for skaters to do summer training at pairs centers, international judge visits and workshops for skaters and coaches, and travel support for pairs skaters to enter Senior Bs. Each of these efforts would provide systematic support for improved pairs results -- and I think more success than going to worlds and bombing.

Any pairs or dance teams who are pioneers from "smaller" skating countries, make tremendous sacrifices to be able to train these disciplines. Often they have to train abroad from a young age, they have hardly any sponsorship, next to no opportunities to skate in shows and hardly any recognition at home for their efforts.

Why do you think they do this? To go to a summer training camp? To skate in a B-international? No, they do it to skate at the Euros and the Worlds.

Skating at the Worlds means media coverage, possibly sponsorship, even if they are last. Having athletes at the World Championships means recognition and public funding for their federation. It means that young skaters from that country will believe that they belong to the sport and that they could do better.

Figure skating is already such a tiny sport in terms of the number of athletes and fans worldwide . Why does the ISU try to shrink it even further? Are they trying to make it disappear? :confused: