PDA

View Full Version : If you could have a rule created, what would it be.



Pages : 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10

GoldenMichelle
07-15-2011, 01:03 AM
I'd like to see a deduction in the SP for not completing a required element. In the 6.0 days the tough thing about the short was that you had to execute in order to have a shot at the title. This doesn't exist anymore, its basically a short free skate. I think a mandatory deduction, say between .5 and 1 point per non-completed element would accomplish this.

I agree with everyone about the step sequences. They used to be one of my favorite parts of a program and now I can't wait for them to be over. And I miss serpentine sequences.

Ziggy
07-15-2011, 01:17 AM
I'd like to see a deduction in the SP for not completing a required element. In the 6.0 days the tough thing about the short was that you had to execute in order to have a shot at the title. This doesn't exist anymore, its basically a short free skate. I think a mandatory deduction, say between .5 and 1 point per non-completed element would accomplish this.

If you don't complete a required element, you lose loads of points and most likely your shot at the title.

GoldenMichelle
07-15-2011, 01:27 AM
If you don't complete a required element, you lose loads of points and most likely your shot at the title.

Not necessarily. For example if a skater does a perfect quad toe as thier solo jump but it is not preceded by steps, he will still get a lot of points for the jump as there is no deduction for the actuall jump. However, there is no penalty for not completing the required element which is a triple or quad out of steps. There should be an automatic deduction for this.

gkelly
07-15-2011, 01:32 AM
What do folks think about this idea?

In the junior and senior free program only,

Jumps of 1 revolution, except in combinations, are considered nonlisted jumps. No points and they don't take up a jump slot.

This means that skaters who pop jumps would get a free do-over if they choose.
However, judges could be advised to penalize in Performance/Execution and Choreography as appropriate for awkward pops and obviously shoehorned-in elements.

It would also mean that skaters would be free to include things like split flip, split lutz, or tuck loop as transitional moves without wasting a jump slot.

What about 1.5 jumps?

Backward-takeoff jumps landed forward after 1.5 revolutions can be fun transition moves or they can be underrotated doubles or popped triples or quads. Since they'll get next to no points as downgraded (<<) doubles with negative GOE, can we let them get no points and not fill slots regardless of whether they happened by mistake (negative effect on PCS) or with choreographic intention and control (positive effect on pCS)?

As with the single jumps, it would be up to the skater whether to try a popped jump again, knowing that a second failure will probably lead to lower scores than just sticking to the choreography as planned.

Single axels are going to happen pretty frequently as pops or as singled double axels late in the program when skaters are tired. And currently it is required to include "an axel-type jump" (single, double, or triple) in the free program. But we also do want to encourage things like delayed axels and one-foot axels, as highlight moves.

Maybe the rule could be that single axels and less-than-single forward outside takeoff jumps (waxels, waltz jumps, bell jumps), whether clearly mistakes or clearly intentional or unclear, fill the required axel-type jump box, even if they get no value, if they are the only jump in that program from that takeoff.

So if a skater plans one double axel and singles it, s/he would still get about one point for the attempt. If the skater plans a delayed axel, tuck axel, etc., it would be a freebie transition if there's already at least one double or triple axel in the program, successful or not. If there's no other axel jump, then a clean, enhanced, fully rotated single axel would fill the axel slot and earn base value of the single axel plus positive GOE.

Ziggy
07-15-2011, 01:32 AM
Not necessarily. For example if a skater does a perfect quad toe as thier solo jump but it is not preceded by steps, he will still get a lot of points for the jump as there is no deduction for the actually jump. However, there is no penalty for not completing a required element which is a triple or quad out of steps. There should be an automatic deduction for this.

True.

There are deductions for lack of steps, they just don't get implemented by the judges. :/

gkelly - I actually like the fact that popping the jumps makes you lose loads of points. It rewards the skaters who attack the programs and go for it.

I'd rather see falls on rotated jumps than pops.

azurika
07-15-2011, 02:14 AM
Not so much "A" rule, but a rethinking of competition structure for singles/pairs - basically making the SP way more rigid and the LP much more "free"

SP - have the "required elements" be explicitly listed, kinda like how they do for juniors now and used to do for seniors, but more, e.g. "the combo jump for this year is (2 or 3)lutz-(2 or 3)toe, the single jump is (2 or 3)sal," but also "the combo spin is ___" (e.g. "Lvl1 layback with x position") and "the fw sequence is "[specification of steps here]," etc. Can do them in any order to your choice of music. Great way to compare elements from one skater to another and also reintroduce some "classic" or "simple" spins.

FP - no "well balanced program" nonsense, just do what you do best, as much of it as you want. If it's unbalanced, the judges can take off from the PCS. John Curry's iconic "Don Quixote" has something like 9 jumping passes in it, there's no artistic reason to limit it to 7 or 8. Plus this way skaters who are really good at spins/FW can capitalize on that to a much greater degree instead of having to expend time and energy on filling 7-8 jumping boxes.

....and, since I'm feeling inspired, one more:

scrap the ISU minimum score in favor of an international version of the "senior test," content of said test TBD. Doesn't have to be based on the USFSA one. Once you've passed, you've passed. Can take it at any time.

Ziggy
07-15-2011, 02:30 AM
FP - no "well balanced program" nonsense, just do what you do best, as much of it as you want. If it's unbalanced, the judges can take off from the PCS. John Curry's iconic "Don Quixote" has something like 9 jumping passes in it, there's no artistic reason to limit it to 7 or 8. Plus this way skaters who are really good at spins/FW can capitalize on that to a much greater degree instead of having to expend time and energy on filling 7-8 jumping boxes.

If you did it this way, everyone would just perform as many jumps as possible, as they are worth much more points than spins and footwork.

azurika
07-15-2011, 02:36 AM
Not necessarily...if you're great at spinning, but there's a decent-to-good chance of falling on your 3z attempt, it probably pays to do an extra spin instead. We already see skaters (well, coaches) using similar logic, avoiding "hail Mary" 3/3s and quads, for example. Plus programs that the judges found distractingly imbalanced (e.g. all spins) could be deducted under CH in the PCS. I just think it'd be nice to have some discretion for skaters to show off - and capitalize on - their strengths in the LP.

Macassar88
07-15-2011, 02:59 AM
What if in the FS, they did
8 jumps and 6 spins/footwork/spirals

caseyedwards
07-15-2011, 03:00 AM
I would get rid of the bonus after the halfway point. But If you are going to keep that than 1.1 becomes 1.2 or 1.3 in the last 30 seconds. I would if the post halfway point bonus rule is kept ban doing more than three jumps in a row with no spin or step in between. This would hopefully end the thing where after 2:00 in ladies or 2:15 in men you get four or five jumps in a row with nothing inbetween them at all. This would spread the jumps around if that is so important to people. How is midloading - not at all backloading- really spreading the jumps around.

gkelly
07-15-2011, 03:28 AM
John Curry's iconic "Don Quixote" has something like 9 jumping passes in it, there's no artistic reason to limit it to 7 or 8.

Of course, the men's free program until 1980 was 5 minutes long, not 4 1/2.

julieann
07-15-2011, 03:37 AM
I would get rid of the bonus after the halfway point. But If you are going to keep that than 1.1 becomes 1.2 or 1.3 in the last 30 seconds. I would if the post halfway point bonus rule is kept ban doing more than three jumps in a row with no spin or step in between. This would hopefully end the thing where after 2:00 in ladies or 2:15 in men you get four or five jumps in a row with nothing inbetween them at all. This would spread the jumps around if that is so important to people. How is midloading - not at all backloading- really spreading the jumps around.

I don't think taking away the bonus will help, if anything it would make it worse. Skaters put hard elements at the end of the program where it is more difficult to perform because they get the bonus. Otherwise they will put all the hard elements right at the beginning. It's not up to ISU rule-makers to choreograph the skaters programs.

Some fans aren't going to be happy until all the skaters are wearing the costumes, skating to the same music, skating to the same choreography and may the best one win. :yikes:

Ziggy
07-15-2011, 03:39 AM
Not necessarily...if you're great at spinning, but there's a decent-to-good chance of falling on your 3z attempt, it probably pays to do an extra spin instead. We already see skaters (well, coaches) using similar logic, avoiding "hail Mary" 3/3s and quads, for example. Plus programs that the judges found distractingly imbalanced (e.g. all spins) could be deducted under CH in the PCS. I just think it'd be nice to have some discretion for skaters to show off - and capitalize on - their strengths in the LP.

You'd have to set a limit on the number of allowed elements, however, or it would result in huge spike in injuries.

And make a rule against repeating spins.

With the rule against repeating variations on spins, it could turn up that doing a 2lutz would make more sense than doing a spin.

Zemgirl
07-15-2011, 05:31 AM
Some fans aren't going to be happy until all the skaters are wearing the costumes, skating to the same music, skating to the same choreography and may the best one win. :yikes:
Well, I do miss compulsory dances :D


I also would like a rule for what amounts to a TKO:

-3 falls in any program, and you are assumed to be too injured to continue to skate; leave the ice.

Having watched several skaters fall many times in the LP, I would really have appreciated it if the ref had escorted them off after the 3rd fall. In hindsight, I bet they would appreciate it too.
That would have ended Patrick Chan's GP season last year... Actually, I don't think it's a bad idea to have some sort of limit, to make sure skaters don't hurt themselves and because beyond a certain point, a program marred by so many falls just doesn't have much merit anymore, athletically or artistically. And yes, I realize we all have skaters whose programs we feel have no merit regardless of falls. ;)

caseyedwards
07-15-2011, 05:43 AM
I don't think taking away the bonus will help, if anything it would make it worse. Skaters put hard elements at the end of the program where it is more difficult to perform because they get the bonus. Otherwise they will put all the hard elements right at the beginning. It's not up to ISU rule-makers to choreograph the skaters programs.

Some fans aren't going to be happy until all the skaters are wearing the costumes, skating to the same music, skating to the same choreography and may the best one win. :yikes:

The skaters are not putting jumps at the end of the programs , they are putting them right in the middle, that is why a last 30 seconds rule may be better.