PDA

View Full Version : Has IJS made the short program redundant?



Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5

essence_of_soy
09-17-2012, 06:59 AM
With the elimination of the preliminary round at worlds, skaters will qualify also on the basis of a minimum TES.

Since the free skate is essentially an extended short program with required elements to be completed as well, is the short program really necessary any more to determine the best overall skater?

VIETgrlTerifa
09-17-2012, 07:04 AM
That's what I'm wondering. Wasn't the purpose of the SP (other than trying to make skating more tv-friendly and give Janet Lynn a chance to win a title to which she botched) to allow judges to evaluate skaters on a set list of skills that they were forced to adhere to whereas the LP portion was a lot more varied with what the skaters presented (thus allowing them to hide their weaknesses better and show up their strengths)?

With COP, I just feel like the SP is very redundant since the LP really is just an extended version of it except with more combination jumps. Maybe the ISU can think of a way to differentiate the SP from the LP a bit more.

briancoogaert
09-17-2012, 07:41 AM
I don't like the SP as it is now.
You can miss the combo, and still be in 1st place. So, it's not a SP with required elements anymore.
I don't know how to change it, but for example, if you miss any of the required elements, you get 0 for it !

VIETgrlTerifa
09-17-2012, 07:51 AM
Yes, making a mistake on a REQUIRED ELEMENT should have much harsher penalties in the SP. I miss the drama that came from skaters knowing that they had to hit all their elements.

kwanfan1818
09-17-2012, 08:35 AM
With COP, I just feel like the SP is very redundant since the LP really is just an extended version of it except with more combination jumps. Maybe the ISU can think of a way to differentiate the SP from the LP a bit more.
The "well-balanced" rules for the FS were in place before CoP. What CoP doesn't do is allow the judges to dump a skater for missing an element, which was never applied equally.

I agree that penalties should be harsher in the SP. I've written before that I think any missed element (including a fall), should get 0. (A 2/2 combo would be a missed element, for example. Flawed elements should be credited.) Practically speaking, for the most part, with -3 GOE, skaters net little for them now until they're in the 3Lo-quad range.

Marco
09-17-2012, 08:40 AM
Yes, in essence you get more time to do 4 or 5 more jumps and an extra sequence in singles, or more jumps and lifts in pairs. Because elements are marked individually and there are so many rules to follow, a long program has basically lost the element of freedom which had previously encouraged creativity. Everyone repeats the same spins over both programs.

I would like ISU to extend the current junior practice of prescribing a jump and/or a spin in the short program to seniors, and also relax some long program rules. Such as:

in the short program:

- the 2 solo jumping passes should both be preceded by footwork / transitions and should be one edge jump and one toe jump (compulsory axel requirement should be eliminated)
- there should be one prescribed double/ triple jump each season
- the position of the solo spin / flying spin should be prescribed and perhaps changed every season (like in Juniors)
- the entry of the flying spin should be prescribed and perhaps changed every season
- prescribed footwork pattern (circular or serpentine or straight line)

in the long program:

- no more compulsory axel requirement but there must overall be 2 types of toe jump takeoffs and edge jump takeoffs, otherwise there is a deduction
- for each additional takeoff without "e" call, there can be a bonus
- for each additional takeoff with 3 revs and above, there can be another bonus

etc...

Karpenko
09-17-2012, 09:26 AM
Maybe make the SP more of a compulsory program, with two or three of the required elements actually being "required" and the GOE will be the difference on those elements as opposed to a level. Like maybe have something like, a required level 2 or level 1 spin with a certain position that has to be attained or something along those lines. Short program now should be more about quality over difficulty you can squeeze in that time frame within the guidelines. It would make the SP "make or break" the skater again because it will be about the quality of the elements in the program instead of half-arsed difficulty that will still score well because its difficult.

johndockley92
09-17-2012, 12:19 PM
Yes, in essence you get more time to do 4 or 5 more jumps and an extra sequence in singles, or more jumps and lifts in pairs. Because elements are marked individually and there are so many rules to follow, a long program has basically lost the element of freedom which had previously encouraged creativity. Everyone repeats the same spins over both programs.

I would like ISU to extend the current junior practice of prescribing a jump and/or a spin in the short program to seniors, and also relax some long program rules. Such as:

in the short program:

- the 2 solo jumping passes should both be preceded by footwork / transitions and should be one edge jump and one toe jump (compulsory axel requirement should be eliminated)
- there should be one prescribed double/ triple jump each season
- the position of the solo spin / flying spin should be prescribed and perhaps changed every season (like in Juniors)
- the entry of the flying spin should be prescribed and perhaps changed every season
- prescribed footwork pattern (circular or serpentine or straight line)

in the long program:

- no more compulsory axel requirement but there must overall be 2 types of toe jump takeoffs and edge jump takeoffs, otherwise there is a deduction
- for each additional takeoff without "e" call, there can be a bonus
- for each additional takeoff with 3 revs and above, there can be another bonus

etc...


Perhaps not these specific changes, but something in this direction sounds intriguing.

gkelly
09-17-2012, 03:14 PM
I don't like the SP as it is now.
You can miss the combo, and still be in 1st place. So, it's not a SP with required elements anymore.

Oh, it was possible to miss the combo and still be in 1st place under 6.0 as well. It all depended what the other skaters did.


I don't know how to change it, but for example, if you miss any of the required elements, you get 0 for it !

Define "miss." :)

Under 6.0, there were required deductions for errors of varying severity. So a severe error or leaving out an element entirely would lose more points than a less severe error. And yet, in casual parlance, we might say that the element with only a moderate error (e.g., stepping out of a jump landing) was "missed."

But what did they lose points from? Each judge set a base mark for each skater in their minds, the score they would have given that skater for the whole program if skated as intended, and then subtracted the deductions from there. So more difficulty and/or better overall quality on the other elements and the in-between skating could easily make up for one missed element.

I believe (although I was not following skating closely at the time) that, in the 1970s-80s, the deduction for complete failure on the jump combination was as high as 0.7, so missing that particular element would indeed make it very unlikely for the skater who missed it to come out ahead of skaters who skated clean or missed only one "lesser" element, unless there was a considerable gap in overall skill level.

But by the early 90s the maximum deduction for any failed element was 0.5, and then by mid-90s the maximum deduction was 0.4 (0.5 for complete omission). So by then it was no more costly to miss the combination than to miss any other jump element, or to completely miss a spin.

I think the reasoning was that the overall quality of the skating and of all the elements should have more impact than the success or failure of one element. And this was at least a decade before IJS.


I would like ISU to extend the current junior practice of prescribing a jump and/or a spin in the short program to seniors, and also relax some long program rules. Such as:

in the short program:

- the 2 solo jumping passes should both be preceded by footwork / transitions and should be one edge jump and one toe jump (compulsory axel requirement should be eliminated)
- there should be one prescribed double/ triple jump each season
- the position of the solo spin / flying spin should be prescribed and perhaps changed every season (like in Juniors)
- the entry of the flying spin should be prescribed and perhaps changed every season
- prescribed footwork pattern (circular or serpentine or straight line)

in the long program:

- no more compulsory axel requirement but there must overall be 2 types of toe jump takeoffs and edge jump takeoffs, otherwise there is a deduction
- for each additional takeoff without "e" call, there can be a bonus
- for each additional takeoff with 3 revs and above, there can be another bonus

etc...

I could live with something along these lines.

I'm sure a lot of the reasons for the current long program rules are to simplify the computer programming.

And if there's a required jump in the short program each year, then some years it would be the axel?

VIETgrlTerifa
09-17-2012, 05:43 PM
Yeah, but a 0.4-0.7 deduction under 6.0 is a much bigger than under COP, not to mention more is at stake with factored placements making it much more difficult to move up from a bad SP.

briancoogaert
09-17-2012, 06:37 PM
Oh, it was possible to miss the combo and still be in 1st place under 6.0 as well. It all depended what the other skaters did.

Define "miss." :)

The thing is that I wouldn't give credit for a Double jump, if the required element is a Triple.
And of course, it's not a missed element, but the example I have in mind that I didn't like was 2005 Worlds SP, where Michelle Kwan placed in 3rd behind two skaters who made mistakes ! LOL.
Under 6.0, I'm sure such mistakes would have cost the 1st and 2nd places.
I guess it's just because I'm a MK Fan, and that I'm spiteful !!! ;)

Vash01
09-17-2012, 06:55 PM
I don't like the SP as it is now.
You can miss the combo, and still be in 1st place. So, it's not a SP with required elements anymore.I don't know how to change it, but for example, if you miss any of the required elements, you get 0 for it !

Exactly. SP used to be a do or die part of the competition. Fall on a jump in the SP and usually it took you out of medal contention, under 6.0. Now skaters can fall, make other mistakes, and still come up on top. It's meaningless, the way it is now. Now a short program is just that- a program that is shorter than the long program.:lol:

caseyedwards
09-17-2012, 07:02 PM
It was sometimes called the technical program and they should dramatically cut the factor of PCS to make it more technical. Now people can mistake mistakes on elements and it can be wiped out by continued high PCS. It was true that that was the case with 6.0 too but as was mentioned the deductions from 6.0 were far more severe.

aliceanne
09-17-2012, 07:40 PM
I think the short program is more tv friendly for casual fans. If you don't know the difference between the different jumps the long program can seem very tedious and repetitious, and 4 minutes can seem a long time. I've had more than one casual fan ask me, "When is he going to stop skating?'.

Macassar88
09-17-2012, 07:44 PM
I personally would like it if they had prescribed elements (like the solo jump must be a certain one that changes every year and the spins change)