Should IJS change how jumps are valued for ladies.

Discussion in 'The Trash Can' started by bek, Jan 31, 2012.

  1. gkelly

    gkelly Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2003
    Messages:
    10,496
    Which is why I'd rather see a few good triples, a few good doubles, and an interesting program than a few good triples, a few failed triples, and nothing in between.
  2. bek

    bek Guest

    Well absolutely I don't like to see people falling all over the place. But I'm still reeling from Korpi's scores at Euros and imaging if they could give her or Lepisto more points for doubles. I think they are rewarded enough on PCS.
  3. Rock2

    Rock2 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2008
    Messages:
    1,855
    Korpi and Lepisto get a bump in PCS because they are pretty. When judging was 100% subjective the ISU could effectively pick the faces of the sport, the decent skaters who had crowd appeal and could attract audiences. This is also in part why figures have gone away...to get rid of the Trixie Schubas of the world.

    Now with CoP anyone can win, especially if your tech is good. While that should be a good thing, it can also be bad for business if your jumping beans have no crowd appeal. So, PCS - the subjective part - is being manipulated a touch to give every hope to B-level skaters who could sell the sport. If it was up to me I'd lower the worth of PCS and knock it down to 3 scores only (1. Skating Skills, 2. Choreo and Transitions, 3. Performance and interpretation) to maximize the value of the technical impact and get rid of some components that I think intersect.

    My discussion with a friend illustrates the above paragraph very well the year after Nagasu won Nats. Note that casual fans represent the majority of skate-watching audiences:
    Me: HEY, US NATS ARE ON THIS WEEKEND
    Friend: COOL IS MICHELLE KWAN STILL SKATING?
    Me: NO, MIRAI NAGASU WON IT LAST YEAR.
    Friend: WHO?!?!??
    Me: NAGASU.
    Friend: UH, OK. LET'S DO SOMETHING ELSE...

    I like the idea of 1.1 bonus for combinations in general and 0.8 factor for repeating any jump. You really don't need a bigger bonus for 3/3s. The reason is, if you can cram 2 or more of your allowed allotment of triple jumps into one pass instead of 2, you have bought yourself another jumping pass to gain points. e.g.
    Scenario 1: 1st pass = 3F 2nd pass = 3T
    Scenario 2: 1st pass = 3F+3T 2nd pass = 2A
    Scenario 2 gets you more points, so that's how you're bonused for a 3/3
  4. bek

    bek Guest

    Rock I don't like the .8 factor for any repeated jump. That means a man doing a second 4toe gets penalized.

    If a skater has already done all of the other triples than I don't think they should be penalized for repeating.

    Maybe though there should be that factor if the skater in the end repeats one triple but never attempts/does the other kind of triple.

    I.e if a skater does all 5 triples and the repeats the 3lutz and 3toe, no .8 for them.

    But if a skater does only 4 types of triples, they should get the .8 hit on repeated jumps.
  5. briancoogaert

    briancoogaert Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2003
    Messages:
    12,385
    The skater with only 4 types of triples are already being penalized by not being able to attempt 7 triples.
    Can you imagine a skater like Ivana Reytmayerova with .8 factor because she can only do 3Sal and 3T at her best ?
  6. victoriaheidi

    victoriaheidi New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2010
    Messages:
    1,784
    Agreed. Plus, how are we going to get 7-triple programs if there's a penalty on a repeated jump?

    I think jumps are being scored ok ATM. Not perfect, but I don't think scoring them differently for men and women is a good idea, given the ISU's track record with changes to scoring systems. GPF FD, anyone? :shuffle:
  7. bek

    bek Guest

    There's no current bonus whatsover for having all the triples. 7 triple programs are a rarity and skaters aren't encouraged to risk doing their weakier jumps.

    I think there should be SOMETHING to be said for mastering all of the jumps. Someone like Rochette never got any kind of advantage for having all the triples unlike Kim/Asada. I don't think she deserved to beat them, but the technical playing field there should have been a bit more even.
  8. victoriaheidi

    victoriaheidi New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2010
    Messages:
    1,784
    Asada DID have the 3A, though.
  9. smarts1

    smarts1 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2009
    Messages:
    2,015
    Maybe we could do something like if you attempt a lutz or a flip in the LP, they must be repeat at least one of those jumps again in the LP... A little out there, but it could potential work. It would force skaters like Carolina right now to attempt another flip in her LP.
  10. bek

    bek Guest

    But she still was only attempting four types of triples in Vancover. I'm fine with giving her a bonus when she attempts 5 kinds.
  11. briancoogaert

    briancoogaert Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2003
    Messages:
    12,385
    I wouldn't attempt any Flip or Lutz anymore with such a rule ;)
    I think the best is a bonus point for those who attempts all kind of take-off (and correct edge, no Flutz or Lip). Double or triple or single, nevermind, but all kind of take-off. If you can't do a 3Lz, then, one jumping passes must be a 2Lz...
    Katarina Witt didn't attempt 3F anymore in 1988, but she had this 3Sal/2Flip sequence. I think that was good because she had one more kind of take-off with this (only the 2Lz was missing).
  12. bek

    bek Guest

    My only concern is I'm not sure its fair to someone who struggles with lets say a 3sal vs someone who struggles with a loop. Yu-na for example easily would fulfill the loop requirement with her 3 jump pass; but it would be harder for someone missing a 3sal. I guess a sequence... But it is likely time to insist on this. I think they obviously got rid of the 3 double axels for that reason too.
  13. briancoogaert

    briancoogaert Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2003
    Messages:
    12,385
    That's right. Why not 2Sal/3T. Or 2A/half-loop/2Sal.
    For the Lutz, it's more difficult, except a 2Lutz/3T. But this combo would be more points than 3T/2T.
  14. bek

    bek Guest

    Can everyone do a 3t after any jump.

    I think the point is that Kim for example could fit in the double loop requirement and not have to loose a jumping pass.

    But someone else might have to put in that double instead of a double axel or a triple they can do. I'd like to see the penalty for not having the triple be the same for all. Maybe the key is bonus, instead of require? But a sequence I guess could cover it.

    In the end I really don't want it to be in order to win you must have all the triples, because Kim was a great Champion without the 3loop. But it would be nice to see a bonus for those who have all the triples and have the edges correct too. Because clearly thats hard to do.
  15. maharbabackward

    maharbabackward New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2003
    Messages:
    55
    I like the idea of 1.1 bonus for combinations in general and 0.8 factor for repeating any jump. You really don't need a bigger bonus for 3/3s. The reason is, if you can cram 2 or more of your allowed allotment of triple jumps into one pass instead of 2, you have bought yourself another jumping pass to gain points. e.g.
    Scenario 1: 1st pass = 3F 2nd pass = 3T
    Scenario 2: 1st pass = 3F+3T 2nd pass = 2A
    Scenario 2 gets you more points, so that's how you're bonused for a 3/3[/QUOTE]

    In a free program what if someone does:
    1st pass = 3F+3T 2nd pass = 3T
    1st pass = 3T+3T 2nd pass = 3 F

    Do you think this is even? Mind you, person A would get some GOE benefits but do you think that makes it all up?
  16. Coco

    Coco Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2002
    Messages:
    10,583
    I get what you are saying, gkelly, but bek hits on the problem with not having a sizeable gulf between doubles and triples in the scale of values. It's the unintentional doubles that need to be "punished" and unfortunately the well done intentional doubles, tricked out with transitions and variations, suffer.

    I would also rather see a great program with cleanly landed 2a, 3t and 3sal (all repeated) plus a nice tano 2z from spread eagle or 2flip from charlotte or 2loop from spirals with the arms overhead.

    But the place to separate that program from the slower skater who ignores their music and "chucks" jumps is in PCS and GOE, not TES.

    As to my earlier post, I would like to see balance in the SP, so two toe assisted jumps and two edge jumps (axel plus something else, now that they allow the axel to be either 2a or 3a). It would prove to be quite the equalizer, I think. Only downside would be no edge-edge combos. My original idea would allow for edge-edge, though. The first jump of the combo and the solo jump should be opposite types.

    I still like the idea of 6 passes for ladies whether it leads to 3-3-3 or not. I think ladies programs are long enough at 4:00 (4:10). One less jump would really open it up for slow sections, more involved choreography, etc.
  17. bek

    bek Guest


    But Coco the question of rather is really a hard point. I guess if we are talking about two mediocre skaters; I'd say sure reward it to the more balanced program. But for me 2010 worlds was a great example of the problems with rewarding doubles. Neither Ando or Phaneuf were doing "mediocre triples" Ando has some of the best jumps in the business. And Kostner's jumps were definetly a bit shaky, but she wasn't a mess and had a lot of Lepisto's great qualities. I'd rather have had Kostner rewarded with that bronze than Lepisto. It felt like Lepisto was rewarded for going the easy route.

    And same goes for me with Korpi and Polina at Europeans; if Korpi hadn't lost a jump she would have been within 4 points of Polina's 7 triple program with a 3flip/3toe and a double axel/3toe. And once again very well executed, high and exquisite triples from Polina (except for a slight double foot? on the lutz) Mainly that was due to PCS but give Korpi more points for doubles....

    Don't get me wrong I don't necessarily dislike Korpi's skating; she has a more interesting style than Polina; and I definetly wouldn't disagree with her getting higher PCS. But Korpi isn't a revelation artistically either. She's no Kostner. (She's not even Lepisto). She's not exactly breaking the mold artistically where she should be that close to a great technical skate....

    This IS frankly a sport and at the top levels; when we are talking about making a podium at an ISU championships; doubles would ideally just not be there. I'm sorry they shouldn't be. Revolutions are frankly one of the least subjective things about figure skating.

    Now what I want to see is errors on high base valued elements-penalized more.
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 4, 2012
  18. gkelly

    gkelly Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2003
    Messages:
    10,496
    How would you feel about the following two programs, if skated cleanly?

    A:
    seven triples and a double axel, including a difficult 3-3 combo, most with positive GOE
    all level 1 spins, with about 0 GOE
    level 1 steps, with 0 GOE
    boring choreo spiral with 0 GOE
    nothing but crossovers, three turns, mohawks, and long glides in between

    B:
    five triples of three different kinds, two double axels (in six jump passes by executing two of the above in a sequence) and another good 2-2 combo or solo double out of steps, most or all with positive GOE
    level 4 spins (or maybe one level 3, let's say she doesn't have a Biellmann ;) with +GOE
    level 4 steps with +GOE
    beautiful and difficult choreo spirals with +GOE
    lots of transitional skating moves of various kinds (e.g., walleys, split jumps, spread eagles or Ina Bauers, edge work and steps into and out of elements), well phrased to the music

    Obviously A has the more difficult jump content.
    But arguably B has the more difficult program, more difficult technical content in terms of the program as a whole

    Wouldn't it be sporting to reward B for all her areas of extra difficulty?

    Maybe the non-jump difficulty is enough to make up for the difference in jump content even just in the TES. Or maybe it can just close the gap in TES enough that she can win on PCS (if in fact she deserves to -- as I described above we don't know how the two skaters' Performance/Execution or Interpretation compare, or most of the Skating Skills criteria)
  19. nubka

    nubka Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2006
    Messages:
    7,634
    It most certainly IS the answer... :D
  20. aliceanne

    aliceanne Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2010
    Messages:
    2,148
    I never was good at math. Couldn't we just vote them off the island?
  21. David21

    David21 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2002
    Messages:
    2,030
    The values are mostly fine as they are but I'd like the skaters to get rid of the obligatory, sloppily done double axel-double sth-double sth combination at the end of each programm. It is much more difficult to do the last jump of that three jump combo at the end of of a triple-double or even triple-triple combo and they scores should somehow reflect that.



    It is not ridiculous because the difficulty of the loop is very similar to that of the flip. There are plenty of top skaters who have/had bigger problems with the loop than with the flip even though you apparently think that flip is much more difficult than the loop which it is not. Soem time ago, the ISU changed the base value of the loop to make it more similar to the flip than to the salchow which was a good move.
    The difference between the triple lutz and triple toeloop could be a bit more than only 1.9 points, though, I agree with that.
  22. smarts1

    smarts1 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2009
    Messages:
    2,015
    ^ Although many senior ladies do struggle with the loop, many more struggle in doing a proper flip jump (and many others don't even do the triple flip in their programs).