Should IJS change how jumps are valued for ladies.

[MR-FAN]

Judging from Tukt's TES marks at the GP this season, and Polina at Euros a couple of days ago, I'd say difficult jump content is being rewarded. In TES. COP gives value to choreography, presentation, skating skills, transitions, etc... in the PCS. You can't be a jumping bean and expect to win anymore. Carolina has been winning competitions left and right with a reduced technical arsenal, but look at the scores. She's always hovering around 120s, it's just that there's noone to challenge her at this time. We've seen what jump content and artistry can do (scores in the 150s, 140s, and 130s for women) and if someone has the PCS that say Kostner or Alissa get AND the content of the 3-3-russian-youngsters, they WILL outscore the ladies with reduced technical content. There just isn't, and in a system that tries to strike a balance between technical difficulty and skating skills/artistry, I'd say all the wins of Alissa, Mao and Kostner this season are well deserved.

I'm a big fan of COP, but I still there's a lot of fixing needed for it. It's way better than back in 2004, but there's still more work to be done. And I also think the way elements are valued and scored needs reform, but I don't aggree the reforms need to be approached from a "lets reward difficult jumps" point of view. Boring zombies doing quads and 3-3s with barely any flow or choreography isn't the answer

[Aussie Willy]

Whilst everyone is being judged under the same criteria, I am not sure why making the values for each element that a woman does compared to a man is going to change anything. And what sort of motivation does it provide? It is like adult skaters complaining that they should be judged easier because they are adults and it is harder for them to learn to skate.

You do a big jump, you get credit for a big jump. Do a tiny jump and you will get it consider as a tiny jump. If the tiny jump is fully rotated it will still get the full value of the element.

[BigB08822]

I love the idea of rotating the triple in the SP. Change the rule so it can be a double, though. Also, only rotate between loop, flip and lutz. I don't want to see people doing toes and salchows as the solo jump.

[gkelly]

Or... We could make the rule again saying that women are required to attempt all five triples...

There never was such a rule before. You could make such a rule for the very first time.

[Coco]

What about an sp requirement of the solo jump and the first jump of the combination being opposite type jumps? One has to be toe assisted and the other an edge jump. Or they could make it a bit easier to enforce and say that one of the three non-axel jumps must be an edge jump.

On a somewhat related note, I've been thinking that the women should only have 6 jumping passes. Men currently have 8 to the women's 7, but they get an extra 30 seconds for that one jumping pass. Yes, they have two step sequences, and step sequences are more exhausting than spirals, but one of the step sequences is not for awarded levels.

It just seems strange to me that ladies have to cram 4 additional jumping passes in just 1:20 from sp to lp, while men get 1:50 to fit in 5 additional passes.

With 6 jumping passes, but keeping 3 combos including the 3 jump combination, there would be a huge reward for 3-3 combos, and incentive for a 3-3-3. In terms of exciting jumps, I think the future of women's skating is in combinations. Most women aren't going to be able to do triple axels.

[BigB08822]

Only a few women can land 3/3 combinations cleanly, how many 3/3/3 combinations do you expect to see? I don't want to outlaw it or anything, if you can do it then more power to you, but limiting the jumping passes even further will probably NOT result in 3/3/3 combinations. Maybe someone will try one here or there but good luck getting all 3 jumps rotated. It will result in even BIGGER wins by those with fewer triples but good PCS as their PCS will be a bigger % of total score.

[gkelly]

What about an sp requirement of the solo jump and the first jump of the combination being opposite type jumps? One has to be toe assisted and the other an edge jump. Or they could make it a bit easier to enforce and say that one of the three non-axel jumps must be an edge jump.

I assume you mean "at least one of the three non-axel jumps." Which means they all could be. E.g., 3S+2Lo and 3Lo, or 3Lo+2Lo (or 3Lo+3Lo) and 3S.

Would it be OK to show no toe jumps in the SP, given that, arguably, edge jumps are more about skating skill (vs. jumping skill) compared to toe jumps?

If the idea is to show balance between both types of jumps, then you'd need to say at least one must be a toe jump and at least one must be an edge jump. But 3S+2T and 3Lo or 3Lz+2Lo and 3F could meet that requirement.

On a somewhat related note, I've been thinking that the women should only have 6 jumping passes. Men currently have 8 to the women's 7, but they get an extra 30 seconds for that one jumping pass. <snip>
With 6 jumping passes, but keeping 3 combos including the 3 jump combination, there would be a huge reward for 3-3 combos, and incentive for a 3-3-3. In terms of exciting jumps, I think the future of women's skating is in combinations. Most women aren't going to be able to do triple axels.

Only a few women can land 3/3 combinations cleanly, how many 3/3/3 combinations do you expect to see? I don't want to outlaw it or anything, if you can do it then more power to you, but limiting the jumping passes even further will probably NOT result in 3/3/3 combinations. Maybe someone will try one here or there but good luck getting all 3 jumps rotated. It will result in even BIGGER wins by those with fewer triples but good PCS as their PCS will be a bigger % of total score.

Exactly. Just limiting the jump passes is not magically going to make the majority of senior ladies capable of executing elements that even the best jumpers (men and women) find challenging.

To me it would make more sense to let the women skate longer programs, 4:15 or 4:30 +/- :10, and give them the option of an 8th jump pass or 4th spin or another type of element.

[nlyoung]

It is a sport. A teeny tiny girl hopping straight up into 3 rotations 2 inches off the ice is not an indication of technique either, which is why so many of them flame out when they start to grow.

True, but the reality is that judges tend to just count whether a jump is completed or not. There are provisions in place to reward stronger jumps that are higher or cover more ground with GOE/SS, but it's not clear they are used consistently. A tiny, but perfectly executed jump with great technique shouldn't be penalized just because the girl attempting the jump isn't strong enough for massive height or distance.

[aliceanne]

True, but the reality is that judges tend to just count whether a jump is completed or not. There are provisions in place to reward stronger jumps that are higher or cover more ground with GOE/SS, but it's not clear they are used consistently. A tiny, but perfectly executed jump with great technique shouldn't be penalized just because the girl attempting the jump isn't strong enough for massive height or distance.

I wonder if counting revolutions on jumps is a good goal for women's skating. It is relatively easy for a slight child to do double jumps without jumping out. Simply hop up in place and spin. The problem is that isn't good technique when they grow and put on weight. They should be learning to jump up and out, rotating at the peak of the arc. This is harder to do in terms of strength and timing, but is necessary with an adult body.

I guess if you want to keep skating a child sport, or a sport for women with pre-teen bodies (who lack stamina because they don't eat) counting revolutions is OK, but it doesn't give many skaters a long enough career to develop artistry, and small jumps aren't very exciting as sport.

With all the under-rotation and edge calls women are getting it seems the technical content is going backwards not forwards. You now have champions who can't do all the triple jumps, let alone move on to triple axels, quads, and triple/triple combinations.

[mag]

....With all the under-rotation and edge calls women are getting it seems the technical content is going backwards not forwards. You now have champions who can't do all the triple jumps, let alone move on to triple axels, quads, and triple/triple combinations.

But really, could any more do them cleanly before? I suspect the number of clean jumps has not changed substantially over the last 20 years. What is different now is we have the technology available to see the under rotations and call them. (Because Kwan has to be in every thread I'll use the following example) I recently came across an older youtube video of Michelle. I laughed out loud as Dick Button said, as Michelle was doing a 3Lz, "Now there is a clean out side edge with no sign of a flutz." It is absolutely clear on the video that she changed to an inside edge before take off. Maybe not as blatant as some, but a clear change none the less. Now, she would get an edge call, back then, it was clean. Now before I get jumped on, given the sureness of Michelle's jumps, I suspect if there were edge calls when she was skating she would have done a Rochette and fixed the lutz absolutely and completely and would have had a deep outside edge, but the reality is, she didn't need to. In real time, under the judging system of the day, it didn't matter. Same goes for the many cheated jumps. Kimmie's 3A's at US Nationals would never hold up now, Ando's 4S same. What about Tara's 3l/3l? Was it always clean by today's standards? Probably not.

[bek]

I wonder if counting revolutions on jumps is a good goal for women's skating. It is relatively easy for a slight child to do double jumps without jumping out. Simply hop up in place and spin. The problem is that isn't good technique when they grow and put on weight. They should be learning to jump up and out, rotating at the peak of the arc. This is harder to do in terms of strength and timing, but is necessary with an adult body.

I guess if you want to keep skating a child sport, or a sport for women with pre-teen bodies (who lack stamina because they don't eat) counting revolutions is OK, but it doesn't give many skaters a long enough career to develop artistry, and small jumps aren't very exciting as sport.

With all the under-rotation and edge calls women are getting it seems the technical content is going backwards not forwards. You now have champions who can't do all the triple jumps, let alone move on to triple axels, quads, and triple/triple combinations.

There are plenty of older girls who can do the jumps. And in a lot of cases smaller girls are going to have smaller jumps. Look at Tukt her jumps are smaller but its partially because she's so small. However the technique on her jumps is first rate. Its not like Tukt's just relying on being teeny tiny to get those jumps around.

[gkelly]

I wonder if counting revolutions on jumps is a good goal for women's skating. It is relatively easy for a slight child to do double jumps without jumping out. Simply hop up in place and spin. The problem is that isn't good technique when they grow and put on weight. They should be learning to jump up and out, rotating at the peak of the arc. This is harder to do in terms of strength and timing, but is necessary with an adult body.

I guess if you want to keep skating a child sport, or a sport for women with pre-teen bodies (who lack stamina because they don't eat) counting revolutions is OK, but it doesn't give many skaters a long enough career to develop artistry, and small jumps aren't very exciting as sport.

Very true. What is the solution?

*Reward big, rotated triple jumps with +2 and +3 GOEs (often the case already, unless there are problems with the landing, takeoff edge, and/or telegraphing)

*"Penalize" small jumps with no more than 0 GOE, or maybe +1 if there are other enhancements (mostly already the case)

*Further penalize underrotated jumps with lower base value and -GOE (already the case)

*Reward big clean double jumps, especially with enhancements, with +GOE so that a great double can be worth more than a bad triple

*Reward overall programs with

Obviously the skaters who can do all of this including big clean triples will have a huge advantage. But rotation in the air should not be the single most important determinant of a figure skating champion -- male or female, although we expect more of the men to have mastery of big triples

With all the under-rotation and edge calls women are getting it seems the technical content is going backwards not forwards. You now have champions who can't do all the triple jumps, let alone move on to triple axels, quads, and triple/triple combinations.

And if you want mature skaters who are strong skaters and not just jumping beans, that's likely to be the case and not necessarily a bad thing IMO.

Although it has been rare in the past 20 years to have a champion with fewer than 5 different triple jumps, it has been even rarer to have champions with triple axels or quads. It's not as though these were ever standard elements in women's figure skating. Not having them is not going backward -- one or two skaters having them in some years was an exception.

It's probably been about 50-50 on triple-triple combinations; I'd have to go back and check year by year for exact counts of champions who won with or without one. Kwan and Slutskaya, for example, each won both with and without.

[bek]

*Reward big clean double jumps, especially with enhancements, with +GOE so that a great double can be worth more than a bad triple

This would be so ripe for abuse. We've already seen some get away with all kinds of doubles. I like the concept of GOE but I can't help feeling its use to hold some up and some down.

Not to mention the fact that what if someone's jumps are small, but they are still cleanly done with good technique. A smaller girl isn't necessarily going to have the highest jumps. I pointed out Tukt as an example because her jumps are clearly well done with very good technique even if they aren't the biggest. And she has the best landings in the business.

Given the age rules; I think puberty pretty much takes care of a lot of jumping beans with Zhang's former technique. Now perhaps the judges SHOULD start hitting those hard who are clearly doing the jumps with shoddy technique. But I don't think someone like Tukt should necessarily be hit with low GOE just because her jumps are smaller.

[gkelly]

I can easily see a small, clean jump earning +1 GOE

Base mark for seven triples and seven +1s across a program will hold up well against fewer triples even if some of them earn +2

When I said a double with +2 or +3 GOE should earn more than a bad triple, I meant a bad triple -- negative GOE and possibly 70% or downgrade basemark -- not more than a good, rotated, but small triple

[bek]

I can easily see a small, clean jump earning +1 GOE

Base mark for seven triples and seven +1s across a program will hold up well against fewer triples even if some of them earn +2

When I said a double with +2 or +3 GOE should earn more than a bad triple, I meant a bad triple -- negative GOE and possibly 70% or downgrade basemark -- not more than a good, rotated, but small triple

But to me everyone at that level should be able to do a clean/big double jump. (maybe the double axel is hard) but double jumps they should all be able to do that easily so I don't agree with handing big time plus GOE for it at the Senior level. Now maybe at the Junior level to discourage coaches from teaching young kids shoddy technique yes.

[gkelly]

A good double jump is a good double jump. The rules shouldn't be different for different levels. Of course the expectation of what's "good" might vary between a level where most of the competitors are physically mature (senior) and where most are prepubescent (below novice -- novice and especially junior levels tend to be a mix of physical maturity)

NOT ALL SENIOR LADIES CAN DO ALL TRIPLE JUMPS. The same rules apply not only to world medalists but also to senior B event, qual rounds at ISU championships, etc.

The rules for the senior short program require at least two different triples and a double axel. Great doubles in the senior SP still earn -3 GOE.

In the long program, what do you want from a low-average senior-level jumper who can do 2A, 3T, and 3S but no other triples -- of whom there are many below the world level? Those jumps alone will fill a maximum of 6 jumping passes, given the repeat rules. So there will be at least one other jump pass in which the skater either needs to plan a double jump (or combination of double jumps) or else attempt a triple she's not capable of. I'd rather see good doubles score better than failed triples.

Younger seniors who still have hope of mastering more triples might include one they're still working on if they can avoid a fall or downgrade, to get experience trying it in competition in hopes that they'll be more comfortable with it when (IF) they finally "get" that jump. That's their choice.

If the best jump content a skater can use to fill an extra jump pass or two after her triples are used up is a big clean double, let her work on making it even bigger and cleaner and/or enhancing it in some way so she can get positive GOE and make the program cleaner and more interesting. I wouldn't want to see higher rewards for a telegraphed, cheated, two-footed 3Lo< or 3F< just for the sake of trying another triple.

[bek]

A good double jump is a good double jump. The rules shouldn't be different for different levels. Of course the expectation of what's "good" might vary between a level where most of the competitors are physically mature (senior) and where most are prepubescent (below novice -- novice and especially junior levels tend to be a mix of physical maturity)

NOT ALL SENIOR LADIES CAN DO ALL TRIPLE JUMPS. The same rules apply not only to world medalists but also to senior B event, qual rounds at ISU championships, etc.

The rules for the senior short program require at least two different triples and a double axel. Great doubles in the senior SP still earn -3 GOE.

In the long program, what do you want from a low-average senior-level jumper who can do 2A, 3T, and 3S but no other triples -- of whom there are many below the world level? Those jumps alone will fill a maximum of 6 jumping passes, given the repeat rules. So there will be at least one other jump pass in which the skater either needs to plan a double jump (or combination of double jumps) or else attempt a triple she's not capable of. I'd rather see good doubles score better than failed triples.

Younger seniors who still have hope of mastering more triples might include one they're still working on if they can avoid a fall or downgrade, to get experience trying it in competition in hopes that they'll be more comfortable with it when (IF) they finally "get" that jump. That's their choice.

If the best jump content a skater can use to fill an extra jump pass or two after her triples are used up is a big clean double, let her work on making it even bigger and cleaner and/or enhancing it in some way so she can get positive GOE and make the program cleaner and more interesting. I wouldn't want to see higher rewards for a telegraphed, cheated, two-footed 3Lo< or 3F< just for the sake of trying another triple.

I actually wouldn't mind more penalties for badly done triples and even if a very badly done triple is worth a double.

But I don't want good doubles to be racking in GOE because that means these skaters will still be racking up points over skaters with good triples.

I think doing a double at the highest levels is not a good thing whatsoever; and that a well down triple frankly needs to be worth a lot more than it is.

I actually do think the skaters should have to attempt all the kinds of triples; but those who don't have all of the triples should have to take a major point hit because of it. Doesn't mean they should necessarily lose if they can rack up points elsewhere, but I don't want to see them getting huge points for that particular double jump.

I didn't think for example Ando or Cynthia at 2010 worlds were properly rewarded TES wise vs Lepisto, for their many triples and Lepisto's many doubles. We aren't talking about Lepisto's PCS here but about TES. I don't know why Johnny Weir (hardly the jumping king)'s point about how Lepisto was doing jumping passes people do at the intermediate level; should somehow be so dismissed.

An average triple that is cleanly done should be worth a lot more than a good double.

[gkelly]

An average triple that is cleanly done should be worth a lot more than a good double.

It is.

Double lutz (2.1 base mark) with +3 GOE (0.9) = 3.0 points

Triple toe with 0 GOE = 4.1 points

[kwanfan1818]

If they removed the Zayak rule for 3T and 3Lo as the second and third elements in jump combinations, we'd see more 3/3 attempts. Not that I think it's likely to see a skater do 3T/3T and 3T/3T/3T in the same program, but to save us from that possibility, there could be a requirement that the Zayak rule doesn't apply as long as the first jumps are different.

No, I don't think there should be different scoring systems for Men and Ladies: I think they should be the same. The same values, the same program lengths, the same number of elements, the same SP requirements, the option of a spiral step sequence in both disciplines, and the same PCS weighting.

[aliceanne]

It is.

Double lutz (2.1 base mark) with +3 GOE (0.9) = 3.0 points

Triple toe with 0 GOE = 4.1 points

Originally Posted by aliceanne
An average triple that is cleanly done should be worth a lot more than a good double.

I don't know what the answer is. I'm just throwing ideas out there. Under the current system they should get rewarded for extra rotations because it is harder, and that is the standard that has been set. But looking at ladies' skating compared to men's that standard doesn't seem to be working as well for the progression of the sport. The men can peak in their 20's, but a lot of the women are done by then. It doesn't give them much chance to develop artistry.

I don't know if the men just hide it more, but the women also seem to be caught in the trap of maintaining an unrealistic body type. Everyone talks about head cases, but I wonder how women like Sasha and Alissa can have the strength and stamina for the long program when they are on such low calorie diets. Yet a little added weight seems to seriously affect their ability to rotate in the air. Kimmie Meissner didn't grow that much, and yet when she did mature her triple jumps were gone.