How much does CoP really encourage senior skaters to improve their basics?

[Kwantumleap]

A conversation about basic technique from the Tonya Harding thread sparked my interest in present day skaters that are able to improve their basics. Kostner and Asada are two skaters that omitted their weaker jumps from programs in order to earn a maximum score under CoP. However, it seems that deductions from TES and low PCS generally tend to lead skaters to improve their basics.

Mao, Caroline Zhang, and Mira Leung (is she still competing?) are skaters that worked to improve their basics, but it's debatable if they will ever be rewarded like they were in the past when the rules were more lenient and they skated to the strengths they already possessed. Has it just been bad timing for Caroline and Mao considering puberty tends to throw things off, especially because technique had just been reworked? It may mainly be a ladies singles issues and I haven't checked the lastest revision of CoP, but it seems to me that tampering with technique tends to be rewarded less often than working the system to suit what you already have working.

[Aussie Willy]

It is not just senior skaters but all skaters who need to work on basics. I am constantly saying to skaters when they ask for judging feedback they need to work on their basic skating technique. I don't expect them to have Chanlike skating skills, but I do want to see them improve.

I have very little respect for skaters who do not think basic skating skills are important. I have seriously had skaters say that to me. If their skills are not good, it usually shows up in their technique on the elements such as lack of edge quality going into jumps or spins. And very poor footwork.

It is also not just about speed but how the technique looks. Knee bend is important, but ankle flexion and flexibility contribute a lot to a good technique. Because it helps with foot placement and maximising the power from the stroke.

[gkelly]

A conversation about basic technique from the Tonya Harding thread sparked my interest in present day skaters that are able to improve their basics. Kostner and Asada are two skaters that omitted their weaker jumps from programs in order to earn a maximum score under CoP. However, it seems that deductions from TES and low PCS generally tend to lead skaters to improve their basics.

I'm not sure what you're asking, since variety of jump takeoffs is not usually what we mean by "basics."

The ISU can set (and change) rules in an effort to encourage skaters to work on qualities they want to reward. When they have specific intentions behind their changes, it would be good to make those intentions very explicit to make sure skaters know what each new rule is intended to reward and aren't just guessing.

The ISU probably could also give judges clearer guidelines on how to use GOEs and PCS to reward quality and performance . . . and aspects of program layout in the sense of choreography more than just meeting the well-balanced rules.

The tech panel applying the well-balanced rules and the level features, etc., will determine the technical content that gets credit. But in some cases the rules and the guidelines for how tech panels are supposed to apply them seem to reward following the rules more than they reward actual skating quality, which should probably be a lot less the case than it currently is in long programs. (Short programs have always been restrictive, originally much more than they are now.)