Interview with ISU Vice President Lakernik on how figure skating will change

The brutal cut off into the free skate has more potential to harm the bigger countries. Smaller feds are probably just going to keep their one spot regardless of if they make the cut, unless their team can break into the top 10. But if big feds have a couple of teams make mistakes and not get into the FS it is a huge disaster for their pairs programs. USA got down to 1 pairs spot and Canada also got somewhat close to that happening too.

A lot of the lower ranked small fed pairs teams who are pushing out top federation skaters from the free skate are only relatively young teams who could expect to improve. I actually think the big federations are concerned.

Don't forget about judge rep. You start making the FS at Worlds regularly, your ranking goes up, you get more exposure, and slowly you start moving up in the skating world. More little countries making the FS at the expense of the big ones? More little countries improving their standings, moving up...they might start getting ideas. Soon there might be lots of little country pairs on the GP, and moving even further up the standings. What atrocity next?

In case my cynicism didn't tell enough, I think the fact that US/Canadian/Chinese pairs were among those not making the cut is more responsible for the increase in the FS than the fact that the cutoff score jumped from 52 to 63 in two years.

EDIT: And are they going to increase the number of GP spots for pairs too?
 
The cutoff of 16 in pairs is a little rough -- esp now that the top teams are so close to each other. It's like you miss one element and you'll risk not qualifying (for the non top 5 teams)

Having said that, I don't have strong feelings about # of qualifying spots.
 
I'm convinced the main reason that the number making the free skate in pairs will increase is because the small federation skaters are pushing out top countries. We've had China, USA and Canada not get pairs through the qualification because one mistake and you're out at the moment. Would they be so keen to make this change if this was not happening?

I'm sure it's a major motivator.

But when you want someone to do the right thing, you value whatever gets them to act. The year they increased the number of dancers on the GP, Russia had two National Champion teams at risk of only one invitation. And all the host countries were looking at losing their free host spots just in order to fill all the guaranteed ones. Voila, we got action!

And, let's face it, most of us don't want to see Peng & Jin and Seguin & Bilodeau missing the cut any more than we want to see the North Koreans, Austrians, Czechs, Australians, etc. Action is good.

What I meant by my comment is that no one has landed on the podium solely because they repeated a quad. Everyone on the podium at the OLYs repeated at least one quad, but Hanyu won because he had a beautifully choreographed program with Level 4 steps and spins that he executed beautifully, along with great jumps.

Yes, well, Denis Ten had all that stuff & didn't win 2013 Worlds. The ability to perform two quads was a huge separator between Patrick & the field for years. You have to win with the rules you're given; and if this change happens, I'm sure the men will do their best. Just as athletes did when the Zayak rule went into place.

I highly doubt there will be 4-4 next year. When and if that happens they can change the rule again

Of course, it's true that rules can be changed again. Nothing is set in stone. But if rules don't reward certain skills, then why would athletes commit the time needed to perfect them? And we certainly can't set a timeline on when something will happen. Who in their right mind would have guessed we'd go from our first 4-quad program to our first 6-quad one in a year and 3 months?
 
I think shortening men's programs has more to do with standardizing the rules between men's and ladies although I can't imagine why that's a priority for anybody.
 
Why can't I get outraged about 4 minute LPs for mens and pairs? Should I be? I think it's the perfect length for ladies and dance (can you imagine 4:30 free dances!?! :scream: ) and depending on the required elements of the LP, I think it makes sense. Why should men get 30 seconds more than ladies? Honestly, on the whole, I feel like mens program tend to drag more than ladies.

I'm somewhat surprised by all the doom and gloom.

I know Lakernik has mentioned in the past he would like to reduce the number of "boxes" in the LP to encourage higher quality elements and a little more freedom.

#eternaloptimist :p

Everything is stupid.

Yes. And to be more precise, actually, everything is terrible.
 
30 seconds less, 1 jump element less (approximately 10 seconds max)
How does this all contribute to higher quality and a little more freedom? 20 seconds less time! Minimize openings by 5, go directly from spin to spin, saves a few seconds but ooh how boring!, shorten step sequences by 5 seconds, and still it can’t add up to 20 seconds. Less prep time for quads, so how to get transition score? Choreography sequence, what choreography sequence? Were elite athletes coaches and choreographers asked their opinions? If you’ve watched a junior competition where skaters skate both senior and junior, the shortened time with same elements, they look manic, no time whatsoever to revel in the beauty of skating. Listen closely, can you hear ‘Flight if the Bumble Bee’? This rule is complete ignorance what is needed for quality.
4.30 minutes was also a test of endurance and dedicated training, a very appropriate measure of ideals of Olympic sport.
ISU has proven to be reactionary and also make new rules to benefit certain skaters.
Change the rules, the numbers, etc, how much time and money to do this?
How much time and money does it cost to keep the rules as they are so coaching technique, off ice training, and skaters’ mastery can catch up plus enforce greater knowledge of judges compared to the time and money to make such major changes, most importantly the stress to all who actually work in the ice? And no extensive training of judges. Keep the players so busy they don’t have time to question and keep the judges ignorant so they can be easily manipulated.
Wake up folks.
 
I agree about the men's junior programs. The programs are far more just jump, jump, jump than the senior men's have been in general. (And it's obvious the top guys need more prep time for the big jumps. I don't care who it is. Even Hanyu scrapped a bunch of choreography when he started filling the program with more of the harder ones). And the ladies programs have looked short on choreography for some while. The choreographic sequence is never enough time for them to hold a position long enough to make it look exquisite. We should be arguing for longer women's programs, not shorter ones for the men.

Now, having said that, if I was a guy staring down the gauntlet that is the current list of elements we are seeing in the top men's programs, I would be oh-so-fine with shortening the programs. Seriously, they can't breathe.
 
Which element is being cut from the pairs' FS with the removal of 30 seconds?
 
Adding a rule where each type of quad can only be used once would be a windfall for certain skaters like Chen, Uno, Jin etc who can do a lot of different quads.
The changes will impact most on those skaters who don't do 2 3As e.g. Nathan Chen. Under the proposals (loss of 1 jumping pass, and not allowed to repeat quads) he would have to drop a 4T and 4F and replace them with a 3A, losing 14.1 Base Value points, compared with a 0/1 quad skater who will almost certainly lose a 2A worth 3.3 points.

Any other quad skater who repeats a quad will only ever lose the value of that one quad, and have to do a triple instead, thereby losing only a few BV points. However the vast majority of them do 2 3As so won't be affected as much - it'll only 'feel' that way for a skater with a single quad as a greater proportion of their score comes that way. However their reduction in Base Value will be no different from a 4 quad and 2 3A skater who has to drop a quad.

N.B. As far as I can see SPs will be totally unaffected by the changes. Also we may well get far more -3Lo combos as skaters try to make up for losing the quads e.g. we could well see far more 3Lz-3Lo combos, plus because of the loss of the jumping pass and lower BVs of the top guys TES scores will magically get closer to PCS ones. Just mentioning this in passing. Also we may well see far more -3Lo combos from the 0/1 quad skaters anyway, they'll be trying to get as many big jumps as possible into 7 jumping passes, so I imagine -3T, -3Lo and -1Lo-3S/3F combinations will become standard.

Also there will be far less Zayak implications if you can't repeat quads, the only jumps you can repeat will be triples so there won't be quite the pressure to get off combos on the back end of their repeated quad, instead they will almost be able to take their time, it'll only be the 3A where they need to land the 2nd/3rd parts.
 
I see several problems w/the proposal to allow each quad to be repeated only once.

1. It is inconsistent with current practice regarding triples, which I believe allows any triple to be repeated once, as long as it's in combination. Why, in theory, should quads be treated any differently than triples?

2. It ultimately reduces skaters' flexibility in how to gain points. The reality is that some skaters struggle with particular jumps. For example, Nathan with the 3A, Yuna Kim with the 3Lp due to injury, the list is long of skaters who have had trouble with particular jumps. But they can still be amazing skaters even if they don't have one particular jump or don't have it well. In general, I think it's a good thing if the system offers ways for skaters to flexibly choose jump layouts to emphasize their strengths. The results can be very positive. Hanyu's LPs with two amazing quad Salchows and quad toe loops are IMO far more interesting to watch than another skater's program with 4 different quads done at a much more mediocre level of quality. Why should the second skater score more, simply because he has more different jumps, when the jumps aren't as good? Basically I feel this is a very arbitrary rule that isn't necessarily going to produce a better product in terms of the actual performances.
 
I see several problems w/the proposal to allow each quad to be repeated only once.

1. It is inconsistent with current practice regarding triples, which I believe allows any triple to be repeated once, as long as it's in combination. Why, in theory, should quads be treated any differently than triples?

2. It ultimately reduces skaters' flexibility in how to gain points. The reality is that some skaters struggle with particular jumps. For example, Nathan with the 3A, Yuna Kim with the 3Lp due to injury, the list is long of skaters who have had trouble with particular jumps. But they can still be amazing skaters even if they don't have one particular jump or don't have it well. In general, I think it's a good thing if the system offers ways for skaters to flexibly choose jump layouts to emphasize their strengths. The results can be very positive. Hanyu's LPs with two amazing quad Salchows and quad toe loops are IMO far more interesting to watch than another skater's program with 4 different quads done at a much more mediocre level of quality. Why should the second skater score more, simply because he has more different jumps, when the jumps aren't as good? Basically I feel this is a very arbitrary rule that isn't necessarily going to produce a better product in terms of the actual performances.
It’s just one among many proposals. It’s not like they’re going to pass it. I am more afraid of the GOE...
 
I'm somewhat surprised by all the doom and gloom.
At FSU? Noooo, never. :p :lol:

I really don't see doom and gloom, per se, because the ISU will do what they want to do, eventually. I would just suggest this to them: The sport has a real credibility problem when the ISU cork sniffers think they need to overhaul the rules practically every other season. Subtle tweaks here and there are fine, but enough of this total renovation stuff. If they want to change the rules and overhaul the sport dramatically, do it already and then leave it alone. I think most of this musical chair mentality after every season can be traced directly to the ongoing bickering from fans that get ticked off when their favorites don’t win, especially after an Olympic Games. :summer: This obnoxious micromanaging has become OTT and tiresome. :gallopin1

JMHO :soapbox:
 
True, but we can still offer our opinions on it. And who knows that they won't pass it? I don't know how they pass some of the things they do. :rolleyes:
The GOE bullets and their “step in plus”and “step in minus” will be the talk of the day for the next 4 years. Like how on earth they think of something like that lmao. As if the judging needs to be more complicated.
 
Having a cap would be okay, imo. The numbers equaling the total score do not have to keep going up to infinity.

6.0 was nothing but a shameless popularity contest in most cases... occasionally they got it right, but CoP has become terribly flawed AND just as corrupt.
 
Last edited:
Having a cap would be okay, imo.

When you have a cap and everyone reaches it, a Code of Points system has to be revamped even more often and more dramatically. The 10.00 Code of Points system in gymnastics required drastic revision every four years, which led to extremely messy routines the year following the Olympics and to high retirement rates from young athletes unwilling or unable to revise their entire routines after COP revision. The open-ended scoring system used now has a lot of flaws, but one of its major advantages is that it requires less revision and has a higher athlete retainment rate.

6.0 never had a cap on difficulty because technical scores were always relative to the rest of the field.
 
Last edited:
I also found the way gymnastics seriously altered their COP to the point where it substantially changed the actual sport every four years (which means a gymnast was really a victim or beneficiary of timing) back during the 10.0 days and even now in the open-ended system made it seem like a sport that didn’t know itself, and I still sort of feel that way. Changing the difficulty cap because everyone was maxing out on like double layouts and double tucks and getting 10.0s is one thing, but the gymnastics COP changes every four years was really ridiculous in many aspects and every change can be used to invalidate a past champion in people’s minds to the point where the timing issue is a very real thing one can point out. I think that’s a real image problem for those paying attention like they don’t know what they are doing or what they really want to value in the sport.

I honestly don’t know any other judged sport that had to change their sport as drastically and dramatically as gymnastics has done on such a regular basis (every four year interval).
 
Last edited:
I officiate women's lacrosse and while that sport is perhaps not the best example (we have major problems), they issue rule changes every year. They have been changing rules annually for the past 15 years I've been involved in it. In fact, at the NCAA level, the rule changes for this year have been massive and transformational (for the better!!).

So rule changes, valuation changes, etc., aren't a sign that something was wrong. They are indicative of growth, progress, greater understanding, better vision for the future.

That's not to say that every rule change is good. Also, rules committees like to prove their worth and justify their existence.

It is a shame that in skating there is no mechanism for rules to be "tried out" for a period of time to see their impact. In women's lacrosse, we have off season "fall ball" where they test new rules and survey coaches and officials to see if the rule had it's desired effect and to see if it works for all skill levels. But in skating, with people getting programs choreographed and that being so expensive, there's no fair way to test rules out, imo. Also, even if there was a 'pro' league, there is no one else at other levels doing quads.

So rules changes in and of themselves don't bother me or indicate that anything is wrong. But in skating, I'm worried that no one is looking at the big picture of audience experience, ease of communicating what is good and what is bad to a TV audience, driving the right behaviors in program development.

The simple concept of GOE on technical elements move the sport forward light years, imo.

But it has become glaringly obvious that the absence of a similar structure for everything else (transitions, entire programs, etc.) is like a millstone around the sport's neck. We won't see real progress until Federations let go of their need to manipulate results for political reasons.

Some ideas:

At the GP/Worlds/Olympics level, it should be possible to measure ice coverage through the use of video cameras. This should be used to put skaters into various overlapping ranges of PCS. Skaters with the best ice coverage can be in the 6-10 range, skaters with 2nd best can be in 4-8 range, 3rd best in the 2-6 range. This will give skaters outside the 6-10 range some concrete idea of how they can move up to a better range, even though they may not initially earn higher PCS as they improve their ice coverage.

Abandon the corridor or at least create two or three corridors: (Corridor 1: skating skills + transitions, Corridor 2: Ch & C + Interpretation, Corridor 3: P/E). This will allow for skaters to be ranked by individual component in a way that reflects what actually happened on the ice.

And for the love of god, let the technical panel assess GOE with the "musical structure" element moved to one of the components. Maybe even move the creative entry & exit bullet points to one of the components, too. GOE is grossly manipulated by the judges. Now that we are at +/-5, that manipulation is going to be a huge, ugly problem.

Here are the old bullet points (not sure if any have been added):
1) unexpected / creative / difficult entry
2) clear recognizable (creative, interesting, original for jump preceded by steps/movements of the Short Program) steps/free skating movements immediately preceding element
3) varied position in the air / delay in rotation
4) good height and distance
5) good extension on landing / creative exit
6) good flow from entry to exit including jump combinations / sequences 7) effortless throughout
8) element matched to the musical structure - MOVE TO PCS
 
When you have a cap and everyone reaches it, a Code of Points system has to be revamped even more often and more dramatically. The 10.00 Code of Points system in gymnastics required drastic revision every four years, which led to extremely messy routines the year following the Olympics and to high retirement rates from young athletes unwilling or unable to revise their entire routines after COP revision. The open-ended scoring system used now has a lot of flaws, but one of its major advantages is that it requires less revision and has a higher athlete retainment rate.

6.0 never had a cap on difficulty because technical scores were always relative to the rest of the field.
I know... I'm not talking about what you are. I'm speculating about a complete overhaul. Not this (upcoming) season, of course, but sometime in the future when the fans can handle it, or, more accurately, when the ISU feels like it, and when they've had enough time to create the right atmosphere and mood for such a change to occur.

I would mention a :sekret:, but when I do, oops, I just did, people get all wild-eyed and uptight. :eek: :lol:

Oh well… They’ll live… :)
 
Last edited:
At FSU? Noooo, never. :p:lol:

I really don't see doom and gloom, per se, because the ISU will do what they want to do, eventually. I would just suggest this to them: The sport has a real credibility problem when the ISU cork sniffers think they need to overhaul the rules practically every other season. Subtle tweaks here and there are fine, but enough of this total renovation stuff. If they want to change the rules and overhaul the sport dramatically, do it already and then leave it alone. I think most of this musical chair mentality after every season can be traced directly to the ongoing bickering from fans that get ticked off when their favorites don’t win, especially after an Olympic Games. :summer: This obnoxious micromanaging has become OTT and tiresome. :gallopin1

Do fans really have that much influence?? :lol: I'd love to think the ISU cares what we think, but I've never seen any evidence that they do. :D


I know... I'm not talking about what you are. I'm speculating about a complete overhaul. Not this (upcoming) season, of course, but sometime in the future when the fans can handle it, or, more accurately, when the ISU feels like it, and when they've had enough time to create the right atmosphere and mood for such a change to occur.

I would mention a :sekret:, but when I do, oops, I just did, people get all wild-eyed and uptight. :eek::lol:

What would a @Weve3 post be without a :sekret: :D.

I actually am in favor of a complete overhaul at this point, or let's say a third way (not 6.0 or IJS, but potentially a new system). It's the inherent flaws of IJS, and bad judging, not petty whining by fans, that's making it necessary to tweak the system now.

My only problem is, I do not trust the ISU to come up with something new. Maybe if there was completely new "management." :scream:
 
A Code of Points system will always require updating on a quadrennial basis.

The dancers have maxed out their difficulty & all but hit the ceiling.

I know I'm banging on like a broken record on this, but the +/- 5 GOE is going to make dance's problems so much worse in my opinion.

Because GOE is not the same thing as difficulty. If anything, I believe that it will encourage more simplicity in order to attract higher GOE. This GOE will be used as another layer of PCS to elevate up whatever current chosen ones.

Because there is no room in the levels, there will be nothing any other team can do to make their program more difficult to counter this.

Or, it will take a season or two for everyone to bottle neck up the top again with +5 GOE and the scoring will still be totally maxed out just as it is now. Judging by that committee meeting, pretty much everything getting a +3 now is going to get a +5.

What dance needs is more levels. But what more can you do to dance to add technical difficulty without turning it into pairs?

Lifts could be made more difficult. They could add in another 'technical marker element' like the twizzles (what I'm not sure). But then you are starting to get pairs right?

I think I need to just give up on dance scoring and treat it as a fluff/politikal fest as most long term fans do.

I know... I'm not talking about what you are. I'm speculating about a complete overhaul. Not this (upcoming) season, of course, but sometime in the future when the fans can handle it, or, more accurately, when the ISU feels like it, and when they've had enough time to create the right atmosphere and mood for such a change to occur.

I would mention a :sekret:, but when I do, oops, I just did, people get all wild-eyed and uptight. :eek::lol:

Oh well… They’ll live… :)

Are you talking about the technical vs artistic programs?
 
Hmmm, I sense a few toothy posters are feeling bored today? Or, just insecure and thin-skinned? :yawn:

Back to the topic at hand...

30 seconds less, 1 jump element less (approximately 10 seconds max)
How does this all contribute to higher quality and a little more freedom?
Exactly. It doesn't. It's the ISU trying to scale things back - in baby steps. Hard to believe w/ the addition of the team event not so long ago. They do listen to the fans ... complain, mostly. One person's fix is another person's gripe.
 
The idea of "one type of quad only" is ludicrously short sighted. Because what will happen?

for the first season or two, Chen, Uno and Hanyu will be winning everything because they're the only ones that can do four-five different types. Zhou may also be brought into the mix in this way. Jin will suffer (only toe, Salchow and Lutz) and everyone else will fall behind.

And then...

Then the men will go crazy trying to learn the more difficult types of quads even if maybe they really don't have the technique or ability to do it. They'll start throwing them in competition for the base value even if they're not successful. And bada-bing, bada-bip, we're in a total splatfest mode. Yeah. Great job, ISU.
 
The idea of "one type of quad only" is ludicrously short sighted. Because what will happen?

for the first season or two, Chen, Uno and Hanyu will be winning everything because they're the only ones that can do four-five different types. Zhou may also be brought into the mix in this way. Jin will suffer (only toe, Salchow and Lutz) and everyone else will fall behind.

And then...

Then the men will go crazy trying to learn the more difficult types of quads even if maybe they really don't have the technique or ability to do it. They'll start throwing them in competition for the base value even if they're not successful. And bada-bing, bada-bip, we're in a total splatfest mode. Yeah. Great job, ISU.

Actually Jin has the same number of quads as Hanyu. Uno theoretically has 4, same as Chen.
Until we see how this plays out with the other rules (like quality +5) it is hard to say how this plays out. After all, the quadsters who make mistake with -5 may go behind those who have few quads. It comes down to how different rules interact to create results.
 
for the first season or two, Chen, Uno and Hanyu will be winning everything because they're the only ones that can do four-five different types. Zhou may also be brought into the mix in this way. Jin will suffer (only toe, Salchow and Lutz) and everyone else will fall behind.

- if the named few skaters can do many types of quads then it is only fair that they win.
- those who can't do 4+ types of quads should rightfully loose points, and the solution is: learn other types of quads.
- when someone took time effort energy talent to learn 4+ different quads, that person should be rewarded higher than someone who took an easier route: learned only 2 types of quads and then repeats each several times in the same programme.

Chen, Uno and Hanyu are better than the rest at present, and the others are just shit out of luck for not doing 4+, for whatever reason: lack of ability, lack of talent, lack of time, not old enough, started late, had injuries, not lucky.... whatever. One works harder, one has more talent, one does more and more difficult - one takes reward, and others can sulk and bite their lips from envy.... :lol: http://pritchi.in/sovremennie/images/130.jpg
 
Last edited:
The one type of quad suggestion is bullsh!t. IMO if a skater can deliver 2 beautiful quads toes, and a hideous 4flutz, let them show their best qualities and not have to show an inferior jump just because the rules say so. Just penalize falls more. I would be happy if UR, falls and other errors would automatically cut the value of the jump by 50%, the -1 is easily absorbed under IJS, but cutting the jump values in half would automatically cost more points and wouldn’t let the judging panel make up that -1 with unwarranted GOE as easily as it can be done now.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
Do Not Sell My Personal Information