Well you're wrong and he's also wrong. While I can't name too many, there was Hanyu doing 3Lz at the end in his Hope and Legacy program (he'd done a 3F much earlier).
Well, some people would argue the Lz and F are equal in difficulty, lol. And I'm sure there are some who would argue that Ilia's 3Lz+3A is more difficult than any solo quad except the 4A. I'd posit the theory that it probably depends on the individual skater to some extent.
They should simply justify it by saying that it's difficult to include quality elements with all the level requirements and 7 jumping passes, at least for men. For women, it's been 4 minutes for a long time, and most don't even do quads. But for men, there's little to no time to show anything in between, and the quality of many elements suffers because they're so tired by the halfway point.
IDK who this is but I hope he finds out what happens in Vegas and stays in his room for the rest of the congress.
Oh, sweet Summer child... Papa Boris is the nickname for Boris Chait, head of the Israeli fed and father of Galit. It was coined back in her competitive days when Papa Boris' political influence certainly benefited Chait & Sakhnovsky's unprecedented rise through the ice dancing ranks. I just assumed the posters in this thread would recognize the reference, forgetting that others might not be old enough to know it, lol.
Well I'm not that young, more "fresh to figure skating fandom" than most of you
What is their reasoning?
Mostly just the timing of the implementation. They aren't opposed, in theory, but they don't want to see such a major change - eliminating one regular pairs lift and adding in a new choreo lift during the pre-Olympic season.
I know that it's the ISU and therefore they never will, but they need to justify why lowering tech requirements is a change that's going to be affecting skaters in an adverse way in the middle of the cycle. Heightening the requirements I'd at least understand and I'd be against it too.
The thing is, I'm not sure you can quantifiably say that the proposed pairs changes ARE a lowering of the tech requirements. We've seen what effect the choreo elements have in dance - as unleveled elements that are pure GOE grabbers as long as you meet the sometimes rather nebulously defined criteria. Adding not one but two purely choreo elements in the pre-Olympic season seems to be rather mad because that gives the teams just one season to adjust and figure out what works per the criteria and what does not.
The USFS, Ukraine, JSF, Israel, and at least one other fed are opposed to the entire package, I believe. I hope it fails or is put off until the 2026-27 season.
Just to add for completion (and not to continue arguing), they also changed the choreographic spirals and choreographic steps from women's/men's singles respectively to a "choreography sequence" for both disciplines, between the 2011-12 and 2012-13 season.
Don't know about boring, but a 3A as the 2nd jump filler? Illia, jump-wise, crushes the rest."The last jump is just something thrown in for the points." Yes, Ilia's 3Lz-3A combo was the most boring thing ever.
I was being facetious with respect to the comment i quoted.
The first thing he said was that only the first few jumps were exciting (in response to those who talked about the crowd getting excited about jumps, not choreo sequences).
Changing choreo spiral/steps to a more generic choreo sequence or removing the step sequence pattern requirements is nowhere near the same sort of sweeping changes the tech committee is currently proposing and pretending like they are is laughable. The changes proposed now would easily cause a loss of 7-10 technical points for most skaters. Changing from choreo spiral/steps to a more loosely defined choreo sequence caused no loss in technical points for most skaters. Same with ditching pattern requirements for the step sequence.
Then I bring up the original point about a spin being dropped between 2007-09 again. And how edge calls/warnings were introduced before 2007-08.
And perhaps the ISU members have reached the conclusion, after making those changes mid-Olympic cycle that this was not ideal and they did not want to do that again. It's been a dozen years since they last did it. They didn't have an ISU Congress in 2020 due to the pandemic, so we'd have to look at the 2016 agenda to see whether or not major changes were proposed and defeated to have a better idea of what the sentiment was then but it seems clear to me, based on what's been said by several federations this week that there is not a lot of appetite for mid-cycle scoring changes this year.
passssss itttttttttttttttttttttt
