Feb 13, 2020: Hersh article about possible ISU changes

[becca]

Personally I don’t like the idea of Jason as poster boy for the system being wrong. Considering how many men exist with wonderful skating skills AND the ability to do hard jumps.... To me the best skaters do both.

I do think finding away to judge skating skills why not for example award points for speed?

 

[tony]

Actually, I think 'scoring the PCS correctly' would have a pretty dramatic impact. Let's use the example of the 8.00 to 7.00 average skater - that's a 12 point difference in the TSS in PCS alone. At 2019 Worlds, the 2nd through 7th place finishers in the Ladies competition were separated by 11.29 points. Even though the jumpers have a large advantage in the TES, they also have room to make mistakes due to their relatively high PCS. If they make costly errors (such as multiple falls on quads), then the PCS difference could determine the podium.

The problem also is in the way PCS is required to be scored. If Skater A is deserving of 9.5s or 10s but makes two severe errors, their PCS is dropped down to the 8.75-9.00 range almost guaranteed, because it can’t be higher. If skater B is an 8.50 skater to begin with and makes mistakes, I think there’s a much less likely chance of seeing that same drop, even though it’s supposed to happen.

The jumpers this year in ladies are much more ahead than in the past- we are seeing TES at 100 or over 90. There are 3-4 obviously way ahead of the pack, a few a little bit ahead, and then the rest of them. Even an 8.00 dropped down to a 6.00 average- which A) won’t happen and B) shouldn’t happen anyways isn’t going to make a big difference.

 

[becca]

The problem also is in the way PCS is required to be scored. If Skater A is deserving of 9.5s or 10s but makes two severe errors, their PCS is dropped down to the 8.75-9.00 range almost guaranteed, because it can’t be higher. If skater B is an 8.50 skater to begin with and makes mistakes, I think there’s a much less likely chance of seeing that same drop, even though it’s supposed to happen.

The jumpers this year in ladies are much more ahead than in the past- we are seeing TES at 100 or over 90. There are 3-4 obviously way ahead of the pack, a few a little bit ahead, and then the rest of them. Even an 8.00 dropped down to a 6.00 average- which A) won’t happen and B) shouldn’t happen anyways isn’t going to make a big difference.

But I don’t have a problem with super high PCS being affected by poor execution. They should be. 9.5 or 10s should be given for only exceptional skates. No one should be guaranteed a 9.5 or 10 they should earn it. With an exceptional skate. And if you have fallen several times well that’s not 9.5 display. No matter how good your skating skills maybe on paper. You on that night are nowhere near a 10. However it’s way harsher to give a 8 skater a 6.
I don’t like the idea this is 9.0 skater...Hugely problematic.


Thank goodness there have been some rule changes it was a joke.

 

[Vagabond]

Maybe they could just go back to 6.0.

 

[okokok777]

The problem also is in the way PCS is required to be scored. If Skater A is deserving of 9.5s or 10s but makes two severe errors, their PCS is dropped down to the 8.75-9.00 range almost guaranteed, because it can’t be higher. If skater B is an 8.50 skater to begin with and makes mistakes, I think there’s a much less likely chance of seeing that same drop, even though it’s supposed to happen.

I 100% support the PCS caps on programs with mistakes and I agree with your point. The rules should apply to everyone. Skater A and skater B should receive the same penalties - if that is equivalent to 0.5-1.00 points in PCS, than so be it.

The jumpers this year in ladies are much more ahead than in the past- we are seeing TES at 100 or over 90. There are 3-4 obviously way ahead of the pack, a few a little bit ahead, and then the rest of them. Even an 8.00 dropped down to a 6.00 average- which A) won’t happen and B) shouldn’t happen anyways isn’t going to make a big difference.

Ehh, actually if you look at individual competitions that's not really the case. Look at the Grand Prix. A 9 point difference in PCS at Rostelecom would have swapped the gold and silver medalist - even though the gold medalist attempted 4 quads while the silver medalist didn't attempt a single quad or 3A. An 11 point difference in PCS at Skate Canada would have swapped the gold and silver medalist for similar reasons (except, in this case, the silver medalist completed several 3As vs. the gold medalist several quads). A 12 point difference in PCS at Skate America would have swapped the gold and silver medalist - even though the silver medalist does not have any quads or 3As.

A drop from 8.00 to 6.00 would be a 24 point difference - that could actually change the makeup of the GPF & is a huge difference (basically those 100 TES would be down to 76) The TES is significant but the impact of PCS is also very significant.

 

[MacMadame]

So it may work that way in theory/in general, but it doesn't always apply to every individual audience member!

It doesn't have to. It works for more people than it doesn't and therefore, they'll keep doing it.

 

[aftershocks]

I think the better idea would be to just loosen the free skate requirements...

My thoughts exactly! I also do not see the point in having both program segments last 3 min and 30 seconds. They should leave the length of programs the way they are. It's already difficult for skaters to concentrate on artistry and choreo in free programs due to the ISU cutting back the length of free programs, w/o significantly limiting tech content in free programs.

The best bet is to allow the free programs to actually be FREE, without a bunch of requirements. If anything, have a set of themes or genres from which to choose, but allow more creativity to reign in free programs. As it stands now, there are no distinctions between sp and fp, aside from length (and making them the same length is NOT the answer). The audience needs to be surprised and engaged. Right now every athlete's program layout is exceedingly predictable.

Skater A and skater B should receive the same penalties

Frankly, PCS scores are also awarded based on politics, reputation, and placement manipulation.

 

[layman]

...Well, the 3A has been around a lot longer, but always considered extraordinary until this season...

It's still extraordinary for the women...with only Kihira, Liu, Kostornaia, Tuktamusheva and You landing them cleanly this season.

 

[Theoreticalgirl]

There are also a lot of improvements that could be made to the scoring software itself. Right now, the onus is on the judge to assign those marks honestly, but we've all seen instances where that's not the case. AFAIK, the software doesn't do this. Building in a little more complexity/adaptability might help address some of those issues and increase the perceived "fairness."

Two ideas:

• After X number of deductions, the system could prevent judges from assigning PCS over 8.
• If a spin is called at a certain level or someone falls on a jump, the range of GOE is limited.

 

[Spun Silver]

It's still extraordinary for the women...with only Kihira, Liu, Kostornaia, Tuktamusheva and You landing them cleanly this season.

But there have never been five women competing with them at the same time before, to speak only of seniors, with heaven knows how many coming up in lower levels. Barring a rules change, the 3A is becoming a new normal for women.

 

[layman]

But there have never been five women competing with them at the same time before, to speak only of seniors, with heaven knows how many coming up in lower levels. Barring a rules change, the 3A is becoming a new normal for women.

Yes...four senior women and one junior woman are doing them this season. Still...if it were easy, I would expect to see a lot more women landing them...but right now, we are not seeing that.

If you look at the junior and senior men however, all the junior medalists are performing the 3-Axel as well as all the senior medalists. That's what makes that "normal" for the men but in my opinion, still exceptional for the women.

 

[flyingsit]

I 100% support the PCS caps on programs with mistakes and I agree with your point. The rules should apply to everyone. Skater A and skater B should receive the same penalties - if that is equivalent to 0.5-1.00 points in PCS, than so be it.

The penalties should be imposed by the referee rather than individual judges -- let the judges give their "regular" PCS and then the referee pushes the penalty button as many times as necessary and the deductions are taken across the board. Just like falls are handled.

 

[MacMadame]

Two ideas:

• After X number of deductions, the system could prevent judges from assigning PCS over 8.
• If a spin is called at a certain level or someone falls on a jump, the range of GOE is limited.

No, no, no! That is not how PCS are supposed to work. GOE is about the quality of the element and level is about complexity. If someone is performing elements with lower levels but exquisitely, they should be able to get the highest level of GOE. (For falling on a jump, there already is a GOE reduction.)

I also don't think you can arbitrarily say that a certain number of deductions means you can't get high PCS on everything. It depends on what those deductions are for. Falls can be very disruptive to the IN and PE marks but may or may not impact the transitions. And whether they indicate poor skating skills depends on what you are falling on. OTOH, there are deductions for things like finishing after the music and for having lifts go on too long and for costume issues. How can those kinds of deductions impact PCS?

Personally, I think in a few years these harder jumps will be even more common and you won't get skaters who finish 20 points ahead of the skaters without them. So I don't see the need to make major changes to the system. A few tweaks here and there should do it.

I do like the idea of having two tracks like in gymnastics -- NCAA vs. Elite. But I'm not sure there are enough people doing figure skating at the elite level to support that. Then again maybe that is a chicken and egg sort of problem.

 

[layman]

The discussion of who's doing the 3-axel made me realize that to be competitive as a junior or senior man, you MUST perform the 3-axel.

Ladies are getting closer to the 3-axel being a MUST as well.

I don't think this should be limited. It's just the natural progression of the sport.

 

[Theoreticalgirl]

Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but running the math on the proposed program length

No, no, no! That is not how PCS are supposed to work. GOE is about the quality of the element and level is about complexity. If someone is performing elements with lower levels but exquisitely, they should be able to get the highest level of GOE. (For falling on a jump, there already is a GOE reduction.)

I don't entirely agree that falls impact select component marks, depending on their context all of them can be impacted. It's possible for a L2 spin to earn more than +5 but the majority of them earn 2-3 at best in competition from what I have seen.

I wasn't taking into account every possible scenario—that should have been plainly obvious. Who knows, maybe the software calculates those things on on specific types of deductions. My point is that the software is being underutilized and possibly assist with aspects of the sport that are commonly perceived as potentially biased, like when a judge still doles out positive GOE for a trainwreck of a jump.

I think we both can agree that an overhaul isn't necessary, but our approaches differ.

 

[gkelly]

It's possible for a L2 spin to earn more than +5 but the majority of them earn 2-3 at best in competition from what I have seen.

Largely because most level 2 spins seen in the current reality are from weaker spinners who either don't attempt to earn higher levels because they know they can't do so (at least not reliably) or skaters attempting level 4 spins who fail in their attempts, either often because they're overreaching their own skill levels or because they just made a rare mistake.

However, if the system were set up somewhat differently, such that GOEs were worth much more than base value or such that spins with fewer features were required elements, then we would see the most talented spinners attempting level 2 (or lower) spins on purpose and focusing on maximizing their quality.

 

[AxelAnnie]

Jason Brown has fabulous skills and abilities. H however he is not competitive. Adjusting the judging system so he can win is silly.
Skating to go roar down the skating super highway with eteri skaters.

That is how a sport moves forward. adjusting scoring system so the people who can't keep up have an equal chance doesn't help anybody really.

I think there is a lot that can be fixed on the tecmark. If you fall on a jump you fell. Getting points for just getting around and then fine doesn't make any sense. And it hurts skating. We watched those empty stands all through the ground prix season why would that be? maybe because skating has become too difficult to understand and too difficult to explain to a casual fan. also if there were less points for just sticking your leg out maybe people would do something artistic out

 

[overedge]

I don't see how it's more exciting for all the top names/potential medalists to be in the last group. I don't think I'd like to go back to the system where it was totally random, and Mr/Ms Olympic Gold Medalist would be competing before and after skaters from Nowherestan. But IME putting all the top skaters in the last group makes the audience focus only on that last group, and also indirectly encourages the judges to hold back their highest marks for that last group.

 

[tony]

I don't see how it's more exciting for all the top names/potential medalists to be in the last group. I don't think I'd like to go back to the system where it was totally random, and Mr/Ms Olympic Gold Medalist would be competing before and after skaters from Nowherestan. But IME putting all the top skaters in the last group makes the audience focus only on that last group, and also indirectly encourages the judges to hold back their highest marks for that last group.

Either way, now that there are seasons best rankings and personal bests and world standings, the judges are well-aware of who the top skaters are regardless of the skate order. Remember, from 1999-2006 or whatever it was, the qualifying round at Europeans/Worlds- which we never saw for the most part, essentially did the same thing going into the short.

 

[overedge]

Either way, now that there are seasons best rankings and personal bests and world standings, the judges are well-aware of who the top skaters are regardless of the skate order. Remember, from 1999-2006 or whatever it was, the qualifying round at Europeans/Worlds- which we never saw for the most part, essentially did the same thing going into the short.

I think everyone knows that the judges are well aware of who the top skaters are by the time Worlds rolls around.

If the skating order was randomized, or more random than it is now, it would look pretty suspicious for a judge to give the Nowherestan skater lower marks than Mr/Ms Olympic Gold Medalist if they both skated programs with equal difficulty and comparable performance.

I saw qualifying rounds at two Worlds, and both times there were skaters with minimal international experience who were marked high enough to get into the short program (and several of those made it to the long program as well). IMO the judging in the qualifying rounds was quite fair and wasn't primarily based on reputation.

 

[Theoreticalgirl]

@gkelly Not sure I agree that all L2 spins are from "weaker spinners."

Using a layback as an example, LSp2 with 3-4 +GOE is the same as a LSp3 with 0 GOE. I understand the rationale to take the risk for the higher BV. It's also entirely possible that accruing 1-2 more levels can compromise the creative vision of a program.

And then there's unique outliers, such as the way USFS adult events limit the amount of spin levels at Bronze, Silver, and Gold.

 

[overedge]

@gkelly Not sure I agree that all L2 spins are from "weaker spinners."

And then there's unique outliers, such as the way USFS adult events limit the amount of spin levels at Bronze, Silver, and Gold.

Which is fundamentally unfair IMO, especially given the uneven range of abilities among adult skaters. If an adult skater is a fantastic spinner but is competing at a lower level because they don't have the jumps required to compete at a higher level, they should be fairly rewarded for the elements that they are able to do the best. But that's a separate topic of discussion....

 

[CaliSteve]

And really if they would score PCS appropriately (not tied to TES) it would fix a lot of the problem.

Thats not going to happen anytime soon...

 

[Coco]

If they are worried about skating not being competitive, or someone having a several fall cushion, perhaps they should try:

-giving all elements in the sp a flat level, with GOE the only way a skater can distinguish themselves (ex- jump combo 7.5)
-Add an 8th element which is basically a set pattern, like a compulsory dance, skaters can earn levels and GOE on this element
-eliminate PCS for SP only


So you'd just be left with base value, which would be the same for everyone unless someone omitted an element, and GOE. Maybe multiply it by 2 to make it count for about what the SP counts for now?

People will be ranked on their technique and performance in the SP. The free skate will really be free, and those capable of great difficulty can pull ahead, although that new 8th element I proposed should pull down a few quadbabies PCS.

 

[Holy Headband]

Personally I don’t like the idea of Jason as poster boy for the system being wrong. Considering how many men exist with wonderful skating skills AND the ability to do hard jumps.... To me the best skaters do both.

I do think finding away to judge skating skills why not for example award points for speed?

I do think Jason Brown-type skaters deserve to be rewarded, but the thing is... he IS rewarded! Winning silver at 4CC without a quad is an amazing coup! (I think Kostornaia is a somewhat imperfect comparison for him in the ladies' field because she remains competitive with Trusova and Shcherbakova even without quads--though you could say her execution of the jumps she has is better than theirs, and of course she has a 3A. The fact ladies can't include quads in the short helps her massively here, so the artistic/technical division is already in place to an extent... The ISU could just extend it to the men's event if they like its effects.) The only issue is that skaters like him need to build up a reputation with the judges before they can start getting the PCS boost they deserve relative to other top skaters, which may sometimes take a couple of seasons.

If anything, someone should take up Kihira's cause because her jumping technique is cleaner than any other top lady's (including that of Kostornaia, whose Lutzes and Flips are sometimes suspect), but that's not reflected in her GOEs.

Also, regarding spins, which were mentioned earlier... It bugs me to no end that the best spinners do not get rewarded for their superior skills. I get that jumps are harder and really should be worth more points, but it's appalling that having better spins than anyone else in the field is worth 1-2 points at most. I think one way to address this would be to increase the BV of L4 spins and rework the criteria so that slow/travelling/laboured spins can't qualify for that level. But IDK if the judges would use the GOE as intended if that happened.

As you can probably tell, I find the way GOEs are currently awarded more problematic than the PCS... I don't think GOEs allow for meaningful differentiation based on element quality among the top skaters as it stands now.

 

[caseyedwards]

This is awful! The whole ISU is sitting around trying to find ways to totally devalue quads and make another quadless journeyman olympic champion! Why is so much work being done to make jason brown Olympic and world champion. To make quadlessness the ultimate and most important value of a men’s skater?

 

[Tavi]

Jason Brown has fabulous skills and abilities. H however he is not competitive. Adjusting the judging system so he can win is silly.
Skating to go roar down the skating super highway with eteri skaters.

That is how a sport moves forward. adjusting scoring system so the people who can't keep up have an equal chance doesn't help anybody really.

I think there is a lot that can be fixed on the tecmark. If you fall on a jump you fell. Getting points for just getting around and then fine doesn't make any sense. And it hurts skating. We watched those empty stands all through the ground prix season why would that be? maybe because skating has become too difficult to understand and too difficult to explain to a casual fan. also if there were less points for just sticking your leg out maybe people would do something artistic out

You do realize Jason just won a silver ISU championship medal at 4CCs, right? And that he is currently #4 on the season’s best list, behind only Nathan, Yuzuru, and Kevin Aymoz (whose SB from the GPF is about 1 point higher than Jason’s)?

 

[DreamSkates]

... the jumpers have a large advantage in the TES, they also have room to make mistakes due to their relatively high PCS. If they make costly errors (such as multiple falls on quads), then the PCS difference could determine the podium.

Such errors in a technical program should result in 0 points for a fall on a jump. That wipes out an advantage.

 

[gkelly]

Such errors in a technical program should result in 0 points for a fall on a jump. That wipes out an advantage.

Should a fall on a jump takeoff (no rotation, or less than 1 revolution) be worth the same as a fall on a rotated quad?

 

[DreamSkates]

Should a fall on a jump takeoff (no rotation, or less than 1 revolution) be worth the same as a fall on a rotated quad?

Do you think anything should be changed about points and falls? Or just fewer points overall for a quad?