Is there any reason for the Int'll Jr. program requirements to be different than the Int'll Senior any longer?
- Thread starter barbk
- Start date
On My Own
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 9,955
Is there a reason for ChSq not being a part of junior LPs?
screech
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 7,454
Isn't it because the junior LP is 30 seconds shorter, but with the same number of jumps?
skatingguy
decently
- Messages
- 19,986
It's only the short program that is limited, and given the range of ability in the junior ranks I don't think it's unreasonable to have a lower technical level in the short program.
kwanfan1818
RIP D-10
- Messages
- 39,947
There's certainly no "better for the health and development of younger bodies" argument against a choreographic sequence in the FS.
On My Own
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 9,955
I just watched Yuna Kim's LP from 2006 JWC. She does one less spin than the senior ladies.
And if I timed it correctly (I don't have the requirements for that season), the junior program is still shorter than the senior LP.
1. Why didn't they drop a jump instead?
2. We currently have 12 elements for the senior ladies, exactly like they had for junior ladies in 2005-06 despite being 30 seconds shorter. They could have subbed out the spiral sequence for the choreo sequence. Instead, they dropped yet another choreographic element?
How is this good for the development of "artistry" (which the ISU wants to emphasise, as a paraphrase from me), or to protect junior bodies, as some say?
And generally, I did wonder, because I'd think they would want to emphasize better SS in juniors, as the basis over which to build everything, and the ChSq can aid that...
Same applies for junior men. No choreo sequence to sub in for the second step sequence they used to do...
Orm Irian
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 1,769
Yes. The rules are there to protect thirteen-year-olds from the medal-focused indifference of coaches and from their own incompletely developed judgment.
Karen-W
YMCA is such a catchy tune!
- Messages
- 51,825
Here is my question... why can't the TES score a junior earns be used to meet the senior TES mins? That is not the same as having a junior TES min that is lower, which I can see a really good reason for having, to protect these kids' bodies. But if a junior skater (Malinin, Thorngren, Chiu, Circelli, Sarnovskiy, etc) is able, in a junior competition, to meet the senior TES mins, why should they be required to compete in a senior level event to obtain them again? Shouldn't the judges be applying the same standards of evaluation re: reviews & GOE, across both levels?
gkelly
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 16,721
There are several differences between senior and junior short program requirements:
In the junior SP,
*triple axel is not currently allowed as the solo axel jump for women
*the jump combination may be double-double
*the solo jump is required to be loop, flip, or lutz, on a 3-year rotation among those 3 takeoffs, and may be either double or triple
*the flying spin is specified as camel or sit each year
*for junior men, the one-position change-foot spin is always sit or camel, whichever is opposite of the flying spin; for junior women, the one-position spin does not change foot and may be either layback or whichever of camel or sit is not used in the flying spin that year
Regarding the number of jump revolutions, if the ISU wants to encourage ambitious juniors to attempt harder jumps they could allow the same top difficulty as the seniors. But the majority of junior competitors are not doing the top difficulty, and some youngsters from smaller federations are not capable of even the minimum difficulty required of seniors (at least one triple in the combination, and triple in the solo jump -- especially with the takeoff being required as loop/flip/lutz). So even if the maximum difficulty for juniors were raised, the minimum should still remain lower.
Then there's the question of whether the required jump takeoff and required spin positions are developmentally useful at this level.
In the junior SP,
*triple axel is not currently allowed as the solo axel jump for women
*the jump combination may be double-double
*the solo jump is required to be loop, flip, or lutz, on a 3-year rotation among those 3 takeoffs, and may be either double or triple
*the flying spin is specified as camel or sit each year
*for junior men, the one-position change-foot spin is always sit or camel, whichever is opposite of the flying spin; for junior women, the one-position spin does not change foot and may be either layback or whichever of camel or sit is not used in the flying spin that year
Regarding the number of jump revolutions, if the ISU wants to encourage ambitious juniors to attempt harder jumps they could allow the same top difficulty as the seniors. But the majority of junior competitors are not doing the top difficulty, and some youngsters from smaller federations are not capable of even the minimum difficulty required of seniors (at least one triple in the combination, and triple in the solo jump -- especially with the takeoff being required as loop/flip/lutz). So even if the maximum difficulty for juniors were raised, the minimum should still remain lower.
Then there's the question of whether the required jump takeoff and required spin positions are developmentally useful at this level.
skatingguy
decently
- Messages
- 19,986
Maybe it's just as simple as forcing federations to send skaters to more competitions in a season, and filling out some of those lower ranked senior international events. I could also see the argument being that it might force skaters to decide between either senior or junior for a season in an attempt to limit the amount of jumping back and forth. I'm not sure. I never really understood the reason for this change a few years ago.
I have thought that the scoring differences (not total score, but individual element/PCS scores) between junior event, minor senior events, and major senior events was a lot like the green/blue/black/double black labels for runs in skiing: a blue run at Jackson Hole is akin to a black run at a whole lot of other resorts.
But back to junior elements: if the free program doesn't limit the elements they can attempt, I can't see how they benefit developmentally or physically from restrictions in the SP. Comps are only a small part of a skater's hours on the ice.
I have no opinion on rotational requirements. But I am all for specifying the solo jump and spin (and requiring a different one each year) to encourage diversity and comprehensiveness and would fully support callers be extra strict on edges, rotations and precision of positions. I actually would love to see that requirement carry over to seniors in some shape or form. The short program should be kept 'technical' afterall. And I reiterate my proposal to reward skaters who can demonstrate diversity in jumps (e.g. single skaters doing all 6 takeoffs with 2.5 rev plus gets a 2 point bonus; or those not doing at least 5 takeoffs with 2 rev plus gets a 2 point deduction etc)
Regarding the missing ChSq in juniors free - we all know a ChSq and any other additional chorerography does not take 30 seconds to perform so in therory juniors have it harder because they have less actual time to squeeze in 7 passes, 3 spins and 1 StSq. Without a required ChSq though, I feel the rules should at least require the juniors to display a field move held for 2+ seconds (a spiral, a spread eagle, an ina bauer, a hydroblade etc - heck perhaps they could specify it and rotate the move every year - wouldn't that be lovely), failing which there would be deductions in CH, for example. If timing doesn't allow, I am OK with cutting the 7th pass / 3rd combination.
All in all, I have said for years that there should be a bigger review of rules all over and including seniors (still requiring an axel in the short / free? encouraging jump diversity per above? reviewing PCS factor? considering combination / sequence bonuses, adjusting actual value of GOEs etc)
I agree that scores from junior comps should be recognized for senior mins, but not the other way round simply because currently senior scores are easier to achieve than junior ones with quads/3axels being allowed in the short (men/women), one extra ChSq and no specific element requirements in the short as stated by gkelly.
Perthaps that's what's weird and so the ISU feels it makes more sense to fully separate the scores from the two divisions.
I follow junior dance more closely than the other levels, so when junior competitions could be used for senior minimums, I think that we were seeing (in ice dance) junior teams earn the senior minimums, especially in the then SD (now RD), in their last year of junior, and then being able to hang on to them for a couple of years in senior, and then the same teams were unable to reach those minimums in the few seasons after their junior minimums expired. Perhaps it was easier to rack up enough levels and GOE on the junior patterns, but then they were struggling with the senior patterns.
With the GOE increases now, it doesn't seem like the RD tech minimum is as difficult to earn as it used to be, so perhaps this issue wouldn't exist now.
gkelly
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 16,721
About the free skates. From memory...
At the very beginning of the IJS, originally senior men had 14 elements (8 jump passes, 4 spins, 2 step sequences) and senior women had 13 (7 jump passes, 4 spins, 1 step sequence, 1 spiral sequence).
The juniors had the 13 and 12 elements, respectively, with only 3 spins.
Around 2006, one element was removed from each program: the 4th spin from the senior programs, and the second step sequence/spiral sequence from the junior.
For the 2011 season, the senior free skates changed again with the conversion of spiral sequence/second step sequence to choreographic sequence, but the total number of elements remained the same. The bigger change that year was the removal of the spiral sequence/second step sequence from the short program, bringing the number of short program elements down from 8 to 7 for both genders, both senior and junior.
Just a couple years ago, the senior and junior men's free skates were reduced by 30 seconds and one of the jump elements was removed.
So now all free skates for both levels, both genders, have a total of 7 jump elements -- senior men and women have a total of 12 elements, and junior men and women a total of 11 with no choreo sequence.
There were similar changes in pairs at the same times, but I haven't memorized those, which are more complicated because of the larger number of element types in pair programs such that some are now included only in the SP and some only in the free skate, and also that some elements such as lift hold and death spiral edge have specific requirements in the senior as well as junior SP each year.
At the very beginning of the IJS, originally senior men had 14 elements (8 jump passes, 4 spins, 2 step sequences) and senior women had 13 (7 jump passes, 4 spins, 1 step sequence, 1 spiral sequence).
The juniors had the 13 and 12 elements, respectively, with only 3 spins.
Around 2006, one element was removed from each program: the 4th spin from the senior programs, and the second step sequence/spiral sequence from the junior.
For the 2011 season, the senior free skates changed again with the conversion of spiral sequence/second step sequence to choreographic sequence, but the total number of elements remained the same. The bigger change that year was the removal of the spiral sequence/second step sequence from the short program, bringing the number of short program elements down from 8 to 7 for both genders, both senior and junior.
Just a couple years ago, the senior and junior men's free skates were reduced by 30 seconds and one of the jump elements was removed.
So now all free skates for both levels, both genders, have a total of 7 jump elements -- senior men and women have a total of 12 elements, and junior men and women a total of 11 with no choreo sequence.
There were similar changes in pairs at the same times, but I haven't memorized those, which are more complicated because of the larger number of element types in pair programs such that some are now included only in the SP and some only in the free skate, and also that some elements such as lift hold and death spiral edge have specific requirements in the senior as well as junior SP each year.
Last edited:
On My Own
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 9,955
I know you're only going off memory, but small correction, it was the 2008-09 season where the 4th spin was removed, in seniors, and the second step sequence/spiral was removed from juniors.
Yes, the 2010-11 season was when we saw the removal of spiral sequence/second step sequence from the SP.
For the women's LP, the Spiral Sequence was renamed the Choreographic Spiral Sequence with different requirements.
For the men's LP, the second step sequence was renamed the Choreographic Step Sequence.
Both with fixed base values, and called level 1.
This remained in the 2011-12 season.
In the 2012-13 season, the choreographic spiral and steps were both removed, and replaced with the choreographic sequence we know now, for both disciplines. Still, in the 2012-14 seasons, the senior women were required to do a spiral position in their ChSq for it to count. Further, the step sequences were no longer required to be done in the old patterns (straight line, circular, serpentine).
MacMadame
Doing all the things
- Messages
- 65,293
A move that makes programs much more interesting, btw.
kwanfan1818
RIP D-10
- Messages
- 39,947
I don't think a one-size fits all policy should have to be implemented: in my opinion, where the junior programs are a subset of senior contents, junior scores should count toward senior minimums. Where anything is harder in juniors, like lutz being the required jump, it's because a senior has chosen not to perform an element required in juniors, in the case of required jump in the SP, as a triple or quad.
Unless the pattern is the same in juniors and seniors, the junior minimums shouldn't apply to seniors, ie, in the RD, since it's apples to oranges. ETA: Similarly, if the required type of spin is the opposite for the SP and FS for junior and senior Pairs, and the element base/+GOE for the junior type is higher than the senior type, then those scores wouldn't count towards senior minimums, either.
Unless the pattern is the same in juniors and seniors, the junior minimums shouldn't apply to seniors, ie, in the RD, since it's apples to oranges. ETA: Similarly, if the required type of spin is the opposite for the SP and FS for junior and senior Pairs, and the element base/+GOE for the junior type is higher than the senior type, then those scores wouldn't count towards senior minimums, either.
Users who are viewing this thread
Similar threads
- Sticky
