ISU rules changes proposals & reaction

[manhn]

That golf analogy is pretty darn weak. If balls were falling into the water constantly, golfers would complain. Golf courses are constantly tweaked to ensure it is not too hard. People want birdies, not pars. Same for tennis. Wimbledon and other grass court events have made their surface so devoid of potential bad bounces, you might as well have them on hard courts. And the NFL get a ton of complaints when the Superbowl is some lopsided affair.

 

[BittyBug]

Good grief. The nerve of that Adam Rippon who was such a crappy skater that he only managed to be national champion, 4CC champion, two time junior world champion and multiple time Grand Prix medalist. How dare he comment on the sport when that’s the best he can do.

 

[skateboy]

I find this so strange since I grew up frequently reading that figure skating prided itself on not allowing the technical elements to supersede the artistic side of the sport. It was cited as the reason the second mark outweighed the first in a tie-breaker during the LP. And I always felt that it was an integral part of what defined figure skating as unique among the rest of the Olympic pantheon.

The second mark didn't always outweigh the first in a tiebreak. In 1988 it was the other way around and Brian Boitano won the gold over Brian Orser, in a first mark tiebreak.

I have a slightly different take on the art/athleticism controversy, in that I don't believe a performance is scored on "half athletics, "half artistry," nor do I believe they merit equal weight. More than that, I don't believe the sport has ever been judged that way, really.​

​

For me, figure skating is an athletic sport (hence, the reason it is in the Olympics, which is about athletic achievement), with an element of artistry to it. If we are honest, there have not been that many exceptionally gifted artists in the sport at any given time. Peggy Fleming, Janet Lynn, John Curry, Toller Cranston, Gordeeva/Grinkov, Torvill/Dean, Oksana Baiul, Michelle Kwan, Sasha Cohen, Daisuke Takahashi, Patrick Chan... some may disagree with my list, or claim that there have been others, which is all fine... but my point is that it is a very small list.​

​

For me, those skaters are wonderful but, really, icing on the cake. The rest (and majority) of elite skaters are highly talented athletes that work to put their skills into some sort of aesthetically pleasing package. Most of them succeed, even if they are not artistic geniuses.​

​

Artistry/presentation has never been judged "fairly." And, at the end of the day, figure skating is not ballet or any other kind of dance. In most cases, the real artists are rewarded for their exceptional ability (Patrick Chan and Jason Brown come to mind). The athletic/less artistic skaters receive less in presentation marks but, as long as their programs show an attempt at artistry and meaning, are not penalized as severely as element mistakes. And I'm okay with that.​

 

[clairecloutier]

I think the extent to which a lot of people here are arguing that artistry is a fairly minor or even incidental part of figure skating is just further evidence of how much IJS has changed the sport and the way hardcore fans see it.

Meanwhile, when you look at the bigger picture in North America, ratings and show attendance continue to stay flat or struggle .... And which discipline seemed to capture the public interest the most during the Olympics? Ice dance. The discipline that prioritizes artistry, beauty, and presentation the most. (Even though it also has a strong technical component.)

There's not a general-interest viewer out there who would really want to sit through the splatfest that was the men's FS at Worlds. Yes people enjoy athleticism, but they also want to be entertained as they watch, or they'll do something else. As @manhn noted, when the level of play or scoring drops in other sports, yes, you hear about it and yes, adjustments and rules changes are often made.

Figure skating is different from basically any other sport out there ... that's why the majority of fans love it. And if you degrade the performance quality of it enough, yes it will affect viewership IMO.

As to the argument that figure skating only has a small fraction of exceptional artists, I find that to be a somewhat meaningless statement. Most sports have only a limited number of people who are exceptional in any particular area at any given time. Even now, we have only a limited number of men who are truly exceptional in the area of landing quads. Does it therefore follow that landing quads should be downgraded in the overall scoring because only a few are really good at it??

Figure skating is its own entity. It has always been the most unusual of sports, always different. To state that "figure skating is an athletic sport, with an element of artistry to it" is interesting, in that figure skating once, in fact, had little athleticism to it. When it began, it was mostly about edgework and blade control, with only a relatively small dose of athleticism in the form of simple jumps and spins and lifts, and just a bit of rudimentary artistry in the form of basic choreography to music. So to suggest that it has somehow always been a primarily athletic sport is simply incorrect. Over time, its pure athleticism has grown ... so has its pure artistry. Both the athletic side of the sport and the artistic side are now arguably further developed, down through the entire ranks of international competitors, than they perhaps have ever been. Meanwhile, pure edgework quality, once the basis of the sport, is now of lower significance. I guess the larger point being that figure skating is a malleable entity in many ways, and it is constantly in the power of the governing body and the public to reshape the sport. To suggest that its true essence is, or should be, primarily athleticism is not some kind of absolute truth but simply one of several possible perspectives. It happens to be a perspective I don't personally agree with.

 

[skatesindreams]

I don’t think you need to explain to skating fans what sport is and that they should watch ballet or whatever to get art. So many fans love figure skating because of the art and performance mixed with the jumps and skills. They are fans of the sport for a reason and I don’t think it’s fair to tell them their interests don’t belong in this sport.

You speak for me.

 

[Rock2]

It's not mistakes that are a problem. It's when the program mistake after mistake after mistake. That goes for other sports besides skating. If the players on may favorite team make a few isolated mistakes, I can continue watching, but if it's one of those games where they aren't doing anything right, I'll often turn it off.

Mens skating has too often turned into a complete mess, making it probably my least favorite disipline currently. There are mistakes in other disiplines, but they aren't as frequent.

It's not a simple thing to diagnose...or fix.

First you have the issue that many of these athletes CAN do all all these elements and they do them consistently in practice. There are many reasons for misses in competition. Could be mental, could be ice conditions (not talked about much but chewed up or unstable ice is super hard to skate on), could be jet lag/fatigue, could be illness. Making the determination that mistakes/falls mean these athletes just can't do these elements and so rules must change isn't really considering all factors. Some of the mistakes just happen. It's really difficult to change quads to triples a few days before the event or on the day of, if you're not feeling well. Your body doesn't adapt that quickly and you are just as likely to miss the triple (see J/C 3STh). So, mistakes can happen even for the best athletes.

Second, what is the threshold of 'too many mistakes'? Looking at men's long at world's there was an obvious issue of fatigue and other factors limiting preparation. Jin, Zhou and Uno had quite uncharacteristic bad skates. We know Uno was injured but tried stuff anyway so it's not about inability. As for the other two we know they can do those elements on the regular, so what happened in Milan I think was a unique circumstance and not worth changing the sport over.

Looking at the other 21 athletes who skated the long, I count six falls. Total. One fall for every 3 skaters. Ish. I would say this event was high quality with a few anomalies.

(PS, 16 falls in the ladies long in Milan but I'm not hearing complaints. Just sayin....)

We might be in different places in our definition of a 'splatfest'. There's a question of perspective, IMHO.

 

[jlai]

I think the extent to which a lot of people here are arguing that artistry is a fairly minor or even incidental part of figure skating is just further evidence of how much IJS has changed the sport and the way hardcore fans see it.

Meanwhile, when you look at the bigger picture in North America, ratings and show attendance continue to stay flat or struggle .... And which discipline seemed to capture the public interest the most during the Olympics? Ice dance. The discipline that prioritizes artistry, beauty, and presentation the most. (Even though it also has a strong technical component.)

There's not a general-interest viewer out there who would really want to sit through the splatfest that was the men's FS at Worlds. Yes people enjoy athleticism, but they also want to be entertained as they watch, or they'll do something else. As @manhn noted, when the level of play or scoring drops in other sports, yes, you hear about it and yes, adjustments and rules changes are often made.

Figure skating is different from basically any other sport out there ... that's why the majority of fans love it. And if you degrade the performance quality of it enough, yes it will affect viewership IMO.

As to the argument that figure skating only has a small fraction of exceptional artists, I find that to be a somewhat meaningless statement. Most sports have only a limited number of people who are exceptional in any particular area at any given time. Even now, we have only a limited number of men who are truly exceptional in the area of landing quads. Does it therefore follow that landing quads should be downgraded in the overall scoring because only a few are really good at it??

Figure skating is its own entity. It has always been the most unusual of sports, always different. To state that "figure skating is an athletic sport, with an element of artistry to it" is interesting, in that figure skating once, in fact, had little athleticism to it. When it began, it was mostly about edgework and blade control, with only a relatively small dose of athleticism in the form of simple jumps and spins and lifts, and just a bit of rudimentary artistry in the form of basic choreography to music. So to suggest that it has somehow always been a primarily athletic sport is simply incorrect. Over time, its pure athleticism has grown ... so has its pure artistry. Both the athletic side of the sport and the artistic side are now arguably further developed, down through the entire ranks of international competitors, than they perhaps have ever been. Meanwhile, pure edgework quality, once the basis of the sport, is now of lower significance. I guess the larger point being that figure skating is a malleable entity in many ways, and it is constantly in the power of the governing body and the public to reshape the sport. To suggest that its true essence is, or should be, primarily athleticism is not some kind of absolute truth but simply one of several possible perspectives. It happens to be a perspective I don't personally agree with.

Artistry technically isn't a scoring item at all. Pcs is at least half skill-based execution, which includes skating skills and transition and performance and execution.
I think posing and upper body movement in itself isn't skill-based performance and not athletic related and scoring should devalue that. Chan-like transition that translates into a good program, sure, reward by all means

 

[Rock2]

I think the extent to which a lot of people here are arguing that artistry is a fairly minor or even incidental part of figure skating is just further evidence of how much IJS has changed the sport and the way hardcore fans see it.

Meanwhile, when you look at the bigger picture in North America, ratings and show attendance continue to stay flat or struggle .... And which discipline seemed to capture the public interest the most during the Olympics? Ice dance. The discipline that prioritizes artistry, beauty, and presentation the most. (Even though it also has a strong technical component.)

I have always argued (as a sports marketer for part of my history) that artistry does very little to drive interest in the sport. If that was the case, show skating would have continued to thrive through amateur's decline.

The small base of uber fans on here love the sport for very specific and personal reasons that survive most transitions of the sport.

As for the general market, the main driver by a LONG SHOT (long!!) is starpower. Everything else is almost beyond secondary.

Skating was huge in North America and especially the USA specifically because of the long legacy of ladies stars that the country pumped out since the mid 1900s to about Michelle Kwan. Ladies skating died when Michelle left the sport. Gracie had an amazing chance to revive it but we all know what happened there. Tragic.

The capable and charismatic ladies stars started to come out of Russia and Asia. Stole all the Americans light.
Do you honestly think Korea would care much about skating if Queen Yuna never happened? Japan was nowhere as a skating nation until Midori and then Mao. If they were drawn to skating you'd see equal interest across disciplines. But no they come out for ladies because Mao was there, then they leave. I saw this first hand in 2009 at Vancouver 4CC. Arena about 1/3 full until Ladies free at which point it was standing room only. The moment the Japanese finished skating, the arena emptied out, unless they won gold. Yuzu (and to a degree Takahashi before him) are doing this for men, too.

Skating in Canada died after Orser, Kurt, Elvis. Kurt and Elvis themselves packed the arena with their masculine charisma. We never had such a huge audience of straight men before or after that era.

We never cared about dance until Shae&Vic and then Tessa&Scott. Now that those eras are over, we'll go back to ignoring the discipline and suddenly start caring about ladies, which we never really did since Manley.

The world cared about ice dance for a year because of the scorching appeal and competitive drama of the French and Canadians...PLUS...three American teams right up there. This interest will dissipate fairly quickly in the next cycle as V/M and Shibs back away.

Brief interest in pairs in Canada for Sale/Pelletier. Not the same for Meg and Eric because sadly they don't have star power, despite all their achievements.

Beyond the people on these boards, attraction to skating has almost has nothing to do with the sport, the discipline, the artistry. All star power. It's what accounts for the ebb and flow between disciplines, countries and the sport itself.

 

[Bellanca]

The fickleness of the sport, changing the rules at the drop of a hat, the corruption (past and present), the feeling of the sport being little more than a glorified popularity contest, just to name a few, are some of the reasons why most American citizens have checked out.

Waning star power? Possibly. Then again, over-saturated coverage and attention to one or two stars only can become very tiring and predictable, too. However, this sport has suffered one too many black eyes, scandals, and credibility problems, imho. The sports-inclined would rather invest their time into a sport that doesn’t have such OTT drama attached to it.

The every four-year fan does recognize when the fix is in, especially at an Olympic Games when scores are not in alignment with what a skater has just put out on the ice. Four-year fans may not get the entire scoring structure, but they sense it is not kosher when such favoritism is applied, and more than half of the competitive field has been eliminated from medal consideration before the event has even begun.

Also, when you advertise that handfuls of skaters cannot possibly in their wildest dreams win a medal, that right there is a total buzzkill for the sport.

 

[gkelly]

If you want a sport in which everyone in the field is capable of winning based on what they put out on the day, then you probably want lots of high-risk moves that any given skater may or may not execute successfully in competition with high rewards for success, severe penalties for mistakes, and no credit or negative credit for outright failures. Yes-or-no success on the risk moves would be more determinant of who wins than overall quality. That kind of event can be exciting, but it also is going to encourage splatfests.

The question is whether audiences find it entertaining to watch a lot of wipeouts and big opportunities for surprise results or redemption in later rounds of competition, or whether audiences prefer mostly "clean" performances with results decided by difficulty and technical quality (which are often invisible to casual fans although it doesn't take much knowledge to understand that quads are worth more than triples) and subjective evaluation of artistry.

I think both approaches to watching skating exist. The former probably more from sports fans and the latter more from arts fans. But sometimes both at once from the same people.

 

[Tinami Amori]

Artistry/presentation has never been judged "fairly." And, at the end of the day, figure skating is not ballet or any other kind of dance. In most cases, the real artists are rewarded for their exceptional ability (Patrick Chan and Jason Brown come to mind). The athletic/less artistic skaters receive less in presentation marks but, as long as their programs show an attempt at artistry and meaning, are not penalized as severely as element mistakes. And I'm okay with that.

Artistry/presentation will never be judged "fairly" until there are set criteria what "it is". The only way to accomplish it (imo) is to evaluate the moves/forms/positions/gestures against EXISTING standards in modern dance/ballet/jazz-dance/folk dance/etc., and elements from other classic/established forms of performance art.

If this is the standard: https://dancespirit-img.rbl.ms/simage/https://assets.rbl.ms/15205482/980x.jpg/2000,2000/d0wO5FxAJWWZroV3/img.jpg
... then this is good
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/3c/b1/31/3cb1319eb926bf37ce322e7989cf8d8d.jpg
https://catiechong.files.wordpress.com/2015/07/spiral.jpg
... and this is not...
https://www.myactivesg.com/~/media/consumer/images/sports/ice skating/gc209_spiral.jpg
http://78.media.tumblr.com/59caf4937a4fd31a90746cbec83cfd2f/tumblr_inline_or8aciT60b1qm80iy_540.jpg

very simple! the standards for artistry exist, but they are not used... for the wrong reasons sometimes, like "oh she does not have the flexibility, not the right body type, has her own "idea" what it should look like..

We know what Charlie Chaplin looks and acts like......
http://www.thatsmags.com/image/view/201603/history-charlie-chaplin.jpg
... well.....use it! it can be done...
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/_nNit1Z5ohI/maxresdefault.jpg
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-nvm1e5tCy5I/UI7Z7xpCy1I/AAAAAAAAgAA/eXBU6HPlU2E/s1600/NobunariOda.jpg

performance arts do have STANDARDS... use them.

 

[clairecloutier]

@Rock2 I definitely agree with you that star power plays a very big role in skating's popularity. And also, a certain amount of nationalism, as you mentioned. (The latter I think especially comes into play in countries that are relatively new to top-tier skating, like South Korea.)

However, ask yourself: Where does star power come from? Some of it comes from the skater's own unique personality. But, the real magic happens when personal charisma is married to artistry to produce programs and moments that audiences remember and that boost that skater's fame ever higher. It is the combination of charisma + artistry that in large part produces star power.

Kwan was not a star just because she was 5-time World champion. The true reason for her stardom was that she took people places, emotionally. She brought people to their feet, made them cry. The artistry in her programs, her musicality, her charisma, produced her star power.

It's the same with Virtue/Moir. The stuff they've done the last couple years is incredible, and they became more famous with each performance in Pyeongchang, and it's because they skated the last 2 years with total commitment and engagement and passion, presenting really satisfying moments artistically, and now they're bigger stars than ever.

Not every skating star is known for their gracefulness or beautiful line. Some, like Elvis and Plushenko and Joubert, became famous mostly for their jumps. But even though they were never considered "artists," all 3 of them had iconic programs/moments that may have not been balletically beautiful, but still presented an aesthetic image/moment/persona that audiences responded to.

So I would just argue that artistry is a very important factor in star power, and in that way, it does help drive interest in the sport.

 

[missing]

I have always argued (as a sports marketer for part of my history) that artistry does very little to drive interest in the sport. If that was the case, show skating would have continued to thrive through amateur's decline.

The small base of uber fans on here love the sport for very specific and personal reasons that survive most transitions of the sport.

As for the general market, the main driver by a LONG SHOT (long!!) is starpower. Everything else is almost beyond secondary.

Skating was huge in North America and especially the USA specifically because of the long legacy of ladies stars that the country pumped out since the mid 1900s to about Michelle Kwan. Ladies skating died when Michelle left the sport. Gracie had an amazing chance to revive it but we all know what happened there. Tragic.

The capable and charismatic ladies stars started to come out of Russia and Asia. Stole all the Americans light.
Do you honestly think Korea would care much about skating if Queen Yuna never happened? Japan was nowhere as a skating nation until Midori and then Mao. If they were drawn to skating you'd see equal interest across disciplines. But no they come out for ladies because Mao was there, then they leave. I saw this first hand in 2009 at Vancouver 4CC. Arena about 1/3 full until Ladies free at which point it was standing room only. The moment the Japanese finished skating, the arena emptied out, unless they won gold. Yuzu (and to a degree Takahashi before him) are doing this for men, too.

Skating in Canada died after Orser, Kurt, Elvis. Kurt and Elvis themselves packed the arena with their masculine charisma. We never had such a huge audience of straight men before or after that era.

We never cared about dance until Shae&Vic and then Tessa&Scott. Now that those eras are over, we'll go back to ignoring the discipline and suddenly start caring about ladies, which we never really did since Manley.

The world cared about ice dance for a year because of the scorching appeal and competitive drama of the French and Canadians...PLUS...three American teams right up there. This interest will dissipate fairly quickly in the next cycle as V/M and Shibs back away.

Brief interest in pairs in Canada for Sale/Pelletier. Not the same for Meg and Eric because sadly they don't have star power, despite all their achievements.

Beyond the people on these boards, attraction to skating has almost has nothing to do with the sport, the discipline, the artistry. All star power. It's what accounts for the ebb and flow between disciplines, countries and the sport itself.

I tend to agree that star power is the driving force for interest in figure skating. It is, after all, for many other sports. Think of what Tiger Woods brought to golf, the Williams sisters to tennis, Tom Brady to football, etc.

The tricky part of stardom in figure skating though is it can accumulate as the result of conservative, relatively cautious, programs, because those are the ones the skaters can execute cleanly. Michelle Kwan, for example, gave up any attempts at triple/triple combinations. Scott Hamilton knew he was finished when more and more men were doing triple axels. Even at the most recent Olympics, Savchenko and Massot were idolized for a program with less risky content than their competitors.

The flip side of this is Nathan Chen. His stardom in skating has been assumed since his earliest Nationals competitions. He came to the Olympics as national champion and NBC, presumably wanting to build on is stardom potential, ran commercials and fluff pieces about him. He then had a weak short program in the team event, which ultimately had no bearing on the results, and a weak short program in the men's event, which kept him from medaling. Both short programs had difficult jumping elements, which he failed to execute. And no matter how brilliant his freeskate was, coming in fifth at the Olympics, after a lot of hype, weakens your stardom quotient.

I don't know what the ISU should do. Personally, I prefer skating competitions that don't have a lot of falls in them. Other people feel equally strongly about underrotations, cheated edges, second half bonus points, flailing arms. On the whole, different priorities for different fans is probably a good thing, because otherwise skating fandom would be kind of boring.

 

[attyfan]

It would be nice if there could be two "tracks" for skaters ... one (the Oly track?) emphasizing the "sport" aspect (rewarding athleticism) and another (the show track?) emphasizing the "entertainment" or "artistic" aspect.

 

[BittyBug]

@Rock2 ome, like Elvis and Plushenko and Joubert, became famous mostly for their jumps. But even though they were never considered "artists," all 3 of them had iconic programs/moments that may have not been balletically beautiful, but still presented an aesthetic image/moment/persona that audiences responded to.

This is a minor nit but Plushenko was definitely an artist, and he had extensive ballet training. His brand of artistry may not have been to everyone's taste, but he had all the characteristics of the old "artistic presentation" - good carriage, line, and extension, he finished his moves, and he was musical.

 

[MAXSwagg]

@jlai I mean, Adam isn't the most gifted skater ever and never could be. But my point is that his skating ability is entirely irrelevant to his opinion.

I do agree that we need to value other kinds of difficulty. It's crazy that a so-so quad can get 2-4x what an excellently done difficult spin or step sequence can get in points. I think that even if the ISU wants to focus on TES, they can fix that imbalance. Of course, to justify an increase in L4 spin/steps value closer to a triple/quad jump I think the calling would need to become a lot stricter.

@gkelly Thinking about it, I'd love to see a bonus for a jump set-up that would be like the Jr/Sr MITF powerpulls. One foot pulls with a series of turn in there form corner to corner leading to a jump. The burn on those legs would make that insanely difficult. Or even requiring more difficult linking steps into a jump like a twizzle or L4 turn cluster - especially if the turns had to be called clean for the linking steps to count. I don't think fans who don't skate would appreciate the difficulty as much, but if a skater could do that into multiple jumping passes I would be so impressed.

Difficulty HAS to be taken into account. No spin or step sequence is as difficult as a quad. Not even a 3A. While the step sequence should be worth more in base value because of the sheer amount of time it takes in the program, to equate it's worth to a quad or 3A is idiotic (with all due respect).

No rule needs to be made about specific footwork before jumps. The system needs less convoluted and pointless rules, not more. The judges don't even call the current requirement for steps into the solo jump, and the technical panel barely gets rotations and edge calls right. I would rather see something like required key points in step sequences. And if judges - again - awarded GOEs properly, the current worth of spins and steps would be more apparent. Skaters get +1 and +2 by default for crappy quality just because they DID the element when in reality they should be getting 0 or -1. It's the same with components. I can name on one hand the skaters who should be getting near 9s for components, but the judges seem to think there are many who are equal in skill to those few skaters.

 

[aftershocks]

I have always argued (as a sports marketer for part of my history) that artistry does very little to drive interest in the sport. If that was the case, show skating would have continued to thrive through amateur's decline.

The small base of uber fans on here love the sport for very specific and personal reasons that survive most transitions of the sport.

As for the general market, the main driver by a LONG SHOT (long!!) is starpower. Everything else is almost beyond secondary.

Skating was huge in North America and especially the USA specifically because of the long legacy of ladies stars that the country pumped out since the mid 1900s to about Michelle Kwan. Ladies skating died when Michelle left the sport. Gracie had an amazing chance to revive it but we all know what happened there. Tragic.

The capable and charismatic ladies stars started to come out of Russia and Asia. Stole all the Americans light.
Do you honestly think Korea would care much about skating if Queen Yuna never happened? Japan was nowhere as a skating nation until Midori and then Mao. If they were drawn to skating you'd see equal interest across disciplines. But no they come out for ladies because Mao was there, then they leave. I saw this first hand in 2009 at Vancouver 4CC. Arena about 1/3 full until Ladies free at which point it was standing room only. The moment the Japanese finished skating, the arena emptied out, unless they won gold. Yuzu (and to a degree Takahashi before him) are doing this for men, too.

Skating in Canada died after Orser, Kurt, Elvis. Kurt and Elvis themselves packed the arena with their masculine charisma. We never had such a huge audience of straight men before or after that era.

We never cared about dance until Shae&Vic and then Tessa&Scott. Now that those eras are over, we'll go back to ignoring the discipline and suddenly start caring about ladies, which we never really did since Manley.

The world cared about ice dance for a year because of the scorching appeal and competitive drama of the French and Canadians...PLUS...three American teams right up there. This interest will dissipate fairly quickly in the next cycle as V/M and Shibs back away.

Brief interest in pairs in Canada for Sale/Pelletier. Not the same for Meg and Eric because sadly they don't have star power, despite all their achievements.

Beyond the people on these boards, attraction to skating has almost has nothing to do with the sport, the discipline, the artistry. All star power. It's what accounts for the ebb and flow between disciplines, countries and the sport itself.

This subject and figure skating itself is a lot more complicated than the viewpoints you are expressing. Of course star power is a huge factor in skating's popularity, but I agree with @clairecloutier that the most enduring stars of fs meld artistry and athleticism. As Dick B has said, "There will always be a debate about artistry vs athleticism in the sport of figure skating." If you look back at fs history, it's clear that the uniqueness of the sport developed around this tension and conflict. There are also so many important cultural influences that have impacted how the sport has developed for better and for worse.

I would disagree that artistry has done little to drive interest in the sport. Janet Lynn's artistry had an enormous impact on the growth and interest in the sport in Japan and around the world in the early 1970s. And Lynn's unique artistry combined with the factor of increased tv coverage was instrumental in leading to rules changes with the creation of the sp. In the late 1970s and early 1980s, the artistry and athleticism of John Curry and Toller Cranston drove interest in fs, and their remarkable artistic legacy continues to impact the sport to this day.

Alexei Yagudin was a fantastic jumper, but it was his focus on developing artistry under TAT, that forged his Iron-Masked Winter glory. The Battle of the Brians was not just about a jumping contest. Far from it. The fs television special, Carmen, in the aftermath of the 1988 Olympics, won awards and ratings. That inspired fs venture is as delightful to watch today as it ever was, and even more-so in view of the fact there's such a dearth of creative figure skating available in the form of television productions that were so popular back-in-the-day.

Once again, the reasons for this lack and for fs lagging in interest and popularity today (chiefly in NA) is due to many complex factors, including lack of ISU leadership and vision; cultural changes and technological advances that have led to so many competing sports and entertainment choices and distractions; obviously the loss of U.S. television contracts as the sport is now accessible on other platforms; and the explosion of the sport's popularity in Asia (a result of many factors) has also changed the balance of power among federations. Until the sport's power brokers recognize the need for new leadership, forward-thinking vision, and cooperative, inclusive decision-making, fans will continue kvetching, commiserating and wracking our brains till the cows come home.

Your reference to show skating not thriving as somehow being related to artistry not driving interest in the sport, is inaccurate IMHO. Again, there are complex factors involved, but the biggest I think has something to do with the ISU and US fed erroneously thinking that pro skating was a threat to eligible skating, and thus pitting themselves against pro events and non-sanctioned shows. There are other aspects of this as well, none of which have anything to do with audiences lacking interest in artistry combined with athleticism.

Another point is that Nathan Chen is as much of a unique, budding artist as he is an athlete. He understands music and he knows how to interpret music on the ice, and he's continuing to learn about how to bring out that aspect of his skating while also maximizing his points and continuing to fine-tune all aspects of his skating. Nathan is not worried about rules changes because he has a range of talents and he knows he can adapt and still find ways to reach the podium. Nathan would be a champion in any era.

Also Adam Rippon's observation that the ability to perform quads has a great deal to do with body composition and early training apparently has been completely overlooked in the ensuing conversation. But yeah, once again, figure skating is complicated. Everyone has good points to offer but there are no easy answers, nor simple reasons for the current state of the sport.

I also feel that the athletes (past, present and future) as well as the sport itself are the richest and most important resources that should not be underestimated nor taken for granted. The same goes for the sport's history which requires more in-depth study and consideration.

 

[DreamSkates]

Have you forgotten Carolina Kostner's beautiful arm movements?

She doesn't just move her arms without movement throughout her whole body.

 

[DreamSkates]

From the Ambesi - Dolfini discussion (link listed with several others). I agree that Patrick Chan's footwork should have earned him many more points than someone waving their arms to be "artistic".
And this: "Medvedeva can’t have a higher Skating Skill score than Kostner. This is objective. Because of speed, depth of edges and much more. But at same time, if we look at Transitions, there are four points between Medvedeva and Kostner. For me it would be right to have 10 on one component and 6 on another, 7.5 on another one and so on. It’s absurd all components are always in the same corridor, because that is not what happens on ice for almost everybody. And it’s here the issues start arising."
I agree. When I look at component scores they tend to be the same or in a similar range.

 

[MacMadame]

This is a minor nit but Plushenko was definitely an artist, and he had extensive ballet training. His brand of artistry may not have been to everyone's taste, but he had all the characteristics of the old "artistic presentation" - good carriage, line, and extension, he finished his moves, and he was musical.

He also had an artistic vision for each performance.

 

[MAXSwagg]

From the Ambesi - Dolfini discussion (link listed with several others). I agree that Patrick Chan's footwork should have earned him many more points than someone waving their arms to be "artistic".
And this: "Medvedeva can’t have a higher Skating Skill score than Kostner. This is objective. Because of speed, depth of edges and much more. But at same time, if we look at Transitions, there are four points between Medvedeva and Kostner. For me it would be right to have 10 on one component and 6 on another, 7.5 on another one and so on. It’s absurd all components are always in the same corridor, because that is not what happens on ice for almost everybody. And it’s here the issues start arising."
I agree. When I look at component scores they tend to be the same or in a similar range.

It's because the people in the ISU in figure skating are stupid. I truly believe that. There's no other explanation for the whacky things that go on. That and/or the judges don't care and/or agree with the current judging trends. They must agree with it, because they are the one's giving the marks.

 

[synchrogirl17]

It’s absurd all components are always in the same corridor, because that is not what happens on ice for almost everybody. And it’s here the issues start arising."
I agree. When I look at component scores they tend to be the same or in a similar range.

I can't stand this corridor! Skaters can have better performance skills than skating skills, and having good skating skills does not automatically mean that the skater is performing difficult or pleasing transitions... The same thing happens in synchro, there is usually 1.00 variation at most. It makes it hard for teams to break into a new point range even with really interesting, creative and well-performed programs.

 

[Willin]

Difficulty HAS to be taken into account. No spin or step sequence is as difficult as a quad. Not even a 3A. While the step sequence should be worth more in base value because of the sheer amount of time it takes in the program, to equate it's worth to a quad or 3A is idiotic (with all due respect).

No rule needs to be made about specific footwork before jumps. The system needs less convoluted and pointless rules, not more. The judges don't even call the current requirement for steps into the solo jump, and the technical panel barely gets rotations and edge calls right. I would rather see something like required key points in step sequences. And if judges - again - awarded GOEs properly, the current worth of spins and steps would be more apparent. Skaters get +1 and +2 by default for crappy quality just because they DID the element when in reality they should be getting 0 or -1. It's the same with components. I can name on one hand the skaters who should be getting near 9s for components, but the judges seem to think there are many who are equal in skill to those few skaters.

I don't think it's as difficult as a quad - few things in skating are. What I'm saying is that the BV of L4 spins/footwork should be increased. For reference:

• Triple jumps (minus axel) are 4.3-6.0 (avg. 5.02) points in BV.
• Level 4 spin is 2.4-3.5 (avg. 2.95) points in BV.
• Level 4 steps is 3.9 points in BV.

Considering that most people achieving L4's in these elements are skaters that are doing triple jumps, shouldn't they be rewarded as closer to difficulty to triple jumps? At least raise the L4 spin BV to a range more like 3.5-4.5 and the L4 steps to 5.0 BV.
In the 2010 season, the BV for a step sequence should've been quad level: more men did quads at the Olympics that year (10) than achieved a L4 step sequence (4). NO men at those Olympics got all their step sequences called as a L4, while 9 men got all quads called clean. There were 14 fully rotated quadruple jumps, but only 6 L4 step sequences. So at that point a L4 step sequence was harder to get called than a clean quad.
Compare that to the 2018 Olympics where a whopping 11 men got L4 in the FS and 10 got it in the SP, and almost all of the men who got a L4 got it in both programs.
I think there is an argument to be made that calling standards should be stricter to get these levels. Since the call is so easy to get right now, I can see why you think that step sequences and spins are comparatively easy. I've seen some awful turns and borderline rotation get L4s recently. I know skaters themselves have gotten better, but that doesn't excuse the easy calling on these step sequences. I say judge it like dance - you miss clear edges on one turn and you miss the L4.

This isn't about adding rules - skaters wouldn't have to do it - it would be a bonus for skaters who could do it. We need to acknowledge that there's more way to add difficulty to jumps than just rotation, and that those ways of adding difficulty could add creativity to programs.

I do agree that PCS is convoluted. That needs to be fixed - badly. Medvedeva and Zagitova beat Yuzu in skating skills (how?) - I could see the case for Osmond being close to Hanyu in skating skills, but I still don't see her beating him. And Ashley's PCS have always been so overscored in the non-performance/interpretation categories. TBH at this point PCS just seems like a place to politic as opposed to a reflection of what just happened on the ice.

 

[Seerek]

For me, figure skating is an athletic sport (hence, the reason it is in the Olympics, which is about athletic achievement), with an element of artistry to it. If we are honest, there have not been that many exceptionally gifted artists in the sport at any given time. Peggy Fleming, Janet Lynn, John Curry, Toller Cranston, Gordeeva/Grinkov, Torvill/Dean, Oksana Baiul, Michelle Kwan, Sasha Cohen, Daisuke Takahashi, Patrick Chan... some may disagree with my list, or claim that there have been others, which is all fine... but my point is that it is a very small list.​

We discussed this in previous thread, but all of the above examples were at minimum technically on par (arguably at times slightly ahead) within their era.

Also, when you advertise that handfuls of skaters cannot possibly in their wildest dreams win a medal, that right there is a total buzzkill for the sport.

In individual sports that are not directly head-to-head competition (where "upset" wins take place), it's rare to not have at least a "top tier" who are favoured to win - and usually do. I don't think that's a bad thing.

 

[David21]

He also had an artistic vision for each performance.

Please don't remind us. His "visions" most of the times were horrible. I totally disagree that he was a particularly muscial or artistical skater but then I don't see how that is in any way relevant for this thread

 

[Bellanca]

Apparently, based on a handful or so of what are obviously transparent and biased posts in this thread, there is more than a small suggestion that some of the fans are getting caught up in their own fandom - and therefore cannot see the forest for the trees...

A few amusing characters have almost twisted themselves into pretzels trying to justify a particular rule change or two on behalf of their guy or gal.

Oh well, that's okay... It's nothing new...

 

[nimi]

New Lakernik interview: https://www.sovsport.ru/others/figu...tema-ocenok-ob-ektivna-no-sudi-obychnye-ljudi

This google translated bit is relevant to my interests:

- Will the number of technical elements in random programs for men and couples be reduced?
- Yes, it will be one element less. Men will now not have eight jumps, but seven, like women. And in pair skating, most likely, one rotation will be reduced. They have one rotation and one pair. Now they will be separated by programs - one will be in short, the other in random.

So there will likely be only 1 spin in pairs free. I have zero problems with that, really. But if this proposal passes, I'd like it if the teams were allowed to do an "extra" choreo spin in addition to that. Then we might actually see somebody try some cool spin that looks new/interesting when they don't have to worry about getting the levels.

 

[Bellanca]

In individual sports that are not directly head-to-head competition (where "upset" wins take place), it's rare to not have at least a "top tier" who are favoured to win - and usually do. I don't think that's a bad thing.

Sure, I see your point regarding sports outside of figure skating and ice dancing having a top-tier, and I understand where you are coming from. However, there are a few things that separate figure skating and ice dancing, exclusively, imo, from some of the other sports:

A) Figure skating/ice dancing is a judged, subjective sport where peers and people are sitting in ‘judgment’ handing out scores. This could potentially invite favoritism, ultimately leading to or being interpreted as collusion or corruption in an attempt to keep top-tier skaters/ice dancers at the top for a whole gamut of reasons.

B) A lot of sports do not have this issue because they are not relying on judges/tech panels, etc. to decide the final outcome.

C) Figure skating and ice dancing is the one sport that suffers consistently from the appearance of holding up top-tier skaters and holding down lower-tiered skaters (e.g., sending them a message for whatever reason or agenda) when the situation does not necessarily warrant such action. This behavior contributes to the sport suffering from various credibility and PR issues, staleness, predictability, and frustration.

Having a top-tier is fine, but not allowing the ‘B’ group to make strides unless the situation cannot be avoided without causing controversy (and we’ve seen plenty of that) is not conducive to a healthy and respectable sport in the eyes of the every 4-year fan or the dedicated fan base.

** There have been bad or incorrect calls made by a referee or umpire in various sports that rely on them in the past, resulting in the fan base thinking the fix is in… but, by and large, widespread abuse of a game or contest being controlled or score-fixing occurring is not as visible as it is or has been in skating.

It’s difficult to cheat at a sport like golf or bowling (okay, be kind now ) for the most part because you are not relying on judges to deliver the final outcome.

ETA: Even if the athlete is competing against a clock, for example, they are still going head-to-head in a way with their competitors because they are trying to get the best time to beat them, to defeat the rest of the field. All individual sport is still head-to-head in its own way… Lucky are those athletes who do not have to rely on judges to declare victory.

 

[Rock2]

The fickleness of the sport, changing the rules at the drop of a hat, the corruption (past and present), the feeling of the sport being little more than a glorified popularity contest, just to name a few, are some of the reasons why most American citizens have checked out.

Waning star power? Possibly. Then again, over-saturated coverage and attention to one or two stars only can become very tiring and predictable, too. However, this sport has suffered one too many black eyes, scandals, and credibility problems, imho. The sports-inclined would rather invest their time into a sport that doesn’t have such OTT drama attached to it.

Sort of. Let me reconcile scoring system and star power.

Everyone more or less knew skating was subjective and a popularity contest...and even that fixes were in. But no one really complained because for the most part the 'fixes' were based on who was already popular. That's how 6.0 worked. ISU incubated the biggest stars based on both talent and appeal and you saw those skaters all over the posters and on the podium for a full cycle, culminating with Olympic coronation. Audiences didn't complain because the popular ones usually won with a few exceptions that were obvious on the ice.

In addition, the skating powers historically had their own domains. Russia had pairs and then dance. US, Canada, GB had the men. USA and Germany had ladies. There wasn't much encroaching on each other's turf, so each country was able to incubate and graduate its own stars to be ambassadors of the sport.

ISU got rid of figures in part because it was costly and not a draw, but also to weed out skaters with strong skating skills but no showmanship. A few instances of those guys winning events was enough to turn the ISU off and cue the rule change.

In the early 90s the cozy little paradigm started to shift. Russian and Ukranian men got good. Asia started to enter the scene. The west discovered dance. The world order was getting messed up and we saw how the 2002 pairs event was the culmination of attempts to defend historical turf.

IJS was the right ethical idea, but exacerbated the problems that were percolating behind the scenes. It made scoring a bit more subjective such that many more skaters had a chance to win, including those who were not audience favorites. In the old days there wasn't that much complaining that people were winning who weren't artistic or strong performers. Now we see it a lot. Audience favorites don't always win like they used to. Viewers can no longer reconcile the scoring to what they see, and now they are turned off. Look at Adam and Caro. Lots to like about both, but no one really cares that their technical is of junior worlds quality. People think they should be world champs if they go clean.

For better or worse, ISU is working its way back to the old days by reducing base tech values and increasing the impact of GoE and PCS, the subjective parts of judging where there is no accountability. ISU and the panels will now have more opportunity to place the athletes at the top of the podium that they think will do the most for the sport.

We're headed back to 6.0 to reap the benefits of that era...but will cloak this agenda in a scoring system with ever more fake objectivity.

 

[aftershocks]

Apparently, based on a handful or so of what are obviously transparent and biased posts in this thread, there is more than a small suggestion that some of the fans are getting caught up in their own fandom - and therefore cannot see the forest for the trees...

A few amusing characters have almost twisted themselves into pretzels trying to justify a particular rule change or two on behalf of their guy or gal.

Oh well, that's okay... It's nothing new...

You are definitely the one to talk about bias, amusing characters and justification of fs rules via bodily pretzel twisting!