Bellanca
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 3,301
Great post!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.
Tbh, at this point, I would like to see a clean slate, an eventual overhaul, something very radical and very different would be welcomed. The only problem is the majority favor remaining in comfortable places with minimal adjustment. Think of it like, or compare it to, relocating… Many people dislike moving from their nest, their comfort zone. The same reasoning could apply to making changes in the sport, especially this one, but I feel change is healthy, reasonable and necessary.
As the sport continues to grow, technically and otherwise, despite recent attempts to set it back to another era, a relevant scoring system should be introduced with the goal of assisting the sport in proceeding forward, not regressing backward.
I’ve never been a fan of what I see as the ongoing, shameless practice and mentality of using and abusing a continuing desire to have a pecking order in this sport. I think it is a complete insult to the fan base to suggest that two or three skaters, at most, are the only skaters that can be considered for an Olympic or world title, etc. Or, as it goes, have any business winning them. It’s B.S., and they know it.
Outside influence directs and dictates more than it should be allowed. It is unfortunate that commercialism has taken such a toll on the sport. IMHO.
Last edited: