ISU rules changes proposals & reaction

[VGThuy]

I thought that had already been changed so that the minimum age for both is now 15 as of the previous July 1? I agree that having different ages for the GP and for Championships seems strange.

Oh has it? So the age actually went down to 15?

 

[Deleted member 40371]

Oh has it? So the age actually went down to 15?

No, for the GP it went up to 15 ... the rules for Olympics and Worlds remained the same. Remember it is 15 by 1st of July of the previous year. So the athlete will turn 16 by 1st July of the Olympic year. Since Figure skating is a winter Olympic sport, July 1st is used. For Gymnastics, a summer sport 31st December is used.

 

[VGThuy]

No, for the GP it went up to 15 ... the rules for Olympics and Worlds remained the same. Remember it is 15 by 1st of July of the previous year. So the athlete will turn 16 by 1st July of the Olympic year. Since Figure skating is a winter Olympic sport, July 1st is used. For Gymnastics, a summer sport 31st December is used.

Thank you for explaining that to me. I was never good at understanding the age rules eventhough your explanation was pretty simple.

 

[jlai]

I think you wouldn't have to work the age angle so hard if speed, power and SS are given enough points that great skaters like Mao or Kostner stands out in PCS from the young girls.

 

[gkelly]

Because the winter Olympics are in February, more than half of the skaters who were 15 as of July 1 will have had birthdays and have turned 16 in the interim. A skater who had just turned 15 shortly before the previous July would be 15 and 7+ months during the Olympics. That is effectively the lower age limit for the Olympics. By the time Worlds comes around, another month's worth of first-year seniors would have turned 16.

 

[snoopy]

I think they should change it all up and make getting into seniors based on a skill set rather than an age.

 

[gkelly]

I think they should change it all up and make getting into seniors based on a skill set rather than an age.

Where could a 20-year-old with two triples and no one else at the same level in her home country find appropriate competition?

 

[snoopy]

Where could a 20-year-old with two triples and no one else at the same level in her home country find appropriate competition?

In juniors. It would be skill based too.

 

[Erin]

What I don't get is how skaters can compete in senior GP series events but aren't age eligible for ISU championship events.

That rule changed several years ago. Pretty sure Radionova was the last skater to take advantage of skating in the GP series while being too young to skate in ISU championships, so I believe it changed in the 14-15 season.

 

[MAXSwagg]

Like always, the ISU is just pulling new rules out of its behind instead of actually fixing the issues. You wouldn’t have to refactor PCS, for example, if the judges actually scored it correctly. The issue is that they judged most everyone within three points on each component (7-10) aid do not make significant distinctions between the actually level of skating and performance. Refactoring won’t solve the problem (same with GOE). It will just make the numbers bigger. LOL

I’m sorry but 15 is not senior. If you let 15 year olds skate with seniors what is the point of having a junior segment?

Removal of ChSq in pairs will make those programs look even more like hectic attempts to cram all those elements into the allotted time with no opportunity for choreography.

Removing fall deductions because it’s accounted for in GOE makes no sense even if it is moved to mandatory deductions in PCS. Failed elements should be scored as such: with zero points for that element.

There absolutely needs to be separate panels for GOE and PCS. If you get bored, leave and go find something else to do! It’s your JOB, a job you’re supposed to be passionate about.

Removal of required steps? So instead of enforcing rules they just make new ones to overrule the old ones. Very efficient.

What is the vision for ISU? Where is the sport supposed to be going? ISU certainly has no clue.

 

[SkateFanBerlin]

Like always, the ISU is just pulling new rules out of its behind instead of actually fixing the issues. You wouldn’t have to refactor PCS, for example, if the judges actually scored it correctly. The issue is that they judged most everyone within three points on each component (7-10) aid do not make significant distinctions between the actually level of skating and performance. Refactoring won’t solve the problem (same with GOE). It will just make the numbers bigger. LOL

I’m sorry but 15 is not senior. If you let 15 year olds skate with seniors what is the point of having a junior segment?

Removing fall deductions because it’s accounted for in GOE makes no sense even if it is moved to mandatory deductions in PCS. Failed elements should be scored as such: with zero points for that element.

What is the vision for ISU? Where is the sport supposed to be going? ISU certainly has no clue.

MAX, you're often harsh but I agree with much of it. The vision question is key. It's similar to "what do we want to see on the ice." The tweaks to IJS has be guided by what ISJ/the public want the sport to be. IJS currently ridiculously rewards quads with minimum penalties for falls. What do we get? a bunch of guys trying these 4-3 combinations and falling all the time.

 

[Rhino]

If the rules are passed we may only rarely see quads in combination, except for the SP.

If you have 3 different quads and you're only allowed to do each one once your routine will look like

quad1, quad2, quad3, 3A, 3A, 3Lz, 3Lz with your 3 combos likely to be -3T, -3Lo if possible to make up missing points, and -1Lo-3S/3F. Why would you ever try a quad in combo unless your 3A is pretty bad? You would just do them after the 3A and 3Lz which would now be the 2 triples you would repeat.

Even at 4 different quads you would still have quad1, quad2, quad3, quad4, 3A, 3A, 3Lz and the above combos might still be possible after the 2 3As and the 3Lz. Only at 5 different quads might you get 1 in combo.

IMO this would be a retrograde step, falls on quads aren't great (but will be punished more harshly by the -5 GOEs and lower BV). However some 4-3's are things of beauty and we may rarely if ever see them again except in the SP.

 

[gkelly]

The vision question is key. It's similar to "what do we want to see on the ice." The tweaks to IJS has be guided by what ISJ/the public want the sport to be.

The problem is defining what "the public" wants to see.

If ISU officials read these boards, they can get a lot of information about what diehard fans want to see. And we don't all agree with each other.

Then there are casual fans, people they might meet in everyday life who might say "I just love watching figure skating at the Olympics. I love the X but I wish there was less Y." Some other casual viewers might say "No, I don't really watch figure skating. Too much X and not enough Y."

There's also likely input from TV networks about what they think the majority of their viewership want to see in skating.

And of course there's also input from judges/other officials and coaches and skaters about what they want to sport to emphasize, and not all people within the sport agree where the emphases should be either.

All those different voices will give conflicting input. We can continue to offer our opinions and discuss/debate with each other, and skating officials doubtless do the same. But I don't think it's realistic to expect any answer that will please all the stakeholders.

 

[MAXSwagg]

The problem is defining what "the public" wants to see.

If ISU officials read these boards, they can get a lot of information about what diehard fans want to see. And we don't all agree with each other.

Then there are casual fans, people they might meet in everyday life who might say "I just love watching figure skating at the Olympics. I love the X but I wish there was less Y." Some other casual viewers might say "No, I don't really watch figure skating. Too much X and not enough Y."

There's also likely input from TV networks about what they think the majority of their viewership want to see in skating.

And of course there's also input from judges/other officials and coaches and skaters about what they want to sport to emphasize, and not all people within the sport agree where the emphases should be either.

All those different voices will give conflicting input. We can continue to offer our opinions and discuss/debate with each other, and skating officials doubtless do the same. But I don't think it's realistic to expect any answer that will please all the stakeholders.

Four-year fans want to see jumps and programs with no visible errors, and falls are especially jarring. Casual fans are even confused how skaters with a fall beat a skater with no fall.

 

[Willin]

Sure, some 4-year-fans want to see no visible errors, but I'd bet just as many want to see a splatfest. There's a reason some of the most popular YouTube videos for skating/gymnastics/cheerleading/diving/etc. are people falling. I remember back around Vancouver (or maybe Sochi?) Cracked even had an article that claimed most people watch skating for the splats - and the commenters agreed.

 

[clairecloutier]

I can only say that the 4-year fans I've known definitely do not want to see falls. They think falls should be a rarity.

 

[kwanatic]

So I'm going to do some cross posting from Golden Skate (only b/c I don't feel like writing that out again). I read through the entire document (for Singles skaters). Here are the highlights:

194) Netherlands - Rule 353 (1.j.): Splitting the judging panel

"Our sport is getting more and more complex and therefore more demanding to judge. The revised GOE range of +5 to -5 will require more accuracy of the Judges to assess correctly. Therefore the task to assess also more than 20 criteria within the Program Components is getting too much for an individual Judge. It will be more fair to both Judges and skaters if the Program Components will be assessed by a separate panel of Judges. "

100% for this! This was one of the suggestions I had when it came to making the sport fairer and less bias. It may help to eliminate some of the across the board PCS scoring judges are prone to...in a perfect world at least. But they make a valid point: it's ridiculous to expect a judge to accurately evaluate all of those elements and criteria within the small time frame they have to get scores in. I'd love to see this one go through...


197) Canada - Rule 353 (1.h.iv.) - Limiting jumping pass bonus in SP & FS

"In the Short Program and Free Skating of Single Skating the Base Values (but not the GOEs) for all jump Elements started in the second half of the program will be multiplied by a special factor 1.1 in order to give credit for even distribution of difficulties in the program, with a maximum of 2 in the Short Program and 4 in the Free program"

Again, another suggestion I'd like to see enacted. The process of backloading has gotten ridiculous and it really needs to be nipped in the bud ASAP. The good thing about this is if skaters wanted to put every pass in the 2nd half they can...they just won't get extra credit for it. I really think this needs to happen. If "balance" is going to continue to be a criteria in PCS then this rule needs to happen.

Japan proposed to limit it to only one solo jump in the SP (not the combo) and only three jumps in the FS. I like the proposed Canadian split more...


259) Rule 611, para 2: Eliminate required steps before solo jump

I guess I'm for this as well. It's so rare that skaters are sufficiently punished for not having it, it just makes sense to remove it and allow and preceding steps to be a part of TR and GOE.


260) Rule 611, para 3: Mandatory spin and solo jump

Basically this one proposes to treat the seniors singles similar to the juniors where each season a mandatory solo jump and spin is required. The jump and spin would change season to season. For example: For both men and women in the 2018-2019 season the solo jump would be a flip and the spin a flying camel. This means men wouldn't be able to repeat the camel position and would be required to have their second spin be a sit spin (with the combo as the third).

The reason I think this would be good is because (1) it forces skaters to develop the correct technique and (should) punish those who have bad technique or get by with omitting certain jumps or spins. By the time skaters hit the senior level they should be able to execute all of the triples... (2) It will result in a switch up of the elements so maybe we won't see the exact same layout multiple seasons in a row. Different elements should add a bit of variety.

I actually like this idea. The only thing I would change is to specify the solo jump must be triple or quadruple (for both men and women). As it's written in the communication it says "double or triple;" I say no less than triple for either discipline and people should have the option to do a solo quad as well.


261) Rule 612: Limits quads to only one each
The same rules apply for doubles, double axels and triple jumps (no more than 2, second in combination of the triple) but it goes on to say that no quad can be repeated in a program. Meaning if you only have a 4T you can't do a solo and combo with that jump; it'd be one or the other.

I don't know how I feel about that. On one hand it levels the playing field somewhat but it's also a bit stifling. There's still an advantage for those who can do quads. If you have 4 different quads you can still have 4 quads in your program. I just suppose the maximum number of quads would be 5 in a program...


That's pretty much all I found. There is stuff in there about the +/- 5 GOE scale and something about a fall/interruption to a program requiring a mandatory deduction in PCS which makes sense but I don't think they went into depth when it comes to how much of a deduction it should be. I didn't see anything about tanos/rippons so apparently that's not as troubling to them as it is to a lot of us.

Most people over at GSF didn't like the mandatory jump/spin proposal (I think it'd be interesting) or the no repeating quads. It will be interesting to see which of these actually go through.

 

[gkelly]

And others are fine with the fact that skaters fall but want to see those who do either disqualified or penalized so severely that they can't place ahead of other skaters who remain upright (even if those other skaters are much weaker overall and/or attempting easier programs, but casual fans generally can't see the difference between deep edges and flats or between a toe loop and a flip, let alone between a lutz and a flutz).

And others really like to see cutting edge jumps and would be more entertained by falls on quad attempts than by pops.

 

[skateboy]

Four-year fans want to see jumps and programs with no visible errors, and falls are especially jarring. Casual fans are even confused how skaters with a fall beat a skater with no fall.

This.

We figure skaters and FS fans are so used to falls, we forget how jarring they really are to see.

To the casual fan, falls = incompetence.

 

[MacMadame]

This.

We figure skaters and FS fans are so used to falls, we forget how jarring they really are to see.

To the casual fan, falls = incompetence.

Except for the casual fans who think falls add to the excitement. They like the "will they fall or succeed?" aspect of it and would find skating boring if falls were rare.

 

[mag]

I am confused by why figure skating should care about what “every four years” fans think. I watch the Super Bowl about every two years. I am sure the NFL doesn’t care what I think.

If falls should get zero because it is a failure, then << should get zero because the jump is a failure. A jump is defined by the number of rotations. If you can’t complete the rotations, you should get zero.

 

[missing]

And others are fine with the fact that skaters fall but want to see those who do either disqualified or penalized so severely that they can't place ahead of other skaters who remain upright (even if those other skaters are much weaker overall and/or attempting easier programs, but casual fans generally can't see the difference between deep edges and flats or between a toe loop and a flip, let alone between a lutz and a flutz).

And others really like to see cutting edge jumps and would be more entertained by falls on quad attempts than by pops.

I am confused by why figure skating should care about what “every four years” fans think. I watch the Super Bowl about every two years. I am sure the NFL doesn’t care what I think.

If falls should get zero because it is a failure, then << should get zero because the jump is a failure. A jump is defined by the number of rotations. If you can’t complete the rotations, you should get zero.

I am anything but a casual fan, having been to Worlds, US Nationals, Skate America and Skate Canada (and all but SC more than once) and I can't tell the difference between deep edges and flats, can still get confused between a toe loop and a flip (I'm aces on axels and loops though) and tend to believe a flutz is a lutz jumped by a skater you don't like.

And to me, non-casual but never been on ice skates fan, an underrotated triple jump can be defined as a double jump, and an underrotated quad as a triple. Both would be sloppy, but on both the skater remains upright. By all means define the jump by the number of rotations, but don't equate two or three with zero.

I don't want to see top level competitions where all the skaters skate cautiously and cleanly. The risk of a fall adds to the suspense.

But I also don't want to see top level competitions where many of the skaters fall multiple times and the one or two skaters who do skate cautiously and cleanly lose because they never had a chance to win, four rotations trumping no falls.

I think when fans argue these points, they're influenced by their particular fondness or disdain for specific skaters. If you dislike a skater (for whatever reason) who backloads a program, then you're less likely to acknowledge the difficulty of a program and more likely to disapprove of the 10% bonus rule. If you like a skater who can't land a quad but does everything else well, then you're more likely to favor a judging system that rewards spins and footwork and punishes falls. And while fandom and style preference are chicken and eggs, both color responses to the judging system as it is and as it might evolve.

 

[HSCluv]

One change I would like to see is something to address the loooong footwork sequences. I have not seen a big competition in person since 2004 Nationals so no IJS there nor a local or lower level comp in a long time either. But I just know on t.v. at least it looks like the skaters are going so slow through those sequences that it seems like at times they are taking up half of the program. I much prefer the quicker, even if they are less complicated, footwork sequences of the 90s.

 

[skatepixie]

ANd with only one withdrawal, they were out of contention for medals at worlds. That means they don't have enough depth in senior ladies. Two stars, not enough depth.

Zagitova was in contention after the short. Just had a terrible, awful, really bad day. It happens. *shrug* All the pressure was bound to hit her eventually, and it just sucks that it hit her all at once. She showed in the gala that her jumps are still there, 3/3s and all. She'll be back and better than ever, I'm sure.

 

[Aussie Willy]

Like always, the ISU is just pulling new rules out of its behind instead of actually fixing the issues. You wouldn’t have to refactor PCS, for example, if the judges actually scored it correctly. The issue is that they judged most everyone within three points on each component (7-10) aid do not make significant distinctions between the actually level of skating and performance. Refactoring won’t solve the problem (same with GOE). It will just make the numbers bigger. LOL

I’m sorry but 15 is not senior. If you let 15 year olds skate with seniors what is the point of having a junior segment?

Removal of ChSq in pairs will make those programs look even more like hectic attempts to cram all those elements into the allotted time with no opportunity for choreography.

Removing fall deductions because it’s accounted for in GOE makes no sense even if it is moved to mandatory deductions in PCS. Failed elements should be scored as such: with zero points for that element.

There absolutely needs to be separate panels for GOE and PCS. If you get bored, leave and go find something else to do! It’s your JOB, a job you’re supposed to be passionate about.

Removal of required steps? So instead of enforcing rules they just make new ones to overrule the old ones. Very efficient.

What is the vision for ISU? Where is the sport supposed to be going? ISU certainly has no clue.

At the end of the day figure skating is a subjectively judged sport. Whatever you do, everything that is put in place is an administrative control because a person has made a decision. There will be people that will think it is a great idea and people who don't. However no matter what the ISU does, how the changes are viewed are basically perception, not fact. And opinion as not facts either. We all think are experts but again we have subjective biases.

We also love to be airchair critics but I daresay if you were in a position to make a decision, whatever you do won't keep everyone happy either.

 

[SamuraiK]

To be fair all the proposals about new factoring for PCS, elimination of fall deduction and separate panels do not come from ISU: Its actually all from the Netherlands: who knew they actually care for figure skating instead of just speed.

Proposals that come from just one fed instead of the technical comitee or ISU council have a harder time getting approved so we'll see how this goes.

 

[clairecloutier]

At the end of the day figure skating is a subjectively judged sport. Whatever you do, everything that is put in place is an administrative control because a person has made a decision. There will be people that will think it is a great idea and people who don't. However no matter what the ISU does, how the changes are viewed are basically perception, not fact. And opinion as not facts either. We all think are experts but again we have subjective biases.

We also love to be airchair critics but I daresay if you were in a position to make a decision, whatever you do won't keep everyone happy either.

No policy is going to satisfy 100% of the people 100% of the time. However, it does not follow that all policies are more or less neutral or that any effects of such policies can only be measured via opinion. There are tangible ways by which the judging system and policies can be measured and evaluated. There are objective differences between what's happening in the sport now vs. what was happening in 1990 or 2000.

Every policy deserves to be, and can be, analyzed on its merits, once its effects are apparent, or by extrapolation, once its details are announced. This is true not only of figure skating governance, but all governance. Of course there will be some level of opinion involved; but in any case, people's opinions are not irrelevant, as the predominating opinion is what generally sets policy to begin with.

 

[VALuvsMKwan]

To be fair all the proposals about new factoring for PCS, elimination of fall deduction and separate panels do not come from ISU: Its actually all from the Netherlands: who knew they actually care for figure skating instead of just speed.

Proposals that come from just one fed instead of the technical comitee or ISU council have a harder time getting approved so we'll see how this goes.

Maybe Trixie Schuba and/or Dianne deLeeuw got woke.

 

[skateboy]

I am confused by why figure skating should care about what “every four years” fans think. I watch the Super Bowl about every two years. I am sure the NFL doesn’t care what I think.

If falls should get zero because it is a failure, then << should get zero because the jump is a failure. A jump is defined by the number of rotations. If you can’t complete the rotations, you should get zero.

I'm one who doesn't think falls should get zero, because an attempt should be worth something. If a skater was to fall on every jump (extremely rare) and scored zero for those attempts, then that would be the same jump score as a skater who went out and attempted no jumps at all (not that a skater would do that, but I think you all understand my point).

That said, I am all for pushing athletic limits and I'm all for successful and beautiful quad jumps, but would like to see falls punished more. Like casual fans of skating, I'm pretty much that way about gymnastics... I don't follow it much except during the Olympics. But, it seems to me (please correct me if I'm wrong) that falling off the beam, bars, pommel horse, vault, rings... rarely results in a gold medal or a podium finish, especially in major events.

There are a lot of variables, of course. And many events are not splatfests. The top men were great at 4CCs and Olys this year. But, for instance, I thought it was outrageous that Kolyada, with his splatfest skate, was scored higher than Adam's clean one, in the Oly team event. The mens event at this year's worlds, aside from Nathan, was embarrassing. I'd have rather seen Bychenko, who skated well, make the podium over Shoma or Kolyada. And splatfests don't only happen in the mens event.

Sure, we can dismiss the feelings of casual fans, but maybe it's also a matter of "out of the mouth of babes." Falls ARE ugly and jarring. And, at the end of the day, I think most viewers (longtime or casual) want to see skaters have the Aljona & Bruno/Sarah Hughes/Tara Lipinski/Alexei Yagudin/Sarah Meier (at Euros)/Javi (at 2016 Worlds) moments. I know I do, but they happen less and less these days, IMO.

 

[Orm Irian]

Most people over at GSF didn't like the mandatory jump/spin proposal (I think it'd be interesting) or the no repeating quads. It will be interesting to see which of these actually go through.

Thanks for this; I missed seeing the mandatory solo jump/spin proposal in my read-through. I'm more in favour than against, given that the SP is supposed to be about demonstrating technical mastery which includes the ability to do all of the listed jumps at some level, though I can see arguments for both sides. I'd also accept a formal restriction on repeating quads in the SP only, for the same reason - but that would really just be explicitly stating what's more or less enforced by the existing rules anyway, so it probably wouldn't be necessary. The current rules for jump repetition seem fine for the FS to me.