What Do Fans Want?

[On My Own]

'q' is definitely too minute and overly specific. I'm happy they went to differentiate between (!) and 'e' and < and << though.

 

[farahfan]

Welllllllll, they make slo-mo vids that they post on FSTWT, Reddit and FSU for everyone who cares to review & argue about also.

lol please tell me where I can find these!

 

[Jenny]

Back in the early 2000s, Tatiana Tarasova and Nikolai Morozov choreographed programs where the step sequence became an audience highlight, and that trend was quickly copied by others.

Pausing to enjoy happy memories of Yags at his height

 

[Rukia]

I feel like we don't really understand what we're talking about here. When you say "what do fans want?" I presume you want more eyes on the sport and more attention/sponsor money. But it sounds like some of you just want people in the arena. And while one can lead to the other, they are 2 very different things. I personally think the most important thing would be to get people watching, because if people get invested enough they will want to spend the money to attend at least part of a competition. This requires people being able to easily watch competitions and also some people who understand how to market to the youths lol.

I also think Tony is not wrong with his technical issues/proposals. The thing is, people don't take time to discuss the technical issues because a lot of time it's hard to decipher! And yeah, there's only so much we can do to help people who don't want to take the time to learn to distinguish a flip from a lutz, but in my experience people are very interested in this. We don't make it easy on them though. And while some of that can't be taken away, there are ways to simplify things as well. Take away a step sequence, give skaters a choreo spin, and then fans get the vibes-related skating they desire.

Also the fans want pattern dances back they all told me personally.

 

[Desperado]

There’s a huge difference about what can work to get more people interested in skating shows vs competition skates. What @overedge put in their OG post definitely fits the former better.

Since the 80s, I have gone in person to shows in my city (only once in another city - COI then SOI) over 30 times.

Back when they were on, I would watch every skating TV show and professional competition.

My technical knowledge was basic, but enough to allow me to enjoy what I was seeing. In my 20s-30s, I would’ve been all about the special access and marketing stuff.

I’ve never traveled to a competition because of limited vacation time and because I traveled to explore, not be indoors for long periods of time, on consecutive days, in an uncomfortable setting, paying thousands of $$$ along the way.

I’ve been to exactly two (2) competition sessions in my city, in my life.

Maybe I’m the “antique times” average skating fan?

I’ve had a deep love of skaters and skating for decades and although my technical knowledge has increased a lot over the years, it will never be enough to please “the experts” on this board and I don’t want to either.

Although I have tons of time now, you would need to pay me a lot to delve into technical rule intricacies that change every year and I’m not sure I would take the job.

I would however, pay good money for one streaming service that shows all the Challenger competitions and adore the ISU channel. I would subscribe to both for the year, I’m sure others would also.

Would we be the “current” average fan skating wants more of ? Would it want attenders more than viewers? They should want both but skating is made up of many silos…

P.S. One of the many reasons I subscribe to FSU is to get the analysis the “experts” are so willing to share for free.

PPSS: Are FSU subscribers even the average fan skating wants more of?

 

[once_upon]

Are ice show well attended was asked up thread. IME, No! not since the days of Michelle Kwan, Scott Hamilton and Kurt Browning. Stars on Ice used to be packed - sold out. After the stars of skating left it became more evident skating appeal was declining. Stars on Ice began to drop cities with maybe 10 shows around the county.

Disney on Ice is popular - not for skating itself - but because it's reach goes to several audiences. The kids enjoy the Disney stories. The parents like the skating because it's enjoyable.

I know it's going to be pooh-poohed as stupid or me being stupid; but one of the best guides that helped me enjoy skating early on was and watching skating was Skating for Dummies by Kristi Y. She broke it down to the basics. Describing the jumps - not into ! ^ e etc, what constitutes a landing - not the underotates. Or why a fall does not result in a deduction any more. No one is doing that anymore. We - the uninformed - are expected to intuitive know why it is scored the way it is.

To be criticize for comparing skating sport to other sports - while a review is happening for errors or flags or other penalties the commentators are showing why something changes a score. The volleyball under review shows the error in several slow motion angles, points out what the technical panel is looking for. As for evenly applied - every sport I know has controversy over missed fouls or this play not being called out.

I think rather than filling the time discussing "when I was a star" or chit chat by panel of themselves. They could be doing a "here's how it's going to be scored an error or ^" or this is the point where the skating dance skill is a Level 1 vs Level 4. The non trained viewer hasn't spent hours combing through rules, because it becomes a bunch of words without specific demonstrations.

Stupid concept - skating for dummies kind of guide is much more useful than a green blob, red blob, or gray X.

Dick Button used to do a primer in real time. Take spins for instance - to complete the credit for a spin it must rotate 7 times. Why a spin that looks uncontrolled is really a change of edge. Or what the lift rules were for dance. Or what makes a pair exit on lifts an error. Show me in slow motion, the exact exit point is crashy.

Break it down to why. Volleyball shows the net violation several times why it is reviewed where the fingers touched the ball. Skating could do that - like the landing foot didn't complete the jump. Skating for dummies, tell me what constitutes a a ^, !, e or whatever

 

[once_upon]

lol please tell me where I can find these!

You can't. That's a problem

 

[Former Lurve Goddess]

Judging by this thread, someone would need a PhD in FSUology in order to figure out what fans want. I'd be into a commentary track that provided play by play snark.

 

[kwanfan1818]

I do not prefer skating on streams to live skating, because I don't care about facial expressions: I care about flow in and out of jumps,body position and movement quality, patterns, directional skating, and ice coverage. And what has gotten high composition scores is often laughable when you see it live.

OTOH, I think more could be done to educate fans on the technical side, especially in the arena. If you attend the event, there’s no “flag on the play” where you know five elements are under review. You just sit there and wait forever while they could include this info on the Jumbotron. There’s no listing of who is winning the FS as opposed to overall standings so you see a great skate and then they’re in 5th. Again, they could easily add this information to the scoreboard.

Watching the stream, I live for hearing even Ted Barton talk about the number of elements under review and how they're resolved, and, YES, YES, YES, this should all be on the Jumbotron. Unfortunately, replays from the official stream would be out, because the tech panel doesn't have those views or could be distracted/illegally watch them instead of the official replays. (I would love to see a pip view of what the tech panel is seeing, because they're on different drugs than the stream viewers.)

Live, you see people on their phones in between skaters, and not everyone is looking at their email or taking selfies: I used to be refreshing wedgie data, looking up skater info and prior results, and reading and posting to FSU.

I liked those ear bud things they had at the 2020 Olympics for skating, curling, and maybe one other sport. They had at least one credentialed tech panel person on the waves, and the discussion was like having Hanretty speaking with another knowledgeable person. (I nominate Jean-Luc Baker.) I know we wouldn't be watching replays, but they could air the ISU commentary on those ear bud things, even if they muted it during the skating, while watching the Jumbotron turn the elements colors after the review and showing the changes in scores.

I could see rousing discussions in the audience between skaters, and it wouldn't matter how long they took to come up with the final scores to the people in the audience who were doing what people do in every sport: agree or disagree with the calls and who was better back in the day.

 

[gkelly]

Watching the stream, I live for hearing even Ted Barton talk about the number of elements under review and how they're resolved, and, YES, YES, YES, this should all be on the Jumbotron.

Agreed.

Unfortunately, replays from the official stream would be out, because the tech panel doesn't have those views or could be distracted/illegally watch them instead of the official replays. (I would love to see a pip view of what the tech panel is seeing, because they're on different drugs than the stream viewers.)

Do you mean:
"official stream" = "world feed" shared with broadcasters who don't have their own cameras on site, and used for broadcasting on the ISU youtube channel
"official replays" = the ISU-hired footage with the single camera near the tech panel that keeps the whole skater including blades in the frame at all times, no artsy editing?

I don't see why the latter couldn't be shown on the Jumbotron. It would require someone hired by the ISU also to have access to the replay feed to choose clips to show while waiting for the skater's marks, rather than using a broadcast feed. They wouldn't show the same clips in synch with what the panel is watching during reviews because the panel might watch some elements more than once to confirm something (e.g., spins to count revolutions in certain positions), while other replays that the audience would like to see replayed (e.g., a beautiful triple axel, especially by a woman, or a quad, that is undoubtedly clean) might not have been flagged for review by the tech panel. And certainly the audio of what the tech panel is saying while reviewing would not be shared. But I don't see major obstacles to someone official choosing clips from the replay feed to show the live audience at the same time that the tech panel is reviewing the same or different clips from the same feed.

I liked those ear bud things they had at the 2020 Olympics for skating, curling, and maybe one other sport. They had at least one credentialed tech panel person on the waves, and the discussion was like having Hanretty speaking with another knowledgeable person. (I nominate Jean-Luc Baker.)

And preferably a singles skaters for singles events, and a pair skater for pair events. Someone hired to be matter of fact and informative, not to cheerlead or be controversial as network commentators often are.

I know we wouldn't be watching replays, but they could air the ISU commentary on those ear bud things, even if they muted it during the skating, while watching the Jumbotron turn the elements colors after the review and showing the changes in scores.

Sure.

 

[tony]

Don't flame me even more , but what I gather from the last few years of FSU is that there are some of the most long-time fans here, some of the people who have attended the most events in all of skating fandom, and they simply do not give a shit to learn any of the technical rules or the more nuanced <, +COMBO, L2, e, !, q, and everything else. They supposedly just want to enjoy the skating. Someone earlier said the technical people are somehow going to make her want to leave watching the sport, apparently.

So, we've had years and years of the technical score box showing the red, yellow, and green boxes until recently. I don't think showing an in-arena audience the same thing that had been shown for years and years on the screen prior is going to make anyone invest in understanding the rules. (And I know keeping that red/yellow/green blob box up during the actual reviews is taking it a step further, but I still don't think people will bother to figure out the 'why' behind those judgement calls). They simply just do not care. Actually, I'm going to stick to people 'not caring' until a controversial result happens, until their favorite or their nationalistic pride comes in, and the result seems somewhat wonky. Then they want to know exactly where the score came from, why it's applied to skater A but not skater B, why the Russian skater gets such and such GOE and PCS, and so on. So I think people actually do care, but they just do not want to read the actual rules. And if people are not learners through reading, the ISU put out a really informative set of ice dance judging videos years ago that could cater to the visual learners. The material is there, as messy as ISU document wording can get.

So, for someone who likes this kind of stuff, I'm all about it. But for those people who have watched every last competition in the last 30+ years and still don't feel comfortable identifying jumps or basic edges, I can't see them suddenly having interest. But it is a judged sport, after all, and we all have our different reasons in coming into it. I personally like the IJS protocols more than throwing top skaters a 5.8 or 5.9 for presentation time and time again.

Where this clashes with moving the sport forward, though, is that the skating actually has to be interesting regardless of all of those little nuances that can still be called. And, as I mentioned earlier in the thread, I think it has to come down on the actual foundations of what comprises the programs themselves. Do we really think adding the flashy smoke-filled entrance to the ice and the LED boards are going to suddenly grab fandom?

 

[NinjaTurtles]

It would be interesting to consider why a judged sport like halfpipe attracts such a significant audience, and how collegiate gymnastics has grown into an arena-filling series of competitions.

When Vidmar, Dagget and Gaylord were competing at UCLA we never saw crowds, though they were remarkable gymnasts.

I personally know some people that have competed at the highest levels of BMX and related 'extreme' sports (snowboarding, skateboarding) and there are similar types of arguing we see in figure skating re: big tricks/difficulty vs. the underemphasis of things like 'flow', 'style', etc. that are akin to our GOE and program components. The ISU actual goes into much greater detail on the definition of these things compared to the UCI; although, we all know that the judging doesn't always reflect those specificities of the rulebook.

I don't think a judged sport will ever be rid of that push and pull. But as noted above in various places, it's clear that physically and visually impressive feats of athleticism are exciting to watch. Big jumps, many rotations, long air/hang time reach a wider audience compared to the other impressive feats of athleticism that require a more nuanced understanding of the sport. I think most of us know that excellent skating skills is an impressive feat of athleticism (in addition to lending itself to artistic highs), but it's not as immediately impactful to the layman. Figure skating is often trying to achieve elements that look 'easy' despite their difficulty, we don't want it to look like massive work. That's what makes it impressive, as well as maybe less exciting to the casual fan. A 1080 in skate/snow boarding typically requires a ramp that's at least 20-70'...even if the flow and execution by the rider looks effortless, it will always seem more extreme/athletic/intense/risky given the sheer spectacle of the equipment of the sport. I'd hypothesize that most people are excited by seeing people dropping into the halfpipe and airing out than the actual nature of the tricks done in the air.

Gymnastics' base has grown partially via Simone's dominance in the sport. Breaking records, blazing new trails. It's exciting. Some of the sports' top stars have started doing collegiate competition, I imagine that has surely helped grow the sport's popularity at those levels. But gymnastics also has a peppy and noisy meet culture that can be an attractive vibe for an audience member that just isn't common in sports like figure skating where we need some silence in respect of the performance.

I am a hockey fan but my interest peaks when my Canucks are winning. So, let Canadian skaters win more frequently?

I feel like we don't really understand what we're talking about here. When you say "what do fans want?" I presume you want more eyes on the sport and more attention/sponsor money. But it sounds like some of you just want people in the arena. And while one can lead to the other, they are 2 very different things. I personally think the most important thing would be to get people watching, because if people get invested enough they will want to spend the money to attend at least part of a competition. This requires people being able to easily watch competitions and also some people who understand how to market to the youths lol.

I also think Tony is not wrong with his technical issues/proposals. The thing is, people don't take time to discuss the technical issues because a lot of time it's hard to decipher! And yeah, there's only so much we can do to help people who don't want to take the time to learn to distinguish a flip from a lutz, but in my experience people are very interested in this. We don't make it easy on them though. And while some of that can't be taken away, there are ways to simplify things as well. Take away a step sequence, give skaters a choreo spin, and then fans get the vibes-related skating they desire.

Also the fans want pattern dances back they all told me personally.

When it comes to getting butts in seats, buying tickets, higher TV ratings, much of it is athlete personality and winning. Casual fans like to witness greatness. Watching someone win or dominate is fun. A dynamic personality grows fans and sponsors. Look at people questioning Ilia's leaning into the Quadg0d moniker and making merch...but it's the closest we've had in a long while to an athlete in skating replicating what famous athletes in every other sport do. The old culture of figure skating really dampens athletes' ability to be expressive off the ice. Cockiness does not have the negative connotation in other sports like it does figure skating (and I don't even necessarily think Ilia is cocky). Figure skating often gives off big OK, Boomer energy. @Willin is so right that a lot of it comes down to parasocial relationships we build across sports (and all media).

And someone will say, nooo Ninja people like to root for the underdog. And that's true too. But guess what, greatness and dominance also attracts debate that people like to get in on. Lifetimes have been spent on ESPN and the internet arguing whether Lebron James or Michael Jordan is the GOAT in basketball. Why are the Dallas Cowboys 'America's Team'? It's not because everyone loves them - in fact, many people passionately hate them for their bygone dominance and persistent popularity. 'America's Team' is because everyone has an opinion one way or the other on them. People love to root for greatness and the rest love to engage in it as haterz. People watch and comment to express their opinion either way.

The sport needs to be readily accessible to watch is number 1 (and no that doesn't mean cable TV).

Hypothesis: People want intuitive results. I don't think people want to pay $$$ to attend an event where they don't understand the scoring. If competitions are always going to come down to microscopic q / < tracings, we're back to the days of compulsory figures. I do think the scoring system misses the forest for the trees in a lot of cases, and some of that impacts fan enjoyment. And I say that as someone who has a good eye for these things.

I really like @Willin's suggestions to get the audience more involved in the scoring.

I'm not entirely convinced. Figure skating's scoring could be more accessible for sure, but IME fans have similar lack of knowledge of the rules in other and more popular sports. Most people do not know the definition of a catch in the NFL, for example. Which seems shockingly basic, but the rulebook for football is annually changing and massively detailed (~100 pages) not unlike figure skating. I guess people at least need to think they know the rules .

I remember a lot of people saying back during an old Olympics (Sochi? Vancouver?) that the official judge-along system was not only fun but helped them understand the judging system better. I think the ISU creating an official judge-along app would be a great way to engage current fans and help new fans understand IJS better. Maybe have the fans able to key in scores, but also have a quick reference on GOE bullet points, PCS standards, etc. for fans to see as they judge. They could even make it a game - at the end of the segment you could see how close your scores were to those of the real judges.

It's a good idea (they could even lift/license it from SkatingScores https://skatingscores.com/tools/), and it's honestly not even a modern concept. People have enjoyed tracking/writing their own boxscores in baseball since the late 1800s.

 

[AnnM]

I am not part of other sports fanbases, but I do know people in other fanbases. I don't see some table tennis fan going "Yeah remember that 1/8 round in 1995 men's doubles at that one comp?????? It was so amazing man, I want to watch it again, pity it's gone off youtube".

I know 49er fans still talk about The Catch from like 1982 so it's not far fetched for me to think that other sportsball fans have similar memorable moments for their favorite teams and players that they reminisce about and rewatch. And I know lots of obsessive Lakers/Kobe fans who talk about various stats all the time that don't make much sense to me but clearly matter to them. Isn't the ESPN Classics station still a thing? Not that they'd ever think about reairing old skating comps, but it would be cool if they did.

As far as the main question of this thread, as a fan who tries to attend 1-2 competitions each season, event location matters the most to me. Proximity to an airport and walkability from lodging to the arena are my top two considerations - I don't want to have to rent a car. More opportunities for skater meet and greets on the concourse would also be great; I feel like that used to happen more frequently. Specific to USFS- they have seemingly decided to take the approach of trying to attract fewer, but higher dollar donors rather than having lower dollar donor entry points for fans that may eventually become high dollar donors. I'm not sure that's a great tactic and it's somewhat off putting.

 

[kwanfan1818]

Do you mean:
"official stream" = "world feed" shared with broadcasters who don't have their own cameras on site, and used for broadcasting on the ISU youtube channel
"official replays" = the ISU-hired footage with the single camera near the tech panel that keeps the whole skater including blades in the frame at all times, no artsy editing?

I was thinking of "official stream," and the ISU commentary, because I'm trying to think of ways they could use what they had and not spend a lot of money, because we know they're not going to spend a lot of money, unless it's on first class air travel.

On the streams, I would love to see the play-in-play video of what the tech panel camera saw vs. the official stream. That would certainly make the point that that the tech panel can't always see what we see and vice-versa. It might also convince the ISU to fix the limitations and add what some other sports have, like slo mo or existing technology to evaluate rotation. I think it was NHK that at one point provide graphics of the speed going in and out of jumps and the height and distance of them. They could superimpose the graphics for a skater who had the highest score (to date) on an element over the current skater, and then argue about whether one should be scored differently. That would work both on the stream and the Jumbotron, since it's no longer ordinals.

I think that at least some people who don't care about the "minutiae" don't want to hear the discussion over them here. Others don't want to see replays that show how wrong the tech panel and/or judges got it, because the technology they use is as updated as the skating boot, so why bother. Others will never care about q's and !'s.

But sport after sport after sport, including the major professional sports that have three-inch rule books that 100 people have read, have used graphics, replays, and commentary to get people engaged. The little screen pen thing with the x's and arrows to show what happened in a play engaged so many people for whom they'd just seen a center throw to a quarterback and a bunch of people scrambling around until there was a completed pass, a missed pass, an interception, or a handoff and some running, especially on low-yardage plays. The purpose of all that scrambling, what worked and what didn't, was suddenly clear.

And preferably a singles skaters for singles events, and a pair skater for pair events. Someone hired to be matter of fact and informative, not to cheerlead or be controversial as network commentators often are

I've heard very few commentators who were even singles skaters at some level give that much insight into singles skating, where, when listening to JLB, he was talking about how the entries into jumps, like use of edges and overall impact, not just revolutions, made. I found his commentary fascinating overall. But if there were two people like the guys on the waves at the 2010 Olympics who had singles and Pairs experience, I'd be all for it.

 

[KCC]

I like the occasional broadcasts where they measure the height and distance of jumps and would like to see more measurements (speed, edge angles, etc.). Not sure what I'd do with that info, but I like to see a few hard numbers when deciding on a technical score.

I often wonder what would happen to the sport if it was divided into two separate competitions: one 100% technical competition that is all about jumps & spins & speed & tricks, still set to music but with no second mark, and a separate "complete" competition (1 program, not short + long) that shows off the many other skating skills and includes both marks. I'd watch and probably enjoy both, especially to see who will be competitive in both.

The team competition does nothing for me, but I watch it just to see more skating.

 

[gkelly]

On the streams, I would love to see the play-in-play video of what the tech panel camera saw vs. the official stream. That would certainly make the point that that the tech panel can't always see what we see and vice-versa.

True

It might also convince the ISU to fix the limitations and add what some other sports have, like slo mo or existing technology to evaluate rotation.

The tech panel does use slo mo replays to evaluate rotation. There are a few things they're not allowed to use slo mo for -- e.g., prerotation. So they might watch a jump combination at least twice, first in real time to determine whether the toe loop at the end should be downgraded for taking off forward, and then again in slo mo to look at the landing of the first jump.

They can also use slo mo to check if a spin really did have at least two revolutions for positions/edges where two are needed to earn a feature, or eight for the eight-revs feature, or less than two to get into position on the landing of flying spins. That's part of why they probably wouldn't show exactly what the tech panel is looking at while they're reviewing.

Showing two different angles of the same jump could make the point that what the tech panel sees can be different from what the broadcast camera shows. Or they could just show the tech panel angle for the replay. Then the fans would see what the panel sees and would be less likely to disagree with the call.

If these clips make it online and not just on the Jumbotron, undoubtedly some nitpicky fans would make their own side-by-side comparison videos.

I think it was NHK that at one point provide graphics of the speed going in and out of jumps and the height and distance of them. They could superimpose the graphics for a skater who had the highest score (to date) on an element over the current skater, and then argue about whether one should be scored differently.

In the current rules, there's a lot more than height and distance that are considered in jump GOEs, so arguing about the final GOE based on that one metric would not be useful. There could be a cutoff for what qualifies as "very good" height and distance for each kind of jump -- if so maybe that measurement could be incorporated directly into the scoring. Although what's very good distance for a loop might not be so good for a toe loop, and what's very good for the second jump in a combination might not be so good for the first jump. So all that would need to be taken into account to make this determination more objective than relying on each judge's visual estimation. More significantly, what's very good for a 5-foot tall junior woman might not be so good for a 6-foot tall senior man. And everything in between -- I don't know how an algorithm could account for that.

Speed in and out would be considered under "good takeoff and landing," but there are other considerations in that bullet point. E.g., a massive flutz that clocks in with great speed in and out would not deserve that bullet point and would also deserve a reduction for the wrong edge call.

It would be helpful to have those measurements. And maybe someday they will be incorporated directly into the scoring somehow. But there are other qualitative assessments that are not so easily shown with numbers or with quick graphics.
Some of which could be pointed out by commentators on the replays, e.g., edge wobbles or snow on landing edges, especially when accompanied by significant loss of speed.

Would fans want detailed analysis of every jump on all these metrics? Or just the most important jumps (e.g., envelope-pushing content), or the ones that looked like they deserved positive GOE in real time but ended up with negative scores. Or an after-the-fact comparison of a jump that earned +4s and +5s vs. another skater's successful jump that scored lower.

It's all useful information, but probably too much to get into even during the K&C time while waiting for the panels to finish scoring.

But sport after sport after sport, including the major professional sports that have three-inch rule books that 100 people have read, have used graphics, replays, and commentary to get people engaged. The little screen pen thing with the x's and arrows to show what happened in a play engaged so many people for whom they'd just seen a center throw to a quarterback and a bunch of people scrambling around until there was a completed pass, a missed pass, an interception, or a handoff and some running, especially on low-yardage plays. The purpose of all that scrambling, what worked and what didn't, was suddenly clear.

Yes, that kind of video markup by commentators has occasionally been used in skating and can be helpful to point out things like edge changes, two-foot landings, underrotation. And perhaps other details like a skater not achieving a valid sit or camel position, or enough split in illusions to count as difficult spin entry/exit/variation. But I don't think we can expect commentators to catch the latter kind of issues in real time unless it's really obvious. If they have to wait to see the protocols to know that a skater only earned level 2 for that spin and want to figure out why, it would likely be after the fact. But perhaps worth doing in a close contest where a favorite ended up losing because of lower spin levels.

I don't think we can have all this stuff for every element of every skater in every competition. But they can all be available for broadcasters to focus on as relevant. Or maybe showing jump height/distance/speed for comparable jumps in one competition segment, without suggesting that those qualities alone determine the GOE.

 

[Badams]

Speaking for myself as a fan, I want clean skaters and fair judging. That's it.

 

[farahfan]

unpopular opinion: I want to be entertained. And I want to be able to invite my non-fan friends to watch skating and for them to be entertained, too. whether in person or on TV.
you know, most people go to sports events and plunk down lots of money not because they understand everything technical about the game, but because it's fun.
so, Tara and Johnny may not be our favorite commentators but they do understand the value of putting on a show for the crowd. Im always excited to see what Johnny's next outfit is.

 

[On My Own]

I know 49er fans still talk about The Catch from like 1982 so it's not far fetched for me to think that other sportsball fans have similar memorable moments for their favorite teams and players that they reminisce about and rewatch. And I know lots of obsessive Lakers/Kobe fans who talk about various stats all the time that don't make much sense to me but clearly matter to them. Isn't the ESPN Classics station still a thing? Not that they'd ever think about reairing old skating comps, but it would be cool if they did.

I get the memorable moments - I definitely see why someone would want to upload top 10 from worlds/olympics up until 1980 or something. I don't necessarily see why someone would want to go beyond that though, to see grand prix or CS events from a really long time ago, or something, hence why I bring up the example of a 1/8 match from a long time ago.

Maybe I just don't get it, and that's okay though.

 

[gkelly]

I get the memorable moments - I definitely see why someone would want to upload top 10 from worlds/olympics up until 1980 or something. I don't necessarily see why someone would want to go beyond that though, to see grand prix or CS events from a really long time ago,

Speaking for myself...

If there's a whole competition that I haven't seen before from before I started following the sport (in the 1990s), I'd be interested to try to mock-judge it for fun and/or to see the range of what kind of elements and program composition skaters were using at that point in history.

I don't expect great artistry from most of the field in the figures era or even in the 1990s, but there may be some surprisingly enjoyable skaters with lesser technical skills, or who have some skills that were unusual then and perhaps unknown now.

If it's a competition I did watch at the time or on video when I started following, if I remember there being some particularly memorable programs from skaters lower in the rankings, I might appreciate the opportunity to watch them again.

 

[On My Own]

Speaking for myself...

If there's a whole competition that I haven't seen before from before I started following the sport (in the 1990s), I'd be interested to try to mock-judge it for fun and/or to see the range of what kind of elements and program composition skaters were using at that point in history.

I don't expect great artistry from most of the field in the figures era or even in the 1990s, but there may be some surprisingly enjoyable skaters with lesser technical skills, or who have some skills that were unusual then and perhaps unknown now.

If it's a competition I did watch at the time or on video when I started following, if I remember there being some particularly memorable programs from skaters lower in the rankings, I might appreciate the opportunity to watch them again.

It's a very hyper-specific need, though. I am not altogether surprised that it's dying out, because I don't think there's a particularly deep explanation beyond "O tempora, o mores!".

Maybe there can be a specific archive for someone training to be a judge or something that ISU can take up, but personally I don't think one can expect TV networks to broadcast it. And fans, well, they can't be around forever. None of us.

 

[tony]

Speaking for myself...

If there's a whole competition that I haven't seen before from before I started following the sport (in the 1990s), I'd be interested to try to mock-judge it for fun and/or to see the range of what kind of elements and program composition skaters were using at that point in history.

I don't expect great artistry from most of the field in the figures era or even in the 1990s, but there may be some surprisingly enjoyable skaters with lesser technical skills, or who have some skills that were unusual then and perhaps unknown now.

If it's a competition I did watch at the time or on video when I started following, if I remember there being some particularly memorable programs from skaters lower in the rankings, I might appreciate the opportunity to watch them again.

As someone who has amassed about as big a video collection as possible, I love finding competitions, shows, and skaters I’ve not seen that were before my time. I love 80s skating and I’ve been fortunate to see some rare stuff with skaters I’d never dreamed of seeing.

And I can remember being so excited by the Grand Prix coverage the US got starting in the late 90s, 6.5 hours a week per each event on Mondays, Fridays, and Sundays. Skating clips online weren’t really a thing yet, DVDs weren’t fully a thing, and I had to record everything to VHS if I wanted to see it again. So I did, starting when I was 11. There were skaters who weren’t ever shown then on US coverage who were big surprises and big talks of message boards- Denkova/Staviyski in 99/00, Galina Maniachenko and her SP at Skate Canada the following season, etc. All of it is nostalgic to me just as video games or movies or toys are for many other people, and I’m sure a lot of others feel the same too. There were standout performances from non-medal threats all the time, and I remember so much of those ‘peak’ skating years details like it’s nothing.

That’s also why I’m happy to post and share as much skating history as possible, because there are so few people left with an interest of keeping it in existence, or dealing with copyright issues when they do try to share.

 

[gkelly]

Maybe there can be a specific archive for someone training to be a judge or something that ISU can take up, but personally I don't think one can expect TV networks to broadcast it. And fans, well, they can't be around forever. None of us.

No, I don't expect TV networks to broadcast whole past competitions. I don't think they should. I'm just explaining why some fans like to watch old competitions, and why some new fans might want to catch up on the history of the sport by watching old events, to see how things used to be. It could also be fun to see people now known as coaches back when they were competing.

Fans used to save and share broadcasts on videotape or DVDs.

Later online, but that's where copyright infringement became a real issue, not just of the music but of the broadcaster's property.

 

[On My Own]

I actually don't know if some new fans would. I am not old by any means, but it's still clear my take on arts (not talking about fs) is vastly different from Gen Z's. Goodness knows why they like what they like, but I don't see them going to study old skating. Not the overwhelming majority, anyway, you might get the odd person here and there.

Or watch an entire 6 hour long competition either. Soccer matches with their 90 minutes going at it, especially if they're rival teams and you really love one of them, that makes so much more sense.

 

[MacMadame]

And Grand Prix events have small fields. The big events and even Nationals events in the States don't have any way around that, so there's no way to fix that problem.

I don't think it's necessarily a problem but it's an example of why you can't compare a skating competition to a concert. And you definitely can't compare flying to one competition that is 6+ days long to going to 6 local games throughout a 20-week season. wtf

(So on this we we agree. I am not arguing with you here.)

(go Ducks!)

GO BEAVERS!!! also to the Ducks.

LOL - @tony, yes, fans DO travel. In hordes and around the country. Just because your own experience was as a student does not mean that it mirrors that of these fans that travel to as many games as possible during the regular season.

But games are part of 1 day (the majority don't tailgate and make a day of it) and generally on a weekend. Here in the Bay Area, Raiders fans do often go to "home" games in LV and make a weekend of it. But they fly in on Friday after work and are home by Sunday night before work the next day. To go to Nationals, you need at least 5 days of PTO but usually more. Most of us in the US don't have that kind of PTO even if we had the money.

It's just a very different kind of commitment.

Also the fans want pattern dances back they all told me personally

They told me that too!

 

[Karen-W]

GO BEAVERS!!! also to the Ducks.

LOL! I grew up in a divided household and have cheered for both the Beavs & Ducks my entire life - and, let me tell you, those were some dark, dark years before the Ducks began to rise slowly.

Really, though, if we're going to anyone for the demise of the Pac, it should be USC. I was so pleased to see them fall flat on their faces their first season in the B1G.

 

[Willin]

One of the big things I’ve noticed about the newer/younger fans is they have no interest in the history of the sport. Many think Yuzuru Hanyu is the undisputed GOAT or that Nathan VS Yuzu is the only men’s rivalry that matters. Similarly, they seem to forget ice dance existed before Virtue/Moir. I’ve even seen some ignore the brilliance of 90s-early 00s skaters like Michelle Kwan! It’s really amazing.

Even in exhibitions, the younger fans miss out on so much because they can’t be bothered to watch older stuff.

While it’s great to like new and exciting things, there is a lot of old exciting things newer fans just don’t seem to care about…

 

[overedge]

A bit more detail about the discussion at the seminar that I started this thread with.

In retrospect what was interesting about the discussion, comparing it to the discussion here, is no one said anything like "the artists need to make better music" or "have more loud guitars" or "get rid of synthesizers". The discussion wasn't about adjusting the music to get more fans. It was about understanding what attracts fans to an activity (in this case, music) and how to use that attraction to build an ongoing audience (and of course to get the audience to spend money).

Also, this was a discussion about what the panelists called "core fans" or "stans" - the superfans who spend a lot of time on their fandom, and spend lots of money to travel to shows, buy albums/online streaming, buy merchandise etc. The consensus seemed to be that an artist can't necessarily "make" a superfan, because some fans, no matter how much they love the artist, just don't have the resources to be a superfan. But having multiple incentives for them to express their fandom - eg they might not be able to afford a concert ticket, but they can afford a T-shirt - helps build a larger audience and makes it a loyal audience.

The panelists also said that fans are often more involved with their idea of what a musician is like, and build their fandom around that, rather than what the musician is actually like. Which is why things like meet-and-greets tend to rate relatively low as incentives.

 

[Orm Irian]

A bit more detail about the discussion at the seminar that I started this thread with.

In retrospect what was interesting about the discussion, comparing it to the discussion here, is no one said anything like "the artists need to make better music" or "have more loud guitars" or "get rid of synthesizers". The discussion wasn't about adjusting the music to get more fans. It was about understanding what attracts fans to an activity (in this case, music) and how to use that attraction to build an ongoing audience (and of course to get the audience to spend money).

Also, this was a discussion about what the panelists called "core fans" or "stans" - the superfans who spend a lot of time on their fandom, and spend lots of money to travel to shows, buy albums/online streaming, buy merchandise etc. The consensus seemed to be that an artist can't necessarily "make" a superfan, because some fans, no matter how much they love the artist, just don't have the resources to be a superfan. But having multiple incentives for them to express their fandom - eg they might not be able to afford a concert ticket, but they can afford a T-shirt - helps build a larger audience and makes it a loyal audience.

The panelists also said that fans are often more involved with their idea of what a musician is like, and build their fandom around that, rather than what the musician is actually like. Which is why things like meet-and-greets tend to rate relatively low as incentives.

That's very interesting, not least in that it positions fandom primarily as a consumption-focused activity. Coming from an SF/F fandom background (both literature and media), I position it as a creation-focused activity with a transformative component (making fanfic, fanart, fanvids, meta, etc.), which may be why the kind of efforts the ISU and different federations put forward to pull in fans don't resonate with me at all, and in fact are often deeply alienating. The sense that being a fan or participating in fandom requires and indeed equates to spending money on things is alienating in and of itself. To be a fan, to be a participant in any fandom, should require nothing more than a library card or access to free-to-air television, and maybe an internet connection!

 

[On My Own]

ISU did do something for the fans who want to spend nothing: they are streaming on YouTube.