AxelAnnie
Like a small boat on the ocean...
- Messages
- 14,463
It would also eliminate the breathless commentators who say "he/she is now entering the second half of the program............."
What would happen if the 10% bonus were eliminated?
- Thread starter missing
- Start date
Coco
Rotating while Russian!
- Messages
- 19,292
I'm fine with the bonus for 4 jumping passes in final half (FS) and a bonus for 2 jumping passes in the final half (SP).
There is no excuse for front loading an SP, yet it happened all the time.
ETA: We've seen that skaters/choreographers won't do anything until they know there will be a concrete reward. Even if a concrete reward is available on the PCS side, no one will believe it is being applied as PCS remarks are so fungible.
There is no excuse for front loading an SP, yet it happened all the time.
ETA: We've seen that skaters/choreographers won't do anything until they know there will be a concrete reward. Even if a concrete reward is available on the PCS side, no one will believe it is being applied as PCS remarks are so fungible.
Last edited:
Cachoo
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 12,774
this, This, THIS! I understand why one would back load a program but at the Cup of China the Japanese women were captivating from beginning to end and I cannot say the same about Zagitova. Zagitova is talented but I saw better programs from the Japanese ladies.
The pendulum would swing back to more front loading and still unbalanced programs IMO. With more 'juice' in the tank, more skaters would go for bigger energy sucking tricks up front, and if/when not achieved, would see listless marking of time during the ends of programs, and potentially more injuries as a result of training those bigger tricks. I'm sure there would be more ramifications but those initial derivatives come to mind.
briancoogaert
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 13,761
As much as I like Alina Zagitova's skating, it's very difficult for me to appreciate her LP.
Honestly, 4 or 5 jumps in a row just to get the bonus... It deserves no more than 5 in Choreography...
Honestly, 4 or 5 jumps in a row just to get the bonus... It deserves no more than 5 in Choreography...
As someone mentioned, it is important to realize that the bonus was implemented for two very different reasons in the SP and LP. The SP bonus was more of a carrot to encourage sound construction, because we were heading toward having the 3 jumps as elements 1-3 in every SP skated.
In the SP, given its history of requirements, I think abolishing the bonus and requiring that no two jumps be done consecutively. In the LP, I think they just need to be clear about where points will be lost for unbalanced programs- allow for +GOE of jumps in the 2nd half, articulate how much an unbalanced program should impact the TR and CH PCS, etc.
Would a "no two consecutive jumping passes" rule for the 2nd half of the LP be inappropriate if the bonus is kept? I would rather it go, as the jump is still held to the standards of a jump done earlier. If these jumps are 10% more difficult, why not also require leniency in the GOE and UR reductions?
In the SP, given its history of requirements, I think abolishing the bonus and requiring that no two jumps be done consecutively. In the LP, I think they just need to be clear about where points will be lost for unbalanced programs- allow for +GOE of jumps in the 2nd half, articulate how much an unbalanced program should impact the TR and CH PCS, etc.
Would a "no two consecutive jumping passes" rule for the 2nd half of the LP be inappropriate if the bonus is kept? I would rather it go, as the jump is still held to the standards of a jump done earlier. If these jumps are 10% more difficult, why not also require leniency in the GOE and UR reductions?
gkelly
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 16,720
I see no reason to require or automatically penalize any particular element layout. Different layouts will work for different music and program themes, not to mention for different skaters' skill sets.
What is the value in forcing skaters into cookie-cutter layouts? Why not encourage creativity and let judges use their judgment when to reward or penalize?
My favorite 2 step sequences in a row from the 6.0 days of 2-step-sequence men's SPs
I know we'll never see anything quite like that under the current rules, but why preempt possibilities in advance?
What is the value in forcing skaters into cookie-cutter layouts? Why not encourage creativity and let judges use their judgment when to reward or penalize?
My favorite 2 step sequences in a row from the 6.0 days of 2-step-sequence men's SPs
I know we'll never see anything quite like that under the current rules, but why preempt possibilities in advance?
Last edited:
As much as I like Alina Zagitova's skating, it's very difficult for me to appreciate her LP.
Honestly, 4 or 5 jumps in a row just to get the bonus... It deserves no more than 5 in Choreography...
But again, many skaters actually throw a bunch of jumps together at the 2 minute mark, and they have no relevance to the music AT ALL. It's just to get them done with the bonus and then continue with their 'artistic' programs. That's why I don't mind Alina's program so much. Obviously it's a lot going on, but it actually fits the music more than any of those other programs with a bunch of jumps in a row.
Choreographically, or as the ISU now calls it 'composition'-wise, I think it's fine. Her SS obviously still need a little bit of work.
ETA- I agree with the others in this thread that if you start making specific rules such as no more than x jumps in the second half or no two jump elements in the SP can be done in a row, then the programs literally will all look the same. We are already going to see plenty of 1+6 and 0+7 jump layouts next year I bet, but no one complained when it was the other way around.
Moreover, I did some numbers crunching.
Kaetlyn Osmond does her 3+3 and her 2A+3T in the first half of her program, along with the 3Lz. The other four jump elements (including a 3+2+2) are in the second half. She repeats the toe and the flip. Her jump base value? 46.52
Zagitova, with all jumps in the second half including a 3Lz+3Lo, 2A+3T, a second 3Lz and 2 3F's, has a 50.71 base value. The < call on the Lutz at CoC made the base drop two points. Either way, it's not as if she's running away with the competition because of the second half bonuses. She is being rewarded fairly for risking all of that not only so late in the program but also so closely together, because one big error such as a fall is going to make her have to play catch-up very, very quickly to get it all back together.
Kaetlyn Osmond does her 3+3 and her 2A+3T in the first half of her program, along with the 3Lz. The other four jump elements (including a 3+2+2) are in the second half. She repeats the toe and the flip. Her jump base value? 46.52
Zagitova, with all jumps in the second half including a 3Lz+3Lo, 2A+3T, a second 3Lz and 2 3F's, has a 50.71 base value. The < call on the Lutz at CoC made the base drop two points. Either way, it's not as if she's running away with the competition because of the second half bonuses. She is being rewarded fairly for risking all of that not only so late in the program but also so closely together, because one big error such as a fall is going to make her have to play catch-up very, very quickly to get it all back together.
