“There’s no need to frequently change the rules in figure skating. Each year, there are bans, nuances, limitations and everyone starts doing the same thing.” Elizaveta Tuktamysheva on rule changes
Elizaveta Tuktamysheva about rule changes.
original source: sports.ru dd. 12th June 2024
In her long post on SportsRu Elizaveta Tuktamysheva shares her opinion on current rules in figure skating and proposed changed. Here’s a translation of her comments.
“Throughout my career, the rules have changed many times. I vividly remember how they removed the spirals, although it was still in the free program when I performed at the Russian Nationals. Of course, I remember the transition to the new system. In Glazov, I still performed according to the 6.0 system. And we didn’t immediately switch to the new scoring system, so I experienced both. When the change happened, I didn’t immediately understand how the scores were given. I think many figure skaters faced this – it was very unusual.
And now about the changes that have occurred in the last few years.
Pros and cons of jumps in the second half of the program
The rule on reducing jumps in the bonus area, adopted after the 2017/18 season, didn’t affect me at all. In my programs, it was almost always like this: four jumping elements in the first half in the free program, and three in the second. I think this rule leads to balance. And I like this – jumps at the beginning of the program immediately captivate the viewer, grabbing their attention. On the other hand, it would be interesting to see the girls who don’t jump 7 times as consistently in the second half as Alina Zagitova did. That’s a serious risk. It’s hard for me to name even a single athlete who could do all the elements in the second half right now. So it would be interesting to find out who is so well trained that they can handle this as clean and lossless as possible.
From the point of view of the harmoniousness of the program, the viewer is waiting for the most difficult jump or combination at the beginning. There’s immediately an intrigue: will she make it or not, how will she cope with the nerves? And to wait for 2 minutes until the jumps start, is probably not always interesting for the viewer. But then you think: what will happen now – will she be able to make it or not?
Considering that girls have mastered the ultra-c well, moving all jumps to the end seems almost unreal. Although for those who have not mastered quadruples or a triple axel, there would be an opportunity to compensate in points by placing all jumps in the second half.
Possibly, if the bonuses for the second half were higher, it would intensify the competition. Then with such a skate, as Alina had in Pyeongchang in 2018, one could compete with skaters doing quads.
Why decrease the value of ultra-c?
When I restored the triple axel, I wasn’t thinking about the fact that its value fell in 2018. Because I was very happy to bring back my jump. The reduction in the base value of jumping elements has had more effect on quads. But the ISU began this shift back in 2010 when Evan Lysacek outperformed Evgeni Plushenko in Vancouver. In my opinion, it’s not quite correct.
I know how difficult the triple axel can be. Learning it cannot be compared to any other triple jump, it is much harder. Even now, as I am restoring my jumps, the lutz and flip are easy, but mastering the triple axel is a serious challenge. And lowering the value of such difficult jumps, which not everyone performs, seems illogical. The more risk involved, the more we see complex elements, the more interesting the competition becomes. And it’s this that leads to an increase in popularity: the drive towards records, complex programs. On the contrary, athletes who are learning something new should be encouraged.
What’s wrong with the new changes – lifting the ban on the back flip and refusing one combination?
Some athletes do a back flip after their free skate programs, so physically, it seems, it’s not a very demanding element. But there have been plenty of cases where a skater learned a back flip and broke something: an arm, a shoulder. After all, it’s still a head-down position, one moment, something done wrong, fear, loss of concentration, and you can get injured.
When you’re learning quadruples, the process goes gradually, under the supervision of a coach. Of course, nobody goes to do a back flip right away either, but there have been cases where people have gotten really serious injuries. That’s why the back flip is considered dangerous – your concentration has to be at its peak. Probably when a skater constantly jumps it, everything happens automatically, but all the risk falls on the learning process.
It’s always spectacular when skaters perform such tricks. But at the same time, if the ban is removed, many will go for the back flip – and it will no longer surprise anyone, its uniqueness will be lost. And if you lower the cost of complex jumps, then the motivation for skaters to do them will disappear, and no back flip will retain the attention of the viewers. I wouldn’t want the complexity of the programs to decrease.
That’s why I’m definitely against removing one of the combinations in the free program, as is being planned now. I always find it interesting to watch a performance when I don’t know exactly will the athlete cope or not. That’s why I like men’s skating so much – you can never predict what will happen there. Although I won’t hide it, sometimes simplifying the rules can be convenient. For example, when a jump sequence was equated to a combination – it was only an advantage for me, I love sequences with a double axel.
I still don’t quite understand why the combination is being removed. Everyone was coping, jumping. Is it to enhance the artistic quality? But when Carolina Kostner, for example, skated, there was everything – expressiveness and jumps. If you want, you can perfectly combine components and musicality with seven jumping elements. And if someone can’t handle this, I don’t think that it will suddenly work with six jumps.
Of course, I always banked on jumps. In childhood, I fought competitors precisely because of this – I was never a skater who won only because of components. Maybe I’m wrong – and the quality of programs will actually increase. It will take time to assess this change.
The component scores of men and women should be equal
But what I don’t understand is why the component scores of men and women are evaluated differently. I never understood this and probably never will. I have always held the view that there should be equality. Then why is the coefficient for components higher for men?
Yes, they used to have longer programs, they did more elements. But now men have the same duration programs, jump the same number of jumps. The programs are identical. So why not then equalize the components? Let’s not lower the coefficient for the guys, just raise it for the girls. This has no effect on the results. And it’s very easy to do – just multiply by a different coefficient, you don’t need to change the system.
Our girls have shown that we also have difficulty at the male level, but the components remain the same. That’s incorrect and illogical. Single skaters should have uniform rules, we all do the same thing.
There’s no sense in frequently changing the rules, but technology would benefit judging
I wouldn’t change anything else in the rules. But I would add technology that would accurately mark – where’s the edge, where’s the full rotation, and where’s not. I would like the quality of gliding to always be precisely and impartially graded, as well as connecting steps. So that the status of a skater does not influence the score.
Speaking of development and improvement in figure skating, only with strict judgment can we achieve that. So long as we only focus on jumps but forget about everything else, this will be difficult. Or, for example, spins – some of them, for which they assign a fourth level, are not very aesthetic or slow.
But the main thing is that everyone should be judged equally – both beginners and titled athletes. So that every skate is assessed impartially. Of course, leaders always get more but it should be justified and not trigger extra discussions.
In general, there’s no need to frequently change the rules in figure skating. Each year, there are bans, nuances, limitations. It’s noticeable in pairs: because of the limits in performing lifts, everyone starts doing the same thing.
The same goes for spins. For example, I’m not the most flexible skater, and last season it was difficult for me to do a level four spin. I can’t do a Biellmann, and without it, it’s impossible to do three spins at the highest level. So I like the novelty of the choreographic spin – you can show creativity there, and viewers will appreciate it. The more restrictions, the less possibility there is to come up with something unique. I would give skaters more freedom.
Raising the age minimum makes sense, but there are also contradictions
I don’t have a clear position on raising the age minimum. I’ve thought a lot about it and haven’t come to a conclusion. I started my senior career very early. And when an athlete feels the atmosphere of senior competitions, it’s easier for them to participate in international competitions.
At the same time, it’s not entirely fair to compare a female body and a child’s body. I think this was largely guided by raising the age minimum. There is indeed a huge difference in programs, physique, stamina. On the other hand, if the movement is towards simplifying the rules, then the age minimum can be returned – everyone will be in a more or less similar position.
I hope the ISU thoroughly studied this issue. If there really is a trend that due to early switching to seniors athletes are more prone to injuries, early retirement, and psychological pressure, then that’s correct. I’m all for athletes not sacrificing so much for the sake of their careers.
Although quadruples will still be learned from childhood – so I hope the ISU had weighty arguments to raise the age minimum. If we look at juniors, not many jump quadruples at the international level. But in Russia, many girls go for quads.
Apparently, the age minimum was changed with the aim that older skaters would stay in the sport longer. When you return after puberty, you can skate much longer. If there’s a skater who has a long career, who becomes the face of the sport, viewers like this. Perhaps this played a role. This is actually a complex topic, an incredibly delicate balance is needed here. And it’s not possible to evaluate this decision yet. Firstly, data without our athletes can’t be considered reliable. We can’t exactly understand what this rule means for figure skating. Secondly, we need time – at least one Olympic cycle with all the leading teams. Then we’ll understand whether this change has benefited our sport or not.”
Related topics: Elizaveta Tuktamysheva
Leave a Reply