Adult WBP Charts

[daisies]

The updated Well Balanced Program/IJS charts for Adult Singles and Dance have been posted at http://usfsa.org/New_Judging.asp?id=313.

The Pairs chart is TBA.

One thing to note is that the rule that a jump may be repeated only once (in other words, performed no more than twice) is in there. It was inadvertently left out of the chart last year, even though it was in the rulebook.

Unchanged is the rule that if a jump is repeated, it must be in combo or sequence.

[NickB]

daisies,

Do you by any chance know whether the definition of two spins being "of a different nature" for adults matches the one described in this clarification that is applicable for juvenile through novice (i.e., "different nature" = "different IJS code")? (ETA: http://www.usfigureskating.org/content/TechnicalClarification5SINGLES.pdf ) Because I am planning to skate up to bronze next month and currently have both a one foot upright spin and a backspin in my program, both of which would get the code "USp1" but which clearly aren't the same spin. If they are considered to be of "the same nature" I suppose I could try to replace one of them with a change foot spin. In practice, my event won't actually be judged using IJS and unless they were specifically told that forward upright and back upright spins were considered to be of the same nature, I'm sure most judges would count them as being of a "different nature" (especially since some judges aren't experienced with IJS and wouldn't know or be thinking about what the codes would be). Still, I always like to know all the nuances of the rules as a judge and want to be sure not to violate any of them as a skater. ;)

Thanks in advance. :)

Now I just have to find out if the competition is using the new rules or the old rules, to know if I can even do the 3 spins I have in my program...

[daisies]

Hi Nick. Yes, as far as I know, "spins of different nature" does mean different IJS codes. Therefore, even under 6.0, your 1-foot spin and backspin should receive a deduction.

Why do you think that "most judges would count them as being of 'a different nature'"? I'm a judge, and, to me, under the new rules, they are of the same nature. Thus, from me, you'd get a deduction. (Sorry!)

That's the key -- under the new rules. Whereas your spins might have been fine before, under the new rules they're not.

In my experience, judges have more of an IJS mindset now than they do a 6.0 mindset. IJS is being implemented more and more, and most judges -- especially the ones who will be at AN -- will be well-versed in it. So even if they're judging under 6.0, they still know the rules.

Good luck!

[jazzpants]

Oh, dear.... 8O

I guess that means this would be a violation of the rule too -- 1) sit spin, 2) backsit-forward attitude and 2) plain scratch spin. 1) and 2) would probably violate the new rule? I guess I better switch my sit spin (which is sadly currently my best spin...) for a camel, huh? :?? (Which sadly in my case, is non-existent at all. :frus: )

[Thin-Ice]

Oh, dear.... 8O

I guess that means this would be a violation of the rule too -- 1) sit spin, 2) backsit-forward attitude and 2) plain scratch spin. 1) and 2) would probably violate the new rule? I guess I better switch my sit spin (which is sadly currently my best spin...) for a camel, huh? :?? (Which sadly in my case, is non-existent at all. :frus: )

The way I understand it, you should NOT have to change the program, because 1) would get the SSp (sitspin) code, 2) would be CCoSp (change of foot/combination spin) and 3) would be USp (upright spin). So those all receive different codes/are different natured spins. At least that's the way we were told to consider them at the seminar we had last weekend.

[techskater]

Yes, thin, you are correct

[NickB]

Hi Nick. Yes, as far as I know, "spins of different nature" does mean different IJS codes. Therefore, even under 6.0, your 1-foot spin and backspin should receive a deduction.

Why do you think that "most judges would count them as being of 'a different nature'"? I'm a judge, and, to me, under the new rules, they are of the same nature. Thus, from me, you'd get a deduction. (Sorry!)

That's the key -- under the new rules. Whereas your spins might have been fine before, under the new rules they're not.

In my experience, judges have more of an IJS mindset now than they do a 6.0 mindset. IJS is being implemented more and more, and most judges -- especially the ones who will be at AN -- will be well-versed in it. So even if they're judging under 6.0, they still know the rules.

Good luck!

Thanks for the clarification. I hadn't seen or heard anything official about what "different nature" meant until I specifically sought out a definition, and that clarification specifically noted that it applied to juvenile through novice. So if I hadn't found that and received your interpretation, then I would've given the skater the benefit of the doubt and would not have deducted if a skater did a level 1 one-foot upright or scratch spin and a backspin unless I had been specifically told to. I would've guessed before seeking out the clarification that "different nature" meant simply that you couldn't do the exact same spin twice (and while a backspin and one-foot upright/scratch have the same code, they're not the same spin), which is how I've always interpreted the rule up until now. I suspect many other judges would use the same interpretation, and while I'm sure all the judges at Adult Nationals are very well-versed in IJS, not all judges at non-qualifying competitions are.

Anyway, that does help. And knowing that there's at least one judge out there who would give me a deduction reinforces the desire I already had not to violate any rules whatsover. :)

[TimDavidSkate]

For Silver...

are two flying spins allowed? :halo:

[NoVa Sk8r]

You could do *3* flying spins if you wanted, as long as they have different call names.

So flying camel (FCSp), flying camel/back sit (FCoSp), flying camel/back sit/forward sit (FCCoSp), and flying camel/forward camel (FCCSp) are some examples

Death drop or flying sit (FSSp) or flying upright spin (FUSp) and then all the variations of the flying sit and upright that there are with the above-mentioned flying camel spins.

Knock yourself out.

[TimDavidSkate]

You could do *3* flying spins if you wanted, as long as they have different call names.

So flying camel (FCSp), flying camel/back sit (FCoSp), flying camel/back sit/forward sit (FCCoSp), and flying camel/forward camel (FCCSp) are some examples

Death drop or flying sit (FSSp) or flying upright spin (FUSp) and then all the variations of the flying sit and upright that there are with the above-mentioned flying camel spins.

Knock yourself out.

I'm sure I will splat on it if I ever try two flying spins - in one program, I was just curious ;)

[rlichtefeld]

I have an interesting observation about the non-repeating jumps. In Silver, there is a max of 5 jump elements, and a max 3 combinations/sequences. So, how would someone do the max with the limit on repeats.

With most of us able to really only do Loops or Toe-Loops as the second or third jump of a combo or sequence, that would rule out a Toe or a Loop as the first jump in a combo or sequence, or am I missing something?

I skated under IJS this year in Estonia and had a Salchow, Lutz-Loop, Flip-Loop, and Loop-Loop-Loop. And, they all counted. Should they not have? And, does that mean I have to change my program for this year? I do loops much better right now because of the problem with my left knee.

Rob

[dcden]

I think you're right, basically the 3 combo rule, with one combo having three jumps, means that there is a max of four jumps that can be the non-first jump of a combo. Synthesizing this observation along with the repeat rule, that means these four jumps would have to be two toes and two loops, in some order.

The other five jumps would then have to be taken from Axel, Lutz, Salchow, and flip. Now I ask: is there another rule that limits how many different types of jumps you can apply the repeat rule toward? That is, if you've already repeated a loop and toe-loop, could you also repeat Axel and/or Lutz and/or Salchow etc.? I believe there is no such limit but I could be wrong.

[sk8er1964]

I don't know if you are specifically speaking about silver, but in gold you would. In fact, if you do not have a solid double (like me - mine was downgraded at AN and it was one of my better efforts), then the only way to maximize the jump points is to do two axels, one in combination, two lutzes, one in combination, and two flips, one in a three jump combination (not a sequence - you lose points on those - and of course, the three jump combo could be on the axel or lutz too - I'm just using my own example). The salchow disappears as an unnecessary jump, unfortunately - I don't think you'd get dinged for it under IJS, but you might under 6.0. Of course, when I skate under 6.0 my solo flip would be a double sal anyway. ;)

[Hannahclear]

Hmmm.....so I can't do a back camel/back sit/forward sit combo spin and then later do a forward sit/back sit combo, can I? That's two change foot spins, but one without change of position.

Well the change foot from back to forward isn't there yet anyway, so I guess I can just see if it is by next winter.

[techskater]

Yes, you can both spins you listed. One is a CCoSp and the other a CSSp.

There is no limit as to how many different jumps you can repeat twice.

Also, if anyone is planning on doing a sequence under IJS, they need to review the new rules carefully.

[Hannahclear]

Thanks. When I thought about it later, I realized that I might be ok.

[sexyskates]

In the jump sequence you can also add half jumps for interest, and can therefor use the salchow. The half jumps do not count as a full jump in the tally. Under the new rules, my program last year ended up with a Lutz, a Flip, a Lutz-toe, a Loop-loop, and a Flip-toe-half loop-salchow. Of course with a loop-loop, I had to sacrifice my Lutz-loop. I asked one judges about the new rules, and she said that the judges want to see a variety of jumps. So I guess we should try to become creative with the combos.

[Debbie S]

Also, if anyone is planning on doing a sequence under IJS, they need to review the new rules carefully.That's right, you can't do mohawks or 3-turns bet jumps in a sequence anymore - does anyone else agree with me that this makes no sense? So it's no longer possible to have a sequence with most of the "unlisted" jumps, such as falling leaf, split or stag jumps, b/c you would need a 3-turn to do another jump (ex: (any single)-falling leaf-toe loop).

Really, the only connecting element that's allowed under the new (IJS) rules is a half-loop. A toe tap/side toe hop is permissible too, I think - at the Chesapeake Open, I saw quite a few axel-toe tap-axel sequences in Intermed and Novice (I didn't see Juv, but I'm sure they were there, too).

[daisies]

I would've guessed before seeking out the clarification that "different nature" meant simply that you couldn't do the exact same spin twice (and while a backspin and one-foot upright/scratch have the same code, they're not the same spin), which is how I've always interpreted the rule up until now. I suspect many other judges would use the same interpretation, and while I'm sure all the judges at Adult Nationals are very well-versed in IJS, not all judges at non-qualifying competitions are.

The rule used to be interpreted that way, but no more. Judges are changing their thinking, so skaters would be wise to do so too.

For example, the old way of thinking would be that you're doing an "upright spin" and a "backspin." But the new way would be that you are doing an "upright spin" and an "upright spin with reverse entry" -- a reverse entry simply being a "feature."

So, I have to ask ... are judges in your area not using IJS? I am honestly dumbfounded that you would suspect judges at nonquals wouldn't know IJS. It's all we use around these parts, from Juvenile up, but the same judges are used for the 6.0 events.

Regarding the sequence rule, I totally don't get it either. If you have to do a half-loop between jumps, that actually makes the sequence pretty difficult because half-loops can go awry pretty easily ... so it really isn't worth doing sequences under IJS, especially when you only get .8 of the value! (Under 6.0, though, they are still worth doing, IMO.)

I guess we will have to see how that rule is implemented!

[techskater]

I kind of understand why no three turns are allowed as the in between anymore in a very vague sense. They changed the combination rule to read that a double three done between jumps will still be called a combination but judges are required to give it a lower GOE. So, if you had someone that intentially did it as part of the unlisted elements between jumps in a sequence and they got a lower score with the combo and negative GOE they could complain about it. I guess it's to make the caller's job easier in terms of intention of the skater in that sense. The mohawk part of the rule I don't understand, though.

FWIW, no more jump sequences in my program because of it...:giveup:

[LWalsh]

I am still confused about the non repeating jumps. I am at Silver level. I have a Lutz, Lutz-toe-Loop (3 jumps), Loop-Loop, Flip-toe, Sal. Does this mean I have too many loops? If so how could I maximize my difficulty in absence of the axel? Help!

Lara

[NoVa Sk8r]

I am still confused about the non repeating jumps. I am at Silver level. I have a Lutz, Lutz-toe-Loop (3 jumps), Loop-Loop, Flip-toe, Sal. Does this mean I have too many loops? If so how could I maximize my difficulty in absence of the axel? Help!

LaraPerhaps you could do:
-Lutz
-Lutz/toe/loop
-Loop
-Flip/toe
-Flip/half loop (or toe tap)/Sal

or
-Lutz
-Lutz/toe/toe
-Loop/loop
-Flip/half loop (or toe tap)/Sal
-Sal -or- Flip

[lovepairs]

Does anyone know why the WBP hasn't come out for the Pairs, yet? Does anyone know when it might hit the stands? I can only imagine what they are fighting over at this point.

[daisies]

Does anyone know why the WBP hasn't come out for the Pairs, yet? Does anyone know when it might hit the stands? I can only imagine what they are fighting over at this point.
There is no fighting going on. It is being proofread and perhaps rewritten to better mirror how the standard-track charts are worded ... that is NOT to say the rules are the same, it simply means if the standard chart says something like "One axel-type jump" and the adult chart says something like "One axel is allowed," they want to make the wording similar so that there is more uniformity and it does not confuse the technical panel. Everyone working on it is volunteering their time, so please be patient.

(I proofed and reworded the singles one, which I why I know that! :))

[frbskate63]

I am still confused about the non repeating jumps. I am at Silver level. I have a Lutz, Lutz-toe-Loop (3 jumps), Loop-Loop, Flip-toe, Sal. Does this mean I have too many loops? If so how could I maximize my difficulty in absence of the axel? Help!

Yes, you do have too many loops - but you only have one salchow, so why not do salchow loop instead of loop loop?

Fiona

[techskater]

Why not replace the first loop in the combination with a flip and have:
Lutz
Lutz-loop-toe loop
Flip
Flip-loop
Salchow-toe loop

[lovepairs]

Thanks, Daisies. Are you on the Adult Committee? Is this why you know this? If, yes, then when are they going to post who is serving on the Adult Committee? They seem to have taken that list down from the USFSA website.

Actually the WBP for the Pairs really doesn't matter, because the IJS doesn't adhere to it anyway. But thanks, anyways...

[daisies]

Thanks, Daisies. Are you on the Adult Committee? Is this why you know this? If, yes, then when are they going to post who is serving on the Adult Committee? They seem to have taken that list down from the USFSA website.
Yes, I am on the committee. I would assume the reason the list was taken down is that the committee is in the middle of transitioning. Each year some members go off of the committee and new ones come on, and the new ones who are asked to join have a certain amount of time to accept. So USFS is probably getting together the "new" list and will post it when it's complete.

[slusher]

Okay, I have a question. For Adult Bronze it says no axel-type jumps. Does that mean a waltz jump would be a deduction? (ie axel type "takeoff"), or do waltz jumps just count as connecting moves etc?

Because at Silver, it says it may include an axel-type jump, so if I'm at Silver, could I do a waltz jump and have it count as a jump element?

I've got a possibility of doing a US competition this season (sssh, it's a "business trip") and don't know quite where I slot in and there's differences between WBP and our IJS so I was trying to go by the required elements. I've never done an axel but have the test that says I have ;)

If waltz jumps have been discussed before, just point me to the thread, okey-dokey.

[lovepairs]

Thanks, Daises!

By the way, could you please tell me what the term rotation is for the people who are already serving on the Adult Committee?

[Debbie S]

Okay, I have a question. For Adult Bronze it says no axel-type jumps. Does that mean a waltz jump would be a deduction? (ie axel type "takeoff"), or do waltz jumps just count as connecting moves etc?
Waltz jumps in Bronze are OK; you just don't see a lot of people doing them, esp with the new rules that limit one to 4 jump elements, b/c waltz jumps obviously don't get as much credit as the full rev jumps and everyone wants to maximize their tech difficulty.

Under IJS, waltz jumps receive 0 credit, but I believe they do count as a jump element (for ex, a popped axel). Under 6.0, which Bronze and Silver are judged by (even at AN), waltz jumps do count as a jump element and do get some sort of credit.

[daisies]

Thanks, Daises!

By the way, could you please tell me what the term rotation is for the people who are already serving on the Adult Committee?
I believe each term for members is one year, but each member can be invited back to continue. So sometimes people serve one year, and sometimes people serve more.

The terms for the Chair and Vice Chairs may be longer -- I am not sure what they are, though.

[NickB]

Waltz jumps in Bronze are OK; you just don't see a lot of people doing them, esp with the new rules that limit one to 4 jump elements, b/c waltz jumps obviously don't get as much credit as the full rev jumps and everyone wants to maximize their tech difficulty.

Under IJS, waltz jumps receive 0 credit, but I believe they do count as a jump element (for ex, a popped axel). Under 6.0, which Bronze and Silver are judged by (even at AN), waltz jumps do count as a jump element and do get some sort of credit.

I didn't even notice that it said "no axel type jump" at bronze. I would certainly hope this doesn't mean waltz jumps are illegal, since it's my best jump (and because I think that would be an incredibly stupid rule-- in fact, my personal opinion is that a waltz jump should be required at bronze, and should have a point value). Yet I have always heard a waltz jump counted as an "axel-type jump." My understanding is the same as Debbie's-- that it would count as jump element and receive a call of "A" or "axel, no value," which is also what I was told by technical specialists when I asked the question. Is a waltz jump now illegal at bronze, daisies?

[Debbie S]

I didn't even notice that it said "no axel type jump" at bronze. I suspect that whoever decided to phrase it that way in the rulebook didn't think too hard about the wording - I assume what they meant was that axels (and double axels, triple axels, etc) are not allowed in Bronze, and just didn't think about waltz jumps. Maybe they didn't think anyone in Bronze would do a waltz jump, or maybe they were thinking in IJS terms where a waltz jump doesn't count, but I suspect "axel-type" just refers to axels. Hey, it wouldn't be the first time a rule was worded confusingly, or incorrectly. :roll:

Daisies, any insight on the axel/waltz issue in Bronze?

[NickB]

The rule used to be interpreted that way, but no more. Judges are changing their thinking, so skaters would be wise to do so too.

For example, the old way of thinking would be that you're doing an "upright spin" and a "backspin." But the new way would be that you are doing an "upright spin" and an "upright spin with reverse entry" -- a reverse entry simply being a "feature."


Right. But I also realized that my old spin layout is exactly what is on the adult bronze free skating test (one foot upright spin, backspin [as it is called on the test form], and sit spin), and that the rationale for adding the third spin to the well-balanced program requirements was to create "equivalency" between the test and competition requirements. I guess that doesn't automatically imply that the test requirements would suffice in competition, and there are other examples where the test requirements still don't match the competition requirements (i.e., a flying spin isn't required until the intermediate FS test but is required in [non-restricted] juvenile free skate competition). But if bronze skaters aren't "expected" to be able to do enough spins to fill up the 3 boxes without repeating codes to get to that level, that at least might be one possible rationale for not taking the clarification for juvenile through novice to apply to, say, adult bronze. Have you talked to others on the adult committee about this? I know you really know your stuff but I'm curious if your interpretation is universally shared, since the clarification I linked earlier as worded only applies to juvenile through novice. And because my change foot spin isn't very good yet. ;)

The other thing I was thinking of is this: how would judges know what levels the spins were if a competition was judged under 6.0 (to know, for example, if the skater did two CCoSp3s or one was only level 2?). Even those judges who happen to be technical specialists might not realize it because judges are instructed to look at quality and not the difficulty. I know my friend has trouble staying on an outside edge on her backspin, so maybe she can teach me how to change edges and make my backspin a "USp2" so they wouldn't have the same code. ;)


So, I have to ask ... are judges in your area not using IJS? I am honestly dumbfounded that you would suspect judges at nonquals wouldn't know IJS. It's all we use around these parts, from Juvenile up, but the same judges are used for the 6.0 events.


The judges with competition appointments certainly know and have been using IJS a lot, but not all judges who only have test appointments know a lot about it. And I do have quite a lot of experience practice judging with IJS (and have enough 'points" to judge with it for non-quals, though I haven't had a chance yet) and try to read up on all the rules and I have been confused about several issues that I haven't seen definitively and officially addressed (as you can tell from this topic), so it's certainly possible other judges, even those who know IJS pretty well, might have similar questions. I appreciate your taking the time to answer them. :)

[NickB]

I suspect that whoever decided to phrase it that way in the rulebook didn't think too hard about the wording - I assume what they meant was that axels (and double axels, triple axels, etc) are not allowed in Bronze, and just didn't think about waltz jumps. Maybe they didn't think anyone in Bronze would do a waltz jump, or maybe they were thinking in IJS terms where a waltz jump doesn't count, but I suspect "axel-type" just refers to axels. Hey, it wouldn't be the first time a rule was worded confusingly, or incorrectly. :roll:

Daisies, any insight on the axel/waltz issue in Bronze?

My suspicion is that the intent wasn't to ban waltz jumps either, because I just can't fathom why anyone would intend to do that, but generally the requirements have said "no axels or higher jumps" when axels or higher jumps weren't allowed, and not "no axel-type jumps," period. As worded, I think it would exclude waltz jumps so hopefully daisies can clarify, or an official clarification can be issued.

It might not come as a surprise to anyone here that my 4th-grade teacher once wrote on my report card that I often took things too literally. :P

[techskater]

Spins of a different nature mean that you cannot do 2 CCoSp or 2 FCSp in a program whether they are different levels or not. So, for a program to have three spins that count, they have to be of a different nature - so these are the codes that count as a different nature:
USp
SSp
CSp
LSp
CoSp (change position, no change of foot)
CUSp (change foot, no change of position)
CSSp (change foot, no change of position)
CCSp (change foot, no change of position)
FCSp (flying camel)
FSSp (flying sit)
FCoSp (flying combination spin such as flying camel-back sit)
FCCoSp (flying change combination spin such as flying camel-forward sit)
CCoSp (change foot combination spin)

Of course, flying spins are not allowed in Bronze.

[NickB]

That makes more intuitive sense, techskater. I was considering "USp1" to be the "abbreviation," so that a USp1 and a USp2 would have different abbreviations and could both get points. Assuming you're right, I guess they're considering just the "USp" part to be the "abbreviation," so both a USp1 and a USp2 have the same abbreviation and therefore only one could get credit in the program. For competitions judged under 6.0, it wouldn't make sense to expect judges to know when to deduct if the former interpretation were correct, but under IJS the computer would know, so it makes a big difference whether the rule just means that you can't do 2 CCoSp3s or that you can't do a CCoSp1 and a CCoSp3. There's no clarification of this in ISU 1445 (though it's possible there's another document where they more precisely define "abbreviation").

The fact that they had parentheticals in the spin box as to what "different nature" meant ("e.g. spin combinations with/without change of foot and/or change of position, spins with only one position, flying entry, etc.") might lend support toward your interpretation since it doesn't mention anything about levels but I wasn't taking that as gospel because it sort of makes it sound like "spin with only one position" and "flying entry" are in themselves "natures" but that's obviously not the intent since a sit spin and an upright are both spins in one position but clearly have different natures based on the clarification. Are you on the adult and/or another committee, techskater? Thanks for your input.

[lovepairs]

Thanks, again, Daisies.

Is there a document, or a set of bylaws where I can read what the actually term limits are for skaters serving on the Adult Committee? Actually, I'd be interested in reading all of the rules and regulations that apply to Adult Committe and Adult Sub-Committee members.

If you can post the link to the Bylaws that govern the members of the Adult Committee, I'd greatly appreciate it. Many thanks!

[Virtualsk8r]

In Canada, the waltz jump does have a value - 0.3 - that is used when our Code of Points system is used. Obviously the ISU system doesn't apply to events lower than Junior, so each country has adapted a value system for its use. Canada - CoP, USA - IJS.

In adult competitions, the waltz jump is used as an axel-type jump when required. The Cdn silver adult level requires an axel-type jump - so most adults do a waltz jump., worth 0.3 points.

The axel-type jump requirement also exists in the Canadian starskate system for competitions and in the well-balanced program outlines for most competitions whether 6.0 or CoP. So the waltz jump fufils that checkmark for most beginners.

[Virtualsk8r]

The new ISU rulings regarding spin positions are being adapted to events other than Senior and Junior level..........specifically the rule that a camel spin must have the freeleg higher than the hip, and a sit position whereby the hip has to be parallel to the skating knee (ie no butts in the air anymore!)

Under the new points system, a squat sit spin receives no value nor does a camel spin that fails to achieve the camel position -- not to mention you have to maintain a minimum number of rotations (2 in each position and total of 3 in a single position spin). I had an adult lose both the sit spin and the combination spin boxes - which had previously been counted under a 6.0 system.

[daisies]

I also realized that my old spin layout is exactly what is on the adult bronze free skating test (one foot upright spin, backspin [as it is called on the test form], and sit spin), and that the rationale for adding the third spin to the well-balanced program requirements was to create "equivalency" between the test and competition requirements.

The rationale was simply to have the same number of spins in the test and competition programs, not necessarily to make them equivalent in terms of difficulty. It's easier to change a spin in a program than have to rechoreograph an entire section to accommodate or remove a spin.

Have you talked to others on the adult committee about this? I know you really know your stuff but I'm curious if your interpretation is universally shared ...
I'm giving you my opinion as a judge and not as a member of the adult committee.

The other thing I was thinking of is this: how would judges know what levels the spins were if a competition was judged under 6.0 (to know, for example, if the skater did two CCoSp3s or one was only level 2?).
They wouldn't necessarily know what level a spin is -- levels don't apply to 6.0. The level has nothing to do with the abbrevation. If you do a USp1 and a USp2, it's the same nature.

... so it's certainly possible other judges, even those who know IJS pretty well, might have similar questions. I appreciate your taking the time to answer them. :)No problem. Everyone has questions about 1445! It's all very unclear. It's going to take a couple of competitions (internationals) to sort things out, I'm sure.

Assuming you're right, I guess they're considering just the "USp" part to be the "abbreviation," so both a USp1 and a USp2 have the same abbreviation and therefore only one could get credit in the program.

Again, the level doesn't count in the abbreviation. :)

Is there a document, or a set of bylaws where I can read what the actually term limits are for skaters serving on the Adult Committee? Actually, I'd be interested in reading all of the rules and regulations that apply to Adult Committe and Adult Sub-Committee members. If you can post the link to the Bylaws that govern the members of the Adult Committee, I'd greatly appreciate it.

Huh? Why would I have bylaws? (Random!) I've never even seen any.

Anyhoo ... I'm sorry but I don't have an answer to the Bronze predicament. AFAIK, a waltz jump is a transitional element. But you'd need to get clarification from a technical panelist, of which I am not. I will ask around.

[Debbie S]

I didn't think the levels counted toward the "different nature" of a spin. Here's my beef (warning - rant coming): Bronze and Silver are both being judged using the 6.0 system, not IJS. Why, then, are IJS terms referenced in the WBP? OK, I realize that judges and skating committee members, etc, all have IJS on their minds. But if a comp level is not judged under a particular system, those at that level shouldn't have to use standards (spin abbreviations, axel-type vs. waltz) from another judging system. It just doesn't make sense. Define "different nature" as it was defined under 6.0 for those levels. And under 6.0, forward upright and back upright were considered to be of a different nature.

And another rant about IJS: unless I'm misreading things, the number of positions (I mean positions, not variations of position) doesn't affect the point values received for most combo spins. For example, a camel-sit-back sit-back scratch is coded CCoSP, but so is a sit-back sit-back scratch. Yes, I saw that for some combo spins, doing all 3 positions on each foot, or something like that, does get counted as a feature that increases the level, but the 2 spins I just referred to would be counted the same (obviously, variations that a skater chose to do within those positions would affect the total number of points received). My point is that it is harder to start in the camel position (assuming the camel position is held for at least 2 revs) than it is to start with the sit position, since the camel is a harder spin, but there is no recognition of that in the scale of values when you are just talking about the basic spin.

OK, rant over. :)

[NickB]

Thanks for your responses. :) OK, I wasn't sure if what you were saying about the upright and backspin was something that had been officially agreed upon by the adult committee or your own opinion. I suspect you're probably "right" about it but since the clarification only mentioned juvenile through novice the "official" word is ambiguous, so I will try to get an official clarification from someone on the judges committee. As well as a clarification on the "no axel-type jump" at bronze and whether an intended waltz jump counts as a jump element and at what levels. I know that the ISU rules say that skaters may do small jumps as "decorations" (their term) that are counted simply as transitions, and I believe the wording was such that a waltz jump could fall under that heading. I also think I remember some international skaters doing waltz jumps as part of footwork that were clearly "decorations." However, I also know that waltz jumps that are clearly popped jump attempts do count as an "axel, no value." The ambiguity comes in when you get to levels low enough where waltz jumps are actually intended as jump elements and are neither pops nor (intended to be) "decorations."

[daisies]

My point is that it is harder to start in the camel position (assuming the camel position is held for at least 2 revs) than it is to start with the sit position, since the camel is a harder spin, but there is no recognition of that in the scale of values when you are just talking about the basic spin.

OK, rant over. :)
I totally hear you! I have a similar beef with jumps: A double lutz, for instance, gets a value, and a double toe loop gets a value, but then a two-jump combination of double lutz-double toe loop simply gets those two jumps' values added together. There is no recognition of the fact that a combination is harder than a solo jump.

[daisies]

However, I also know that waltz jumps that are clearly popped jump attempts do count as an "axel, no value."
That's actually usually a "benefit of the doubt" call. When an axel is required in a program, a popped one will get called as an attempt so that the skater doesn't get a deduction for not having one in the program. The skater will simply get no value, rather than no value plus a deduction for not following the rules.

[NickB]

Upon re-reading the clarification and seeing the wording at the bottom that says, "Therefore, a spin abbreviation may only be used once within a program for all levels from juvenile through senior," I now would interpret that as saying it would not apply for levels below juvenile (but that the spins still must be somehow different, because 2 basic scratch spins obviously wouldn't be of a different nature under any definition), but am in the process of asking for clarification.

Who knew planning a bronze program could be so confusing? ;)

[lovepairs]

Daisies,

The reason why you would have "Bylaws" is, because whenever you are asked to serve on either the board, or committee of a non-profit organization, such as the USFSA, or even a for profit organization, such as corporations, before accepting the responsibility of serving or representing a constituency (or, a group of people) you are given a set of rules and regulations (bylaws) by which you are bound to represent, govern, and make decisions for the people/skaters whom you represent.

Bylaws can or cannot be an extensive document that covers such things as informing you about your term limits, about your election, or reelection process, about how many votes (qourums) are required to pass a decision or law into action, about what your responibilities are for either attending meetings or participating if your meetings are web-based, ect... it basically is a set of quidelines that give peramiters about representing us, so that it's not a total chaotic free for all and that decisions are not made by only a few people, because others are neglecting their responsibilities...that's all.

It's interesting that you are unaware that a document exists that would be able to tell me for a fact about term limits, rather than just speculating that it is one year and then you are invited back ad infinitum, which is a very strange system if this is true. Aren't you curious about how the Adult Committee operates, since you are serving upon it? It seems that for an institution that is nothing other then about Rules and Regulations, which is why we are talking about the details of a WBP, that a set of Bylaws that govern the committee who represents us doesn't exist.

[w.w.west]

Pages 12 -15 in the current rulebook is all about committees. Maybe this is what you are looking for?

[lovepairs]

Thanks, West.

I've read this section of the Rule Book that you mentioned above several times. The only thing that vaguely points to anything pertaining to the Adult Committee is section 5 on page 12 "Special and Ad Hoc Committees." However, this is a far cry from anything resembling "Bylaws," which every member who serves on the board and, or, committees of USFSA sanctioned skating clubs throughout the country receive. In fact, there is a template for "Bylaws" for skating clubs, which is under the "forms" section of the USFSA website...so, they do exit, but were never implemented for a governing body, such as the Adult Committee, which, again, is rather surprising, since the USFSA is about nothing other than rules and regulations as it pertains to skating.

The pages that you pointed out pertain for the most part to the Chair of the Adult Committee and everyone either horizontal or above that post. The Adult Committee who serves underneath and at the pleasure of the Adult Committee Chair is below (in terms of structure) this post, and the pages you pointed out do not apply to the Adult Committee members, or Adult Sub-Committee members.

But thanks for trying to find something for me to look at and read to answer my original question about "term rotation." Much appreciated!

[techskater]

That makes more intuitive sense, techskater. I was considering "USp1" to be the "abbreviation," so that a USp1 and a USp2 would have different abbreviations and could both get points. Assuming you're right, I guess they're considering just the "USp" part to be the "abbreviation," so both a USp1 and a USp2 have the same abbreviation and therefore only one could get credit in the program. For competitions judged under 6.0, it wouldn't make sense to expect judges to know when to deduct if the former interpretation were correct, but under IJS the computer would know, so it makes a big difference whether the rule just means that you can't do 2 CCoSp3s or that you can't do a CCoSp1 and a CCoSp3. There's no clarification of this in ISU 1445 (though it's possible there's another document where they more precisely define "abbreviation").

The fact that they had parentheticals in the spin box as to what "different nature" meant ("e.g. spin combinations with/without change of foot and/or change of position, spins with only one position, flying entry, etc.") might lend support toward your interpretation since it doesn't mention anything about levels but I wasn't taking that as gospel because it sort of makes it sound like "spin with only one position" and "flying entry" are in themselves "natures" but that's obviously not the intent since a sit spin and an upright are both spins in one position but clearly have different natures based on the clarification. Are you on the adult and/or another committee, techskater? Thanks for your input.

The reason why the level isn't included when saying spins of a different nature (so a CCoSp2 and CCoSp3 would be OK in the scenario that the level helps define the nature of the spin) is because if you short a rotation in a feature, your spin level could be downgraded from a 4 to a 3 or a 3 to a 2 and you might end up with 2 spins at the same level.

Also, so many people at the Senior level internationally were doing 2 CCoSp4 spins that were modified from each other that they might as well have done 2 of the same spin!

Also, you can only do one flying spin in a single position and you can do a FCCoSp or a FCSp as a separate nature in the program according to the communication.

I am not on a committee or subcommittee. I just don't have time and our local reps do a fantastic job (WW West, and company from Mids always make sure we are kept up to date). :bow:

I understand the rules' intentions because I have read through this very carefully and discussed at length with my coach who is a newly minted Regionally appointed TS under ISU communication 1454 and it's clarification memos from USFS and the ISU that are available to technical panels (it was available and being used in the training when she passed her test in April). This is why daisies suggested strongly you discuss it with a technical panelist - because they get memos and clarifications the rest of us don't see! 8O

[NickB]

Thanks! I was thinking the same thing if the level did count (that it could lead to controversy when spins weren't called at the level intended and the skater lost credit for a spin) so it makes more sense not to count it.

[rlichtefeld]

Daisies,

The reason why you would have "Bylaws" is, because whenever you are asked to serve on either the board, or committee of a non-profit organization, such as the USFSA, or even a for profit organization, such as corporations, before accepting the responsibility of serving or representing a constituency (or, a group of people) you are given a set of rules and regulations (bylaws) by which you are bound to represent, govern, and make decisions for the people/skaters whom you represent.



I have served on many volunteer organizations, and have never seen committee bylaws.

MY USFS club, and I bet your club, has club bylaws, but none of the committees do. If you have question about term limits on the Adult Committee, couldn't you ask Pairsman?

Rob

[southernsk8er]

As far as the WBP chart for Adult Bronze and Silver - it says only one 3-jump combo/sequence is allowed. Does flip/half loop/salchow count as 3 jumps, or is the half loop considered some kind of transition? Or is that a sequence?

[flying~camel]

As far as the WBP chart for Adult Bronze and Silver - it says only one 3-jump combo/sequence is allowed. Does flip/half loop/salchow count as 3 jumps, or is the half loop considered some kind of transition? Or is that a sequence?

That would be considered a sequence, since the 1/2 loop isn't a "listed" jump.

[southernsk8er]

Thank you!!

[lovepairs]

Hi Rob,

Who's Pairsman2?

Anyway, you are right; board members are given Bylaws, and the committee members are ususally not given them, but certainly do have access to them...they are public records, which should be available to all memembers of the club, so they know how their club is functioning, and know what the rules and regulations are with regard to their club. If you can point me in the direction, or provide a link to the "Bylaws" that governing the Adult Committee, I'd grately appreciate it. Again, page 11-16 in the Rule Book does not consititute "Bylaws."

[rlichtefeld]

Hi Rob,

Who's Pairsman2?

Anyway, you are right; board members are given Bylaws, and the committee members are ususally not given them, but certainly do have access to them...they are public records, which should be available to all memembers of the club, so they know how their club is functioning, and know what the rules and regulations are with regard to their club. If you can point me in the direction, or provide a link to the "Bylaws" that governing the Adult Committee, I'd grately appreciate it. Again, page 11-16 in the Rule Book does not consititute "Bylaws."

Don't know about Pairsman2. But, if I'm not mistaken (but maybe I am), don't you run the Adult Pairs Skating website, and isn't your partner on the Adult committee? I thought his handle was Pairsman.

The only bylaws, constitution, whatever, that I know of, with US Figure Skating is in the printed rule book.

However, Tony Conte, who is the chair of the adult committee should be able to point you to any that pertain directly to the Adult Committee. His email is posted on the USFS website, so I guess posting it here, shouldn't be a problem: sedated@bellsouth.net (kewl email since he's an anesthesiologist)

Rob

[lovepairs]

Don't know about Pairsman2. But, if I'm not mistaken (but maybe I am), don't you run the Adult Pairs Skating website, and isn't your partner on the Adult committee? I thought his handle was Pairsman.

The only bylaws, constitution, whatever, that I know of, with US Figure Skating is in the printed rule book.

However, Tony Conte, who is the chair of the adult committee should be able to point you to any that pertain directly to the Adult Committee. His email is posted on the USFS website, so I guess posting it here, shouldn't be a problem: sedated@bellsouth.net (kewl email since he's an anesthesiologist)

Rob

Oh, that Pairsman2; funny you should mention it, because we don't know if he is still on the Adult Committee, or not, because the list hasn't come out and, moreover, there are no Bylaws available that explain term limits, so he doesn't know what his term is. Just the way Daisies for certain couldn't tell me what the exact term limit is...so, we don't know.

About the Adult Pair Skating website...No, I don't "run" it. It is a democratic website comprised of all of it's members who have "voting" power, and can talk with one another, and express exactly what they want through a "Polling" system. Unlike the USFSA Adult Committee the website is not hieratical system, but rather a "flat" system, which is run and determined by the conversation of it's members. Threads are not shut down for any reason, anyone can say what ever they want, there is no "monitoring" of speech, language, or content. The members monitor one another and themselves through their conversation.

Oh, and I've been intouch with Toni about this issue on several occassions, which has produced nothing to date.

Thanks you for your suggestions, Rob. Nice to be corresponding with you, again, and hope to correspond with you on the Adult Pair Skating "Chat" more often, too. :P

[w.w.west]

I can tell you the term is for one year. This is stated in the rulebook. But that does not mean it is only for one year. It is up to the discretion of the chair of each USFS committee who is retained each year. Members may be asked to stay for more just like most committees. Most often, the SVC's of each committee review their section. I am surprised that your partner is not aware of his status, because each SVC of the adult committee reviewed their section months ago and and all members were notified. If he has a question on his status, he should contact his appropriate SVC for his section. If he was asked to stay, he would have received an official letter from headquarters asking willingness to serve. So my suggestion would be for him to contact his appropriate SVC.

[manleywoman]

Yup. I was notified by Gail Sombati, my SVC, and got a formal letter from USFS to let them know my willingness to serve on the committee.

[lovepairs]

Just two things:

Could you please tell me on which page of the Rule Book that it sthez one year?

What is SVC?

PS. Sorry for hyjacking this thread, and Mr. Honorable Pairsman2 did receive his notification. :halo: :giveup:

[FrankR]

Just two things:

Could you please tell me on which page of the Rule Book that it sthez one year?

What is SVC?

PS. Sorry for hyjacking this thread, and Mr. Honorable Pairsman2 did receive his notification. :halo: :giveup:

I believe that in the context of this thread SVC stands for section vice-chair.

[herniated]

Okey dokey... I have a question regarding the step sequences. Specifically for Silver. It says it must be at least 1/2 the ice surface. Now... I have a circular step sequence. Am I to assume that the circle that I make must reach the center of the rink? When I start it at an end and finish at the same end? Hope I don't sound too stupid.:oops:

It just seems that if I took that circle and stretched it out into a straight line it is way more than 1/2 the ice. Also, under the 6.0 system do the turns have to be cw and ccw? I have some in both directions but mostly cw.

Thanks!!

[techskater]

For Silver, it should take up a minimum of 1/2 of a circle described by 1/3 of the ice surface. So, for an example, my footwork is a circular sequence that takes up from the blue line to the end boards as it's laid out.

[w.w.west]

Just two things:

Could you please tell me on which page of the Rule Book that it sthez one year?

What is SVC?

PS. Sorry for hyjacking this thread, and Mr. Honorable Pairsman2 did receive his notification. :halo: :giveup:


Page 15

SVC = Sectional Vice Chair

[blue111moon]

Terms for all USFS Committee people are one year, with a maximum of three consecutive years.

[Mrs Redboots]

Does anybody know when the Adult Dance requirements for next year will be posted? They are usually the same at the Mountain Cup and Vana Tallinn Trophy.

[herniated]

For Silver, it should take up a minimum of 1/2 of a circle described by 1/3 of the ice surface. So, for an example, my footwork is a circular sequence that takes up from the blue line to the end boards as it's laid out.

Thanks techskater. My step sequence also reaches the blue line. Phew!!

[doubletoe]

Okey dokey... I have a question regarding the step sequences. Specifically for Silver. It says it must be at least 1/2 the ice surface. Now... I have a circular step sequence. Am I to assume that the circle that I make must reach the center of the rink? When I start it at an end and finish at the same end? Hope I don't sound too stupid.:oops:

It just seems that if I took that circle and stretched it out into a straight line it is way more than 1/2 the ice. Also, under the 6.0 system do the turns have to be cw and ccw? I have some in both directions but mostly cw.

Thanks!!

A full circular step sequence must use the entire width of the rink, which is 80-85 feet for a standard NHL sized rink. According to the technical controller I asked, ti just needs to come within about 8 feet of each side wall, so the diameter of your circle should be 70-75 feet for the entire circle. I would presume that if you're just doing half of that, then you can do the width of the rink but just make a half circle, or you can do the same diameter half circle but do it lengthwise so it takes up half a rink width.

[daisies]

Does anybody know when the Adult Dance requirements for next year will be posted? They are usually the same at the Mountain Cup and Vana Tallinn Trophy.
Is this what you're looking for?

http://usfsa.org/content/2007-08%20Adult%20OD%20Elements%20v1.pdf

[herniated]

A full circular step sequence must use the entire width of the rink, which is 80-85 feet for a standard NHL sized rink. According to the technical controller I asked, ti just needs to come within about 8 feet of each side wall, so the diameter of your circle should be 70-75 feet for the entire circle. I would presume that if you're just doing half of that, then you can do the width of the rink but just make a half circle, or you can do the same diameter half circle but do it lengthwise so it takes up half a rink width.

Thanks so much doubletoe!! My step sequence does reach each side wall. And it is a full circle. Again, Phew!!

[doubletoe]

Thanks so much doubletoe!! My step sequence does reach each side wall. And it is a full circle. Again, Phew!!

That's great, then you have a "full ice surface" footwork sequence. :) BTW, a straight line footwork sequence starts at the red line at one end of the rink and goes to the red line at the other end, so half of a straight line sequence would be red end line to red center line. And if you straighten out a circle that covers almost the full rink width --say 70' in diameter--then your step sequence would be 220 feet long, i.e., longer than a full rink length (and no, I did not remember that diameter x pi = circumfrence formula off the top of my head, LOL!),

[herniated]

Doubletoe, don't even worry about the pi thing. Whenever anyone talks math my brain shuts off anyway!!:lol: I don't know how I got through trig in high school. Oh, yeah with a tutor!!! Thanks again!!

[Mrs Redboots]

Is this what you're looking for?

http://usfsa.org/content/2007-08%20Adult%20OD%20Elements%20v1.pdf

Thank you - partly, but I was also hoping to know which compulsory dances have been chosen for each level.

[lovepairs]

Daisies, W.W. West, Rlichtefeld, Pairsman2, Manleywoman, Blue111moon, and who ever else might be interested in this topic of "term limitations" with regard to serving on the Adult Committee, I'm going to move this discussion over to a separate thread, since it is moving away from the topic of this original thread about the new Well Balanced Programs.

I read page 15, and have some thought about it...