Recently I've been looking at some of the directions, including coach's questions, on CoP/NJS on the USFS website. I have a new program, choreographed by a Russian coach at my rink, that I absolutely love. My coach and I told her that we would use this program through two seasons (since I won't be going to AN this year) and that we want elements in it that I may not be able to do well right now -- but will be able to do well in a year. (Hopefully on the jumps! ) We also told her that CoP/NJS will probably be in place for the 2007 AN.

Looking at the Q&A's and the criteria, it is a very CoP/NJS friendly program (and no, I do not have multiple Beilmans - I'd throw my back out ). Tough footwork, pretty much no easy jump entry, lots of stuff before spin entries, changes of position in the combo spin. Is anyone else getting/looking at CoP/NJS friendly programs?

What do you think of CoP/NJS as a less-than-elite skater (not as an elite-skater fan)? Personally, I'm kind of liking it, because it is challenging me both technically, and from a presentation perspective, because if I don't sell this program, it simply won't work well. I think it is actually making me a more well-rounded skater, because I have to pay attention to stuff that I used to let slide by.

__________________
"The only place where success comes before work is in a dictionary." -- Vidal Sasson

"Never give up on a dream just because of the time it will take to accomplish it. The time will pass anyway." -- Unknown

I like it as well (and I like using "CoP" as a verb, too!).
As a very-less-than-elite skater (adult silver), I think Code of Points heavily favors a good spinner. Since I think that my spins trump my jumps any day of the week, I'm happy about this. Since mostly all my competitors do the same jumps, except for those gifted lads with the axel, the spins can really set you apart.
To wit: For a spin combination with change of position and change of foot, level 1 = 2 points, level 2 = 2.5 pts, level 3 = 3 pts, and level 4 = 3.5 pts. the 0.5 difference in each level (and the full point from level 1 to level 3) is quite significant, considering that an axel has only a base value of 0.8 points.

Also, while CoP will not be used for adults till AN2007 (and even that is not set in stone; it was only a resolution that needs to be passed at governing council in May) many of the judges at our competitions--and certainly at AN, which includes senior level judges--have been trained on the NJS. So I really think they are going to be applying their new-found knowledge to our programs. Considering jumps, this will include looking at the preparation, take off, air position, and landing position.

Since I probably won't be competing at sectionals or adult nationals this year, I'm devoting my attention to the Oberstdorf competition in June. So I've trying to achieve the maximum number of points. And with the NJS, I'm viewing getting a level 2 and a level 3 spin as my primary goal and will be thrilled if this happens. Attaining a level 3 spin is easier for me than ever being able to land an axel.

And isn't it fun trying to get as many "features" into your spins as possible? I'm working so hard on those "difficult variations!"

ETA: And oh dear, this ISU communication has STICK figures drawn in it:
http://www.usfigureskating.org/conte...C_05-08.29.pdf

__________________
Doubt whom you will, but never yourself.
"Do what you love, and you'll never have to work a day in your life."
-Haha, I've *arrived*! I am listed as a reference on Wikipedia.

Since our coach went to a European comp with her Novice, she came back and made ALL our new programs IJS (this is NOW the politcally correct term) compatible. Definitely makes it more fun to work on and more challenging and frustrating as well. In 2:37, I count 4 crossovers TOTAL!!!!

NoVa,

You're a great jumper too! This is probably been posted already on the site, but can you direct me to where I can find specifics about the different levels, particularly of spins? I've also been trying to beef of the technical aspect of my spins.

Thanks,
naomi

I have only really experienced it at Oberstdorf, and I wasn't skating there, but I think it's fantastic, and the sooner they introduce it across the board, the better. Of course, for low-level dancers like us it's not ideal, as the ISU doesn't stoop so low, but the various national bodies could and should set standards for the lower-level dances and solo dance.....

The thing is, you can see exactly what the judges liked and what they didn't, what worked and what needs to be looked at, where they reckon your weak points are, and what your strengths are. Whereas when they just hold up 1.8 or 2.1 (or 6.0 if you're Jayne Torvill, which I'm not!), you don't know what the problem was or what you needed to do differently.

And anyway, in dance the 2nd and 3rd patterns of a CD get more points than the first, which suits me down to the ground, as I always need at least one pattern to settle down & stop shaking!

__________________
Mrs Redboots
~~~~~~~~
I love my computer because my friends live in it!
Ice dancers have lovely big curves!

I don't like the NJS in terms of watching elite skating, but I don't mind it in terms of my own skating, because there are good ways to get more points.

Even though the earliest I can attend Adult Nats (if all goes well) is 07, my coach is trying to get my program to be new judging system friendly. I'm at bronze, so it may not even be used, but it still makes for good programs.

What am I doing specifically?

1) Entering sit/change sit from right inside 3 turn.
2) Footwork directly into salchow.
3) Forward outside edge spiral, swing roll, right mohawk, back three into back outside edge spiral, then LO three into a loop.
4) Mohawk with a power edge directly into flip/toe at the last last last part of the program, around 1:25. I keep wiping out on this though.

So basically, we're just trying to do jumps and spins out of turns or spirals to add more "stuff" in the program. Also, placing demanding jumps (for bronze LOL) at the very end. Additionally, I have a second lutz around the 1:15 mark.

I've been looking at ISU Communication 1319 (includes this season's newly added level 4 items), found on the USFS website:
http://www.usfigureskating.org/conte...munication.pdf

Check out pages 8-9 for spin level scale of values (as well as those for step and spiral sequences).
Page 14 lists the type and number of features that are necessary for each type of spin to achieve the desired level.
Page 15 explains what counts as a "difficult variation."

Happy deciphering!

__________________
Doubt whom you will, but never yourself.
"Do what you love, and you'll never have to work a day in your life."
-Haha, I've *arrived*! I am listed as a reference on Wikipedia.

Yep! Already chose my next program music based on whether I wanted to do a spiral sequence or footwork sequence (I chose spiral sequence, figuring I should be able to get up to a level 2 or 3, which I probably couldn't do with the footwork).

In Gold, you should really consider having a footwork sequence and a MIF sequence (spirals, etc). A missing footwork sequence may be counted against you as everyone else has one and even though the rules state "either/or" they really seem to be looking for both.

I'm in Pre-Bronze/Bronze (occasional skate-up) and I had both spirals and footwork in my last program and am planning to have both in my next program. I thought both were required in Bronze and up, but it does seem that in Bronze at least, the lack of a footwork sequence doesn't hurt people. I figure that since I'm not going to dazzle the judges with my jumps and spins, I better have as well-rounded a program as possible to get as many brownie points as I can.


Thanks for the link, NoVa. It was interesting to read. Since I can't really do any of the "difficult" spins listed, I think I'm in trouble. Actually, from what I've seen of Bronze comps, it will be a challenge for most Bronze skaters to conform to CoP/IJS standards. That's one of the reasons I think the system won't be effective for adult comps, at least not at the lower levels.

I don't expect to have time for both, since a footwork sequence using the entire ice surface takes at least 20 seconds, and so does a 3-spiral sequence using the full ice surface. I'm banking on the judges paying attention to the spiral sequence, which they ought to if it is judged under the new system, with a technical expert calling out a level 2 or 3 spiral sequence.

I'm going to echo techskater and say do both. I know that time is a huge issue--I'm facing the same problem and currently I have a straightline step sequence, but I don't have a spiral sequence. If/when I ever move up to gold, I plan on using that extra 30 seconds for the purpose of putting one in.

Just from looking at the results from last year's Obsterdorf competition (are they still up on the web somewhere?), the skaters who did well in the silver and gold had both in their program. You can rack up 1.8 points for a level 1 step or spiral sequence. That's about what you'd get in base value for a double lutz (1.9). A level 1 spiral consists of two spiral positions (or less than two? The ISU manual contradicts itself) held for at least 3 seconds each. You can do crossovers in between them, but the pattern must take up a full serpentine or circle/oval, and the 3 second bit is the most important part. You could probably put together an OK level 1 spiral sequence in 10 seconds.

In general...
Another thing to think about with the time issue: spins need 6 revolutions to get the base value (whether it's a level 1 or a level 4 spin), and 10 revolutions minimum for a base value in a combination spin. That's a LOT of time, unless you spin REALLY fast. I think I get 6+ revolutions on my sit spins and 10+ on a combination sit spin, but my camel spin? HAH! In order for me to get 10+ revolutions on a camel-camel, I think I'd have to have the harness holding me up with my coach pushing me around or something.

That said, I'm definitely working on spin variations. I've learned front and back catchfoot variations, a Fratianne sit, and layover positions in the back camel and forward sit/back sit. But...can I do them and hold the spin for 6 or 10 revolutions to get the base value? Well, here's to hoping for it to happen by 2007. The only realistic "hard" spin I have right now is a flying sit with a layover position and a very weak change of edge that I can hold for about 2 revolutions right now before completely lose it. If I can get all three of those factors though (flying sit, layover, change edge) with 6+ revolutions, that sucker is a level 4.

More than anything, though, I'm working on stroking, moves, dance, etc. That stuff is now going to be quantified, and besides, it's more enjoyable right now than playing human zamboni while I valiantly try to master the double salchow and double loop.

Oh, and a friendly FYI for everyone: under CoP, only one of your jumping passes can have 3 jumps in it, and sequences somehow devalue the base points. The Obsterdorf results show that a lutz into a double salchow sequence [lutz-half loop-double sal?] has a 1.5 base value, when a lutz itself has a 0.6 and a double sal itself has a 1.3 value. Since we're allowed 3 combinations or sequences, I'd say the best bet is to NOT do any sequences and max the value of your combinations. It seems that the ISU's take on sequences is that they are messed up combinations (i.e. an intended combination with an extra double 3 or falling leaf in between the jumps). Also, if you only have one "real" (listed) jump in your sequence, then it's not a sequence. For example, a split jump-falling leaf-flip jump is counted not as a sequence, but as a single flip jump with bonus for a difficult entry.

By the way, all of the technical stuff I'm referencing here is in ISU communication 1319 (the one NoVa linked) in Rule 320, paragraph 2...on page 4-5.

About the number of spin revolutions required... I seem to recall that last year's Oberstdorf (sp? no time to check) announcement had slightly different parameters outlined. I think the requirements were three revs in a solo spin and at least 3 on each foot of a combination spin.

__________________
Where are those knives when I need them?
----------------------------------
I need a detachable left foot!

I like CoP very much. I noticed a difference in the skating at Pacific Coast Sectionals. It was so much more interesting, though I did tire of seeing Biellmann's. However, the footwork, interesting spins, quite difficult jump entries, etc., were wonderful. There were still those skaters who seemed to go from jump to jump only, with not a lot in between --- and they didn't fare very well, despite the jumps.

If CoP would be applied across the board, I would love it. Just my opinion, but I think even at my level it would help me be a better skater, and have a more interesting program. From what I have observed, CoP forces the skater to develop himself (unless the skater was *already* doing it....) in transitions, which I think also allows for more artistry.

In this thread, the question about either footwork or spiral? I don't compete a lot, but I watch a lot. Again, only what I think......I'd say somehow get both in, as I think a program looks well-balanced when each is included. Plus, it certainly seems to be what everyone else is doing. I think it would be better to rack up what points you can for spiral(s), but include the footwork to remain competitive, and not be dinged......

I'm pretty sure that has to be the case because I looked at the points for the Silver skaters and I remember noting who got credit for which spins. One of them got credit for a flying camel and I know she doesn't get 6 revolutions on her flying camel.

I have read the technical documents regarding point values and deductions, but I don't recall seeing anything about a sequence being worth less than a combination. Is it possible that the person whose scores you were reviewing was getting dinged for something else on that sequence?

Sequences get multiplied by 0.8. (as for that sequence posted earlier, the 1.9 gets multiplied by 0.8 to result in 1.5). I guess the rationale is that the sequence is easier because of the middle step, which results in not taking off directly from the landing foot.
At the lower levels, this can ding you: an axel/2toe (2.1) is hence worth more than axel/half loop/2sal (1.7) axel/half loop/2flip (2.0).

The spins have a required minimum number of revolutions. For senior, junior and novice, 6 revolutions are required for the flying spin and the spin with only one position. 10 revolutions are required for the spin combination. For intermediate, 4 on each foot for the combination spin and 5 revolutions for the other spins are required. For juvenile, the combination must have
at least 8 total revolutions and the other spins must have at least 4.

HOWEVER, the Oberstdorf rules supersede the standard/official NJS rules.
For silver level, the required spins must have a minimum of 3 revolutions in position, and a spin combination which changes feet must have a minimum of 3 revolutions in position on each foot.

For gold level, the required spins must have a minimum of 4 revolutions in position, and the spin combination must have a change of foot and a minimum of four 4 revolutions in position on each foot.

__________________
Doubt whom you will, but never yourself.
"Do what you love, and you'll never have to work a day in your life."
-Haha, I've *arrived*! I am listed as a reference on Wikipedia.

Ahhh...I was wondering what magic number they used for valuing sequences. Thanks. Where did you find this info??? I've been looking for it forever.

The de-valuing of sequences has been a huge gripe I have with CoP, actually. At the lower levels, cool sequences are sometimes what make programs...well, cool. I'd LOVE to see an axel-half loop-double flip (2.0), and it kills me that it would be worth less than a double flip-single toe (2.1). Not that I can do a double flip, mind you, but anyway...

Is there anything in writing about the ADULT rules for spinning? Where can I find that document? And are the Obsterdorf rules going to be the adult standard, or were they set for that competition only? I'd LOVE to be wrong about the 6 rev business... I recently had a guest lesson with some Canadian international skaters who compete under CoP and they got me good and scared about the 6 and 10 revolutions thing. Maybe too scared.

Yes, thank you for the clarification! I agree with Pennybeagle about the unfairness of downgrading sequences. Instead, I think they should award the total value of the jumps in a sequence and differentiate them from combinations by giving extra credit (say, an additional 10%) for combination jumps. I mean, doing two jumps as part of a sequence is still harder than doing them by themselves, so why get less credit than if you had done them by themselves, right?

I had figured the reason the new system required 6 and 10 revolutions on spins was because they were talking about Junior and Senior level skaters, but it would make sense that they would have to come up with some standards for Adult Silver and Gold at Oberstdorf.

But for a combination spin, it's 4 revs on each foot, not necessarily in position, right? Because if I recall correctly, even at the Senior level they only require 2 revolutions in each position of a combination spin for that position to count (although there IS a minimum number of rev's required on each foot).

Edit: Found it...page 4 of the Official Communication.

But in an Axel/Half Loop/2Sal, the third jump does take off directly from the landing foot of the "middle step." Also, since the Half Loop is actually a full revolution jump, I'm more inclined to consider the Axel/Half Loop/2Sal (or 2Flip) a combination and not a sequence.

Is there anything official (USFSA, ISU) that might distinguish the above as a sequence or a combination?

C'ya!

Kelton

It's sort of silly that in the Instructions for Technical Specialists, it says that a jump can be landed on either foot, but they specifically single out the half loop as being an unlisted jump. Here's what it says:

FREE SKATING JUMPS

• A jump sequence with more than one revolution on the ice from the completion of the one jump before the commencement of the other jump will not be considered as a jump sequence. The two jumps with the highest SOV of the sequence will be entered as two individual jumps with using two jump elements boxes.
• Two jumps connected with a “half-loop” (e.g. Triple Toeloop – half loop – Triple Salchow) will be considered as a jump sequence. Reason: a half-loop is not a listed jump.
• Jump Combination: If the first jump of a two-jump-combination fails to succeed and turns out into a “not listed jump”, the unit will still be considered as a jump-combination.
• Axel type jumps in a row without any connecting hop, mazurka or any other non-listed jump is not a jump sequence, but two separate jumps.
• If a third repeated jump is executed in a combination or sequence, the entire combination or sequence will be treated as an additional element and therefore not considered.
• All jumps may be landed on either foot. The GOE applies for both landings.
• A jump sequence may consist of any number of jumps of any number of revolutions linked by hops, mazurkas and non-listed jumps immediately following each other; while maintaining the jump rhythm (knee). There can be not more than one (1) revolution on the ice between any hop, mazurka, non-listed jump or jump. There can be no crossovers or stroking during the sequence.
A jump sequence, consisting of only one listed jump together with other non-listed jumps is not considered a jump-sequence but will count as a single jump.

But the half loop is an UNLISTED jump. A sequence is defined as a series of jumps linked by unlisted jumps.

To quote the ISU's INSTRUCTIONS FOR TECHNICAL SPECIALISTS - SINGLES:

A jump sequence may consist of any number of jumps of any number of revolutions linked by hops, mazurkas and non-listed jumps [emphasis added] immediately following each other; while maintaining the
jump rhythm (knee). There can be not more than one (1) revolution on the ice between any hop, mazurka, non-listed jump or jump. There can be no crossovers or stroking during the sequence. A jump sequence, consisting of only one listed jump together with other non-listed jumps is not considered a jump-sequence but will count as a single jump.

And specifically listed:
Two jumps connected with a “half-loop” (e.g. Triple Toeloop – half loop – Triple Salchow) will be considered as a jump sequence. Reason: a half-loop is not a listed jump.

__________________
Doubt whom you will, but never yourself.
"Do what you love, and you'll never have to work a day in your life."
-Haha, I've *arrived*! I am listed as a reference on Wikipedia.

The definition of a combination vs. a sequence has not changed as far as I know with the new judging system. I was always taught that only a toe loop or a loop jump could be the second jump of a combination since they are the only jumps that take off from the landing edge.

For us adults, the relevant issue with sequences is that half jumps so far do not count as jumps, and so (as someone else said) a "sequence" of waltz jump falling leaf flip, for example, is only a flip with a difficult entry. That's just the way the rules are at this point in time. I expect in the U.S. that changes will be made for the lower levels of standard-track skaters, and that those changes would filter over to the adult levels, but I don't know if the ISU will ever make similar changes. Last year in Oberstdorf, I was watching one of the official practices and a man had just done a sequence that had two waltz jumps in it. Well, of course under the new judging system he would get no credit for the jumps as technical elements. A judge came over to me and told me to "spread the word" that waltz jumps get no points value, even though "we think they look very beautiful."

BTW, the wording last year on the announcement had said for bronze, for example, that a spiral sequence or step sequence was required, but some skaters did both and got credit. I had read it to mean what it said, but it didn't.

__________________
August 22, back on the ice!

If someone is able to a lutz in their not-usual-jumping direction, perhaps a lutz (or toeless lutz) in that not-usual-direction could be the second jump in a combination. But that would be a very rare thing to see!!! Perhaps there are some high-level ISI skaters who could do a lutz or toeless lutz as the second jump in a combi, since jumping in both directions is required to some degree in the higher ISI test levels. (Hmmm, perhaps someone could convince Rohene Ward to put something like that in his program.... Jazzpants? Up for it?) (Then again, since he's competing at the senior level, it would probably have to be 2lutz or 3lutz in the not-usual-direction to rack up enough points for him....

__________________
Ask me about becoming a bone marrow donor.
http://www.marrow.org
http://www.nmdp.org

Although, according to the wording of that ISU communication (see yesterday's post), it appears that any full revolution jump other than the loop can be landed on either foot, which means you could theoretically land a flip on the left foot, then take off on a salchow directly from the LBI landing edge. But of course I'm not volunteering to be the guinea pig with that one, LOL!