COP System- a fault?

[triple twist]

The CoP system, all new to us, seems to be working greatly on the world scene. I can't wait until it's used at worlds.
But I'm seeing a trend that seems to be getting on my nerves. Particularily in dance, and even in pairs programs, the programs are all starting to look the same...you can probably even include some ladies and mens in this. All have the same jumps, lifts, circular patterns for footwork...I was watching tapes from old olympics and worlds compeitions and the programs are so diverse and just amazing to watch because NONE are WHATSOEVER a like. But nowadays, watching competitions, it's like they are all the same thing, like I'm seeing another version of a compulsary dance or the same short program being performed to different music by a different skater. Is anyone else seeing this trend?

[lotusland]

Yes, IMO you are right, programs are beginning to look more and more alike today. The "generic" program you (and I) are seeing is a direct result of the competitiors & coaches trying to gain as many points as possible in each program.

Because there is a current list of recognized elements, and each of those elements have been assigned both a difficulty level and a corresponding point value, skaters would be doing themselves a serious scoring disservice to include any lower level elements "if" they are capable of doing something that scores higher in the CoP system. Why do a beautiful and very uncommon delayed single axel ... even if it is absolutely exquisite in the choreography ... if you can do a double axel or sqeek out the triple? The skater is going to miss out on gaining points. Why have the uncommon and difficult (when done properly) split flip as one of your scoring elements ... when the double flip has a higher score? Why miss out on the opportunity to put your final couple of jumps at the end of your program, you'll score more if they are done there than at the beginning or in the middle? Or worse yet, why do ANY element that has yet to be assigned a score, either something old or something original ... you'd be wasting a scoring opportunity altogether? You get the drift.

Sandra Bezic gave an interview just prior to her retirement and after the announcement of the new scoring system. She said, more or less, she wasn't interested in doing choreography on a point scale ... she loved the "artistic component" of choreography ... the beauty of the program. For her, connecting the right skater to the right music and then creating a piece of athletic skating art was the challenge she enjoyed. The idea of throwing the highest scoring elements together and calling it choreography didn't inspire her at all. :cry:

True, lots of choreographers are trying to stay in the game, and make the best of what they are given. There is however, mounting criticism of their choreographic work ... you can always tell a Morosov or Nicol program because there are strong "Morosov" or "Nicol" or "Whoever" foot prints all over their work ... hence to the fan it all looks the same. Well, of course it does, everyone is playing with the same RESTRICTIVE list of elements and rules for program construction. :frus:

[loveskating]

Well, that's what people wanted...a more "objective" judging of ice dance, and that is what you got.

Now, like in the other disciplines, you will have to notice with what quality and speed the ice dancers "do the same things" and how they add difficult innovations...perhaps notice when they make mistakes?

Me, I don't think anyone in the world doubted who won when Torvil and Dean skated Bolero...but most of that ice dance would now be illegal. But I did not make all these complaints, either, about who won and who did not.

[Artemis]

Several skaters, coaches, and officials have pointed out this flaw in the system, and the ISU has acknowledged that it's something to look at for future scoring allocations.

However, although it does have a result of producing a sameness of particular moves (especially, as you mentioned, dance lifts and pairs lifts), I think there's a great opportunity for the skaters to still come up with different interperetations of creating original programs that still squeeze out the maximum point value.

[triple twist]

I think there's a great opportunity for the skaters to still come up with different interperetations of creating original programs that still squeeze out the maximum point value.

Yes exactly, but I dont see coaches and skaters or choreographers putting in the effort to take their program choreography and really come up with some creative...it's like they are LITERALLY reading everything out of a book and putting it together into a program, with different orders of elements. I just really think that is it taking away from skating, and sort of boring it down.... though i love the system, I just dont know how deep this rutt will go.. :giveup:

[lotusland]

Thought you might like to read what Tracy Wilson has to say.

http://tinyurl.com/4tthc

[icedancer2]

Tracy is right when she says that all of the new requirements are making dance less dancey and more like a pairs "poor-stepsister" (my words, paraphrasing hers). The dances look more and more alike all of the time, "Oh, here is a required dance spin, here is that higher element-points lift, the twizzle sequence, etc."

Quoting Wilson:

"You can't keep zeroing in on whether someone is landing their jump on the edge and then accurately assess a true mark of choreography and interpretation. We need exceptional people judging, not people judging as a hobby. They have to make that kind of commitment to the sport."

It would be great if they paid judges, especially at this level, so that they can really commit the time. I understand that in gymnastics and maybe swimming, the judges are paid -- even at the local level.

[loveskating]

Pairs and singles have always had the "same" elements, excepting those who innnovated new ones, so that's nothing new.

Its the way people do them, the quality in which they do them, that matters.

So far, ice dance is still considerably different, particularly in the details, than either of the above.

Its very "dancy", just not as much as with Torvil and Dean.

[Canskater]

I don't think the problem is necessarily all the fault of the "system". As has been mentioned on this thread earlier, a good deal of the blame (if one ascribes blame here) goes to choreographers who can't make the leap to create truly original work .... as has been said, any Morozov program looks just like any other Morozov program ..... and he is actually rather good. Many skaters use the services of lesser (and by that I mean less talented) choreographers .... some only use their coach !! I also think that there are not enough "exceptional" judges as Tracy Wilson laments ..... these are people who judge part time ... and probably very few have had any serious competitive skating background.

There are few exceptional choreographers .... David Wilson comes to mind .... with him, no two programs ever look the same. It can be done.

-- sheilagh

[lotusland]

Here's the Russian point of view on what CoP has done to choreography etc.

http://www.sport-express.ru/art.shtml?100654

TRANSLATION:
Valentin Nikolaev, (Viacheslav Zagorodnuyk's coach and co-coach of Oksana Baiul), on COP: "New system has a lot of positive things, but the more I observe what's going on, the less I like it. No doubt, the spins and the footwork became more difficult, but with every competition, the programs become more and more alike. Every coach knows what elements to connect to get the maximum difficulty. You don't have to think of anything new."