#max ambesi | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

the-a-factor-fs-blog · 7 years

Text

Kiss & Cry - Episode 1

Welcome to the first Episode of “Kiss & Cry”, Max Ambesi’s latest podcasts series.

For this first Episode, Max was accompanied by Alessandro Genuzio (Winter Sport Journalist, with his field of interests being mainly focused on Skiing in all its variation), who did the introduction, the ending and asked various questions.

By next Episode, Angelo Dolfini (Max Ambesi usual partner for Eurosport Commentary) will be back in the Team.

This first podcast is 104.29 minutes long, and it’s available to be listened in Italian here: https://www.spreaker.com/user/talk-sport/puntata-1

In the following translation, (M) indicates when M. Ambesi is speaking, (A) indicates when A. Genuzio is speaking.

Translated by The-A-Factor Team. Please do not repost without permission.

Table of Content:

Nebelhorn Trophy – Analysis and Talks over the last Olympic Qualification Competition.

Junior Grand Prix – Thoughts over the qualification phase so far. Russian fields and Eteri Tutberidze’s School.

Challenger Series – Yuzuru Hanyu updates one of his World Records, Overview of what Challengers Series offered up to now.

ISU Scoring System – How to changes rules to try and reach a balance between Technical Scoring and “Artistic” One?

Part 1: Nebelhorn Trophy��

Analysis and Talks over the last Olympic Qualification Competition.

(A): “ So let’s start this episode with our first topic: the Nebelhorn Trophy in Oberstdorf, last stage to qualify for the Olympic Games the most important event of the season. Italy has yet to qualify for the men’s event, what shall we look for in this competition and in the men’s event in particular?” (M): “Well it’s a competition that takes place very early in the season, so many athletes were forced to rush their usual preparation, except for those who come from the junior level, who are used to competing in the JGP. There will be 6 spots available for men and Italy is sending Matteo Rizzo to conquer a spot for Pyeongchang. The spot won’t be his directly, but for the Italian skater that will be selected to compete at Olympics by the Italian federation - even though Matteo did very well in the first competition of the season, raising his personal best by more than 20 points, so he has staked his claim to be in the Olympic team. All he needs to do is to finish in top six and that is surely within his reach.

Let’s be even clearer, the great favorite of this competition - Jun Hwan Cha, who’ll turn 16 in October - won’t be there, because he failed to qualify for this event at the Olympic trial in Korea. He had an ankle injury going into that competition, he worsened it by trying numerous quads and ultimately left Korea on crutches. So as a consequence, he wasn’t selected to compete in Oberstdorf, which is a real pity, because this kid can easily get 250 points from the start. His life coach (and training mate) is a certain Yuzuru Hanyu, someone who rarely backs off even when badly injured. It seems that Hanyu really took Cha under his wing, maybe he saw potential in him or he reminds him of his own youth. Anyhow, Cha won’t be in Oberstdorf, much to Korea’s chagrin because now they have to rely on June Hyoung Lee, who had a good career in juniors, but it’s unclear whether he’ll be able to finish top 6 here or not.

Essentially, there are 8 skaters who can aim at top 6: Jorik Hendrickx, from Belgium, who is the favourite; Paniot from Ukraine could be the alternative, he made history already for being the first european skater to land a quad Flip; Matteo Rizzo could be the third pole together with Malaysian Julian Zhi Jie Yee and Philippine Martinez; then there’s Korean Lee, Swedish Majorov and Stephane Walker from Switzerland. Both Majorov and Walker were beaten by Rizzo at Lombardia Trophy, so chances are there for Matteo especially because, since 1988, Italy has failed to qualify a male skater for the Olympics only once - Lillehammer 1994.” (A): “Max, let’s explain the qualification criteria even better and what Matteo needs to do to qualify.”

(M): “Very easy, he needs to finish in top six. For men, there are 30 spots allotted for the Olympics, which could become 31 only if the Korean man doesn’t qualify at Nebelhorn Trophy, so they will have to use the “host spot” to assure the presence of a skater from the hosting country. 24 spots were assigned during the World Championships and the last six will be assigned here. In other disciplines numbers are different, there are 20 spots allotted for pairs and 24 for ice dance.”

(A): “Since you mentioned, let’s get more in-depth and talk about ice dance and pairs too, even looking at the Team Event qualification since this will be the second Olympics with this new competition.” (M): “Let’s start with ice dance and pairs.

Theoretically, there are 5 spots left to assign in ice dance, but there will in fact be six because Denmark waived its place, as their ice dance team had unsolvable issues with citizenship - the matter is really complex, but let’s just say that, over the last years, there has been a lot of buying and selling, especially from countries where it is easier to obtain citizenship. Often when the two federations agree on the transfer, they can present a document to the IOC attesting that there’s no impediment to the citizenship and then the skaters can compete for the new country in no time. Of course this raises a number of problems, as there are countries with less stringent citizenship legislation, such as Israel or Spain, and others like Japan where laws are stricter. Anyways, back to ice dance, there are teams looking for the last spot but we should say there also coaches looking for more spots. In other words, the more countries a coach represents at the Olympics, the more “favourable” the judging will be for his or her lower ranked skaters.

Let’s be more specific, the favourites for the win at the Nebelhorn Trophy are British Coomes/Buckland who are coming back after a long hiatus due to Penny’s injuries; the other two main teams are Germans Lorenz/Polizoakis and Japanese Muramoto/Reed. These last two teams have something in common – they are both coached by Marina Zueva whose top skaters at the moment are the Shibutani siblings; while Coomes/Buckland are coached by Igor Shpilband who has Chock/Bates as his top team. Koreans Min/Gamelin should be the fourth force of the competition and they are coached by Shpilband too. The rest is a lottery, to be honest. The Czech team might have something more than the others, there’s the new Hungarian team with two skaters who had both a brilliant career in juniors - to be fair, Yanovskaya won everything at the junior level with her former partner Mozgov.

All in all, the four teams I mentioned above - Great Britain, Germany, Japan and Korea - shouldn’t have any difficulty earning a spot.

You mentioned the Team Event, and the regulations here are quite contorted. To participate in the Team Event, a country must earn its qualification in two of the four disciplines at least. So let’s say a country qualifies for two disciplines, the ISU allows the country to have an entry in one of the missing disciplines, meaning that there’s the risk one country will end up competing in only three of the four disciplines in the Team Event. Obviously the ISU would like to avoid this possibility, but in my opinion there’s a big chance this will happen with Spain, I’ll explain later why.

For example, the Japanese ice dance team earning a spot at Nebelhorn automatically allows Japan to be at the Team Event in all four disciplines and this is good news since it will certainly be difficult for Japan to earn a spot in the pairs event - by the way, spots in pairs will be five because France waived its second spot.

As for the pairs event, some teams are clearly ahead of the others and will qualify for sure: Czech Duskova/Bidar who came close at the World Championships already; North Koreans Ryom/Kim who have been training in Canada lately, and rumors say they have improved even more; then there’s the Australian pair Alexandrovskaya/Windsor, reigning Junior World Champions – she is clearly Russian but managed to obtain Australian citizenship pretty fast. Fourth in line, Austrians Zieger/Kiefler, she competed in singles at the 2010 Olympics and together they competed at the Sochi Olympics too. The fifth pair in my opinion is the Israeli, with this somewhat mythological character, Evgeni Krasnopolsky, who changed countless partners, but for the Olympic season he always manages to find the right one. He competed at the Sochi Olympics with Andrea Davidovich, then they split and now he found Paige Conners, who competed at the Junior Worlds last season, and they achieved some pretty outstanding scores already, for being such a new team. The wild card could be the Japanese team Suto/Boudreau-Audet, but to be honest they looked pretty bad in their first Challenger Series event, so I see them behind the five teams I’ve mentioned above.

Back to the Team Event, there’s a lot of confusion about the rules so let’s try to make things clearer.

Some teams will be there with full quota and these are the current “superpowers”: Russia, Canada, USA and China. France will be there with full quota as well and Italy too, since Italy has earned spots in three disciplines already, and even if Rizzo should miss the chance in Oberstdorf, the Italian team could still take part in the Team Event in all four disciplines. Germany and Japan will be there with full quota too, thanks to the 3+1 rule. This makes 8 countries, so there are two spots left, and the battle will be between Spain, Australia, Korea, Czech Republic and Israel.

The minimum required to be at the event is to earn the qualification in at least 2 disciplines, although some of the countries I mentioned above could easily qualify in three disciplines. The trickiest country for the ISU is Spain, since it is highly unlikely that the Spanish pair will be able to earn a spot at Nebelhorn Trophy. Clearly, an Olympic Team Event with 9 pairs instead of 10 won’t be really ideal.

We shall see how it ends, as all teams will ultimately be selected based on a very complicated and contorted “Qualification Ranking” that will be compiled at the end of the Grand Prix - I won’t go into details here, but basically, the ranking will add up the skaters’ results in the Grand Prix and Grand Prix Final and the top 10 countries in rank will be allowed to compete at the Team Event.

There’s obviously hope for Korea to make the Team Event. As we said, they need to qualify in ice dance and men at the Nebelhorn Trophy, and then try to keep their spot as Korea is now ranked 10th in the Qualification Ranking. But as I explained, there are many countries pushing hard behind. As we remarked earlier, Italy is in and will probably bring to Pyeongchang the oldest Olympic Team ever, but we’ll have time to discuss about this later on in the season.”

(A): “Max, as a former skater yourself, what do you think of the Team Event in figure skating? Do you think it makes sense, would you prefer if it didn’t give medals... We see the IOC is pushing a lot for this team competition in many other sports.”

(M): “Well I have practiced figure skating, hockey, and short track to be fair! I would say that the introduction of the Mass Start in speed skating and the Team Event in figure skating are a bit against the essence of these sports.

The real problem of the Team Event in figure skating is the regulations though, because looking closely it’s the short program that decides the standings. We have 10 countries, and the top 5 after the short program advance to the free skate. The problem is that points for the short program go from 1 (for 10th place) to 10 (for 1st place), while points in the free program go either from 6 to 10 or from 1 to 5, so it’s not 10 to the 1st, 8 to the 2nd, 6 to the 3rd, meaning it’s in fact the short program that shifts the weight. That’s where some of the countries we mentioned earlier come into play. For example, if Spain qualifies for the team event, they could tip the weight in the medal competition, not because Spain will get a medal at the Team Event (they won’t even qualify for the free skate), but because Javier Fernandez could steal points from some medal contenders in the short program.

Of course it’s too soon to predict now, but it’s a fact that the competition is highly influenced by the short programs and there are teams that can either “disturb” or “help” the main medal contenders, Italy included. So for example, Fernandez would help Italy, as he is capable of stealing points from all the nations there, Italy included, so for Italy, it would be better if he were there rather than a Korean like Cha, who could beat the Italian skater placing behind one of Italy’s rivals to advance to the free skating.

Although, as I said, it’s still too soon to tell, we will get back to this topic later in the season and maybe do some simulations. To conclude, yes this Team Event isn’t the best and if it were for me I’d place it as the last event and not at the beginning.” (A): “I agree with you. Ok, let’s end our first topic with a preview of the ladies event at the Nebelhorn Trophy, which doesn’t seem like the most exciting event there.”

(M): “Yes, no doubt. It’s undoubtedly the weakest of the four competitions, and also pretty difficult to predict. There are some skaters with superior quality for sure, like Armenian Galustyan, or Australian Kraine; then there’s Lindfors from Finland, Norway’s Gjersem; Algotsson from Sweden, Khnychenkova for Ukraine and a recently imported athlete, Alexia Paganini from Switzerland.

In case some of those skaters should have a meltdown, there are others who can hope, like Amy Lin, although she didn’t look quite good to me in her recent outings. She was previously Karen Chen’s training mate, and then changed coaching team to Rafael Arutunyan, who is very popular right now in the USA but not really a guarantee of improvement.

The ladies’ event is really unpredictable here. I’d only pay attention to Australia, which can really manage to qualify in three disciplines, and it would be a remarkable result. They have already earned a spot in the men’s with Brendan Kerry at Worlds; he’s a good quad jumper – Salchow and the Toe Loop looked easy in training and the Loop isn’t far.

If Australia qualifies in three of the four events, it would be an important signal for the whole figure skating movement and for ISU which tried to help smaller Federations with different initiatives. So let’s see if Australia with a final push manages to even qualify for Team Event.”

[ndT: This podcast was recorded before Nebelhorn Trophy started. After competitions held here, this is the actual situation regarding Olympic Qualification]

Part 2: Junior Grand Prix

Thoughts over the qualification phase so far. Russian fields and Eteri Tutberidze’s School.

Credits to ISU

(A): “So… let’s change topic. We are now well into the season, especially regarding juniors. We are halfway through the junior grand prix, so let’s try to explain what happened in these first competitions and which athletes have already qualified or are well on their way to the jgpf.”

(M): “Well, Russia is currently making history. Truthfully, it’s a coach, rather than the nation itself: Eteri Tutberidze. Clearly of Georgian origins and a former ice dancer, she has worked in the US in the past, also for sentimental reasons – her daughter is called Diana Davis, so it’s clear that Tutberidze was attached to a north american man – before going back to Russia. And then she opened this school – she started working in this school in Moscow – and her method started to take hold. One of her first athletes was Shelepen, former rival of athletes like Sotnikova and Tuktamysheva; weaker than the latter, but those two are incredible talents, the likes of which weren’t seen for quite some time in Russia. But we’ll talk about them later.

Tutberidze has coached many great athletes now, and her girls have won the first four junior grand prix events this season. If we consider last year’s final as well, that makes it five consecutive ones. In general, Russia has won the last seven jgp; the record belongs to the US, with eight consecutive wins. The girls will compete in Zagreb starting from tomorrow, and the favourite for the win is a girl coached by Tutberidze: Tarakanova, a fantastic athlete, who used to work, until last season, with another coach from Moscow, Panova, who coached for years one of the senior girls we’ve seen lately: Maria Sotskova. Tarakanova had a fantastic debut this season, as she immediately reached more than 190 points. She will be the clear favourite in Zagreb, and we could see five out five wins from Eteri in the jgp, and eight consecutive wins for Russia, an impressive streak. But it isn’t so predictable, that Russia will win the final, since the Russian girls’ biggest rival, named Rika Kihira, probably has something more than them. Because Rika is able to do a triple axel, an element that could make a difference, and because maybe, Kihira, who is two years older than the best Russian girls, could have something more when it comes to certain marks of the pcs. The only problem is that Kihira hasn’t qualified yet; she will compete in Italy, Egna, in October; a competition not to be missed. And there we will see several athletes who will need to end up on the podium in order to secure the qualification to the final; girls who have a second place finish from their first assignment: Kihira, Gulyakova and another Japanese girl, who surprisingly ended on the podium in the latest jgp. She is coached by Yuko Monna, Miki Ando’s former coach, and the first coach of athletes like Asada, in Nagoya, Aichi prefecture, the “capital” of skating in Japan. So we can’t take a Russian win for granted. I think that Eteri Tutberidze’s strategy might secure even six wins, because she does have two athletes who might win: Panenkova, who already won a GP, and Kostornaya, who is quickly rising through the ranks and might even make it to the last gp, even though she isn’t entered there yet.

And just because of the Russian federation’s strategy when it comes to the assignments, there will be three, or four, girls in the JGPF, instead of the possible five. Anna Shcherbakova, the leader of the 2003-2004 generation, is injured and didn’t take part in the JGP. Shcherbakova is 100% a product of Tutberidze’s school, almost like Medvedeva, meaning that she started to skate with Tutberidze. And the girls who started to skate with Tutberidze are used to an amount of workload that the other girls can’t sustain. There’s a focus on physical training that other schools don’t have. It’s obvious then that these girls are able to do two double axels and seven triples easily, and with good quality at that. They are all girls with different technique, and yet they can execute difficult elements with good quality. Why? Because the girls who have always worked with Tutberidze are used to practicing free programs, not with two double axels and seven triples, but two double axels, the usual seven triples and another nine triples. Two double axels and sixteen triples! Do I make myself clear? There are girls from other nations who can’t do two double axels and four triples in a free program, and these girls train free programs with all the jumps in the second half of the program, 2+16, meaning that they attach a triple toeloop to all the jumping passes they have in their layouts. So using Zagitova, who isn’t a junior anymore, as an example: if you do a 3lz3lo combo in competition, you attach a 3t after the rittberger during practice. It’s clear that these athletes are used to training such difficult elements that a competition program becomes trivial. We are talking about an evolution in skating, ascribable to this coach, who clearly manages to make these girls work like this. Not to mention that there’s also great quality when it comes to their skating itself, as there’s an incredible amount of transitions, never seen in other Russian schools. The difference can be easily seen in Mishin’s students, even those who arrived there when they were older, if you compare them with 15-17 yo girls. Even 13-15 truthfully. You can’t compare. Maybe some of Mishin’s older students reach 36 pcs, but if we want to talk about transitions and deep edges, we can’t even compare: the youngsters are on another level.”

(A): “Max, I want to play devil’s advocate here, since we are talking about Russia. We’ve recently seen an article in an Italian newspaper, in which the author criticized the young Russian girls, like Sotnikova, who won an Olympic gold medal, but then retired very early. Isn’t there a risk here, that these great skaters, that you are rightly praising here, might end up like this too?”

(M): “Well, Russia had to wait until 2014 to win an Olympic gold medal in the ladies’ field, and until the 90s to win worlds, thanks to Slutskaya, Butyrskaya etc, meaning that they struggled to win in the days of the Soviet Union. They didn’t manage to win the Olympics and Slutskaya wasn’t the one to win the first Olympic title, even though the Salt Lake City 2002 result is debatable, and in 2006 she couldn’t win, since Arakawa was out of reach for her and the others. It’s meaningful that this country struggled to win. It’s meaningful because Russia has the deepest field, and the domestic competition is incredible. During the Sochi Olympics, while commentating, I joked that during training sessions there were observers taking notes – I had defined them as scouts, as it happens for some sports in the US – and some people wrote on Twitter that Ambesi was drunk and spouting nonsense.

Well, this is how it works in Russia: there are scouts, from certain schools, who travel around, to attend local competitions, to see girls who are 9-10 yo. If these girls satisfy their standards, they are brought to the biggest cities: Moscow and St. Petersburg – which is falling to misfortune at the moment, while Moscow is faring better. This is how Zagitova and Tsurskaya were discovered, or even Tuktamysheva. Why am I saying this? Because the depth of this field is astounding; it’s obvious that some girls might not make it, when other interests take precedence over skating. To be clear: Russia probably hasn’t even had two talents like Sotnikova and Tuktamysheva again yet and we haven’t seen a skater with Sotnikova’s quality yet, not even in Sochi – yes, Kim and Kostner included. Have a look at Sotnikova’s feet and what she did with those feet, the likes of which we have never seen. I don’t even want to mention the criticism she received, because those people don’t even have the means to talk about skating. As a matter of fact, Sotnikova lost her way simply because other interests took over. These are young girls who go through hard training starting when they are 8-9 years old; Sotnikova already had four national titles back then, and four Russian titles are not something trivial. She used to beat girls who were 18-19 when she was 11 and the same can be said for Tuktamysheva; they were two incredible talents and everything started with them. After them came a huge number of girls, athletes who haven’t shown to possess that kind of quality: Medvedeva doesn’t have Sotnikova’s quality when it comes to her skating, nor Tutkamysheva’s jumping technique. Maybe Tsurskaya, if healthy, could be the perfect product, but sadly health plays an important part in a skater’s career. In a field with this depth, in which you can be exposed to other distractions as you start winning, there’s risk of a short career. And this is what happened to Sotnikova – I repeat myself, an incredible skater. Whoever has seen her skate in galas, maybe not in the last few months but until last year, was enraptured by the quality of her skating. Had she a different body type, she would probably have been a fantastic ice dancer.

So, yes, these girls can disappear, but it’s because of the domestic competition. We can’t say this system disposes of these girls – that is just wrong. In every sport, in a country where there is such competition, it’s obvious that you always have to be in peak shape and you could happen to be defeated by a younger athlete. This happens in Korea, when it comes to the short track: an athlete now known as Viktor Ahn, whose name is Ahn Hyun-soo, was put on the sidelines of the Korean system. Someone who then went to another country and won loads of gold medal at the Olympics, not considering worlds. Ahn Hyun-soo, greatest of all time, that is put on the sidelines in Korea because there are young athletes on the rise and that, during the trials, might have been in better shape. Yes, he was coming back from injury and all, but it’s the same in Russia.

There’s another problem though, one that nobody has talked about yet: looking into the future, the stronger girls all come from the same club: Medvedeva, from Tutberidze’s school, Zagitova, who reached almost 220 points in her senior debut, while no one had reached more than 200 in their first competition – Lombardia was inflated and all of that, but 220 points is huge. This girl does two Lutz, obviously talking about triples here, and two Flips in the second half of the program. When have we ever seen something like this? These are the most extreme programs in history, not counting those who had a Triple Axel. But then, even those who had one, didn’t have such extreme programs. Zagitova is, in theory, Tutberidze’s no.2, and the no.3 is Polina Tsurskaya, a possible perfect machine, if she didn’t have health problems. Regarding juniors, we have already talked about these girls who are dominating the grand prix: Trusova. We could call her the “total package”, because there’s everything there. Maybe she isn’t rewarded for it when it comes to PCS, but do you know why she isn’t? Because she is seen as small in the rink, kind of like a “Miyahara syndrome”, who was held back in PCS for years, until they realised that she was a great athlete, and then the judging towards her changed. Maybe it’s the same for Trusova, who is seen as small and tiny…and some say that she doesn’t “fill” the rink – and this is one of the most debatable things I have ever heard – and so she isn’t rewarded in PCS. This is an incredible skater. I invite you to look at Trusova’s programs without jumps, and see all the other things she does, spins and jumps aside. This is the next generation: Trusova, and Shcherbakova. Panenkova, who isn’t one of her best pupils, has won a JGP. Tarakanova, who is the newest in Tutberidze’s school, is amazing. And there are others, besides them.

There’s a risk here, when a single school dominates the entire field, it can’t be good for its balance. I think that, if there had been enough spots for Tutberidze’s girls, she could have had four girls in the Final, because there’s a girl who has only one Grand Prix assignment, in Poland – keep an eye on her – who would have reached the final had she gotten two events. All of this to explain the situation regarding one school. There’s incredible competition. Other schools are struggling more, CSKA included, and SPB is in decline, but that’s because some of these schools didn’t really understand how skating has evolved: it will suffice to look at Tuktamysheva, an incredible athlete… but with empty programs. It’s obvious that she cannot compete with Medvedeva, unless she can do two Triple Axels. If she can’t do that, it’s obvious that she can’t be competitive. So, as I was saying, a lot of domestic competition that might “ruin” some athletes. But to say that the system is twisted…seems wrong to me. It’s a system that offers some great quality, and obviously whoever has the most quality keeps going. If you miss an opportunity you can decline, if you are good you can make up for it throughout your career, why not? But this is part of the game, see swimming in the US, or even athletics. I don’t see why the Russian ladies field is so criticized in Italy or elsewhere. Where’s the problem? That we are not able to create a similar system? If that’s it, let’s start by doing an apprenticeship with Tutberidze, instead of other people who are invited here and haven’t won anything. Let’s try to understand how this coach works, inside the rink, and off ice too, because it’s not possible that her athletes are physically on another level. Alessandro, you were an athlete, and I think you understand what we’re talking about.”

(A): “Right…sadly there’s lots of envy in Italy, and probably too little topics to talk about, so we try to discredit our rivals.”

(M): “I tell you this: one of the… so-called Italian legends – I won’t say the name – recently said that what they want is to have great athletes, of 22 years of age. But… in the ladies’ field, your career is basically done, at 22. History says so. All you need is to take a look at who won gold medals. Of course there’s always the exception, but we are talking about girls like Arakawa, amazing athletes who were already strong at the age of 15. It’s not like they suddenly became stars at 22. Carolina Kostner, who made history in Italy, was a phenom at 13. It would have been amazing to see that Kostner in the current Grand Prix, had she grown up with this scoring system and not the 6.0. Because had she learned to skate with this system, she would have the possibility of going head-to-head with these athletes. If you look at her now, against Medvedeva, Zagitova, etc, you see an athlete with great charisma, personality and fluidity – sure – but with much emptier programs than those of these new generations. Then of course, the fact that she keeps skating is incredible and her results in the last season were even more incredible. As a matter of fact though, she is the symbol of a kind of skating that doesn’t exist anymore. Her quad was the 2007-2010 one, if not the one before that; yet she won a medal in 2014. Afterwards, skating changed: because in 2014, the athlete who did two Double Axels and seven triples won: go and have a look at how many athletes did 2+7, the other girls on the podium included. But after 2014, two Double Axels and seven triples became the norm. The only one who can do one less triple is Osmond, who has great quality and makes up for that with GOE and PCS. Kostner can probably be compared to Osmond, in a way, but Osmond is a skater of this generation, while Carolina belongs to another. And you can notice that if you look at her and the leaders of the current junior field, like Trusova and Shcherbakova. As a matter of fact, she can’t compete.”

(A): “Just like it happens with skiing, the new generation, who learns to ski with a different technique, is on a different level [ndT: Compared to those who learnt with a different system and had to switch to the new one during their career].”

(M): “Of course. To get to the point about the Junior Grand Prix: Russia dominates the ladies’ field, but there could be a surprise in the Final. Eunsoo Lim, from Korea, will make it to the Final; she’s a skater with fantastic elegance, fluidity, with good edges. The only problem is that her programs are a bit empty, but she has a lot of talent. The men’s field didn’t show a lot to be honest, besides a Russian boy who did well in the latest GP, Erokhov, from Tutberidze’s school. Tutberidze had already won another GP with Pitkeev, who recently switched to ice dance. Erokhov has something more when it comes to his jumps, if compared to Pikteev. We will see how far he goes. Not much else to say about the men’s field. In ice dance, a US couple, Carreira/Ponomarenko, who already ended up on the podium at Junior Worlds last year, was expected to dominate and so it happened, but the Russian couples aren’t that far. We expected a bigger difference, but their lead wasn’t big, so there will be quite a fight in the most important events of the season. I have nothing to say about pairs, because they are in a transitional phase, as the best Russian couples split and there are new ones, and those who had already done well last season haven’t started in the best way. Maybe we’ll talk about them later in the season, since there’s not much to talk about now.

Regarding Italy: it went quite well, both in the ladies and men’s field, as we’ve had good results, but we could have done even better. Grassl wasn’t sent to the right GP, and whoever sent him should take a hard look at themselves. He trains in Egna and the second GP was in Salzburg, so competing at “home” there wouldn’t have been bad: he would have had one more week of training, it wasn’t far and it would have saved him from a transoceanic trip at the start of the season. And they skated inside a mall in Australia, during the first JGP, with several problems for many athletes and quite a weird situation. So maybe our best junior athlete – as Rizzo competes among seniors, even though he will probably compete in Egna – should have been treated with greater care. Maybe someone could explain why Grassl was sent to Australia, and if it was his team then it’s their fault, even more so considering that if you had a look at the entries you would have seen some big names there. Amongst those names, one has been of particular interest – he’s been mentioned by Hanyu, and Hanyu doesn’t mention others without a reason – Krasnozhon. Hanyu said that he had seen this boy try the 4Lo and that he had been motivated by him to do it. Anyway, Grassl did well in Australia, and he might have the potential to reach 190 points already, if not more, we’ll see what he does in the next competition. Among ladies, Lucrezia Beccari did well, a talented girl from Turin who struggled a bit in the short program, but then had a good free, with good skating and jumps. This girl, well, kid, as she will be 14 in December, ended up being the first after the Korean, Japanese, Russian and US girls…and the US girls are not better in terms of jumping technique – they get bigger scores because of their nationality – but honestly they’re not exactly much better than Lucrezia. Then Tornaghi, from Milan, Agorà, also did well. She did better in the short and struggled in the free, but both Tornaghi and Beccari are interesting. They’re both young, so they won’t be able to compete in seniors before 2019-2020, but if they aren’t stopped by puberty in the future, they can reach good results. Folini also did well; he doesn’t have the technical content that Grassl has, but he has the kind of quality in his skating that you can’t find in many other countries at the junior level. He was quite appreciated, but clearly you can’t really be competitive if you don’t have the jumps now. He can partially make up for it with his PCS, but we will talk about technical elements and PCS in the last part of this podcast.

Part 3: Challenger Series

Yuzuru Hanyu updates one of his World Records, Overview of what Challengers Series offered up to now.

Photo Credits to CharlieBenBrown

(A): “We’re almost an hour into the podcast and we just started to get into figure skating’s hot topics, so now it’s time to talk about the athlete who is currently making history, by breaking record after record: I’m obviously talking about Yuzuru Hanyu. A skater that Ambesi had begun to follow even before he started rising through the ranks. You’ve always praised him so much that in Canada a banner quoted you and your famous “planet Hanyu” phrase, which I now ask you to repeat; those who are listening will be thrilled about it.”

(M): “That would be “welcome to planet Hanyu, population one: him.”

(A): “Exactly. Let’s say that if skating was going through a 2.0 phase with the new scoring system, Hanyu was the one who brought it into a new phase, a 4.0 with quads the like of which we had never seen before. And so, in Canada during the Challenger Series, in his first competition of the season, he immediately broke a world record. Where can this phenomenon go from here?”

(M): “Wherever his body will allow him to go. He doesn’t hide that he wants to include a 4A in competition. Let’s be clear: Yuzuru can complete 5 quads in training; the one he doesn’t really train is the Quad Flip. He can rotate and land the Axel, maybe with a 30% success rate, but he does it. A Quad Axel, do I need to say more?

In competition, we might see it in the next seasons, if Yuzuru decides to keep skating (after the Olympics). This season he decided to add the 4Lz, which he didn’t execute at ACI, partly because of some physical problems. Although in the Short Program, with a simplified layout that isn’t even the one he had planned, he proved to be the perfect example of technical omnipotence that meets artistic excellence.

What can I add? It was a perfect program: he almost achieved the highest score he could receive. With that layout he could have achieved no more than 115,11: he got 112,72. It’s a record for the Short Program, ice dance included (if considered in terms of % points received vs maximum points he could have achieved): it was previously held by Davis/White, who managed to get to 97,4% of the possible score: 78.89 out of 81. Yuzuru Hanyu: 97,92%.

What can you say about that program? Nothing. It’s the perfect program. He could win the Olympics with a simplified layout, with a 4S as the solo jump in the short program, the 4T3T combo and the 3A in the second half of the program. If you can call that “simple”.

But if he did that, that wouldn’t be Yuzuru: in his head, that 4S needs to be replaced by either a Lutz or a Rittberger. That’s why in practice he tries two different layouts for the Short Program: one with the Lutz and the other with the Rittberger, to achieve an even bigger score.

Truly, does he even need that? Probably not. But that’s how he is: he’s an athlete who likes to push himself to the limit. He is competing against the others, but even more so against himself. And we need to consider how he executes those quads and how they fit into the choreography.

He does them so well he makes them look like triples and he executes them coming from difficult turns and steps. I want you to look at the quads executed by Shoma Uno at the Lombardia Trophy: count the crossovers he does and how much time passes before the Quad Flip, Quad Sal and the first Toe Loop. Then look at Yuzuru Hanyu’s jumps: the difference is huge. We are looking at an athlete who is able to put together almost all the best that figure skating can offer; it’s true that maybe there are some who have something more on spins, see Jason Brown for example, who’s the best spinner in the world… Jason Brown who also has quite a lot of transitions in his programs, but then, sadly he hasn’t been able to land quads so he couldn’t be that competitive against the others. But, today, Hanyu is the perfect synthesis (of art and technique), nothing else to say: seven elements in which the maximum GOE score is +3 GOE, which is incredible. He isn’t the only one who wants to do that. Shoma, Nathan Chen, they will try to do the same; Nathan Chen might even incorporate eight elements that could receive +3 GOE. [t/n: Max here means that they will do 7 or 8 elements which GOE coefficient is 1.0. Only quads and triple Axel can reach a full +3 GOE once the coefficient has been applied]

It’s clear that Hanyu does these elements with different quality: his layout should be 4Lz; 4Lo; then possibly 3F – that could also become 3Lz, we’ll see, but let’s go with 3F – then in the second half: 4S3T, a combination that gave him some problems last season and that he executes easily now; 4TLo3S, an element with huge BV that he can easily complete, solo 4T, 3A2T and 3A as the last jumping pass. This would be an incredible layout, with a BV of 111 points if I remember correctly; with +3 goe on every elements he could reach 140… it’s a whole new level. Then it’s obvious that doing these elements isn’t trivial, and sometimes Yuzuru, when he isn’t in great shape, struggles to complete that layout.

In Canada, last week, he wasn’t in his best shape, and it could be seen from what he did in practice: Hanyu usually executes as many jumps as he can in practice, because that’s how he is. He did his run through – a run through is a practice session with music – in which he skipped some jumps, which isn’t the norm for him. This was because he wasn’t at his best, he had a small physical problem that didn’t allow him to completely show his potential. And even then, without being able to express his full potential, he still almost reached 113 points in the Short Program. For me, we are truly looking at an athlete from another dimension: this is really an athlete that will be remembered in a hundred years as the one who changed skating. It isn’t up for debate here. And I believe he could keep making history, as he is also pushed by some great rivals: Shoma Uno, a Japanese skater from Nagoya, has shown to have qualities to put on the table… maybe more quantity than quality at the moment, but we will talk about this later in the season. And yet, quantity makes a difference.

I remember a beautiful sentence by a dear friend, Silvia Fontana, during the Sochi Olympics: “Figure skating is not supposed to be potato counting”. What did she mean by “potato counting”? Summing triples or quads without looking at quality [on all aspects of skating] and saying, “Okay, this skater did 7 triples, so she wins the competition ‘cause others do less.” For Sotnikova, the case in question back then, quality was there, but that’s another topic. Well, what’s the difference between Hanyu and Shoma or Chen? It’s the quality he executes those quads with. The same can be said for Patrick Chan, another one who - when he rotates his quads - he does so with very high quality, same as Hanyu. Other skaters’ quality is lower, and there we have an issue with GOE. Hanyu’s quad Loop is a jump that, when executed well, is worth +3, no discussion. For what he does before it, for what he does after it. Others get to +3 with a quality that isn’t comparable and here we have a problem about judgement, but we will talk about this later.

So, Hanyu started with a bang. An amazing short program, huge score. A free program he had many difficulties with, but it’s clear his own competition was about the short program. It was there he needed to understand some things, he got his answers. We will see where his level is at the Rostelecom Cup, the first GP stage.

His goal is to aim for the perfect season, by winning again the Grand Prix Final, by conquering again the second gold medal at the Olympics - rare event in the men’s field, we need to go back to a skater from another era, a skater Hanyu knows well and whom he quotes often, but we will talk about this another time - and we’ll see if he will attend the World Championships. We hope it will be so, since Worlds are in Milan, Italy, and Worlds with Hanyu raise their profile by quite a lot.

What everybody could notice is how many athletes are already in very good shape - across all disciplines. Hanyu for what he did in his short program, Shoma for what he did at Lombardia in both programs, many ladies: Medvedeva got close to 230, Zagitova at her senior debut with 220, Marin Honda at her own debut with almost 200. And in her case, she was at Salt Lake City. Had she competed at Lombardia Trophy, her scores wouldn’t be far from 215 either. Wakaba Higuchi, another Japanese lady, reached a personal best not far from 220. Let’s say Japanese and Russian athletes did start at a high level already. Also because some of these athletes are not sure they will be on the Olympic Team. They have to win out over a highly competitive field internally, so for them, these months will be hard ones. What’s the problem? They risk to be burnt out come December, when the main competitions - Grand Prix Final and the Nationals - to decide who makes the Olympic team will be held. Then, if you go over that bear trap (more on the ladies’ side than men’s), you have one month and half to train and practice in peace, to regroup and recharge and plan your Olympics approach. But if you don’t go over that bear trap, your season is basically over.

Japan has six athletes for two spots. It means that among Higuchi, Honda, Mihara, Shiraiwa, Miyahara, Hongo and there’s also Sakamoto, there are five of them who will remain home. Incredible.

For Russian ladies, it’s not much different. What’s the point there? There’s a school, as we were saying before, that at this moment is displaying superior quality, Tutberidze’s school. Medvedeva and Zagitova directly on the Olympic team, and then Tsurskaya. The others are behind. Radionova - we saw her at the Nepela Trophy - is a skater in big difficulties right now. She lacks quality on jumps to be competitive with others. On skating, she has improved greatly. As usual, she is a great interpreter and she has good musicality, but on jumps she is not on the same level as others. She jumps just the same as when she was Moscow’s little queen at 11. Years passed, though. Back then, Medvedeva - both of them were born in 1999, Radionova in the first semester, Medvedeva in the second one - couldn’t compete with her. Now positions have been reversed. The Nepela Trophy has been singular for this reason indeed: Medvedeva dominated the competition with Radionova left behind by tens and tens of points. And you know who is the only athlete who won a competition over Medvedeva in Seniors up to now? Radionova. In a Rostelecom Cup a couple of years ago. Right now, Radionova is 50 points behind the best Medvedeva. Tuktamysheva is someone who has the jumping quality to make Tutzberidze’s athletes’ lives hard – if we speak about jumps alone. But she needs to nail two triple Axels in her programs to have a chance. Which is a pity, because she is a skater who could express a greater quality on skating itself [had she gotten programs good enough to bring out those qualities]. We will see Maria Sotskova, now training mate of Radionova. Or rather, Radionova became Sotskova’s teammate when she switched coaching team in the past months, to Buyanova: the one who helped Sotnikova reach her Olympics title. But historically, Sotskova has something less than Medvedeva. They know each other well, since Sotskova’s date of birth is in the first semester of 2000, and Medvedeva has a technical consistency that is way above Sotskova’s.

Pogorilaya is a skater who could try and be a danger to Tutberidze’s skaters. Maybe not to Medvedeva, but to the others. Although, even Zagitova may be out of reach. But she is behind Eteri’s athletes in different things. She is weaker on spins. There are less transitions in her programs. Probably in terms of scenic presence, Pogorilaya has something more, but you can’t win events with that.

So, in Russia, there’s a fight too for those Olympic spots, but it’s an easier battle to read. In Japan, it is mayhem. In Russia, Medvedeva and Zagitova - barring injuries - have a good margin on the others.

All these (Russian) athletes have shown to be in top condition since the start, never before have we seen ladies get to 220 in September. And the same can be said for Japanese skaters, who get to to 216, 217 points like Higuchi did. Higuchi, who had some suspect rotations at Lombardia Trophy – probably technical panel was quite generous there – but her quality as a skater is above any discussion; contrary to the quality of her programs’ construction and layouts, but that’s another topic.

Carolina Kostner’s opponents are these girls. An epic challenge. Probably her goal is not to win against the best Russian or Japanese skaters. Her goal is to show that even now, over 30 years old, she is still a competitive athlete, one with the longest career, and who can skate in the last group of an Olympic free skate event. Along with skaters that have (technically) a gear more today, but that if we compare what Kostner showed when she was a junior and what they do today, their technical level is not that far apart, this must be said.

So, Alessandro, a lot of quality in the beginning of the season, a lot of quads… We saw Nathan Chen land a quad Rittberger, becoming the first man to land five different quads in his career (in different competitions). Who would say (it was going to happen) three or four years ago? But it happened. Shoma Uno put a quad Salchow in his free program, so he is at four different quads landed, only Lutz and Axel missing. Hanyu will get to four with Lutz. Jin Boyang, another quad master, is working on the Rittberger, which he tried once already - without success - last season. He has already a Lutz of greatest quality, he has Salchow, Toe Loop. In the end, it will be four different quads for him too, so in a free program he may go for 5 or 6 quads total. This is the “Quads Era” and those who aren’t able to keep up with the pace do get left behind from a great distance. These skaters are writing new pages of figure skating history, it’s a new era. The era Plushenko would have liked to be in.

Plushenko said, two years ago: “Do you see that one? That one is Hanyu. I’d like to go on so to take part in the 2018 Olympics and compete with him, but that one will go for four quads.” And back then we all thought, “Yes, he will do four quads total” but no, Hanyu will go for four different quads. Plushenko did understand that because he saw him during practices for summer shows. And Plushenko on his side affirmed he wanted to go to Pyeongchang with his two quads, Toe Loop and Salchow, and see what happens. Then, sadly, age and injuries made it impossible; but Plushenko - in the same way as Carolina Kostner - is a skater from another figure skating, a figure skating that doesn’t exist anymore. A figure skating where the footwork is nowhere comparable to what top skaters do now; and in this sense, Plushenko was already a step behind Yagudin in 2002. Of course, Plushenko did live through extraordinary seasons. He won the 2006 Olympics by a landslide, he is the moral winner of the 2010 Olympics, no doubt, but his skating is not what skating is now. He’d love to live in the “Quads Era”, because the young Plushenko was an athlete who tried everything in practice. We saw it in Italy too, when he came here: Flip, Lutz, etc… Flip wasn’t Plushenko’s jump, but he tried it anyway, with disastrous results - all of Mishin’s athletes usually have a bad Flip, it doesn’t matter the number of rotations - but Plushenko didn’t go on developing those jumps because he didn’t need them.

Once Yagudin’s era ended, Plushenko’s opponents were Joubert - who had huge limits on different aspects of figure skating: he had huge charisma, but his spins were weak and his skating quality wasn’t comparable to Plushenko, who wasn’t the number one there to start with - and then there was Lambiel, who was second to none if we speak about quality of skating, back then, but triple Axel was his nemesis and without the triple Axel you can’t go anywhere. Of course, he won World Championships and Olympic medals, but the best Plushenko was on another dimension (compared to him). So Plushenko, because of his opponents back then, never really tried to develop some of those jumps in competition, even if he had the skills to try. Contrary to now, when we have this incredible evolution that will probably end with Hanyu trying a quad Axel.

What is the consequence of all this? Changes in rules, right?" (laughing)

(A): “Exactly! Earlier I want to provoke you, we talked of the many records, these records are possible because since 2002 - after the Salt Lake City scandal - the changes in the scoring system allowed for a more “mathematical” kind of judging. In a way, scores can be almost seen like seconds in a time-trial. In the old system we only had a 6.0, so with so many quads, how many 6.0 could we find in today’s programs?

(M): “On a clean program, it’s a concrete hypothesis to have many 6.0’s. Hanyu’s Short Program at the Autumn Classic is a program worthy of 6.0, on both technical and artistic scores, we’d need to go back to the Bolero skated by Torvill & Dean. So yes, we’d see some 6.0, but let’s not forget that when you do many quads, chances of making mistakes are high. This is true for everybody. Really, 100% clean programs with three or four quads are not that common. We still have to go back to Hanyu and what he did at the last World Championships.

Part 4: ISU Scoring System

How to changes rules to try and reach a balance between Technical Scoring and “Artistic” One?

(M) What you are saying introduces us to an important theme: actual scoring system. We read a lot about it in the last few weeks; it seems ISU is thinking about new rules; I have the feeling that they are thinking down the wrong path.

I think that what you need to change to balance the technical and "artistic" (or PCS) parts of a score is pretty easy. I've the feeling ISU is going towards a wrong direction.

Let's explain what's happening. It seems they are working to lower the base values of jumps: quads would have less value, but also triples and all other kinds of jumps. According to the ISU, this will bring the technical part of the score and the artistic one to more equal ground.

But that's not what will happen. Friends ran simulations of last World Championships’ results (ndT, see here), applying the criteria as proposed by some ISU officials: the final result would have remained the same and the highest technical score would have still remained well over 110. Translation: that is not the way to intervene.

What's the real actual issue today? It is that we see programs with 5 quads automatically given 90+ points on PCS. This is not acceptable. Program Components don't have to follow the number of quads you do. It's not written anywhere. Bring the rulebook to me and make me see where they put this rule! In that case, I raise the white flag and say "You are right." And in that case, don't give 90-92, let's give 100 and maybe an extra 5 points more as bonus, so we are all happy.

Shoma Uno at Lombardia Trophy scores 92 (on PCS). We were talking about it earlier: go and see what Shoma Uno does before his quads. Go and see how many crossovers there are, how long his setting up for a quadruple is. How many empty choreographic parts there are. Does he execute five quads? Perfect: you reward him with the quads' base value. If that quad is a technically good quad, you reward him with GOE – and here we open another new storyline that we may go into another time – but it shouldn't be that a skater good at waving their arms around automatically gets 92, and I invite you to look at what Shoma Uno does with his feet and to compare him with others. Because then, if Uno Shoma gets 92, Patrick Chan should start at 120.

So, here, the issue is linked to judgement. It's right and good to reward a technically strong athlete on TES, it makes no sense to overpay him on PCS too if there's no actual reason to do so. And it's here that the actual scoring system is breaking down.

Then it's obvious that when you have athletes like Hanyu, Uno, Chen that plan to present free programs with base values of around 110, programs that may reach 140 on TES when GOE get added, you have to change something in the scoring system. But what's the simple thing anyone would do? Change the PCS coefficient factor. Said this way, it may seem a difficult thing to do, but it's actually extremely easy. In a free program, instead of multiplying judges' scores by 2, you multiply them by 2.2 or 2.4, evaluating which is the best option. In that way, artistic score – even if PCS shouldn't be labelled as artistic score since it is more complex than that – gets enhanced and you can eventually reach a balance between TES and PCS.

If you lower the base values of jumps by 7, 8, or even 10% instead, it does change nothing. Absolutely nothing. Because in any case everybody would be pushed to execute those quads––they still give you more points. Who would to do a triple lutz if they can get almost double the points with a quad lutz? If I have the skill to try a quad, I would work to accomplish that.

So whoever says, "let's lower quad BV’s so we have fewer quads and to give more importance to the artistic part," they have understood nothing because at the end what it does matter is to win. Athletes will keep on planning jumps with the highest BV available to them. They would not go and plan a triples-only program, saying, "they will pay me on PCS this way and I will get to podium!"

They would still see podium from miles afar, if they are lucky.

I'm baffled by the fact that this concept has not been clearly understood. Not to mention we also need to distinguish among different disciplines. Men's discipline has some problems. Ladies' discipline has some other problems. Pairs' have some other ones again.

And you want to lower jumps BV for all three disciplines? It's wrong, it makes no sense.

I should show with numbers – but to speak about numbers in a podcast may not be the easiest thing to do – how wrong this path proposed by the ISU is. On the other hand, they are the ones making the rules, but I think they should consult external people, maybe experts in the math field. People who can analyze for them various scenarios and to study how to intervene. And I'm sure anyone would say: make the second part of the score higher, make the coefficient factor bigger.

Lowering the jumps' value, we risk to impoverish skating in the future, compared to skating in the past.

If you make PCS higher, you can still compare the TES side across different years and you just need to reapply the coefficient factor on PCS scores from the past, and you could still say things like "Yes, Hanyu in 2015 would have gotten a higher score than Cha in 2021" for example. But if you change the technical elements’ base values in such a big way, everything crumbles down. Does it make sense, or is it worth it? In my opinion, it doesn't.

Ladies' discipline: what kind of modification is needed? It's super easy. In ladies' SP, there are many ladies going over 40 TES. Why "40"? 40 is the threshold, the highest PCS a lady (but a pair’s couple too) can get in an SP, while for men it is 50, but it should be raised to 60.

That 40 could be raised to 50. Why 50? Because it's probable that soon there will be more athletes who are able to land a 3A. But Medvedeva, who is without doubt the leader of the movement right now, doesn't reach 50 on TES. She isn't even close to reaching it. She is always over 40, but she doesn't go up to 50. But if we want to give PCS more value, I think it's fair to put their limit to 50.

I want to add an important bit. Miss Carolina Kostner, who has been one of the leaders of the field on PCS in the last 10 years, for sure, has an average of 55 on TES in the Free Skate since post-Vancouver (2009-10) season. Top skaters right now all clear the 70 threshold. Miss Carolina Kostner with the current scoring system has always landed on the podium bar one event. What does it mean? That evidently the scoring system isn't that bad – at least for Ladies' Free Skate. For SP there may be a problem.

But that aside, in my opinion, we can push beyond, we can raise PCS for SP and FP both, it would be okay. The key would always be to judge those components right. Because if you give bonus on some components to athletes that don't deserve to reach 9 or 8.5, then you can spin and change every scoring system but you will be back to square 1 in no time.

I don't believe it's a problem in the rules in and of itself. It's a problem of the rules' application. And this is the same also for GOE. As of today, GOE has seven grades of judgement, from -3 to +3, 0 included. The fact that they want to bring it to eleven grades, from -5 to +5, 0 included, it's a positive thing in my opinion. But then you have to apply those GOE in a correct way. It's not like a program can be +5, +5, +5, +5 on everything. I don't believe in absolute perfection, so once again, what's important is to give the correct evaluations.

If the actual system has degenerated and if there are talks of changing it now, it's because in some cases they have lost their bearings. Some athletes have been overscored, and now it's hard to go back. As an aside, a thing I can't bear is how if someone is given 9.25 for Skating Skills, then it is 9 for Transition, 9.25 for Performance, 9.30 for Composition and 9.30 for Interpretation. But it shouldn't be so. It can't be this way.

Medvedeva can't have a higher Skating Skill score than Kostner. This is objective. Because of speed, depth of edges and much more. But at same time, if we look at Transitions, there are four points between Medvedeva and Kostner. For me it would be right to have 10 on one component and 6 on another, 7.5 on another one and so on. It's absurd all components are always in the same corridor, because that is not what happens on ice for almost everybody. And it's here the issues start arising.

So, even before talking about how to revolutionize the scoring system, let's try to start evaluating athletes for what they are doing.

In my opinion, everyone should do a self examination and analyse where we are now. Then I'm the first to say, let's raise the PCS coefficient factors! In the men’s field, it’s 50 max in the SP at the moment? Let's bring it to 60! Aside: Hanyu and Fernandez already went over 60 on TES, let's not forget. Free Program? To 120? That's good! That's good! There will be athletes anyway who can go to 130 on TES, but it will be more balanced. But if, then, the athlete who is really strong on that component is not properly rewarded and you give him the same score as the other one who does five quads with little more, then what does it change? What could it change? Nothing.

That 120 on PCS would be the same as 100 today. Changing BV on jumps and not touching anything else, would change nothing all the same. Until you change how the scores are given and if you don't start giving each one his own due [t/n, in Italian: "date a Cesare quel che è di Cesare" - "Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's" – a widely used figure of speech meaning to give each person his/her due] on components score, we will always be back to the starting point.

So, what is the conclusion? That we are talking about hot air. Empty talk. Because first we need a self examination on how rules are actually applied, and everything else will follow as consequence. And for sure that consequence will be to raise the PCS coefficient factors.

We can speak also about Pairs. In a season where Pairs' SP has a back outside Death Spiral and a lift from Group 5, those who can also do a triple lutz side by side and a triple lutz throw can get––if GOE is all +3––up to 50 points on TES. But only if you have all these elements [ndT: those mandatory elements are with the highest BV], and as you all know for sure, required elements in Pairs’ SP change from year to year. For example, last year the lift had to be from Group 5, while this season it isn't from Group 5, so it has a lower base value. That aside, in Pairs – same as Ladies – it's reasonable to bring PCS to 50. Because there are many couples that have cleared 40 on TES in the past, so the actual coefficient is under pressure.

But I do repeat, results will change only if athletes are evaluated for what they do. If then the one who does five quads is also the best one on the "artistic" side, then hats off, he is the one who deserve to win by a landslide and it's fine so.

But you can't come here and say that Nathan Chen––an extraordinary athlete in many aspects, in my opinion––can reach 90 on PCS, so 9 on average, as of today. Almost 110 if factor were 2.4 in an FS. Because––and it's again objective––it's not what he is showing right now on ice. It's impossible to see Patrick Chan scored lower than Shoma Uno. Anyone who has seen those athletes skate live realizes the difference between them. On everything. It's true, the latter jumps more––not better but more––and then he brings home more on TES. But then, if Shoma Uno goes to 92 on PCS, then Patrick Chan should go up to––I don't say to 120 as I affirmed before––but at least 110, then.

The problem is only this one. I hope I've been clear, because I’ve read many analyses about this, some of which are complete nonsense, some others better focused and argued, but the magic wand is in the judges' hands. And in those who supervise the judges' work. If what is happening now is okay with everybody, and indeed ISU deems some athletes worthy of systematic 9s, then there is no solution to change things. And it will always be the ones doing five quads winning competitions, or those doing three to five quads plus two 3A. No one else. Jason Brown, who is an extraordinary skater in various aspects, will never win a competition. If you instead start judging PCS for what they are, and you reward Jason Brown for what he does indeed, which is a lot undoubtedly, maybe Jason Brown will be able to compete with those doing two or three quads. In any case it would be hard for him to compete with those doing five quads. We had a demonstration of this in recent time. Jason Brown did a good Lombardia Trophy, all in all. I repeat: Scores at Lombardia Trophy were inflated beyond any reason. Max Aaron – cult skater thanks to some peculiar and debatable programs choices recently, like a Footloose he then decided to quickly abandon – with a quad Toe Loop and Salchow scored more than Jason Brown at Lombardia Trophy. Max Aaron who competed at Salt Lake City in a competition where PCS were less inflated than at Lombardia. It's clear that quadruple jumps' weight is a lot, now.

It's clear that had Jason Brown scored 95 on PCS in the actual system and Max Aaron 60, which is what he is worth as of now – with all due respect to him – then Jason Brown could compete even if Max Aaron puts down five quads between the short and the free programs. But only if PCS scoring is correct. And this is valid for top skaters, but also in cascade for skaters on all levels: second-tier skaters, third ones, juniors...

That's all.

I think this talk will go on, and it's good that the ISU is trying to understand how to intervene. But to me, ISU should help others, help itself – to quote a cult sports movie, Jerry Maguire. A quote to say that ISU needs to ask for help from external people. To understand what kind of modification to do. To develop a software to understand the real progression of scores, how many athletes did go over the determined threshold. For example, in the modern era post-Vancouver, seven athletes in the men’s field went over 100 on TES in FS. It's easy to tell their names, more or less they are all outstanding aces. Then let's ask ourselves if, for those seven, it's worth revolutionising everything. Maybe yes, maybe no, but let's do an analysis.

In the ladies' field, perfection on PCS is 80. Do you know how many athletes did go over 80 on TES? One. Evgenia Medvedeva in a competition that is midway between competition and show––the last World Team Trophy. I've no doubt she can reach 80 on TES in one of the next competitions too, but at the moment there's only her. In the future, Zagitova, too, for sure, but right now it's only Medvedeva.

For pairs, 8 times a pair went over 75 on TES. No one reached 80, which is again the highest PCS they can get. So there, the system works, why go and change it? Do you want to change it because this discipline is called "pattinaggio artistico" (t/n figure skating is literally "pattinaggio di figura", but italian name for the sport is "pattinaggio artistico", "artistic skating") and, according to someone on top, there is little artistry right now? Then okay, let's change the PCS coefficient factor but let's leave the jump BV’s untouched. You can't suppress technical development. It would mean going backwards.

Also because we can't forget one important detail––that many seem to forget. After the half-scandal of Vancouver 2010 with Lysacek defeating Plushenko, also due to Plushenko's own demerits because he needed to do little to win that gold medal, ISU decided to incentivize quad attempts. How? By increasing BV. So you increase it in 2010––correctly to incentivize technical development––and in 2018 you lower it because, according to you, technical development has put artistic growth in jeopardy? For me this is folly.

Do something so that the artistic component gets valued for what it is––at best raise its value––and leave everything else untouched. It seems the simplest solution to implement to me. I don't know if it will be the path ISU takes, someone will listen to this podcast and get angry and shout about "lese majesty" and "who the fuck is this Ambesi who comes here telling us about these things?" And I do invite Italian Figure Skating Federation’s officials to come to a round table discussion, me alone and ten of them, on numbers from the last ten years. Let's see who takes up the challenge to show, numbers in hand, which is the path to follow. Then maybe they will end up on the same side as me, and I'll be happy because it would mean "Italians do it better" and they understand this topic better than others.

(A): "And with this gauntlet thrown by Ambesi, we can end our first podcast with a bang."

And here you are the full translation of the first podcast.

As we already wrote in our introduction post, Max and Angelo will also answer questions from fans in future podcasts, so if you have any question you’d like for them to cover, drop it in our inbox and we will forward them.

201 notes · View notes