----------------------
I dedicate this article to the memory of all the great trainers who gave me the love of skating and the art of the edge: Cecilia Colledge, Megan Taylor, Pierre Brunet, Maribel Vinson Owen and Karl Schaeffer.
What I am about to elucidate may seem “old fashioned” and “out of date” to those who practice figure skating today. However sometimes it is necessary to analyze the problems of the present by a return to the roots of the past. There are several subjects to consider which all contribute to the pathetic state figure skating has now reached:
- ISU and National regulations
- Judging
- Injuries
- School figures
- Equipment (boots, blades, sharpening)
- Jumps and content of free skating programs
- Music, costumes and choreography
A simple view of the skating situation today should alarm anyone about the sport. In the last 15 years there are two parallel trends: the more skaters do triple and attempt quadruple jumps, the higher the level of serious and crippling injuries. It is evident that this has attained a peak which in 2008 means the loss of two top skaters, Jeffery Buttle and Stéphane Lambiel. This withdrawal is not because they have decided to move on to other fields of interest but because they both have chronic serious injuries to back and legs which if they continue training and working to produce quadruple jumps will leave them seriously crippled for life or at the least require important orthopedic surgery usually destined for persons over 60. Contributing to the decision of these top skaters to leave the field is the ISU (International Skating Union) new judging system which was instituted to “eliminate” all cheating and secret deals between judges but which turns out to be so “modern” that the calculations end up being more obscure and often not at all related to what the skater has skated with never anyone responsible.
One of the excuses for eliminating school figures was that the public did not understand the results which counted in the over all score of a skater. What is the difference between the judging of school figures and the new “fool proof” system which gives credit for moves such as a change of edge in a spin, which spin should not change edge since it is counter to the art of the ice? The only true difference between these two scoring systems is that at least the school figures contributed to the total formation of the skater.
Through the practice of school figures the skater gained a well proportioned muscular development and reflex to the right and left sides of the body. This accompanied a control of edges thereby acquiring an ice technique and an understanding of the use of the circle thus creating a foundation for all free style moves, (steps, spins, jumps…).
To sum up, here we are today with the most artistic skaters injured and a judging system more obscure than ever. The net result is a disaffection of the public for a sport where the best artists withdraw and a marking system incomprehensible to the average television viewer.
How did this art/sport which drew thousands to TV for major national and international events reach this stage? Gone are: school figures, amateurs, artistic programs and with them, the skaters. We shall now try to analyze this decline.
The art of Skating Technique
For decades, the mastery of school figures was a prerequisite for any serious skater in the same why the ballet dancer in ballet does a barre or the musician practices daily scales and Czerny exercises.
No skater could enter a national or international competition without achieving a certain level of mastery in school figures. No very young skater could do a free skating program until a minimum level of school figure control was accredited. The more television entered the field, the less school figures were considered important to the point they were reduced and then completely abolished resulting in two free style programs, a short to be “technical” and a long to be “artistic” but which now have come to resemble each other more and more. The general public has difficulty now in distinguishing the difference.
The emphasis on multiple rotation jumps has become a decisive factor to such a point that little else counts. To counteract this phenomenon, “difficulties” to gain points were introduced in required elements. However, many such “difficulties” were unrelated to the art of the edge but just counter movements which instead or improving the art are obstacles which must be overcome to try and maintain the art.
For example: All spins in skating are made with very small backward loops either on the back inside or the back outside edge. All backward movements on the ice are on the front of the blade which is equivalent to the ball of the foot. This as with the pirouette on the floor allows the weight of the body to rise against gravity creating minimum resistance on the ice or floor thus increasing the speed of the turn. When one is spinning and changes edge in the spin this is a counter movement to the momentum since the weight goes to the back of the blade and the skater is now making forward loops. The body is thus spinning on the heel. Obviously this is difficult to control just as it would be difficult on the floor to turn on one’s heel instead of on the ball, half toe or “sur la pointe” of the foot! Such a “difficulty” is not a true one but and an obstacle to overcome. A comparison in a totally different arena of sports would be to have a racing car pilot attempt to keep his car at full speed all the while simultaneously putting on the brakes. A real difficulty in a spin would be to do 40 rotations at top speed and centered! In the case of spin requirements the judging criteria must return to centering, speed, beauty of position and turning on the correct edge.
Copyright © Cécile Däniker Rüsch
Directeur Artistique
Danse en Ile de France
info@danse-en-ile-de-france.com
