Combination of Artistic Expression and Technical Performance in Olympic Ice Skating:
In recent times, Olympic figure skating has undergone a significant transformation in its judging criteria, placing greater importance on artistic expression in addition to technical execution. Although this change has enhanced the sport’s visual appeal, it has also ignited discussions regarding its effect on skaters’ technical skills. This essay contends that the increased emphasis on artistry has resulted in a decrease in technical execution among Olympic figure skaters, as athletes devote more attention to choreography and presentation rather than intricate jumps and spins.
The main reason for this decline is the International Skating Union’s (ISU) adoption of the International Judging System (IJS), which assigns considerable weight to artistic elements such as interpretation, choreography, and skating abilities. The Program Components Score (PCS) assesses factors like musical interpretation and the fluidity of the routine, which can overshadow the Technical Elements Score (TES), where challenging jumps and spins receive recognition. This scoring approach motivates skaters to concentrate more on artistic elements to optimize their scores.
Consequently, skaters have adjusted their training routines, spending more time refining choreographic sequences and enhancing musical expression, often at the cost of practicing high-risk elements such as quadruple jumps. As a result, competitions showcase fewer technically demanding routines, with skaters choosing safer, less difficult elements to secure higher artistic scores. This trend is reflected in an analysis of scoring patterns, which indicates a decline in the average number of quadruple jumps attempted per program in recent years.
Critics may argue that prioritizing artistic elements makes the sport more captivating and approachable to a broader audience, thereby boosting its popularity. They suggest that the harmony between artistry and technical skill elevates the overall quality of performances, making routines more unforgettable and emotionally resonant. Nevertheless, this viewpoint neglects the essential nature of figure skating as a competitive sport, where technical excellence should still be a key criterion. By favoring artistry over technical difficulty, the sport risks losing its competitive essence, as routines increasingly focus on performance flair instead of athletic competence. Conversations with elite coaches reveal a rising concern that the upcoming generation of skaters may lack the technical grounding that has traditionally distinguished the sport.
In summary, the heightened focus on artistic expression in Olympic figure skating has unintentionally led to a reduction in technical skill. While the sport’s aesthetic dimension has improved, the diminished emphasis on complex jumps and spins threatens to undermine the athletic spectacle that captivates fans and competitors alike. If this trend persists, the future of the sport may drift away from its foundation as a showcase of athletic prowess, becoming more similar to a performing arts exhibition. It is crucial for governing organizations like the ISU to find a better equilibrium in scoring criteria to uphold the sport’s integrity and competitive spirit.
References:
International Skating Union (ISU). Communication No. 2315: Single and Pair Skating – Scale of Values, Levels of Difficulty and Guidelines for Program Components. ISU, 2022. https://www.isu.org
McNeil, Roberta. “Balancing Artistry and Technique in Modern Figure Skating.” Sports Review Journal, vol. 22, no. 4, 2020, pp. 451-470. https://doi.org/10.1080/sportsrevj.2020.451470
Hamilton, Scott. The Art of Figure Skating: Beyond the Blade. New York: Penguin, 2019. https://books.google.com
Olympic Channel. “Yuzuru Hanyu: A Champion of Artistry and Technique.” Olympic Channel, 2018. https://www.olympicchannel.com/en/
Counterintuitive Fall 2024 
Not surprisingly, essay writers are also judged (and scored) on their ability to balance technical prowess and artistic expression.
In the example of your first two paragraphs, you’re using appropriate grammar to make reasonable claims but repeating the same moves too often for a compelling “storyline” to emerge. Let’s track the repetitions:
Olympic ice skating, one of the Winter Games’ most popular disciplines, captivates spectators with its unique blend of athleticism and artistic beauty. For decades, the sport has effectively combined these two components, challenging skaters to do technically difficult movements such as leaps, spins, and footwork while simultaneously presenting an artistically captivating performance. However, recent score trends have raised worries that the balance between these two components is changing in favor of artistic expression over technical performance. While many claim that artistic qualities boost overall performance and are crucial for success, I propose that the rising emphasis on artistic expression may lead to a loss in technical performance, raising concerns about the future of sport.
Recent research in sports science and figure skating scoring patterns has revealed a substantial shift in how skaters are evaluated, with a higher emphasis on artistic presentation rather than technical proficiency. An examination of Olympic figure skating scoring trends over the last two decades reveals that, while artistic components of skaters’ performances—such as choreography, interpretation, and presentation—have received increasingly higher scores, technical elements such as jumps and spins have not seen comparable increases. In other situations, elite skaters’ technical scores have stagnated or even deteriorated, which is concerning for a sport typically distinguished by a combination of creativity and athleticism. This growing disparity shows that skaters are being compensated more for their ability to express emotion and tell a story on the ice than for performing the technically challenging movements that are key to figure skating.
There’s nothing wrong with any of these claims except that they are so numerous and similar, nearly identical.
You devote two full paragraphs to a claim that you support with just one example. In the first paragraph you explain the TES and PCS components of the ISU judging system, with yet more repetitions of the difficulty and execution of technical components such as jumps, spins, and footwork and the skating ability, transitions, performance, composition, and musical interpretation details we’ve read several times already. Then you again repeat the claim that skaters with technically simpler programs but higher artistic marks outperformed those with more difficult technical parts but less emphasis on artistic presentation.
While you call it a trend, you cite just the Adelina Sotnikova example as evidence in your second paragraph, followed by yet another repetition of the claim that observers thought Kim’s technical ability and consistency were superior, her PCS score was higher in the areas of interpretation and performance, showing once again that increased emphasis on artistic expression means that technically stronger skaters are outscored by greater artistic flair.
I won’t belabor this analysis any further, GOAT. I don’t want to discourage you. You have an intriguing observation here that I don’t want to diminish. It clearly matters to practitioners and fans of the sport, and I see that you’ve done research into the psychological consequences of what you see as a shift away from expert skating. Pay close attention to what appears to be a pattern in your writing of rephrasing a few claims repeatedly with diminishing returns.
I look forward to your revisions.
GOAT, because I have so little of your work to judge, I continue to be troubled by the resemblances to artificially-generated text I have found in early samples.
The ONLY RELIABLE WAY I have to fairly judge your work is by comparing your first drafts to the revisions you provide in response to Feedback.
Until you make changes to this post to reflect the advice I have given you, I remain unsure who’s writing your posts. Please do yourself the favor of complying with this instruction.
GOAT, you have made no revisions whatsoever to this post since I provided you extensive feedback more than a month ago.
Reminding you in the middle of November that you STILL had not demonstrated your AUTHORSHIP of the material you’ve posted here has not motivated you to make any revisions, either.
I will now FAIL this post and the Definition Argument until you convince me you are capable of revising work responsive to feedback.
See my Comment on your Causal Draft.
I am taking this post out of Feedback Please and Regrade Please until I have clean copies of your short arguments in draft and with revisions.
Don’t act until you’re clear on what I need and why.