New ISU All Final System guidelines

At the first StarClass in Bergamo, the new progression schedule was explained during the Team Leader Meeting before the start of the competition. I will try to explain the complete system in this post, but before I do that I need you to read and apply the following quote:

Forget everything you think you know about all final systems – Reinier Oostheim

Now, that is settled we can start with a clean slate. Basically you need a progression system where you start with heats and after a few rounds you should end up with finals, where every skater progresses to a certain final. There are a lot of ways to do so, but now that the ISU has finally decided on a progression scheme, future All Final competitions should use this variant.

The progression system that will be used at ISU competitions where the all final system applies (such as StarClass and Danubia competitions, but most probably more), is based on the distance classification in every round. This is very different from what we are used to. I will try to make it as clear as possible in the upcoming paragraphs.

Distance Classification

A distance classification takes into account the finish places in the previous rounds prior to the faster time on that distance in one of the rounds. For instance, if two skaters become third in the quarter final, the finish place in the heats is taken into account. Only if that is also equal, the time will decide who is ranked first. However, not the time of the last race, but the fastest time skated on the current distance. Let us take the example of two skaters who both finish 2nd in the Heats and 3rd in the Quarter Finals. Skater A might have skated faster than skater B in the Quarter Finals, but skater B was faster in the Heats then the time of skater A in the Quarter Finals. Then skater B will qualify instead of skater A if only one spot is available in the higher group.

It is clear that this is not only confusing, but also very hard to work with for both coaches and skaters as the number of variables is very high. And this is only the beginning…

Progression Schedule

Before the start of the competition, a progression schedule is given to the team leaders/coaches. In this schedule, the number of skaters in each round is determined. It tells us how many skaters qualify in each round for the next round. Sounds simple, except that it is not. We are used to the fact that once you make it in a certain group, you cannot end up with skaters from a lower group in later rounds, that is if you do not get a penalty. The new progression system wipes away this certainty. On a 1000m for instance, 10 skaters might qualify to the Semi Finals, Group A. However, the finals A and B are only skated with 4 skaters each. It means that the lowest 2 ranked skaters on the distance classification after the semi finals, are moving into the C final and will be skating against the skaters that didn’t make the Semi Finals, Group A but are among the best ranked skaters of the Semi Finals, Group B.

Sounds feasible? Well it gets worse… In Short Track Speed Skating skaters are penalized with a Penalty for various reasons such as Impeding, Kicking Out, Double False Starts, Off track and Assistance. When a skater receives a penalty, he will move into the group below the one he is currently skating in. For instance, let us take a 500m with 8 skaters in the Semi Finals, Group A. If a skater receives a penalty he will move down a Final in the next round and end up in the C final. That, however, means the B final is left with only 3 skaters. The new system fills up this empty spot with the highest ranked skater from the Semi Finals, Group B. So that means that skaters that are actually skating for a C or D final in Semi Finals, Group B, can still end up in the B final in case of penalties in the higher group.

OK, well what happens when a skater is advanced? That is a very interesting question because in that case the foreseen number of skaters in a certain group is changed. If 10 skaters are scheduled in the Semi Final 1000m, Group A but in the Quarter Finals there is an advancement, the number of skaters will become 11 in the Semi Final 1000m, Group A. However, as the A and B finals are skated with only 4 skaters, now, 3 skaters will end up in the C Final, leaving again less place for skaters from the Semi Final 1000m, Group B to qualify for the C final.

Issues

• Since races are skated in order from the lower group to the highest group, it is impossible to tell where you end up in the next round because penalties might create room in a higher group.
• In Bergamo the lap counter was of low quality, specifically 8 races skated too few or too many laps, resulting in missing times, which has big implications in this new system. Advancements were made when this happened, but you still get less chances to skate a fast time in case your finish places are equal to that of another skater.
• Finals A and B are, for some reason, skated with less skaters than Finals C and lower, which makes the puzzle even worse if you have skaters in these lower groups.
• When you have a bad race, a fall or some other skater made an action which resulted in a penalty against you, you have a big disadvantage in the upcoming races because your distance ranking will most likely be worse than that of other skaters which obtain the same finish places in the same group, meaning they get priority over you when it comes to qualifying for a higher group.
• Where should you advance a skater to? You could take the highest possible group from the group he is in, but at the point the ADV is given, this group might not be clear. And what if a skater is impeded when skating is second to last position? Shouldn’t he be advanced to some appropriate group too? The fall which might have occurred won’t help him at all because he has a bad time and a bad finish place…

Advantages

• The number of skates in a race is more controlled than before and is therefore safer. Advancement in a certain round are cancelled out in the next round. However, to keep it safe the number of foreseen skaters should be kept low enough. In Bergamo foreseen numbers for Semi Finals 1500m was 7 and for lower Finals 1000m, it was 6. It might not surprise you that a race of 9 skaters on a 1500m was still occurring because of this.
• It seems to be a more fair system in case a skater is advanced but might have never made it into the higher group without the advancement, in the next round he most likely ends up in the lower group again.

Conclusion

It is a system with a lot of variables and possible outcomes. Before the start of the race so many variables have to be investigated, that it makes no sense to go through every possible scenario with your skates before the race. It is easy to say that they have to win the race with the fastest time of the whole pack in all rounds to be certain, but that is just utopia. Beside that, spectators have no clue of what is going on. Why does this skater end up there and why is it this skater and not the other. It takes minutes to get it all explained… Beside this, the obscurity around the whole system makes it even harder for team leaders and coaches to validate that no mistakes were made, which unfortunately still happens too much. We have to prepare the skaters for the races with pointers for good tactics and shouldn’t be checking if the races our skaters are in, are the correct ones… Or check if the mentioned number of qualified skaters in each rounds corresponds to the progression schedule we received at the beginning of the competition.

What do you think of the new ISU All Final Progression System? Are there any additional issues you can think of? What do we need as team leaders/coaches to make this more of a workable system?

We sincerely hope that team leaders/coaches around the world will be asked for feedback to to help improve the current system so a workable system can be created for both competitor stewards and team leaders/coaches.