The skating judges won't think so. At the end of the day, the contestants are there to learn to jump properly. If they do it, they should get marked accordingly. If you don't do a jump properly, or any type of discernable jump usually taught, then it's not going to look good anyway.
Credit for leaving the ice, ok. But it really should be a proper jump. Depends on how much T&D are really looking to get out of their celebs and what they'll consider an actual jump.

From my point of view, if somone just steps across in a three-jump pattern and flings their arms in the air, it's not a jump.

In practice, it would limit the mark, since they wouldn't dare give a 6.0 or 5.5 to someone who obviously messed up a required element. But most of them aren't at any risk of getting that high a mark anyway, and if someone gets, say, a 3.5 or 4.0, how are we supposed to be able to tell what was taken off for any particular thing? Though of course, a judge might say, and then we might take their word for it in their case.

Anyway, here's a question for those who know such details: what is the penalty when an ice dancer, for example, fails to complete a required element as compared to other mistakes they might make?

I don't fully understand the technicalities of the marking system now, as it is so intricate! But I would imagine someone would get marked down slightly more for a failed required element, as these are often not the hardest parts of the routines.
Required elements tend to be twizzles, step sequences in a required pattern etc. Obviously they will get marked up if the grade of difficulty of that element is harder (eg number of steps, difficulty of footwork, arm movements in twizzles). If a couple then decides they want to triple axel (they would in pairs, not in ice dance) then fair play to them, they'll get a higher difficulty mark, but if they mess it up, then points will be lower, and deducted if they fall.

Of course, but if they do something that gets both feet off the ground ...?

It seems there are two different questions: step vs jump, and jump vs proper jump; and I think it's clear from previous years that some of the jumps can be pretty minimal.

I would, personally, see it as a kind of continuum from steps that don't get both feet off the ice, through minimal jumps that do get both feet off, then on to proper jumps of various sorts; but if extra significance is attached to whether someone has done the required element, then it does kind of matter exactly where the jump vs non-jump line is drawn; and so I'm wondering where it should be drawn and where people would draw it.

In Olympic competition, marking is as follows (found this on the Beeb site & thought I'd post it as this is a very similar convo to the one we're having in another thread!):

"Under the new, more complicated system, each programme is now given a technical score and a score for 'programme components'.

Technical score

Each jump, spin, lift or step sequence is given a 'base value' before the competition begins. A triple axel, for example, is worth 7.5.

It is the job of a 'technical specialist' to decide during a skater's routine which move has been executed - whether it is a double or a triple axel, for example. Two assistants are on hand to correct any errors.

As that happens, the nine judges - drawn randomly from a panel of 12 - each decide how well the element has been executed.

They use a scale ranging from -3 to +3. The highest and lowest of these nine marks are taken away, and the average of the remaining marks taken.

This average is then added to the 'base value' to obtain a mark for each element which goes towards the final score.

Programme components

The old artistic impression mark has been replaced by a set of five judging criteria, each with a scoring scale ranging from 0.25 to a maximum of 10.

Skating skills - reflects the general quality of the skating.

Transitions - covers how well the skater has executed the steps which link each element.

Performance/execution - assesses style, posture and changes in speed.

Choreography - how well the movements, steps and music work together as a whole.

Interpretation/timing - how well the skater works in time with the music. "

Hopefully that's made things a bit clearer!

In regards to your above post I think the viewers will interpret a jump as they want. Some who maybe don't skate may pick up on the judges comments, or may not be bothered by them.
Viewers who do skate may be more critical. But then, people still have their favourites and may vote that way regardless

In the later version of the 6.0 system, there was another big difference from DOI: the marks from individual judges were converted to ordinals before being combined with those from other judges. So they didn't add the judges marks together like they do in DOI. And so all that mattered for the final result was the relative placings derived from a judge's marks. It was really a putting skaters in order system, rather than being about adding points or taking them away.

That's why Robin kept saying, during the Olympics, that with the new system skaters were being judged on what they did and not being compared to other skaters. Being compared with other skaters is what the old system did.

(Some of Nicky's comments in DOI seem to be based on the way judges would think when using that 6.0 system. I mean when he says some skater got his "base mark" for and seems to be intending to mark the others relative to that.)

In that sort of system, it doesn't really make sense to think of specific numbers of points being taken away for specific mistakes. The idea is to say skater A is better than skater B by giving A more points, not to calculate a total that then tells you whether A was better than B. The new system as used in the Olympics, on the other hand, calculates a total, and there's a "code of points" that says how to calculate it.

However, in 6.0 there was an idea of what the particular numbers meant, even though it didn't matter for the result what specific numbers a judge used. (All that mattered was the order they out the skaters in.) Anyway, those meanings were:

0 — not skated
1 — very poor
2 — poor
3 — mediocre
4 — good
5 — very good
6 — perfect & faultless

Re the co-called artistic mark, see my next post.

Re the artistic impression mark, I'm not sure there actually was one.

I saw an interesting post about this a while back that linked to this article: http://www.cbssports.com/u/women/ska...emore12298.htm

That article is about the old 6.0 system, but a similar point could be made about the new one as well.

Yes, now there's a technical score and a component score (which incorporates performance, choreo etc) as I posted above.

Anywho, however they're scoring on DOI, it's nowhere near any kind of Olympic marking and I do think they are marked relatively at times (on the show, not Olympics!). And it's not intended to be taken that seriously either.
I'll have my opinions on what I think a skater deserves mark-wise, and so does everyone else, which is where a good debate lies. It just depends how different people interpret how the scoring should be done.

All good fun!

Indeed R (and V) I am enjoying this discussion and getting much insight from it! There is a whole thread devoted to over and undermarking elsewhere and perhaps our discussion on this would be useful there (I haven't visited that thread lately)?

Maybe my memory is fuzzy but I am sure I can recall the terms "techincal merit" and "artistic impression" used in the past - but I can also remember hearing "composition" and "presentation", and maybe the former was as you say V some departure from the latter. I can only reiterate that, for me, how well a technical move is done should count not only in content terms but in overall performance terms as well. I suppose on DOI they are trying to bundle all this together but the emphasis will differ from judge to judge - whereas in the competitive marking these days they have two sets of judges I believe.

I suppose as far as DOI performances go I would be looking for someone who is doing something complex but making it look easy!

Nice point! Making something difficult look easy whilst giving a good performance must be the overall aim at the end of the day. There you have technical and component marks all in one (hopefully!).

I'm really interested to see who does which jumps tonight and who really challenges themselves. I'd be slightly disappointed to see Hayley just do a three-jump for example, as I feel she's probably capable of a toe-loop. However I guess it all goes on what she's been given, what fits the routine and what she's better at!

The terms were certainly used by commentators (I've heard them too); whether that's what the marking was actually about, though, ...

Still, there are some criteria in the new (ISU / code of points) system that are at least closely related to artistic impression. For example, the criteria for the performance/execution programme component include:

I like the part that's contrary to physics if taken at all literally: "The skater radiates energy resulting in an invisible connection with the audience."

Program Component Explanations (pdf).

(One way to read pdf is to search for the URL using google and then click on google's "Quick View".)

However, there's a lot of other stuff in the programme components as well.

There's a technical panel that decides what was done and then judges say how well it was done.

For more detail:

Summary of ISU Judging System