Following the road to Turin’s Grand Prix Final
The ISU Grand Prix of Figure Skating Final in Turin was the destination for athletes who had built their seasons one result at a time. Before the lights came on at Palavela from December 5–8, 2019, every senior and junior finalist had already competed in the qualifying series and accumulated enough points to finish among the leading contenders.
The standings were shaped by performance, consistency, and opportunity. Skaters could enter a maximum of two Grand Prix events, meaning that one victory was valuable, but two strong placements usually provided the safest route to Turin. The system also created close races, with several finalists separated by only a few points.
Understanding the qualification process adds context to the results in Turin. The final was not simply a meeting of the most famous names in skating; it was the outcome of a six-event series that rewarded athletes who delivered under different conditions, against changing fields, and on international ice.
The points race behind the event
The senior Grand Prix series consisted of six competitions: Skate America, Skate Canada International, the Internationaux de France, the Cup of China, the Rostelecom Cup, and the NHK Trophy. A skater or team could compete at two of these events, with their combined placements determining their position in the qualification standings.
First place earned 15 points, followed by 13 for second, 11 for third, 9 for fourth, 7 for fifth, and 5 for sixth. Further points were available for seventh and eighth place. This structure made two podium finishes especially powerful, while a single victory could still be enough if the athlete’s second result was competitive.
Qualification was therefore different from a season ranking based on every competition. A skater who entered only one Grand Prix had a much smaller margin for error, while a competitor with two assignments could recover from an ordinary performance. When athletes finished level on points, the ISU used tie-breaking criteria based on placements and competition results to establish the order.
The Junior Grand Prix followed the same broad principle, with leading junior skaters earning a place in the Junior Grand Prix Final. Turin hosted both age categories, giving spectators the chance to see established champions and future senior stars within the same event programme.
The men’s field was built around two perfect campaigns
Nathan Chen and Yuzuru Hanyu arrived in Turin with the strongest possible qualification record. Each won both of his Grand Prix assignments and reached 30 points. Chen took Skate America and the Internationaux de France, while Hanyu won Skate Canada International and the NHK Trophy.
Their paths were different in style. Chen’s qualification campaign emphasized technical difficulty and control, while Hanyu combined high-level skating with the competitive experience that had made him one of the sport’s defining figures. Their perfect records also increased anticipation for a direct meeting in the final.
Dmitri Aliev qualified with 26 points after a first-place result at the Rostelecom Cup and a third-place finish in France. Kevin Aymoz followed with 24 points, supported by a second-place performance in France and a strong result at Skate America. Alexander Samarin also reached 24 points, while Boyang Jin completed the six-man field with 22.
This group illustrated the value of two reliable results. Jin’s victory at the Cup of China gave him a substantial foundation, while the other finalists combined a win with a second or third-place finish. The final places were not reserved for athletes with one spectacular skate; they belonged to skaters who accumulated enough points across the series to withstand pressure from the rest of the field.
The ladies’ standings revealed a powerful generation
The ladies’ qualification race featured three Russian teenagers who would become central to the season: Alena Kostornaia, Alexandra Trusova, and Anna Shcherbakova. Kostornaia topped the qualification standings with 30 points after winning both of her assignments. Her skating combined difficult content with unusually mature control and presentation.
Rika Kihira qualified with 28 points, while Trusova also reached 28. Kihira’s technical quality and consistency made her a leading challenger, whereas Trusova’s reputation rested on ambitious jumping content and the possibility of changing the competitive balance through high-risk elements.
Shcherbakova completed the leading group with 27 points. Her qualification campaign showed why the standings can be more informative than a single result: she remained in contention through two strong performances, even while competing in an exceptionally deep field.
Bradie Tennell and Satoko Miyahara filled the remaining places. Tennell’s 24 points reflected the importance of securing a high finish in both assignments. Miyahara’s qualification demonstrated the reward for precision, interpretation, and consistency, qualities that had made her a regular presence at major international events.
The ladies’ field also showed how quickly the competitive landscape was changing. Established stars and emerging Russian skaters were meeting within the same series, and the Grand Prix Final brought that generational shift into sharp focus.
Pairs qualification rewarded consistency across continents
The pairs standings were led by Wenjing Sui and Cong Han, who collected 30 points. Their combination of speed, difficulty, and musical connection made them one of the most complete teams in the field. They were joined at the top of the qualification list by Aleksandra Boikova and Dmitrii Kozlovskii, also on 30 points.
Evgenia Tarasova and Vladimir Morozov qualified with 28 points. Their experience and polished skating kept them among the leading teams, while Peng Cheng and Yang Jin reached 26 points. Daria Pavliuchenko and Denis Khodykin followed with 24, and Nicole Della Monica and Matteo Guarise completed the six-team lineup with 22.
Pairs qualification can be especially demanding because mistakes affect two athletes at once. A missed lift, unstable landing, or fall in a short programme can reduce both the technical score and the confidence needed for the free skate. The teams reaching Turin had therefore shown the ability to manage risk as well as perform difficult elements.
The standings also reflected the international spread of the discipline. Chinese, Russian, and Italian teams all contributed to the final field, giving Palavela a broad representation of the technical schools and performance traditions shaping contemporary pairs skating.
Ice dance depended on precision and sustained quality
Gabriella Papadakis and Guillaume Cizeron produced a perfect qualification campaign, earning 30 points from victories in both Grand Prix appearances. Their skating was built around edge quality, speed, and seamless movement, with the rhythm dance and free dance performed as a continuous partnership rather than a series of isolated elements.
Victoria Sinitsina and Nikita Katsalapov also qualified with 30 points. Their style offered a different visual identity, emphasizing power, dramatic projection, and strong technical execution. Madison Hubbell and Zachary Donohue followed with 28 points, continuing their rise as one of the leading American teams.
Madison Chock and Evan Bates earned 28 points as well. Piper Gilles and Paul Poirier qualified with 26, while Kaitlin Hawayek and Jean-Luc Baker secured the final place with 24. The six teams represented a mixture of established medal contenders and partnerships building toward future championships.
Ice dance standings are shaped by small margins. A level deduction, a missed key point in the rhythm dance, or a slight loss of speed can change the order. That made the two-event qualification format particularly revealing: the teams in Turin had sustained quality across different music, themes, and judging demands.
The qualification picture at a glance
The following overview brings together the senior finalists and their Grand Prix points. Equal totals show why placements and tie-breaking procedures mattered when the field was assembled.
| Discipline | Finalists | Grand Prix points |
|---|---|---|
| Men | Nathan Chen, Yuzuru Hanyu, Dmitri Aliev, Kevin Aymoz, Alexander Samarin, Boyang Jin | 30, 30, 26, 24, 24, 22 |
| Ladies | Alena Kostornaia, Rika Kihira, Alexandra Trusova, Anna Shcherbakova, Bradie Tennell, Satoko Miyahara | 30, 28, 28, 27, 24, 22 |
| Pairs | Wenjing Sui/Cong Han, Aleksandra Boikova/Dmitrii Kozlovskii, Evgenia Tarasova/Vladimir Morozov, Peng Cheng/Yang Jin, Daria Pavliuchenko/Denis Khodykin, Nicole Della Monica/Matteo Guarise | 30, 30, 28, 26, 24, 22 |
| Ice dance | Gabriella Papadakis/Guillaume Cizeron, Victoria Sinitsina/Nikita Katsalapov, Madison Hubbell/Zachary Donohue, Madison Chock/Evan Bates, Piper Gilles/Paul Poirier, Kaitlin Hawayek/Jean-Luc Baker | 30, 30, 28, 28, 26, 24 |
The totals show a recurring pattern. A pair of victories created the maximum score, while a win and a second-place result generally placed a skater or team securely in the final. Several competitors qualified with 24 or 26 points, proving that a perfect campaign was not essential when both assignments produced podium finishes.
They also show the competitive density of the 2019 series. In every discipline, the difference between the final qualifying place and the leading group was small enough to make each Grand Prix appearance meaningful. A strong short programme, a clean free skate, or a successful recovery from an early mistake could decide a season.
Why the standings matter once the competition begins
The qualification table provides more than a list of names. It explains the momentum each finalist carried into Turin. Chen, Hanyu, Kostornaia, Papadakis and Cizeron, and several other leaders had already proven that they could win twice. Others arrived with something to gain after qualifying through closely fought races.
It also helps separate reputation from current form. A decorated athlete was not guaranteed a place, and a rising competitor could qualify by taking advantage of a single opportunity. The Grand Prix system rewarded what happened during the current season, not only what an athlete had achieved in previous years.
For spectators at Palavela, the standings offered a useful guide to the event’s storylines:
- Compare perfect qualification campaigns with finalists who advanced through two consistent podium finishes.
- Watch how athletes respond when a short-program error puts their carefully earned ranking under pressure.
- Follow the younger competitors alongside established champions to see where the sport’s next era is emerging.
- Use the official results and protocols to examine how technical elements and programme components influence the final order.
- Revisit the qualification events to understand the performance patterns behind each finalist’s Turin appearance.
The final was the moment when those separate journeys became one competition. Every point earned in the autumn series had helped create the starting field, but the medals still had to be won at Palavela through two demanding programmes.
Explore the Torino 2019 event information, schedules, results, competitor profiles, practice sessions, seating details, and exhibition gala coverage to follow the full story of how the Grand Prix finalists reached Turin and what happened when they arrived.