Figure skaters (and their coaches) treat jump layout like a little math-and- strategy puzzle: they place each jump where it will earn the most points without making the skater so exhausted that they start falling or breaking the program’s flow.

How jump placement is planned

1. Start with the rules and base values

Before anyone touches choreography, they usually map out a technical layout on paper:

  • List all the jumps the skater is allowed and required to do (for example, a certain number of triples, one Axel-type, limits on repeats, etc.).
  • Assign each jump its base value from the official scale of values (a triple Lutz is worth more than a triple Salchow, quads more than triples, and so on).
  • Decide which jumps will be solo and which will be in combinations or sequences, since a combination counts as a single element but packs in more base value.

At this stage, it’s almost like building a shopping list of points: “I want two quads, a triple Axel, and two triple–triple combinations.”

2. Consider stamina and where the skater is strongest

Next they overlay that plan onto the skater’s actual energy curve during a program:

  • Difficult jumps like quads and triple Axels are often placed early when the skater has the most speed, power, and focus, making them more likely to land cleanly.
  • Some jumps are saved for later only if the skater has proven stamina—otherwise a “big” late jump becomes a risky fall that hurts both technical and component scores.
  • Coaches also think about which corners or patterns on the ice feel most natural for each jump (for example, where the skater can reliably build speed and set up the right edge).

A common real-world pattern: open with one or two of the hardest jumps, then alternate jumps with spins or step sequences to give mini “breathers.”

3. The second‑half bonus and why timing matters

Under modern ISU rules, jumps done in the second half of a program receive a 10% bonus on their base value in many categories.

That leads to a trade‑off:

  • Put too many hard jumps late and the skater may be too tired to land them well, turning that “bonus” into a net loss due to mistakes.
  • Put some strong, reliable jumps in the second half (often a triple–triple or a solid solo triple) to take advantage of the bonus while keeping risk reasonable.

So you often see layouts like:

  1. Early: biggest risk/reward jumps (quads, triple Axel) while fresh.
  2. Middle: one or two combinations when the skater is still steady.
  3. Late: consistent triples that can still earn bonus + good execution.

4. Jump combinations and efficiency

Jump combinations are a scoring efficiency trick : combining two (or more) jumps into one element gives more total base value than a single jump in that slot.

Skaters place combinations where:

  • They can maintain enough flow out of the first jump to realistically rotate the second jump.
  • They’re still in control mentally—combinations are often scheduled early‑to‑mid program rather than at the very end, because one small wobble on the first jump can wreck the combo.

Olympic‑level skaters often have a planned “Version A” layout and a “Plan B” they can switch to on the fly if a jump goes wrong (for example, changing which jump gets used in a later combination so they still meet the rules and repetition limits).

5. Fitting jumps into choreography and music

It’s not just about math; jumps must fit the music and choreography :

  • Jumps are usually placed at musical high points or accents so they feel natural and exciting rather than random.
  • Judges score “composition” and “music interpretation,” which includes how well elements like jumps are integrated into the program structure.
  • Clustering all the jumps in one block can make the program look front‑heavy or back‑heavy, which can hurt composition and transitions scores even if the jumps themselves are good.

So choreographers weave jumps between step sequences, spins, and connecting moves to keep the program balanced and artistic.

How this affects scores

Figure skating scores are mainly split into Technical Element Score (TES) and Program Components Score (PCS).

1. Technical Element Score (TES)

Jump placement affects TES through:

  • Base value: Which jumps are selected, where combinations are placed, and what gets the second‑half bonus.
  • Grade of Execution (GOE): Each jump gets a GOE adjustment based on quality—height, flow, clean rotation, and clean landing.
  • Consistency: A fatigued jump at the end of the program is more likely to be under‑rotated or fall, causing negative GOE or even “downgraded” calls that slash its value.

Example: A quad toe early in the program with big height and smooth exit can earn high positive GOE, often scoring more than a late quad with 10% bonus but poor landing.

2. Program Components Score (PCS)

Jump layout also influences the more “artistic” PCS categories:

  • Transitions: Packing too many jumps back‑to‑back with long “set‑ups” can reduce the variety and intricacy of steps and turns between elements.
  • Composition: Judges look at how well elements are spread out, how balanced the structure is, and whether jumps feel placed with intention rather than crammed in one section.
  • Performance & Interpretation: If jump sections are timed with musical climaxes and the skater stays expressive (not just “surviving” jumps), PCS tends to rise.

A layout that maximizes TES but makes the program look choppy or empty between jumps can still lose ground in PCS.

3. Strategic trade‑offs skaters make

Common strategic choices include:

  • Risking a big quad early (higher success rate, but no second‑half bonus) versus saving a slightly easier triple for the bonus zone.
  • Deciding whether to put a triple–triple combination early (higher consistency) or later (more points if they can still do it cleanly).
  • Spacing jumps out enough that PCS stays strong, even if that means slightly less raw TES potential.

At the elite level—especially with the 2026 Olympic cycle in full focus—coaches constantly tweak layouts, making small changes between events to find the sweet spot between ambition, stamina, and artistry.

Mini story: a “behind the scenes” example

Imagine a skater planning their free skate:

  1. On paper, they design: two quads, one triple Axel, and two triple–triple combinations.
  2. In practice, they discover they often miss the second quad when it’s in the last minute.
  3. The coach moves that quad earlier, replaces the late quad with a reliable triple Lutz in the second half (to still get the 10% bonus), and shifts one combination to the middle.

The final program might actually score higher overall : fewer falls, better GOE, cleaner transitions, and a more musical build to the ending—because the jump placement is smarter, not just harder.

TL;DR:
Figure skaters plan jump placement by combining rule‑based point calculations (base values, bonuses, combinations, repetition limits) with real‑world factors like stamina, favorite take‑off spots, and musical phrasing. That layout then directly shapes both their technical score and their artistry marks, which is why at the top level, jump order is as carefully rehearsed as the jumps themselves.

Information gathered from public forums or data available on the internet and portrayed here.