2017 GP Cup of China Ladies FS

[Mathman]

Compare their comments about her just last season at JW.

https://youtu.be/Wi_mKcMomZI

And now... quite a drastic change in opinion really

As a senior she is held to a higher standard than last year.

 

[Grin]

As a senior she is held to a higher standard than last year.

Backloading has nothing to do with the difference between senior and junior standards

 

[Mathman]

You should know better by now to not take serious BoP's long and patronising essays about how he is the main authority about what FS rules should be, what proper technique is, what the right choreography is, and how ISU should judge.

What I like about Blade of Passion's posts is that he always gives understandable reasons for his opinions, whether I agree with them or not. He is a squeaky wheel , but I enjoy the analyses of what constitutes good PCS, according both to the published criteria and the traditions of figure skating.

 

[Ender]

I'm going to have to mention this thing I found really funny. Tracy Wilson was doing commentary for the Olympic Channel on Gabby's SP and on the slow motion at the end she referred to Gabby doing a triple flip... Gabby supposedly does a 3Lz in her SP. Tracy just unmasked Gabby's flutz!

And yet the panel called Daleman’s Flip as “e” https://youtu.be/KWFXGmWWUrI
How can we trust this panel at all, given that they’re going to judge the men event at the Olympics?

 

[Mathman]

Backloading has nothing to do with the difference between senior and junior standards.

I don't know. I can see where it might happen that a junior skater is praised for having the strength and stamina to do 7 jumping passes in the final two minutes. But at the senior level considerations of balanced choreography might come to the fore.

 

[Grin]

What I like about Blade of Passion's posts is that he always gives understandable reasons for his opinions, whether I agree with them or not. He is a squeaky wheel , but I enjoy the analyses of what constitutes good PCS, according both to the published criteria and the traditions of figure skating.

No he doesn't. All Eteri's skaters have bad tech, all her ladies have bad 2A, Eteri has "little girls standard" and so on - he is full of that kind of comments. Typical antis bs

 

[Grin]

I don't know. I can see where it might happen that a junior skater is praised for having the strength and stamina to do 7 jumping passes in the final two minutes. But at the senior level considerations of balanced choreography might come to the fore.

Anyone can be bashed for backloading. Eteri 13yo girls were criticized for that

 

[qwertyskates]

No, that was not the situation we are seeing here and what I was describing. Alina rightly deserves higher TES for the difficulty. She also deserves the high TR and GOEs for what she did. Yet the programme as a whole was not sophisticated albeit very difficult. The jump segment was obviously busy and rushed. You may find it appealing. I don't. It's not what I think of as a balanced or well choreo routine. As such PCS should be lowered really. She deserves high marks but not for the reasons you are describing as no where in the ISU rules is this mentioned.



Again, difficulty technically should not be automatically taken to mean superb PCS. Otherwise, the Vincent Zhou and Jin Boyang in men should get bumped up a lot more! I agree that Wakaba has less TR but she does hers with meaning and high quality instead of the Alina and Zhenya quantity. Alina's basic glide is also no match for Wakaba. So by all means Alina should get better TR but lower SS, the converse for Wakaba. As both skated with fire, they deserve equally great PE but Wakaba's interpretation is more sophisticated and I felt she really deserved better overall IN and CO than Alina. Perhaps it's still not enough to win over the high tech scores but certainly the scoring in PCS should be fairer. I really can't tell what more Wakaba can do to boost her PE, IN and CO.

Definitely Wakaba is capable of more transitions leading to her jumps. At the moment, they are simple entries and exits, eg turns, and the top skaters are bringing a linked series of steps, eg spread eagles, choctaws, brackets, etc. and to cut down on the crossovers and two-footed skating.

In the end, perhaps each skater is playing up their strengths and disguising their weaknesses, and Wakaba's strengths are her edges and speed but she cannot manage difficult entries and exits to her jumps without compromising their quality, so she sticks to crossovers and turns.

Difficulty is something that Zagi and Med are able to execute with stamina and endurance, so they try to score by attempting the most difficult and taxing programs.

It doesn't matter if we all like a certain style over another. That's really personal. I dislike somersaults, I think they are ugly, but they score highly in gymnastics and I accept their scoring.

Fairness in scoring in sports is based on fulfilling the judging criteria. So a damaging accusation like "so and so wuz robbed" should be substantiated by more objective evidence, but personal preferences of course can be anything, the sky's the limit. Eg Eurosport guys might prefer James Bond over Ballet, many people do and they can state their subjective preference.

 

[qwertyskates]

No, that was not the situation we are seeing here and what I was describing. Alina rightly deserves higher TES for the difficulty. She also deserves the high TR and GOEs for what she did. Yet the programme as a whole was not sophisticated albeit very difficult. The jump segment was obviously busy and rushed. You may find it appealing. I don't. It's not what I think of as a balanced or well choreo routine. As such PCS should be lowered really. She deserves high marks but not for the reasons you are describing as no where in the ISU rules is this mentioned.



Again, difficulty technically should not be automatically taken to mean superb PCS. Otherwise, the Vincent Zhou and Jin Boyang in men should get bumped up a lot more! I agree that Wakaba has less TR but she does hers with meaning and high quality instead of the Alina and Zhenya quantity. Alina's basic glide is also no match for Wakaba. So by all means Alina should get better TR but lower SS, the converse for Wakaba. As both skated with fire, they deserve equally great PE but Wakaba's interpretation is more sophisticated and I felt she really deserved better overall IN and CO than Alina. Perhaps it's still not enough to win over the high tech scores but certainly the scoring in PCS should be fairer. I really can't tell what more Wakaba can do to boost her PE, IN and CO.

"Sophistication" isn't a clear criteria, it is completely subjective, I really don't know what you are referring to with this term, unless defined in a way that can be universally understood. This is why "transitions leading to jumps" is so specific that it is a required element for the SP - one can say that this makes the execution of the jump more "sophisticated". It shows how seriously the judges regard this ability.

So you have your own definition of "sophistication" which has nothing to do with difficulty, you deem Zagi's program unsophisticated, but this is unrelated to do with the official judging criteria, and thus the scoring.

Technical difficulty is also judged based on execution. Poorly executed difficulty, eg difficult jumps with flaws receive lower scores than jumps that are well-rotated, at a good height, distance, with difficult entries/exits, etc. Technical difficulty such as difficult jump combos executed in perfect synchronicity to music, like Zagi's program, thus score higher.

I can't believe I'm still arguing the basics, it's as if all these are forgotten or thrown out of the window when it comes to certain skaters ....

 

[Sam-Skwantch]

It's fine. :yes:

But no, it's not fine. It is cheated by close to 90 degrees. To me, here is the bottom line: Don't under-rotate your jumps (easier said than done, I know). If you get full rotations, you have seized control of your own destiny. If you do not get full rotations, you put your fate in the hands of the technical panel. Sometimes the call will go your way, sometimes not.

Should technical panels strive for consistency? Of course they should. But an athlete should never count on being bailed out by the officials.

It is a unsatisfying sporting event if the outcome is decided, not on the field of play, but by a controversial call on the part of the officials. It seems like figure skating produces more than it fair share of "unsatisfying sporting events" by this criterion.

Not a word I don’t agree with here so I bolded the entire post Very well said!

 

[Baron Vladimir]

Wakaba's SS are better than Alina's.
Alina's TR are better than Wakaba's.

Both were fine in Performance and interpretation. Alina was a little frenetic and didn't have good posture. Wakaba was precise but doesn't have the lines. It evens out.

Alina's program composition was a lot worse than Wakaba.
example: If a skater did nothing but all the 7 jumping passes in the first half, then in the second half only doing one spin an some steps - would you consider this a balanced program? No.
Now a skater does nothing but one spin and some steps in the first half and then puts all 7 jumping passes in the second half. That's not a balanced program either.
So conclusion: Alina's program composition is worse than Wakaba's, which is part of the CH category of PCS.
Resulting, Alina's PCS should have been lower than Wakaba or Wakaba's should have been higher than Alina's.

Im amazed how most of you got this definition of what balanced programme should look like, because that is not definition of balanced composition of the programme by ISU. Its just your subjective opinion how balanced programme should look like. And balanced progtamme in figure skating is defined in terms of ice coverage - placements of the elements on the ice and its saying that skaters should use different places of the rink while performing elements. Balanced programme is when skater performs elements on different places on ice surface, thus covering all ice rink. And you can see manifesation of that in judges marks of composition.

 

[Purv]

No he doesn't. All Eteri's skaters have bad tech, all her ladies have bad 2A, Eteri has "little girls standard" and so on - he is full of that kind of comments. Typical antis bs

But it is true,for you constructive critic is antic bs. What is it says about you? Anyone cannot express other opinion because ?Because you like the skaters? because they win ?

 

[OS]

That's lovely, but you can't compare judging between competitions. Zagitova is not on par with Mao, however Zagitova is skating well to music and choreography that is appropriate for her age. You cannot compare 2014 Mao to current Zagitova.

I am trying to illustrate
- what inflation looks like
- over mark look like
- what a senior ladies level 68 look like
- even just compare with Wakaba's 67 or Marin's 64, Ziagitova is already relatively over marked.

One's artistry based on the same program don't just suddenly drastically improve overnight. Just as someone's PCS don't suddenly drop overnight. Yet Both happened in this competition, literally overnight.

Of course, you should able to compare the standards between competitions. Great performances don't change from one competition to the next, they are a standard of excellence that outlasts rule changes, trends and points games. Otherwise, it is like saying a 3-year-old who is able to recite 3 blind mice using both hands happily and adorable at a world-class piano competition deserve the highest scores just because he is the only one didn't make any mistakes. The crowd even let out a collectively loud gasp at the end vs someone just completed an imperfect Liszt sonata that some people found boring. (See what i did there? )

I also wish the judges should judge everything with a good deal of contextual awareness when rewarding these marks.

The mark of difficulty is not the same for everybody. Backloading on ice doing a gymnastic work out is certainly far more difficult if you are 5ft7 statuesque Yoda age Carolina Kostner who wish to present poetry on ice, but far easier if you are tiny cute 16-year-old jumping bean who has yet to go through puberty who has only ever able to show one dimension expression.

To create a nuanced emotion highs and lows vision with a 16-year-old with limited life experience, however, would be far difficult to achieve vs a veteran who has been doing these for years and years. (despite Wakaba and Marin both tackling these around 16)

Yet this is an artistic sport allowing these very different scopes of ambitions and standards to coexist and treat them as if they are all alike.

I would argue development, progression, experimentation, effort, risks, physical limitations, and natural comfort level are really not that subjective and should be weighed in more when diagnosing these markings. All factors should matter - when appraising anything to do artistic components. One shouldn't able to benefit from the TES strategy and expect your PCS wouldn't suffer as a result unless you have made a proven case of improvements and progression - that is very much dependent and relative to what other competitors did in the same field. Otherwise, Boyang and Vincent of this world would have had far better successes already.

 

[Purv]

Im amazed how most of you got this definition of what balanced programme should look like, because that is not definition of balanced
composition of the programme by ISU. Its just your subjective opinion how balanced programme should look like. And balanced progtamme in figure skating is defined in terms of ice coverage - placements of the elements on the ice and its saying that skaters should use different places of the rink while performing elements. Balanced programme is when skater performs elements on different places on ice surface, thus covering all ice rink. Because of that neither Alina and Wakaba have exceptional balanced programmes comparing to some other skaters. And you can see manifesation of that in judges marks of composition.

balanced - not everything in a row

 

[Baron Vladimir]

balanced - not everything in a row

Yeah, which is a common definition. In figure skating balance is dependable of ice surface (placing elements on the ice), not of time (placing elements in time). That is obviosly left on every individual, to place elements in time how he/she chose it. E: So composition and balanced of the programmes can change in the same skaters programme dependable of how skaters use the ice rink in that exact day of the competition. To consider composition mark how most people consider it here has no sense, because implication of theirs definition is that there is no need to be judged CO of the same programme by same skater in diferent competition per year every single time, because all those programmes placed skaters elements of the programme the same, regarding time - Zagi or Waka programme always look the same in that regard from competition to competition. What can be different from competition to competion (and thus what is judged in CO) its theirs usage of ice rink.

 

[whatif]

Where does it say that balanced=not everything in a row. Pls, show me!!!!!

The current rules actually encourage and appreciate just the opposite. Otherwise why would they give 2nd half bonuses???? It would be stupid to give higher mark for something then later they offset by reduction in other. Make no sense. Read the rulebook.

 

[Purv]

Where does it say that balanced=not everything in a row. Pls, show me!!!!!

The current rules actually encourage and appreciate just the opposite. Otherwise why would they give 2nd half bonuses???? It would be stupid to give higher mark for something then later they offset by reduction in other. Make no sense. Read the rulebook.

Nowhere it says. Thats what it means. You all say that means "placing elements on the ice" I am curious how judges and you will be judge when most of the skater will have such balanced programs.They will be identical. Oh yes alina will put some spin in one corner, Zhenia in other one.And they exchange their jumps in other places to not look like they do the same stuff

 

[whatif]

Nowhere it says. Thats what it means. You all say that means "placing elements on the ice" I am curious how judges and you will be judge when most of the skater will have such balanced programs.They will be identical. Oh yes alina will put some spin in one corner, Zhenia in other one.And they exchange their jumps in other places to not look like they do the same stuff

Nobody cares whether programmes identical or not. That is not a judging criteria. You can place your elements anywhere you want. You do not like it? fine. But don't assume that others won't or that your dislike should affect the skater's scores when all she/he just trying to do is meet the competition requirements in order to win.

 

[Mathman]

And balanced progtamme in figure skating is defined in terms of ice coverage - placements of the elements on the ice and its saying that skaters should use different places of the rink while performing elements.

I don't think that this tells the whole story. "Balance" consists of appropriate placement of highlight elements in space and time, in accordance with the musical structure and the vision of the choreography. It also refers to a "balance" between different kinds of elements -- spins and footwork should be highlighted as well as jumps.

In the ISU discussions that led up to the second half bonus rule, the thinking was not only to reward stamina but also to correct the "imbalance" of doing all the jumps in the first minute, then allowing the program to peter out in intensity at the end. A truly balanced program should have features of interest throughout. In this sense, I do not find Alina's program to be out of balance. There was plenty of cool stuff going on even before the jump-storm started.

People were talking about "a balanced program" long before the IJS was a glimmer in Mr. Cinquanta's eye. It is not really explicitly defined (although a few pieces of the definition are thrown out here and there) in the current IJS rules, nor need it be.

 

[Purv]

I am trying to illustrate
- what inflation looks like
- over mark look like
- what a senior ladies level 68 look like
- even just compare with Wakaba's 67 or Marin's 64, Ziagitova is already relatively over marked.

One's artistry based on the same program don't just suddenly drastically improve overnight. Just as someone's PCS don't suddenly drop overnight. Yet Both happened in this competition, literally overnight.

I would argue development, progression, experimentation, effort, risks, physical limitations, and natural comfort level are really not that subjective and should be weighed in more when diagnosing these markings. All factors should matter - when appraising anything to do artistic components. One shouldn't able to benefit from the TES strategy and expect your PCS wouldn't suffer as a result unless you have made a proven case of improvements and progression - that is very much dependent and relative to what other competitors did in the same field. Otherwise, Boyang and Vincent of this world would have had far better successes already.

I agree with you. But just imagine what would have happened if she didnt win.Alina won by 1.36. If judges didnt give her such big points in PCS ,she could lost. But she had to win. Because "she had evertyhing in second part" and she deserves it