- Joined
- Nov 12, 2009
It all comes down to a question of math, which is what CoP is about. silverlake22, for some reasons, seems to ignore the 12 other elements when he/she thinks KVDP is underscored vs. Patrick Chan. But when you put them SBS, it's pretty clear why Chan scored much higher TES and it's not all because of his spins and footwork either. Here is a SBS comparion on jumps:
KVDP
4T; 3A; 3Lz; 3F; 3Lo; 3S; 3T X 2;, 2A; 2F => Total Base Value from Jumps = +/- 52.2
Patrick Chan
3A X 2; 3Lz X 2; 3F; 3Lo; 3S; 3T; 2A; 2Lo; 2T X 2 => Total Base Value from Jumps = +/- 55.0
Shocking eh? Not really, it's called math. I found that people who complained the loudest tend not to think or calculate before they complain. Even if we overlook all the spins and step sequences which KVDP sucks big time, Patrick Chan still has higher base value from all his jumps than does KVDP, even though the latter has a Quad and a 4+3+3 combo. For one thing, KVDP doesn't have a second Triple Axel and had only 2 jump combinations even though he could have three and should have taken advantage of the opportunity. Under CoP, it's really hard to argue against TES because this portion of the marks is fairly objective and it is what it is. Even though KVDP had no falls, he did have some mistakes such as the minor edge call (!) on his Triple Lutz and unstable landing on his Triple Salchow, cost him about 1 point per piece on these jumps. You could certain say Patrick Chan's errors were more serious from a GOE standpoint, which is true but factoring the higher Base Value to begin with, it sort of become a wash even at the jump level. Now layering the spins and step sequences on top of everything, no wonder Patrick Chan blew KVDP away in the TES even though the non-jump elements merely count for about 25% of the total TES whereas the jumps count for about 75%.
See, when you put it down on paper, it really isn't hard to see the why and what not. I just wish people would think more before they open their mouth.
Ok, ok point made. I just think the quad should be worth more points and that jumps done in combination should be worth more than just the base values of the jumps added together. Doing a 4t-3t-3t is harder than doing a solo 4t, a solo 3t, and a solo 3t, and yet point wise there is no distinction.