2014 Worlds - Ladies Free Skating

[CarneAsada]

I totally disagree with you and think you get it all wrong, but I have a question. I'd really like to know what in your opinion whould happen when a skater underrotates a jump. Let's say Mao does her usual setup into the triple axel and underrotates it more than usual, let's by 2/3 rotation but still manages to land it. Useing your logic, one should argue that her setup for those 2,33 rotations is too long and she should get a hit in the PCS for her choreography.

Mao has almost never underrotated a 3A attempt in competition by 2/3 rotations, and I have never seen her do so without having a horrible splat. In fact when she underrotates it significantly about 1/4 there is usually another landing error that accompanies it. If she pops, steps out, or splats on a 3A attempt in her Rachmaninoff LP, it fails to achieve the intended effect. But if she lands the jump with only an UR and no other errors, obviously her PCS shouldn't take a hit.

 

[Blades of Passion]

I'd really like to know what in your opinion whould happen when a skater underrotates a jump. Let's say Mao does her usual setup into the triple axel and underrotates it more than usual, let's by 2/3 rotation but still manages to land it. Useing your logic, one should argue that her setup for those 2,33 rotations is too long and she should get a hit in the PCS for her choreography.

You're really missing the point.

An underrotated jump doesn't change the look of the choreography hardly at all if the jump is clean. The skater is still going up in the air, doing a good amount of turns, and then exiting on a flowing edge. Here's a perfect example of an underrotated 3Axel from Mao that was still beautifully executed - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hoZUjtm1LJw

If the skater lands 2/3 short, then it again depends on how well the landing was controlled and what the context of the jump was. There will be a clear turn on the ice, but if there isn't any kind of wobble on the landing then it might not be too detrimental. Here's an example of that - Lu Chen 1998 Olymic LP Triple-Triple attempt. Her second Triple is immensely short but she remains upright and on the edge and her free leg is in correct position. It doesn't hurt the program more than if she had just done a 3Toe+2Toe, although a fully rotated 3Toe+3Toe would have been spectacular at the very end of the program like that.

 

[CarneAsada]

You're really missing the point.

An underrotated jump doesn't change the look of the choreography hardly at all if the jump is clean. The skater is still going up in the air, doing a good amount of turns, and then exiting on a flowing edge. Here's a perfect example of an underrotated 3Axel from Mao that was still beautifully executed - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hoZUjtm1LJw

Well, in David21's opinion, every time Mao underrotates a jump she deserves -2 points for the entire attempt and it is a far greater crime than his beloved Caro popping a telegraphed jump.

 

[David21]

Mao has almost never underrotated a 3A attempt in competition by 2/3 rotations, and I have never seen her do so without having a horrible splat. In fact when she underrotates it significantly about 1/4 there is usually another landing error that accompanies it. If she pops, steps out, or splats on a 3A attempt in her Rachmaninoff LP, it fails to achieve the intended effect. But if she lands the jump with only an UR and no other errors, obviously her PCS shouldn't take a hit.

Well, in David21's opinion, every time Mao underrotates a jump she deserves -2 points for the entire attempt and it is a far greater crime than his beloved Caro popping a telegraphed jump.

Congrats for completely missing the point of my posts. If you don't have anything to add to the discussion then I kindly suggest that you stop with your lame BS trolling.

You're really missing the point.

An underrotated jump doesn't change the look of the choreography hardly at all if the jump is clean.

(An underotated jump by defintion isn't clean but that's another discussion.)
A double flip instead of a triple flip doesn't change the look of the program, either. If Mao decides to do a double axel instead of a triple axel at the beginning of her program, her choreography suddenly does not get worse - and useing your logic that is basically what you are saying.

The skater is still going up in the air, doing a good amount of turns, and then exiting on a flowing edge. Here's a perfect example of an underrotated 3Axel from Mao that was still beautifully executed - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hoZUjtm1LJw

If the skater lands 2/3 short, then it again depends on how well the landing was controlled and what the context of the jump was. There will be a clear turn on the ice, but if there isn't any kind of wobble on the landing then it might not be too detrimental. Here's an example of that - Lu Chen 1998 Olymic LP Triple-Triple attempt. Her second Triple is immensely short but she remains upright and on the edge and her free leg is in correct position. It doesn't hurt the program more than if she had just done a 3Toe+2Toe, although a fully rotated 3Toe+3Toe would have been spectacular at the very end of the program like that.

This is different from what you said before, though. You said that the amount of rotations of a jump element affects your choreo. If you underrotate a jump, you have less revolutions than you had planned in your original choreography.

 

[nguyhm]

I usually admit when she is over scored and I don't think so. She has before in the past like CoR or Olympics and I always admit it. I least think she landed in the right spot on the podium. Maybe Anna could have beat her if she wasn't scored so low in the SP but Yulia came in with 4 Golds this year and a Silver. The judges never let go of that. Caro should be in 4th at least IMO. Yulia has a deceptively tough program. She just makes it look fairly easy. Even with a fall it was a great skate. IMO

I personally wish Yulia would hold her moves/positions just a bit longer to allow us time to take them all in (would the word "savor" be appropriate?). Her moves felt a bit rushed, more so in this WC than before, but then again this is just me and I'm not an expert, just expressing how her skating felt to me. I like her a lot and am hoping that the artistry will develop/improve as she matures. The talent and the passion are definitely there and she always gives it all on the ice, making her the one I will cheer for in the next few years.

 

[nguyhm]

W H Y was Mao's triple-axel given an under-rotation call? And even more so the 3 flip-3 loop, which was totally rotated! ***!?

The 3A looked perfect to me. I'm glad she won otherwise it would be another hardbreak for me, still irritated though.

 

[Blades of Passion]

This is different from what you said before, though. You said that the amount of rotations of a jump element affects your choreo. If you underrotate a jump, you have less revolutions than you had planned in your original choreography.

*sigh*

It's about the differential. As I said, doing a single flip instead of a triple flip creates a completely different look. Underrotating a triple flip doesn't really change the look. In terms of the choreography the only thing different is the skater turning on the ice for .05 seconds instead of in the air.

 

[zamboni step]

This is different from what you said before, though. You said that the amount of rotations of a jump element affects your choreo. If you underrotate a jump, you have less revolutions than you had planned in your original choreography.

No, you don't seem to understand that a singled jump ruins the dramatic impact the jump might have had, and if the choreography doesn't have the impact....then the choreography just isn't as good. Simple as that. In regards to whether under-rotating a jump should also lower the CH mark....when you pop a jump, you feel shock/sadness/maybe glee if you really hate the skater, whereas if the UR the jump you put it in as a sidenote, it doesn't actually affect your impression of the performance or the choreography at all.

 

[Sam-Skwantch]

No, you don't seem to understand that a singled jump ruins the dramatic impact the jump might have had, and if the choreography doesn't have the impact....then the choreography just isn't as good. Simple as that. In regards to whether under-rotating a jump should also lower the CH mark....when you pop a jump, you feel shock/sadness/maybe glee if you really hate the skater, whereas if the UR the jump you put it in as a sidenote, it doesn't actually affect your impression of the performance or the choreography at all.

:agree:

 

[David21]

No, you don't seem to understand that a singled jump ruins the dramatic impact the jump might have had, and if the choreography doesn't have the impact....then the choreography just isn't as good. Simple as that.

In other words, when Mao decides to do a double axel instead of a triple axel at the beginning of her program, her choreo is suddenly worse than before.
No judge in the world would seriously follow that logic, I'm quit sure of that. If anything, the loss of impact you are talking about should be considered under P/E and not under choreography.

 

[David21]

when you pop a jump, you feel shock/sadness/maybe glee if you really hate the skater, whereas if the UR the jump you put it in as a sidenote, it doesn't actually affect your impression of the performance or the choreography at all.

For people who are able to notice underrotations, it indeed does affect your impression of the performance...

 

[zamboni step]

In other words, when Mao decides to do a double axel instead of a triple axel at the beginning of her program, her choreo is suddenly worse than before.
No judge in the world would seriously follow that logic, I'm quit sure of that. If anything, the loss of impact you are talking about should be considered under P/E and not under choreography.

It should be considered under both, not everything is related to strictly one factor of PCS. For instance; if there are transitions that go very well with the music, that would fall under both TR and CH. If the choreography doesn't leave as much of an impact, then it's because the choreography isn't as good as it could be. I do see where you're coming from, and you make a fair point, but that isn't how the system works. Not everything is binded to simply one factor.

For people who are able to notice underrotations, it indeed does affect your impression of the performance...

But a UR is a million times more subtle than a pop, I can identify URs but they don't make me gasp the same way a pop or a fall does. If they affect your ability to enjoy the performance without interruption as much as a fall, pop or step-out, your thought process is odd.

 

[David21]

It should be considered under both, not everything is related to strictly one factor of PCS. For instance; if there are transitions that go very well with the music, that would fall under both TR and CH. If the choreography doesn't leave as much of an impact, then it's because the choreography isn't as good as it could be. I do see where you're coming from, and you make a fair point, but that isn't how the system works. Not everything is binded to simply one factor.

Of course not everything is simply one factor. But among the PCS, CC is the one who by definition is the most stable one from one competition to the next IMO. It is about how the program is structrued, the intent and the concept of it. If you perform the choreo not well, then other PCS are affected.

People are on this forum told me before that the PCS of one skater should always be the same in one season, because things like skating skill do not vary. I disagreed with them and told then even things like skating skills can vary in different compeitions because on a bad day you skate with less speed etc. But in this thread I've heard for the first time that a step out or pop of a triple jump affects your score for choreography and I'm really puzzled how you can anyone think that.

But a UR is a million times more subtle than a pop, I can identify URs but they don't make me gasp the same way a pop or a fall does. If they affect your ability to enjoy the performance without interruption as much as a fall, pop or step-out, your thought process is odd.

Personally, my enjoyment of a program does not depend on the number of the revolutions of the jumps. A pop which isn't too disruptive doesn't take away from that. If a step-out or fall looks bad and it affects the rest of the program and not only one element for 0.5 seconds, then it does affect my enjoyment. And I think that's excatly how the judges are supposed to use the PCS. When the technical mistakes affect the performance and the rest of the program, then - and only then - the judges are supposed to consider that in the PCS. And among these program components, PE is the first one who should be affected by technical mistakes, and CC is the last one.

 

[johnsmith72]

Of course not everything is simply one factor. But among the PCS, CC is the one who by definition is the most stable one from one competition to the next IMO. It is about how the program is structrued, the intent and the concept of it. If you perform the choreo not well, then other PCS are affected.

People are on this forum told me before that the PCS of one skater should always be the same in one season, because things like skating skill do not vary. I disagreed with them and told then even things like skating skills can vary in different compeitions because on a bad day you skate with less speed etc. But in this thread I've heard for the first time that a step out or pop of a triple jump affects your score for choreography and I'm really puzzled how you can anyone think that.





Personally, my enjoyment of a program does not depend on the number of the revolutions of the jumps. A pop which isn't too disruptive doesn't take away from that. If a step-out or fall looks bad and it affects the rest of the program and not only one element for 0.5 seconds, then it does affect my enjoyment. And I think that's excatly how the judges are supposed to use the PCS. When the technical mistakes affect the performance and the rest of the program, then - and only then - the judges are supposed to consider that in the PCS. And among these program components, PE is the first one who should be affected by technical mistakes, and CC is the last one.

While I agree with most of this, I think Carolina's execution, transition, choreography score should have been lower. Her popped jumps were messy and did disrupt the flow of the program. The choreography centered around the jumps in Bolero for most of the program. When she had a messy fall and pop then the choreography was less good.

 

[zamboni step]

Of course not everything is simply one factor. But among the PCS, CC is the one who by definition is the most stable one from one competition to the next IMO. It is about how the program is structrued, the intent and the concept of it. If you perform the choreo not well, then other PCS are affected.

People are on this forum told me before that the PCS of one skater should always be the same in one season, because things like skating skill do not vary. I disagreed with them and told then even things like skating skills can vary in different compeitions because on a bad day you skate with less speed etc. But in this thread I've heard for the first time that a step out or pop of a triple jump affects your score for choreography and I'm really puzzled how you can anyone think that.





Personally, my enjoyment of a program does not depend on the number of the revolutions of the jumps. A pop which isn't too disruptive doesn't take away from that. If a step-out or fall looks bad and it affects the rest of the program and not only one element for 0.5 seconds, then it does affect my enjoyment. And I think that's excatly how the judges are supposed to use the PCS. When the technical mistakes affect the performance and the rest of the program, then - and only then - the judges are supposed to consider that in the PCS. And among these program components, PE is the first one who should be affected by technical mistakes, and CC is the last one.

My point isn't that it should always lead to a reduction in CH, it just tends to, as the skater either gives up on using the choreography well or just doesn't have the same sparkle. Caro didn't here, she didn't let it die but it wasn't the same as Olympics. At points she looked worried about the jumps, and the constant mistakes made the choreography less effective, if the choreography is less effective, it should take a hit. An example of a time it shouldn't take a hit is her 2013 Worlds SP where she still performed it like nothing had happened. If CH weren't depended on how the skater executed it, then a skater such as Zhang Kexin could have the most beautifully choreograohed program and receive top CH marks but low everything else, that's not quite right.

 

[CarneAsada]

But a UR is a million times more subtle than a pop, I can identify URs but they don't make me gasp the same way a pop or a fall does. If they affect your ability to enjoy the performance without interruption as much as a fall, pop or step-out, your thought process is odd.

Speaking seriously, we can look at Carolina's 2013 Worlds FS as an example. It actually was one of the best performances she gave of Bolero presentation-wise even if it was not all there technically. She had a minor underrotation, a pop, and a huge fall. The UR on her 3F-3T was minor and didn't get called. It hardly affected my enjoyment of the performance at all. The pop on her 3Loop mostly felt unfortunate as the audience was just starting to clap to the beat after her hip wiggle and blown kiss. The dramatic fall on her Salchow actually improved the ending even though it was called << IMO as it was like a dramatic leap of faith followed by a tumble down to earth, matched very well with the ending of the music, and it was a real pity she had to get up to avoid a deduction. But other posters tell me that they found it extremely disruptive and they were bothered by how she finished behind the music. Either way, she was really selling the performance throughout the whole program, so I don't think it deserved any hits in PCS.

How did her performance this year compare? Well, she was wobbling in her ending pose, the second pop had a crappy landing, and the 3F-3T was an outright fall instead of just a little UR. You could argue that she didn't really miss any choreography because there is literally nothing leading in or out of the jumps for several seconds anyway, but that just makes the errors more disappointing.

 

[David21]

My point isn't that it should always lead to a reduction in CH, it just tends to, as the skater either gives up on using the choreography well or just doesn't have the same sparkle. Caro didn't here, she didn't let it die but it wasn't the same as Olympics. At points she looked worried about the jumps, and the constant mistakes made the choreography less effective, if the choreography is less effective, it should take a hit.

No, it doesn't tend to. I guess we have to agree to disagree because that's not how I understand the rules. The choreo is what you have and have to work with. It can become less effective but that is because of your poor performance of it which should take a hit then.

Choreography/Composition: An intentional, developed and/or original arrangement of all types of movements according to the principles of proportion, unity, space, pattern, structure and phrasing.

Performance/Execution: Performance – The involvement of the Couple physically, emotionally and intellectually as they translate the intent of the music and the choreography.
Execution – The quality of movement and precision in delivery. This includes harmony of movement.

 

[sk8in]

No, you don't seem to understand that a singled jump ruins the dramatic impact the jump might have had, and if the choreography doesn't have the impact....then the choreography just isn't as good. Simple as that. In regards to whether under-rotating a jump should also lower the CH mark....when you pop a jump, you feel shock/sadness/maybe glee if you really hate the skater, whereas if the UR the jump you put it in as a sidenote, it doesn't actually affect your impression of the performance or the choreography at all.

Choreography isn't just supposed to be judged on an artistic/emotional impression though. It is about the timing, and the unity of the movements. I still really don't get this argument. The triple flip that Gracie Gold does and the triple flip that Mao Asada does are aspiring to be the same thing. They have differences in technique, but this is based on their physical ability. They don't choose to do it any particular way. I get how a fall can ruin the impression of a program, but that's an emotional reaction. You're painting "choreography" with too broad a brush.
If Jason Brown did 3 quads in his Riverdance would he really deserve highers PCS for choreography because quads are more exciting? Asking judges to parse the emotional impact of a particular jump just seems ludicrous.

 

[Blades of Passion]

Choreography isn't just supposed to be judged on an artistic/emotional impression though. It is about the timing, and the unity of the movements. I still really don't get this argument.

It should definitely be judged on artistic impression, in part. That's point of unity of movements - that they create ideas and form something greater than their individual parts (aka ART).

The triple flip that Gracie Gold does and the triple flip that Mao Asada does are aspiring to be the same thing. They have differences in technique, but this is based on their physical ability. They don't choose to do it any particular way.

All choreography is based on physical ability. You work with what you've got. Midori Ito could deliver certain programs better than anyone else because her massive jumps change the look of the choreography. Sasha Cohen could deliver certain programs better than anyone else because her amazing extension allowed her to create choreography that others couldn't.

If Jason Brown did 3 quads in his Riverdance would he really deserve highers PCS for choreography because quads are more exciting?

Depends on how the program was changed to incorporate those Quads. If he did a Quad to open that program the choreography and interpretation become worse because he'd have to take out the spiral and it would work with the gentleness of the music as well.

The Triple Axels and first Triple Lutz in that program could be replaced with Quads and it might make the program better, although he'd need to figure out some kind of quicksteps to incorporate before the 3rd Quad or else he'd be losing part of the character of the movement and would be off the timing of the music.

 

[cuon_alpinus]

Google translate it

Bad media reporters ((((
http://www.sovsport.ru/gazeta/article-item/699668