I'm just talking about the CoP system in general comparision with 6.0 system, which has been used so long. So when a new system is developed, you have to use some standard ones as bench mark. In this case it is the old 6.0 system, since it has been used so long. in 6.0 system, While you step out or two footed quad might get some credit in 6.0 system, but a falled quad definetely got no credit from judges.antmanb said:While i agree with you about the SP I diagree about the LP - the official rule book said (now i'm paraphrasing but i'm fairly sure i'm prtty much spot on with the language) that a failed quad jump should be given no more credit than successful double jump. Strictly speaking that's not no credit that's the same as a clean double. Now i realise at the moment that a failed quad is about as good as an clean easier base triple and agree that something should be done but it is a misconception that the old system didn't reward failed jumps.
Plus there's the small matter of the judges just giving one mark out for technical. If a judge gives a 5.8 then how do we know how much weight they may or may not have given a failed quad?
Ant