CoP Olympic report card

[Mathman]

There has been a rule added after the first COP season specifically to avoid penalizing skaters for downgraded quads counting as triples for the Zayak rule. On the other hand, downgraded triples are still counted as triples for that purpose.

Thank you for that very interesting piece of information! I didn't know that, but it is quite consistent with the overall philosophy of the New Judging System.

This thread has produced a lot of bombast along the lines, "The ISU can't tell me what to do, by gum!" Much heat but little light.

If anyone wishes actually to learn something about the judging system and how it works, instead of just blowing off steam, he/she could begin by reading this document:

http://www.isu.org/vsite/vfile/page/...-0-file,00.pdf

Next, check out the files on this page:

http://www.isu.org/vsite/vnavsite/pa...v-list,00.html

Then you will know what you are talking about.

But no one will do this. It's much more fun just to shout out opinions than to bother to learn the facts.

Do you see the relevance of this change in the rules about quads and triples to what we are talking about here? Or is this another case of, "I know what Zayak means and the ISU can't tell me any different?"

[Mathman]

Lastly, what about the coach telling the skater? "Plan "B" Sasha, Go to plan "B"!"

I don't know about Sasha, but Michelle did have a Plan B. She prepared two different endings to her routines, depending on whether she hit her triple toe/triple toe or not.

If she landed the triple/triple, then she would do a falling leaf at the end just before her final spin. If she bailed and only did a triple/double, then she would throw in an extra triple toe at that point, to get her count of triples up. (Plan B backfired in the 2001 Grand Prix final, when she went for the closing triple toe and fell, marring an otherwise outstanding program and allowing Irina to skate off with the prize.)

Actually, I liked the Plan A+ version the best. That's when she was totally feeling her oats and did two split jumps in a row at the end.

.....

No wait. Plan A++. When she did four triple Axels in a row in her closing segment in COI.

[Mathman]

PS. Since people have been following up on the Nancy Kerrigan quote that I posted, I think we should note that what she said was that the judges are required by the rules to give skaters a deduction for a flutz, and that skaters should work hard to do this element right.

That's just what the ISU rules say (the part about a deduction of one to three points for a flutz, depending on the severity). Like it or not -- and I know you don't -- that's the rule.

I'm sorry, but all sports must have rules and they must be enforced. The rules must be clearly stated and they must be enforced as written, not how we might wish them to be. If you want to know what the rules are about flutzing and the penalties for it, they are readily available on the ISU site.

You can't just have the fans vote on the Internet about what they think the rule ought to be. (This isn't the Marshall's call-in-the-vote cheesefest, LOL.)

[Mathman]

Really I have been looking at this all as "need for definitive and FOLLOWED rules." You start getting all "wafflie" about what rule you decide to follow when, and you wind up loosing credibility. The Technical score should NOT be approached with the same "flexibility" as the artistic.

Artistic is "impressionistic."
Technical is scientific, is or isn't. - Yin Yang

Yes, that is the whole point. You cannot start waffling about what rules to follow and what rules not to follow. The rule is, if you flutz you get a one to three point deduction. Period. That's the rule. No waffling allowed.

If you read the entire CoP, and not just one isolated detail, it becomes quite clear that it is not the intent of the rules to allow a mistake on one element to negate a completely different and separate element later on. That, frankly, would be absurd. If you make a mistake on an element, you get a deduction for that mistake, then on you go. To me, that's perfectly "yangy" and, indeed, is just common sense.

Try this one, as an example:

Your jump sequence is 4T, 3Lz/3T, 3A, 3A/3T.

On your opening jump, you come up short on your final revolution. All the other elements in your program you do perfectly. How should the scoring go?

Well, Joe might argue like this. A triple toe is a triple toe is a triple toe and the ISU can't tell me different. So...

You get a 5 point deduction for the underrotation on the quad attempt (4 points instead of 9). Then you get a 4 point deduction (0 credit) for the triple toe in your 3A/3T combination because it is your third triple toe. Then you get a 7.5 point deduction (0 credit) for the Axel part of the combo because it's not a combo any more.

So altogether you lost 16.5 points for underrotating your first element -- an element that was worth only 9 points to begin with! That's crazy.

But more than crazy, it's against the rules. The rules (thanks again to GKelly for helping me to understand this) -- the rules say, deduct 5 points for the underrotation of the quad, and give credit for the correctly done 3A/3T. That's what the rules say, however much we fume and bluster.

[antmanb]

As for many people (whoever they are) not worried about the difference between a lutz and a flip probably never figure skated in their lives. Figure skaters work hard to perfect their elements. I wouldn't give them a cheap 'who cares'.

Joe

But personal bug bears are another matter, i am both a fan of figure skating and and a figure skater (with a bad flutz!) and i'm all for the "mark the attempt" viewpoint. I know very well when i attempt a flip and when i attempt a lutz, the only reason i know i've done a true lutz from an outside edge rather than a flutz is that i two foot the jump! For some reason if i get a true lutz i always put the free foot down on the landing, if i get it on one foot and check the tracing i've always rocked over to the inside edge! But my set up, my arms, the checklist in my head, the pick in, the general feel of the jumps are very different.

Ant

[antmanb]

A Lutz is a jump in figure skating when a skater who is on a back outside edge toes off with his free leg; does an appropriate air turn(s) and lands on the other foot on a back outside edge. I didn't make this up. This is the rule for a Lutz.
Joe

Can you please provide evidence that the definition of a Lutz jump is in the rules...

Ant

[Mathman]

...the only reason i know i've done a true lutz from an outside edge rather than a flutz is that i two foot the jump!

[antmanb]

Yes, figure skating is a girly sport. Viva la femmes!

I have been reading up on this, and here's one girl who agrees with you -- Nancy Kerrigan. In her book Artistry of Ice she has a whole chapter on how to do a Lutz. She concludes:

"As I mentioned before, the most common error in the Lutz comes from rocking over on the blade before the jump. This actually turns the jump into a flip because you are on the inside edge, and the judges are required to deduct for the mistake. The rules dictate that you do two of each jump, and one has to be in combination. So if you do two flips and two Lutzes, but your Lutzes are flips, you should be marked down."

She goes on to give tips on how to approach the jump (position of the arms, location of the toe pick, etc.) that will help you stay on the outside edge.

"We still see people do flutzes even at the Olympic level, which indicates how difficult this jump is, but it is a mistake, and you should work to land them correctly."

Well, it's hard to argue with that. I guess you and Nancy have won me over.

But opinions are opinions and rules are rules...i might be of the opinion that the COP is a load of old crap and a worthless judging system and i might conclude that all results under COP since its inception are not valid...that's my opinion but rules is rules. Nancy made a very good opinion there but the rules are the the things that have to be followed and under 6.0 the rules clearly said you mark the attempt - a change of edge on a lutz that made it go off an inside edge was to be regarded as a flawed lutz not as a successful flip.

Ant

[Joesitz]

Which the code provides for already. A bad flutz where the other three phases of the jump are done average (base) gets 3 points instead of 6, or 1/2 credit. A fall on an underrotated 3A downgraded to a 2A gets a fraction (.2) of point after the fall deduction. A fall on any jump never allows for compensation for great height or perfect air position or intricate steps into take-off; it's -3 GOE and -1 for the fall. While I might argue that a jump with a fall should never receive more than 1/4 or 1/3 or [fill in the blank] of base, I suspect the ISU's counter-argument for rewarding 5 points (vs 9 base) for a fall on a fully rotated 4T and 3.5 (vs 7.5 base) for a fall on a fully rotated 3A is to encourage risk-taking, although many in the audience prefe an all-or-nothing approach to the big elements.

Do we see these figures in the scoring? This is why I go along with Chuckum's proposal for the Caller to say 'it was a Flutz' and may add on 'Bad One' so that the judges take note, and we would get a uniform deduction throughout the scoring - not just by one judge.

ITA. It's hard enough for skaters to improvise when they know they've missed an element, but how can a sport be credible when it penalizes the athlete without even telling him/her so that s/he can adjust?

It's hard enough for the skaters to adjust to the term FREE skate to CoP orders.

Joe

[Joesitz]

But opinions are opinions and rules are rules...i might be of the opinion that the COP is a load of old crap and a worthless judging system and i might conclude that all results under COP since its inception are not valid...that's my opinion but rules is rules. Nancy made a very good opinion there but the rules are the the things that have to be followed and under 6.0 the rules clearly said you mark the attempt - a change of edge on a lutz that made it go off an inside edge was to be regarded as a flawed lutz not as a successful flip.Ant

C'mon Ant. Nancy can skate rings around you and she's been in competitions for how many years? She knows the difference between a Lutz and a Flip. I'm just surprised you don't. She is saying the Rule is incorrect. That's not an opinion, that is a factual statement. There is a difference between a Lutz and a Flip.

Joe

[Mathman]

To me, the issue is not so much to define what constitutes proper technique on a Lutz jump. Everyone is in agreement about that.

Rather, the point that the rules must address is, what should the penalty be when the element is not executed properly.

Here the rules are very clear. If you click here (scroll down to page three) you will see exactly what the penalties are for different kinds of errors, including "starting from wrong edge."

http://www.isu.org/vsite/vfile/page/...-0-file,00.pdf

Of course we can argue about whether, in our opinions, the penalty for this particular error should be made more severe. But the overarching principle of the rules taken as a whole is that making a mistake on element A should not result in a double deduction by also negating (through a misapplication of the intent of the Zayak rule) a properly performed element B later in the program.

[Mathman]

She is saying the Rule is incorrect.

Well, not exactly. Nancy is not saying that the ISU rules are incorrect. On the contrary, she says that according to the ISU rules "the judges are required to deduct for the mistake." And "[If] your Lutzes are flips you should be marked down."

Everyone agrees with that, including the ISU rule book.

[Joesitz]

Well, not exactly. Nancy is not saying that the ISU rules are incorrect. On the contrary, she says that according to the ISU rules "the judges are required to deduct for the mistake." And "[If] your Lutzes are flips you should be marked down."

Everyone agrees with that, including the ISU rule book.

Yes, but they do not downgrade the jump from lutz to flip which is what the jumps turns out to be, so the penalty is definitely in question. If it is a wrist slap then why bother with the sport? Why not just eliminate the Lutz altogether?

A heavy penalty, on the other hand, would improve the sport in that competitors will work harder to get the proper lutz. It is possible to do a proper lutz. Just look at the Russian skaters.

Joe

[antmanb]

Viktoria Volchkova does the text book Lutz so we don't have to think in term of whether the jump is hard or not. If she perfected the jump then other senior skaters should also.

She also has a very pronounced outside edge take off on her triple flip...

BTW, If you look at the lutzes of VV and OB you will see great height. The reason is because the toe off acts as a pole vault when done properly. That is fact. Any skater when doing a proper lutz will have better height on that jump than any other.
Joe

Actually in any toe jump, the picking in leg is described as pole vaulting the skater - check out Petkevich's book explaining the jumps.

Also Joubert seems to get greater height on his flip than on his Lutz (which is off an outside edge)...also i think many of the russian males get greatest height from their triple axels....jumps which to me far more resemble a pole vaulting action because of the hook off the toe pick pushing all of the momemtum up through using the arms and free leg...the pole vaulting analogy for me only, seemed more real for the axel...but i might be alone in this!!

Ant

[antmanb]

C'mon Ant. Nancy can skate rings around you and she's been in competitions for how many years? She knows the difference between a Lutz and a Flip. I'm just surprised you don't. She is saying the Rule is incorrect. That's not an opinion, that is a factual statement. There is a difference between a Lutz and a Flip.

Joe

If she says a rule is incorrect that is most certainly an opinion and not a fact. I think it was Gkellly also saying that s/he can't necessarily tell the difference when s/he flutzes or underrotated a double salchow...good for Kerrigan if she can tell, she is an elite skater after all...

Personally a greater skater, in my opinion, is Robin Cousins - he has stated that he sometimes couldn't tell if he'd done a double or a triple jump...if its all the same with you i'll go with Robin's view thanks all the same

Ant