Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 137

Thread: Hamilton Shares His Thoughts on Judging System

  1. #31
    Custom Title Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    28,357
    Quote Originally Posted by SeaniBu
    Why not just a flat out Half the points - Quad "failed"(for what ever reason) 2.5 or less?
    That's basically what they do. The point value for a quad toe is 9.0. If you fall you get 5.0.

  2. #32
    Custom Title Joesitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    20,185
    Quote Originally Posted by Mathman
    That's basically what they do. The point value for a quad toe is 9.0. If you fall you get 5.0.
    That is provided the Caller sees 4 air rotations. Am I correct? It's not just a statement on paper that the skater is going for a quad.

    Yet a triple lutz that the caller sees as not complete in its air rotations, and then is downgraded to a double lutz goes from 6.0 to 1.9 or -4.1 points and then is judged on how the downgraded jump was executed.

    Apparently, the disruptive process in the skating flow is immaterial with the quad toe. Maybe some judge will take off -1 in the PCS scores. am I correct?

    It never worked for Michael Weiss but nowadays if a skater can turn 4 times in the air, it's worth the risk. In fact, it's not much of a risk.

    Joe

  3. #33
    Custom Title antmanb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    UK - Manchester
    Posts
    4,913
    Quote Originally Posted by attyfan
    I agree that it is a sport and athletes do fall, but that doesn't mean it is a good idea to encourage athletes to fall by encouraging them to do quads they can't do -- which is the critical difference Jeff's tactic and what occaisionally happens to Stephane or Brian. Under the 6.0 system, when falls were punished more harshly, the judges still had ways of rewarding "risk" -- but no one used a fall as a "tactic" back then
    But how do you ever get a consistant quad if you can't put in a program before you truly have and not come under fire?

    Joubert had at least one season where he hardly ever (if ever) landed a clean quad in competition - i don't see why he should get the benefit of the doubt and buttle not.

    I can't see that Buttle plans his quad to fall - he plans to land it but often does fall. Should we complain about Miki and her quad attempts too?

    Ant

  4. #34
    Custom Title antmanb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    UK - Manchester
    Posts
    4,913
    Quote Originally Posted by attyfan
    I agree that it is a sport and athletes do fall, but that doesn't mean it is a good idea to encourage athletes to fall by encouraging them to do quads they can't do -- which is the critical difference Jeff's tactic and what occaisionally happens to Stephane or Brian. Under the 6.0 system, when falls were punished more harshly, the judges still had ways of rewarding "risk" -- but no one used a fall as a "tactic" back then
    Sorry just adding to say i think they were treated the same under 6.0 - remember i think it was 1995 worlds were Stojko stepped out of his quad attempt but still wound up with one or two 5.9s?

    The skaters with flawed quad attempts including falls always came out ahead of teh 8 clean triple crowd in the few seasons leading up to the introduction of CoP...in this regard i don't think the judging systems are that different.

    Ant

  5. #35
    Custom Title antmanb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    UK - Manchester
    Posts
    4,913
    Quote Originally Posted by Joesitz
    That is provided the Caller sees 4 air rotations. Am I correct? It's not just a statement on paper that the skater is going for a quad.

    Yet a triple lutz that the caller sees as not complete in its air rotations, and then is downgraded to a double lutz goes from 6.0 to 1.9 or -4.1 points and then is judged on how the downgraded jump was executed.

    Apparently, the disruptive process in the skating flow is immaterial with the quad toe. Maybe some judge will take off -1 in the PCS scores. am I correct?

    It never worked for Michael Weiss but nowadays if a skater can turn 4 times in the air, it's worth the risk. In fact, it's not much of a risk.

    Joe
    Actually, that's a really good point - Mike Weiss would do really well under CoP with his two footed quads - the quad Lutz he did in Nagano was fully rotated and just had the free toe go down for support on the landing.

    I'm guessing now but maybe the punishment for downgrading a triple to a double being very harsh is intentional, taking the line, these are supposed to be great athletes who can do triple jumps, so if thhey mess it up and have it downgraded to a double then fair enough, but the quad being a riskier element should be penalised so much??

    Or perhaps not enough thought went into it and the ISU don't like eating humble pie.

    Ant

  6. #36
    MY TVC 1 5 SeaniBu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Watching the Wheels
    Posts
    4,984
    Quote Originally Posted by Mathman
    That's basically what they do. The point value for a quad toe is 9.0. If you fall you get 5.0.
    Basically? Just thinking of the "dudes" that think that half might be 4.5 or less. Stupid it could be - likely most of what I say might be, but like I say it was Just A Thought.

  7. #37
    Shoe Diva
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Detroit, MI - So Glad to be Home!
    Posts
    2,837

    Question

    Quote Originally Posted by antmanb
    I can't see that Buttle plans his quad to fall - he plans to land it but often does fall. Should we complain about Miki and her quad attempts too?

    Ant
    Since Buttle's quad is a major beef I have with CoP, here's a question ~ has he ever landed a clean quad in competition? I don't remember seeing one, but since I'm not a big Buttle fan, that doesn't mean I could've missed it...

  8. #38
    Custom Title Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    28,357
    Quote Originally Posted by Joesitz
    That is provided the Caller sees 4 air rotations. Am I correct? It's not just a statement on paper that the skater is going for a quad.

    Yet a triple lutz that the caller sees as not complete in its air rotations, and then is downgraded to a double lutz goes from 6.0 to 1.9 or -4.1 points and then is judged on how the downgraded jump was executed.
    I think that's correct. If the jump is downgraded AND you fall, then you're out of luck:

    Quad Toe downgraded to a triple, with a fall:

    9.0 base value, downgrade to 4.0 for short rotation, -3.00 GOE (mandatory), -1.00 fall penalty (mandatory) = 0.00 total for the element.

    Triple Lutz downgraded to a double, with a fall:

    6.0 base value, downgrade to 1.9, -1.00 GOE, -1.00 fall penalty = -0.1 for the element.

    To me, that's fair enough. If you totally screw up you get 0 points.

    I think that the basis of our complaint about the fall on the fully rotated quad is that it throws the rating scale out of balance, giving way too much credit for one aspect of the jump (rotating in the air) compared to others (landing shiny side down, for instance).

    MM
    Last edited by Mathman; 07-05-2006 at 02:27 PM.

  9. #39
    Custom Title Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    28,357
    Quote Originally Posted by Kwanford Wife
    Since Buttle's quad is a major beef I have with CoP, here's a question ~ has he ever landed a clean quad in competition? I don't remember seeing one, but since I'm not a big Buttle fan, that doesn't mean I could've missed it...
    I just checked Olympics, Worlds, GP Final and all GP events for the last three seasons, and it looks like the answer is no, Jeff has never landed a quad in competition.

    2005-2006 season. No quad attempt in any Short Program (or qualifying round at Worlds). LP: Olympics = fall. Worlds = no attempt. GP Final = no attempt. Eric Bompard = fall. Skate Canada = fall.

    2004-2005 season. No quad attempt in any SP or qual. Worlds = no attempt. GP Final = no attempt. Cup of China = no attempt. Skate Canada = fall.

    2003-2004 season. Worlds (not there -- Sandhu and Ferreira made the Canadian team). GP Finals (withdrew). NHK SP = fall (it was his intended combo, but he didn't do the second jump. In that season there was only a -3.00 GOE deduction and no extra -1.00 fall deduction. After the 2003-04 season the ISU decided to penalize falls more heavily by tacking on the extra -1.00.)

    NHK LP = Solo triple toe (2nd element, probably intended to be a quad).

    Skate Canada SP = fall, no combo. Skate Canada LP = Solo 3T.

    So basically, I would have to say that the quad is not Jeffrey's friend.
    Last edited by Mathman; 07-05-2006 at 02:30 PM.

  10. #40
    Shoe Diva
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Detroit, MI - So Glad to be Home!
    Posts
    2,837
    Quote Originally Posted by Mathman
    I just checked Olympics, Worlds, GP Final and all GP events for the last three seasons, and it looks like the answer is no, Jeff has never landed a quad in competition.


    So basically, I would have to say that the quad is not Jeffrey's friend.
    Thank you MM!!! And as a former Detroiter, my heart goes out to all of you in the Motor City two days after Black Monday - Stevie AND Ben?!? very sad...

  11. #41
    MY TVC 1 5 SeaniBu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Watching the Wheels
    Posts
    4,984
    Quote Originally Posted by Mathman
    I think that's correct. If the jump is downgraded AND you fall, then you're out of luck:

    Quad Toe .......
    ....To me, that's fair enough. If you totally screw up you get 0 points.

    I think that the basis of our complaint about the fall on the fully rotated quad is that it throws the rating scale out of balance, giving way too much credit for one aspect of the jump (rotating in the air) compared to others (landing shiny side down, for instance).

    MM
    You really know how to make perfect and reasonable sense. I basically just think "memorize MM posts." That way I can exsplain it to others and I (via the "Mman") make sense for a change. You can make logic simple leaving no question to the answer.

    After that, how could it possibly be anymore fair. You're so cool

  12. #42
    Go NJ Devils
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    2,700
    Quote Originally Posted by Mathman
    I just checked Olympics, Worlds, GP Final and all GP events for the last three seasons, and it looks like the answer is no, Jeff has never landed a quad in competition.
    Somewhere you missed one. He landed a 4T in one program a couple of years back, and it may have been in combination, but had so much adrenaline going, he messed up on other jumps.

  13. #43
    Custom Title Joesitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    20,185
    Quote Originally Posted by Mathman
    I think that's correct. If the jump is downgraded AND you fall, then you're out of luck
    Not sure what is correct. Is it the quad or the triple. Apparently, they are dealt with differently.

    I think that the basis of our complaint about the fall on the fully rotated quad is that it throws the rating scale out of balance, giving way too much credit for one aspect of the jump (rotating in the air) compared to others (landing shiny side down, for instance). MM
    ITA. There is apparently, a credit for 'risk taking' in the quad but not for other jumps. Not exactly in the Rules but definitely in Practice.

    Joe

  14. #44
    Custom Title Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    28,357
    Quote Originally Posted by Joesitz
    Not sure what is correct. Is it the quad or the triple. Apparently, they are dealt with differently.
    Both. What you said about the quad and what you said about the triple Lutz in post #32 are both correct, I believe.

    However, they are dealt with the same. If you under-rotate a quad it gets downgraded to a triple. If you under-rotate a triple it gets downgraded to a double.

    In both cases, then there are additional points taken off in GOE for various kinds of mistakes, including the maximum GOE penalty for a fall, plus an extra -1 fall deduction.
    ITA. There is apparently, a credit for 'risk taking' in the quad but not for other jumps. Not exactly in the Rules but definitely in Practice.
    For the most part, I think the "extra credit" is built into the point structure. You do lose points for various mistakes on a quad, but the starting level is so high (9.0 for a quad toe) that even if you lose a point for this and a couple of points for that, you still end up a big winner.

    As you say, "in practice," that's a different matter. Just like the ladies with their triple/triples, tha judges do like the quad boys. (As well they should, IMHO.)

    Still, though, ... this "risk" thing is bothering me. "Taking a risk" means you get a big reward if you make it and a big penalty if you fail. The way the quad is scored under the CoP, I see the big reward. I don't see the big penalty. Where is the "risk?"

    Hockeyfan and Soogar have pointed out that if you fall on a quad, maybe (or maybe not) you will do worse (or better) in the rest of the program.

    But that's not what we are talking about. We are talking about how many points the CoP awards for a fully rotated quad and how few it takes off for a fall on the element.

    MM

  15. #45
    Custom Title Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    28,357
    Quote Originally Posted by hockeyfan228
    Somewhere you missed one. He landed a 4T in one program a couple of years back, and it may have been in combination, but had so much adrenaline going, he messed up on other jumps.
    You are right as always, Hockeyfan. Jeff landed a quad toe/triple toe combination in the Short Program at Four Continents in 2003.

    Jeff said at the time:

    "I think I got a little excited after the combo. That was the first time I ever landed a quad toe in competition. To do a quad-triple in the short was a pretty big thing. I got a little excited and a little stiff in the knees after that so that my triple Axel and Lutz suffered."

    This was before the CoP, so I don't know how it would have been scored (as far as rotations, etc.) under the NJS.

    (Did he also land one at 2003 Worlds, or is that an urban myth?)

    Incidentally, the next season he attempted quad toe/triple toe as his combination in the Short Program in both of his Grand Prix events. But in the longs he consistently backed off to a triple.

    This might be a good plan for Jeff. Give it a shot in the SP. If it works, you've got a bunch of points to carry into the Long. Then in the LP, do what you can do, concentrate on skating a clean program with great choreography and interpretation. It might work.

    BTW, last season his SP combo was a wimpy 3F/3T.

    MM
    Last edited by Mathman; 07-05-2006 at 08:26 PM.

Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •