1. 0
Originally Posted by Zuranthium
If you aren't taking any steps inbetween the jumps, I think that should still count as a combination.
The "+SEQ" means that there were steps between. As far as I can see, the rules for a combo have not changed -- you can still do a maximum of three jumps (and only one combo with three jumps).

BTW, does anyone know what the rationale is for not being allowed to do two double Axels in sequence? Both Michelle Kwan (closing group number in 2005 COI) and Kurt Browning (Don't Fence Me In) have done four in a row in exhibition programs, and it looks really cool.

2. 0
I just don't see overrotating as a bad thing if it looks clean.

Often times your landing might be bad on a 2.5 jump, but other times it means you are doing 3 full revolutions with just a clean half rotation done on the ice instead of the air. In Shizuka Arakawa's 2004 Worlds Short Program, she only did 2.5 revolutions in the air for the second part of her 3Lutz/3Toe combination, but without the slow-mo you could barely tell anything was wrong because the extra half rotation of the blade on the ice was totally clean. In these cases I think it should be counted as a double jump with a bonus.

3. 0
Maybe they figure that you deserve a penalty because you landed on the wrong edge -- say, a forward inside edge instead of the required back inside edge. (?)

Just guessing. I agree that the penalty for underrotation seems out of line compared to that for other mistakes. You have already lost the majority of the jump's value by the downgrade.

4. 0
Originally Posted by Mathman
The "+SEQ" means that there were steps between. As far as I can see, the rules for a combo have not changed -- you can still do a maximum of three jumps (and only one combo with three jumps).
I think that rule should be changed as far as a maximum of three. As long as each jump is different from the preceding one, what is the problem? Obviously a 3Lutz/2Toe/2Toe/2Toe/2Toe/2Toe/2Toe combo would be very boring, but imagine a 3Lutz/2Toe/Half Loop/2 Sal/2 Loop. Brilliant.

I myself have been working on 2Axle/Half Loop/2Sal/2Toe/2Loop. Not that it's consistent or anything.....

5. 0
Originally Posted by Mathman

They did? Isn't it still 4.0, as always?
I meant the 3Twist. I've edited my post so I don't confuse anyone else.

Originally Posted by Mathman
But that would be an 8-jump Combo, and the last 5 jumps would get no credit

It would have to be more like 3Lo+[mohawk/3turn]+2Lo+half Lo+2Lo etc. Although I don't know enought about skating technique to know what edges mohawks and three turns are done with, and what the legalities of getting on the correct take-off edge are.

I think they'd be more like the lovely sequences that your Dorothy and Janet Lynn used, and that Gordeeva/Grinkov did in their pairs routines.

Originally Posted by Mathman
s the Charlotte a spiral or is it a moves-in-the-field element? Do skaters do a Charlotte on an edge or on the flat? I don't think I have ever seen a change of edge Charlotte, or even one done in an arc.

MM
You're probably right. I haven't seen a full Charlotte on an edge, but I've seen Kwan and Slutskaya do penche's on an edge. (135-150 degrees with a forward lean.)

6. 0
Originally Posted by Mathman

BTW, does anyone know what the rationale is for not being allowed to do two double Axels in sequence? Bith Michelle Kwan (closing group number in 2005 COI) and Kurt Browning (Don't Fence Me In) have done four in a row in exhibition programs, and it looks really cool.
Inoue/Baldwin did a 2A+2A sequence at the Olympics. I didn't see a rule change for next season that prohibits this sequence specifically. Did I miss it?

7. 0
Originally Posted by Mathman
Here are the rules on underrotation of jumps. If it is underrotated and downgraded, the judges are supposed to take off an additional -1 to -3 off the downgraded base value.
Keyword here is supposed.

If it is slightly underroted but not downgraded, the judges are supposed to take off -2 from the full base value.
'supposed' again. What is the definition of 'slightly' underrotated? Where is the Caller on all of this?

This is not a change from last year, BTW. So, for instance, if the judges were following the rules on Lambiel's downgraded triple Axel, the fact that 8 of the 12 judges gave Stephane 0 or positive GOEs means that those eight not only thought that the jump was rotated enough to be called a triple, but in fact was a fully rotated triple, all 1260 degrees with no cheat whatever.
This was my argument after seeing it LIVE in Calgary. It was not a popular call at the Worlds. It seemed as if the Caller was just expecting an underrotation because of previous 3As in competition.

I think there isn't much change in the ISU regarding underrotations.

And the Flutz remains a legal jump without calling it by its true name.

Joe

8. 0
Originally Posted by Joesitz
What is the definition of 'slightly' underrotated? Where is the Caller on all of this?
"Slightly" means less than a quarter turn. In other words, it is underrotated, but not so badly as to be downgraded.

As I understand it, the caller's only job is to say yes or no, it was more than a quarter turn underrotaed or not.
This was my argument after seeing it LIVE in Calgary. It was not a popular call at the Worlds. It seemed as if the Caller was just expecting an underrotation because of previous 3As in competition.
That argument was quite correct. I didn't competely understand it at the time. (That is, I did not realize that a 0 or 1 GOE meant that the judge thought it wasn't underrotated AT ALL, much less by more than a quarter turn. Both you and Antman tried to explain it to me at the time, but somehow it didn't click in my mind (what mind? LOL).)

I think the issue of technical specialists and judges "expecting" skaters to do well or poorly on certain elements is quite prevalent.
I think there isn't much change in the ISU regarding underrotations.

And the Flutz remains a legal jump without calling it by its true name.
Yes, there is no change in either of these. Same rules as last year.

9. 0
Originally Posted by hockeyfan228
The fire hydrant, Charlotte, arabesque (both front and back), side extension to back spiral, and unassisted attitude --rarely done; Cohen used it in exhibition as an entrance to her Charlotte -- are all spirals without hand assists.
Question; many people do grab their leg or boot with a charlotte, but it isn't considered hand-assisted? I never really thought about that! The others I listed (fan and abrasque spirals), but we DO see many of those (poorly) done positions in addition to beillmanns so I doubt we'll see much changes in the spiral sequences, unless I read wrong and you can only do ONE beillmann position to get a level 4.

I like when skaters go from on position to the next in their spirals without dropping the free leg-the two popular transitions seem to be how Irina/Elena/others do fan position to backwards abrasque, Sasha/Shiz/others do Y-spiral to fan. Alissa does side catch to forward traveling abrasque. The skid/slide move gets credit as being difficult under COP, so I wish that those kinds of transitions also upped the level as well, because, IMO, it shows strength and blade control.

10. 0

## Correction

Oh, wait a minute. That's all wrong, what I said about jump sequences. The old rules allowed multiple jumps (more than three), too. So this is not a change.

Old rule: A jump sequence may consist of any number of jumps of any number of revolutions linked by steps (not more than 2 and not crossovers), hops, mazurkas and non-listed jumps immediately following each other, while maintaining the jump rhythm (knee).

New rule: A jump sequence may consist of any number of jumps of any number of revolutions that may be linked by non-listed jumps immediately following each while maintaining the jump rhythm (knee); there cannot be more than two three turns/Mohawks during the sequence; there can be no crossovers or stroking during the sequence.

I'm not sure I understand the difference. Are they trying do get skaters to do more interesting things linking the jumpos (like a toe Walley, for instance)? The "may" seems to say that this is just a change in wording to clarify the intent of the rule, rather than an actual change.

So, what about Zuranthium's 3Lutz/2Toe/Half Loop/2 Sal/2 Loop. That's a "sequence of combinations." Does that use up two of your allowed combos? Is it legal at all?

So now my question is, if skaters were allowed to do many-jump sequences all along, why didn't any of them do it?

11. 0
Originally Posted by hockeyfan228
Inoue/Baldwin did a 2A+2A sequence at the Olympics. I didn't see a rule change for next season that prohibits this sequence specifically. Did I miss it?
I might be remembering wrong. I looked just now for such a rule and couldn't find one. Aki Sawada did 2A+2A sequence in the junior GP final last year.

Still, I do remember the discussion when Michelle came up with her 4 triple Axels in a row, that there was some reason she couldn't do that in a competitive program (besides the fact that she was taking too many steps between).

Anybody?

MM

12. 0
Originally Posted by Theatregirl1122
I don't really understand what effect this rule has at all. Jump+COMBO should be the same as Jump+SEQUENCE. Both take up one of your multi-jump passes, correct? Or have I missed something?
Isn't it a greater penalty than the COMBO because you get a 0.8 multiplier on a sequence rather than a combo?

Ant

13. 0
Originally Posted by Mathman
I might be remembering wrong. I looked just now for such a rule and couldn't find one. Aki Sawada did 2A+2A sequence in the junior GP final last year.

Still, I do remember the discussion when Michelle came up with her 4 triple Axels in a row, that there was some reason she couldn't do that in a competitive program (besides the fact that she was taking too many steps between).

Anybody?

MM

Just laughed at your typo mathman - the thought of Michelle coming out with four triple axels in a row and a Zayak violation to boot!!!!

I'm not looking in any rulebooks to know for sure but i thought the 2A/2A sequence was something that was introduced specifically to pairs and pairs only because of the rule about not being allowed to repeate the same triple again and 2As suddenly being brought within the Zayak rule. I thought for singles skating two double axels couldn't be a sequence?

Ant

14. 0
Mathman - We love MK but triple axels?

What could be wrong with doing two axels of any rotations in a row (i.e., without any step in between)? It works choreographically. It demonstrates the skater's command on the ice. Three consective axels in a row would be choreographically the best of bravura skating. Luv it!!!

Joe

15. 0
Originally Posted by Mathman
Still, I do remember the discussion when Michelle came up with her 4 triple Axels in a row, that there was some reason she couldn't do that in a competitive program (besides the fact that she was taking too many steps between).
That would have been a Zayak violation. But she could have done 4 double axels in a row, if she had no more than two three turns or mohawks.

I never realized that sequences weren't restricted. I obviously didn't read that rule carefully.

I wonder why the rule was changed : I don't think I've ever seen a sequence with more than two (charted) jumps.

Page 2 of 8 First 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Last

#### Posting Permissions

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