CoP scoring question: Binshu Xu

In the ladies LP at Skate America, Binshu Xu's first elemnt was marked as 3Lz+SEQ. The score for the element was 4.80 base value (80% of 6.0), and with GOEs of -2 and -3 she ended up with average GOE of -2.40 and total element score of 2.40.

This is usually what we see for a second triple Lutz later in the program when the first one was intended to be a combo but the skater could not pull off the second jump of the combo (the "phantom combo" rule).

What does Xu's score mean? Did she intend a combo, but landed so badly on the first jump (but it was fully rotated and she didn't fall) that she had to take a step before the second, which she then totally popped?

If she had left off the abortive attempt at the second jump altogether she would have got 6.0 base value instead of 4.80, right? Plus, she wouldn't have used up one of her three combo/sequence passes.

What if she had taken two extra steps in between instead of 1, then popped the second jump into not even a single. Would that have counted as two separate jumping passes?

unrelated

On an unrelated topic about Binshu Xu. She is now experiencing growth spurt(the so-called 'puberty monster'). I read a newspaper article saying she's grown from 148 cm to 154 cm for the past year. She has not gained much weight, but the height alone has dramatically impacted her balance ability resulting in loss of jumps.

She did very poorly in three recent national competitions. Many of her jumps are gone. She is now doing more dry-land training in order to restore balance and jumps. Hopefully she will get her jumps back next season.

This just shows you how unpredictable Jr. female skaters' outlook is...

Caroline Zhang/Mirai/Asley/Rachael....Be careful...

I hope someone who understands the rules will correct this if I haven't understood this properly, but it seems that there are two times that an incomplete sequence or missed combo is subject to the 80% deduction:

1. When the combo or sequence is attempted, but does not meet the sequence requirements. In this case, the second attempted jump does not take up a second element spot, but instead, the attempt takes a 20% penalty in addition to a likely GOE hit.

2. When the same triple or quad is rotated without an attempted combination or sequence. I don't think this is a "phantom sequence," but a rule change to say, "If you want full credit for the jump, once it must be in combination or sequence. We're not going to give you no credit if both attempts are solos, but we are going to take 20% off the top of the second. Plus you lose the 1.3-5 you might have gained by completing the second jump in combination, because it does take up a combo/sequence spot in your program. So don't go throw a 2T onto that solo 3Sa, because then that's your 4th combination, and it won't count."

Mathman said:

What does Xu's score mean? Did she intend a combo, but landed so badly on the first jump (but it was fully rotated and she didn't fall) that she had to take a step before the second, which she then totally popped?

Click to expand...

Or she took too many steps before the second jump so it didn't count at all even if it was completed.

See p. 56 of this pdf:
http://www.usfigureskating.org/content/First-Aid-Single_2007-08-15.pdf

Touchdown with free foot (with weight transfer) after the first jump and 2 three turns or no turns between the jumps
The element will be called by the Technical Panel as follows:
First Jump + Combo in the Short Program
First Jump + Second Jump + Sequence in Free Skating (if the definition of a Jump Sequence is fulfilled) and First Jump + Sequence (in other cases).

Click to expand...

See also the definition of Jump Sequence on p. 57 and the discussion of the "Half revolution or more on the ice" mistake on p. 59.

If she had left off the abortive attempt at the second jump altogether she would have got 6.0 base value instead of 4.80, right? Plus, she wouldn't have used up one of her three combo/sequence passes.

Click to expand...

I think that is right.

What if she had taken two extra steps in between instead of 1, then popped the second jump into not even a single. Would that have counted as two separate jumping passes?

Click to expand...

Might depend on the rhythm. The tech panel guideline above would seem to suggest exactly the call that she got, First Jump + Sequence, if the two jumps are closely connected but in a way that doesn't fulfill the definition of a sequence. If they were separated with more steps, then, yeah, they would probably be called as separate passes.

Sometimes the failed jump landings where the skater manages to tack a second jump afterward anyway are messier than specifically putting the free foot down with weight on it or putting weight on the free foot and also turning 2 three turns. E.g., landing on the wrong foot in the first place or hopping from one foot to the other with or without turning in the process or stepping out forward to the other foot (mohawk) and then changing foot and doing one three turn, etc.

Whether it counts fulfills the definition of a sequence or not (and thus whether the second jump will count or not) seems to depend on whether any turning between the two jumps is done on the ice or in the air

But if the rhythm is continuous between the two jumps although there are turns on the ice, it could be considered a failed sequence and just called as "First Jump + Sequence."

I'm not sure how a tech panel would consider a situation where the skater lands the first jump in control and clearly intentionally puts several turns and steps or hops afterward as transition to another jump intended as a separate jumping pass (that might have been considered as a sequence in the old rules).

Also, is it to the skater's advantage to have the second jump counted as a separate jumping pass or ignored completely? That probably depends on whether the skater had intended it to be a separate jumping pass. If yes, then s/he wants that jump to count even if it doesn't get full credit. If not, then s/he doesn't want it to fill another jump box because then the last jump pass of the program will not be counted.

Last season if a skater did two jump with step/turns in between, it was called a two jump sequence if it met the requirements for a sequence. If it did not meet the requirements for a sequence it was called as two jump elements. This usually made the last intended jump element an extra element which then received no score.

This season, if the two jumps do not meet the requirements for a sequence it is called jump+seq. The second jump is ignored, and the last jump element is then not an extra element and does count. The purpose of this is to insure the last element does not become an extra elment, and to limit the damage to the score of the attempted combination (or sequence).

So she attempts a 3Lz combination, she makes an error and has turns and steps in between the two jumps. The two jumps with steps/turns do not meet the requirements for a sequence. It is scored 3Lz+seq and the second jump is ignored.

Watching her free skate at the Kerrigan site (at the 37:16 mark), Xu did a 3Lz with a turnout (one full revolution), than a 2T. I think that it was her tilted air position that led to the turnout (rather than being under-rotated). There was a weight transfer to her left leg and back to her right leg during the turnout. I think that the jump rhythm was maintained. I think that the weight transfer eliminated the element from being a combo and the turnout eliminated it from being a sequence.

While I like the improvement in the rules for this season, I would've preferred that the 2T be counted. The penalty for being a sequence and the GoE penalty was sufficient, IMO. 3.7 points would've represented what she did better than the 2.4 points she received.

I can't follow this thread. CoP is so confusing.

That's all I can say.