Sashas Edges

With regard to the amplitude of Sasha's spiral (forgetting edges for the moment), I admit this is bad to ask, but I do wonder if some people don't like the 180-degree spiral position itself or if what they really don't like is the 180-degree spiral position on Sasha.

Click to expand...

I don't like the 180 degree position on anyone. At least not on anyone I've seen. I won't say that I'll never like it, because (for me at least) body type plays a part in the way a move looks on a certain skater. So maybe if a skater with a different body type than Sasha did it then I might like it better. Also there are other factors such as body position, extension, etc that can make one sprial look better than the other even if other factors are all the same.
As far as Sasha goes, I think her sprial looks best in the first "stage" of it . If you notice when she goes inot her sprial position she does it in like 2 stages, she lifts her leg almost all the way up, then pulls it up to the full split. I think it looks much better before she pulls it all the way up. I wish she'd do her sprial like that....I think it's much prettier

Rgirl said:

As for the 180-degree split on her spiral, I love it. Of course it's not just the split, it's the arch of the back, the turnout of the free leg from the hip, the pointed toe, the extension (and I mean extension as in S-T-R-E-T-C-H), and the whole quality of the move. I loved Nicole Bobek's 180-spiral and I love Sasha's. I also love the spirals of Michelle, Yuka, Irina (when she doesn't rush them), and a number of other skaters, though of course for different reasons. In his prime, Paul Wylie had one of the most beautiful spirals I've ever seen.

As for me, I'll take Sasha's free leg on her spiral straight up, thank you, though I would like more speed and deeper edging. As Mzheng pointed out, the higher the free leg, the more difficult it is to hold a deep edge because of the change in the center of gravity, especially a FIE. I couldn't find them, but there are a couple of photos of Irina and Michelle doing their FIE spiral with the edge at a good 45-degree angle or less to the ice. But you also see, especially on Irina, the free leg out to the side (abducted). Not so much on Michelle. To get a really deep FIE on a spiral and keep the free leg directly behind the hip, especially at greater amplitudes, is incredibly difficult to do without falling over.
Rgirl, Ecumenical Spiral Lover
Rgirl

Click to expand...

Rgirl, I agree, Sasha's free leg is perfectly aligned with over all body position, while with other skaters (Michelle included), free leg goes to the side.

While watching skaters perform live at this season's COI, I made some observations: Nicole gets good extension, but alignment is so-so, also, as she goes forward, free leg moves lower.

Michelle makes a dramatic COE, but stops almost right there, and covers only about 2/3 of the rink.

Sasha covers an entire rink, makes smooth transitions, while holding a perfect body position. Holding so still, while moving so fast shows a great strength and edges control. That's why commentators crown her spiral as the best in the world.

mzheng

I am so glad you return to this thread, I am still trying to muddle through the physics

The CONTROL of the edge, that's what she is lacking. It includes adjust the edges according to the speed, body lean, and the curv on ice etc. There is a physics formular: CenterForce=m*v*v/r=m*G*cos@. and the VerticalSupport=m*G*sin@, which is applied to the blads by the ice surface. Where @ is the angle between blads and the ice surface.

Click to expand...

Be patient with me, I am physics challenged, so let state the formulae again

CenterForce = m*v*v/r = m*G*cos@

Intuiitvely, I think these equations are used to compare
the same skater's inside and outside edges, e.g. depth of Irina's inside and outside edges, and not the depth of Fumie's edges v the depth of Sarah's edges, because m (I assume that is the mass) is listed in both equations, therefore it cancels out.

So v*v/r = G*cos@

or r ( the arch line, and I am still not sure what an arch line is) is inversely proportional to the cos of @

The smaller the @, the deeper the edge and the larger is the cos of @. and the smaller the r. What is the arch line?

Further, I believe your equations can not be used to compare one skater's amplitude v another skater's depth of edges, i.e. @. So we can not use your equations to compare Sarah's amplitude v Fumie's edges

So if I am not mistaken, by your equations, you are telling us that it is more difficult to keep a deep inside edge than a deep outside for the same skater So a skater like our reigning Olympic Champion Sarah is a very special, because both her inside and outside edges are DEEP

Now onto the third equation:

VerticalSupport=m*G*sin@

For a skater who has deep edges (either outside or inside) i.e. small @ the vertical support is smaller too, because sin of a small angle is a small number. Does that mean that a skater needs to have extra skill to maintain a deep edge (small @) since the vertical support is smaller for a smaller angle.

I am seriously interested in this physics stuff, so I appreciate a response, and please do not laugh at me, I threw away my high school physics books long time ago.

I've been reading this since it started and I don't see what the big deal is. Everyone has different strengths. No, Sasha's edges are not the best, but her flexibility is (IMO). I guess you sacrifice one for the other. Let's all just agree to disagree! And now I'm going to go hide from the physics because I hate math.

Still trying to muddle through

v*v/r = G*cos@

the smaller the @, the larger is the value of cos@, i.e. the smaller the value of r. Does that mean when a skater with deep edges strokes through the ice, it looks like the path she takes is a curve, the deeper the edge, the more curvy or round is the path. For a skater who has shallow edges or skates close to flat , the path on the ice also looks flat, almost like a straight line.

Now how do we compare a the total distance covered by a skater with deep edges, i.e. who traces a curvy, round path on the ice to the total distance covered by a skater who has flat edges, and traces a flat almost straight line looking path? Of course it is not a straight line, just a large r that gives the appearance of a straight line

Back to the example of our reigning Olympic champion Sarah, who has a DEEP inside edge spiral. When she covers seemingly just half the distance of an ice rink with her deep edges, the total distance actually travelled may be more than another skater, e.g. Bonaly who skates on flat edges, but seemingly covers the whole rink.

mzheng, I could be totally wrong, so I appreciate a response. BTW, professor Mathman if you are reading, don't laugh. I bet you won't accept me as a student,but I am trying my very best.

PS, my next muddling effort, I want to look at v - velocity, i.e. the speed of the skaters. v*v/ r = G cos @ hmmm....

nothing really lavender, just trying to be positive in a somewhat negative thread.

rGirl - Welcome back. I knew I'd find you on a Sasha thread.

Sasha's over emphasizing her flexibility is done as part of her overall performance. It is considered by many, including me, as striking; stunning; exiciting. I adore it. But......

I'm a lyricist at heart, and after all that excitement, I get all choked up with a more supple, soft approach to flexibility which does not require the acrobatic style. Just my opinion.

Joe

To rtureck ...

rtureck,

Physics was my under's majore, it was more than 20 years ago and I studied in a different languge. Now I'm in a different country with a different profetion, which has nothing to do wiht any of this formular but a lot to do with computer. So sometimes I may not express it well. By the arch I mean a section of spiral (or circle).

If you are interested, a while ago there is a disscussion thread in MKF, which disscus the edge and spiral from the scientific view and with a lot nice draw analysis. The link to the thread:

http://pub1.ezboard.com/fmichellekwanforumarchivedtopics.showMessageRange?topicID=303.topic&start=1&stop=20

The equation I gave above can only be used to show a general idea -- intutively -- where the speed, lean, and curve etc affect the control. The more accurate analysis should include the Forces applied to the blad by the ice.

Joesitz said:

rGirl - Welcome back. I knew I'd find you on a Sasha thread.

Sasha's over emphasizing her flexibility is done as part of her overall performance. It is considered by many, including me, as striking; stunning; exiciting. I adore it. But......

I'm a lyricist at heart, and after all that excitement, I get all choked up with a more supple, soft approach to flexibility which does not require the acrobatic style. Just my opinion.

Joe

Click to expand...

Well put, Joe!

RTureck, Take a small section of arc, approximate that section by the circular arc with the best possible fit, take the radius of that circle, then pass to the limit as the arc gets smaller and smaller. That's r. The curvature of the arc is 1/r (with inverse distance units).

As MZheng says, these formulas are intended to quantify the following basic and commonsensical ideas:

(a) The faster you go and the tighter the curve, the more you have to lean.

(b) The farther you lean, the more likely you are to fall down.

"Control of edges," then, means making all those tiny instinctive muscle adjustments necessary to keep all of these forces in balance. I don't know how you "train" this. Obviously, practice makes perfect, like a baby learning to walk. Beyond that, I think it just comes down to natural talent. Your coach can't tell you, no, no, you should be leaning an extra 0.2861 degrees when your velocity is 3.3964 meters per second on an arc of curvature .1749 per meter. So I wonder how much improvement in this skill is really possible for a skater in the later stages of her developmental career.

Anyway, what MZheng calls "failing to control your edges" and what Dustin calls "a momentary loss of balance" -- I think they are saying the same thing.

FanforLady2001 -- I totally agree with everything you said:

(1) Sasha's edges are fine;

(2) Sasha has pretty costumes;

(3) I hope she ends up on the podium; and

(4) It's better to say something positve than something negative.

Mathman

Joesitz said:

rGirl - Welcome back. I knew I'd find you on a Sasha thread.

Sasha's over emphasizing her flexibility is done as part of her overall performance. It is considered by many, including me, as striking; stunning; exiciting. I adore it. But......

I'm a lyricist at heart, and after all that excitement, I get all choked up with a more supple, soft approach to flexibility which does not require the acrobatic style. Just my opinion.

Joe

Click to expand...

ITA that's what I love so much about Nicole, NNN, and AP. All three incorporate their flexibility without it being "the main attraction" they work it into their programs into a more subtle way.

Thanks Mathman. You explain it well than I do.

(a) The faster you go and the tighter the curve, the more you have to lean.

Click to expand...

Since I have nothing better to do.

v*v/r = G cos*@

Why can't I look at the other side of the coin, so to speak. The smaller the @, the larger is the value of G cos*@. Since v is proportional to cos * @, that means, the more the lean, (smaller @) the more speed v the skater has to generate to maintain that small angle. Because there are skaters who skate fast, but do not have deep edges. Obviously skaters like Irina and Yuka have both deep edges and speed

mzheng said, that if we compare the inside and outside edge of the same skater, it is easier to maintain a deep edge (smaller @) for an outside edge. That is something new to me, because if we look at our reigning Olympic champion Sarah, or the world champion Irina, their inside edges are just as deep as their outside edges. I guess that is why they are Olympic and world champions.

The farther you lean, the more likely you are to fall down.

Click to expand...

So going back to the verical support: I assume the more support the less chance the skater will fall.

VerticalSupport=m*G*sin@

So for a skater with deep edges, small @, there is less vertical support , because sin @ will be smaller. That means the skater must acquire more skill to avoid falling, if she is maintaining a deep edge.

Thanks for explaining it in non math / physics language but I prefer to muddle through all the terms in the equations.

The Best And Worst Spiral

It's Goofus & Gallant Time:

For a demonstration of how to perform a perfect spiral, click on this little icon:



For a demonstration of how to perform a not-so-perfect spiral, click on this little icon:

RG#1--Ta-MOOOOOO!

Joe--But my FIRST post since coming back was on the Michelle 3/3 thread As for lyrical vs acrobatic, like all of skating and dance I suppose these qualities are in the eye of the beholder and also perhaps in sematics. I don't find Sasha's style acrobatic nor Michelle's style lyrical. I like the way both skate, though Michelle is clearly the stronger skater overall. In general, I tend to like whatever skaters do when they use their most natural strengths to express themselves. I think Michelle made a quantum leap in this area last season and that Sasha made progress but still has a way to go especially in integrating her expression and her technique. IMO, as of last season, Michelle had no rival in this area. To paraphrase Orson Welles, "I believe [skating] is good to the degree it expresses the [skater] who is creating it." Perhaps as another thread topic we can discuss how and why we like certain styles over others, if we do, and how and why we choose certain words to define the styles of various skaters -- stealing a thought from your thread on naming feelings in Le Cafe

Mathman--Ah, the limits of grammar when one is posting at one a.m. about one's feelings about possibly asking that one question that might be the one that upsets someone. ;-b

Idle--I am SO happy the new GS allows you to return to blessing us with your superb talents with photos. I know Realtorgal and a number of others are thrilled with this change as well. And of course I'm my (_!_) off at how NOT to do a spiral. Is that Bret or Brad?

Mzheng--Love and appreciate your biomechanical analyses, but I disagree with your assertion that doing a FIE spiral should not make it any more difficult to get a deep edge. True, the COG is the same but not the relationship of the weight of the extremities, specifically the free leg (FL) relative to the FIE. When doing a FOE spiral, the FL is on the opposite side of the edge lean. But when doing a FIE spiral, the FL is on the same side of the edge lean, this putting more weight on the same side toward which the skater is leaning toward. No matter high high the FL, this makes it more difficult to get as deep an edge on the FIE spiral than on the FOE. That's why skaters who get great depth of edge on both their FOE and FIE spiral would certainly get maximum points for that move from Judge Rgirl. I think if you try it even in barefeet and not moving you'll feel the difference.

Registered--I have to disagree about Sasha getting greater ice coverage than Michelle on her FCE spiral. From what I've seen in their competitive programs, Michelle and Sasha get about the same amount of ice coverage on their FCE spirals. Also, although I think Sasha's position and energy are superb, I think it's clear that Michelle has greater speed and deeper edges, with her speed especially improving last season. In fact the only skater I've seen live who equals Michelle in speed and edges on her spirals is Irina, although of course Irina's style is much different from both Michelle and Sasha.

In general, however people like their spirals, I'm most happy that we have so many beautiful examples to enjoy. As I've said before, spirals were not given much importance by skaters ten years ago and since then various skaters have used their natural skills to develop a number of very different but, at least IMO, equally effective, difficult, and breathtaking spirals.
Rgirl

rGirl - My computer was and I think still is giving me a hard time. But the first time I was able to get back into GS, it was the Sasha thread. I did see you announcement later with a hit on the 3/3 MK.

I don't think we disagree all that much. Preferred styles are a matter of taste and therefore subjectivity is lurking all around. In the case of Sasha, I don't see her as an acrobatic skater. I do see certain "tricks" in skating that I would call acrobatic as I would in ballet. The 180 degree penchee arabasque in the Black Swan Pas de Deux, is totally acrobatic but it in line with the character of the dance, and for me, that's appropriate. So many of the "tricks" in skating that appear to me as acrobatic are ok if they are in line with the choreography. However, I am not overwhelmed with these 'tricks' (my personal taste).

For me, Sasha, makes a fabulous dynamic skater which I classify in the "bravura" style. This is by no means a put down of the term I am using. It just clarifies certain styles of movement to music (or even the playing of an instrument. a la Heifitz or Menuhin). One is not better than the other. It's just a matter of preference.

What makes Swan Lake a big favorite is the fact that the lead dancer has to be a lyrical white swan and a bravura black swan. You can imagine the arguments of the ballet fans here.

In Aranjez, MK was not at her lyrical East of Eden so maybe I can assume she is able to skate both styles and be enjoyed. Maybe a softer more supple style of Sasha will appear in the near future. I think it will.

Joe

IdleRacer, thanks for the picture of Nicole's spiral. That's simply beautiful (and check out her fingers, especially her right hand! )

Rgirl, does Nicole (and also Michelle) rotate her hips more than Sasha does on this move? Is that good or bad?

RTureck, I give you an A+ on your analysis of these equations. But note your final conclusions:

The more the lean, the more speed the skater has to generate to maintain that small angle. And..

That means the skater must acquire more skill to avoid falling, if she is maintaining a deep edge.

Click to expand...

We don't really need any formulas to tell us that. Consider the limiting cases:

(1) @ = 90 degrees, v = 0, r = infinity. The skater is just standing there, on her flats. She is probably not going to fall down. (Although I just tried it, balancing on a two-by-four, and I fell off.)

(2) @ = 0 degrees, v = infinity, r = 0. She is lying flat out on the ice, twirling around at infinite speed. This is a very spectacular move, especially if she can also maintain a 180 degree split. Physicists and skating fans alike come from miles around to see it. Yes this requires a great deal of skill, especially the infinite speed part.

BTW, as the skater's speed v approaches the speed of light, these formulas have to be modified to take into account relativistic considerations. The mass factor, for instance must be divided by the square root of 1 - (v/c)^2, where c is the speed of light. Think of a neutron star swirling around faster and faster, maintaining a perfect outside edge with ever decreasing @, as it is sucked into a black hole.

(3) @ = 180 degrees. The skater has drilled herself headfirst into the ice. This is a very beautiful ending position, if she can also maintain a 180 split and if the ice is deep enough and transparent all the way down.

Mathman

NO!

That's just some weird picture I stumbled on while browsing around on the web. I have never worn hockey skates or a helmet (at least on the ice) in my life.

A+ for analysis of these equations

Click to expand...

Well my 5th grade math teacher would be proud,

I can hear her voice repeating over and over, "Stay calm, be cool, don't be intimidated by the problems and the numbers"

One last question, somewhere in the sulci and gyri of my brain, there are 2 terms centripetal, and centrifugal forces. So when mzheng talks about center force which one she is talking about.

Now I can see my high school physics teacher frowning at me, "You forgot everything I taught you !!!!"

About neutron stars being drawn into black holes. When a HUGH GIANTIC STAR dies, what remains is a black hole right. It must be an equally awesome sight to behold, (if there is a way to get there) when a star is born.