Results 1 to 15 of 82

Thread: What if the "flutz" and "lip" jumps were ratified?

Threaded View

  1. #24
    it's olympic season :D bethissoawesome's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    NYC; Tokyo
    Posts
    495
    I understand the conflictions you would have with the Zayak rule if you actually ALLOWED the jump to be written into the program (ex. 3Flutz-3Toe combo). What I was trying to say in my previous argument, which I guess I didn't word quite correctly, was that you could still leave it as the skater would have to declare a 3Lutz-3Toe combo, however if they happen to do a Flutz, it would be given a base value and the GOE would be based on how it was performed, disregarding the edge deduction. So if the skater took off and flutzed, but still maintained a beautiful position in the air with three complete tight revolutions and a clean landing, positive GOEs should be awarded... the consequences would be that your base value is lowered.

    Simply because a lutz with the wrong edge upon entry is not a lutz at all. I used some examples before, so I guess I'll throw in another one. I also do the trapeze... if I was trying to catch a double sommersault but instead only did one but it was performed well, should someone say that it was faulty attempt at a double sommersault or a good single one? In skating, an under-rotated triple jump is given the base value of a double, not the base value of a triple because that is what was "attempted." Any specific jump has a basic definition for its take off... if the jump being "attempted" does not fulfill that definition, why should it be ratified as that jump and be given the same base value? In essence (using the flutz again), I don't see how giving the flutz/"attempted lutz" a different base value than a true lutz is really any different than giving an "attempted triple" that is under-rotated the base value of a double.... so long as it can not be written purposely into the program to violate the Zayak rule.

    A simple solution would just be, for instance, taking 20% off the original value of the true jump that was being attempted, setting that as the corrected base value, and then allowing for positive and negative GOE's based on the execution overlooking the original fault at entry.

    /steps off soapbox
    Last edited by bethissoawesome; 08-18-2008 at 04:10 PM.

Posting Permissions

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