Ladies SP
- Thread starter Dodhiyel
- Start date
Oh really? How about getting points for a jump that you fell on?? Did not Kostner get points for her fall on 3Lutz?? This is ridiculous?? If you rotate a jump and fall, does it meand that you can do it???
Last edited:
I recorded it!!! If you had read my previews post I said that I kept re-watchin it and the only jump that could be downgraded was her 2Axel [i didnt SUPER slow motion it, but i slow montioned it as much as I could] ... but to make you happy I'll say "IMHO"... & like I said b4, I dont like protestin either, but in this case, I do. & b4 I also wrote that maybe "Im blind" coz i dont see that many failures...
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2008
when Yu-Na fell on the Lutz at Worlds, she didn't finish second.
The tech callers have super slo-mo they can check.
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2006
- Country
-
She was contending a full seeded field of all the skaters considered the world's best in 2008, not the watered down field at Cup of Russia. Plus, different set of judges, different technical controller, and different technical specialist. Different impressions. This is why it's impossible to compare results from one competition to the next.
Yes it does. The only jump Kimmie has a history of getting dinged for is the triple toe on the back half of a triple-triple combination. Usually she can get within a quarter turn of everything else, no problem. And if not, she'll have one UR, but multiple URs in a clean program? Weird. I don't have any conspiracy theories, I just think it sucks. There are many, MANY times when people get away with slightly cheated jumps. If you are going to be strict with one person, be strict with everyone.
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2008
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2007
- Country
-
^ Re: URs, as I've said so many times, my problem is that falling can often/usually net you more points than an UR. That's what seems so ridiculous.
It's not clear cut at all, the whole situation. With the 1/4 turn allowable "cheat," there's some leeway/room for judgment/looseness to the system right off the bat. If you accept as a given that some leeway is allowed, then, isn't it consistent or at least applying a certain logic to then give more points for an almost triple than a clear and intended double? The skater is achieving more rotation in an almost triple, presumably, than in a clear double.
In other words, given we have certain leeway with the definition of the jump, it seems we're going for a continuous scale of looking at the jump, rather than a discrete cutoff.
But that's where the confusion and the room for "judgment" lies. Sometimes a panel of officials will seem to use a clear, discrete cutoff -- and then other times it seems more of a loosey-goosey continuum has been used.
ETA: Also, if we're going to penalize UR so severely, shouldn't a hand down also be penalized pretty severely? I mean, if you had to put your hand down to complete the jump, isn't that a pretty huge error also?
To me, that's less of a proper jump than an UR. So what if the right number of turns were there, if the skater then had to put a hand down! Shouldn't there be more to the definition of the jump than just the specified number of rotations -- shouldn't the very definition of a jump also include NOT putting one's hands down, and, (it seems absurd to have to say this) NOT falling?
It's not clear cut at all, the whole situation. With the 1/4 turn allowable "cheat," there's some leeway/room for judgment/looseness to the system right off the bat. If you accept as a given that some leeway is allowed, then, isn't it consistent or at least applying a certain logic to then give more points for an almost triple than a clear and intended double? The skater is achieving more rotation in an almost triple, presumably, than in a clear double.
In other words, given we have certain leeway with the definition of the jump, it seems we're going for a continuous scale of looking at the jump, rather than a discrete cutoff.
But that's where the confusion and the room for "judgment" lies. Sometimes a panel of officials will seem to use a clear, discrete cutoff -- and then other times it seems more of a loosey-goosey continuum has been used.
ETA: Also, if we're going to penalize UR so severely, shouldn't a hand down also be penalized pretty severely? I mean, if you had to put your hand down to complete the jump, isn't that a pretty huge error also?
To me, that's less of a proper jump than an UR. So what if the right number of turns were there, if the skater then had to put a hand down! Shouldn't there be more to the definition of the jump than just the specified number of rotations -- shouldn't the very definition of a jump also include NOT putting one's hands down, and, (it seems absurd to have to say this) NOT falling?
Last edited:
Yeah, she finished 3rd. Didn't she fall on both lutzes two years ago and still get 3rd? Falling is alright, as long as you rotate those jumps.
Then I'll pray for them to be as objective as they can... like with Kostner :agree:
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2008
you will see: tomorrow Kimmie will be so nervous that she will fall. but, oh no, a super-low score again, because... of the falls.
Totally agree with you, buddy :agree:
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2007
why would kimmie protest?? she messed up! I want her to do well but...if u are UR, not finishing spirals, not doing enough revolutons in spins...then i think you should get marked down. Its simple. Her PCS scores were quite good considering...so the judges like her...but if she is making mistakes like that...u have to mark down.
Also Carolinas...where it was not perfect...she at least rotated jumps..and did not get dinged on spins or the spiral sequence. Its simple.
Also Carolinas...where it was not perfect...she at least rotated jumps..and did not get dinged on spins or the spiral sequence. Its simple.
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2005
I will tell you when Kimmie's score came up I seriously thought it was a mathematical error. If I was Kimmie's coach I would be checking her
tech scores with a fine tooth comb.
tech scores with a fine tooth comb.
UR calls can be subjective and not properly applied to everyone. It's not necessarily "messing up". That's where the issue lies.
And why should Carolina be praised for "at least rotating her jumps" when she fell? It happens time and time again with her. I'd rather see someone fight to stay on their feet on a jump than fall and get credit just because it's supposedly "rotated". But, there's nothing we can do. This is the scoring system in place.
And the thing is, Carolina will get penalized for her mistakes as well, as we often forget. I don't have all the calculations right here with me, but I know that she will get a -3 across the board for her Lutz since she fell, and on top of that a -1 deduction for falling in the first place. But she did do a fully rotated triple, and therefor, it will be treated as such. Because she fell, the value of that triple Lutz will be greatly reduced, but it doesn't change the fact that it was a triple.
Similar threads
- Sticky
- Sticky
- Sticky
