Ladies LP

skatingbc said:

An underrotated landing is a poor landing. It may look esthetically pleasing, but it's not a proper landing. Miki's lutz was better than Joannie's. Joannie took off a bit wonky and had to fight for the landing, I'm not denying the first jump. However, Joannie's combination was better because she fully rotated both jumps.

Click to expand...

An underrotated Triple is more rotation than a double, plain and simple. It is harder to do and should be worth more. If you do a double jump, you have failed to do a triple. You have missed an entire rotation. If you underrotate a Triple, you have missed a smaller amount of the rotation. It is less of a mistake.

TripletA said:

I agree 100% that a fully rotated triple double should be given more credit then a cheated triple triple (even if the first jump is clean) If you are going to try the harder stuff and cheat your jumps then you should not be trying the harder jumps.

Click to expand...

If someone underrotates a jump that doesn't necessarily mean they can't do it. EVERY skater in the World has underrotated a jump at some point. It's simply a mistake, like putting your hand down on a landing. It happens.

The problem is that the mistake of underrotating a jump is given FAR too much of a deduction in the current CoP. If you fall out of the landing on a 3Lutz, it is still worth more than if you had only done a 2Lutz. Why, then, should underrotating a 3Lutz (but landing it well) make that jump be worth less than if you had only done a 2Lutz?

museksk8r said:

Fail. I'm a US citizen, born and raised.

Click to expand...

Yes, you're correct, I should have worded that differently. Fanboy attitude is not caused solely by National favoritism.

museksk8r said:

Mao and Tatiana had to know that attempting two 3Axels in the LP was a very risky move. That's Team Mao's fault, not the judges. If she can't manage the technique and content properly under pressure, she shouldn't be attempting it. Same with Miki Ando. Time and time again, she has been downgraded for her under-rotated 3loop attempts in competition, but Team Ando made the decision to attempt them anyway, faulty technique and all. It's not the judges' fault that correct technique was not taught and that smart jump layouts were not planned.

Click to expand...

What an incredibly biased and incorrect line of thinking. Miki Ando does not have poor technique. From what you're saying, ANY jump that is not completed perfectly must be because the skater doesn't know how to do the jump at all.

Joannie failed to do her 3Loop. She fell out of the landing of her 3Lutz. Are you saying that, because of those mistakes, she shouldn't have attempted the jumps at all? That's what your argument is. And it makes no sense.

fumie_fumie said:

Joannie finished her process of fixing her flutz at the age of 17. Look at what Mao is going through at the same age with the same problem. Even the genius Mao can't solve the problem overnight. It is getting to a point where you can't teach an old dog new tricks.

On the other hand, Mao got her 3-3 at 12 or 13. Imagine Mao trying to learn 3-3 at the age of 19 or 20, after she gets her 3lutz sorted out. Maybe, it is not the case of having plenty of time to learn, rather it is the case of getting too old to learn.

Click to expand...

What difference does it make, though? You do what you can and that is what you get judged on. Mao not being able to do a 3Lutz with a complete outside edge and Joannie not being able to do a 3-3 is simply the fact of their current situation. Why make an excuse?

fumie_fumie said:

Save yourself from insulting other posters. That will give your posts more credibility.

Click to expand...

I've insulted nobody. If someone feels insulted because I am debating their opinion they should probably change their perspective. I believe that many assumptions being made here are incorrect and as such I am discussing why.

Blades of Passion said:

If someone underrotates a jump that doesn't necessarily mean they can't do it. EVERY skater in the World has underrotated a jump at some point. It's simply a mistake, like putting your hand down on a landing. It happens.

Click to expand...

What I have issue with is skaters underrotating time and time again. I don't think it's simply a mistake in that case, it is a habit that needs to be fixed, and in some cases it has been ignored. For example, if you compare Ando to Rochette in terms of underrotated jumps over the years, Ando would have multitudes more than Rochette (I don't even know when Joannie would have had one) Joannie addressed her technique issues and it has definetly paid off for her.

I heard from the Mao's fan site that Trasova told Mao that you have to cry now in order for her to smile at the Olympic. Maybe Mao team took a risk to try everything this year to prepare for next year. They wanted her to try lutz and 2 triple axels before the season ended. We know that Mao succeeded 2 triple axels. Did not she get ratified lutz once before? It was unfortunate that Mao could not give her 100percents to try those jumps. She did not have enough confident. I do not know taking a risk was good idea or not, but I thought that what they wanted to do. If she succeeded, she would put triple lutz combo and 2 triple axels (one after the halfway of the program) for Olympic.

i love to skate said:

What I have issue with is skaters underrotating time and time again. I don't think it's simply a mistake in that case, it is a habit that needs to be fixed, and in some cases it has been ignored. For example, if you compare Ando to Rochette in terms of underrotated jumps over the years, Ando would have multitudes more than Rochette (I don't even know when Joannie would have had one) Joannie addressed her technique issues and it has definetly paid off for her.

Click to expand...

I love to skate too.

Sometimes it's a technique issue, but you can't differentiate between the two in terms of the judging system. It's the same mistake either way.

Miki has been downgraded more than Joannie because she attempts FAR more difficult content. That shouldn't be seen as a negative, though. Miki can do the 3Lutz-3Loop, it just doesn't always happen perfectly. Joannie didn't give up on doing her 2Axel-2Axel sequence, even though she always made a mistake on it in competitions during the 07-08 season.

Blades of Passion said:

I love to skate too.

Click to expand...

Good to hear!

Tinymavy15 said:

I am not sure if there was higher quality. Only yu-na landed a ratified 3/3 and i believe she was the only lady to try one in the freeskate (maybe Elena G. tried one... not sure).

Click to expand...

Elene did a fully rotated 3T-3T in her LP and earned a +1 GOE for it. (Her problem jump was the salchow.)

did you know Kim's PCS is higher than Plushenko's in torino OP?

^ :scowl: Another fanbot is born!

Dipyramidal said:

i am japanese and i live in japan, and i can telll you from my experince that mao has been critized very bluntly and very impertinently. Sadly many of the reporters in japan think mao did not give 100%. I'm not going to rebel against this because then more and more news and different views of mao will surface. -_-./

Click to expand...

That is horrible. Why are they kicking her when she's already down? Didn't they treat Miki the same way before? So are they suddenly in love with Miki again because she won bronze? :disapp: (sorry for speaking in questions only)

I have to agree with Blades of Passion on the under-rotated triple versus perfect double issue. In my opinion, I prefer an under-rotated triple than a fully rotated double.

It's bad for the figure skating as a sport when the outcomes are so surprising. Even the so called expert commentators can't tell whether jumps are fully rotated or not most of the time. "We have to wait to see what the TS call it." The casual viewer and the even the average fan has no chance.

You hear, "that was a great three pointer," "that's a nice birdie," "that was an awesome ace," "that was an amazing touchdone," "that's a stuck landing."

But in figure skating now, you might here "that was a wonderfully clean triple toe-triple toe, well, MAYBE."

I do agree that a clean jump should definitely be worth more than an under-rotated triple. But the penalty now is too extreme; it shouldn't be worth less than a double. Likewise for under-rotated quad vs. triple.

Just my opinion. You don't have to agree, but I wish the ISU would!!!




On a side note, although I thought Ando should have gone ahead of Rochette, I was so glad Rochette won the silver medal because she skates with more heart.

An underrotated triple is the equivalent of an overrotated double. Overrotated jump is an erroneous jump. Therefore it should receive negative GOEs. I don't see any problem with that. Why should an 'attempt' to land a triple be rewarded at all? If some batter's foul ball misses the pole by half an inch, it is still nothing but a foul ball. That's what sports is all about, IMO.

quikrush said:

An underrotated triple is the equivalent of an overrotated double. Overrotated jump is an erroneous jump. Therefore it should receive negative GOEs. I don't see any problem with that. Why should an 'attempt' to land a triple be rewarded at all? If some batter's foul ball misses the pole by half an inch, it is still nothing but a foul ball. That's what sports is all about, IMO.

Click to expand...

I think what Blades of Passion is trying to say is that yes, an underrotated triple is an erroneous jump and negative GOEs should definitely be applied. The problem lies in the harshness of the penalty--does it make sense that an UR triple merits the penalty that it has now, which makes it worth less than a double?

And the nature of COP awards 'attempts' to land things, not just UR jumps anyways. Even a fall will get you some points.

And the nature of COP awards 'attempts' to land things, not just UR jumps anyways. Even a fall will get you some points.

Click to expand...

Big flaw. One should NOT get any points for a failed attempt (that results in a fall or a bad stumble). I think one should at least get some points for a UR triple, less than a fully rotated one but more than a double.

Wasn't the reasoning for giving credit to a fall was that, take off is what really matters, landing is based more on luck?

Red Dog said:

Big flaw. One should NOT get any points for a failed attempt (that results in a fall or a bad stumble). I think one should at least get some points for a UR triple, less than a fully rotated one but more than a double.

Click to expand...

I agree, a UR triple should be worth more than a double--the double penalty is too harsh in my opinion.

Does a fully rotated triple with a fall/hand-down/step-out get more points than a UR triple that looks clean?

Blades of Passion said:

I've insulted nobody. If someone feels insulted because I am debating their opinion they should probably change their perspective. I believe that many assumptions being made here are incorrect and as such I am discussing why.

Click to expand...

FWIW, I don't think you've insulted anybody, either. Seems like some have Joannie on a pedestal, and would foam at the mouth should she be brought back down to earth, however slightly.

Personally, I was bored to tears by her LP and I find her so-called 'artistry' overly affected. Her movements don't seem natural to me at all. I don't know enough about technique to say I'm bothered by hers, but the fact that her jump layout is not even remotely on the same level of difficulty as Mao or Yu-Na's doesn't make me respect her competitive skills any more.

Joannie has always been a 'B' skater in terms of results up until this season. To me, the reason for the sudden change is fairly obvious.

quikrush said:

An underrotated triple is the equivalent of an overrotated double. Overrotated jump is an erroneous jump.

Click to expand...

An overrotated jump isn't erroneous, it just means that your landing will probably be less secure. Also, an underrotated triple = more rotation than an overrotated double.

quikrush said:

Why should an 'attempt' to land a triple be rewarded at all? If some batter's foul ball misses the pole by half an inch, it is still nothing but a foul ball. That's what sports is all about, IMO.

Click to expand...

I find this to be a bad analogy because it's a completely different sport. A good comparison would be diving. In diving you receive a base score for the dive and then a grade for your execution. If you do a complex dive and end it in a belly flop (OUCH) and make a huge splash, the dive isn't worth 0 points. It's just worth a LOT less.

An attempt at a jump should be worth something (not much, of course, if it's a terrible attempt) because the act of actually doing the rotations shows a skill. Being able to rotate a 3Lutz but never being able to land it at least shows more proficiency with that jump than someone who can't rotate it at all. Of course, you'll never want to do it in competition if you can never land it.

Underrotating a jump is a moderate, not huge, error. The penalty should be about the same as any other given error on a jump that merits -2 GOE. Although, for underrotations it should be deducted from the base value of the jump (because if you make other mistakes on the jump, like falling, it needs to be deducted via GOE).

ISU is just really lazy about fixing this stuff. They don't want to be bothered to, say, make a new table of values for underrotated jumps. Even though it's quite easy! All you have to do is average two values together (and then round down). For example, a Double Lutz is worth 1.9 points and a Triple Lutz is worth 6 points. Average those together and round down and, VIOLA!, an underrotated Triple Lutz is worth 3.9 points.

Andalusia said:

Joannie has always been a 'B' skater in terms of results up until this season.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't say that, but I do think she has been hit and miss (and never "amazing"). She deservedly got 5th place at the 2006 Olympics and 2008 Worlds, which is very respectable. Then there is also her performance at 2005 Canadian Nationals, which was very good and would have placed top 3 at most any World Championship.

Blades of Passion said:

ISU is just really lazy about fixing this stuff.

Click to expand...

That's the primary problem, the rest is the symptom.

Blades of Passion said:

All you have to do is average two values together (and then round down). For example, a Double Lutz is worth 1.9 points and a Triple Lutz is worth 6 points. Average those together and round down and, VIOLA!, an underrotated Triple Lutz is worth 3.9 points.

Click to expand...

Except that Single, Double and Triple jump scores don't follow a linear point progression, so it doesn't make sense to use a linear average to score between them. Geometric mean would put it at 3.376, that would be a little better but ... the other problem is the -GOE attached to it as well.

The whole CoP system is enslaved by wrong-headed math and faulty reasoning. Maybe if, as you mention, they actually bothered making the necessary changes on a regular basis, CoP could actually progress toward something that starts to almost make sense. But at this rate, I don't think it will in our lifetime.

Red Dog said:

Big flaw. One should NOT get any points for a failed attempt (that results in a fall or a bad stumble). I think one should at least get some points for a UR triple, less than a fully rotated one but more than a double.

Click to expand...

The problem I have with not giving some value to "failed attempts" is that it fails to consider the two other important aspects of a jump - the takeoff and air position.

I can't believe that we are still debating the UR issue. I thought they would have decreased the penalty for UR jumps after Yukari lost a medal with a seemingly clean skate, and deserving of at least a silver. Clearly, only changes are made when Scott and Sandra get indignant about he wuzrobbing of some American or Canadian skater.

Particle Man said:

Except that Single, Double and Triple jump scores don't follow a linear point progression.

Click to expand...

True, but I think it's suitable in this case. I did forget to mention that they would also have to create new GOE values for this new table of values, but that isn't hard either. Again...laziness (or lack of insight, take your pick).