Ladies Short Program

**Andalusia** · 04-16-2009, 02:37 PM

Originally Posted by LeCygne

I think her 3-3 looked rotated too... I think she was disappointed that she didn't break 60. Judging by her fist pump, she probably thought she would. But I don't know, she did look pretty slow here.

Boy, did she ever. She needs to fix that problem, stat - it's killing her PCS scores. I detect a slight improvement in her jumps and overall movement, but, if anything, it's her speed that has regressed. I'm actually surprised that Caroline beat Rachael in TES when both were as clean as they could be. OTOH, Rachael beat her in PCS, which I think is totally justifiable.

This user has better quality videos of Caroline, Rachael and Mao's SPs:

http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=...or&view=videos

**TrueAndJutice** · 04-16-2009, 02:45 PM

Mao's Triple Axel== 2.75 rotation in the air.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UGUbfqhmdkM

http://bbs.sports.media.daum.net/gai...th&searchName=

**LeCygne** · 04-16-2009, 02:45 PM

Originally Posted by Andalusia

I'm actually surprised that Caroline beat Rachael in TES when both were as clean as they could be. OTOH, Rachael beat her in PCS, which I think is totally justifiable.

I think Caroline's TES was probably due to her spins and spirals. Though even Rachael looked a bit slower here than her usual, I have to agree that she deserved higher PCS.

But one thing that's been bothering me, Caroline has often gotten Level 3's (maybe even 2's?) on her spins when there's absolutely no reason for that. I think she needs to hold each position in her spins and maybe even come up with more variations in the combo spin. Like she really needs to hold the sit position right after the change of foot before she pulls it up into an I-spin position. She did it at her two GP events, but it seems like she's gotten lazier since then..

**R.D.** · 04-16-2009, 02:49 PM

Anyone have the total placements?

As this competition is taking place in JAPAN, the results (and scores) is of no surprise whatsoever to me. Home crowd advantage, definitely. But if anything, these are your front-runners going into the Olympic season. As to whether they'll be able to deliver when the chips are down, that remains to be seen. It better not be a blowout or I'm boycotting some of these competitions. On that topic, as far as I'm concerned, forget about this one.

**Nigel** · 04-16-2009, 03:45 PM

Originally Posted by Alicja

I thought both Rachael's and Caroline's 3T looked rotated but then again the camera angle wasn't exactly the best to tell...

The tech panel was a bit strict in their calls from our seats in the arena last night. The combos were shown slo-mo on the jumbotron in the arena and Flatt's 3/3 combo was very very good and should have had +'s. Zhang's 3T looked good, but the 3F may have been a bit short. Ando's combo looked good on the 3Lz and perhaps the 3Lp was questionable, but barely. If the panel was being this strict, Mao's 3A should have had the same level of scrutiny. Rochette's jumping passes on the OH, were not so stellar last night with step out on the solo jump and the combo was less than picture-perfect.

**Mathman** · 04-16-2009, 03:54 PM

Originally Posted by TrueAndJutice

Mao's Triple Axel== 2.75 rotation in the air.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UGUbfqhmdkM

Looks good to me.

Yu-na Kim isn't even at this competition. If she were, we would see a Korean video titled, "Mao's triple Axel is only 1.2 rotations."

**ks777** · 04-16-2009, 04:17 PM

Originally Posted by mathman

looks good to me.

Yu-na kim isn't even at this competition. If she were, we would see a korean video titled, "mao's triple axel is only 1.2 rotations."

lol

**fumie_fumie** · 04-16-2009, 05:06 PM

Originally Posted by Mathman

Looks good to me.

Yu-na Kim isn't even at this competition. If she were, we would see a Korean video titled, "Mao's triple Axel is only 1.2 rotations."

:chorus::chorus:

And I bet "TruthAndJustice" is a software developer. The equal sign (==) the poster used is a classic sign. He should have said,

String techCall = null;
Camera techCamera = new Camera();

if (Mao.3Axel < 3.5f)
{
Mao.3AXel.analysis = techCamera.setToSlowMotion(Mao.3Axel);
if (Mao.3Axel.analysis == 2.9f)
{
techCall = "Underrotations";
}
}

**museksk8r** · 04-16-2009, 05:27 PM

Congrats to Mao and her best SP of the season . . . looks like she's possibly found a SP jump layout that may work for her. Good for her!

**Mathman** · 04-16-2009, 05:48 PM

Originally Posted by Red Dog

Anyone have the total placements?

http://www.isuresults.com/results/wtt2009/index.htm

Binshu Xu did a fine job.

She finished ahead of Chinese national champion Yan Liu and also Candice Didier, who is a pretty good skater herself.

**Dipyramidal** · 04-16-2009, 06:28 PM

That was a CLEAN triple axel.

**marscindy** · 04-16-2009, 07:38 PM

http://bbs.sports.media.daum.net/gai...th&searchName=

Please watch her feet of 3A 2T.

Is it really 2T? or 1T?

I think it is 1T.

And I don't like her 3A because she turns 180 on ice before she jumps. Anyway I'm sure it is 3 turns.

**cosmos** · 04-16-2009, 08:45 PM

Originally Posted by Andalusia

Hmmm. I thought Mao was exquisite (this is the best she's performed her SP all season), but I'm not quite sure I agree with the scoring. The article I've linked below states that she received a Level 4 for her footwork. Now, come on, her footwork didn't look that difficult to me. I mean, how often do skaters receive the highest level for their footwork sequences? Even the men would be hard-pressed to receive a Level 4. Mao's footwork here looked about the same as the way she performed it at Worlds, and I'm pretty sure her footwork was a Level 3 there.

http://web.icenetwork.com/news/artic...e_pressrelease

Agreed. It seemed to me her 2T was more problematic. In my eye, it was clearly under-rotated.

Mao once got level 4 step in Campbell? but not in regular ISU competition. It shows clearly that scoring in competitions like WTT, Campbell is different from regular ISU competitions. AFAIK, this score is not recorded as her SB or PB. So, overscoring here won't matter.