Jenny Kirk's Blog: The Quad | Golden Skate

Jenny Kirk's Blog: The Quad

merrybari

Final Flight
Joined
Oct 21, 2007

Yes, it is!

I suggest re: Evan that he hasn't backed away from the jump or his feelings about it entirely and still feels it's the direction of the sport in the men's division. He backed that up by continuikng to attempt it the entire season and as we all know, but she didn't mention, he left it out of his Worlds performance on doctor's orders. That said, he has said that the determining factor for inclusion in a program is his own consistency with it, not the number of points.

Others are saying the same. Also, lately I wouldn't say even Joubert has been as consistent with the jump as earlier in his career. And some of the younger skaters coming up have included the quad successfully but as Jenny points out, if the other elemints in the program are lacking, it's not a guarantee of a medal.

I'm curious as to whether or not Lambiel and Plushenko are empahsizing the jump in their "comeback" tries.

Sure does make the men's competition the most exciting of the four disciplines. Drama indeed! Just what the sport needs.

Bring it on!
 

Nadine

Record Breaker
Joined
Oct 3, 2003
Another well-researched & thoughtful article from Jennifer, as only an elite skater such as herself can provide (btw I've enjoyed reading all of them). :)

Though I respect Jennifer's opinion, mine differs a bit.

To me, the Quad separates the men from the boys.

As the old proverb goes:

"to the victor go the spoils"

May the best MAN win!
 

Buttercup

Record Breaker
Joined
Mar 25, 2008
I don't see why Jenny feels the need to re-open the quad debate - I understand that she only started writing recently, but this post would have been more appropriate three or four months ago, especially since it adds nothing new: Joubert thinks quads are important, some skaters win without quads, skaters should strive for well-rounded programs (actually, I think Joubert simply feels that quads are a part of a well-rounded program, and he's not alone in that). I felt some of her previous posts were more interesting and thought-provoking.

Also, her argument was not very clear. She suggests that maybe quads should be worth more, but then ends with:
While it might be thrilled (sic) to see a skater attempt the quad, the most important thing for a skater is consistency (sic) executing a clean program when it counts. That’s what wins championships.
By all means, then, let's remove all risk from programs so that everyone goes clean. Clearly Stephane shouldn't bother with a 3A, and neither should Patrick Chan, for whom it's still a risk. Laura Lepisto doesn't need to work on getting a triple lutz even semi-consistent: she should always leave it out! I'm sorry, but that's a terrible idea. Skaters should take risks; they should be calculated risks rather than stupid ones, but if people only focus on going clean, skating will be boring.

Merrybari, Joubert is consistent on the quad in the sense that he always attempts quads (other than TEB SP, and that wasn't intentional), he almost always rotates them, and he rarely falls on that jump. What we did see from him in 2008-9 was some uncontrolled landings on quads (Euros LP, Worlds SP). Re Stephane and Plushy, I'm sure they'll go for quads. For one thing, they always have; also, Lambiel needs one if he can't do a 3A.

BTW, can a 3A-3T really get as much as 18.2? I think Jenny's wrong on that one.
 

antmanb

Record Breaker
Joined
Feb 5, 2004
Also, her argument was not very clear. She suggests that maybe quads should be worth more, but then ends with: While it might be thrilled (sic) to see a skater attempt the quad, the most important thing for a skater is consistency (sic) executing a clean program when it counts. That’s what wins championships.

I agree I think she well and truly sat on the fence and didn't really come down one way or the other.

By all means, then, let's remove all risk from programs so that everyone goes clean. Clearly Stephane shouldn't bother with a 3A, and neither should Patrick Chan, for whom it's still a risk. Laura Lepisto doesn't need to work on getting a triple lutz even semi-consistent: she should always leave it out! I'm sorry, but that's a terrible idea. Skaters should take risks; they should be calculated risks rather than stupid ones, but if people only focus on going clean, skating will be boring.

I think you're making a leap from Jenny's article that she herself didn't make though. She did not say anywhere that all risk should be removed from a programme. She actually said very little that we don't already know - a clean programme will rule over an error filled programme. That surely is right. Has to be right. It's not about not ever attempting something you struggle with it's about trying to go clean. All of the skaters you mentioned have more success than not in practice with the jumps you mentioned so they have to include them in their programmes inorder to get come competition mileage out them. remember they've been doing this since they first competed as kids and tired a 1Lz/1Lp for the first time. This is what they do.

The observation that Jenny missed which is the most important is that while the theory of cleanest programme wins is correct, the reality is - who does a clean programme these days? Not many. It just happens that the last two mens champions managed it that one time, at the same time that the guy with more points on the table because of having a quad made mistakes. But aside from that clean skates are rare under COP.

BTW, can a 3A-3T really get as much as 18.2? I think Jenny's wrong on that one.

No i think she got that wrong. The base value for a 3A+3T is 12.2 she's added 6 points to it thinking that +3 GOE across the board gets you two lots of three points (one fo the toe-loop and one for the axel) when in reality it's just the one hardest (i think) jump GOE that gets added so the most you could actually score is 15.2.

Ant
 

Buttercup

Record Breaker
Joined
Mar 25, 2008
I agree I think she well and truly sat on the fence and didn't really come down one way or the other.

I think you're making a leap from Jenny's article that she herself didn't make though.
Obviously I was exaggerating ;). Really, this was not one of Jenny's better efforts - as we both noted, she could have done a better job of stating her argument (if she had one - she was firmly on that fence). There were also errors and omissions, and some proof-reading wouldn't have gone amiss.
The observation that Jenny missed which is the most important is that while the theory of cleanest programme wins is correct, the reality is - who does a clean programme these days? Not many. It just happens that the last two mens champions managed it that one time, at the same time that the guy with more points on the table because of having a quad made mistakes. But aside from that clean skates are rare under COP.
Indeed - neither Jeffrey nor Evan could have beaten some of the other top guys if they would have gone clean and skated their planned programs well; in Evan's case, even with the other guys making mistakes it was pretty close. The "do whatever you need to skate clean" tactic doesn't necessarily work, and means that a skater becomes dependent on others making mistakes or not skating the programs to their full potential.

Of course, clean skates with considerable technical difficulty are rare under system. But if we want people to take risks, or be creative, they should be rewarded for it. Right now I don't think the system does enough in either respect.
 

merrybari

Final Flight
Joined
Oct 21, 2007
Buttercup - I agree that Joubert is consistent in attempting it but he's not been consistently clean in those attempts as you also stated.

From that standpoint, up until Worlds when he was forbidden to do it, Evan has been consistent in the attempt as well. Without the stress fracture he may have been more successful with it, too, last season.

So depending on what is meant by consistent, I still say there are very few, if any, these days that are delivering it consistently clean. :) I think it's important to keep going for it.

I also agree it's not being rewarded as highly as it should be and is being punished more severely than necessary. What's up with that?

Weighing pros and cons is a juggling act. As for Jenny sitting on the fence about it, isn't that exactly where most are sitting right now?
 
Last edited:

Buttercup

Record Breaker
Joined
Mar 25, 2008
Joubert is consistent in attempting it but he's not been consistently clean in those attempts as you also stated.

From that standpoint, up until Worlds when he was forbidden to do it, Evan has been consistent in the attempt as well. Without the stress fracture he may have been more successful with it, too, last season.
OK, I understand and respect that you're a fan of Evan, but you don't have to defend him against everything, and this one is really a stretch ;).

I stand by what I wrote: Brian attempts more quads than just about any active skater, does them in the SP and the LP, and though his quads aren't as pretty as some skaters', he normally doesn't fall or UR. As I wrote, when Joubert has quad problems, it's usually an uncontrolled landing, which isn't as bad as some mistakes. Brian's been doing quads for many years, so it's no surprise he's relatively good at it.

Evan has had more UR calls on his quad attempts, it's not as consistent for him, he doesn't do them in his LPs on a regular basis, and rarely attempts quads in the SP - this was true even before 2009 Worlds. He's more prone to URs than Joubert in general; Brian's main technique issue is lipping.

As for Jenny sitting on the fence about it, isn't that exactly where most are sitting right now?
Brian Joubert, Yannick Ponsero, Patrick Chan, Nobunari Oda, Evan Lysacek - they have all expressed opinions on the matter; strong opinions, in some cases. And they stand to lose a lot more than Jenny does for doing so, because it can affect the way they are perceived by judges and fans. Quite a few journalists have also weighed in. What's the point of writing a column if you're not adding anything new and not committing to anything?

I also agree it's not being rewarded as highly as it should be and is being punished more severely than necessary. What's up with that?
I know, the unequal GOE thing makes no sense to me. If the system is going to punish bad execution more than for other jumps, it should reward good execution on the same scale. BTW, had that been the case, Yannick Ponsero would've medalled at Euros.

Now that we have found something to agree about, let's go argue about music choices :biggrin: :eek:.
 

ImaginaryPogue

Record Breaker
Joined
Jun 3, 2009
Is there a website that has all the values for the jumps, from single toe loops up to the quad salchow? I'm curious about something.
 

antmanb

Record Breaker
Joined
Feb 5, 2004
Weighing pros and cons is a juggling act. As for Jenny sitting on the fence about it, isn't that exactly where most are sitting right now?

Most aren't writing columns about it though, so to not give an opinion one way or the other about the subject matter leaves you wondering why she bothered dealing with the topic at all. I think a lot of her previous coumns have been great at "blowing the lid" off some topics that are taboo in skating and she has provided insight into the tpoics and most importantly her own opinion as a high level skater. This article was pretty blah really, maybe she'd have had more of an opinion if she'd tackled something she has epxerience of. Since the quad is in the men's arena maybe she should have talked about the 3/3?

Ant
 

Bennett

Record Breaker
Joined
Nov 20, 2007
i find her a smart woman and a good writer. tends to be pretty straightforward in expressing her opinions although she doesn't say much in this particular article.
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
I thought she was pretty clear in her conclusion:

I suggest skaters take the emphasis away from this one element, and instead focus on skating a balanced, sound performance –... That’s what wins championships.

At the same time, she criticizes the IJS for not making the quad worth more.
 
Joined
Jul 11, 2003
She's right. Far too much emphasis on one jump. I have my own system of placing skaters in a competition I have watched. Howevever, since Joubert upped his game with a more rounded out LP in Gottenborg it was tough for me to give it to Buttle who had a better more rounded program. joubert's quad won me over. But honestly,to me it was a tie with a nod to Buttle.
 

ImaginaryPogue

Record Breaker
Joined
Jun 3, 2009
Thanks Mathman. Though I've gotta say, I'm a little surprised at some of those values (taking a closer look at them)
 

jennylovskt

Medalist
Joined
Oct 20, 2006
Nothing new in this blog. Many skating fans have already stated the same ideas long ago.

While I am wishing that my favorite skaters win no matter what way they take, I am not thrilled with the position of skating a clean program and not risking in the Olympic year.

It was so unfortunate to this sport that the last two year worlds have won without a quad. The quad cannot stand alone to win a competition, but it is an important measure to separate the ordinaries and the greats. It ought to be highly emphasized. Given the current quad skaters' general abilities on other elements, the jumps other than the quad, spins, footworks, etc, I have to say that if every one skates clean, the winner must be a quad skater. If a competition won by a non-quad skater, it means that those quad skaters must have faltered in some degrees, therefore, it must be a bad competition.
 

enlight78

Medalist
Joined
Nov 2, 2005
I know, the unequal GOE thing makes no sense to me. If the system is going to punish bad execution more than for other jumps, it should reward good execution on the same scale. BTW, had that been the case, Yannick Ponsero would've medalled at Euros.

Now that we have found something to agree about, let's go argue about music choices :biggrin: :eek:.

I think it is to prevent the Buttle Syndrome. To prevent skaters from throwing in the quad even thought they cant do it just to get the points and extra jump(zayack rule). I think is was the smartest idea the ISU had. It was a way to increase the quad value but also keep the balance between difficulty and quality.
In realty a quad to is worth 9.8 + (extra triple toe)zayack rule 4.0 + the Pcs bonus that quads seem to get + 2.5 for a grand total of 16.3. Any more and the quad would be all you need aka 2006 torino. So I think the balance is pefect . The quad give you the winning edge if you take advantage of it. but if forget about rest of skating you give your edge up.
 

Buttercup

Record Breaker
Joined
Mar 25, 2008
I think it is to prevent the Buttle Syndrome. To prevent skaters from throwing in the quad even thought they cant do it just to get the points and extra jump(zayack rule). I think is was the smartest idea the ISU had. It was a way to increase the quad value but also keep the balance between difficulty and quality.
In realty a quad to is worth 9.8 + (extra triple toe)zayack rule 4.0 + the Pcs bonus that quads seem to get + 2.5 for a grand total of 16.3. Any more and the quad would be all you need aka 2006 torino. So I think the balance is pefect . The quad give you the winning edge if you take advantage of it. but if forget about rest of skating you give your edge up.
I agree that negative quad GOEs should be worth more than 1, for the exact reason you pointed out. However, if a skater did well on what is a very difficult jump, the positive GOEs should likewise be higher. Since few skaters get very high GOEs on quads, I don't think it's going to throw anything out of whack.

GOEs for other elements are commensurate with the base value of that element, so why is it that +GOEs are the same for a 3T (base value 4), a 3A (base value 8.2) and a 4T (base value 9.8)? Meanwhile a level 4 spin, which is much closer in base value to the 3T (e.g. 3.2 for a flying camel, 3.0 for a flying sit spin), gets lower GOE units than the 3T, as do level 3 step sequences (base value 3.3).* It makes no sense!

Also, on most of the elements with a lower base value , the +GOEs are worth more than the -GOEs. As I read it, this basically gives an advantage to the skaters who play the numbers game over those who take risks, and that's not right, nor is it good for skating. I think the positive/negative GOEs should be equal regardless of the element.

At this point, there is too much risk and not enough reward for skaters to try quads - otherwise we would see more quad attempts, and eventually, more successful quads. But if skaters do not have incentive to put it in their programs, many won't give it their best shot.

Torino was not won or lost on quads; Plushy scored well on other elements as well, and while I have issues with his programs there, it cannot be argued that he was that one-dimensional. Buttle and Lambiel medalled not because they did quads (or quad-falls) but because everyone else was awful in one or both parts of the event.

* I used the link mathman provided. If the ISU has revised this again, I apoligize for any errors.
 

antmanb

Record Breaker
Joined
Feb 5, 2004
Nothing new in this blog. Many skating fans have already stated the same ideas long ago.

While I am wishing that my favorite skaters win no matter what way they take, I am not thrilled with the position of skating a clean program and not risking in the Olympic year.

It was so unfortunate to this sport that the last two year worlds have won without a quad. The quad cannot stand alone to win a competition, but it is an important measure to separate the ordinaries and the greats. It ought to be highly emphasized. Given the current quad skaters' general abilities on other elements, the jumps other than the quad, spins, footworks, etc, I have to say that if every one skates clean, the winner must be a quad skater. If a competition won by a non-quad skater, it means that those quad skaters must have faltered in some degrees, therefore, it must be a bad competition.

I agree with everything you've written except the part in bold. I think the system right now does exactly what you said (and i actually completely agree with it). If everyone skates their planned content and skates it clean then you would see the top guys on the podium with a quad (or possibly two).

All that has happened for the past couple of years is that the guys with the quads have messed up something else in their programme. IMO landing the quad should not give a skater any kind of cushion to make mistakes over skaters with a full set of clean triples.

The part I disagree with is that if the quadsters falter then it must be a bad competition. Just because one or two skaters have a mistake on one or two elements it doesn't mean the competition was bad (unless those are you favourite skaters:p). As Joe has already stated - Joubert in Gothenburg didn't have a bad a competition - he made one (or was it two errors) but was otherwise great. That wasn't a abd competition at all - there was some COP kiggery pokery with combos etc but overall it was extremely entertaining and nail biting to the end.

I think it is to prevent the Buttle Syndrome. To prevent skaters from throwing in the quad even thought they cant do it just to get the points and extra jump(zayack rule).

But that doesn't explain why the +GOE isn't bumped up by the same percentage that the -GOE has been made more severe. I agree that by increasing the value of the quad the -GOE levels had to increase to stop people getting even more points for a failed quad, but by the same token a very good quad worth +GOE would maybe go some way to addressing those that think the quad is not valued enough.

Ant
 
Last edited:
Top