Jenny Kirk's Blog: The Quad

antmanb said:

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

Click to expand...

I don't know, it would put a better emphasis on doing it cleanly to have
+goe and -goe equal. I think Goe's should be weighted on the points an element is worth. But they're not look at the spins a ftwrk vs jumps. Since their not so far it is quite balance. If they fix the quad +GOE they need to fix the non-jump elements to keep the balance.

I think a lot of men leave out the quad for the same reason ladies don't do 3/3 or 3A. A lot can't do them. Others have no consistancy. Nothing about risk and reward. A success rate of 5/10 is a risk. A success rate of 2/10 is either hope or stupidity. Skaters don't even do 10 competitions in a season. (I so happy when Kozuka finally got credit for rotating.)There was a lot of quad attepts last season(Ponsero, Alban , Brian, Armodio, Kevin, Kozuka ,Oda, Tomas, Evan, Johnny, Bradon, Ryan, russian guys I cant spell. ) I've only name 12 are sure there was some more. There will be lot more this season. If its not worth the risk how come so many skaters even bother to train it and try it.

In order to win the old skating sport trophy, one had to jump over the last barrel placed in the row. Not easy - there was blood. However when there was a winner it could be proclaimed, the best skating jumper and they were immediately swept up into shows

The Quad, like barrel jumping is amazing for the spectator, and it would be special if a skater could do more than just a quad in his program. For me, that is essential. No sadness if we don't see a quad but we see something special in figure skating.

antmanb said:

The part I disagree with is that if the quadsters falter then it must be a bad competition.

Click to expand...

Take 2008 worlds as an example, Lambiel faltered. Takahashi faltered. Buttle skated brilliantly. Joubert's choreography in his LP wasn't impressive compare to Buttle's. A good day Lambiel or a good day Takahashi would have beaten Buttle's skate of his lifetime. (keep in mind that I am not a Takahashi fan.) So in that sense, 2008 worlds was a bad competition.

So Joubert faltered by having a poorly choreographed LP?

This is what I don't get about the "all things being equal" argument. Since when are all things equal? Isn't that what competition is about - separating the wheat from the chaff?

I also said that quad alone cannot win a competition. Joubert's choreography wasn't up to his potential (like all his competition choreographies). Joubert didn't falter but he didn't skate his skate of the life time. Plus some of the top quad skaters with more all around skills totally meltdown. Takahashi was the predicted winner in all the analysis before the worlds. Ask Buttle if he has ever thought that he could win that worlds before it began? No. He took the opportunity that some quad skaters were not up to the game and skated the way he could possibily skate. He was the rightful winner and it was a dream moment for him but it was still a sad note for men's skating. Needless to say that 2009 worlds was even more sad.

Ehh, I don't think I get what you're saying, so I'm gonna try

1. In terms of all around skills, Buttle wouldn't be a top three contender (at 08 worlds). (I agree)

2. Several of the skaters who are generally considered better than him had poor skates, or at least, poorer than what we're used to from them (from Lambiel and Takahashi) or what we think they can achieve (Verner, Joubert, though I'm not arguing from a minute that those two skates are in any way equal). (I agree, except with Joubert. I don't know what he's capable of. He seems to win medals - most honoured skater under COP and all that without ever skating to his "full potential")

3. As a result, it was a sad note in figure skating because many of the stronger skaters didn't perform up to par. Disagree. I guess my comment comes from the fact that the deserving skater won - which means that the skating was judged, and not reputation etc. Secondly, a number of second tier skaters had solid skates that showcased future potential - I'm thinking of Chan, Kozuka, and Voronov. We got a gutsy skate from van de Perren. Sure, while I'd like to have all the top candidates skate lights out, I don't think it's a noteworthy sad moment for them not to have done so.

4. I don't know why 09 was even more sad.

ImaginaryPogue said:

except with Joubert. I don't know what he's capable of. He seems to win medals - most honoured skater under COP and all that without ever skating to his "full potential".

Click to expand...

How he gets his medals was not part of my arguement. I do think that he has potential that he has never shown in the competition. Johnny Weir is probably by far the most mentioned name when talking about not skating up to his potential. How do people know that? Because people saw how he did at the practices, and how he performed at non-competition shows. Same as Joubert. He was a lot more artistic than he has shown in the competitions. What if he used all his artistic skills, along with his superior jumping abilities in the competition? He must have won a lot more medals than he has.

ImaginaryPogue said:

I guess my comment comes from the fact that the deserving skater won - which means that the skating was judged, and not reputation etc. Secondly, a number of second tier skaters had solid skates that showcased future potential - I'm thinking of Chan, Kozuka, and Voronov. We got a gutsy skate from van de Perren. Sure, while I'd like to have all the top candidates skate lights out, I don't think it's a noteworthy sad moment for them not to have done so.

Click to expand...

I just want to say this: "The deserving skater won" was not necessarily related to whether the competition was a good competition or not.

ImaginaryPogue said:

I don't know why 09 was even more sad.

Click to expand...

Do you really have to have me open this new can of worms?

jennylovskt said:

Take 2008 worlds as an example, Lambiel faltered. Takahashi faltered. Buttle skated brilliantly. Joubert's choreography in his LP wasn't impressive compare to Buttle's. A good day Lambiel or a good day Takahashi would have beaten Buttle's skate of his lifetime. (keep in mind that I am not a Takahashi fan.) So in that sense, 2008 worlds was a bad competition.

Click to expand...

The choreo isn't what caused Joubert to finish second. first, Joubert lost some points in the SP, because he fell (IIRC on the 3Lz) and had a music deduction. In addition, Joubert had a relatively low base value LP, not miximizing the combinations and having lower level spins than usual. Edge calls on the 3F, which he did twice, did not help his score. A better jump layout would have gotten a higher score, though it might not have been enough due to having points to make up from the SP. This has nothing to do with choreography.

Dai and Stephane made mistakes in both the SP and the LP. Had everyone skated their planned LPs with no major mistakes (which never happens anyway), my guess is that Dai would have won that year.

ImaginaryPogue said:

I guess my comment comes from the fact that the deserving skater won - which means that the skating was judged, and not reputation etc. Secondly, a number of second tier skaters had solid skates that showcased future potential - I'm thinking of Chan, Kozuka, and Voronov. We got a gutsy skate from van de Perren.

Click to expand...

I felt at the time, and still do, that Buttle was the deserving winner, but that he was a bit overmarked with the GOEs on some elements. Some argue that Joubert was overscored because he finished slightly ahead on PCS; I disagree. It was a great performance, and was marked as such, but not a great skate for CoP purposes because of the base value.

Van der Perren was wonderful in Gotheburg! And I remember thinking Kozuka was adorable, didn't he wear what looked like a bowling shirt in one of the programs?

I can guess why Jenny found 2009 even more sad, but that's for her to say. Personally, even though I'm a fan of Brian, I was happy with the 2008 results. Jeffrey earned his win and skated beautifully, and he seems to be a good guy. Brian came back strong after being sick for much of the season. Johnny finally medalled, even if with a so-so skate. It seemed like a good podium to me.

jennylovskt said:

Take 2008 worlds as an example, Lambiel faltered. Takahashi faltered. Buttle skated brilliantly. Joubert's choreography in his LP wasn't impressive compare to Buttle's. A good day Lambiel or a good day Takahashi would have beaten Buttle's skate of his lifetime. (keep in mind that I am not a Takahashi fan.) So in that sense, 2008 worlds was a bad competition.

Click to expand...

I don't think Lambiel faltered in 2008 - he had a bad season all season (wasn't he injured for most of it) and there was little chance he'd have a good skate given the state of his body and frankly, his state of mind. Regardelss of the errors the programme was wonderfully constructed and was still great.

I can't remember exactly the errors that Takahashi made but the only one i seemt o recall hurting him was the extra combo. I don't call that faltering - it was a COP misnomer without which he'd have won the bronze - not so bad considering the skates that won Gold and Silver.

And saying that Joubert's choregoraphy wasn't as good as Buttles is just stating the obvious, like saying Buttle didn't have a quad. That's the point with these two skaters - Buttle could never do the jumps that Joubert tries just as Joubert couldn't do the choreography that Buttle does - that doesn't mean either of their skates were bad, they were actively good.

2008 Mens worlds LP was not a bad competition to me at all.

Ant

antmanb said:

I can't remember exactly the errors that Takahashi made but the only one i seemt o recall hurting him was the extra combo. I don't call that faltering - it was a COP misnomer without which he'd have won the bronze - not so bad considering the skates that won Gold and Silver.

Click to expand...

The protocols have the answers! Dai screwed up on his 3A in the SP, and had a UR on his second quad attempt in the LP. He fell once - I think on the UR 4T attempt - and his second 3A was not clean so he couldn't do the planned combination (the two "sequences" are what led to him getting Zayaked).

So that's not just a CoP thing; Dai made mistakes, and while he could have scored higher without the Zayak error, it wasn't a great performance. Of course, with Stephane skating badly, Johnny only so-so, KvdP having too much ground to make up from the SP and Tomas doing his Hidden Czech routine, it could have been enough for a bronze.

enlight78 said:

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.

Click to expand...

Is the CoP consistent? It's ok to ATTEMPT a Lutz knowing full well that the skater has never done one successfully in competition, but should it not receive credit for the Quad ATTEMPT?

I don't think the ISU ever uses the term "ATTEMPT" officially, but fans love to use it.

Buttercup said:

The choreo isn't what caused Joubert to finish second. first, Joubert lost some points in the SP, because he fell (IIRC on the 3Lz) and had a music deduction. In addition, Joubert had a relatively low base value LP, not miximizing the combinations and having lower level spins than usual. Edge calls on the 3F, which he did twice, did not help his score. A better jump layout would have gotten a higher score, though it might not have been enough due to having points to make up from the SP. This has nothing to do with choreography.

Dai and Stephane made mistakes in both the SP and the LP. Had everyone skated their planned LPs with no major mistakes (which never happens anyway), my guess is that Dai would have won that year.

Click to expand...

Thank you, B! You are right. I forgot about it and was too lazy to do the research.

antmanb said:

And saying that Joubert's choregoraphy wasn't as good as Buttles is just stating the obvious, like saying Buttle didn't have a quad. That's the point with these two skaters - Buttle could never do the jumps that Joubert tries just as Joubert couldn't do the choreography that Buttle does - that doesn't mean either of their skates were bad, they were actively good.

Click to expand...

Ant, you don't give up, do you?! Allright, I have to agree with you on this part this time. Next time, I'll pick fight more carefully and fight you back! :banging:

jennylovskt said:

Ant, you don't give up, do you?! Allright, I have to agree with you on this part this time. Next time, I'll pick fight more carefully and fight you back! :banging:

Click to expand...

No I don't give up! But honestly it was because i really liked both of their LPs. Despite writing a lot of negative things about Joubert afterwards based on his behaviour in interviews afterwards i actually liked his skate and thin kboth skaters deserved the credit for what they put out there.

Ant

antmanb said:

No I don't give up! But honestly it was because i really liked both of their LPs. Despite writing a lot of negative things about Joubert afterwards based on his behaviour in interviews afterwards i actually liked his skate and thin kboth skaters deserved the credit for what they put out there.

Ant

Click to expand...

What?! You wrote a lot of negative things about Joubert in 2008? I wasn't in the debate at that time, but I was with Joubert. I agreed with him on a lot of things he said and felt bad for him that he didn't win despite the fact that I was a Buttle fan (well, not a total, ardent fan though) and he has won the game. So complicated some times.

jennylovskt said:

What?! You wrote a lot of negative things about Joubert in 2008? I wasn't in the debate at that time, but I was with Joubert. I agreed with him on a lot of things he said and felt bad for him that he didn't win despite the fact that I was a Buttle fan (well, not a total, ardent fan though) and he has won the game. So complicated some times.

Click to expand...

It is very difficult to read a post describing a skater's program who is an ardent fan of that skater. No way can that fan be honest about the other skaters, at least in my readings.

Thanks, jennylovskt, for explaining what you mean.

Two things from my perspective.

1. To me, a good competition has a deserving winner. While it's true that the reverse isn't always the case, if it's great skating followed by a mediocre/disappointing winner, then my interest plummets (what happened after Salt Lake City, for example). It's like an exciting rollercoaster ride, but as soon as you pull into the station, someone throws pig vomit on you. Did you enjoy the ride now?

While I said that the reverse isn't always the case, I do think that I have them so firmly wrapped up in each other that it almost makes it so.

2. If it's the choice between a great quad and great footwork, I'm gonna go with the latter, nine times out of ten. Ideally, both would be best (why Takahashi's my favourite of the current crop), but I'd rather see interesting footwork.

So the constant meme that using the quad as the barometer for technical progress and lack thereof bugs me. I'm an unrepentant Chan fan, though. I find it noteworthy that eight men landed quads at Worlds 09 in their long program (Lutai, Joubert, Verner, Mroz, Oda, Voronov, Van de Perren, Ponsero) but only one had a level four footwork sequence (Chan).

ImaginaryPogue said:

I find it noteworthy that eight men landed quads at Worlds 09 in their long program (Lutai, Joubert, Verner, Mroz, Oda, Voronov, Van de Perren, Ponsero) but only one had a level four footwork sequence (Chan).

Click to expand...

How many men did quads in the SP, though? Doing them only in the LP is usually the mark of skaters not as secure about their quad. Anyway, the reason I signed in was to write a totally OT reponse to your comment re footwork . I'll make it clear, so that nobody accuses me of anti-Chan bias, that I felt the same seeing other level four step sequences:

My main issue with the requirements for high levels on step sequences is the emphasis on upper body movement. Level 3 requires moderate use of upper body movement (in reality, it's a lot more than moderate) while level 4 requires full use of upper body movement (see communication 1494, page 10).

Certainly some upper body movement is warranted, but to me what's required right now detracts from the appeal of the actual footwork, which is often relegated to a secondary role while skaters gather flowers, swat away bees, do their impression of a windmill, check out their reflection on the ice, and so on. I just don't see why the upper body movement should essentially be the difference between high and low levels - I don't think you can argue that when Chan or Takahashi (or the handful of other skaters to get a level 4) do a lower level sequence, the steps are any less complex.

I keep hoping that someone will rebel like Stephane did with the spins one season, but it's just too costly in terms of points, especially since the field is so deep right now.

Finally, I think the fact that we see so few level 4 step sequences indicates that something about the way they are judged is off, because at least on my TV, Plushy, Chan, Caro and Dai are not the only skaters who do well in this respect - and even they rarely get/got 4s. With spins and spirals, more skaters hit the highest levels on a fairly consistent basis; I'd like to see the same sort of distribution for step sequences.

So I'm not totally OT - I would prefer to have upper body movement rewarded as a choreography feature that fits the music rather than as part of the tech score; the quad, on the other hand, certainly belongs under tech.

Buttercup said:

Certainly some upper body movement is warranted, but to me what's required right now detracts from the appeal of the actual footwork, which is often relegated to a secondary role while skaters gather flowers, swat away bees, do their impression of a windmill, check out their reflection on the ice, and so on. I just don't see why the upper body movement should essentially be the difference between high and low levels - I don't think you can argue that when Chan or Takahashi (or the handful of other skaters to get a level 4) do a lower level sequence, the steps are any less complex.

Click to expand...

Totally agree. Windmill arms don't get me unless there is a reason for them., but I do enjoy the sway of the body with the music.
Speed in the footwork is essential and if the layout is intricate, all the more points a skater should get, imo.

I keep hoping that someone will rebel like Stephane did with the spins one season, but it's just too costly in terms of points, especially since the field is so deep right now.

Click to expand...

Spins as well as footwork are integrated in the whole program for Stephane. If judges are looking for some bullets to judge, they may not be there. His artistry comes first, so other skaters may win over him because they meet better the requirements of the CoP. I believe he is still the product of the old FREE SKATE and does not feel compelled to be part of the RESTRICTED CoP SKATE. If the moves in his skate fit the theme of his program, so be it. Plushy and Dai have or had Russian coaches who are brilliant in following the rules of the game. Not sure why this is not workig for Weir.

Four skaters did quads in the short program (Joubert, Verner, Ponsero, Voronov). In the top thirty anyway - I assumed none of the rest did. None did level four footwork (Chan has done level four footwork in the short, but it was rated level three here).

Finally, I think the fact that we see so few level 4 step sequences indicates that something about the way they are judged is off, because at least on my TV, Plushy, Chan, Caro and Dai are not the only skaters who do well in this respect - and even they rarely get/got 4s. With spins and spirals, more skaters hit the highest levels on a fairly consistent basis; I'd like to see the same sort of distribution for step sequences.

Click to expand...

How so? And who's Caro (Zhang or Kostner. Or is it a male skater I don't know?). I read somewhere else that a fan said that the rules are a bit vague in terms of how these are constructed, but I also know that two different performances of the same constructed step sequence could yield two different levels.

For reference sake, there were no level four footwork sequences at worlds 08 in the long program (8/9 quads, depending on how you count Weir's). It does seem weird, actually reading the facts, doesn't it?

ImaginaryPogue said:

who's Caro (Zhang or Kostner. Or is it a male skater I don't know?).

Click to expand...

Caro is Carolina Kostner, who was given a level 4 at one of her 2007-8 GPs - NHK, I think. I'm not aware of any other lady receiving a level 4 at an international event. Zhang is usually referred to as Caroline.

I read somewhere else that a fan said that the rules are a bit vague in terms of how these are constructed, but I also know that two different performances of the same constructed step sequence could yield two different levels.

For reference sake, there were no level four footwork sequences at worlds 08 in the long program (8/9 quads, depending on how you count Weir's). It does seem weird, actually reading the facts, doesn't it?

Click to expand...

What facts? That 8-9 skaters tried quads? I can read protocols, you know . I figured it was around that much, but the numbers have dropped in recent years, especially in SPs, which indicates to me that this element has been de-valued. And few skaters attempt two quads in an LP these days, even those who can do them fairly consistently. Now, some would say that's as it should be - but I disagree. As to quads and level 4 footwork, the difference, of course, is that it's very clear what a skater needs to do for a quad; it's not nearly as clear, as you noted as well, what a level 4 step sequence really calls for.

I would like to see the actual footwork emphasized and the rules clarified so that more of the top skaters can put the effort towards earning level 4s. Right now, the requirements are too vague, unlike spins and spirals where it's pretty clear - hold so many positions for so long, change edges at certain points, specific things that can be done as features, etc. Skaters who were considered weak to mediocre spinners have put in the work to make their spins better - because they knew what they had to do. It's ridiculous that so few skaters have been able to achieve level 4 step sequences, as compared to other called elements such as steps, spins, and lifts.

On top of that, I still think some of the requirements are not contributing to appealing footwork. Innovation is not being rewarded enough. Intricacy and flow are not being rewarded enough. Speed isn't being rewarded enough (I don't care if it counts towards calling the level or giving GOEs; it should count for more than it does now). And even if you play the game and do all that ugly upper body movement, high kick like there's no tomorrow and change directions so much the viewers' heads spin, it still might not be enough to get more than 3.3 base value and a half-point GOE.

Did any skater get a level 4 at 2008 Worlds, in either program? In any of the non-dance disciplines? I think nobody did. Not Jeffrey Buttle, who had lovely footwork. Not Dai, who has received level 4s before. Not Caro, who had done so earlier that season. And there were other skaters in Gotheburg who did excellent step sequences. Come to think of it, the few level 4s I've seen did not look more difficult or more innovative to me than many level 3s, whether by the same skaters who have gotten level 4, or by other skaters. So what made them so special? Was the technical caller in a good mood? Was it the 4CC happy hour? A going-away present for Plushy? the latter I can write only because seniorita is on vacation and won't see my post.

I'm not one of the anti CoP people, but I really think that after the Olympics, the ISU will need to take a serious look at the scoring and make some significant changes.