Ladies LP

[prettykeys]

Nobody does 2.75 rotations in the air for the Loop, Salchow, and Toeloop.

For the Lutz and Flip it is different, the technique varies a lot more on those, but (especially among Ladies) 2.75 rotations isn't at all the norm for those jumps either.

---

You can't "not agree" with it. That's simply how jumps are done.

2.25 rotations is not ideal, but that is the minimum amount (1/4 turn short) needed to be considered a Triple jump.

But I'm finding a LOT of examples where there are 1/2 air rotations off the "defined" number of rotations (instead of the 3/4) i.e., within the limit that I'm proposing.

Look at the slow-motion for almost any Loop, Salchow, or Toeloop. 1/2 turn of pre-rotation is universally the norm for those jumps. It's not "weird", that's just how they work.

You're right, I see it is true now. Actually I even saw a beautiful 3axel that had 1/2 pre-rotation BUT there were 3 revolutions in the air (Patrick Chan.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VW5dBWUyNf0
At 2:47, YuNa is doing a 3loop with 1/2 pre-rotation, but fully rotating on the landing (i.e. 2.5 rotations in the air.) Correct me if I'm wrong? And she doesn't even like the 3loop, so there must be better loop jumpers out there (not necessarily doing more rotations in the air, but comfortable with doing it more consistently than YuNa.)

No Triple Axel in the history of the sport has ever rotated 3.5 times in the air.

Alexei Yagudin has pretty much the best Triple Axel ever (as seen in the animated gif posted by hellcat) and he gets 3.25 rotations in the air at best.

Sorry, I meant to say that Stephen Carriere did 3 rotations in the air, which is 0.5 (i.e. within "limits") off the defining 3.5 rotations of a 3axel (not that I required the 3.5 rotations to be in the air, but I wasn't clear about that.)

To re-emphasize, having 1/2 a rotation off the defining number of rotations on a jump, in the air, is reasonable...and I haven't even given the ideal jumpers for the referred jumps.

It would be unwise to use Alexei Yagudin as the baseline because, as you said, he was amazing at the 3axel as well as other jumps.

[hellcat]

It would be unwise to use Alexei Yagudin as the baseline because, as you said, he was amazing at the 3axel as well as other jumps.

No, that shouldn't be the baseline but, he should get the full credit while those who don't meet that should not have full credit so that he gets some advantage over the other inferior jump.

Again, my point is that nobody needs to have 100% of the score if no one gets it right.

Even Alexei doesn't need to have 100% of the score if he's a bit off from the rotations as long as there's a diference between his score and others who're more off from the defined # of rotations in the air

[prettykeys]

No, that shouldn't be the baseline but, he should get the full credit while those who don't meet that should not have full credit so that he gets some advantage over the other inferior jump.

Again, my point is that nobody needs to have 100% of the score if no one gets it right.

Even Alexei doesn't need to have 100% of the score if he's a bit off from the rotations as long as there's a diference between his score and others who're more off from the defined # of rotations in the air

Sure, that is another fair way of going about it, if it is applied consistently and proportionately among skaters. In practical settings, however, that may be very difficult, and we still have GOE's to help differentiate quality.

[Blades of Passion]

But I'm finding a LOT of examples where there are 1/2 air rotations off the "defined" number of rotations (instead of the 3/4) i.e., within the limit that I'm proposing.

That number of rotations would be a "perfectly" executed jump.

CoP allows 1/4 short of before it is considered underrotated. Which makes sense. Even a well-executed jump won't always have perfect rotation.

[prettykeys]

That number of rotations would be a "perfectly" executed jump.

CoP allows 1/4 short of before it is considered underrotated. Which makes sense. Even a well-executed jump won't always have perfect rotation.

Hmm, okay. 2.25 in the air for those triple jumps where up to 1/2 pre-rotation is standard.

Else, 2.5

[Blades of Passion]

The value of the Flip and Lutz should be adjusted if that kind of distinction is going to be made.

I'm not sure how good of an idea that would be, though. Michelle Kwan used the technique of pre-rotating 1/2 turn on her Lutz and Flip but they still looked very good. You'd have to land completely backwards to get full credit, which simply doesn't happen all the time (and isn't even always ideal, in terms of having a well controlled landing).

[figurejennah]

(the following 2 are animated gifs so I changed it to be downloadable from inserted images as they're a bit too big for inserts - 3 & 5 MB)

http://www.box.net/shared/06os5kfkj3

http://www.box.net/shared/oktge6arog

Isn't this 3A?


http://www.box.net/shared/static/4y2u61sa8a.gif

Also, check out this beautiful jump by Peggy Fleming.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdPKgg8SGys

OMG that 3A.................... so beautiful. Looks like he's flying
around... lol

Because I don't think I've seen a female skater do 3A like that recently after Midori ito... And will Mao be able to
do her 3A again this season? :(

http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/884...122awereqw.gif

[evangeline]

OMG that 3A.................... so beautiful. Looks like he's flying
around... lol

Ilia Kulik had, IMO, probably one of the best triple axels ever in the history of the sport. Check out this 3A with a loooooong spread eagle entrance at 0:40 of this video. Simply amazing (*fans self*)

[skate4ever]

There have to be boundaries.

Whatever happened to

I think what Blades of Passion is referring to is the current rule that says if you underrotate by 89 degress you get full credit for a triple, but if you underrotate by 91 degrees, then you only get credit for a double.

we've got to draw the line somewhere.
Plus, that's not what happens in practice (between 89 and 91 degree rotations).
Skaters get the benefit of the doubt and most jumps that receive downgrades look significantly under-rotated even to untrained eyes such as ours.

Ah, that's just the thing, though. It isn't BLACK and WHITE.

....?

Let me rephrase my question because you've refined your position since the following post.

you want to create a new element that a skater can't practice, can't attempt, and can only be done by accident?

What kind of an element is THAT?

You want to create a new element that skaters won't practice, won't attempt (because it will affect their landing and they can get more points by doing other elements), and can only be done by accident?

What kind of an element is THAT?

A figure skating element is something that skaters include in their programs, something that skaters practice in training to perfect.

Triple jump: An element
2.6 jump: NOT an element
2.3 jump: NOT an element
Double jump: An element

If you can't/don't understand this concept, God help you.

And I'm just glad that you're not a member of the ISU.... or are you?

[☆Genie]

I love mao's 3A. It looks very effortless and easy to do. Looks like a double! Vaugh Chipeur has a crazy triple axel too.

[Blades of Passion]

Let me rephrase my question because you've refined your position since the following post.

I've not changed my position at all. I said things are not Black and White and that is true. The gray area needs to be properly acknowledged.

What's also true is that there needs to be SOME form of boundary. We can't measure and grade (and don't want to measure and grade) every single rotation a skater does.

The classification of "Double", "Underrotated Triple", and "Triple" is sufficient.

You want to create a new element that skaters won't practice, won't attempt (because it will affect their landing and they can get more points by doing other elements), and can only be done by accident?

What kind of an element is THAT?

I don't want to create a new element at all. You are backwards in your thinking.

Underrotated jumps already ARE a scored element in figure skating. The problem is that they are not scored correctly. They count as Triples for Zayak purposes but are only worth the value of a Double.

What kind of logic is THAT, to quote your line.

A figure skating element is something that skaters include in their programs, something that skaters practice in training to perfect.

Triple jump: An element
2.6 jump: NOT an element
2.3 jump: NOT an element
Double jump: An element

If you can't/don't understand this concept, God help you.

You are still very confused.

When a skater falls on a jump or double-foots the landing or puts their hands down on the landing, etc....these things are mistakes. They are scored. Underrotating a jump is also a mistake and it needs to be scored correctly.

Remember, though, "mistake" is relative. A Double jump is an "actual element" but when you Double a Triple jump, that is a BIG mistake.

Skaters don't want to fall on jumps or make other such mistakes, but the fact is that it happens. They are not planned elements, but they are "elements" which happen nonetheless.

So, for the last time -- an underrotated Triple shows more skill than a Double and needs to be graded as such. It's no different of a concept than how a double-footed Triple is still worth more than a Double, or how a double-footed Quad is still worth more than a Triple.

[skate4ever]

Underrotated jumps already ARE a scored element in figure skating.

When a skater falls on a jump or double-foots the landing or puts their hands down on the landing, etc....these things are mistakes.

Underrotating a jump is also a mistake

They are not planned elements, but they are "elements" which happen nonetheless.

You are harrowingly clueless, just as I thought.

Who in the world says that URs, wrong-edge takeoffs, falls and double-footing are figure skating elements?

They are, as you acknowledge, mistakes/errors committed by skaters during performance, for which they are penalized.

If you can't make that distinction, again, God help you.

I don't want to create a new element at all.

You might be suffering from short-term memory loss (in which case I'm not making fun of your symptoms because I heard it can be a serious problem) so let me just refresh your memory.

Downgraded jumps should have their own base value.

Any element can be defined. An underrotated jump should be treated as its own element.

If you keep straddling the line regarding the very bases of your agrument, this discussion is not going to get very interesting.

Time to make up your mind.