Why Zero Points and Invalid element?

Sk8tr321 · Nov 15, 2009

Rachael flat did a combination spin at the end of her freeskate porgram at SA. She did as Sott Hamilton remarked "extermely difficult" spin in both directions. She received zero points and they listed it as two spins with an asterisk *Invalid element

12 CSp2* * 0.00
13 CoSp1* * 0.00

Is this because the two spins were not on the same spot?

Thanks

i love to skate · Nov 15, 2009

It's because she travelled more than 6 feet.

Sk8tr321 · Nov 16, 2009

i love to skate said:
It's because she travelled more than 6 feet.

Is that called traveling when you change feet. She didn't travel while she was spinning. I thought traveling was when you were spinning not when you were changing feet. They counted it as two different spins but then disqualified both. You usually get -GOE for traveling not invalid element.

Thanks

Sk8tr321 · Nov 16, 2009

I looked in the rules for combination and this is what I found.

If the spinning centres (before and after the change of foot) are too far apart and the criteria of “two spins” is fulfilled (there is a curve of exit after the first part and the curve of entry into the second part), the second part will not considered and the spin will have no value.

I believe there was a curve of entry to both spins so should one of the spins counted?

BTW, There is s lot of bad grammar in those rules...I guess it's the international translator.

Joesitz (RIP) · Nov 16, 2009

The CoP refuses to acknowledge Spins and Jumps in both directions as being difficult. They are!, and it's blade to ice; not some contorting body position.

I think they would get the same credit if the number of spins and jumps are within the regulations, but no additional credit for difficulty.

Can you imagine doing double axels in both directions and getting credit for only one? All the scoring has to show is one axel and GoE of +6.

prettykeys · Nov 16, 2009

Joesitz said:
The CoP refuses to acknowledge Spins and Jumps in both directions as being difficult. They are!, and it's blade to ice; not some contorting body position.

I think they would get the same credit if the number of spins and jumps are within the regulations, but no additional credit for difficulty.

Can you imagine doing double axels in both directions and getting credit for only one? All the scoring has to show is one axel and GoE of +6.

Really? That's messed up. Some people are left-handed while the majority is right-handed. Both directions need to be considered equal.

mskater93 · Nov 16, 2009

Joesitz said:
The CoP refuses to acknowledge Spins and Jumps in both directions as being difficult. They are!, and it's blade to ice; not some contorting body position.

No, they are considered difficult and a spin in each direction with a small enough step between would be a change combo spin (which is what Flatt was going for). She got it called as 2 spins because of the distance travelled and they were invalis because of the fact she had not met the criteria of having a CCoSp yet (a required spin).

jenaj · Nov 16, 2009

How many points did she lose because of this?

schiele · Nov 16, 2009

jenaj said:
How many points did she lose because of this?

Depending on the level she would've gotten and a possible +1/2 GOE, maybe 3.5-4.0? Basically she would've broken into 120 level..

i love to skate · Nov 16, 2009

Sk8tr321 said:
Is that called traveling when you change feet. She didn't travel while she was spinning. I thought traveling was when you were spinning not when you were changing feet. They counted it as two different spins but then disqualified both. You usually get -GOE for traveling not invalid element.

Thanks

Sorry, I should have been more clear - I wrote that right before I went to bed! The distance between the two spins was more than the six feet.

jenaj · Nov 16, 2009

This is a nitpick, but I wish Rachael (and other skaters, including Yu Na) would get rid of the boot covers. I suppose Rachael or her advisers think it lengthens the look of her legs, but even so, I hate the way the shape of the skate shows through around the ankles. On Rachael, they tend to bunch. It seems to me that the covers aren't fooling anyone. And I really don't get why Yu Na (or Mao) wear them--both are rather long-legged to begin with.

jcoates · Nov 16, 2009

mskater93 said:
No, they are considered difficult and a spin in each direction with a small enough step between would be a change combo spin (which is what Flatt was going for). She got it called as 2 spins because of the distance travelled and they were invalis because of the fact she had not met the criteria of having a CCoSp yet (a required spin).

That's true. Rochette did a two direction combo spin in last year's LP. Not sure if she's doing it this season. If you don't notice the change of direction, Rochette's spin looked kinda simple, but it was actually fairly hard and there was minimal distance between each portion of the spin.

Perhaps the issue with Rachel's spin is that she enters each portion from a camel. That may increase the risk that there is a traveling violation. Still a very cool attempt.

Mathman · Nov 16, 2009

jenaj said:
This is a nitpick, but I wish Rachael (and other skaters, including Yu Na) would get rid of the boot covers.

:yes: Especially Yu-na.

Joesitz (RIP) · Nov 16, 2009

mskater93 said:
No, they are considered difficult and a spin in each direction with a small enough step between would be a change combo spin

I'm aware of that. Not writing about Flat, but what the CoP says about spinnng or jumping in both directions is that the not-so-used direction is equal to the famililar direction. That doesn't show difficulty. Only a non skater could agree to that and a +1 GoE would not suffice.

And to call it 2 separate jumps is off the wall. It shows the skater can do the same jump both ways and should get credit for it regardless if his jump quota is about to overflow. It's one jump in both directions. It is NOT a combo nor a sequence.

Tinymavy15 · Nov 16, 2009

jenaj said:
This is a nitpick, but I wish Rachael (and other skaters, including Yu Na) would get rid of the boot covers. I suppose Rachael or her advisers think it lengthens the look of her legs, but even so, I hate the way the shape of the skate shows through around the ankles. On Rachael, they tend to bunch. It seems to me that the covers aren't fooling anyone. And I really don't get why Yu Na (or Mao) wear them--both are rather long-legged to begin with.

Really? I know it is a matter of opinion but I think it looks so much better with the boot covers. Other wise the feet look big, the legs short.

Joesitz (RIP) · Nov 16, 2009

jcoates said:
That's true. Rochette did a two direction combo spin in last year's LP. Not sure if she's doing it this season. If you don't notice the change of direction, Rochette's spin looked kinda simple, but it was actually fairly hard and there was minimal distance between each portion of the spin.

Perhaps the issue with Rachel's spin is that she enters each portion from a camel. That may increase the risk that there is a traveling violation. Still a very cool attempt.

Why should Joannie do it again? It's not worth the difficulty. Rachael's spins were not the same spin. Wasn't it a camel one way and a sitsspin the other. That could have been a factor.

Sk8tr321 · Nov 16, 2009

Joesitz said:
Why should Joannie do it again? It's not worth the difficulty. Rachael's spins were not the same spin. Wasn't it a camel one way and a sitsspin the other. That could have been a factor.

It looked to me like Rachael did a camel-change edge-catch foot then changed direction and did a sit-cannon ball -to a good old fashioned scratch spin. So, even though it was difficult, and a great way to end a program since it does not fit into the "rules", it does not count at all, zip, zero, nada.

I just watched a few of Michelle Kwan's older Free Skates. Then Kristi Yamaguchi 1992 FP, and then Oksana. I understand the need for this point based system with strict rules on what you can do but remember when a Free Skate was a Free Skate! Remember when you could watch without counting.

Joesitz (RIP) · Nov 17, 2009

prettykeys said:
Really? That's messed up. Some people are left-handed while the majority is right-handed. Both directions need to be considered equal.

Have you ever been to a ballet or another type of Dance presentation? They have the ability to move in both directions and a few skaters do too.

Joesitz (RIP) · Nov 17, 2009

Sk8tr321 said:
It looked to me like Rachael did a camel-change edge-catch foot then changed direction and did a sit-cannon ball -to a good old fashioned scratch spin. So, even though it was difficult, and a great way to end a program since it does not fit into the "rules", it does not count at all, zip, zero, nada.

I just watched a few of Michelle Kwan's older Free Skates. Then Kristi Yamaguchi 1992 FP, and then Oksana. I understand the need for this point based system with strict rules on what you can do but remember when a Free Skate was a Free Skate! Remember when you could watch without counting.

Yup, it's hardly a Free Skate anymore. It's hardly a Sport either when a contestant can's show his best - only the best of what he is told. Oh for the days when a double walley was scrutinized for it's back inside takeoff.

mskater93 · Nov 17, 2009

Joesitz said:
I'm aware of that. Not writing about Flat, but what the CoP says about spinnng or jumping in both directions is that the not-so-used direction is equal to the famililar direction. That doesn't show difficulty. Only a non skater could agree to that and a +1 GoE would not suffice.

And to call it 2 separate jumps is off the wall. It shows the skater can do the same jump both ways and should get credit for it regardless if his jump quota is about to overflow. It's one jump in both directions. It is NOT a combo nor a sequence.

IJS considers a spin in the opposite direction a feature and with enough other features, can push it to a higher level spin. If Flatt had stepped close enough, it would have been a CCoSp4 (she had three other features - COE, catch foot, cannonball).

As for jumps, if they are back to back, it is either a combo (like putting a toe loop on it) or sequence (with the current sequence rules, I have a harded time picturing how it could be) depending on how they are connected, otherwise if it is as you are suggesting, it is completely not worth it as you would only get points for one energy expension. A skater at our Regionals did a 2Lz (CW) /2Lz (CCW) combo and was highly rewarded for it with 3.8 as the base value and received high GOEs for it's quality. In your estimation of the same jump, she would have gotten 1.9 points + GOEs.

Why Zero Points and Invalid element?

Sk8tr321

i love to skate

Sk8tr321

Sk8tr321

Joesitz (RIP)

prettykeys

mskater93

jenaj

schiele

i love to skate

jenaj

jcoates

Mathman

Joesitz (RIP)

Tinymavy15

Sinnerman for the win

Joesitz (RIP)

Sk8tr321

Joesitz (RIP)

Joesitz (RIP)

mskater93

Similar threads

Connect with us