Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 68

Thread: Why Zero Points and Invalid element?

  1. #1
    On the Ice
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    40

    Why Zero Points and Invalid element?

    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

  2. #2
    Rink Rat i love to skate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,477
    It's because she travelled more than 6 feet.

  3. #3
    On the Ice
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    40
    Quote Originally Posted by i love to skate View Post
    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

  4. #4
    On the Ice
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    40
    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.

  5. #5
    Custom Title Joesitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    20,185
    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.

  6. #6
    can't come down to Earth prettykeys's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    1,801
    Quote Originally Posted by Joesitz View Post
    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.

  7. #7
    At the rink. Again. mskater93's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,155
    Quote Originally Posted by Joesitz View Post
    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).

  8. #8
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,224
    How many points did she lose because of this?

  9. #9
    End subjectivity,reduce PCS, fix the COP! schiele's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Turkey
    Posts
    633
    Quote Originally Posted by jenaj View Post
    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..

  10. #10
    Rink Rat i love to skate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,477
    Quote Originally Posted by Sk8tr321 View Post
    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.

  11. #11
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,224
    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.

  12. #12
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,065
    Quote Originally Posted by mskater93 View Post
    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.

  13. #13
    Custom Title Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    27,933
    Quote Originally Posted by jenaj View Post
    This is a nitpick, but I wish Rachael (and other skaters, including Yu Na) would get rid of the boot covers.
    Especially Yu-na.
    Last edited by Mathman; 11-16-2009 at 03:07 PM.

  14. #14
    Custom Title Joesitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    20,185
    Quote Originally Posted by mskater93 View Post
    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.

  15. #15
    Beliver in Sasha's Perfect Program Tinymavy15's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    LA
    Posts
    4,988
    Quote Originally Posted by jenaj View Post
    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.

Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •