Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 43

Thread: CoP or 6.0: Different Podium Finishes?

  1. #1
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    301

    CoP or 6.0: Different Podium Finishes?

    Given all the debate about figure skating scoring, I was wondering if there had been any cases where the 6.0 system led a skater to win or have a podium finish even if their skate, by CoP, would not have warranted it? Or has there been a case where CoP awarded a skater with a podium finish where their skate, under the 6.0 system, would not have been placed so highly?

    For all the talk of Sarah Hughes, I have heard that her skate in SLC was flawed in that some of her best elements, her jumps, were underrotated (and would have been judged as such under CoP), but the 6.0 system awarded her daring and audacity to attempt such a program. I am new to figure skating so I don't know about this case but I would love to know.
    Last edited by Marrymeyunakim; 02-05-2010 at 06:54 AM.

  2. #2
    Off the ice Buttercup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Left field
    Posts
    3,426
    [FONT="Verdana"]That's always a fun possiblity to consider - and I know that on FSU, people play judging games occasionally. You have to remember, though, that if skaters in the 6.0 era were under a different system their programs would have been constructed differently, so evaluating 6.0 skates with IJS criteria doesn't tell you much. For instance, yes, Sarah Hughes had poor technique - but if she were under IJS, she would probably have left out the 3Lz and maybe done different combinations. I don't think she would have won, but who knows what might have happened; Shizuka Arakawa wasn't going for the hardest program in Turin.

    That having been said, we all know that at least officially, the IJS was a reaction to the pairs controversy in SLC. Had that event been judged under the current system with the programs as they were, B/S would have had such a huge lead out of the SP that the LP wouldn't have been a big factor in determining the result (though I believe they would have won that, too).[/FONT]

  3. #3
    Custom Title Joesitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    20,185
    I suppose if there were a Technical caller in SLC he might have caught some flaws by Sarah, but the bottom line lin SLC was that all the top contestants (Sasha, Irinia, Michelle) had noticeable flaws too. Sarah skated the cleanest.

  4. #4
    Skating is art, if you let it be. Blades of Passion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Hollywood, CA
    Posts
    4,003
    Slutskaya definitely would have won in 2002 under CoP if you put those performances directly into the system. There's no telling if the skating would have been the same if CoP had been in place, though.
    Last edited by Blades of Passion; 02-05-2010 at 10:08 AM.

  5. #5
    Custom Title Joesitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    20,185
    Quote Originally Posted by Blades of Passion View Post
    Slutskaya definitely would have won in 2002 under CoP if you put those performances directly into the system. There's no telling if the skating would have been the same if CoP had been in place, though.
    I do not doubt you but we will never know for sure. In those days, I believe there was the antiAmerican group plus the lingering Soviet bloc group v. the lonely proKwan/Sasha group.
    IMO, I would say Irina had the Tech but she never had a special performance in competition.

  6. #6
    - * - blue_idealist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    2,771
    Under CoP I don't think the judges would have got away with giving Grishuk and Platov gold at the 1998 Olympics, as they had a fall in the free dance, which of course would be more heavily penalized under CoP.

  7. #7
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    3,865
    Quote Originally Posted by blue_idealist View Post
    Under CoP I don't think the judges would have got away with giving Grishuk and Platov gold at the 1998 Olympics, as they had a fall in the free dance, which of course would be more heavily penalized under CoP.
    No, they certainly did not have a fall in the free dance at 1998 Olympics.

    They had a fall in the free dance at 1994 Worlds. And in the OD at 1998 Europeans (they placed 2nd in that phase).

    At 1998 Olympics, their biggest mistake was a touchdown on one step of the compulsory dance.

    Is one of those what you're thinking of?

    With the current system, it's pretty clearly spelled out how much of a penalty there is for falling. If the team is far enough ahead of their competitors, they might make up enough points in other areas to offset the points lost in the fall.

    It also helps if the fall is by one partner only (1.00 as opposed to 2.00 deduction), just a quick down-and-up with no gap in the dance requiring additional deduction, and not on a point-scoring element where points would be lost in GOE and levels of the element, or it might end up not counting at all.

    Dances were constructed differently in those days, though, without point-earning step sequences, so any fall on steps would just get the 1.00 fall deduction according to today's rules.

  8. #8
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    5,609
    Well, B/S would've been so far ahead of S/P after the short program (and S/P did have a fall adding the deduction) in 2002 that it wouldn't have mattered who won the long - B/S would be the "uncontested" winners (inasmuch as there is such a thing in figure skating).

    I wonder if Drobiazko/Vanagas would've made up ground on the top four at the same Olympics.

    Presumably Kwan's PCS would've gotten her the gold in Nagano, and I don't think Chen would've won bronze either.

    Kerrigan would be a winner now. And Midori Ito would've won bronze in 1988.

  9. #9
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    208
    Under 6.0, Kostner probably would not have made it to the top five at World's 2008. Under CoP she won silver. I love Kostner and her skating (when she's on), but that judging was a travesty--a step out or shaky landing on nearly every triple. Take a look, very insteresting. Mao won gold--with a skid into the boards on a 3-axel attempt, Kostner silver, Kim Yu Na, bronze and Nakano 4th. Yu Na and Nakano wuz robbed, big time!

  10. #10
    Mashimaro on Ice
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    1,419
    Quote Originally Posted by Eddie Lee View Post
    Under 6.0, Kostner probably would not have made it to the top five at World's 2008. Under CoP she won silver. I love Kostner and her skating (when she's on), but that judging was a travesty--a step out or shaky landing on nearly every triple. Take a look, very insteresting. Mao won gold--with a skid into the boards on a 3-axel attempt, Kostner silver, Kim Yu Na, bronze and Nakano 4th. Yu Na and Nakano wuz robbed, big time!
    IMAO. Mao would've won under any system because although she fell, there were no major mistakes. Under 6.0, she wouldn't be hit with edge calls or URs, so she would've won the SP and come in 2nd for the LP. I remember Michelle also won with a fall at one major competition. Yuna was too far behind in the short to catch up. And it was harder to catch up under the 6.0 system than the CoP. Bottomline is no one skated clean at that worlds, so I don't think anyone was majorly robbed.

  11. #11
    Go marry the quad if you love it so much DesertRoad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    646
    Nancy Kerrigan would've won over Oksana Baiul in 1994 in the LP, easily. Oksana's LP skate in Lillehammer was shockingly devoid of complexity and content, even by 6.0 standards. There were no transitions, footwork, and the spins were all of the simplest variety. Nancy, on the other hand, filled her program with lots of workmanlike content. The COP loves to reward complexity, Oksana wouldn't have stood a chance. But then, where would we be? A world in which Nancy Kerrigan is the triumphant Olympic champion after her devastating attack by an ill-mannered rival. We'd never be rid of Kerrigan and her lumbering, robotic skating. ::shudders::

  12. #12
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    208
    Quote Originally Posted by miki88 View Post
    IMAO. Mao would've won under any system because although she fell, there were no major mistakes. Under 6.0, she wouldn't be hit with edge calls or URs, so she would've won the SP and come in 2nd for the LP. I remember Michelle also won with a fall at one major competition. Yuna was too far behind in the short to catch up. And it was harder to catch up under the 6.0 system than the CoP. Bottomline is no one skated clean at that worlds, so I don't think anyone was majorly robbed.
    Really??? If Kostner had been placed appropriately, Kim would have gotten silver, and Nakano, bronze. Especially sad for Nakano--leg wrap and all. Take another look at Kostner's disastrous performance....and while you're at it, take a peek at her fabulous exhibition number.

  13. #13
    Skating is art, if you let it be. Blades of Passion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Hollywood, CA
    Posts
    4,003
    I don't think Nancy was all that, but her performance was definitely not robotic.

    The Nancy vs. Oksana debate will never end, though.

    1992 and 2006 are the only Olympics of the past 30 years where everyone agrees with the Female Gold Medalist.

  14. #14
    Mashimaro on Ice
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    1,419
    Quote Originally Posted by Eddie Lee View Post
    Really??? If Kostner had been placed appropriately, Kim would have gotten silver, and Nakano, bronze. Especially sad for Nakano--leg wrap and all. Take another look at Kostner's disastrous performance....and while you're at it, take a peek at her fabulous exhibition number.
    I agreed with you on Costner. However, I don't agree under 6.0, it would've been much different because the judges always favored Europeans even if undeservedly. And while I am at it, I think under 6.0, skaters like Kostner will be favored more because her skating is actually nice to look at despite everything. Also, I think Mao will do better under 6.0 given the lenient UR calls. Kim will do well, but I think Rochette will do the best since she has almost a full set of triples. Miki wouldn't do so well because she's just jumps but lacks artistry. The CoP is better for her and for Flatt. Mirai will do better under 6.0.
    Last edited by miki88; 02-06-2010 at 12:57 AM.

  15. #15
    she takes the audience on her journey of emotions Layfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Mexico City
    Posts
    3,640
    Quote Originally Posted by Blades of Passion View Post
    I don't think Nancy was all that, but her performance was definitely not robotic.

    The Nancy vs. Oksana debate will never end, though.

    1992 and 2006 are the only Olympics of the past 30 years where everyone agrees with the Female Gold Medalist.
    I agree, Nancy wasn't robotic but her style was so distinctive. It's a bit love or hate it. I can never decide. Sometime I hate it. Other times I like it just because it is so different.

    I think she would have won under CoP for sure. But obviously, Oksana would have never done such a simple program under CoP. I don't know if she was capable of difficult combination jumps... maybe her time would have come later. That would have been nice. I always thought it was such a pity and Oksana had such a short competitive career. I'm a fan of her skating but she could have been even better, barring injuries and such. Much better.

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 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
  •