Stojko opposes the ladies result

[R.D.]

I think the placement (of the top 4 that is) is right. It's the margin of victory I don't agree with, however. Kim should have won probably by 10 pts max, not 30. But of course the judges won't be held accountable for that because the result is mostly non-controversial. Yawn. Next!

[rallycairn]

Oh, I see. Well, Yuna doesn't do two 3-3, so she's using it as a loophole then, I guess. It really is very CoP-smart.



Yes, your comparison is more accurate. It's still the case that the third double-axel in Yuna's case is being used to 'pad' her program.

Messing with the point system is so tricky, isn't it.

I don't see this as a "loophole" at all -- loophole suggesting an unintended consequence, usually benefiting someone who isn't intended to receive said benefit. As Mathman said, the option was left in so that the last jumping pass doesn't have to be completely wasted. This is true for everyone. Yu Na is not using a "loophole," nor is she "messing" with the system in the negative sense, or being "tricky." She's being strategic and smart by constructing her programs to gain maximum points under the rules. I actually don't like this system much at all, if I were a competitive skater I would loathe having to worry about selecting my jump layout, moves, choreo, etc. etc. to gain points rather than to serve what the theme/mood of the program is supposed to be, what I might be good at, etc. I don't like the system but it is what it is. Why direct so much pointed criticism at one skater repeatedly just for being strategic about the rules? Terms like "tricky" and "messing" and "loophole" and "pad" continue to cast aspersions on Yu Na, and not only that, you generally single Yu Na out for your use of such loaded terms.

Again, this discussion is not about Yu-na Kim, right?

[snort]

[hurrah]

I don't see this as a "loophole" at all -- loophole suggesting an unintended consequence, usually benefiting someone who isn't intended to receive said benefit. As Mathman said, the option was left in so that the last jumping pass doesn't have to be completely wasted. This is true for everyone. Yu Na is not using a "loophole," nor is she "messing" with the system in the negative sense, or being "tricky." She's being strategic and smart by constructing her programs to gain maximum points under the rules. I actually don't like this system much at all, if I were a competitive skater I would loathe having to worry about selecting my jump layout, moves, choreo, etc. etc. to gain points rather than to serve what the theme/mood of the program is supposed to be, what I might be good at, etc. I don't like the system but it is what it is. Why direct so much pointed criticism at one skater repeatedly just for being strategic about the rules? Terms like "tricky" and "messing" and "loophole" and "pad" continue to cast aspersions on Yu Na, and not only that, you generally single Yu Na out for your use of such loaded terms.





[snort]

I guess I do single out Yuna repeatedly, because I see her as the person who was singled out by the judges as their favorite and got the benefits of the present system, and I really do recognize that she would have won without the judges' help---and for this I really respect her---but it stll doesn't make it right that the gold would have been handed to her regardless.

I'm a Mao fan, you see. I hate to see a system in place where Mao's passion, effort and talent wouldn't have had an effect on the outcome. And it's more heartbreaking for me because she's just so stoic and yet at the same time maintains such a sunny disposition in face of the whole situation.

And I guess I use forceful language to put my points across, because my impression is that these boards are very often used for politiking anyway.

[Jaana]

Johnny Weir is a kind of similar to Yuna but they didn't give him high score, which is difficult to understand.

I don´t see anything difficult to understand about Weir´s result: Unlike Yu-Na he skated to a 6,0 programme and also had a couple of mistakes. IF he had had a proper CoP programme, he would have been higher in the results. On the other hand I have lately come to the conclusion that maybe he is not able to skate to a CoP programme and that is the reason he uses old 6,0 programmes. Why else would a skater leave points on the ice in competitions which are judged under CoP-system?

[hurrah]

Coud've, would've, should've! I do not understand why you obsess over something that we will never know (if the judges would hand her the gold). I really hope that Mao isn't doing the same thing because it's a waste of energy moving forward.

Forceful language is not necessary. There have been plenty of people on this board who got their points across about their issues with COP in this competion without the need to single out a single skater. It's clear what you supposdly "respect" Yuna and keep saying that you believe she won fair and square, you take every chance you get to put her down in some way and keep bringing up the same point over and over. That is why some folks on this board are not taking your points, while perfecly valid, as seriously.

And again I think it's great that Mao did 3 3A in this competition -- an accomplishment in itself -- but I don't know why you've chose to ignore the fact that she only had 4 triples ratified in the LP. It seems a little bit of a double standard that you're picking on Yuna, who got 6 triples ratified, plus a 3-3, because she's doing a 2A-2T-2L(tando) but yet completely ignore the fact that Mao, while having the triple axels, only got a triple flip and a triple loop ratified otherwise. I have a feeling that you're going to argue with me about the judges ignore URs from Yuna and dings Mao on URs. Go ahead do that.

As politicking, maybe some do. But quite frankly I think most people on these boards are just regular folks that love to watch skating and like to discuss it. If you were arround to read the early parts of the Ladies LP thread, there wasn't any of this political debate---it was mostly talking about what we like and didn't like as we got through the LP. (And also helping each other find live feeds!)

Finally, I want to point out that while I don't agree with you on a bunch of things and still believe that you're singling out Yuna a bit much, I do find your posts interesting and worth reading and glad to get into rousing discussion. (That is what these boards are for.)

Well, I'm not the only one to utilize ascerbic language, and I see plenty of even harsher posts. I don't understand why I'm being singled out for doing it! Having said that, I understand that it's easy to single me out now because I've been very vocal these few days.

I didn't ignore that Mao only had 4 triples ratified. I keep on saying Yuna deserves her gold. Yuna's toe jumps are undeniably impressive.

But I don't think I'm the only one with a sense that Yuna was favored too much. Put it another way, her score was so big, she would have beaten Lysacek!! Surely, Yuna's jumps can't have more height, width, speed than Lysacek? It's just that others are being a bit more PC about saying it, or they only say it once and then get out of the discussion so they're not dissed for their comment.

Anyway, I recognize that I'm obsessing. I have to get out...

[Mrs. P]

Well, I'm not the only one to utilize ascerbic language, and I see plenty of even harsher posts. I don't understand why I'm being singled out for doing it! Having said that, I understand that it's easy to single me out now because I've been very vocal these few days.

I didn't ignore that Mao only had 4 triples ratified. I keep on saying Yuna deserves her gold. Yuna's toe jumps are undeniably impressive.

But I don't think I'm the only one with a sense that Yuna was favored too much. Put it another way, her score was so big, she would have beaten Lysacek!! Surely, Yuna's jumps can't have more height, width, speed than Lysacek? It's just that others are being a bit more PC about saying it, or they only say it once and then get out of the discussion so they're not dissed for their comment.

Anyway, I recognize that I'm obsessing. I have to get out...

Well I deleted that post because I realize I would be putting myself in a pot calling the kettle black situation, but guess you caught wind of it before I deleted it. I believe that I wrote the Mao "only 4 ratified triples" stat in several threads (some in stats posts that I wrote and other in response to other opinions) and I realized it was overkill. Which is why I deleted this post. It would be a double standard for me to say don't obsess about Yuna but yet respond by pointing out all of Mao's flaws over and over again.

As for beating Lysacek, besides not having the 3A (which I think Evan barely has), I bet some people on this board (and they're not ubers) would probably argue that she could probably match Evan at least in the speed and height category.

[ThePointblank]

I'm looking at the results from an amateur watcher point of view, and I can offer my thoughts:

Mao's problem is that she didn't skate very cleanly. She lost a lot of speed mid-way through her program, and she stumbled and under rotated a couple of times. She lost a lot of points just off the bat for this. Her individual elements are excellent, when done properly, but as a complete package, her program needs a bit more work to make it more coherent. Yu-na's program was done much more cleanly, and her program as a whole (technical difficultly AND how well it was executed) as skated on that ice was better than Mao's performance. Don't get me wrong; both skaters are excellent. It's just that Mao's performance wasn't where I think she wanted or needed it to be on top of the podium when it really counted. And looking at Mao's performance as a whole this season, it just hasn't been up to standards of where Mao usually does (like that meltdown at TEB and Rostelecom Cup), and her performance at the Olympics is only just another chapter in Mao's efforts to get back to her usual form.

[hurrah]

As for beating Lysacek, besides not having the 3A (which I think Evan barely has), I bet some people on this board (and they're not ubers) would probably argue that she could probably match Evan at least in the speed and height category.

Are you quite sure Lysacek didn't include two triple-axels in his LP?

Check it out:

http://www.isuresults.com/results/ow..._FS_Scores.pdf

Suddenly, I'm feeling sorry for Evan....

[Bennett]

I'm looking at the results from an amateur watcher point of view, and I can offer my thoughts:

Mao's problem is that she didn't skate very cleanly. She lost a lot of speed mid-way through her program, and she stumbled and under rotated a couple of times. She lost a lot of points just off the bat for this. Her individual elements are excellent, when done properly, but as a complete package, her program needs a bit more work to make it more coherent. Yu-na's program was done much more cleanly, and her program as a whole (technical difficultly AND how well it was executed) as skated on that ice was better than Mao's performance. Don't get me wrong; both skaters are excellent. It's just that Mao's performance wasn't where I think she wanted or needed it to be on top of the podium when it really counted. And looking at Mao's performance as a whole this season, it just hasn't been up to standards of where Mao usually does (like that meltdown at TEB and Rostelecom Cup), and her performance at the Olympics is only just another chapter in Mao's efforts to get back to her usual form.

I agree that she is perhaps still in a process of getting out of her slump. I thought that the team would do something challenging a year before the Olys and play it safe in the Oly year. But it turned out that they kept bigger challenges. She has overcome the three 3As and the dark, heavy music that few people believe that she would. That's a great accomplishment.

[tralfamadorian]

Mao's planned base score in the long was 64.0 vs. Yuna's 60.90, because although Mao lost 0.5 from her base score on the combination, she won 2.2 for the solo 3A vs. a solo lutz, so the 3A would have given her the edge on the tech base score in the long if clean even without the lutz.
(I think it's kind of cool though when you can "cover up" your insecure lutz with a 3 axel )

[Bennett]

http://mainichi.jp/enta/sports/10oly...0027000c5.html

Q. What do you think of the current system that doesn't give many points to big tricks?

浅田：難しいですね。自分の言葉では言うことはできないので、すいません
Asada: It is difficult. I cannot say in my words, sorry.

安藤：自分はまあやっぱりルールに沿って競技をするしかないと思うので、何も言うことはないですし（中略） 選手にとっては大変ですけど、いまのルールに疑問を持たずにやっているので何も言えない。
Ando: Well, I think that I can do nothing but to perform under the rules so that I have nothing to say (snip) it is hard for skaters but I do without questioning the current rules so that I can say nothing.

鈴木：すごく答えにくいんですけど、（中略）スパイラルの６秒は「うーん」と思っていました。
Suzuki: It is very difficult to answer (snip), but I was thinking, "hmmm," about the 6-second (rule) on spirals.

-----

It's very smart of Mao and Miki not to say anything. I can understand Suzuki questioning the 6-second rule because she says she wants to skate as if singing.

[rallycairn]

Well, I'm not the only one to utilize ascerbic [sic] language, and I see plenty of even harsher posts. I don't understand why I'm being singled out for doing it! Having said that, I understand that it's easy to single me out now because I've been very vocal these few days.
.

Well, speaking for myself, it's not that you've been vocal that made me respond, not at all. It was that in some posts there were claims that the suggestions you were making for CoP WEREN'T made with Yu Na specifically in mind, but now you are at least saying, "I guess I do single out Yuna repeatedly, because I see her as the person who was singled out by the judges as their favorite and got the benefits of the present system." I hope this thread carries on with the good debating, but I do agree with Mrs. P (at least I'm pretty sure she said it, apologies if it was another poster) that when arguments are made with an unacknowledged ulterior motive, a lot of the validity of the arguments is usually taken away.

Again I hope this discussion carries on in a fair and balanced way, we've had some great suggestions made and I've learned a lot. Unfortunately I've got to tear myself away to get ready for work.

[Fan123]

Well, speaking for myself, it's not that you've been vocal that made me respond, not at all. It was that in some posts there were claims that the suggestions you were making for CoP WEREN'T made with Yu Na specifically in mind, but now you are at least saying, "I guess I do single out Yuna repeatedly, because I see her as the person who was singled out by the judges as their favorite and got the benefits of the present system." I hope this thread carries on with the good debating, but I do agree with Mrs. P (at least I'm pretty sure she said it, apologies if it was another poster) that when arguments are made with an unacknowledged ulterior motive, a lot of the validity of the arguments is usually taken away.

Again I hope this discussion carries on in a fair and balanced way, we've had some great suggestions made and I've learned a lot. Unfortunately I've got to tear myself away to get ready for work.

I totally agree. I think Hurrah's posts to be fine as are others. I'm learning both sides of the arguement.

[miki88]

I think the CoP favors certain type of skaters over others. I can't help thinking that Michelle may not have done so well under this system. Her jumps didn't have much height into them. However, I think a skater like Tonya Harding may have done well under this system at least in terms of GoE because her jumps were huge and covered a lot of ice. Same goes with Midori Ito.

[pokky_oc]

There may have been some "history" in preliminary versions of the CoP, but as far as I can recollect it went something like this.

Each of the triple jumps was worth haslf a point more than the next easiest, so it went like

3T = 4,0, 3S = 4.5, 3Lo = 5.0, 3F = 5.5, 3Lz = 6.0.

But the triple Axel was regarded as much more difficult, so instead of getting 6.5 points they pegged it at 7.5. A quad toe was even harder, so it got 9.0.

Thus it was recognized from the beginning that these jumps were way ahead of the other triples.

The double Axel was regarded as quite a bit easier than any triple, so it got only 3.3 base value.

After the 2008 season, I believe, they revisited the base values and decided that there should be an even bigger gap between the other triples and the triple Axel. The base value of the triple Axel was raised to 8.2 points, making it worth 2.2 points more than a triple Lutz and closer to a quad. But since the quad is harder yet, they also raised the value of a quad toe to 9.8. This maintained (almost) the reletive difference between a 3A and a quad, but separated those two jumps even farther from the "mere triples."

In fact, they decided that the triple Axel, with its three-and-a-half revolutions was more like a junior quad than a super triple, so now they list the 3A with the quads, with the 3A being the lowest.

To be consistent, they then decided to put the double Axel in with the triples instead of with the doubles. So they pegged the double Axel at 3.5, then went up the list of triples by half-point increments as before. To make sure that skaters did not take undo advantage of this, they limited the number of double Axels allowed in a program to three.

So now the proposal from Elvis and others is, basically, do it again. Raise the value of the triple Axel another 7 tenths or so.

My personal opinion is that instead of doing this, the ISU will tackle the problem of combinations afresh. It is more difficult to do two triples in combination than to do the same two triples separately. It is more difficult to do a 2T/3T than to do a 3T/2T, yet the two combos receive the same base value. This is an area that needs attention, in my humble opinion.

Each combo should get their own base value!! Plus, 3Lo as a second jump is so difficult and 3A to a combination is so hard compared to other combinations!! All the combos should get higher base value like 3Lz+3T aswell!!