Page 31 of 35 FirstFirst ... 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 LastLast
Results 451 to 465 of 520

Thread: Stojko opposes the ladies result

  1. #451
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    289
    Quote Originally Posted by key65man View Post
    I agree that there were no controversies in the ladies. But, the issue will surface in future when the margin may be smaller like what happened in the mens. If talking about quad at all for the men, why not settling 3A for the ladies now?

    I was being sarcastic about Yu-Na because some people are making it into an issue of a skater or two, and they don't really talk about it in the context of fundamental issues and causes.
    But you have to ask, who is making a big issue of this other than Mao fans? As janetfan mentioned above, Mao lost because she made mistakes and she didn't have CoP friendly program--not necessarily because she was "underscored" for her 3A.

  2. #452
    Custom Title Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    28,336
    Well, rules changes for the future cannot affect Mao Asada's placement at the 2010 Olympics. But I don't see anything wrong with considering now the possibility that in the future other skaters will come along who can do a triple Axel.

    Suppose the ladies short program rule is changed to allow a double or triple Axel for the Axel requirement. In order to take advantage of this rule change a lady would have to do both a triple Axel and a triple-triple. If she did one but not the other, she would not be much ahead of a skater who did the other but not the first.

    Example: 3A, 3F+2T, 3Lo = 20.0 base points.

    Versus: 3Lz+3T, 3F, 2A = 19.0 base points.

    In order to take a commanding lead, Axel Girl would have to do something like 3A, 3Lz+3Lo, 3F = 24.7 base points. She would deserve every bit of her jumping-passes advantage if she could do all of that!
    Last edited by Mathman; 03-04-2010 at 10:17 PM.

  3. #453
    Tripping on the Podium
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by Figure88 View Post
    But you have to ask, who is making a big issue of this other than Mao fans? As janetfan mentioned above, Mao lost because she made mistakes and she didn't have CoP friendly program--not necessarily because she was "underscored" for her 3A.
    I guess we differ in how we see the situation in the mens. I see it as problematic, and it deserves at least some consideration and discussion. If we can find a way of make it better, then that will be good. Therefore, if we are going to talk about the issue of quad, we may as well about 3A for the ladies as it is a relevant issue. We may be better off discussing it not because there is an legit controversy about it right now but because it can serve as a pre-emptive measure. If you see no need for discussion on quad, then 3A for the ladies may have no place in the discussion. That's how I see it.

  4. #454
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    289
    Quote Originally Posted by key65man View Post
    I guess we differ in how we see the situation in the mens. I see it as problematic, and it deserves at least some consideration and discussion. If we can find a way of make it better, then that will be good. Therefore, if we are going to talk about the issue of quad, we may as well about 3A for the ladies as it is a relevant issue. We may be better off discussing it not because there is an legit controversy about it right now but because it can serve as a pre-emptive measure. If you see no need for discussion on quad, then 3A for the ladies may have no place in the discussion. That's how I see it.
    No, I never thought the ladies or men's competition was that controversial. Plushenko would have roundly beaten Evan if he was clean---he was leading in the short even though you could tell he was being more conservative than Evan who pretty much went all out in his short program. The judges would have given the competition to Plushenko. The reason he lost is because he made mistakes in the long. The quad would not even be a matter for discussion if he had won.

    Also, you said judges should just be stricter about pre-rotation/under-rotation. Would you even trust them to do that? If you haven't noticed in the past season, the tech panel has been extremely inconsistent with their calls. In addition to the power that the tech panel already have now, you want to give them more?
    Last edited by Figure88; 03-04-2010 at 10:39 PM.

  5. #455
    Custom Title Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    28,336
    I guess I do not see the urgency of discussing the quad/triple Axel question yet again this year. It comes up before the ISU Technical Committee every year, and every year the same arguments pro and con are brought forth. The last time was when Buttle beat Joubert for the 2008 World championship. The ISU decided, hey, that's not right, let's raise the value of quads and triple Axels for 2009, which they did.

    Now here we are again. No matter how high we raise the base values of these elements there will always be someone who finishes second but might have won if the quad were a few points higher.

  6. #456
    Tripping on the Podium
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by Figure88 View Post
    No, I never thought the ladies or men's competition was that controversial. Plushenko would have roundly beaten Evan if he was clean---he was leading in the short even though you could tell he was being more conservative than Evan who pretty much went all out in his short program. The judges would have given the competition to Plushenko. The reason he lost is because he made mistakes in the long. The quad would not even be a matter for discussion if he had won.

    Also, you said judges should just be stricter about pre-rotation/under-rotation. Would you even trust them to do that? If you haven't noticed in the past season, the tech panel has been extremely inconsistent with their calls. In addition to the power that the tech panel already have now, you want to give them more?

    Thanks for confirming our difference. I know where this may lead to. So, I will leave with one more thing. You are right that the tech panel has been inconsistent on pre-rotation and under-rotation, which is a problem. But, I don't see why enforcing it more strictly would make it more inconsistent or is same as giving the tech panel more power.

  7. #457
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    423
    Quote Originally Posted by Mathman View Post
    Now here we are again. No matter how high we raise the base values of these elements there will always be someone who finishes second but might have won if the quad were a few points higher.
    ITA.

    That said, YuNa receives high GOE because her jumps are huge and good quality. YuNa receives high PCS because she has speed, good skating skill, better choreo. Simple and fair. Quality is YuNa's biggest tool just like 3A is Mao's biggest tool.

  8. #458
    Custom Title hurrah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,148
    Quote Originally Posted by Mathman View Post
    Well, rules changes for the future cannot affect Mao Asada's placement at the 2010 Olympics. But I don't see anything wrong with considering now the possibility that in the future other skaters will come along who can do a triple Axel.

    Suppose the ladies short program rule is changed to allow a double or triple Axel for the Axel requirement. In order to take advantage of this rule change a lady would have to do both a triple Axel and a triple-triple. If she did one but not the other, she would not be much ahead of a skater who did the other but not the first.

    Example: 3A, 3F+2T, 3Lo = 20.0 base points.

    Versus: 3Lz+3T, 3F, 2A = 19.0 base points.

    In order to take a commanding lead, Axel Girl would have to do something like 3A, 3Lz+3Lo, 3F = 24.7 base points. She would deserve every bit of her jumping-passes advantage if she could do all of that!
    Duh, uh! But of course! How did I not realize this? Just shows I'm not CoP-smart.

    So Mathman, you managed to hold your tongue for five-hours, eh? ;>

  9. #459
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    2,707
    Quote Originally Posted by janetfan View Post
    I have to agree with that. The Ladies had no real controversy because Yuna won by such a large margin. If we were to give Mao 5 more points each for her three 3A's she still would have lost.
    Not only that, but if Team Yuna knew the value of 3A's would have been as high as I just mentioned she would have added a second 3x3.
    Add a second 3x3 for what? Then violate the Zayak rule? Yuna doesn't have a loop. Adding a second 3x3 doesn't do anything for her. Do you just say anything that come to mind? Lest you forget, this isn't a CoP thing.

  10. #460
    Custom Title antmanb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    UK - Manchester
    Posts
    4,913
    Quote Originally Posted by Mathman View Post
    I guess I do not see the urgency of discussing the quad/triple Axel question yet again this year. It comes up before the ISU Technical Committee every year, and every year the same arguments pro and con are brought forth. The last time was when Buttle beat Joubert for the 2008 World championship. The ISU decided, hey, that's not right, let's raise the value of quads and triple Axels for 2009, which they did.

    Now here we are again. No matter how high we raise the base values of these elements there will always be someone who finishes second but might have won if the quad were a few points higher.
    Where did the smilies go? I was going to say

    Because any changes to the rules that are knee jerk reactions to one situation, to me, are never going to be particularly sound. (like COP being knee jerk reaction to SLC pairs ) I think the COP is getting right now. One element should not be the be all and end all - we saw it with Joubert/Buttle in 2008 (the correct result) and again in Vancouver IMO the correct result, Evgeni was slightly off - his jump went up all wonky, it's testament to the incredible skater he is that he landed those jumps on one foot. So what did the system do? Well there were two programmes that were pretty evenly matched technically, one did have a harder element in it which would tip the scales in that favour, but for the fact the overall quality of the other programme was better - so the sacles tipped back (only by a small margin) to give the win to the "cleaner" programme.

    I can only speak for myself but that is what I have always wanted from the scoring system.

    Ant

  11. #461
    Banned janetfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    6,889
    Quote Originally Posted by FlattFan View Post
    Add a second 3x3 for what? Then violate the Zayak rule? Yuna doesn't have a loop. Adding a second 3x3 doesn't do anything for her. Do you just say anything that come to mind? Lest you forget, this isn't a CoP thing.
    She could bring back her 3F + 3T. She would have to change the 2A +3T but she wil still raise her point value as well as the wow factor of her program.

    But Yuna does not need a boost to beat the programs Mao showed in Vancouver. With a 20 point cushion Yuna is untouchable by Mao at the moment.
    And of course this is a CoP thing. The OGM is won by scoring the most points and not by one element.
    Are you still confused about that?

  12. #462
    Custom Title Joesitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    20,185
    Quote Originally Posted by Mathman View Post
    I guess I do not see the urgency of discussing the quad/triple Axel question yet again this year. It comes up before the ISU Technical Committee every year, and every year the same arguments pro and con are brought forth. The last time was when Buttle beat Joubert for the 2008 World championship. The ISU decided, hey, that's not right, let's raise the value of quads and triple Axels for 2009, which they did.

    Now here we are again. No matter how high we raise the base values of these elements there will always be someone who finishes second but might have won if the quad were a few points higher.
    It does get tiresome. How does one define competitive Figure Skating? Does it have anything to do with the skating blades on the ice? Or in the Air? Probably both. The only solution I see is to review ALL the Base Values of the elements.

    The reason I say ALL is, as an example: The Spiral in the Ladies Division. Which is more important - the skating edge or the free leg in verticle position? Probably both but I would demand Line as most important. At the Senior Level, Spirals are not difficult but a skater must strive to get a good line to show it off.

  13. #463
    Custom Title Nadia01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    921
    Quote Originally Posted by Joesitz View Post
    It does get tiresome. How does one define competitive Figure Skating? Does it have anything to do with the skating blades on the ice? Or in the Air? Probably both. The only solution I see is to review ALL the Base Values of the elements.

    The reason I say ALL is, as an example: The Spiral in the Ladies Division. Which is more important - the skating edge or the free leg in verticle position? Probably both but I would demand Line as most important. At the Senior Level, Spirals are not difficult but a skater must strive to get a good line to show it off.
    I'd say edge, speed and ice coverage should trump balletic positions. After all, it's figure skating, not ballet skating.

  14. #464
    Custom Title Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    28,336
    Quote Originally Posted by antmanb View Post
    Where did the smilies go?
    To make the clickable smilies appear, click on "go advanced" at the bottom right of the the reply-to-post dialogue box.

  15. #465
    Custom Title antmanb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    UK - Manchester
    Posts
    4,913
    Quote Originally Posted by Mathman View Post
    To make the clickable smilies appear, click on "go advanced" at the bottom right of the the reply-to-post dialogue box.
    Thanks MM! I guessed at the clapping smilie and was right! I thought i'd learnt what they all were but had to stop and think - now i know where to find them!

    Ant

Page 31 of 35 FirstFirst ... 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 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
  •