Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 98

Thread: maybe controversial but want to know...ladies bronze vancouver

  1. #61
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    747
    Quote Originally Posted by Mathman View Post
    Is that the criterion? That her upper body was "prepared to rotate?" Doesn't she have to actually begin the rotation to count as an attempt?
    I wonder about the same too. I remember 13 y/o MK or was she 14 then did the same, prepared for a triple toe, missed the take off then stroked down the rink and attempted a triple toe. Dick Button was all AWWWW about how brilliant little MK was. The judges definitely did not punish her for an attempted jump.

    I think the fact that Skate Canada did not even raise a single question means Mao did not do enough to definitively demonstrate that was a jump attempt. I disagree with the sentiment of another poster that Skate Canada was shying away from controversy. Canada was very adamant about trying to win as many medals as possible, why would they back down from a challenge or potential controversy.

    BAck to topic which is about bronze and not the silver. I think Joannie deserved the bronze, even though Mirari was charming and had the best spin among all the ladies that night.
    Last edited by rtureck; 04-10-2010 at 06:45 PM.

  2. #62
    Custom Title Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    27,963
    Quote Originally Posted by janetfan View Post
    I still wonder about that [Rachael's Flatts scores].

    Seeing Rachael's 200 score at US Natls felt almost absurd to me. She has never approached such a score in Intl competitions.
    Wel, without the two downgrades she would have scored 190 at the Olympics compared to 200 at U.S. Nationals, which is about right, figuring a 10-point home-girl inflation at nationals. So it all comes down to the same question, were the callers at the Olympics excessively strict on Rachael, compared to other skaters?

    As for international competition, I thought Rachael's score of 116.11 for her long program at Skate America was about right for that excellent performance. By that standard, all the scores at the Olympics were inflated (especially Kim's -- she deserved to win, but she has had better performances in her career which received lower scores.)

    Equally interesting was that Mirai's scores at US Natls and the Olympics were almost identical.
    Mirai received downgrades at U.S. nationals (much to the shock of everyone who saw her great LP performance), but none at the Olympics. So the downgrades at Nationals balanced the national score inflation and she ended up about the same.

    I do think that the international judges buffaloed the U.S. judges into over-scrutinizing Mirai's landings at U.S. Nationals. Mirai had received downgrades in both of her Grand Prix events, so it seemed like the tech specialists at U.S. nationals figured, well, we better go along with the program. (Then the international panel pulled another switcheroo and gave Mirai a clean bill of health at the Olympics -- that's skating :indiff

    Do you really believe Flatt deserved a better score after seeing her skate in Vancouver? Was she as good as the top four?
    I thought Rachael was properly scored, with the exception of the two downgrades, which cost her about 8 points. Actually, I could go either way on the downgrades, but I thought they were no more under-rotated than some other skaters jumps that the tech panel let slide.

    No, I did not think Rachael was as good as the top four. I thought she deserved fifth.

    In fact, I thought Rachael's Olympic LP was marvellous -- exceeded only by Mirai's, Joannie's, Mao's and Yu-na's.

    Bottom line. Under the CoP the calls of the tech specialist pretty much completely determine who wins or loses. (Just my opinion, of course.)
    Last edited by Mathman; 04-10-2010 at 06:51 PM.

  3. #63
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,818
    Quote Originally Posted by Mathman View Post
    Bottom line. Under the CoP the calls of the tech specialist pretty much completely determine who wins or loses. (Just my opinion, of course.)
    Well not really, some skaters seem to never get UR calls at all. In fact, I can't recall a single case in the last two seasons that Joannie actually received any UR or edge call whatsoever at an ISU competition, except at the World Team Trophy, if you can call that a regular competition. Some skaters though, can't seem to get on the good side of the Tech Specialist, ever, namely Miki Ando for example. I think she got scared of UR calls that she probably won't try another Triple-Triple for a long time.

  4. #64
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    747
    Quote Originally Posted by wallylutz View Post
    Some skaters though, can't seem to get on the good side of the Tech Specialist, ever, namely Miki Ando for example. I think she got scared of UR calls that she probably won't try another Triple-Triple for a long time.
    Mikii do come across as being "scared". I think getting downgraded by tech spechialist can be a double edge sword. Mirai was downgraded at nats and she was determined to fix her jumps, in that case the downgrade is a motivating factor.

    Anyway under current system, 3/3 is just one of many ways a skater can get points. The system rewards overall skating excellence in many different aspects of skating.

  5. #65
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,713
    Quote Originally Posted by rtureck View Post
    I wonder about the same too. I remember 13 y/o MK or was she 14 then did the same, prepared for a triple toe, missed the take off then stroked down the rink and attempted a triple toe. Dick Button was all AWWWW about how brilliant little MK was. The judges definitely did not punish her for an attempted jump.

    I think the fact that Skate Canada did not even raise a single question means Mao did not do enough to definitively demonstrate that was a jump attempt. I disagree with the sentiment of another poster that Skate Canada was shying away from controversy. Canada was very adamant about trying to win as many medals as possible, why would they back down from a challenge or potential controversy.

    BAck to topic which is about bronze and not the silver. I think Joannie deserved the bronze, even though Mirari was charming and had the best spin among all the ladies that night.
    but ladies could use up to eight jumping passes back then. I'm not sure the judges would've ratified the triple toe had it been her ninth jumping pass.

  6. #66
    Custom Title Phoenix347's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    661
    Seeing the outcry about how Mirai should have won the bronze medal already, can you imagine the furor that would have ensued if the technical panel had disallowed Mao's last jumping pass (2A) due to the fact that she attempted the toe-loop twice and ended up with Mao getting the bronze medal?? That would have destroyed any kind of satisfaction that Joannie would have gotten from the silver medal. There would have been a lot of accusation about "Canadian favoritism."

  7. #67
    - * - blue_idealist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    2,749
    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenix347 View Post
    Seeing the outcry about how Mirai should have won the bronze medal already, can you imagine the furor that would have ensued if the technical panel had disallowed Mao's last jumping pass (2A) due to the fact that she attempted the toe-loop twice and ended up with Mao getting the bronze medal?? That would have destroyed any kind of satisfaction that Joannie would have gotten from the silver medal. There would have been a lot of accusation about "Canadian favoritism."
    Ohh God that would have been bad.. it just wouldn't seem right to have Joannie over Mao

  8. #68
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    747
    Quote Originally Posted by Wrlmy View Post
    but ladies could use up to eight jumping passes back then. I'm not sure the judges would've ratified the triple toe had it been her ninth jumping pass.
    Now speaking from the POV of a casual fan and without the benefit of studying the rules etc.
    Well, that is the challenge of sport like fs, or gymnastics, no matter how objective the rules seem, there is always a judgment call. Seriously, e.g. jump landings with 1/4 of a turn on ice is oK but 9/32 turn is not. I think even with instant replay slow mo, but without actually looking at the tracing on ice, can they really tell it is 1/4 of a turn or 9/32? SPo in case of close call, benefit of doubt goes to the skater. I think skaters who are well prepared know the take the correct strategy. And in a lp, they put in another jump. If the first jump is being called a real attempt, the judges won't count the second, but if the first is given the benefit of the doubt of not counting as a real attempt then they get points for the second jump. I think in olys lp, Mao did not do enough to let the tech specialists to definitively count that as an attempt, or the tech ppl made a judgment call. I donot believe Corp sponsors etc has anything to do with the call. If we want to talk sponsors, the biggest sponsor of olys 2010 was a national sponsor: Canada. I do not believe Skate Canada will let this one go if indeed they have a case. I don't believe in conspiracy theory.
    Anyway, I have a question for those of you who are knowlegablewith the rules etc. Earlier in this thread there is a mention of Mao's questionable 3t was similar to YuNa's questionable layback in her sp at worlds. To me there is a difference, Mao did not give up trying, therefore she added the 2a, but YuNa did not try to do another layback. If Yuna gave layback another try and was denied the credit then we can "cringe" and cried aboutthe injustice. Since YuNa herself already considered she had attempted a layback, and didnot try another one, then obviously the juges won't give her the layback credit.
    Last edited by rtureck; 04-11-2010 at 08:05 AM.

  9. #69
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    3,753
    Just to clarify something about the rules.

    Under the 6.0 judging system there were no maximum limits on the numbers of jumps or spins that could be attempted in long programs. There were only limits on the number of triples that could be repeated and on the number of combinations/sequences performed. So skaters were free to pack their programs with as many elements or attempts as they wanted and it was up to each judge to reward what they felt deserved rewarding under the rules and penalize what they felt deserved penalty. Skating around setting up the same jump multiple times might get the skater credit for a difficult jump if s/he finally managed to land it, but the resulting lack of variety in the choreography and kinds of technical content might cause judges to consider the program "unbalanced" and reflect that in the second mark. A quick second attempt at a missed element without much additional setup would not need much penalty under that system.

    Short programs have always allowed only one attempt per required element. You miss it the first time, and the second attempt doesn't count; depending on the nature of the attempts, under 6.0 doing so might lead to deductions for both a badly failed or omitted element and also for an extra element.

    Under IJS, the limits in the long program are now almost as strict as in short programs, although there is a bit more flexibility in the kinds of spins or jumps that can fill the total number of spin and jump slots.

  10. #70
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    747
    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly View Post
    Just to clarify something about the rules.

    Under the 6.0 judging system there were no maximum limits on the numbers of jumps or spins that could be attempted in long programs. There were only limits on the number of triples that could be repeated and on the number of combinations/sequences performed. So skaters were free to pack their programs with as many elements or attempts as they wanted and it was up to each judge to reward what they felt deserved rewarding under the rules and penalize what they felt deserved penalty. Skating around setting up the same jump multiple times might get the skater credit for a difficult jump if s/he finally managed to land it, but the resulting lack of variety in the choreography and kinds of technical content might cause judges to consider the program "unbalanced" and reflect that in the second mark. A quick second attempt at a missed element without much additional setup would not need much penalty under that system.

    Short programs have always allowed only one attempt per required element. You miss it the first time, and the second attempt doesn't count; depending on the nature of the attempts, under 6.0 doing so might lead to deductions for both a badly failed or omitted element and also for an extra element.

    Under IJS, the limits in the long program are now almost as strict as in short programs, although there is a bit more flexibility in the kinds of spins or jumps that can fill the total number of spin and jump slots.
    Thanks for clarifying. Actually MK did another attempt on the 3t without disrupting the choreography. So like Dick Button said smart girl.

    I thougt sp and lp have different rules, so thanks for clarifying. I remember Tara and Johnny talked about YuNa's missed the marks on 3 required elements, and she couldn't make those elements up. At olys the famous Scott Hamilton did not said Mao missed her 3t and couldn't have another jumping pass. So I think lp even under current rules do allow more flexibility. So YuNa world sp, and Mao olys lp situation are different then?
    Last edited by rtureck; 04-11-2010 at 08:56 AM.

  11. #71
    "Hold an edge and look sexy!" museksk8r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Storybrooke, Maine
    Posts
    3,674
    Quote Originally Posted by blue_idealist View Post
    Ohh God that would have been bad.. it just wouldn't seem right to have Joannie over Mao
    And why not? Joannie beat Mao 4 times in their last 7 match-ups (at 2008 Trophee Eric Bompard, the 2009 4CC, the 2009 Worlds, and the 2009 Japan Open). Asada took the 2008-2009 GPF, the 2009 World Team Trophy, and placed ahead of Rochette at the Olympics (though I still think Joannie should have won the Olympic silver medal).
    Last edited by museksk8r; 04-11-2010 at 09:43 AM.

  12. #72
    Dreaming and dancing Bennett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Watching the sunset
    Posts
    2,793
    Quote Originally Posted by rtureck View Post
    Thanks for clarifying. Actually MK did another attempt on the 3t without disrupting the choreography. So like Dick Button said smart girl.

    I thougt sp and lp have different rules, so thanks for clarifying. I remember Tara and Johnny talked about YuNa's missed the marks on 3 required elements, and she couldn't make those elements up. At olys the famous Scott Hamilton did not said Mao missed her 3t and couldn't have another jumping pass. So I think lp even under current rules do allow more flexibility. So YuNa world sp, and Mao olys lp situation are different then?
    It depends on how far you see Mao's toe loop attempt was as an attempt. She clearly attemped it, but botched it during the set up of the jump when the toe was stuck in the ice wrongly. As MM put it, it was more like an attempt of an attempt. And if that one had to be hit for what is suggested, it seems a pretty nerdy application of the rule to me when it's already nerdy enough.

  13. #73
    Waiting for on-ice perfection.
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    615
    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenix347 View Post
    Seeing the outcry about how Mirai should have won the bronze medal already, can you imagine the furor that would have ensued if the technical panel had disallowed Mao's last jumping pass (2A) due to the fact that she attempted the toe-loop twice and ended up with Mao getting the bronze medal?? That would have destroyed any kind of satisfaction that Joannie would have gotten from the silver medal. There would have been a lot of accusation about "Canadian favoritism."
    True. I'm glad there was a thorough discussion of the attempt rule, though. It was enlightening. Just wonder what would have happened if Joannie had jumped that last 2A and won silver in Mao's stead. I still see controversy. Mao's fans would have trumped the "three 3As" card; Joannie's, overall excellence and the "whole package." It could've been as ugly as Lysacek vs. Plushenko with the same reasoning for both sides. I'm glad that had not happened, just as glad as I am that Mao did not lose to Yu-na with a clean performance. That would have been very, very ugly.

  14. #74
    Custom Title Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    27,963
    Quote Originally Posted by rtureck View Post
    Thanks for clarifying. Actually MK did another attempt on the 3t without disrupting the choreography. So like Dick Button said smart girl.
    In fact, Michelle practiced two versions of her long programs during those years. If she landed her triple toe/triple toe combination at the beginning, then she did a split jump at the musical climax near the end. If she missed the second triple and only did a triple toe/double toe, then she did a solo triple toe instead of the split jump.

    Quote Originally Posted by rtureck
    To me there is a difference, Mao did not give up trying, therefore she added the 2a, but YuNa did not try to do another layback. If Yuna gave layback another try and was denied the credit then we can "cringe" and cried about the injustice.
    This actually happened to Rachael Flatt last year (I forgot which competition.) She started her layback, lost her edge before doing even one rotation, recenterd, and then did the complete layback spin.

    The tech specialist ruled that the first aborted three-quarters revolution was her layback. Since she did not do the required number of revolutions she received 0 credit. And also 0 cerdit for her real layback a second later, because the layback box had been filled.

  15. #75
    can't come down to Earth prettykeys's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    1,801
    Quote Originally Posted by Mathman View Post
    This is a very interesting analysis.

    Specifically with respect to sports, there is also the idea of "playoff rules." In the playoffs (or in the last two minutes of the championship game), the audience wants the game to be decided by the players, not by a referee's whistle. So the officials let stuff go that they would normally call during the regular season.

    As sunny0760 mentions, the technical specialist were indeed pretty lenient at the Olympics, except for Rachael Falatt.
    lol...agree with everything. Do you think it's good or fair? I'm not sure about it either way. It sounds like a good idea, but I don't like to see dirty plays either (I don't watch much hockey so I don't know how bad it is. I do watch soccer occasionally and I hate to see pushing/shirt-tugging and very aggressive and dangerous lunges at the ball.) As for leniency in figure skating, I'm on the fence as well. Being overly lenient means compromising quality and undervaluing skaters who have consistent, clean technique that takes time and effort to get right.

    The call on Rachael Flatt at the Olympics was certainly unexpected, but something happened at Worlds, too. A ! on a 3Lz in her SP and then an underrotated 3F in her 3F-2T. So, was she always clean, or were things overlooked before that judges are scrutinizing more closely now? Or did something happen to her to diminish the consistency of her jumps?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mathman View Post
    A huge concept in judicial law. In the U.S., unspecified "penumbral" rights of the people are guaranteed by the Ninth Amendment to the Constitution. This concept was famously invoked in the Roe versus Wade case that struck down a Texas state law forbidding abortions. The right of a woman to abort a pregnancy in the first trimester was ruled (two Justices dissenting) to be included in the unwritten penumbral right to privacy established by the Fourteenth Amendment.
    I didn't know there was a separate set of "penumbral" rights for Americans! That's so interesting, I love it. Makes me wonder if I should have studied Law...maybe in another life.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hart-Fuller_debate

    That's a reference to the debate we studied in that class. When the application of a rule/law is unclear for a certain situation, does one investigate the meaning of the writing, or the possible intent, for guidance?

    Quote Originally Posted by wallylutz View Post
    Very interesting thoughts, thanks for sharing. I appreciate your perspective, it's refreshing to read. Personally, I think your reasoning makes quite a bit of common sense. You'd think a girl who did three Triple Axels should at least get a Silver, it seems to make the most common sense. That's what I kept telling myself at the event so that I didn't have to feel miserable re: the outcome knowing what I know on that very emotional evening.
    For sure, although if Joannie had been cleaner in her LP, then we may have seen a girl with three 3A's lose even the Silver.

Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 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
  •