Page 10 of 28 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ... LastLast
Results 136 to 150 of 419

Thread: Major Changes Expected in Single Skating in 2010-2011

  1. #136
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    554
    I made a new thread on +3loop combos as this is getting off topic.
    http://www.goldenskate.com/forum/sho...169#post500169

  2. #137
    Custom Title Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    28,356
    I think we are making a mountain out of a molehill in this triple Axel discussion.

    Ladies are already permitted to do triple Axels, if they are able. They are already permitted to do two triple Axels in the long program. They are already permitted to do a triple Axel in the short program, either in combination or out of footwork. The only change in the proposed rules is to add "or as a substitute for the double Axel" to the previous sentence.

    I do not think that this change will cause a sudden rush of young skaters and their coaches to say, well, I didn't give two hoots about the triple Axel when it was allowed only twice in the LP and once in the SP substituting for another jump in combination or out of footwork. But -- whoa -- now I can substitute if for the double Axel in the SP!!! That's for me!

    I also do not see how the discussion of how few ladies can do a fully rotated triple Axel is relevant. If nobody can take advantage of the new rule, that's life. If a few adventurous souls want to try, more power to 'em.

    Quote Originally Posted by Robeye
    My own view is that this busy slicing and dicing and linguistic pasteurization of the criteria is a fig leaf, guilty of both false precision and intellectual bad faith.
    OT -- a challenger to 100yen's "best sentence" crown.
    Last edited by Mathman; 05-02-2010 at 08:17 AM.

  3. #138
    Custom Title mikiandorocks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    697
    I support these proposals with the exception of the changing in the spirals. I think spirals should still be a required element for the ladies SP. It's one of the most beautiful elements in ladies skating.
    I totally support the imposition of a limit to the number of double axels a skater can perform in the LP. Remember all the discussion about Laura's LP in Torino?
    In the last couple of season's most people have been talking about a regression and these rules will probably help increase the competitive side which is something very welcomed in my opinion.

  4. #139
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    289
    Mao already performs a triple axel in the form of a combo in the short program. It would be a step down for her to perform it as a solo jump since she can't repeat it again in a combination. The rule change does give her a significant score advantage if she performs it as a solo jump (~5 points in TES depending on how her program is structured). So since Mao is the only female skater who performs the jump, I'm wondering what the real purpose of the rule change is: advancement of the sport or a thinly disguised attempt to reward the one skater?

    I also agree that the triple axel will likely never become the norm in ladies skating. Midori Ito is the only skater who had success with the jump. I think it's because she gets such enormous height in her jumps and I'd would conjecture that it's partly because of her light physique. Even Mao had more success at 15 years old than today. Most female skaters today are not built this way.

    It's kind of obvious that the rules have been rewritten to advantage one skater and disadvantage another. I'm a little disgusted that the rule system is being used in this manner. I'd also think that there would be a lot of opposition to the new changes if only for the reason that they are radical.
    Last edited by Figure88; 05-02-2010 at 09:26 AM.

  5. #140
    Custom Title Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    28,356
    ^ This rule change does not really benefit Mao Asada very much at all.

    Here is her present jump layout:

    3A+2T
    3F
    2A

    18.5 points in base value

    Under the new rules she could do

    3F+2T
    3Lo
    3A

    20.0 points.

    The only thing she gains is the difference between a triple loop and a double Axel.

    However, it would make for a better program. Mao -- or any skater of the future who might come along -- could concentrate on doing a really good triple Axel without worrying about doing it in combination or out of footwork. Then she could concentrate on doing a really nice 3F+2T and a pretty 3Lo. To me, it is the audience that is the big gainer -- they get to see a better-constructed program.

    As for Yu-na Kim, with

    3Lz+3T
    3F
    2A

    19.0 points in base values, before GOEs,

    she has nothing to fear from the new rules.

  6. #141
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    747
    Quote Originally Posted by janetfan View Post
    I did read wally's post and what you are saying is not what I think he was implying.

    I am a big fan of Mao's skating and admire her fighting spirit so if I don't agree with the rule change it is not because I am against Mao or for Yuna. Actually I am for Mirai

    As to holding the sport back I find that absurd when only one skater is attempting a 3A in her SP.
    If one wished to say it is holding Mao back it might feel more truthful to me.

    Raising the value of the 3A (again) is not the same thing as changing the axel requirements in the SP.

    I think you make a fair enough point that the rule changes might not benefit any particular skater but I can't help feeling the axel change is an attempt to do just that.
    Janet thanks for the thoughtful post. I too am for Mirai. The new rules may benefit her b/c of the spiral sequence as stated by Wally. Who knows , maybe the ISU tech committee intended to help Mao (tht still is a big stretch to me). But then why? She is just the OSM, I would think the ISU tech committee will do everything possible to encourge the OGM stay 4 more yrs. I think even if the committee intended to help Mao, it may not happen in reality. She can not do two 3as in the sp, and currently she is already attempting one 3a in combination. If she follows the rule, she will be substituing the 3a for 2a that is all.

    originally posted by Wallylutz
    Not sure, with only 4 Triples to work with, she will end up having to either include the Triple Loop and risk an error on that jump or downgrade the 7th jumping pass to something like a Double Flip. That's about 5 points of TES that is at risk here. This is not a trivial change for her.
    It the rule change forces Yuna to include the 3lo in her program that is not a bad thing for the sports. I for one am tired of the past 2 OGM being loopless in the competition. I guess in arakawa's case she missed the jump at olys, and Yuna was able to take advantage of the rules to exclude the triple loop. I am not advocating Tara like 3l/3l, but at the very least an OGM should be able to do a triple loop. This is good for the sports, and the sports is greater/ bigger than any one skater
    Last edited by rtureck; 05-02-2010 at 09:34 AM.

  7. #142
    Mashimaro on Ice
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    1,419
    Quote Originally Posted by rtureck View Post
    Janet thanks for the thoughtful post. I too am for Mirai. The new rules may benefit her b/c of the spiral sequence as stated by Wally. Who knows , maybe the ISU tech committee intended to help Mao (tht still is a big stretch to me). But then why? She is just the OSM, I would think the ISU tech committee will do everything possible to encourge the OGM stay 4 more yrs. I think even if the committee intended to help Mao, it may not happen in reality. She can not do two 3as in the sp, and currently she is already attempting one 3a in combination. If she follows the rule, she will be substituing the 3a for 2a that is all.
    Couldn't it just be that some members on the tech committee do want to encourage risk-taking in jumps and that group won out in the end probably due to some compromises being made with some of the proposals made by other members? I don't think rules are intended to help any one skater. Benefits come as a side effect.

  8. #143
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    747
    Quote Originally Posted by miki88 View Post
    Couldn't it just be that some members on the tech committee do want to encourage risk-taking in jumps and that group won out in the end probably due to some compromises being made with some of the proposals made by other members? I don't think rules are intended to help any one skater. Benefits come as a side effect.
    Totally agree, usually decisions from committees are a compromise. I think the tech guys had many things to consider,including some male skaters who were very open and vocal about the triple axel should have more base points ( and afterall these guys are landing 3/3 and triple axels they know at the skater's level). Other things in consideration include encouraging advancement of the sports. They also know Mao is the only female skater who is risking the 3a. The new rules allow her and all skaters to substitute the triple a for the 2a, it potentially helps other skaters and not that much for Mao, who has already put 3a in her sp.

    Even if I try to be cynical, I can't think of one reason why ISU is doing this for Mao? She has declared she will stay 4 more yrs, therefore the TV ratings is already factored in. If ISu is doing rule changes for TV ratings, I would think they will change the rules for Yuna because they want her to stay 4 more yrs
    Last edited by rtureck; 05-02-2010 at 09:45 AM.

  9. #144
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    289
    Quote Originally Posted by Mathman View Post
    ^ This rule change does not really benefit Mao Asada very much at all.

    Here is her present jump layout:

    3A+2T
    3F
    2A

    18.5 points in base value

    Under the new rules she could do

    3F+2T
    3Lo
    3A

    20.0 points.

    The only thing she gains is the difference between a triple loop and a double Axel.

    However, it would make for a better program. Mao -- or any skater of the future who might come along -- could concentrate on doing a really good triple Axel without worrying about doing it in combination or out of footwork. Then she could concentrate on doing a really nice 3F+2T and a pretty 3Lo. To me, it is the audience that is the big gainer -- they get to see a better-constructed program.

    As for Yu-na Kim, with

    3Lz+3T
    3F
    2A

    19.0 points in base values, before GOEs,

    she has nothing to fear from the new rules.
    That's true. Mao needs a 3-3 to take full advantage of the new rule change. Also, you might consider that under the new changes, since she no longer has to perform a 3A in combo, it might free up her energy to perform a 3-3.
    Last edited by Figure88; 05-02-2010 at 09:46 AM.

  10. #145
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    747
    Quote Originally Posted by Figure88 View Post
    That's true. Mao needs a 3-3 to take full advantage of the new rule change. Also, you might consider that under the new changes, since she no longer has to perform a 3A in combo, she might have more energy to perform a 3-3.
    Mao needs 3/3, fix the flutz, and put 3 sal in her programs. I don't think doing a well executed 3a takes any less energy than doing a 3a/2t (although I am not a skater). It seems like putting a 2t as part of a combo is really not that taxing for most skater. The new rules potentially reward many skaters.

  11. #146
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,819
    Quote Originally Posted by miki88 View Post
    Couldn't it just be that some members on the tech committee do want to encourage risk-taking in jumps and that group won out in the end probably due to some compromises being made with some of the proposals made by other members? I don't think rules are intended to help any one skater. Benefits come as a side effect.
    What's curious is if you recall, there was a recent thread here where the head of JSF was publicly calling for the inclusion of 3A as an option in lieu of 2A. The public statement went as far as saying this is good for the sport and that it would prevent Mao's jump being accidentally voided like it happened in the Rostelecom SP last Fall. Yet, such proposal is no where to be found among the ISU Congress Agenda for June. So the question is: "Did Japan suddenly decide they weren't going to propose for such change? Then why was he calling for such a change just a month ago?" And then magically, such change was already included in by the ISU Technical Committee for Single & Pair Skating, which is highly unusual to say the least, completely inconsistent with the way ISU typically works on the subject of jump requirements for SP. If you read through the Congress Agenda, each Member have their sets of proposals to make. The only things Japan has to say is some trivial administrative matter whereas other countries, including some tiny nobody up to the big & powerful federations had a lot more to say. Russia for example is pushing to eliminate the drop of highest & lowest marks. Predictable, eh? B/C that thing really prevented Russia from "dealing" with other countries in the old fashioned way, hence unable to buy votes in Ice Dance, hence losing the Gold in Vancouver. That proposal is a long shot at best, nevertheless, it's obviously important to Russia and they are going to raise it. Canada and USA all have their proposals which are more than trivial and which they hope to see pass. So in comparison, Japan seems awfully quiet. To me, this just seems odd.

    I'd be very surprised if this change wasn't brought about because of a specific skater and a specific skating federation. Otherwise, there is just no justification for it whatsoever or else, they would have eliminated the restriction on no Quads for women in the SP along with it if the intent, as many people have naively claimed here, is to allow the women to explore their potentials. Why prohibit women from doing Quads in the SP, eh? But the restriction is there and still not lifted. Didn't Miki Ando do a Quad a while ago? Can't a hypothetical supergirl suddenly come along and start to land Quads? All those arguments seem suspect when you consider the fact that Quad is not allowed in the SP for women in any shape or form. Call me cynical, I don't believe this change was made to benefit the sport, in fact, there are some serious concerns for such a change that not many coaches in their sound mind would agree even though this may delight the casual fans who has never wear skates in their whole life or probably never even been to a rink.

  12. #147
    Banned janetfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    6,889
    Quote Originally Posted by miki88 View Post
    Couldn't it just be that some members on the tech committee do want to encourage risk-taking in jumps and that group won out in the end probably due to some compromises being made with some of the proposals made by other members? I don't think rules are intended to help any one skater. Benefits come as a side effect.
    Thinking it over - and reading mathman's last post seems to show there is not such a big advantage to Mao or any particular skater with these rule changes.

    The axel rule does give Mao more flexibilty in the SP but without a 3x3 her advantage is not such a big deal.

    Still, I think this is a big break from skating tradition and I believe if Mao was able to do a good 3L this rule would not have happened.

    The problem for me is that only Mao is attempting a 3A in her SP and ISU has not historically changed jump requirements in the SP for only one skater. Say what you will about the future and moving the sport forward - but the simple truth is that in all the years since Midori first showed her 3A the jump has proven too difficult for 99% of Lady skaters.

    Maybe it will change in the future and with strenous off-ice training more Ladies will develope the strength to do the 3A. In all honesty I fail to see how that will be so positive for skating.
    I would still rather see a Lady skater doing the five traditional triple jumps plus 2A than a skater who has the 3A but is unable to perform the other triples.

  13. #148
    Mashimaro on Ice
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    1,419
    Quote Originally Posted by rtureck View Post
    Mao needs 3/3, fix the flutz, and put 3 sal in her programs. I don't think doing a well executed 3a takes any less energy than doing a 3a/2t (although I am not a skater). It seems like putting a 2t as part of a combo is really not that taxing for most skater. The new rules potentially reward many skaters.
    There's nothing new here. Mao would have to do these things with or without these new rules. I think it's better if she opt to not to do the 3a in combination because the judges do not seem to like this combo and often downgrade her 3A in her combo. Based on the results of the past season, Mao single 3A were usually ratified unless she stepped out/ fell. It's the 3A in combo that would get UR even if she landed it. By just doing a single 3A she can add more transitions such as steps leading up to it to earn more GOE.
    Last edited by miki88; 05-02-2010 at 09:58 AM.

  14. #149
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    747
    Quote Originally Posted by janetfan View Post
    Thinking it over - and reading mathman's last post seems to show there is not such a big advantage to Mao or any particular skater with these rule changes.

    The axel rule does give Mao more flexibilty in the SP but without a 3x3 her advantage is not such a big deal.

    Still, I think this is a big break from skating tradition and I believe if Mao was able to do a good 3L this rule would not have happened.

    The problem for me is that only Mao is attempting a 3A in her SP and ISU has not historically changed jump requirements in the SP for only one skater. Say what you will about the future and moving the sport forward - but the simple truth is that in all the years since Midori first showed her 3A the jump has proven too difficult for 99% of Lady skaters.

    I would still rather see a Lady skater doing the five traditional triple jumps plus 2A than a skater who has the 3A but is unable to perform the other triples.
    OK Janet fan, I will play, why does ISU do this just for Mao? She is really that popular? I thought Yuna is more popular.


    originally posted by Wallylutz
    I'd be very surprised if this change wasn't brought about because of a specific skater and a specific skating federation. Otherwise, there is just no justification for it whatsoever or else, they would have eliminated the restriction on no Quads for women in the SP along with it if the intent, as many people have naively claimed here, is to allow the women to explore their potentials. Why prohibit women from doing Quads in the SP, eh? But the restriction is there and still not lifted. Didn't Miki Ando do a Quad a while ago? Can't a hypothetical supergirl suddenly come along and start to land Quads? All those arguments seem suspect when you consider the fact that Quad is not allowed in the SP for women in any shape or form. Call me cynical, I don't believe this change was made to benefit the sport, in fact, there are some serious concerns for such a change that not many coaches in their sound mind would agree even though this may delight the casual fans who has never wear skates in their whole life or probably never even been to a rink.
    OK, I will play along in this conspiracy theory. So why does ISU do it for Mao at the expense ofr Miki? Allowing 3a and forbidding quad jumps. If one is skeptical about ISU bowing to pressure of a federation, is Japan fed really tht powerful? And are we saying that Japan fed is sacrificing Miki for Mao?
    Last edited by rtureck; 05-02-2010 at 10:06 AM.

  15. #150
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,819
    Quote Originally Posted by rtureck View Post
    OK Janet fan, I will play, why does ISU do this just for Mao? She is really that popular? I thought Yuna is more popular.

    OK, I will play along in this conspiracy theory. So why does ISU do it for Mao at the expense ofr Miki? Allowing 3a and forbidding quad jumps. If one is skeptical about ISU bowing to pressure of a federation, is Japan fed really tht powerful? And are we saying that Japan fed is sacrificing Miki for Mao?
    http://www.goldenskate.com/forum/sho...l=1#post494238

    Quote Originally Posted by hurrah
    http://www.sponichi.co.jp/sports/fla...100329088.html

    Says that Japanese Fed will appeal to ISU for a rule change to allow a choice of 3-axel instead of 2-axel in the SP.

    Yoshioka Director (?) of JSF says that they want to make the rule the same as men's and that 'as long as there is a skater who can do it, the rule should be changed'.... It will prevent a situation such as happened at Russia Cup, where Mao's 2-axel was discounted because her 3-axel was called on under-rotation.

    I do think that as long as men are allowed, it should be allowed for women. If it's not going to be allowed for women, then men should not be allowed to have a choice of 2-axel/3-axel.
    真央ちゃんに有利に?日本がSPのルール変更提案へ

     フィギュアスケートで浅田真央(中京大)が武器とするトリプルアクセル(3回転半ジャンプ)がより正当に 評価されるよう、日本スケート連盟が6月の国際スケート連盟(ISU)総会(バルセロナ)で女子ショートプ ログラム(SP)のルール変更を提案することが29日、分かった。採用されれば、女子で唯一3回転半を武器 とする浅田に有利となる可能性が高い。

     日本連盟の吉岡伸彦フィギュア強化部長がイタリアのトリノで明らかにしたもので、「2回転半ジャンプ」とな っている現行の必須課題を男子と同じ「2回転半、または3回転半」と変えるよう要望する。吉岡部長は「でき る選手がいる以上、許すべきだ」と根拠を示し、得点アップへ「可能性も広がる」と期待感を込め た。

     提案が認められれば、浅田は今季3回転半―2回転で跳んだ連続ジャンプを、基礎点がより高い2連続3回転 ジャンプに置き換えることができ、大技の3回転半と合わせて男子のトップ選手に匹敵する構成が 実現する。

     また、3回転半に失敗して2回転半となり、後に跳んだ2回転半が規定違反で0点になった、昨年10月のロ シア杯のような事態も回避できる。



    No conspiracy theory required, this public statement is conclusive as to both the intention and the action of JSF. This was dated March 29, 2010. The statement even specifically mentioned the ISU Congress in June, which also implied the change was going to be proposed and happen in that specific event. And here, we have this information package for the June Congress agenda that already includes such change, voila!

Page 10 of 28 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ... 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
  •