Page 10 of 11 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 LastLast
Results 136 to 150 of 157

Thread: Would Plush have won if the new rules had been applied?

  1. #136
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    3,830
    Quote Originally Posted by gmyers View Post
    What are the chances of a quad lutz in the COP era? Like none???
    Probably about the same as a quad flip. For which we just saw one attempt at this year's Worlds.

    Maybe a little better for all quads once a moderately cheated attempt will be worth more than a so-so clean triple. But still rare.

  2. #137
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    3,633
    There is no doubt that Takahashi's artistry and skating skills were visible at the Olympic free skate but his jumps were underroated and wrong edged and he fell once. It's like after he fell he couldn't do a jump right. So Bronze was decided really on spins and steps and just barely beat Lambiel.

  3. #138
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    3,633
    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly View Post
    Probably about the same as a quad flip. For which we just saw one attempt at this year's Worlds.

    Maybe a little better for all quads once a moderately cheated attempt will be worth more than a so-so clean triple. But still rare.
    Yeah the new rules are coming and maybe the punishment for bold jumping failures or near successes will be less but like no change in rules can change what happened!

  4. #139
    leave no stone unturned seniorita's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    5,580
    Quote Originally Posted by janetfan View Post
    ...
    Did I bother at someone not liking the skaters I like?? Yes thanx for guideline instructions, but I laughed cause the people I mostly talk from here dislike Plush and yet we get along really well. Respect is the word. I never said this is a Plushy forum so don't use words I didnt say, plus I did not speak about Plushenko in double standars. And I know what is Gs and how to behave here and not insult people or their intelligence, at least better than you. Since you wondered where the rest people went..scripta manent, look at your posts.
    Forgot to add: Who addressed to you?It was a general observation I had, it is rather idiotic to address personally and make me a lecture also about behavior here.
    Last edited by seniorita; 05-25-2010 at 02:19 PM.

  5. #140
    Banned janetfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    6,889
    Quote Originally Posted by seniorita View Post
    Did I bother at someone not liking the skaters I like?? Yes thanx for guideline instructions, but I laughed cause the people I mostly talk from here dislike Plush and yet we get along really well. Respect is the word. I never said this is a Plushy forum so don't use words I didnt say, plus I did not speak about Plushenko in double standars. And I know what is Gs and how to behave here and not insult people or their intelligence, at least better than you. Since you wondered where the rest people went..scripta manent, look at your posts.
    I thought you blocked me - but must admit it is not surprising you can't resist reading my perplexing, silly, and occassionally intuitive posts.

    Poor sportsmanship never goes over well in USA unless it is accompanied by a formal apology.
    As a very poor sport myself I know this very well.

    Here is an interesting blog comment for your persusal:

    http://olympicfanatic.com/2010/02/20...es-to-lysacek/

  6. #141
    leave no stone unturned seniorita's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    5,580
    yes I did, but unfortunately people quote you all the time, so there was no use. Sorry jntfan, I m not playing the game. Have fun.

  7. #142
    Custom Title Joesitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    20,185
    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly View Post
    The toe walley is included by default as an alternative to triple toe loop. If anyone does a triple toe walley it will be called as 3T and earn the same base value as a triple toe loop
    Default? Where is that written? It's not permitted in competition and you know it. Why not say that if you can not show an official statement?

    walley is not included in the scale of values because it's only done as a single jump. I'm sure that the reason it is explicitly considered a "nonlisted jump" is so that skaters can do single rotations from this takeoff without wasting jump slots. They're free to
    But you have no idea that single, double, and triple Walleys were not listed, which is what I was trying to find out. I really don't need your guesswork.

    Now personally I think it would be a good idea to include double walley in the scale of values, with a value greater than that of double axel and maybe greater than the easier triples, even though it's less rotation, to give an incentive for skaters to try to learn it. If there were points for it, we'd be more likely to see it
    You seem to be bending on this issue of CoP Listings. A partial listing of an element, is your opinion and not standard ISU writings. I want the whole single, double, triple and yes, the quad listed. Skaters do not have to use them in their programs.[/QUOTE]

    Including triple walley in the scale of values[ would be a purely theoretical. I don't think we will see it in competition before we see quadruple axel.
    Opinons are fine.

    Again, I have no idea what you're trying to convey with this sentence. Maybe if you could choose your words more precisely we could actually communicate with each other.
    Maybe of you took the trouble of the dicussion before you came into the picture.



    First things first. Let's see a first double walley in international competition before we start looking for triples.
    Kristi Yamaguchi and others had them in their programs. You didn't notice?

    If they weren't difficult, we would have seen them before there was a scale of values. The fact that maybe two skaters in the whole history of the sport ever attempted double walley in the last few decades of the 20th century and no one ever attempted triple walley, long after triple axelbecame commonplace, tells me that double walley is probably more difficult than triple axel.
    And quads were all over the place in 1916. Yeah.

    The above is my understanding. No, I haven't seen an official explicit explanation from the people who wrote the scale of values.

    But note that their absence from the SoV does not mean that they are considered "illegitimate" or that they are "banned." When you throw around words like that, you confuse the issue.

    They are absent from the scale of values. That's it. Why? So that skaters can use the single jumps as transitions without wasting jump slots. And because no one ever used to do the doubles or triples under the old system, so there was no expectation that anyone would or could do them now.
    Yes, but to make up interpretatiions with regard to the intent of the drafters of the SoVs, in reply to simple questions, can be misleading.
    Last edited by Joesitz; 05-25-2010 at 05:07 PM.

  8. #143
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    3,830
    Quote Originally Posted by Joesitz View Post
    Default? Where is that written? It's not permitted in competition and you know it. Why not say that if you can not show an official statement?
    Toe walleys of any revolution are permitted in competition and are scored as toe loops.

    It is hard to find the documentation. Especially when it's misspelled.

    http://www.isu.org/vsite/vfile/page/...-0-file,00.pdf

    "Jumps that are not listed in the SOV (e.g., Valley's...) will not count as a jump element, but might be used as a special entrance to the jump to be considered in the mark for Transition.
    A Toe-Valley, however, will be called and count as a Toe-loop."

    Kristi Yamaguchi and others had them in their programs. You didn't notice?
    When did Kristi Yamaguchi or anyone other than the two men I listed in the earlier post ever do double (or triple) walleys?

    Got any video evidence?

    Are you still confusing walleys and toe walleys?

    If you're thinking about single walleys, yes, skaters in Yamaguchi's era did them, and skaters still do them today under IJS with no penalty, no point value, and reward under the Transitions component. Need some examples?

    But you have no idea that single, double, and triple Walleys were not listed, which is what I was trying to find out. I really don't need your guesswork.
    I know for sure that walleys (as opposed to toe walleys) are not listed in the scale of values. They are officially considered nonlisted jumps, as in the quote above.

    The only guesswork is regarding the rationale (i.e., why).
    Last edited by gkelly; 05-25-2010 at 05:31 PM.

  9. #144
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    3,633
    Quote Originally Posted by janetfan View Post
    I thought you blocked me - but must admit it is not surprising you can't resist reading my perplexing, silly, and occassionally intuitive posts.

    Poor sportsmanship never goes over well in USA unless it is accompanied by a formal apology.
    As a very poor sport myself I know this very well.

    Here is an interesting blog comment for your persusal:

    http://olympicfanatic.com/2010/02/20...es-to-lysacek/

    Of course you would post something where someone compelely ignores the existence of one skater doing a quad triple and the other not doing it and how maybe that is what made that persons program cleaner. Clean programs over really difficult one is not a virtue. This person obviously just thinks all jumps are the same and of course the person who had the most in the second half had the harder program. So dumb.

  10. #145
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Helsinki, Finland
    Posts
    3,562
    Quote Originally Posted by gmyers View Post
    Of course you would post something where someone compelely ignores the existence of one skater doing a quad triple and the other not doing it and how maybe that is what made that persons program cleaner. Clean programs over really difficult one is not a virtue. This person obviously just thinks all jumps are the same and of course the person who had the most in the second half had the harder program. So dumb.
    A quad triple is not something that quarantees a win, it is just one element and the rest of the programme needs to be good, too. Besides, as far as I remember Plushenko was beaten in technical scores. Obviously his other elements were not good enough.
    Last edited by Jaana; 05-26-2010 at 02:37 AM.

  11. #146
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    3,633
    Quote Originally Posted by Jaana View Post
    A quad triple is not something that quarantees a win, it is just one element and the rest of the programme needs to be good, too. Besides, as far as I remember Plushenko was beaten in technical scores. Obviously his other elements were not good enough.
    Of course I know Plushenko was beaten on the technical scores but it was on positive execution pluses and after the halfway point bonus points. It would have been different if Plushenko had actually popped a jump or fell or got a level 2 spin or step but both Lysacek and Plushenkso got pretty much the same level on spins and steps. And the problem for me is that Plushenkos doing the hardest jump a skter can do and doing everything else didn't matter when scoring those other elements to several judges on the panel. I mean several judges very obviously factored in the quad triple when grading the other elments but I just think Plushenko was so much more impressive doing everything a skater needs to do be competiive for gold and doing a quad triple. That is so much more impressive than not doing a quad triple in a gold medal performance. You can read the scoring protocall sheets and all written out like that I just find Plushenko so much more mpressive as a whole!

  12. #147
    Custom Title Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    28,178
    Quote Originally Posted by gmyers View Post
    I mean several judges very obviously factored in the quad triple when grading the other elments...
    If several judges really did this, they are greatly in error. In the Technical Element Score each element is scored on its own merit. Doing well on one elements does not get you positive GOE on another.

  13. #148
    leave no stone unturned seniorita's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    5,580
    Quote Originally Posted by Jaana View Post
    Besides, as far as I remember Plushenko was beaten in technical scores. Obviously his other elements were not good enough.
    That is absolutely true. They were not good enough to beat Evan and 4-3 is just one element. But the sentence just reads funny when you consider these not good enough elements were just a point lower than the elements of the Gold medal, which I suppose were good enough but without 4-3.
    My only thought anymore about Olys is that for some reason people have analysed to death the Lps but forget there was an Sp night as well. Where the 4-3 is more crucial to include it. And either you do that to score high or have a program like Takahashi's.
    Last edited by seniorita; 05-26-2010 at 07:20 AM.

  14. #149
    Custom Title Joesitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    20,185
    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly View Post
    Toe walleys of any revolution are permitted in competition and are scored as toe loops.

    It is hard to find the documentation. Especially when it's misspelled.

    http://www.isu.org/vsite/vfile/page/...-0-file,00.pdf

    "Jumps that are not listed in the SOV (e.g., Valley's...) will not count as a jump element, but might be used as a special entrance to the jump to be considered in the mark for Transition.
    A Toe-Valley, however, will be called and count as a Toe-loop."



    When did Kristi Yamaguchi or anyone other than the two men I listed in the earlier post ever do double (or triple) walleys?

    Got any video evidence?

    Are you still confusing walleys and toe walleys?

    If you're thinking about single walleys, yes, skaters in Yamaguchi's era did them, and skaters still do them today under IJS with no penalty, no point value, and reward under the Transitions component. Need some examples?
    I know for sure that walleys (as opposed to toe walleys) are not list
    ed in the scale of values. They are officially considered nonlisted jumps, as in the quote above.

    The nly guesswork is regarding the rationale (i.e., why).
    If you take another look at the list of SoVs there are no Walleys listed - toe or otherwise. That's fact and not guesswork. Kristi did do a toe walley and it is proof that it was done before the omiting of it in the SoV. That's also fact.

    It would be so simple, if you could just say that you do not know why they left them out rather than defending the omissions with all sorts of non rationale talk. Giving an 'imo' would help. It would not be a surprise that you must defend the CoP when fans make suggestions. it's more than just the Walleys.

    It is obvious to me that the Walleys (note plural) are not listed in the SoVs. I think they should be.

    I cannot change the rules of the ISU, but I think fans have a right to object to them. What would be wrong with that?

  15. #150
    Custom Title Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    28,178
    This is a a very interesting discussion about the Walley and toe Walley jumps. If everyone promises not to jump down my throat for posting about it, let me make sure that I understand the current ISU rules.

    If you do a single toe Walley, you get base value of 0.4, the same as for a single toe loop.

    If you do a double toe Walley, the base value is 1.4.

    Base value for triple toe Walley and quad toe Walley are 4.1 and 10.3, under the new proposed ISU Scale of Values that are expected to take effect in the 2010-2011 season.

    So far so good. All of this is not mentioned in the actual listings of the SoV, so you have to dig a little deeper into the ISU Communications and Rules to find it out, as gkelly was kind enough to do for us.

    Now here is where ISU-speak comes in. The ISU uses the term “listed jump” to mean any jump that receives a base value, whether the “listed jump” is actually “listed” in the list of listed jumps or not. For instance, the half-loop or Euler jump does not appear in the list of listed jumps. Still it is a “listed jump,” when done in combination or sequence, with base value 0.5, even though they forgot to include this listed jump in the list. Here is the exact language (page 14, #2 of the new Scale of Values.)

    In jump combinations/sequences the half-loop (or Euler) (landing backwards) will be a listed jump.
    Why does the ISU use the word “listed” in this way? Dunno.

Page 10 of 11 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 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
  •