Mathman, do you have particular programs in mind?
Mathman, do you have particular programs in mind?
Of course the medal-contending programs get the most attention and they probably do want to make some of the adjustments to address issues that the public and the press have been concerned about, as well as the skaters and coaches, who have their own personal interests in what's rewarded.
But some changes are likely made in response to trends across all junior and senior international competitions. If there's one prominent example at the top it may seem as though that skater was personally the impetus for the rule change, but that wouldn't necessarily be the case.
One thing for sure is that I see no clear benefit to a system that remains static as times change and sports evolve. One skater having a big trick does not necessarily feel like a natural progression - and adjusting rules for one skater's potential benefit feels political, especially when that skater's nation is hosting three major ISU events next season. (NHK, Wolrds, WTT)
Perhaps "follow the money" may sound too undignified to you - and if you have a better way to explain such a coincidence I am all ears.
Another skater who will benefit from some of the new rule changes happens to have his nation hosting the WC two years from now. Just another coincidence? Or am I too cynical?
Last edited by janetfan; 05-24-2010 at 06:43 PM.
Here's Chan's program. At what point does he "skate around aimlessly?" You can argue with it being a well-skated program - Chan's injury certainly set him back jump wise, and you can argue about it being a good program for Chan (outwardly melodramatic is not his strong suit), but it's a fully choreographed, balanced program with loads of nutsy difficult transitions (and remember, he was making those easier this season).
And here's the other thing about "backloading." It's harder. If you have two programs of equal jump content, and one does most of the jumps in the first half vs the another doing more in the last half (and in the end, lets be clear, we're talking about the difference in rotations of about a quad, intriguingly enough), the latter is more difficult, and if TES is a measure of difficulty, then shouldn't that be rewarded there?
janetfan, yeah, I think you're being a little cynical. I don't blame you, though.
I don't know what demands more strength to do a quad or to spin..My only way to compare it is that much more skaters spin great than jumping a quad. But then again is what it is easier for someone. Lambiel was doing superb spins now and Plushenko was throwing a bunch of 3axels in their tour shows.
yes thank you both.Originally Posted by museksk8r
I hate hypocrisy cause truth to be told, this board would have exploded gracefully if Lysacek had lost 1.3 to Plushenko for the Gold. Regardless of plushyfan, I m trying to be balanced and see that Lysacek should have won the Lp, and that Plushenko might have been overmarked there and didnt work the CoP but on the other hand all I read is that suddenly Lysacek is the artistic skater who was not in the beginning of the season and who deserved every single pcs and all the GOES somehow. This is hypocrisy to me. If you can recognize the judge gifts to one skater then be decent and look on the other skater's too, what he got comparing to Lambiel and Chan pcs for example or what he got in sp.
And also dont fool ourselves, if Lysacek had won 1.3 over a skater like Takahashi or Lambiel people would have been more vocal about his marks. Most people here didnt care about Lysacek wining , they were just happy he stopped Plushenko for second gold. And if I say something now, I m whinny like Plushenko. Who, by the way, said what he said the moment right after he lost and that's it, and he is not repeating it like some people on the board do the last 3 months.
And we are beating a dead horse anyway, cause Lysacek won the Olympics. And I also wish Lysacek if he goes to Socchi for a second gold to be equally welcomed and warmly commented by the media there even before he arrives, exactly as much as Plushenko was.
A Salchow by nature cannot take off a flat and rotate more than 3/4 (single). Because there is no toe assist in a Salchow, the increase in depth of edge creates the jump (same as a loop jump). You CAN, however, make the mistake of two footing the take off (Goebel was notorious for using the free foot to generate additional impetus while passing through before the lift off on the ice for his Quad Salchow. He did fix it, but that take off was always suspect as once it was fixed, it was still near grazing the ice).
A flip and a Lutz by nature CAN take off the flat once the skater has picked in and is drawing back in order to get the body in alignment and the feet in the correct rotating position and to drive the lift of the jump. If the skater is on too deep of an inside edge with the drawing foot, they will close up what becomes the free hip which inhibits rotation or they will drive that free side out of the circle as they leave the ice which makes multirotations again out of the question. It's a matter of keeping the body square since there is no weight transition. Same with the Lutz - if the drawing foot is on too deep of an outside edge, the free hip will be dropped and the skater will not make rotation/consistently fall. Again, it's about squareness in the position as the skater gets into the air. Once a skater learns the "baby" flip and is starting to progress to the "big skater" flip, it's about keeping the entry flatter and using the motion to drive it UP.
As for the triple Walley, from the laws of physics, I don't think this is physically possible to complete. Single walleys are often lead ins to flips, Lutzes, and Axels as well as used in step sequences at the Intermediate+ level.
Maybe not Chan so much because he does do a lot of transitions with in between in his jumps and spins but he still takes 2 minutes and 15 seconds for three jumping passes and a spin and step sequence!!! but definitely lysacek or brezina-the only thing lysacek does is some sqauts and he made me think there should be a zayak rule for transitions because all he did was squats over and over.
Last edited by gmyers; 05-24-2010 at 07:46 PM.
So a counter rotation jump involves the Laws of Physics when it involves a rotation of more than 2 turns? I do not buy that exception to the definition of a 3Walley. An exceptional Jumper can handle it. The Too difficult jump should not come into the picture to exclude it. It's SPORT. (The Quad Lutz should not be banned, either.
The bonus comes from the quad comes from the fact that it gets a higher base value for a single jumping pass. So you're suggesting that two bonuses come from the quad - one from the element itself (getting a higher value) and then to credit them for evenly balancing their program with a quad (the back end bonus). Assuming this rule enters....
Worlds 2008: Takahashi beats Wier. Buttle won on the strength of his high GOEs AND base value. He would lose only 2.63 points, and he beat Joubert by something like 14.
Worlds 2009: Lysacek still wins, Chan beats Joubert in the long but not overall, so Joubert takes silver and Chan bronze.
Olympics 2010: I don't need to check to know that the medals change - goes Plushenko-Lysacek-Lambiel (not giving credit for Takakashi's quad)
Worlds 2010: Joubert and Brezina switch places in the long, but medals don't change.
So, the back end bonus helps, but it's not the determining factor (Joubert earns his medal based on the fact that he does a quad in the short program, not the back end bonus). And in the case of the Olympics, the scores are so close that you can't cite one determining factor.
I'm really glad you're not in charge of the rules, at any rate, but the rules have been changed to give the quad jumpers a boost and limit the remaining areas as a method for scoring points, so someone agrees with you.
A counterrotational takeoff with no toe assist makes it extra difficult to get height up into the air and also to generate the in-air rotation.
(Note that lutz and toe walley have a toe assist -- walley and toeless lutz do not.)
To complete multiple rotation requires both height and quick rotation. In the history of figure skating jumping, hardly anyone has ever been able to get two rotations from a counterrotated edge takeoff, let alone three.
The fact that no one was doing double walleys in the days before there was a scale of values suggests that pretty much no skaters were able to do two rotations from that takeoff, let alone three.
If double walleys were no more difficult than normal triples, we would have been seeing them in competition in well before the new judging system, and they would have been included in the scale of values, and there probably would have been a score reserved for triple walley as a hypothetical jump that might be achieved someday, same as there is for the harder quads.
I have no idea what this sentence means.I do not buy that exception to the definition of a 3Walley.
Yeah, one skater in a million. There have only been a few thousand elite skaters in the history of triple jumps. That exceptional jumper hasn't come along yet and might not in our lifetime.An exceptional Jumper can handle it.
The quad lutz has not been banned. It's listed right there in the scale of values: 13.6 base mark.The Too difficult jump should not come into the picture to exclude it. It's SPORT. (The Quad Lutz should not be banned, either.
And of course, if it weren't listed in the scale of values it would be a "nonlisted jump" and therefore a skater would be free to include it if he wanted, for the excitement factor, without penalty -- it is not an illegal element -- and without even using up a jump slot.
That's already true of the double or triple walley. If anyone could actually do those jumps well enough to have little risk of a fall or having the takeoff mistaken for a double or triple loop, don't you think he would throw it in as a transition move for the wow factor, for making history? And maybe earn the innovative element bonus that was written into the rules at the beginning of the new system but has never actually been applied internationally as far as I know?
To my knowledge there have been more quad lutzes than double walleys ever attempted in competition. That should tell you something.
I don't know if this helps--I'm not Plushenko's biggest fan, but I wasn't wishing for him to be stopped. In fact, I assumed he had won. When Bob Costas, the American announcer, said his name (in a tone of absolute shock, might I say), you could have knocked me over with a feather. I get the sense that you could have knocked Lysacek over with a feather, too. In a situation like that, with a difference of one or two points, who knows what to think? It's one of those squeakers like Baiul vs. Kerrigan, the two Brians, and of course my personal heartbreaker, Kwan vs. Lipinski. Hey, it could have gone either way.
Lysacek impresses me not as an artist but as a pretty well balanced skater and a darned hard worker. There's a place for that in the world. He's probably not a skater for the ages. A generation from now, people won't be saying his name with a sigh and a smile, the way we talk about Boitano. But he did pull out the win. Good for him! And Plushy has a gold medal as well, which is a great outcome. I'm especially happy for Frank Carroll. But I do understand your feelings. It's part of the love-hate feeling we all have for skating. My condolences!
I think Gmyers is at least partially right about the two strategies, quad versus back-loading. I just checked out the jump layouts for the top 14 skaters at 2010 worlds (men's LP).
First, the quad is alive and well. Nine out of the top fourteen attempted a quad. So I do not see any support for the claim that the CoP discourages skaters from trying it if they can.
Of the five skaters who did not have a quad (Chan, Brezina, Rippon, Contesti, and Amodio), all five put only 3 jumping passes in the first half and 5 in the second half.
For the nine quadsters there was greater variety in the placements of jumps. Three of the nine (Joubert, Schultheiss, and Reynolds) had 5 jumping passes in the first half, 3 in the second. Three (Abbott, Kozuka , and Voronov) did 4 and 4, and three (Takahashi, Van der Perren , and Fernandez) did 3 in the first half, 5 in the second.
So, I am not sure what all that proves. There seem to be many choices for a skater trying to maximize his strengths and point totals.
Thank you mskater93 for the great post about edges on jump takeoffs, post #112,
I think Lysacek can be compared a lot to Boitano...both delivered clean, "conservative" programs when it counted although neither is considered to be a great artist or legendary jumper.