After watching SC I can see I was right. A clean Chan does NOT need a quad to beat the others.
What I don't get is what happened to the old "technical program." It is no more and what we have are two programs with one being longer than the other.
Can you or anyone tell me that Yagudin could have fallen twice in his SP and then again in his steps and still won in SLC?
I think of Yags as perhaps the most complete male skater I have seen - but as great as he was if he made the mistakes Chan made in the SP at SC Yags would not win.
What am I missing here? I happen to be a Patrick fan and love his skating. That doesn't mean I think he can make multiple mistakes in his SP, another in his LP and still win against a skater like Oda.
Maybe we need a press release from ISU stating the SP is nothing but a shorter version of the LP. Mistakes that in the past were costly no longer matter if a skater has good edges and superior TR.
One of the issue with the old Short Program in the 6.0 era is the relativity of marks were out of proportion especially when a skater does an element that is far more difficult than anyone else's, notably Ito's 3 Axel in a SP or Stojko's 4t+3t when it was first introduced. It was very difficult to be exact in the old system. How much is a 4t worth more than a 3Lz in the SP? Nobody knew for sure. Everything else being equal, someone who does a 4t over a 3Lz may score only 0.1 or 0.2 more than another skater. Was that fair?
the 2nd issue has to do with the system limitation. Whereas COP has a much higher theoretical ceiling, the old system can't go higher than 6.0 no matter what. Worrying about running out of room was a major concern among judges in the past, not so under the COP, which is a huge improvement IMO. No more worrying about holding marks back and etc.
In a nutshell, the nostalgia you expressed based on your years of experience as a fan watching the greats like Yagudin taught you that SP acts as in or out system. With a -0.4 for falls in the past, someone who fell on a Quad is pretty much doomed, let alone two falls in a SP. However, the old system was also unfair in failing to properly account for the value and risks of high value elements.
I realize that the system may have changed but to many people, their mentality and understanding hasn't been up to date with time. Given that standings are no longer used as it was in the past, it is only normal that you should also get rid of that in/out SP mentality. there were a lot of things that were inequitable in the past and COP is invented as a mean to address those concerns and IMO, doing a very good job, save the nostalgic factors.
Last edited by wallylutz; 11-03-2010 at 02:52 PM.
I thought mistakes on the the required elements, particularly the required axel jump, solo jump and combination jump in the SP were more costly than missing a jump in the LP.
If the SP is just a shorter version of the LP then I guess I can see how Chan can make mistakes on two of the three jumps and still only be a few points behind skaters who hit their jumps.
Not sure if I really like it - maybe it is nostalgia for the tension the old SP used to provide.
Falling in the SP should not automatically take you out of contention just because you fell, it's true. And sometimes, COP rightly allows skaters who make mistakes in the short to redeem themselves in the long, or capitalize on the mistakes of their competitors, and that's a good thing about the system.
But that is not what happened at Skate Canada. What happened is that Patrick Chan turned in two highly flawed performances, and was awarded a gold for them, over skaters who made fewer mistakes and delivered programs that were just as hard, when you only look at the base value of the elements they actually completed. That's not "looking at things through 6.0 eyes", that's knowing what it looks like when someone is held up.
Based on the scoring protocals at Worlds last year Chan probably would have lost even with 2 clean performances to Takahashi who essentialy skated a clean quadless short as well and a quadless long with a missed triple flip (which is what his failed quad flip attempt went down in points as after the downgrade and the -GOE). And that wasnt in Japan either. And if Takahashi's quad flip attempt which turned into a missed triple flip in points was replaced by a clean quad toe which would still have been his only quad of the 2 programs combined and Chan's 3 mistakes including the 1 fall had been removed, the scoring gap between them would have been about the 10+ point margin it already is.
So in a real event with actual real competition a clean Chan without a quad is far from unbeatable.
Last edited by pangtongfan; 11-03-2010 at 10:56 PM.