Miyabi Oba did a great 2A+3Lo at Japanese Junior Nationals
(at around 0:32)
Miyabi Oba did a great 2A+3Lo at Japanese Junior Nationals
(at around 0:32)
Last edited by oleada; 03-10-2011 at 09:47 PM.
I apologize if this has been answered one of these highly technical posts, but isn't there a limit on the number of combos that can be done in a LP? What is it? Are three combos really allowed? Leaving that aside, I think that three jump combos are pointless. They don't show a great deal of skill, since most elite skaters can do them, and the third jump is usually pretty weak. I would not assign any points to the third jump.
Maybe not in your experience but recent examples have demonstrated that more and more ladies have tried and will likely try combination jumps that include Triple Loop in the near future as demonstrated by skaters named already.However, I was stating that I can't remember ever seeing 2A+3Lo in competition from a man or a woman. I probably saw it in practice from Hollander when he was working up to the 3-3 (which I never saw from him in competition).
Sorry, that's not what I said. I do think it's realistic combination to include for elite ladies today but it's not necessarily easier than a triple-triple. Krislite was the one who suggested, in his/her example, that replacing triple-triple with 2A+3Lo makes the jumping layout easier. I don't entirely agree.wallylutz and Krislite seemed to be arguing that 2A+3Lo would be a relatively easy combination for a good female jumper to include. I'm asking, if it's easier than a triple-triple, how come I can't remember anyone ever doing it?
I am sorry, what makes you think 2A+3T equals even the most basic 3/3?
2A+3T = 3.3 + 4.1 = 7.4
3T+3T = 4.1 + 4.1 = 8.2
Differential = 0.8, almost equal to the difference in value between a Triple Loop and a Triple Lutz, and about 4 times more than the super mega GOE earning differential that the thread starter and other Yu Na fans have been going gaga about in the last few days.
I know a few posters have since reminded you of a couple of recent ladies who did the 2A+3Lo combos but I agree it's rather rare. So I have since re-arranged the jumping layout a little bit, to show a different perspective. It still doesn't change the fact you need the 3/3 combo in order to pack that many content into a FS, and the proposition of thread starter still does not hold.
*Denotes half Loop, explicitly allowed under the 2010-2011 season ISU rules for the purpose of jump combination construction
The base value drops to 45.2, but the only Loop jump combo is a fairly common Triple Loop with a Triple Flip, which many ladies have tried and landed, mostly the younger generation however. The Flip+Loop combo can be easily interchanged with a Triple Lutz+Triple Loop that even junior ladies are doing these days depending on personal preference. The Double Axel is now paired with a fairly standard Triple Toe Loop, nothing scandalous there. The Triple Lutz + Triple Salchow combo is inspired from men's skating but ladies having been doing 3 jump combo that uses the half Loop into Triple Salchow as the final jump for eons so nothing too demanding here either. The drop in base value stems from the loss of a Double Loop, now replaced by a Half Loop = Single Loop in order to avoid the repetition of a 2nd Triple Loop combo that many people and yourself find somewhat nasty to do and you are probably right. It is partially offset by the repetition of the Triple Flip in lieu of the Triple Loop, with slightly higher BV. Overall this layout may appear a little more reasonable and still cannot be replicated by eliminating the 3/3 combos.
Last edited by wallylutz; 03-11-2011 at 12:26 AM.
Talk about a thread regressing. I can't even begin to delve into the bad logic and poor points being made. What really took the cake was talking about Ladies doing 3Axel+3Loop combinations and 2Axel+2Loop+3Sal combinations, with the Loop landed on the inside edge of the opposing foot such that it actually is a combination...and then using that as an argument for why CoP is properly balanced right now?!?!
As far as I'm concerned, any Lady who could do
would not need to bother gaming the system for another point.
why not 3A+3T+3T? Or 3Lz +3T+3T in the first layout? Should impress the hell out of the judges. I would be impressed. But just which Lady do you suppose has a program with such jumps and combos?
I think Krislite’s original claim can be revised to “a skater can always replace at least one triple-triple with a 2A-triple in such a way as to maintain the same base value while picking up the potential to grab an extra tenth or two in GOEs.”
I agree with Wallylutz that the extra GOE thing is so small as to be swamped by other considerations. However, I do believe that the current scoring system does nothing much to encourage and reward skaters who essay difficult triple-triples.
IMHO Blade of Passion’s idea is the right one. Each combination separately should be evaluated as to difficulty and given a base value as a unit. In execution, this would not make the scoring system more complicated for technical specialists and judges (although fans would have to memorize a longer scale of values ), because the arithmetic is all done in the computer anyway.
Agreed. Simple combo bonus has been advocated but rejected by ISU.I agree with Wallylutz that the extra GOE thing is so small as to be swamped by other considerations. However, I do believe that the current scoring system does nothing much to encourage and reward skaters who essay difficult triple-triples.
It is too complicated, requiring a revamping of the entire scoring system plus change of requirements. Jumps still commend much higher points than other elements so the 3 proposed elective elements would be elected to be jumping passes.IMHO Blade of Passion’s idea is the right one. Each combination separately should be evaluated as to difficulty and given a base value as a unit. In execution, this would not make the scoring system more complicated for technical specialists and judges (although fans would have to memorize a longer scale of values ), because the arithmetic is all done in the computer anyway.
Last edited by SkateFiguring; 03-11-2011 at 10:16 AM.
^ I don't see how it would be complicated at all. The rules would all be the same as they are now, in terms of how many jumping passes you have, how many combinations you are allowed, the Zayak rules, etc.
The only thing that would be different is, if you did a triple Lutz-double toe the computer would rack up 6.9 points (or whatever value had been determined for that combo), instead of the value of a triple Lutz plus the value of a double toe. The tech panel would call, "3Lz+2T," the judges would enter, "+!" or whatever, then on you go to the next element.
In this case, the 3/3 combos were used to allow repetition of the two most difficult Triple jumps, the Lutz and Flip, hence the combo slots are tied to both of them and there is no Double Toe or Loop in this layout to perform the switch around. If I re-arrange this layout into something slightly more female friendly, it will look like this:
Taking out the Lutz+Salchow combo and switch it into the slight easier Lutz-Toe combo and make the three jump combo involving half Loop - arguably harder to flow - to the much easier 2A (vs. 3Lz). The two 3/3 are still tied to the Triple Lutz and Flip, it is not possible to replicate this layout by dropping either of the two 3/3, without losing a jumping pass. And for a lady who can do 3A, she can replace the 2Lz slot with a 3A, and the point differential would have been a big 6.4 points, more than the worth of an additional Triple Lutz, which is a very large gap, not to mention the 3 times higher GOE potential on that particular element. So the cost of dropping one jumping pass can be enormous depending on the lady in question. If a lady is capable of doing both 3Lz+3T and 3F+3Lo, it is quite likely this person would be capable of doing the Triple Axel as well or something more, like a Quad. We have seen Asada and Ando fitting this profile and some of the upcoming junior ladies may eventually do as well. Even replacing just one jumping slot that consists of the 2Lz into a Triple Axel would give that lady about 10-11+ points advantage in total base value over Yu-Na Kim's proposed jump layout, without considering the second half bonus points. So all things considered, it would likely create a major TES advantage close to probably 13~15 points - an overwhelming difference. Amazingly, Mao Asada never properly took advantage of this last season because of her jumping technique issue in several of her jumps hence she never really started off with a critical advantage in base value over Yu-Na Kim, hence her quite frustrating defeat in Vancouver despite landing three Triple Axels.
I have stated many times that I am in favor of giving the jump combo a 10% bonus but the current system has quite many built-in incentives that encourage ladies to do difficult triples-triples and the fact is many junior ladies are doing them for a reason. There is no doubt in my mind the trend for ladies skating is towards an emphasis on difficult combination jumps, more so than venturing into Triple Axels or Quads like men do. Consider this layout that I prepared for Mao Asada even though she is not quite ready to do it yet, maybe next year:I agree with Wallylutz that the extra GOE thing is so small as to be swamped by other considerations. However, I do believe that the current scoring system does nothing much to encourage and reward skaters who essay difficult triple-triples.
Using only two jumping passes, she can complete 4 Triples quickly - jumps that are actually her strength and combos that she used to do quite extensively, giving her 5 jumping passes to focus on jumps that give her trouble like the Lutz, Salchow and Axel as stand alone elements. This is a case where the value of doing 3/3 is really obvious, aside from the fact 3F+3Lo worth quite a bit but because in this case the 3F and 3Lo are the two repeated jumps in the program. The room they freed up not only allows her to squeeze in an incredible amount of content into the program, but perhaps more importantly for her, more than anything else, is to allow her to attack her weaker jumps as stand alone elements. All of this would have been possible only if the two 3/3 are performed and in this particular pairing unless you want to resort to some funny combinations like 2A+3Lo. Because 3F+3Lo is something she can do 3 times throughout the competition - exactly the same way, once in SP and twice in FS, it also makes gaining consistency on it a little easier.
I think such proposal wouldn't fly. You see, it's not a matter of creating a longer list of base values for jump combos. That wouldn't be too hard to do. But the Technical Panel also needs to call jumps in a combination that contain errors or unplanned developments. Consider this example: 2Lz<+1T+2Lo<< There are so many possible combination of errors that it's not possible to create a set of predetermined values that also predict what errors skaters are going to make. In a jump combo that contains invalid jumps or pops or +sequence penalty and the list goes on and on and on.... It's a nightmare.IMHO Blade of Passion’s idea is the right one. Each combination separately should be evaluated as to difficulty and given a base value as a unit. In execution, this would not make the scoring system more complicated for technical specialists and judges (although fans would have to memorize a longer scale of values ), because the arithmetic is all done in the computer anyway.
Last edited by wallylutz; 03-11-2011 at 12:26 PM. Reason: typos
I didn't get a chance to read the entire thread, so apologies if I'm repeating what someone said already.
What about this proposal of bonus points for triple-triple combos:
Triple Axel-Triple Loop/Toe Combo = 4 points bonus
Triple Lutz- Triple Loop/Toe Combo = 3 points bonus
Triple Flip - Triple Loop/Toe Combo = 3 points bonus
Triple Loop - Triple Loop/Toe Combo = 2 points bonus
Triple Salchow - Triple Loop/Toe Combo = 1 point bonus
Triple Toe - Triple Loop/Toe Combo = 1 point bonus
Double Axel - Triple Loop/Toe Combo = No Bonus
Those bonuses seem too high -- e.g., the value of the 3T on the end of a 3A would essentially be doubled.
Maybe something smaller, like half the values of what you propose.
But then we have to get into the details of when the bonuses would or would not apply, and whether they would ever apply partially.
What if either or both of the jumps in the combination gets an underrotation call <?
What if either or both gets a downgrade call <<?
What if there are minor errors on one jump (-1 GOE)?
What if there are moderate errors on one jump or minor errors on both (-2 GOE)?
What if there are multiple errors leading to -3 GOE, but no fall?
What if the second jump is completely rotated but ends in a fall?
Is there a firm cutoff between significant bonus and no bonus? That would make some strict tech panel calls even more significant than they currently are.
But Mao could do even better (same base value and possibly a tenth or two of "potential " GOE?) by replacing one of the 3 flip combos with 2A+3Lo and replacing the solo 2A with solo 3F, which I believe was Krislite's original point. So I don't see the CoP incentive for doing two triple-triple combos instead of an Axel-triple combo in this set-up.I have stated many times that I am in favor of giving the jump combo a 10% bonus but the current system has quite many built-in incentives that encourage ladies to do difficult triples-triples...
Last edited by Mathman; 03-11-2011 at 05:58 PM.