JGP Volvo Cup | Page 4 | Golden Skate

JGP Volvo Cup

vintagefigureskater

On the Ice
Joined
Mar 4, 2004
As for the pairs, I was really impressed with Purdy/Marinaro. I don't remember them being so good. Their elements were clean, and some of them quite unique and interesting. They went for a higher level of technical difficulty than they have in the past, and their unison was pretty spot on. I even liked their programs. I did feel like some of the movement was a bit mechanical, but that is to be expected this early in the year. I think this bodes really well for the rest of their season.

ITA! They look nothing like the team who struggled so much at Canadians this year. Amazing what a difference a few months can make when you’re dealing with teenagers. And I agree also about the creativity. Alison Purkiss does some very nice work as we saw with Hole & Johnson the last two seasons. Good to see P&M attempting a triple twist, and putting down a decent triple-toe double-toe combo too. Excellent job! :)

I also think that a 12th place finish shouldn't automatically qualify Nam for a second assignment. This is part of what frustrates me with SC's selection strategy. Despite the fact Nam didn't skate well, there are (were) enough spots and too few Canadian men who met the selection criteria, that he could easily have his second assignment anyways. He could have a chance to redeem himself, and get over the nerves. But since SC has been declining spots, I agree completely that other skaters should be considered for events before Nam automatically get a second.

I don’t think it’s nerves – he’s (thankfully!) grown. His current ISU bio lists him as 5’. He was listed as 4’9" at Canadians. 3 inches taller, and all of it in the legs from the looks of him. Things may get worse before they get better, but that’s how it goes with the really young ones.
 

nadster

Final Flight
Joined
Feb 1, 2004
While I agree with the general thrust of what you're saying (that as Canadian Jr. Champion, he earned his two spots, regardless of his performance here), I wish I was as convinced as you about his potential.

I think that Nam has tremendous potential. The problem for me is that he has Joanne Mcleod as coach. Given her history , I don't think Nam will reach his full potential under Joanne. I don't think Joanne will fix some of the technical issues he has right now.
 

ImaginaryPogue

Record Breaker
Joined
Jun 3, 2009
I agree, nadster. I've heard complaints about this toe-axel for a couple years, so it's unsurprising to see him get dinged for it now. Don't know why McLeod doesn't fix these flaws.
 

Violet Bliss

Record Breaker
Joined
Nov 19, 2010
While I agree with the general thrust of what you're saying (that as Canadian Jr. Champion, he earned his two spots, regardless of his performance here), I wish I was as convinced as you about his potential.

Well, few doubt his potential. It's the realization of such potential that remains to be seen.

I have my reasons to have strong feelings about Little Nam's future success. I saved this article about him not because of the hype but mostly because I was extremely impressed with:


"My dad taught me to control my mind," said Nguyen. "Success is to focus really hard and everything you want will turn out as a success.

"It always comes from the mind. You think it and it will control everything. The body will always follow."

Few ever learn such wisdom and secret of success in their lives and Nam is very lucky he has learned and understood that from his father. The evidence and results are already out there.

He is so very young and the future is hard to predict. I look at the success factors he needs and I see he has the most important ones which are mostly innate and wouldn't be taken from him, e.g, talents, ambition, discipline, hard work, a clear head and clear goals, love of skating and performance, as well as very wise and supportive parent(s). The concerns most people seem to have are extrinsic and can be changed, e.g. coaches, techniques, training methods and location, federation and community support, etc. He and his parents are smart people with clear goals and focus so they will do what it takes. Exactly how great a success Nam will achieve I can't tell, as there are other young competitors out there with their own talents and ambitions. But I know he will go far, a little disapointing (to the fans) competition notwithstanding, as it only serves as a valuable lesson.

I always look at the whole picture and especially the mind, with whatever glimpse I can have, to assess the skaters instead of reacting to a current event or situation. That was why I had full confidence in Patrick Chan when he was the favorite laughing stock.
 
Last edited:

Violet Bliss

Record Breaker
Joined
Nov 19, 2010
I don’t think it’s nerves – he’s (thankfully!) grown. His current ISU bio lists him as 5’. He was listed as 4’9" at Canadians. 3 inches taller, and all of it in the legs from the looks of him. Things may get worse before they get better, but that’s how it goes with the really young ones.

I am glad he didn't show up in Steve Urkel's pants!
 

ImaginaryPogue

Record Breaker
Joined
Jun 3, 2009
SF - you're right - I did mean realization of potential. Nam seems like a natural performer (I loved David Pelletier's reaction to his Olympic exhibition).
 

shine

Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 27, 2003
Top 5 Men's FS

1 Ryuju HINO JPN 124.61 68.91 55.70 5.82 5.39 5.79 5.39 5.46 0.00
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lk9lIbnWanE

2 He ZHANG CHN 123.12 58.88 64.24 6.54 6.18 6.50 6.36 6.54 0.00
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RojXBlzQKHI

3 Timothy DOLENSKY USA 120.25 60.33 59.92 6.07 5.89 6.07 5.93 6.00 0.00
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=riaNgg_B7z4

4 Jiaxing LIU CHN 115.52 58.18 57.34 6.04 5.46 5.71 5.64 5.82 0.00
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkQyKw3-WuM

5 June-Hyoung LEE KOR 113.69 54.99 60.70 6.18 5.96 5.96 6.11 6.14 2.00
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfdYT6o_fiQ
 

Blink

Rinkside
Joined
Jun 13, 2011
I really question whether Poulin/Servant should get a second assignment. (They are currently assigned to the JGP in Romania). Sixth place does not justify an automatic second assignment, IMO. There are simply too many other Canadian ice dance teams that are at least as good as they are, some of whom do not yet have assignments.

The three subs for Romania are Paradis/Ouellette, Fournier-Beaudry/Breton and Bent/MacKeen. I think Skate Canada should send Paradis/Ouellette to Romania instead of Poulin/Servant. They were four points ahead of Poulin/Servant in the free dance at the Quebec Summer competition. (Poulin/Servant did not skate the short dance there, so we can't compare short dance scores). Paradis/Ouellette are currently 4th in my list of competition scores (after the Hawegawas, Orford/Williams and Edwards/Pang), and are the only team in the top five who do not yet have a firm assignment. Poulin/Servant are 11th in my list of this season's competition scores.

Actually, I wouldn't even send Nam Nguyen to his second assignment. I wouldn't rule out a second assignment for him, because there isn't the depth in Canadian men's skating that there is in ice dance. Still, a 12th-place finish is hardly a stellar outing, and I think some others deserve the change to prove themselves before he gets a second chance. His second assignment is currently the JGP in Romania. I would send Christophe Belly-Lemelin or Garrett Gosselin instead (both alternates, and neither of whom have any firm assignments), and put Nam in to either Italy or Estonia.

Actually, Paradis and Oulette have the 9th highest score if you use an average rather than marks from only one event (the last one). Using an average is a much better and more balanced approach. The top 9 teams based on average marks for the summer competitions are 1. Nicole Orford/Thomas Williams (124.95), 2. Victoria Hasegawa / Connor Hasegawa (116.46), 3. Noa Bruser /Tim Lum (113.85), 4. Madeline Edwards / Zhao Kai Pang (109.31), 5. Caelen Dalmer / Shane Firus (109.32), 6. Mackenzie Bent / Garrett MacKeen (109.29), 7. Laurence Fournier-Beaudry / Yoan Breton (109.27), 8. Andreanne Poulin / Marc-Andre Servant (who on average are scoring what they have been scoring all summer - average was 109.24 and today their score was 108.03 with the Latvia – so within range), 9. Elisabeth Paradis / Francois-Xavier Ouellette (103.79). 4 through 8 are basically tied. Lots of potential. Difficult choices for Skate Canada.
 

geoskate

On the Ice
Joined
Jan 22, 2005
Actually, Paradis and Oulette have the 9th highest score if you use an average rather than marks from only one event (the last one). Using an average is a much better and more balanced approach.

Fine, use an average (although for most teams it's an average of two events, which is not very significant statistically). In that case send Fournier-Beaudry/Breton, also an alternate team for the JGP in Romania, or Bent/MacKeen, also an alternate team for the JGP in Romania. I don't care.

This isn't a slam against Poulin/Servant, who are a fine team. However, my point still stands. There are simply too many good junior teams in Canada to be giving a second assignment to one team before other deserving teams have received any. The only exception this year, IMO, should be if a team medals and has the potential of making the JGP Final.

I think that Skate Canada still has a bad conscience over their neglect of Poulin/Servant last season (they finished 4th at their one and only JGP event, and should have had a second event but couldn't because they weren't on the appropriate alternate list) and are overcompensating this season.
 
Last edited:

geoskate

On the Ice
Joined
Jan 22, 2005
Using an average is a much better and more balanced approach.

Perhaps it is, but it's not the approach that Skate Canada uses, so it's actually irrelevant although interesting. They have a 'benchmark' that skaters have to reach. They apparently only have to reach it once. They don't have to have their 'average' surpass the benchmark. If that was the case, the only teams on the JGP this season would be Orford/Williams (average of one event, but we'll continue with your analysis) and the Hasegawas.
 

Blink

Rinkside
Joined
Jun 13, 2011
Perhaps it is, but it's not the approach that Skate Canada uses, so it's actually irrelevant although interesting. They have a 'benchmark' that skaters have to reach. They apparently only have to reach it once. They don't have to have their 'average' surpass the benchmark. If that was the case, the only teams on the JGP this season would be Orford/Williams (average of one event, but we'll continue with your analysis) and the Hasegawas.

Yes and yes the sample size is small but so is 5 or 7 or 9 scores for each element or PC. An average is good for looking at rankings of teams relative to one another since it takes out bad or over rewarded performances even with only two data points. Regardliess, seven teams made the performance number of 115. Further only one team topped 120 at Latvia so all seven teams would have been in the mix at the top, assuming that the scores are directly comparable. Some would agrue this is not the case since there are different panels and in theory harder judging, internationally. However, the average was spot on for Poulin/Servant given their 108 Latvia score. Canada has an embarrassment of riches during a year when there are not enough spots to give them all experience. With the exception of Orford/Williams there is not likely to be anyone in the final, maybe Bruser/Lum who are really quite fantastic and are flying under the radar or the Hasegawa's. Last years' Novice have proven this summer so far that they hungry. Last years' team need to watch out.
 

geoskate

On the Ice
Joined
Jan 22, 2005
Yes and yes the sample size is small but so is 5 or 7 or 9 scores for each element or PC. An average is good for looking at rankings of teams relative to one another since it takes out bad or over rewarded performances even with only two data points.

I've had more time to think about this, and I actually think an average is not a good idea, for two reasons:

1. You minimize the difference between a sample size of two and a sample size of 5 or 7 or 9, but there is in fact an enormous difference in standard deviation for a sample size of two and a sample size of seven, for example. By the time the average of team's scores would have enough sample points to be statistically significant, the season would be over.

2. Secondly, an average is only significant if it is sampling a data population that is not changing with time - but in fact ice dance scores do change with time, at least the technical elements scores. The skaters and coaches learn from their earlier competitions which elements are given low levels, and fix the problems if possible. As a result, we see the scores of most teams improve as the season continues. This happens every season, to almost every team. The score that is most representative of what a team can do will be their latest score, barring major problems in a competition.

So I say, stay with Skate Canada's approach of the best result.
 

Blink

Rinkside
Joined
Jun 13, 2011
I've had more time to think about this, and I actually think an average is not a good idea, for two reasons:

1. You minimize the difference between a sample size of two and a sample size of 5 or 7 or 9, but there is in fact an enormous difference in standard deviation for a sample size of two and a sample size of seven, for example. By the time the average of team's scores would have enough sample points to be statistically significant, the season would be over.

2. Secondly, an average is only significant if it is sampling a data population that is not changing with time - but in fact ice dance scores do change with time, at least the technical elements scores. The skaters and coaches learn from their earlier competitions which elements are given low levels, and fix the problems if possible. As a result, we see the scores of most teams improve as the season continues. This happens every season, to almost every team. The score that is most representative of what a team can do will be their latest score, barring major problems in a competition.

So I say, stay with Skate Canada's approach of the best result.


Ok how about this. The current scores are the sum 44 data points for each team (mostly), over 2 SD and 2 FDs with 10 SD elements, 10 SD PCs, 14 FD elements and 10 PCs. So, in fact the standard deviations will be already be normalized because we are taking means of means for which the variation has already been removed. It is incorrect to assume that the last performance is an indicator of future performance. If we did that then every time someone had a bad day for whatever reason we would peg them at the level of competence and use that as a predictor of their future potential. We don’t so how can the opposite be true? Figure skating is an art and sport and skaters are human. They don’t always do what you hope they might and sometimes they knock your socks off. We can agree to disagree about the math and there is nothing we can do about the criteria. It certainly is interesting to debate it, though. Anything can happen.
 

Binthere

On the Ice
Joined
Jul 28, 2008
I thought it was wonderful to see the ISU finally "get their act together" a bit and actually start posting performances through their own YouTube page. Welcome to the 21st Century :laugh:

That said, it was a shame to see the stands essentially empty for most of the performances. :disapp:
 

NorthernDancers

On the Ice
Joined
Jan 15, 2010
I'm not sure what to believe this early in the season. i think Poulin/Servant have the disadvantage of being in the first GP, and Orford/Williams have arguably the easiest event of the year. They should medal, or that would be a bit embarrassing. That's a gift from Skate Canada. i saw Bent/McKeen in Thornhill, and they have matured a bit and look much stronger this year. Remains to be seen how their event matches competitively. Sometimes it isn't always about the team themselves, but the event and with whom they are matched. i do think Canada has a rich field, and filling up and spreading around the assignments is a good idea, with preference to those teams who will age to Senior after this season, when most things are equal. Time will tell how some of the Novice teams that moved up will do internationally. I certainly don't buy the high scores at BC Summerskate. While i have to allow for improvement, some of the scores seemed a little bumped. Looking at the scores across the Summer competitions, for example, at Senior, Van As/Shindle have the 3rd highest SD score and 2nd highest FD score, and 2nd highest combined score only because of BC. In competition with other teams at the same time, they did not score nearly as high. Did this happen at Junior too? Perhaps to ensure teams reach the JGP threshold? I think time will tell how these teams do. Skate Canada does not always back the right teams. I just hope they give as many of the teams as possible a chance. Especially when it's a little early to tell which ones will rise this year.
 
Joined
Dec 8, 2010
I think that it is a tragedy that Paradis/Ouellette have not been given an assignment as yet. They were 5th if junior at nationals last season, they have been getting good results this year, beating Poulin/Servant at Quebec. I also think that the Quebec teams that went to Lake Placid instead of Minto competition did themselves a dis-service as skate canada has seemed to choose most of their assignments from Minto. If the Quebec teams had gone to Minto and were above the B.C teams and Bent/Mckeen, they would be getting the assignments now. The exception of course of the Hasagawas and Poulin/Servant who were pre-chosen because of their placements at nationals last year. I also think that Orford/Williams have a really good chance of making the junior grand prix final. They should likely win JGP Australia and will medal at their second assignment. I agree with NorthernDancers is saying Orford/Williams have the easiest event of the year in Australia but they medalled on the circuit last year and are a very good team (fast, strong, consistent) so I think they will do well anywhere they go.
 

NorthernDancers

On the Ice
Joined
Jan 15, 2010
Just had a look at the other assignments/events. The good news is that some of the Quebec teams are substitutes for other events, and hopefully they will be given opportunities. Interesting pespective on Minto vs Lake Placid. That would be very unfortunate if its true. It's so hard to base future success on the first couple of competitions. Some teams just need a little more time to solidify new programs, and it's just too early to know which ones will stand on the podium by January. And I'm not convinced all the new kids are that much better than some of the older teams from Junior last year. Why not give them a chance to develop at home at Junior, and give the reprised teams, especially those that will be aging out, the benefit of internatonal monitoring. Unless the new teams are that much better, which I don't think they are.

I agree that Orford/Williams will make it to the JGPF. They should medal at both their assignments. I agree they are fast and show confidence. I'm looking forward to see if they develop finesse and quality skating details, which I think will be necessary for them to achieve success beyond Junior, in the long-term. At Senior, they will have to compete with teams like Virtue/Moir and the Shibs who both have achieved success because of their outstanding details, unison, etc., and Weaver/Poje and others who have made big improvement in these areas. To me, success is not about speed while putting on a show. That's a show program, not a competition program. In fact, speed can hide/excuse the lack of skating skills, which is what I think happened last year at Junior, and perhaps even Novice. I'd much rather watch a little slower team with fantastic edges, quality extensions, unison, attention to details, great lines, posture, and so on. Personally, I think Hasegawa's deserved to win the SD at Nationals in Junior last year, and maybe even the title. I was so impressed with their overall skating ability, and the improvement year over year. Their SD was just brilliant in concept, performance, skating, - the whole package. And perhaps Bent/McKeen were caught a bit in this speed vs quality debate as well.
 

colleen o'neill

Medalist
Joined
Nov 3, 2006
My question is this..have we left slots unfilled for Ice Dance as we have for the other disciplines ?

I must say I'm with geoskate, here. I question the why of 2 assignments for P/S , considering the depth of the field...but not for O/W, our Jr.Champions , who had good results last yr. internationally, after such a brief time together. Judging by their SD at BCSS they've kept up their progress and they definitely have an indefineable something that sets them apart . Surely if you were giving 2 assignments to anyone right off the bat , it should be them. And why would you not try to get them the most advantageous assignments possible ? You know , like other countries do.

I haven't seen the Hasegawa's SD, but I think their FD looks very competitive ( I think Marie - France and Patrice are doing a fine job with them..and in general ) and after seeing The Volvo Cup, I sort of wish , if anyone else was given a chance at 2 slots , it was the Hasegawas. But I can't begrudge Bruser/Lum , or Edwards/Pang their assignments since just at BCSS, you could see they've really come on from last year. If we've left slots unfilled though ,when we have skaters who would meet the requirements , that's a whole other matter.

I like Poulin / Servant, but apart from any mistakes they might have made , I feel 'The Dock of the Bay " doesn't make a very successful Cha-cha and their costumes didn't help to make the connection. The overall effect was puzzling. I think they shot themselves in the foot a bit , there. Oh , I know couples try to be "different" to stand out. I just think they went a step too far.

ETA; Meant to say; O/W will age out this year and it will be interesting to see how they do at Nationals. While I'm sure they're not coming up expecting to challenge any of V/M , W/P or even P/I at this stage of their careers , I'm sure they're looking forward to jockeying for position with the rest.
 
Last edited:

feraina

Record Breaker
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
2 He ZHANG CHN 123.12 58.88 64.24 6.54 6.18 6.50 6.36 6.54 0.00
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RojXBlzQKHI
4 Jiaxing LIU CHN 115.52 58.18 57.34 6.04 5.46 5.71 5.64 5.82 0.00
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkQyKw3-WuM

I loved both of their programs! If only He Zhang had tacked on a 2R at the end of 2A-2T-R jump, he would've won!
Performance wise, I actually liked Jiaxing Liu best. He had the best footwork sequence, he was totally into his program, and he sold his program as well as he could. I'm disappointed that the judges did not see fit to give him higher PCS, especially in comparison to Tim Dolensky -- who did very well for himself, no doubt, but IMHO not better than Jiaxing performance/presentation/skating skills wise.
 

nadster

Final Flight
Joined
Feb 1, 2004
My question is this..have we left slots unfilled for Ice Dance as we have for the other disciplines ?


ETA; Meant to say; O/W will age out this year and it will be interesting to see how they do at Nationals. While I'm sure they're not coming up expecting to challenge any of V/M , W/P or even P/I at this stage of their careers , I'm sure they're looking forward to jockeying for position with the rest.

We have not left any spots unfilled in ice dance this season ( unlike men and pairs ). We were guaranteed 7 slots ( 1 per JGP ) based on our 5th highest country finish at JW.

In those assignments where we sent 2 teams it is because Slovakia ( which finished ahead of us at JW ) is not using all of its slots. Slovakia is the 4th highest ranking country and Canada has first right to any slots they don't use.

Hopefully O/W will medal and/or at least finish in the top 3 countries at JW this year guaranteeing maximum JGP slots next season ( only good if SC actually uses them ). I don't expect much at nationals ( the senior SD uses a different CD altogether ) but hopefully they do enough to at least get an automatic Nebelhorn place next season which could lead to a Skate Canada spot.

As far as assigning to "advantageous" assignments, it is hard to predict beforehand which events will have the tougher fields given you don't know until the last minute whether the "official entry" will go or it will be one of the substitutes ( which in many cases is stronger than the official entry when the lists are first published ). The official entry is just a placeholder for the official entry or one of the named substitutes ( no limit on how many substitutes can be named ).

The one thing SC does wrong though is failing to list everybody as substitutes for every event. This is what other countries do ( I have seen the Americans list 7 substitutes at times for some events). The more substitutes you list , the more flexibility you have.
 
Top