Tuktamysheva: The Views of Frank Carroll

Mathman said:

Michelle Kwan, when the CoP came in, had to truncate her signature change of edge spiral. Why? She wasn't earning any extra points for those six seconds.

Click to expand...

Not sure what you mean.

In the year Kwan competed under IJS, there was no feature for holding a single edge for 6 seconds. Ca. 2007-2010 there was -- if she'd been competing then, she would have gotten credit for holding the RFI edge that long before changing edge.

In order for the edge change to count, the whole time that it was a feature toward a higher level spiral sequence, the edge after the change of edge had to be held for at least 3 seconds. Kwan typically had not been holding the second edge of her signature spiral for long enough under 6.0, so she had to hold it out longer to get credit. Also, if the rules required a change of foot (always the case in the short program while Kwan was competing) and/or both backward and forward edges (required for higher levels), under IJS she also needed to hold those backward/left foot spirals for 3 seconds, which she had almost never done under 6.0.

Of course she wasn't alone in having one sustained edge in the spiral sequence -- gorgeous RFI in her case -- and briefer positions on the other edges. IJS wouldn't give credit for positions held less than 3 seconds, so everyone had to start holding those other positions longer, including Kwan. No one had to truncate anything except perhaps to save time. But if held with quality it would add to the GOE and be worth doing for that reason. And a year or two after Kwan stopped competing, holding 6 seconds was explicitly rewarded (and still is, in the unleveled choreo spiral sequence).

The one time Kwan competed under IJS she earned the highest score for the short program spiral sequence, so it was hardly designed to penalize her strengths there.

colleen o'neill said:

bsfan..I still think you're over reacting, a bit. Frank may have some doubts as to how PCS is being awarded under COP , and we know he has lots of company in this. Liza just happened to provide the example. I don't think it was politicking solely in regard to Liza. He's outspoken. So have many coaches been in the past. Mishin..Tarasova..
I don't see why one coach's comments should influence the judges more than another's

We know it's generally true that many skaters can have great jumps when they're small, but could lose them ( or struggle with them ) when they grow..so there's nothing outrageous in pointing that out.

People on the boards have pointed out that Liza comes from a family of small people ,so she may not grow too much more..but they're obviously aware of the general danger.

And in a similar vein, Tracy Wilson opined that Liza may not have a problem with her jumps as she matures ..because her jump technique is so pure.

Click to expand...

I don't think it is his outspoken. Being older should get him more experience on what to say and what not to say. Being an experienced coach, What was the purpose for him to trash talk a new comer's technique while many pointed out Liza's jumps are backed by good technique? and then talked about how much Liza should get for PCS? to prevent her from getting better scores?

Mathman said:

Alexie Yagudin would not be able to do his eye-popping footwork sequence in his Winter short program. It's only a level 1.

Click to expand...

In 2001 when Yagudin unveiled that program, many people posted that they couldn't see what the big fuss was about that footwork because there was so little to it technically. He spent a lot of time on his toepicks and very little on his blades. There were few turns or edges in the sequence, and it was all pretty basic. Or did you miss that discussion?

Winter is my all-time favourite SP and I love that footwork sequence, not because it's eye-popping, but because fit the program so well.

Dragonlady said:

In 2001 when Yagudin unveiled that program, many people posted that they couldn't see what the big fuss was about that footwork because there was so little to it technically. He spent a lot of time on his toepicks and very little on his blades. There were few turns or edges in the sequence, and it was all pretty basic. Or did you miss that discussion?

Click to expand...

I guess I did miss that discussion. I thought everybody loved it and nobody cared back then about about counting how many turms and edges he used.

Winter is my all-time favourite SP and I love that footwork sequence,...

Click to expand...

That is the discussion that I remember.

...

not because it's eye-popping, but because fit the program so well.

Click to expand...

It did indeed. Under CoP scoring a skater cannot do a step sequence that fits the program so well.

That is ny beef with the CoP. The assumption is that harder is better. In the CoP point of view, a well-prepared and well-executed quad is not as good as a well-prepared and well-executed quad that has some irrelevant and distracting steps and turns leading up to it. A well-executed Lutz ia not as good as a well-executed Lutz with your hand in the air.

In baseball you could make it harder by tying one hand behind your back. That would not get you any more points.

Yagudin's program was perfect. Why would anyone want to junk it up with CoP-isms?

I was watching a tape the other day pre-COP... the commentators (Dick Button and Co.) were griping about telegraphed jumps... I seem to recall a lot of people whining about that here, too... now they are whining that we don't have telegraphing. weird.

Mathman said:

It did indeed. Under CoP scoring a skater cannot do a step sequence that fits the program so well.

Click to expand...

Oh, I think we've seen a few. But it's always going to be rare.

That is ny beef with the CoP. The assumption is that harder is better.

Click to expand...

Harder is worth more in base value. Whether it deserves to score better overall will depend on other factors, including how well it's executed.

And how well it fits the program as a whole should be reflected in the choreography score. How well the judges are using that tool is a matter for debate.

A well-prepared and well-executed quad is not as good as a well-prepared and well-executed quad that has some irrelevant steps and turns leading up to it

Click to expand...

Not as good in what sense?

If one is notably more well executed than the other, then that's the one that will earn higher GOE.

If the execution is comparable, then the well-prepared and well-executed quad that fits the music and choreography can earn the "element matched to musical structure" bullet point toward positive GOE, and it should also be a tickmark in favor of a higher Choreography score.

The well-executed quad with irrelevant steps and turns leading up to it that do not fit the musical structure would not earn that bullet point but might earn the "clear recognizable steps/free skating movements immediately preceding element" bullet point and also be a tickmark in favor of a higher Transitions score.

So it works out about the same. Both quads should be looking at +1 or +2 GOE depending how well prepared and well executed they were. I don't see that the system favors one approach over the other.

Of course if the preceding steps are not irrelevant and actually do fit the musical structure, then the element could earn both bullet points and if it also earns bullet points for good execution then it should earn at least +2.

gkelly said:

Not sure what you mean.

In the year Kwan competed under IJS, there was no feature for holding a single edge for 6 seconds. Ca. 2007-2010 there was -- if she'd been competing then, she would have gotten credit for holding the RFI edge that long before changing edge.

In order for the edge change to count, the whole time that it was a feature toward a higher level spiral sequence, the edge after the change of edge had to be held for at least 3 seconds. Kwan typically had not been holding the second edge of her signature spiral for long enough under 6.0, so she had to hold it out longer to get credit. Also, if the rules required a change of foot (always the case in the short program while Kwan was competing) and/or both backward and forward edges (required for higher levels), under IJS she also needed to hold those backward/left foot spirals for 3 seconds, which she had almost never done under 6.0.

Of course she wasn't alone in having one sustained edge in the spiral sequence -- gorgeous RFI in her case -- and briefer positions on the other edges. IJS wouldn't give credit for positions held less than 3 seconds, so everyone had to start holding those other positions longer, including Kwan. No one had to truncate anything except perhaps to save time. But if held with quality it would add to the GOE and be worth doing for that reason. And a year or two after Kwan stopped competing, holding 6 seconds was explicitly rewarded (and still is, in the unleveled choreo spiral sequence).

The one time Kwan competed under IJS she earned the highest score for the short program spiral sequence, so it was hardly designed to penalize her strengths there.

Click to expand...

Maybe I am remembering through rose-colored glasses. What I remember was that when Michelle skated she hit a gorgeous spiral, held it as long as the swell of the music supported it, and left the audience marvelling in delight. Whether she held one edge 6 seconds and another edge 3 seconds did not seem to be an important consideration.

As she modified her programs to make them more CoP friendly, even before 2005, the spiral element was less dramatically displayed.

gkelly said:

Not as good in what sense?

Click to expand...

Overall, I think the CoP regards a plain quad as not as point-worthy as a fancy quad, everything else being equal.

Quads do not fit musical structure. I have never seen a waltzy quad or a tangoesque quad, or a quad in the style of Romeo and Juliette. Doing a little jig before you do a quad -- well, OK. But personally, I would deduct points from anyone who did a little jig before his quad. Stop actiing silly and show me your quad, man. Then show me your triple Axel.

(I make an exception for Matt Savoie's hydorblade into a triple Lutz. You got me there -- now that's cool!)

Mathman said:

As she modified her programs to make them more CoP friendly, even before 2005, the spiral element was less dramatically displayed.

Click to expand...

Well, IJS didn't exist before fall 2003, so she couldn't have modified her programs to be more friendly more than one season earlier.

2004 Worlds SP RFI held for 6 seconds, not held after change of edge at all, LBO barely held for 1 second (as usual for Kwan and many other skaters, just a token nod to the SP requirement to perform spirals on both feet), RBO for 2 seconds.

I don't know why she didn't hold the change of edge here, but it wouldn't have been because of IJS. Edge change was a feature. Four spiral positions were still allowed.

2003 Worlds SP No one except maybe the small committee developing the new judging system project knew what the spiral rules would be yet, so no one was designing their programs to be friendly to those unknown rules.

Same general sequence except RFI about 4 seconds and RFO after the change about 3 seconds (so it should have been a feature under IJS), but again the left foot position is barely held, which would make the whole sequence level 1. Obviously she wasn't thinking about levels before anyone knew what the levels would be, though.

2002 Olympics SP Solid change of edge; different, perfunctory left-foot positions

2005 Worlds Solid change of edge, difficult and sustained LBI position with OK execution, more difficult new RBO position a little shaky

So the new rules encouraged her to try harder positions and she didn't execute them as well, but she did show us for perhaps the first time that she could hold a spiral edge on her left foot

2005 Marshalls This was obviously designed to meet the IJS rules of the time. RFI before change of edge held for about 5 seconds, which is longer than in some of the other examples here. If the 6-second feature had existed at the time, she probably would have planned to take advantage of it, but we can't know for sure.

Of course, in the case of this particular skater we can't know how much of any execution problems are attributable to adjusting to new rules and how much to injury.

^ re: Michelle Kwan's spiral sequence. Perhaps Dick Button is responsible for the theory that Michelle Kwan shortened her spiral sequence in order to adapt to the new rules. Because that's exactly what he said during her 2004 Nationals LP:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fzcUIuD4xfo&feature=player_detailpage#t=193s

If you watch Elisaveta from last year JGPF or RN 2011, does she look better now? I think her feet and edges look stronger and her jumps more secure on the landings. Anyway it's been 2 years i ve seen her live and I think she looks more powerful now. I dont see how people say she is slow ( maybe I read this elsewhere?)

jaylee said:

^ re: Michelle Kwan's spiral sequence. Perhaps Dick Button is responsible for the theory that Michelle Kwan shortened her spiral sequence in order to adapt to the new rules. Because that's exactly what he said during her 2004 Nationals LP:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fzcUIuD4xfo&feature=player_detailpage#t=193s

Click to expand...

Thanks for finding that.

I have no idea what he meant by that. I assume he knew what he meant at the time, but it doesn't make sense in terms of what the new rules actually were or how they affected Kwan who wasn't skating under those rules that year. Maybe he knew something about how her training was going and what she was working on that he didn't bother sharing with the viewers in detail.

The earlier change of edge seems to go well with this particular moment in the music, so that might be the reason for the shorter inside edge.

Or maybe the new rules had inspired her to work on being able to consistently hold the outside edge after the change for long enough to count, which she'd never had to worry about before.

But as a long program spiral sequence without the change of foot and change of direction, needed only to achieve higher levels in IJS but not used here, I don't think that spiral sequence as performed there was designed with IJS rules in mind. If she knew when choreographing the program that she wasn't going to skate the GP that year, and that the new rules applied only to the GP (and Nebelhorn) that year, why would she bother.

Mathman said:

I guess I did miss that discussion. I thought everybody loved it and nobody cared back then about about counting how many turms and edges he used.

Click to expand...

I remember a LOT of people grousing about the level of difficulty of that footwork. Why was everyone making such a big fuss about such a simple footwork sequence? He spent half of it dancing on his toepicks. That's not real footwork. Where are the brackets and rockers as contained in real footwork? For me, what made that footwork special was not it's difficulty, but that it was a highlight of the program. Skaters were not in the habit of drawing attention to footwork because judges didn't pay much attention to it. It was quietly tacked on at the end, the least exciting of the required elements.

Yags had spent the spring of 2001 touring with CSOI where Kurt Browning was bringing down the house with "Nyah", which was nothing but footwork. I see a direct link between Nyah and Winter which became the first SP to highlight footwork in this way:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0Izl1CA1uA

Mathman said:

It did indeed. Under CoP scoring a skater cannot do a step sequence that fits the program so well..

Click to expand...

Yes the could. They could use the ChSt1 which was created for choreographic highlight step sequences. All skaters have a level 1 regardless of the degree of difficulty.

Mathman said:

That is ny beef with the CoP. The assumption is that harder is better. In the CoP point of view, a well-prepared and well-executed quad is not as good as a well-prepared and well-executed quad that has some irrelevant and distracting steps and turns leading up to it. A well-executed Lutz ia not as good as a well-executed Lutz with your hand in the air.

Click to expand...

And the reverse of that argument is that under 6.0 everything but the jumps had become irrelevant. Under 6.0 I would watch skaters stalk the quad for nearly 30 seconds until I was ready to yell "jump already" at the screen. The first minute and a half of the program was spent on three jumping passes - two quads and a 3A and only after they were done would the skater acknowledge the music. What made Winter so spectacular was that it was a real program from start to finish but once you saw Yagudin, there was little else that was interesting or memorable. Basic skating footwork and spins were an afterthought to the jumps and skating skills were disappearing.

The skills of todays field are amazing, and the field is the deepest I can ever remember and I attribute that directly to the skills the skaters have developed skating under this system. Skills that were being lost under 6.0 in the post-figures era are now back with a vengance. So no, we don't have Yags doing Winter, but we have Takahashi and Chan and Kozuka, and Brezina and Fernandez and Ten and Oda, all of whom are telling different stories with their skating.

Mathman said:

In baseball you could make it harder by tying one hand behind your back. That would not get you any more points.

Click to expand...

Your analogy is very poor because baseball isn't scored on a grade of execution nor does it award presentation points. Skating has multiple ways to score - you pick your best options based on your talent and abilities.

I think Frank has earned the right to comment and give his real feelings after so many years at the top of the game. He may be less impressed than me with Liza, but it is clear he had a similar situation with Kwan in 1994. She was so juniorish, unpolished, a little girl who was a great little jumping bean. He polished her up, she learned quick and was a world champ by 16. I expect the same of liza though she has more rivals in Russia and Japan than 14 year old Michelle had. I remember watching and still thinking Lu Chen was far more polished than Michelle, despite the sexy Salome get-up. It was a great skate, but I lamented the demise of Lu Chen, who was a majestic, exquisite WOMAN on the ice, while Michelle was a dressed up girl with excellent coaching, choreo, makeup, etc. Michelle became the woman skater I admired, and she will remain that amazing 6.0 skater who stayed at the top for 8 years or so.

I may not agree with him totally about Liza, but I defend his right to comment. He is far more in the know than ANYONE on this board. i respect his opinions and will love to read his book, when he ever write it.

gkelly said:

Thanks for finding that.

I have no idea what he meant by that. I assume he knew what he meant at the time, but it doesn't make sense in terms of what the new rules actually were or how they affected Kwan who wasn't skating under those rules that year. Maybe he knew something about how her training was going and what she was working on that he didn't bother sharing with the viewers in detail.

Click to expand...

I think what Button was referring to was that when the CoP was going through its formative stages, Michelle was looking forward to what changes she would have to make to remain competitive. One thing was that she couldn't just coast along on an edge for as long as she wanted to. The reason being, not so much the expected requirements for the spiral itself, but rather that you can't waste that much time on one element. You can get just as many points for a spiral that lasts ten seconds as for one that lasts 15. so do the ten, then get on to the next point-getting element.

As for spins, Michelle read the new rules and figured that she could keep on doing easy spins and make up the difference in GOE. When the scores actually came down, this was a miscalculation on her part. In the early days of the CoP no one was getting much in terms of GOEs on spins, and Michelle was behind the eight-ball in terms of levels.

seniorita said:

If you watch Elisaveta from last year JGPF or RN 2011, does she look better now? I think her feet and edges look stronger and her jumps more secure on the landings. Anyway it's been 2 years i ve seen her live and I think she looks more powerful now. I dont see how people say she is slow ( maybe I read this elsewhere?)

Click to expand...

She doesn't look powerful at all. She looks all elbows and knees, and she's not deep into the ice. She's quite stiff in the knees in her stroking and footwork. That's why her PCS scores are so low at the moment. Two of her spins were Level 1's, and still she scored 121 points. These minor things are to be expected at this age.

The really important stuff is all positives. There is nothing in her current skating which would cause me alarm or fear for her future. Her technique is very sound which bodes well for her future jumping ability. She received positive GoE on every element in the both the SP and LP and only received four -GoE scores from all of the judges on her elements throughout the competition, all in the SP. She had no edge calls and no under-rotations. She has both height and distance with her jumps. I'm trying to remember when I last saw a 6 triple program skated this cleanly.

The one area that does concern me is the poor layout of her program, something has always been an issue with Mishin's skaters. The whole program takes place at centre ice. She does one jumping pass at one end of the rink and absolutely nothing at the other. Her program should be filling the ice surface. This was a regulation NHL rink and she wasn't close to filling that ice. It will be more noticeable in an Olympic arena. This is something that Mishin and the other members of the Russian fed have allowed to happen and you can bet money it's costing ET in her PCS scores under the heading of "poor ice coverage".

Dragonlady said:

I remember a LOT of people grousing about the level of difficulty of that footwork. Why was everyone making such a big fuss about such a simple footwork sequence? He spent half of it dancing on his toepicks. That's not real footwork. Where are the brackets and rockers as contained in real footwork?

Click to expand...

For me, what made that footwork special was not it's difficulty, but that it was a highlight of the program. Skaters were not in the habit of drawing attention to footwork because judges didn't pay much attention to it. It was quietly tacked on at the end, the least exciting of the required elements.

Click to expand...

I broke this quote into two parts because I think we are saying the same thing here. Nobody was going bananas over the difficulty pf Yagudin's footwork. But everybody loved the fact that he made footwork an exciting highlight to the program.

CoP is all about the difficulty. Yagudin would not score well in the CoP with that sequence. The CoP does not value what Yagudin did in that program. But I do.

Let me get at this another way.

I am sad that my favorite sport, figure skating, has all but disappeared from the U.S. sports scene in the last few years. Whenever I say that, my friends of the skating boards say, "Cheer up, Mathman. If you're sad, you can get happy by educating yourself about the CoP."

So I memorized the point values for all the jumps, the penalties for the errors, and the bullets for GOEs and PCSs.

Why aren't I happy?

Frank is getting old, he should probably retire. I rarely have heard him say nice things about skaters that he doesn't coach. I wouldn't be surprised that Michelle left him at the end because she couldn't stand his obnoxiousness any longer.

Mathman said:

I broke this quote into two parts because I think we are saying the same thing here. Nobody was going bananas over the difficulty pf Yagudin's footwork. But everybody loved the fact that he made footwork an exciting highlight to the program.

CoP is all about the difficulty. Yagudin would not score well in the CoP with that sequence. The CoP does not value what Yagudin did in that program. But I do.

Let me get at this another way.

I am sad that my favorite sport, figure skating, has all but disappeared from the U.S. sports scene in the last few years. Whenever I say that, my friends of the skating boards say, "Cheer up, Mathman. If you're sad, you can get happy by educating yourself about the CoP."

So I memorized the point values for all the jumps, the penalties for the errors, and the bullets for GOEs and PCSs.

Why aren't I happy?

Click to expand...

Because you are right! That COP does not value what Yagudin (or Michelle, in her Tosca program, for instance) did is a travesty. It is no wonder that it is now relegated to an obscure cable channel, with commentators who watch it on tape instead of live. The golden age is over, probably for good.

Mathman said:

Miki Ando puts most of her jumps in the second half of the program for no programmatic reason, but just to pick up an extra ten percent bonus. This leaves the middle of the program with nothng going on at all; she is just marking time until the CoP tells her to start skating again.

Click to expand...

...so? You said that you thought it was "great." Are you using what you called a "great performance" to support your criticism of the CoP? (On the other hand, plenty of CoP-lovers were annoyed at the perverted execution of the IJS with regard to Choreo and Interpretation.)

I used to think Yagudin's Winter was the greatest; I still think it is awesome. But I have found others I like just as much, or even more since 2002.

I am glad that the CoP would not value MK's Tosca (as much as it apparently did under 6.0). It is gross to me.