Men - Free Program

[Mathman]

Mathman, care to demonstrate with videos quads and 3As that that you deem better according to each bullet point? Will be much appreciated.

That is an interesting challenge, but will take some time. (I'm not sure I feel up to it. )

However, to me the GOE bullets are supposed to set absolute standards, not to to compare one skater to another.

In category 3, "varied position in the air / delayed rotations," I know what that means even if no skater has ever done it on a quad attempt. Dorothy Hamill had a great delayed single Axel. Brian Boitano did a triple Lutz with a hand over his head and Adam Rippon does it with two hands up. These are "varied positions." Neither Patrick or anyone else has done this for a quad, so neither Patrick nor anyone else deserves credit for this bullet.

For criterion 1), again, I don't think anyone, Patrick or otherwise, has ever done, say, a hydroplane into a quad. Matt Savoie used to do a hydroplane into a triple Lutz. That would earn this bullet, IMHO.

For 2), Patrick's skating just before his solo quad and his triple Axel was great, but I would have a quibble about the language "immediately preceding." How immediate is immediate? I could find example of skaters doing lesser jumps (Johnny Weir had a sort of spiral into a triple Lutz) in which the immediacy is more immediate.

Again, the question is not whether anyone did it better, but whether Patrick or anyone else satisfied the requirement for the bullet.

What struck me about the wording for requirements 4, 5, and 6, is that the skater merely has to be "good" in the areas of height and distance, extension, and flow. Certainly Patrick, like many others, is "good" in these areas. To me it seems like the wording should be changed to "outstanding."