Can Takahashi Close The Gap On Patrick Chan?

[hurrah]

Thanks for the reply. I knew about the changes but I thought they were pretty fair, and I hardly thought they indicated that the system now privileged difficulty over quality. I mean, there's so much danger of under-rotation on difficult jumps still that it seems still pretty unrewarding to do them. Look at Mao's triple-axel. If she under-rotates, the base value goes down to 6.0 and there's always some unnecessarily harsh minus GOEs, so her under-rotated triple-axel is still barely more than a double-axel.

[ImaginaryPogue]

Thanks for the reply. I knew about the changes but I thought they were pretty fair, and I hardly thought they indicated that the system now privileged difficulty over quality. I mean, there's so much danger of under-rotation on difficult jumps still that it seems still pretty unrewarding to do them. Look at Mao's triple-axel. If she under-rotates, the base value goes down to 6.0 and there's always some unnecessarily harsh minus GOEs, so her under-rotated triple-axel is still barely more than a double-axel.

Right, but look at this for an example

4T: 10.3 is the BV (used to be 9.8). A fall is -3 (used to be -4.8). And then the -1 GOE. So now, a fall on a quad contributes 7.3 points (6.3 w/ the fall deduction) whereas before is contributed 5.0 points (4.0 w/ the fall deduction). For comparison, a solid but unspectacular triple lutz gives you a BV of 6.0 points.

It's true that under-rotating jumps carries a significant penalty still, but even that's been negated. Dai scored 0.0 points on his quad in Vancouver (UR + fall + -GOE), In Colorado, he scored 3.2 (UR + fall + -GOE).

Additionally, they changed the wording of the GOE bullets, making it easier to get positive GOEs for elements that don't look like they deserve it.

[Bluebonnet]

If you could find a quote, that would be great. He did say he didn't need a quad to win, which was true (Lysacek and Buttle made it true), and he certainly said some cringeworthy stuff leading up to the Olympics, but can you find an article where he specifically mentions he didn't need a quad (before the point increase occured - aka, pre Vanocuver) because of federation support.

hurrah can't find it because Patrick has never said that!

[skatinginbc]

Really!? When did CoP begin to privilege difficulty before quality? After changes made post-Vancouver? Is this rule definitely applicable to all skaters or only to some skaters?

In diving, the total score for each element is the execution score multiplied by the degree of difficulty. So in theory, one who receives the lowest score 0 for execution would have a zero score for that element.
In figure skating, one can receive the worst execution score possible (all maximum negative GOEs) and yet still receives part of the base mark. That says something funny about CoP, doesn't it? In appearance, it seems to reward both difficulty and quality, but when you look deep into it, you shall see it is the difficulty level that matters the most.

[Bluebonnet]

In diving, the total score for each element is the execution score multiplied by the degree of difficulty. So in theory, one who receives the lowest score 0 for execution would have a zero score for that element.

It'll be funny to receive 0 on execution unless the diver is standing there and not doing any movement.

In figure skating, one can receive the worst execution score possible (all maximum negative GOEs) and yet still receives part of the base mark. That says something funny about CoP, doesn't it? In appearance, it seems to reward both difficulty and quality, but when you look deep into it, you shall see it is the difficulty level that matters the most.

The same as in diving. If the skater didn't do that movement, he/she won't receive the difficulty value on it. It'll be 0.

If there is any down grading, under rotation, or edge call, the base value will also be affected and reduced. What's your point? Shouldn't difficulty level matter the most? Should quad jumps values be more closer to triple jumps values? We've done it and been there already, specifically between 2008 - 2010.

[skatinginbc]

It'll be funny to receive 0 on execution unless the diver is standing there and not doing any movement.

In diving, the execution is scored on a 10-point scale based on Approach, Flight, and Entry
0: Failed
½ - 2: Insufficient
2 ½ – 4 ½: Not good
5 – 6 ½ : Satisfactory
7- 8: Good
8 ½ - 9 ½: Exceptional
10: Perfect
Here is an example of a failed dive: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zrDmkQ0l1Q

[Bluebonnet]

...but the scoring system is designed as such that unless the start value is comparable, "they may compete, but they cannot win."

It's supposed to be like this. Otherwise, an all triple skater would easily outskate a quad skater. A double jump skater would easily outskate a triple jump skater, and so on...

[hurrah]

If you could find a quote, that would be great. He did say he didn't need a quad to win, which was true (Lysacek and Buttle made it true), and he certainly said some cringeworthy stuff leading up to the Olympics, but can you find an article where he specifically mentions he didn't need a quad (before the point increase occured - aka, pre Vanocuver) because of federation support.

He didn't say that? Well, my recollection is very vague, but I thought I should make an attempt to remember, so I did a quick google search. I came up with a link to an article that no longer is available:

http://www.metronews.ca/vancouver/sp...figure-skating

I don't remember what the article said exactly but it was an article where Kurt Browning and Lori Nichol are lavishing praising him, and then I think it may be that some posters on the board were annoyed saying that the Canadian Skating Federation was overselling him. Patrick did say that the quad was unnecessary so that might have gotten tied in my impression as Patrick saying that he didn't need a quad because his federation was supporting him. In my memory, it's mixed with some threads about Patrick's relationship with Elvis Stojko as well. Didn't he call him an 'old man' or a 'has been' or something like that? Or was that Plushenko?

Out of curiousity, when Abbott falls twice and it doesn't affect his PCS, do you also see that as the product of Federation lobbying? Or if Oda? Or Denis Ten?

So are you saying that Abbot, Oda and Denis Ten have done performances where they had two falls and there was no difference in PCS they got for a performance they did without falls on previous occasions, and that they beat out a skater of relatively similar calibre who skated with no falls at the competition and won?

[Bluebonnet]

In diving, the execution is scored on a 10-point scale based on Approach, Flight, and Entry
0: Failed
½ - 2: Insufficient
2 ½ – 4 ½: Not good
5 – 6 ½ : Satisfactory
7- 8: Good
8 ½ - 9 ½: Exceptional
10: Perfect
Here is an example of a failed dive: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zrDmkQ0l1Q

Ouch!!! And what score did he get?

[Boeing787]

In my memory, it's mixed with some threads about Patrick's relationship with Elvis Stojko as well. Didn't he call him an 'old man' or a 'has been' or something like that? Or was that Plushenko?

Evidently you don't have a good memory.

[skatinginbc]

If there is any down grading, under rotation, or edge call, the base value will also be affected and reduced. What's your point?

A downgraded 4F is worth 5.3. Having a severe wrong edge and falling on that element result in all maximum negative GOEs across the board (costing a further deduction of 2.1, not 3 because 4F has been downgraded). In other words, the skater can have a wrong edge, get downgraded and fall and still receive 3.20 points (or 2.20 points if including the mandatory 1 point deduction). What's my point? Difficulty matters the most, outweighing execution.

[hurrah]

Evidently you don't have a good memory.

Okay, sorry my memory isn't crystal clear. I checked. It was Plushenko that Patrick called 'old man'. And I see that Patrick later 'recanted' on that statement. I also went and found the article on Elvis, and I see that Patrick himself did not call Elvis 'delusional' or 'bitter'. He was only quoted in a article where the reporter made that slant.

I feel very bad that I mistakenly thought that it was Patrick himself who said that he did not need the quad because his Federation supports him.

[Bluebonnet]

What's my point? Difficulty matters the most, outweighing execution.

As I've said in my previous post, we've tried the other way and it didn't work. It has made many times a conservative and go-around-to-avoid-facing-up-difficulty "champion". That was the reason the scoring system has been changed after 2010 Olympics.

Now you've found it's so difficult and nearly impossible for your favorites? There is only one way - face it and work harder. Add more difficulty into the programs. That's what Daisuke is doing. I wonder why so many of his fans haven't gotten his this admirable spirit?

[skatinginbc]

Ouch!!! And what score did he get?

Zero, or "no-score" or "no-dive" as they call it, dropping him (Matt Scoggin) from sixth to 10th place in the men's 10-meter platform at the 1992 Summer Olympics.
Receiving a zero score for an element is not that uncommon. Here is another example: http://english.people.com.cn/200408/...17_153479.html

[hurrah]

I like the present system of making attempts at difficult jumps more worthy. And I think there should be no points for falls!