Can Takahashi Close The Gap On Patrick Chan?

Imaginary Pogue said:

My issue, Mathman, is that no one's willing to follow the "0 points for a failed element" proposal to it's logical conclusion. If they were, it would be a different debate.

Click to expand...

Let's go back to this

ImaginaryPogue said:

How about this:

No credit system

4T (solid, +1 GOE)
2A (fall)
3T (fall)
3S (fall)

Total: 11.3 points

4T (fall)
2A (0 GOE)
3T (0 GOE)
3S (0 GOE)

Total: 11.7 points

Is that what you feel would be an accurate representation of what you want to see.

Click to expand...

Yes, I would be satisfied that the person who did three easy imps and fell on his quad should beat the skater who did a successful quad but fell three times later in the program on easy elements. I would be surprised if anyone felt otherwise, under any system.

But if the question is really what I want to see, I would want to see those two guys competing for the bronze in a four-man field, while the winner did 4T, 3A, 3Lz+3T (28.1) and the silver medalist did 3A+3T, 3Lz, 3Lo (22.9).

Having said that, however, I don't think this proposal will ever fly. The stumbling block that beats it is, what to do in the case of a hands-down sort of half-fall.

DianaSelene said:

Too bad he can't do that today.

Click to expand...

On practice in Euros he did 3sal -a sth hop -3axel, I can send you my video I think he could do the old combo but he doesnt do the flip anymore. I used to like his flip, it was not a huge as Joubert's but it looked effortless. And I dont know if it worths this combo now.

I m reading this thread, and I have a feeling we will jinx Takahashi and he will end behind other skaters, and not only Chan

mathman said:

yes, i would be satisfied that the person who did three easy jumps and fell on his quad should beat the skater who did a successful quad but fell three times later in the program on easy elements. i would be surprised if anyone felt otherwise, under any system.

Click to expand...

... Surprise!!!!!

Boeing787 said:

Really? COP limits the number of jumps a skater can do. After these jumps, there are not many jumps he can do, and his SS and TR marks won't be as high as Patrick's. He might still beat Patrick, but not "in no time", not that he'd have the gold in his bag.

eta: under COP, he can only do one three-jump combination. so the 3A+1/2Lo+3F has to go. Oops, his chance of beating Patrick gets even slimer.

Click to expand...

That is a good point. The CoP is quite unfriendly to jump combinations. As Hurrah has been arguing on this thread, the only thing you gain by doing a triple triple of any kind is that you get to score an extra double Axel at the end.

Even allowing Plushenko two three-jump combinations, he could do only something like 4T+3T+3Lo, 4T, 3A+half-loop+3F, 3A+2T, 3Lz, 3S, 2A, 2A -- which I think is pretty close to his actual jump card for that program. (Lysacek could beat him by doing all of his jumps in the second half. )

ImaginaryPogue said:

... Surprise!!!!!

Click to expand...

I am indeed! Your guy attempted four jumps and fell three times! He fell on a double Axel, for goodness sake. Who is he, Brezina at 2011 Skate America?

Actually, I read your post wrong. I agree with you. My error.

I'll just point out that the partial credit system, however, with the -1 deduction, means that instead of 0.4 point separating them, the three fall skater has 14.2 points. The one-fall skater has 19.0. I think that's better.

So it has been established by anyone smart on this thread that even a many fall Chan would be scored above a clean Takahashi. It has also been established that Takahashi wont skate cleanly. What is the point of this thread, and why is it even continuing.

Takahashi is overrated on this forum. People are acting like he is a lock for the silver at Worlds this year and a threat for gold when he is merely the slight favorite over the others for the silver and bronze at best, and no chance at all of gold. It is quite comical people here seem to think he is more in competition with Chan than he is with the other Japanese, the top Europeans, and Abbott. All those guys I am sure think they can beat him, while even Takahashi himself seems to know he cant touch Chan. As I said on another thread I dont even expect him to win the silver at Worlds, since the field (minus Chan) vs Takahashi I give the field more than 50% chance. Then if Plushenko comes back skating like he did at Europeans and the younger skaters keep improving he will have a hard time even staying in the top 3. Competition with Chan is never where his real competition will be.

I like Takahashi and dont particularly like Chan but get a clue. Maybe if all of the following: Chan wasnt the biggest judges pet in skating history and didnt receive grossly inflated GOE and PCS all over the place, and then have all his frequent falls and other mistakes ignored like they didnt happen, and Takahashi wasnt technically past his prime and inconsistent as heck to boot, then maybe Takahashi would be a threat to Chan. Those are alot of ifs that dont exist though.

Mathman said:

Yes, I would be satisfied that the person who did three easy imps and fell on his quad should beat the skater who did a successful quad but fell three times later in the program on easy elements. I would be surprised if anyone felt otherwise, under any system.

Click to expand...

Are we talking about long programs or short programs here?

In a short program, it's unlikely that jump content like 4T(clean)+3T(fall), 3A(fall), 3Lz(fall) or even 4T, 3A(fall), 3Lz+3T(fall), FSSp(fall) would beat 4T(fall), 3A(clean), 3Lz+3T(clean).

In a long program . . . Are the two skaters attempting the exact same jump content (and are approximately equal on spins, steps, basic skating, and presentation as well)?

In that case, do you mean something like
4T(fall), 3A+2T, 3A, 3Lz+3T, 3F+2T+2Lo, 3Lz, 3Lo, 3S (8 clean triples, repeat 3A and 3Lz)
vs.
4T, 3A+2T, 3A, 3Lz+3T(fall), 3F+2T+2Lo, 3Lz, 3Lo(fall), 3S(fall)

Here the first skater has completed more content so we'd expect him to earn more TES points for jumps, unless the jumps he stood up one were really bad and the jumps the second guy stood up on were really good.

But what if the content is not the same?

Maybe 4T(fall), 3A, 3Lz+3T, 3F+2T+2T, 3F, 3Lo, 3S+2Lo, 3T (8 completed triples, repeat jumps 3F and 3T)
vs.
4T, 4T+2T, 3A+3T(fall), 3A, 3Lz+1Lo+3F, 3Lz(fall), 3S+3Lo(fall), 3Lz (2 completed quads plus 6 clean triples including two 3A and two 3Lz)

In that case the second skater, the guy who fell three times, attempted more difficult jump content and completed more difficult jumps, if you consider the first jump of a combination completed with a fall on the second.

Which brings up the question of how you consider falls on the ends of combinations. Usually the jump the skater actually fell on was an easier one, but the combination itself may have had a higher base value than anything else in the program. Do you give credit for the first jump or wipe out all value for the combination?

But if the question is really what I want to see, I would want to see those two guys competing for the bronze in a four-man field, while the winner did 4T, 3A, 3Lz+3T (28.1) and the silver medalist did 3A+3T, 3Lz, 3Lo (22.9).

Click to expand...

Sure. We all hope for good performances -- the skaters too. But, as they say, ice is slippery. Especially for skaters challenging themselves to execute as many elements and transitional moves at the top of their ability within the same 4 or 4.5-minute program.

When a skater really pushes the difficulty envelope and succeeds, it's a magical moment. But, by nature, rare.

Then the question is do we want the rules to encourage skaters to challenge themselves in that way (the figure skating equivalent of higher faster stronger) or do we want them to play safe and skate cleaner.

Mathman said:

That is a good point. The CoP is quite unfriendly to jump combinations.

Click to expand...

Pretty much, yeah.

As Hurrah has been arguing on this thread, the only thing you gain by doing a triple triple of any kind is that you get to score an extra double Axel at the end.

Click to expand...

If you're a man who can do six different triples and maybe one kind of quad, as well as two or more triple-triples, yes, that is true.

If you're a man who can't even do all the triples (axel being the one most likely missing), then even without doing any triple-triples you'll end up with at least one jump pass with no planned triple, and if you do include a 3-3 or two you'll have more open jump passes to fill with doubles.

If you're a lady (or novice man) who can do five different triples (no 3A), then it's a big advantage to be able to do a 3-3 combo because you only get 7 jump passes, you need to include a 2A somewhere, and you'd like to include 7 total triples plus that double axel in those 7 slots, which requires that you combine two of the triples or one of the triples and the 2A in the same slot.

If you're a lady who can do six different triples including 3A, maybe you'd like to do a total of 8 triples in your 7 jump slots, which requires combining two of them. Of course, not even Midori Ito or Mao Asada ever actually did 8 triples in the same program. But someday some lady will want to try.

If you're a senior man who can do two different kinds of quads and six kinds of triples, then by repeating two of the above you could include as many as ten difficult (triple/quad) jumps in your 8 jump passes, but only if you include two triple-triple or quad-triple combinations.

In short programs (junior or senior, male or female) you're always better off if you are able to do triple-triple than if you can't do one.

pangtongfan said:

So it has been established by anyone smart on this thread that even a many fall Chan would be scored above a clean Takahashi. It has also been established that Takahashi wont skate cleanly.

Click to expand...

Where have these points been established? :confused2:

What I can say is that

1) A perfect Takahashi is hard to beat, even for Chan.

2) A perfect Chan is impossible to beat.

3) A perfect Chan will beat a perfect Takahashi.

4) There are chances either or both skaters will skate both programs clean but Takahashi has not done that in recent seasons.

Among the possibilities is of course that of a perfect Takahashi vs an imperfect Chan.

Boeing787 said:

Really? COP limits the number of jumps a skater can do. After these jumps, there are not many jumps he can do, and his SS and TR marks won't be as high as Patrick's. He might still beat Patrick, but not "in no time", not that he'd have the gold in his bag.

eta: under COP, he can only do one three-jump combination. so the 3A+1/2Lo+3F has to go. Oops, his chance of beating Patrick gets even slimer.

Click to expand...

Oops, he could still beat him.

seniorita said:

On practice in Euros he did 3sal -a sth hop -3axel, I can send you my video I think he could do the old combo but he doesnt do the flip anymore. I used to like his flip, it was not a huge as Joubert's but it looked effortless. And I dont know if it worths this combo now.

I m reading this thread, and I have a feeling we will jinx Takahashi and he will end behind other skaters, and not only Chan

Click to expand...

I would LOVE to see that.

SkateFiguring said:

Where have these points been established? :confused2:

What I can say

Click to expand...

I was never referring to you and I dont know where you ever saw the suggestion I was. I also have never concerned myself with your opinions much.

1) A perfect Takahashi is hard to beat

Click to expand...

It has already been established he never skates perfectly, especialy these days, so even if true, irrelevant.

, even for Chan.

Click to expand...

No.

2) A perfect Chan is impossible to beat.

Click to expand...

With the judges adoration of him a many fall Chan is impossible to beat, so of course a perfect Chan is impossible to beat. Is your point supposed to be a revelation of sorts.

Among the possibilities is of course that of a perfect Takahashi vs an imperfect Chan.

Click to expand...

and even in that very unlikely scenario Chan is certain to be scored ahead. The end.



Someone should start a thread of Takahashi vs the various people he has to battle for a silver or bronze at Worlds, rather than this thread of nonsense.

pangtongfan said:

I was never referring to you and I dont know where you ever saw the suggestion I was. I also have never concerned myself with your opinions much.

Click to expand...

Right. Then you proceeded to try to dismiss my statements one by one, with declarations without substantiating facts or data. Thus I wouldn't debate with you.

DianaSelene said:

Oops, he could still beat him.

Click to expand...

Of course, he could. I never claim Patrick Chan is invincible, or he can beat so-and-so "in no time". After all, he is human, so is Plushenko.

Boeing787 said:

After all, he is human, so is Plushenko.

Click to expand...

This I can agree with.

SkateFiguring said:

Right. Then you proceeded to try to dismiss my statements one by one, with declarations without substantiating facts or data. Thus I wouldn't debate with you.

Click to expand...

Yet it was one of the only times I ever bothered to respond to you (mainly to clear up the apparent confusion you had that I was referring to you in my original quote which I never was, and as well your flawed perspective on things providing a perfect opportunity to put into perspective for some confused posters who feel Takahashi is currently competing with Chan predominantly), while you quote me nearly everytime we are in the same thread. Have a nice day.

Bro-o--ther! I had just finished writing the world's all-time longest and wittiest reply to gkelly's post #347, then just as I reached for the send button, ... "poof." (This happens sometimes when someone else posts on the thread at exactly the same time.) I would re-write it, but I forgot what I wanted to say. hwell:

^^^ I see that's how some posts disappear. As long as we are talking about posts that went "poof", mine were definitely longer and wittier than yours.

pangtongfan said:

I like Takahashi and dont particularly like Chan but get a clue. Maybe if all of the following: Chan wasnt the biggest judges pet in skating history and didnt receive grossly inflated GOE and PCS all over the place, and then have all his frequent falls and other mistakes ignored like they didnt happen, and Takahashi wasnt technically past his prime and inconsistent as heck to boot, then maybe Takahashi would be a threat to Chan. Those are alot of ifs that dont exist though.

Click to expand...

"I like Takahashi and dont particularly like Chan but get a clue." this is obvious in your never ending taunts on Patrick in your posts.

"Chan wasn't the biggest judges pet in skating history and didn't receive grossly inflated GOE and PCS all over the place, and then have all his frequent falls and other mistakes ignored like they didnt happen," - This is the accusation you keep repeating in your posts giving the impression that Patrick won solely because he's the judges pet and grossly overmarked. You should know by now based on some of the posts above that the marking system does benefit skaters with strong skating skills and quad jumps. If there is another skater similar to Patrick's skills, they will be getting his scores too.
But it is good that you are now openly declaring that you 'don't like Chan' leads to your constant taunts on this man that he won because he is judges pet and unfairly overmarked.

"Takahashi wasnt technically past his prime and inconsistent " - let this man show that he can do it.

Why you didnt take the post back from restore autosave?

You can't teach an old dog new tricks.

Anyway, the memory of my post was so much better than the real post, I'll just let it go at that.