Men Free Skates

[yuki]

Why no outrage that Hanyu won the FS with a (very disruptive) fall over a clean Takahashi and everybody else?

BTW, Chan netted -1 for his fall. He got zero for his non executed 2A plus one point penalty. Should a fall after a fully rotated quad be considered equivalent to this fall?

Hanyu didn't win the FS, Chan did. Also, Hanyu's fall was not on an element (he had finished his step sequence by then), so he only got the -1 deduction for it. His TES was also the highest of the night, and his lead over Dai in the FS was only .04 (i.e. Dai would have surpassed him in the FS if only he had received a bit higher PCS, which he arguably deserved). So I guess I don't really see your point here.

It's not really Chan's TES and fall that are being argued about, but his PCS, some of which should be lower (especially PE and IN, since he was behind the music at times). The overall result was OK on account of the SP, but he really shouldn't have won the FS.

Also, when in doubt: http://www.isuresults.com/results/wc2012/SEG006.HTM.

[SkateFiguring]

I actually found Hanyu's 'disruptive fall' very suiting to the choreography for some reason...it was like a fallen Romeo who had to pick himself up and fight for love haha.

So Hanyu's fall was his artistic interpretation of "falling in love"?

It is true that rotating in the air and then falling badly shows more skating skill than flubbing the jump altogether. But I think there has to be some sort of floor in the scoring system that says, sorry, that element was not successful.

There is. The tech panel calls how many rotations are actually done and the judges awards or penalize the execution with GOE points.

[wallylutz]

To me, falls are errors of a more fundamental nature than other skating miscues like underrotation. Skating means gliding along and staying on your feet. If a five-year-old is learning to skate for the first time and can make it from one side of the rink to the other without falling, that is a successful skate. All the rest -- rotatiing in the air, etc. -- are just add-ons.

What I would rather see is a system that reduces the base value for elements that end in a fall. (The precedent would be the way URs are handled.) To me the issue is not so much what a skater did before he fell, but rather the nature of the fall itself. Maybe something like this.

Complete prattfall on the ice, 0% of base value.

[...]

It is true that rotating in the air and then falling badly shows more skating skill than flubbing the jump altogether. But I think there has to be some sort of floor in the scoring system that says, sorry, that element was not successful.

In the case of Chan's botched 2A, he got exactly what you proposed: Fall = 0 points. Worse than that, he got -1 for falling, so the net impact of the fall is -1, which is < than 0. If we were also to infer the seconds he lost for falling contributed towards him exceeding the 4m40s time limit, then the additional -1 can also be counted as a direct result of the fall, making the penalty a net -2. Considering that a successful 2A would net him 3.63 + about 1 in GOE = 4.63, the total penalty for falling is 6.63, calculated as 4.63 - (-2). This costs more than losing the base value of a Triple Lutz, almost equal that of a Triple Axel. It seems he got severely penalized for a seemingly freak error to me. So effectively, the panel was NOT lenient nor did they ignore his error just because who he is or anything like that. But of course, unless Chan got dinged with -20 for that error and missed the podium, the panel of judges will still be blamed and sent to the guillotine regardless.

[Becki]

So Hanyu's fall was his artistic interpretation of "falling in love"?



There is. The tech panel calls how many rotations are actually done and the judges awards or penalize the execution with GOE points.

Nah, the fall was a fluke. But for some reason, I thought it wasn't too disruptive.

[SkateFiguring]

Hanyu didn't win the FS, Chan did. Also, Hanyu's fall was not on an element (he had finished his step sequence by then), so he only got the -1 deduction for it. His TES was also the highest of the night, and his lead over Dai in the FS was only .04 (i.e. Dai would have surpassed him in the FS if only he had received a bit higher PCS, which he arguably deserved). So I guess I don't really see your point here.

My point was not why a fallen Hanyu won over a clean Takahashi but about the lack of outrage which always errupts and lasts forever when a fallen or almost fallen Chan wins over a clean and sometimes not clean Takahashi. You see it fit to explain for Hanyu but such analysis is usually angrily rejected when done for Chan.

It's not really Chan's TES and fall that are being argued about, but his PCS, some of which should be lower (especially PE and IN, since he was behind the music at times). The overall result was OK on account of the SP, but he really shouldn't have won the FS.

Different points are always found to argue against Patrick's win and to be focused on and imprinted forever, disregarding all that he has actually done to win and ignoring the various errors of his rivals.

[SkateFiguring]

Nah, the fall was a fluke. But for some reason, I thought it wasn't too disruptive.

Because Yuzuru is so darn cute and adorable!

[yuki]

"It seems he got severely penalized for a seemingly freak error to me. So effectively, the panel was NOT lenient nor did they ignore his error just because who he is or anything like that."

You're making it sound like it's completely extraordinary that he got dinged for an element he didn't do. Since you insist that the panel was not lenient, I'm asking you: what way is there to be lenient on an element that wasn't completed? Should he have gotten the base value for a 2A just because it was, in your words, a "freak fall"?

[euroskate]

I would love to see a clip where you see how hanyu reacts as he realises that he medaled. Anyone?

[Skater Boy]

Sometimes it seems if we like the skater the fall for whatever reason is artistic; if we don't like them it is disruptive? Okay I am mocking because I know arguments are being made as to whether they are disruptive or not but really it is up to the trained judges. I can only hope for example a fall on an element or other wise doesnt become "Oh wow that fall was timed perfectly to the music and was obviously a metaphor for the butterfly ending its life suddenly and the rising from the fall is the last desperate burst of life of the butterfly reaching for the warmth of the sun....

[FTnoona]

Nah, the fall was a fluke. But for some reason, I thought it wasn't too disruptive.

Falling is still falling, fluke fall or not. Chan's fall on the axel was a fluke too. The only unfortunate thing for Chan is that he fell on a required element while Hanyu was luckier and finished his step sequence then ate it on a transition step. Chan was just unlucky.
Looking at Hanyu's protocols, it looks like he skated a clean program. It's interesting that he got higher PCS for this FS compared to his fall-less GPF FS.

[SkateFiguring]

^ You're making it sound like it's completely extraordinary that he got dinged for an element he didn't do. Since you insist that the panel was not lenient, I'm asking you: what way is there to be lenient on an element that wasn't completed? Should he have gotten the base value for a 2A just because it was, in your words, a "freak fall"?

Not sure this is directed to me or who "he" is exactly. But I think Chan deserved his big zero for "2A" and the fall penalty. But I also knew by then he had won because it was a relatively minor element in his program after he had already successfully completed more high value difficult elements exquisitely. In COP term, even without the 2A, he has had more rotations in the air than most and has landed almost all of those beautifully. And of course he has skated with greater skills than everybody else and continued to demonstrate that after the fall.

Chan did not make excuses for his fall but took full responsibility for it just as the judges had made him fully accountable. He and the judges always do.

[FTnoona]

I would love to see a clip where you see how hanyu reacts as he realises that he medaled. Anyone?

It's a really really short clip though. Starts at 3.41
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Rs4XrmgEC8

[yuki]

My point was not why a fallen Hanyu won over a clean Takahashi but about the lack of outrage which always errupts and lasts forever when a fallen or almost fallen Chan wins over a clean and sometimes not clean Takahashi. You see it fit to explain for Hanyu but such analysis is usually angrily rejected when done for Chan.

Different points are always found to argue against Patrick's win and to be focused on and imprinted forever, disregarding all that he has actually done to win and ignoring the various errors of his rivals.

I explained it for Hanyu because the question was about Hanyu. The only reason I answered you in the first place was because you made an incorrect argument. Unfortunately, you don't seem interested in any kind of argument that's even a little critical of Chan, regardless of what's being actually said.

[yuki]

Not sure this is directed to me or who "he" is exactly.

Sorry, I should have been clearer. It was about wallylutz's post (#948).

[SkateFiguring]

I explained it for Hanyu because the question was about Hanyu. The only reason I answered you in the first place was because you made an incorrect argument. Unfortunately, you don't seem interested in any kind of argument that's even a little critical of Chan, regardless of what's being actually said.

I have not questioned Hanyu's marks and placement at all and have acknowledged his amazing accomplishments.

I never discount Chan's errors or respond to all criticism about him. That's impossible and I am not a masochist. I don't argue against people's personal emotional reactions to skaters and their performances. I do explain why Chan wins by rules, the way you just explained for Hanyu, and correct wrong declarations about him, the way you just did my statement that Hanyu won the FS.