How do the top men rank now that the season's begun?

[Bluebonnet]

I’m fine with the current scoring system because I like to see athletes pushing the boundaries and attempting quads. I’m excited that 2014 looks like a repeat of 2002. I don’t want skaters to play it safe and regress to 2010 technical standard.

That's my basic sentiment as well. But if the scoring system changes into punishing more severly on multiple falls, I see it as an improvement for the better.

And notice that most skaters would fall many times before they can get the quad consistent because it’s just so difficult. If Daisuke hadn’t tried 4T many times and fallen many times, then he wouldn’t have improved. Now his 4T is more consistent than before.

So true! And good for Takahashi for not being afraid of falls!

If Jeremy and Armin didn’t do 4T then they would’ve been clean as well and should’ve outscored Tatsuki. I think there should be some rules to punish skaters such as Tatsuki for playing it safe and to reward skaters who push the boundaries.

Exactly. Jeremy knew that his 4T wasn't reliable at all. In fact, he misses it most of the time. But he still tried it. That is the spirit that should be praised at least.

[plushyfan]

ITA. Plus, I wish the current rules will be rightly applied, like there should be -3 goe deduction for no steps preceding the solo jump. Many men doing solo quads in the SP are not doing them out of steps. Kozuka did not get -3 goe at SA for instance. This is so unfair to other skaters like Jeremy who tried to do the 4t out of steps and fell. I’m certain that if Kozuka did his quad out of steps, he’d fall too.

I checked again their SP, I couldn't see Jeremy's steps before the 4T. I don't see real difference.

[Mrs. P]

I don't get why Tatsuki should be punished for doing something well rather than putting in subpar quad. He already got docked in the BV for attempting less difficult content. His SP was the highlight of the competition for me and in fact in the aftermath of the competition, I've actually watched his program more times on YouTube, even over Yuzuru's amazing one.

And Jeremy did outscore Tatsuki anyway in the BV, TES and overall, despite the bad quad attempt and low spin levels.

[Blades of Passion]

You don't need to reward bad Quads that highly for the athletes to be pushing the technical envelope.

No, this will make people not doing the quads. What you suggest is similar to the 2010 system that gave Daisuke no points for attempting a 4T. He really should not have attempted 4T in Vancouver. He would have gotten more points without the 4T and probably would have won. I respect Daisuke for still going for the quad. He was such a warrior!

Absolutely you do! It's a must! Most will not try hard to get a quad good. They will just drop them from their program.

ITA.

You're all wrong.

People will still do Quads if they were worth less for sloppy execution. One of the problems in 2010 was that the value of the Quad wasn't high enough in relation to everything else. That has been changed. A really good quad will now get you about 12 points, in comparison to only 4 points for a good Double Axel (similarly, for the Short Program, the value of the Quad in comparison to a Triple Flip is also considerably higher than it used to be). The other issue of underrotating a Quad has also been fixed; you don't get ridiculously hammered for it now like you did back then, unless you drastically underrotate it, and THAT was the biggest deterrent to people even trying the Quad during the past Olympic cycle.

Remember, falls and other big mistakes on jumps in the 6.0 judging system meant the jump was worth nothing in the eyes of the judges. And yet, the Quad was of utmost importance back then. People WILL do the Quad if it is worth a lot of points. BAD jumps should not be worth so many points as they currently are, though. Saying otherwise completely flies in the face of how the sport has always been judged and how most everyone WANTS to see it be judged.

[chloepoco]

No, this will make people not doing the quads. What you suggest is similar to the 2010 system that gave Daisuke no points for attempting a 4T. He really should not have attempted 4T in Vancouver. He would have gotten more points without the 4T and probably would have won. I respect Daisuke for still going for the quad. He was such a warrior!

And notice that most skaters would fall many times before they can get the quad consistent because it’s just so difficult. If Daisuke hadn’t tried 4T many times and fallen many times, then he wouldn’t have improved. Now his 4T is more consistent than before.

OTOH, I don’t like how Tatsuki won the bronze at SA by playing it safe. Out of 10 skaters, 8 tried quad in SP. Only Tatsuki and Majorov did not try a quad in SP. Tatsuki was able to give a clean performance by leaving the 4T out and got a high 37.13 on his PCS. If Jeremy and Armin didn’t do 4T then they would’ve been clean as well and should’ve outscored Tatsuki. I think there should be some rules to punish skaters such as Tatsuki for playing it safe and to reward skaters who push the boundaries.

You're just assuming they would have been clean; that's not a given. As far as rewarding skaters, they are rewarded with the higher value.

[Bluebonnet]

I don't get why Tatsuki should be punished for doing something well rather than putting in subpar quad. He already got docked in the BV for attempting less difficult content. His SP was the highlight of the competition for me and in fact in the aftermath of the competition, I've actually watched his program more times on YouTube, even over Yuzuru's amazing one.

And Jeremy did outscore Tatsuki anyway in the BV, TES and overall, despite the bad quad attempt and low spin levels.

That's true. I actually didn't mean this way. Between pushing boundaries and doing things perfectly, it's very difficult to draw the line. It needs many times trials and errors. Each time, the system comes to closer to the ideal. But it's not yet ideal, and probably it will never be. I was just voicing my praise on Jeremy and Armin for their fearless efforts. In fact, I've been on the fence myself for Jeremy's doing a quad in SP and I've said it in SA thread. With the success rate on quad that Jeremy got, I don't know if it's a good idea for him to put it into his SP so hastily.

[drivingmissdaisy]

Remember, falls and other big mistakes on jumps in the 6.0 judging system meant the jump was worth nothing in the eyes of the judges.

This isn't necessarily true. Under 6.0 you would often see the top men and women having falls or pops in the SP and still placing ahead of of lesser known skaters, even on the technical mark. An example: Yuka Sato's SP at the 1994 Olympics, did a 1Z, 2A and 2F and got marks on technical merit 5.0-5.3, so the lutz was reflected in that score because those marks do not reflect what she put out the technically.

Rewarding failures on difficult jumps moves the sport forward because, as others have said, it encourages athletes to perfect these moves through trial and error. I wouldn't mind seeing the ISU recalibrating the penalty for Worlds and Olympic competition to encourage clean skating over risk taking, but I'm happy to see the athletes take this risk during the GP.

[plushyfan]

I have to admit it, I'm with Mr. P.

The skater straps on his skates. "Hey, everybody, look at the awesome trick I can do! ... Oops. Never mind."

Figure skating judging should go like this. "You, you and you -- you all fell down. Now, of the guys who are still standing, you got first, you got second, you got third."

I agree. If we look at the rhythmic gymnastics and gymnastics, someone falls in the acrobatics elements or for example fall off the beam, can't win, despite all the rest is perfect in the routine. Or in rhythmic gymnastics, if someone falls three times or drops for ex. the hoop, has no podium, although the rest parts of the program fulfill high artistic level.

[Mrs. P]

That's true. I actually didn't mean this way. Between pushing boundaries and doing things perfectly, it's very difficult to draw the line. It needs many times trials and errors. Each time, the system comes to closer to the ideal. But it's not yet ideal, and probably it will never be. I was just voicing my praise on Jeremy and Armin for their fearless efforts. In fact, I've been on the fence myself for Jeremy's doing a quad in SP and I've said it in SA thread. With the success rate on quad that Jeremy got, I don't know if it's a good idea for him to put it into his SP so hastily.

I was more responding to the poster who said that the system should punish skaters like Tatsuki further because he's decided to do the jumps he does really well instead of going for the quad. But yes certainly its great if you take the risk and I think the system, as it stands, rewards that risk by giving the option of a mid-range UR score.

For what it's worth Tatsuki DID try a quad in the FS and got full credit for it (though he did fall)...so I don't see it as playing it safe. And he has a fantastic 3A -- nice height and there's no doubt he's going to land that jump. And we all know for some the 3A is more a menace than the quad!

[Mrs. P]

One possible suggestion Mr. P had for the falls issue is perhaps docking the fall in base value.

Doris made an interesting point in the ice dance threads that skaters lose so many points in the BV in the pattern dances for not getting the key points, that they're better of getting the technical component even at the cost of getting more GOE.

I think part of the issue with falls, that relatively speaking falls, which is mainly docked in -GOE and in the overall programm, ranks less poorly than a UR, which gets docked in BV AND GOE. If a fall on quad would be equal to the UR quad in BV + the -GOE, then you are still rewarding the skater for trying it, but you're also sending the message that they're better off staying upright on the jump.

This idea probably has to be fleshed out...but to me it seems logical.

[Blades of Passion]

This isn't necessarily true. Under 6.0 you would often see the top men and women having falls or pops in the SP and still placing ahead of of lesser known skaters, even on the technical mark. An example: Yuka Sato's SP at the 1994 Olympics, did a 1Z, 2A and 2F and got marks on technical merit 5.0-5.3, so the lutz was reflected in that score because those marks do not reflect what she put out the technically.

Reputation scoring has always been a problem but this isn't a good example. 2F was the required jump in the SP back then. There are were 8 technical elements and Yuka completely messed up one of them, but she did good/great on all of the other elements, so a 5.0-5.3 on technical merit is correct.

Rewarding failures on difficult jumps moves the sport forward because, as others have said, it encourages athletes to perfect these moves through trial and error.

That's what they would be doing anyway. What are you talking about? The current system doesn't just reward trial and error, it rewards error altogether.

[drivingmissdaisy]

Reputation scoring has always been a problem but this isn't a good example. 2F was the required jump in the SP back then. There are were 8 technical elements and Yuka completely messed up one of them, but she did good/great on all of the other elements, so a 5.0-5.3 on technical merit is correct.

I disagree a bit. Had Yuka's most difficult jump been a 3T she would never have gotten those kind of marks. Yes she did everything well but there's a lot of skaters who do everything well but couldn't pull the marks because they didn't have the most difficult triples. So in that sense a failed 3Z did factor into the scoring and allowed her to score higher than probably a successful 3T would have. (Witt completed a 3T-2T and a clean program but finished one spot ahead of Yuka in the SP).

[Mathman]

No scoring system should reward "trying." No scoring system should reward taking a risk but failing. (See definition of "risk" ) No scoring system should reward attempting to do something without success.

(That's my story and I'm sticking to it. )

[pangtongfan]

To answer the thread topic it is far too early to make even an early assessment as many skaters havent even been seen yet. However excluding Chan who is not part of the actual "competition" for Worlds, but has already been awarded and coronated the gold medal even if he goes on a trip to Hawaii and chooses to not attend the World Championships, this is who I would rate those fighting for the silver, bronze, and all other postions down at Worlds so far:

1. Takahashi- very solid performances in his only outing so far.

2. Hanyu- will likely recover from his bombing at Skate America. Arguably is likely to beat Takahashi now if both skate well as he is technically stronger.

3. Plushenko- good first outing so will be a factor should he choose to compete at Worlds.

4. Kozuka- very good first outing, but seems to still not have scoring potential of others and requires mistakes from others to be up there.

5. Fernandez- shows potential but still needs major consistency improvements.

[Mathman]

...However excluding Chan who is not part of the actual "competition" for Worlds, but has already been awarded and coronated the gold medal even if he goes on a trip to Hawaii and chooses to not attend the World Championships,...

I think you are living in the past. That was then, this is now. So far this year I don't see any evidence that ISU judges are prepared to do anything out of the ordinary for Patrick Chan.

All we have to go on so far is last place marks for a bad skate at a cheesefest in Japan, and second place marks for a hot and cold Hanyu at Skate America.

Lets' see what happens as the new season progresses.