Gotta get our technical points somehow since there are less and less options for getting levels.
Gotta get our technical points somehow since there are less and less options for getting levels.
Yes, Mrs. P. With so many options being negated for spin levels (all the changes this year are funneling the "variety" into almost EXACTLY the same spins from each skater), you've got to come up with the ones you CAN do (even if it's not attractive - yes, A frame spin, I am referencing YOU!) that increase your base value.
Mao was second in FS, and won overall by slim margin. I do not understand the fuss about unfair judging on her. Her jumping mistakes did not affect her overall performance, and she performed nearly perfectly for all other elements. it is not like she fell for multiple times and took time to go back to program or slowed down out of exhaustion. Even with a few jump mistakes, her performance was well executed and deserves high PCS.
On a relative scale, GOE is much less for singles and doubles than for triples, but if even ONE of those popped jumps gets BV, Asada loses...
What do you mean by "popped"?I'm not saying it has never happened, but it seems odd. I would think that the base score should be the best a skater could get for a popped jump.
In long programs, skaters are allowed to do whatever jumps they want, as long as they have at least one axel, don't repeat more than they're allowed, and don't do more combinations than allowed. They're allowed to do doubles. Below the top elite levels, it's expected that some senior ladies will plan some doubles because they don't have enough different triples in their repertoire to fill seven jumping passes -- the very weakest senior ladies won't try any triples at all in their freeskates.
So even for the elite skaters, male and female, who are expected to do the six or seven or eight triples (and maybe a quad or two), they have the option of turning a planned triple into a double on purpose whenever they want during a freeskate, if they're slightly off balance or feeling fatigued or don't have enough speed or the ice doesn't feel right or they're running out of room, etc., etc. If it comes out as a good-quality double then it deserves positive GOE.
A "popped" jump in which the skater intends to do a triple but the body doesn't cooperate in the air is more likely to have an awkward air position, which would be a case against positive GOE and maybe a reason for -1. But if there are other good things about the jump compared to a just-OK intentional double (or triple) -- e.g., speed, height, distance, difficult entry, etc., then it would make sense for a judge to think "There were enough things about that jump that were better than just OK to deserve +2 GOE, but the rhythm and air position were not well controlled, so I'll reduce it to just +1."
That's why when a skater does a big popped single jump we often see GOEs ranging from -1 to +1, depending how many judges focus on the awkward air position and rhythm and how many focus on the size and speed of the jump which would usually be much more impressive than the average single jump by skaters at a level where single jumps are expected.
If it looks like a good double (or good single) and you would have to know the skater and know the planned program content to know for sure that a triple was planned there, then positive GOE is absolutely appropriate. There's no GOE reduction required for "I know that skater is capable of triples and was planning a triple here so that double was a mistake."
When a skater has a high number of triple jumps in an LP, transitions, entries and exits into/out of the jumps, can only be so difficult as to allow successful execution of triple jumps. If an elite skater elects to skate an LP with nearly 40% of jumps in doubles and singles, that LP must be a programme with greater emphasis on artistry than athleticism. Transitions, entries and exits must be all the more difficult and artistically more satisfying than an LP with only triples. And the double/single jumps themselves must be of higher quality in terms of height, distance, air position, choreography whilst in the air, etc. I'd love to refer to 1As executed by John Curry and Robin Cousins (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKh7XS54gBg at 0.37 onwards; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEec6XAhsUg at 0.32 onwards).
Now, Mao's LP has been structured to accommodate 5 stand-alone triples with the degree of difficulty of transitions, entries/exits commensurate with this jump content. But in the actual skate, instead of 5 triples she executed 1 triple, 3 doubles and 1 single, WITHOUT CHANGING THE DEGREE OF DIFFUCULTY OF TRANSITIONS ETC. No wonder audience is not impressed. With that number of doubles and singles, we are entitled to expect an exceptional level of artistry, if not athleticism. In fact if a skater came up with a programme with a mixture of triples, doubles and singles with creative and original transitions, etc, etc, skated with superb skating skills and musicality, this would be a significant challenge to the current ISU regime.
Suzuki was not undermarked in either of her events. She was victimized by the fact Osmond and especialy Asada were OVERmarked. Had she rotated her loop in the short and not URed one triple in the long, she would have scored about 130 in the LP and over 190 overall. That is as high as her numbers should realistically ever go. Asada though would not match her SP or LP score anywhere else with the same performances. If she skates like that in the GP final (meaning Asada) she is in for a rude awakening as it aint Japan anymore.
Since we have seen from a few of the top men, especially P. Chan in his best performances, complex well-executed programs that include top 21st century jump content, we have an idea of what a program that deserves scores of 9-10 for those components. The same program with lesser jump content, or several failures on the difficult attempted jumps, might only deserve 8s or even 7s.
With the ladies, we haven't really seen anyone attempting that level of complexity AND jump content. When Asada or, a few years ago, Kostner have tried, they haven't succeeded in executing everything successfully. Mostly the most complex women's programs still tend to be simpler than the most complex men's programs.
How can judges calibrate what a given program layout would deserve with all clean doubles or with all clean triples and then parse out the difference when they get some clean doubles, some clean triples, and also some singles or failed/flawed triples? Gut feeling? Should there be a formula all can use, for more consistency?
I'd love to see that.In fact if a skater came up with a programme with a mixture of triples, doubles and singles with creative and original transitions, etc, etc, skated with superb skating skills and musicality, this would be a significant challenge to the current ISU regime.
If a rejuvenated Janet Lynn came out in 2012 and performed her 1972 free skate, with one so-so triple and the rest of the jumps good doubles including a couple of axels, what kind of PCS should she deserve given that everyone else is doing simpler programs with more difficult jumps?
Ditto with John Curry's 1976 performance, as is but with 30 seconds edited out to meet today's rules?
Back to Akiko. Because of her short program I can see how she could lose both SC and NHK. It was close; the luck wasn't with her but who knows about the gpf - though I think Wagner will win and show she is the one to beat this year. If Akiko can be consistent she'll earn silver; maybe gold if Wagner makes a slip. Then comes world she can battle yuna who might not be in fighting shape to beat Ashley. Wagner is the one to beat this year I think.
What a nice and lovely thing to say. Unfortunately it is also far form reality.
Should it matter in sport? No. Does it matter in figure skating, unfortunately it Yes.
May be my view is different than yours because I went to an all girl school (yeah that should do it ), and i know beauty absolutely matters in everything regardless if you are in the company of women (and arguably in particularly in the company of women). This is a sport where aesthetics are appraised, that is why skaters wear nice make up, pay attention to their hair, costumes, themes, and most skater would prefer pretty music that are going to flatter their presentation. But should it matter to over ride everything else? Absolutely not. That is why TES is the most important credible part of the COP. Why do you think Miki was never as popular as Mao in Japan? She even had the quads earlier in her career which arguably was just as impressive.
I am curious if we show the 2x2 performances from NHK to a bunch of 12 years olds IN Japan, and ask which skator should win, I bet 9/10 will pick Mao. It seems to me some ISU judges at NHK 2012 were't that much different from a bunch of 12 years olds by 0.05 at least.
To answer the question: Was Suzuki twice a victim of underscoring and pageantry in PCS?
Answer: Yes, but more than twice actually. Something I noticed since her Olympics, but I just love the fact she keeps on going, even putting up 2 lutz in her FS just to make it a point. I love the fact there seems to be hardcore figure skating fans always support her which shows how underrated she is relative to her actual results. Given this is a sport that is a human judged one (humans by nature can be fickle though we try not to be), I think her attitude will get her far not to mention she made so many personal breakthroughs these past 2 seasons.
Last edited by os168; 11-28-2012 at 02:11 PM.