12-21-2012, 08:25 AM
Another practice video with Mao's 3A. This is why she doesn't include it yet in the programs, the jump is not consistent enough and even her second attempt is a bit two footed and maybe UR. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vEJej...=youtube_gdata
12-21-2012, 10:09 AM
Except these were not some random hypothetical skaters, but very specific set of rival competitors, one with a strong federation who wants to take down their rival down with the full support of the sport governing body. The thing is with any change in rules, it can be argued either way and spin it however you like. The question should be on why these specific rule changes, how they came about, what were the formal vetting process? Why those specific timing just after the Olympics, and why these unique skill were targeted and suppressed?
Originally Posted by Mathman
If this is a true fair sport, would this sort of 'shenanigans' be acceptable that 'seems' to target one specific individual while designed to prop up their direct rival? It is more corrupted than 6.0! At least this sort selective targeting was not possible under 6.0!
ISU deserved to be scrutinized heavily by the Olympic Games Committee given what happened, and send a tax man to look over the background finance dealing of the key decision makers. COP book should be thrown out of the window and start over again. The rise of minimum TES and lessen GP spots makes it an even exclusive sport. Nobodies/Newbies wouldn't stand a chance to catch up with the old guards until at least 1 more seasons (Can they last a season in such an expensive sport?). Frankly, there's are enough circumstantial evidence and historical basis to make a case in the court of law, or certainly some sort of auditing process behind these latest 'rule' changes to show why the world should still take this sport seriously.
Can you imagine someone made a rule to insist Mohammed Ali he can only box with one glove because the competition sponsors doesn't like him? Or how about Usain bolt, sorry only one shoe lace for you, we want to make our American sponsors happy and give others a chance, and they are also given better trainers. Or that Michael Phelps, you won too much already, you must remove your Nose clips, it is a distraction to other skaters and give you an unfair advantage. Or how about Michael Jordan, no more dunks for you, you are making everyone else look bad etc. etc..
Last edited by os168; 12-21-2012 at 10:15 AM.
12-21-2012, 11:28 AM
Actually, in other sports they do the opposite. They change the rules to favor the dominant champion.
Originally Posted by os168
In basketball, Michael Jordan got four steps (the "Jordan Rules"), lesser stars three, while the rule book (snicker snicker) says two. In the Rumble in the Jungle, the famous boxing match between Muhammad Ali and George Forman in Zaire, they loosened the ropes so that Ali could do his rope-a-dope trick without getting knocked out.
Back to skating, at least the ISU changed the rules after the Olympics instead of before. In the season leading up to the 2006 Olympics they pulled the rug out from under Shen and Zhao by changing the rules to disallow their most effective jumps, while elevating Totmianina and Marinin's layout.
Last edited by Mathman; 12-21-2012 at 11:37 AM.
12-21-2012, 11:57 AM
This is why I'm a member of GS. I would never know any of that stuff from any other source, Math. I didn't realize that the ISU did what they did to pairs rules in the 2006 cycle. Did that occur before or after Hongbo Zhao ripped his Achilles and had the surgery? So what you're saying is that Shen and Zhao had not only a long comeback from surgery going against them but also a trick in the rules book, and they STILL got a bronze? That's pretty breathtaking. I'm so glad they finally won their gold. Maybe things do work out in the long run, at least sometimes.
I didn't know about the "Jordan Rules." It's moments like this that I'm glad my real favorite sport is classical music.
12-21-2012, 01:01 PM
Base value 43.37. Curiously, this program is beaten by
Originally Posted by Blades of Passion
Base value 44.70. This is Michelle Kwan’s jump layout from 2000 worlds, with the addition of the +2LT+2Lo. This illustrates the advantage a skater has in the IJS if she can present all five triples.
Last edited by Mathman; 12-21-2012 at 04:14 PM.
12-21-2012, 01:07 PM
Before. People speculated that Hongbo's injury came about during intensive practice of the new moves, which did not come naturally to him at that stage of his career.
Originally Posted by Olympia
Of course there was the time when Van Cliburn blew everyone off the stage at the 1958 Tchaikovsky Competition. The organizers were aghast. We can't give this prize to an American!!! Cliburn won only after the direct intervention of Soviet Premier Nikita Krushchev.
Originally Posted by Olympia
Caption: "Give that boy his gold medal!"
Last edited by Mathman; 12-21-2012 at 01:27 PM.
12-21-2012, 01:51 PM
Other examples of major ISU rule changes that seem to have been inspired by specific skaters were the introduction of the singles short program (in 1972-73, a post-Olympic year) and the "Zayak" rule limiting repeated triple jumps (in 1982-83, mid-quadrennial).
These were arguably much more significant changes than the adjustments to the jump distribution rules being discussed here. But at least they gave all the top skaters time to adjust before the next Olympics, assuming they were planning to stick around that long (which Janet Lynn had not been, and unfortunately she couldn't adjust to the concept of required elements within one year, with fewer pre-Worlds competition opportunities).
Certainly not as significant as eliminating school figures entirely or switching from an ordinal-based to a point-based scoring system though. But at least those happened mid-Olympiad as well.
I'm sure the thought process was less "We don't want Skater/Team Q to win, so let's change the rules to stack the deck against them" but rather "We don't like that competitions are often being won almost solely on the strength of Skill X (of which Skater/Team Q is the most prominent example) over other skaters that almost everyone agrees is more well-rounded or better in what we almost all consider more important areas, so let's change the rules to make Skill X less of a determining factor."
Either way, the change ends up making things harder for Q if they're still competing. But they probably shouldn't take it personally.
12-21-2012, 02:44 PM
Hey think all the rule changing chatter merits it's own thread? Probably should leave this thread to be about Asada's improvements and such....
12-21-2012, 03:50 PM
I know that story, and I really love it, because the idea of a cold-war Soviet dictator giving permission to award a top prize to an American is so heartening. Another factor that makes the story even more remarkable: that was not just the Tchaikovsky Competition. It was the FIRST Tchaikovsky Competition ever held, as far as I can figure out. And they still were willing to award the gold medal to the American.
Originally Posted by Mathman
12-21-2012, 05:41 PM
The annual tweaking of the CoP rules, though, has a different flavor. The diminution and eventual abolition of figures changed not just the scoring system but the sport. (It used to be figure skating, suddenly it wasn't. ) The Zayak rule was not really necessary under 6.0. If the judges decided that many repetitions of the same element was not particularly impressive, they could vote with their marks.
Originally Posted by gkelly
Under CoP it seems like the skaters are playing cat-and-mouse with the rules. At the end of each season the mice get caught and the ISU tries to plug a few more mouse holes.
For instance, under the 2010 rules there was nothing to stop a skater from doing seven double axels. Do each of them well enough to get +2 GOE and that's 5.50 points per jump (plus second half bonus). Oops. Formerly there was nothing to prevent a skater from doing a Bielmann position on every spin and spiral and earn levels for them right and left. Oops. Lysacek won the Olympic gold medal without a quad. Oops -- better raise the value of quads.
12-21-2012, 06:01 PM
I hope Asada's improvements will show tomorrow at Japanese Nationals
12-21-2012, 08:04 PM
Actually, the rule was limited to three double axels, wasn't it?
Originally Posted by Mathman
12-21-2012, 08:39 PM
^ It was? OK, that makes sense. I wonder if allowing the third double Axel was specifically for the purpose of bailing out skaters who did not have the full complement of triples.
12-21-2012, 11:01 PM
I think I remember seeing a program with a 2A-2A sequence, a solo 2A, and a combo 2A-2T or something like that. I may be wrong though as I cannot remember who did it and when.
Originally Posted by ImaginaryPogue