I think they are reading Golden Skate.
I think they are reading Golden Skate.
Can we merge this with the KO 2013 World Champ thread? It's already making my head spin trying to follow two Osmond-related threads.
Eh, the article is nothing more than the reporter looking at the scores and saying, "Wow those look close to Yuna's scores." No context, no nuance.
Mathman, your idea doesn't sound that crazy. Some reporter saw the boards, said "That sounds like an interesting topic" and then proceeded to look up information online. And with figure skating be so popular in Korea, some SEO, web savvy editor at the Chosun probably thought -- what story could we post that would get tons of clicks---I know...a story that says a skater is a threat to Kim Yuna. :P
And the headline "Canada's Rising Star May Pose Challenge to Kim Yu-na" SO SEO rich. Straight forward sentence and mention of a popular keyword on search engines. (Kim Yu-na).
Transitions is one mark out of 5. Osmond is below Kim in all of the other 4. This thread is a nightmare.
Yes, that is specific to the one element in the short program.It is explicitly spelled out in the SP rules that a single free skating movement or its equivalent is insufficient to meet the requirement for connecting steps into the solo jump. See here : http://www.isu.org/vsite/vfile/page/...-0-file,00.pdf "A single spread eagle, spiral/Free Skating movement cannot be considered as meeting the requirements of connecting steps and/or other comparable Free Skating movements the lack of which must be considered by the Judges in the GOE."
I have no reason to believe that the same intent is there. No preceding moves are required for any free program jumps or for the jump combination or the axel in the short program. Therefore, as I understand it, anything that precedes any of those jumps is available for consideration as enhancing the jump with a unexpected / creative / difficult entry. That doesn't mean that every jump that has something before it will deserve that bullet point, or will deserve a higher GOE even if it does earn that bullet point. But it also doesn't mean that "unexpected / creative / difficult" requires multiple skating moves.However, in the LP rules, the rules are not explicitly spelled out in the same language though the same intent is there.
But I thought we were mainly talking about the transitions component more than the GOEs, so even if the GOE is not raised (even if it's -3 because of flaws in later phases of the element), doing a single skating move before or after a might contribute a lot or a little to the Transitions component, depending on what the move was, how well it was performed, and how closely it was linked to the element.
Specifically, one spiral or spread eagle leading directly into a jump could be considered as adding difficulty IF it affects the balance and alignment required for the takeoff of the jump. Same with, e.g., a single backward counter or three turn into an axel jump. And it would also contribute to the intricacy of the transitions: a skating move, especially one that covers a lot of ice, immediately linked to an element.
A spiral or spread eagle, no matter how beautiful, with a crossover or other couple of neutral strokes and maybe one simple turn into a standard jump entrance would not meet that bullet point IMO and would not contribute to the intricacy or difficulty criteria of Transitions, although it could contribute to the variety and quality criteria.
Your example that I was responding to, by the way, was that "even a single spread eagle or spiral is considered insufficient," not a single choctaw.
I've seen many many skaters from juvenile level and up break up their long diagonal lutz approaches with a couple of little choctaws on indeterminate edges. I'm not impressed, because the quality is often weak and the exit edge of the last choctaw is not directly connected to the lutz takeoff -- there's usually a flat held for some distance and then the takeoff may not be off an outside edge at all. At higher levels, the edges might at least be identifiable, but not notable or strong.Put it this way, would you consider that a skater who performed a series of Choctaw and nothing else prior to a solo jump to have met the "unexpected / creative / difficult entry" bullet point knowing that even novice level skaters can do the same thing without much difficulty?
But if it's performed in such a way as to demonstrate a strong check and control of a clear running edge held all the way to the point of takeoff, then yes, I am impressed.
(That example, BTW, is from a short program solo jump and thus would have to be penalized under today's short program rules that specify more than one step or skating move preceding the jump. But in a long program, I would consider a strong choctaw like that to constitute a difficult and unexpected lutz entry compared with a standard unenhanced back outside edge.)
In the Beacom example? Holding a forward outside edge for half the rink doesn't demonstrate anything that I wouldn't expect from any other senior-level skater. Holding a forward outside edge for 3-4 seconds and then lifting up into a double axel demonstrates an ability to change the distribution of weight over the edge from the positioning needed to maintain the running edge to the very different positioning needed to take off for an axel jump. I would not expect the average senior skater, even one with a consistent triple axel, to be able to do a double axel from that approach without a lot of practice. I don't think I have ever seen anyone else do an axel jump from a FO edge that was held for even 1 full second.A question I would ask myself is : "What is being demonstrated or showcased in this particular move?" In other words, what does holding a long forward outside edge demonstrate preceding an Axel jump?
If I remember, next time I go to the rink I'll see if I can do a waltz jump out of a forward edge held for several seconds. I challenge you to do the same and report back whether you find it equally easy as a standard waltz jump/axel approach.
this more complex but less mature/polished performance.
(Personally, I enjoyed them both and agreed with the results, but I enjoyed Eldredge's more because it was the climax of a narrative of redemption in which he finally achieved a goal he had been struggling toward, with many setbacks, for at least 5 years -- the program itself bored me. That's my personal aesthetic preference -- I've always enjoyed complexity. And I suspect that the whole narrative of triumph out of adversity was a lot of the appeal for long-time, especially American fans, that might have been lost on Russian audiences looking for a different narrative.)
In the 1980s, some fans preferred Boitano's more spare, majestic style with some spectacular sweeping transitions, and others preferred Orser's greater agility and complexity with more unexpected connections. There was definitely some bitterness between the respective groups of fans, more because of style preference than nationality as far as I could tell. Fans who like variety or who like rivalries benefit from the sport supporting such contrasting styles, not choosing one style that existed during the era and saying "this is when skating looked like it should always look." It didn't even always look that way at the time.
Last edited by gkelly; 01-24-2013 at 01:43 AM.
That out of the way- Kaetlyn Osmond is really something special. She could perform the heck out of a very standard program and make it look lively and fun, if not particularly memorable. In terms of PCS I'm not really the best at spotting transitions etc, though I suspect her program is less intricate than Yuna's, and it is rather hard to compare them at this point in time. But one thing Kaetlyn does is she sparkles on ice. I don't think she'll win Worlds this year, I'm not sure she'll podium this year (though I will be rather surprised if she isn't in the top 5-7), but if she keeps improving, then next year and the year after- well.
I wish Australia had a skater like Kaetlyn!
I believe Chan finished 9th at his first Worlds, when he was the same age Osmond is now and after winning his first Canadian title. I think the bottom half of the top ten is a realistic goal for Osmond, and the gala is within reach if others don't skate well and she does.
And unrelated to your post, BoP is right: transitions are one fifth of the PCS. Can people please stop making them into the most important thing in skating?
Edited to add: Hmm. Maybe not. On rewatching, Kulik's exit from the triple toe goes right into some steps. The camera angle changes right there and it is hard to get the full effect from the video.
Last edited by Mathman; 01-24-2013 at 06:57 AM.
As a non-skating fan of figure skating, I've found this technical discussion interesting and illuminating but it hasn't influenced how I "feel" about the sport. I recently went back and gave a fresh look at both Yuna's and Kaetlyn's SP and FS at their respective National competitions for this year. I was not surprised by what I felt about them. I was impressed by Kaetlyn's SP more than her FS, but in both she displayed great footwork, solid jumps, very good spins, and a wonderful smile and energy. On the other hand, Yuna's skating "moved me", her speed and lightness on the ice is wonderful, her jumps seem "olympian" in the height and air-time she has in them, and when she lands it's like a feather setting down. I'm not a professional judge and I'm not sure this comment has any relevance to the topic of this thread, but to my amateur eyes, Kaetlyn may have better transitions on the ice but still has a ways to go to challenge Yuna (or Mao or Akiko or Alissa or Carolina) in overall impression IMHO.
Last edited by jatale; 01-24-2013 at 09:56 AM.