I have read that when the scale of values for the CoP was in the preliminary stages, one of the events that the ISU used for calibration was the 2002 Olympics men's competition. For the base values that they were testing, Goebel beat Yagudin fot the gold medal.
Well, that was obviously wrong, so they reduced the base value for quads until it came out right.
This is the most awful awful thing about COP!!! That a triple axel triple flip sequence is totally reduced to the base values of both the 3A and 3F with the half loop! You are discussing a triple axel triple flip sequence!!! That deserves total tremendous respect and is totally amazing in all levels of skating history.
Precisely why we don't see much of quad combos anymore, especially in SP. Because it costs the same points as to do a single quad and then a lutz combo in SP.
The CoP argument was to actually quantify just how much more jump content Goebel had in the overall competition over Plushenko, in both segments. It also shows how grossly held up Plushenko was in the SP, placing 4th after a fall and no combination. If anything, he's lucky the 2002 Olympics was pre-CoP because no matter how much PCS he was given by the judges, he would have been buried in the SP, and likely would have lost the LP to Goebel considering his jump disadvantage. Only under 6.0 would he get 5.9 technical merit for a stepout and a doubled jump, not to mention 5.9's for artistry in his SP when that fall was brutal.
That's why I put in parentheses the actual counting of triples and quads. To me, 3 quads and 6 triples is worth much more than 2 quads and 6 triples, particularly when one of the quads was executed in the second half. The 5.4's for presentation and putting him behind Honda in the FS were especially pathetic. When theatrics wins over pure athleticism how can you even call it a sport?
I do agree with gmyers that the 3A-3F sequence doesn't account for how difficult it is to incorporate that 3F after a 3A. I wonder why Plushenko no longer attempts the 3F in his program and just does a simple 2A, when clearly he's been able to execute it easily in the past. But to be fair, that would have been worth 14.3 points, which is a really high amount for a non-quad element. I think he was rewarded with that, because clearly it made up for his other errors and he scored 5.8/5.9 for technical merit.
Nobody "noticed" that because Yagudin wiped the floor with Plushenko and the rest of the competition, and deserved gold, so nobody cared about where Plushenko and Goebel placed. (Notice how Chan winning over Ten was a big deal, but the Germans error-packed freeskate being ahead of the two clean Canadian pairs wasn't a big deal this year.) You said yourself, it's the gold that matters. Yagudin was king of the ice, and Plushenko and Goebel didn't matter.
Goebel's Olympic FS still stands as the most technically demanding program ever skated. 3 quads and 2 triple axels haven't been executed since. The only skaters I can picture even attempting that these days are Hanyu (2 quads, 2 axels), Reynolds (three quads - maybe 4 if he gets the 4L - one axel) or Fernandez (3 quads, 1 axel ... could be 2 axels if he didn't repeat the 3S). It's shameful that such a superb skate was considered practically on par technically with a skate that had multiple jump errors, had one less quad, had no creativity or intricacy going into his jumps, and had a 2A and 2S as the final two jumps.
There are advantages to practicing a quad-triple combo - because it's not a solo jump, you don't require intricate steps going into it. Also, should you mess up your lutz, you get deducted for no combo and there's no opportunity to add in a combination to make up for that. If you mess up a quad, at least you can tack it on to your 3Z.
Of course, there is an advantage in that if you attempt the 3Z+3T in the second half, you get a bonus. But you also supposedly get a PCS boost for attempting the hardest combo (I know people say that shouldn't affect PCS, but if a man does a solo 3Z or a solo 3S, obviously the judges will regard the lesser difficulty). In terms of creating a first impression it says "Look, I just did the hardest combination. Notice me." It does take some focus to execute the 3-3 later in the program too, and some guys just like getting it done right off the bat.
Why do you just assume I'm trolling when you don't even look up the context of the statements I make? Please, do try to come up with an original response that doesn't use your typical words: zamboni, homologation, or predict the impending doom of the sport.
Goebel did not come close to winning the gold medal. Yagudin got all first place ordinals and four 6.0s, including one from the U.S. judge. (There was no Russian judge on the panel.)
My recollection was about the tinkering that the ISU did with the CoP base values in the next year, the 2002-2003 season, when they used the "interim system" while they worked the bugs out of the proposed CoP. Using Yagudin's convincing win as a model (among many other competitions that they mock-scored), this helped the ISU brain trust to calibrate the appropriate base values for elements in future seasons.
Anyway, that's what I remember from discussions of the CoP in the 2002-03 and 2003-04 seasons. If your memory of these discussions is different, that is no justification for gratuitous sarcasm.