Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 31 to 43 of 43

Thread: 6.0 in scoring

  1. #31
    Go NJ Devils
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    2,700
    Originally posted by Joesitz
    IMO, if a skater is about to do a Lutz and unfortunatyely takes off from a back inside edge then to me he has made a very serious mistake in the Lutz. Unless there is a definition of what present day skaters call a flutz, I can not recognize it. I doubt the brass at ISU recognize it.
    According to the CoP rules,

    a) There is a mandatory drop of one GOE (-1) for:

    --Touch down with one hand;
    --Touch down with one foot;
    --Long preparation phase (telegraphed);
    --Short change of edge in take-off of lfip (sic) or lutz;
    --Weak landing (land on wrong edge or toe, etc.)

    b) There is a mandatory drop of two GOEs (-2) for:

    -- Slightly under-rotated either on take-off or landing (1/4 turn or less);
    --Moderate change of edge on take-off of flip or lutz;
    --Touch with two hands;
    --Step out of landing;
    --Land on two feet

    or "Minor problems in two phases described in (-1)"

    c) There is a mandatory drop of three GOEs (-3) for:
    --Severe change of edge on take-off of flip or lutz;
    --Fall

    or "Minor probles in three or more phases described in (-1) or major problems in two or more phases described in (-2).

    So there is an ISU-mandated deduction hierarchy to the "flutz" and "lip," depending on the severity of the change of edge on take-off. And, the ISU has dictated that landing on the wrong edge is worth the smallest deduction, and is 1/3 as bad as a serious flutz.

    Jennifer Robinson saves herself on her double-change ("S") entrance, by rocking onto the outside edge at the last minute/upon take-off.

  2. #32
    Custom Title Joesitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    20,185
    Thanks Hockeyfan.

    So there are deductions for a last moment change of edge and it is graded (GOE) by the short, moderate, or severe edge changes together with other problems in the execution.

    I am happy to see that the deductions are mandated although I presume that will vary with individual judges.

    So, I humble myself before Braveskater and Rgirl for their more accurate views of the Lutz. However, since I am a curmudgeon, I will be a stickler and say if you don't do the jump by definition, you haven't done the jump.

    I am thinking somewhat strategy. If a skater does have trouble maintaining the back outside edge before toe off, and the deductions are no more than 3 at the most, it doesn't give the skater any incentive to improve on the lutz.

    Interesting what you said about Jen Robinson, I saw Michael Weiss do the same thing but I don't know if he does it all the time. To me though, they are lutzes by definition.

    And finally, how often does one catch a skater trying a flip from an outside edge? There again, I believe it is a takeoff from the flat. The flat is the safest part of the blade.

    Joe

  3. #33
    sparkling Tove's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    hiding in Sergej's backpack with Maksim Shabalin
    Posts
    133
    feels like I'm constantly mentioning him...but my man Davydov is defenitely executing his flip from the outside, not from the flat. I've watched my tapes of him too many times, can't be mistaken...but I don't know about other skaters.....

  4. #34
    Keeper of Michelle's Nose berthes ghost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    953
    I am thinking somewhat strategy. If a skater does have trouble maintaining the back outside edge before toe off, and the deductions are no more than 3 at the most, it doesn't give the skater any incentive to improve on the lutz.
    If a skater wants to win, and/or skate their very best, that's incentive enough. No one is in a position to be cavalier about a -3 deduction, which is why no one, not even la kwan with her embarasment of 6.0s, doesn't get cocky and say "Heck, I can wear pants, take a costume deduction, and still win against these loosers.".

    Not to pick on any one skater, but Sarah Hughes comes immediately to mind. IMHO, she worked the whole time on fixing her flutz. Every skater has strengths and weaknesses. No one can do what they can't do, no matter how hard they try. When crunch time came, and the competition was at hand and her flutz was not much better, she did what everyone else does, she played up her strenghts and tried to hide her weaknesses. To me, that is why she did 2 3/3s and made sure the 1 flutz was in combo to avoid getting dinged for doing 2 flips.

    IMHO, any young skater who looks at Tara and Sarah and decides "obviously the judges don't care if you flutz, I won't bother trying to fix mine" is in for a rude awakening. Tara and Sarah just did a heck of a lot of things better than they did this one thing wrong.

    Afterall, the SP has 8 required elements and within the combo jump there has to be at least 5 factors considered (speed, take off edge, height, position in the air, landing edge) for each jump, so that only makes the flutz 1/10th of 1/8th of the total, not really much in the scheme of things.

    On the web however, one would think that the lutz entry edge was THE most important thing in all of skating by the way people go on and on about it. It's not called "Figure Lutzing" after all.

    Somethimes I think that people take this attitude that flutzing is just pure lazyness. To me, it's like benching 200bs. Some of us can do it easily, some of us can do it if we work really hard, and some of us will never be able to do it no matter how hard we try.
    Last edited by berthes ghost; 01-28-2004 at 08:32 AM.

  5. #35
    Go NJ Devils
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    2,700
    As far as strategy is concerned, whether it makes sense to fix a flutz could go either way. In GP events, even if Cohen's flutz was called "severe," in every SP, with a -3 deduction, that would be 7.8% of her total potential points. That might seem like a lot, but her other elements compensated every time in GP; she faltered in GPF when she wasn't close to clean. Under 6.0/OBO it's up to the individual judges to decide what weight a flutz has or hasn't as well as the execution severity. I suspect that at Worlds if Cohen is clean and "on," the flutz will be meaningless, just as Sokolova's underrotated 3/3's were last year.

    Looking at Cohen's top competition, I don't think Arakawa is given full enough credit for her skills in general, Sokolova underrotates her 3/3's and has slow spins and little stretch or beautiful positions, Liashenko telegraphs and makes little mistakes here and there, Volchkova lips and has weakish spins, Suguri's best wasn't within reach of an "on" Cohen in GP, even when Cohen wasn't completely clean; a two-fall Cohen still beat Suguri in '03 Worlds LP, and Slutskaya's been ill. Kwan's outside edge has been watched and disputed for years; four different reports from Worlds last year and Button gave five different answers, from flat all the way to severe flutz to last-minute flutz to clean outside edge to clean outside edge until the last minute to flat.

    What will Kwan's scores be under CoP, especially if the ISU starts enforcing the written guidelines and gets rid of the jump crosswires between the callers and judges? It's possible the scores will tighten up per the written code, or they may be as fluid as this year. (Without knowing which judges were chosen and which scores were used, it's hard to say whether changing from double-trimmed mean to trimmed mean will have much of an impact, either.) If the strict code is used, net/net tech-wise Cohen may have the advantage with her spins and spirals in speed, position, and difficulty even with Kwan's edge advantage, unless Arutunian gets Kwan to up the technical ante. Since Cohen's already got as many level 3's as she's likely to get, the two places she can gain points most readily are transitions -- more difficult entrances into jumps, fewer crossovers -- and either fixing the flutz or/and landing the 3Z/3T, as a +1 3Z/2T yields 8.4 points (6.1 [3Z] + 1.3 [2T]+1), compared to the 7.6 for most severe flutz on the harder combo (6.1 [3Z] + 4.5 [3T] -3). If the flutz is called a -2 instead of a -3 on the 3Z/3T, then the points are slightly higher than the +1 3T/2T (8.6).

    The usual explanation for flutzes is that skaters don't have the strength to hold the back outside edge and rotate in the "counter" direction. This is attributed mostly to young US skaters, because in the US, skaters demand to do the jump before they are ready. Cohen is "cut;" it's hard for me to believe that she doesn't have the strength now. But I have to wonder how much muscle memory is involved. Cohen's flutz has been engrained for many years. Re-learning technique is hard, when the body is strong and capable enough to fall into the old habit. Asa Persson of Sweden had a miserable Euros last year in her home country, because she went to Canada to train with a new coach, who insisted on taking apart her jumping technique. During 4C's, I think it was Underhill who commented that Rochette changed her lutz technique, and even though she has been failing on this jump, her technique in failure is much better than her old technique, and it's just a matter of time before she has confidence in the new technique/timing.

    For skaters in the low top/top middle of the pack, whose pre skills won't compensate for the 2-3 points, and whose spins, spirals, and footwork are generally level 1, fixing a flutz could make a difference to their individual scores and placements under CoP.

  6. #36
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,356
    Despite people commented on flutzing now is taken too seriousely with the net fans. I think it should be taken seriousely. Do we measure all Senior Ladies who competed at Worlds elite level should have all FIVE Different Triples (3A excluded). So if for someone who never has in her life has actually landed a true Lutz should be considered as lacking of Senior Ladies Skill? So automatically deduct the base points?

    I remember onece MK was asked by someone why she is still competing at this level. She answered 'all elite femal skaters competed at senior level have 5 triples. She still have those 5 triples why shouldn't she compete'.

  7. #37
    Custom Title Joesitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    20,185
    The Fluz, the Flutz, the Almighty Flutz. Now that it is actually graded minor, major and serious, it has to be accepted as a Lutz that never was. Ok, if that's what the ISU wants.

    The Flutz acceptance seems to favor the American Ladies - none of whom have a perfect lutz, imo. for the TV armchair judge, the cameraman should show the take-off close up as the skater toes off from the rear. They don't always do that except for Sarah Hughes, and some times other skaters. I'd like to see instant replay for all the US Ladies.

    As for strategy, I reiterate my point that the jump is not the end all in the total scores for a skater, so the skater satisfies the requirement and doesn't get the total amount allowed. No big deal. I doubt very much that a skater ever lost a competition because of one jump (even the flutz). Many skaters have other saving graces.

    I also reiterate my point that there is no real incentive for American Ladies skaters to try to work on a pure lutz while they have all the packaging for a grand presentation.

    As for the CoP, one should read Dirk Schaeffer's take on the CoP in general in the thread labeled "Analyzing the CoP.", particularly his take on Skate America. Judges apparently have marked an element from -1 to +2. Obviously there is a big difference in the experts. Does any skater actually get just the base points? or do judges feel compelled to take away or add on? Sorry, I added this but I just got carried away on grqding a flutz.

    Joe

  8. #38
    Custom Title Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    28,249
    Thanks, Berthesghost and Hockeyfan for those crucial details. Those two posts should be must reading for anyone who wants to play along in the CoP strategy game.

    Mathman

  9. #39
    Go NJ Devils
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    2,700
    Originally posted by Joesitz
    As for the CoP, one should read Dirk Schaeffer's take on the CoP in general in the thread labeled "Analyzing the CoP.", particularly his take on Skate America. Judges apparently have marked an element from -1 to +2. Obviously there is a big difference in the experts. Does any skater actually get just the base points? or do judges feel compelled to take away or add on?
    Not surprisingly, the element on which there is the greatest disagreement among judges is on jumps, and the greatest points value per program are jumps, so discrepancies have the greatest impacts. Do I think this needs to get fixed? Certainly. I think that judges should be required to check off whether the score reflects a clean exit and entry, and whether the jump is fully rotated. If the videotape shows otherwise, the score should be adjusted accordingly. But if the judges can't decide if a jump is done properly under CoP, where the criteria are strict, why would we think that the judges are any more capable of doing this correctly under 6.0/OBO, where they also must factor in relative difficulty for 8-14 elements?

    I just looked over the Skate America Ladies' SP and LP details. Of all of the spins and footwork/spiral sequences performed by all of the competitors -- 132 elements/1452 total scores -- these were the only elements where there was more than one score that was out of a 1-point range*, which certainly would have been trimmed if the judge had been selected:

    One high/one low out of range that would have been trimmed:

    Corwin (spin); Lautowa (spin); Cohen (spin)

    Single trimmed mean would not have eliminated discrepancies; at least more than one score at one end of the range:

    Nakano (spin, one each LP and SP); Maniachenko (SL FW); Kostner (spin); Kirk (spin)

    There were maybe 20 scores in total that were out of line at SA, or about 1%.

    At GPF, there were two instances out of 66 elements/660 scores: Arakawa (SP spin) and Suguri (LP spin).

    *I'm not expecting complete consensus, regardless of the system, using the strike zone analogy: as long as the umpire keeps the strike zone consistent, there can be discrepancies in the strike zone from game to game, just as track and field records are compared within a range of wind factors and ski records are compared within a wide range of conditions in the same race.

    We might agree that this is natural -- easier to tell if there's a trip on footwork or bobble on a spiral or a travel or control issue on a spin. We might even think this is a good thing -- a high degree of consistency among judges. (And there's data to show if the more lenient judges are consistently lenient across all competitors.) However, the vast majority of scores are "0" or "1." That could mean that no Ladies really do very good footwork or spirals or spins, but I don't really believe that: most of the "second rate" NA competitors at 4C's did at least one very fine spin, and several had beautiful spirals and flowing step sequences . Here the skaters with the callers have control over the scores, because if the scores are going to be the same pretty much for everyone, the only thing differentiating the skaters is the level of difficulty, and the overall impression this makes for the PE scores. If the same scoring holds for the men, no wonder the conclusion is that the footwork and spins make little difference in the final score: there's little to differentiate the competitors besides the levels, and the amount of points added for levels is dwarfed by the high point values for jumps, about which the judging is inconsistent.

    None of the analysis shows whether the same judges used the same criteria across all skaters on jumps -- i.e., called a flaw on Arakawa, but let Cohen get away with it. This would be the most egregious of sins, but even if the judges were consistently not taking the deductions, that is unfair to the skaters who perform them correctly in the same competition.

    To answer your question about base scores, from a small sample -- ladies GPF LP's, here is a list of base scores issued, of 143 scores (13 elements each times 11 judges):

    Cohen: 21 (15%)
    Suguri: 37 (26%)
    Arakawa: 57 (40%)
    Liashenko: 64 (45%)
    Sebestyen: 73 (51%)
    Onda: 87 (60%)

    There were plenty of base scores in Skate America ladies; I'm just too tired to count them
    Last edited by hockeyfan228; 01-29-2004 at 02:36 PM.

  10. #40
    Custom Title Joesitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    20,185
    Hockeyfan - No one is going to go through he trouble that you do in analyzing the CoP, and you know I rely on your posts to clear up my own problems with the CoP. For this I can not thank you enough.

    I believe our differences of the CoP has gone from 50 per cent to about 5 per cent. I'm at the point where I would love to see it used in Dortmund.

    Joe

  11. #41
    Custom Title Joesitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    20,185
    Originally posted by berthes ghost

    On the web however, one would think that the lutz entry edge was THE most important thing in all of skating by the way people go on and on about it. It's not called "Figure Lutzing" after all.
    Indeed, Berthes Ghost. It is but one element in a program of many elements which together make up the repertoire of the contestant. It is the 'whole program' of that contestant which in the 6.0 system is the principal method of deciding a winner.

    (How the 'whole program' plays out in the CoP, we will see eventually.)

    The discussions of any element in Forums are full of them: e.g., Who has the best whatever? So when we single out the Lutz it is kinda like nitpicking. There is a definition. Whether a skater fulfils that definition is the subject of the nitpicking. IMO, the Lutz is a very difficult jump by definition, and to execute the jump without regard to the definition, is making the jump much easier.

    I don't think a Lutz ever decided a competition, and I do sympathize with your feelings about how troublesome it can be for some skaters.

    Joe

  12. #42
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    7,555
    To go back to the original question about 6.0:

    The presentation 6.0 given to Sasha Cohen was questionable. Marks are placeholders, and giving such a high mark for a skate with a clumsy fall and a second error when she was the first skater in the final group seems way out of line.

    That judge had to give Kwan 5.9/6.0 to place her higher than Cohen's 5.7/6.0, even though Kwan's technical content did not warrant a 6.0. I can't even begin to think what marks would have been given to Kirk had SHE followed Kwan with a faultless skate.

  13. #43
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    3,865
    Originally posted by mzheng
    Do we measure all Senior Ladies who competed at Worlds elite level should have all FIVE Different Triples (3A excluded). So if for someone who never has in her life has actually landed a true Lutz should be considered as lacking of Senior Ladies Skill? So automatically deduct the base points?
    There is no requirement as to which jumps a senior lady must do in the long program, and only the double axel is required in the short (and two different triples in the short, although which ones are not specified).

    It is not true that all senior ladies attempt triple lutzes.

    If you look at some of the skaters who don't get past the qualifying rounds at Worlds, who even some who squeak past the short program into the long at Europeans or Four Continents, it's not surprising even now for some of them to be attempting only two or three different triples.

    This year Jenny Don won a senior international and placed in the top half at 4Cs with only two. Five years ago Mikkeline Kierkegaard and Lucinda Ruh placed in the top half at Worlds with only three, and in '98 Lenka Kulovana placed respectably with two.

    Overall skating quality counts for at least as much as jump content in determining whether a skater is "senior" or not. (Also, of course, age, and the strength of the field in the skater's home country.)

    In the mid-90s, it often seemed that many low- to mid-ranked senior ladies would have three triples in their repertoire, and the third (after salchow and toe loop) would often be the lutz, because they could get a higher base mark in the short program by trying it instead of the loop or flip, even if they had little chance of successfully completing any of those three triples.

    In the early '90s, skaters with five different triples were rare indeed, and in the '80s, having even one of the harder triples (loop, flip, lutz) was a big deal.

    It's now gotten to the point that enough ladies around the world are trying five different triples that in any given year all or almost all of those who make the final round at Worlds will have all five in their repertoire.

    But of course they won't necessarily complete all or even any of them successfully in their long programs, and they might pop and not rotate more than a single or double when it counts. Some of them may never have landed a particular triple cleanly in competition ever but continue to include it in hopes of getting partial credit for a reasonable attempt. There are all sorts of things that skaters might do wrong on these attempts, and changing edge on the lutz takeoff, whether severely or just slightly at the last second, is only one of many possible errors.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3

Similar Threads

  1. 6.0 tarnished at U.S. Nationals
    By brad640 in forum 2004-05 Figure Skating archives
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 02-17-2005, 06:29 PM
  2. Marshall's scoring...
    By Doggygirl in forum 2004-05 Figure Skating archives
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 11-28-2004, 02:17 PM
  3. How's this for a new scoring system?
    By tommyk75 in forum 2003-04 Figure Skating archives
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 04-14-2004, 09:24 AM
  4. Joy of 6: The thrill is gone It'll be computerized scoring at next Worlds
    By Ladskater in forum 2003-04 Figure Skating archives
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 03-25-2004, 06:44 AM
  5. Bring back the 6.0 mark
    By Kwanisqueen81 in forum 2003-04 Figure Skating archives
    Replies: 56
    Last Post: 09-24-2003, 06:04 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •