6.0 in scoring

Rgirl - I understand what you are saying about the flutz. Some are better than others. At the same time, and in my opinion, you are legitimizing it as an official jump, and not an attempted lutz (or flip for that matter). I'm not against legitimitizing the flutz but I would like to see the Official definition - not something we as fans would make uop. With the official definition I could decide the +s and -s. But not until it has become an official jump.

What you said about my views is not quite correct. It may be that I was not clear but from what I heard was that a flutz is considered officially as an attempted lutz, and is marked down accordingly. There was no judging the flutz as you may wish it; there was definitely judgiong a bad lutz. But this is hearsay that I picked uip. I have not read anything official on the flutz. I would love some poster to point it out to me.

Sorry about the misunderstanding of your views on the flutz. It was your use of the term 'minor' flutzing which got to me. It seemed to have deemed that flutzing should be graded on whether it was minor or major or somewhere in between.

IMO, if a skater takes off from a flat to execute a lutz, he/she is having a poor take off of the lutz. If he/she rocks over to an inside edge, heshe is executing a flip by definition.

We can still agree to disagree on this topic. No problem but I do wish there was an official definition of a flutz, because to me the jump does not exist officially. However, when I see a real defintion of a flutz, I'll change my mind.

Joe

If he/she rocks over to an inside edge, heshe is executing a flip by definition.

Click to expand...

I disagree.

Each jump clearly has a different entry and one is taugh each jump differently.

If a skater glides back on an outside edge and then inadvertantly switches over to an inside edge just before take-off, it's clear that it's a failed Lutz attempt and not an intended flip.

I think that the skater should get a little credit for at least attempting a Lutz, over the skater who simply does the flip and doesn't even try to do a Lutz.

No one teaches a flutz, and no one does a flutz on purpose, IMHO. flutzes are just Lutzes done by people who can't always keep the outside edge, either due to lack of strenght or poor edging, or nerves, etc...

Bethe - Can't disagree with you totally. I was just trying to figure out how one judges a flutz. To me, and it seems like you, it is a failed lutz. the LUTZ is the jump. Either a skater does a lutz by definition or he does not do a lutz. there are plenty of faults with a true lutz besides entry.

If the jump is deemed an attempted Lutz which is because of the entry, then, the skater has failed to do a lutz, but has jumped something which, apparently has an unofficial name. You can call it officially as a flip or unofficially as a flutz.

By the way, can you name a skater who does not attempt a flip? If there are any their numbers are so tiny.

Giving credit to an attempted lutz is not so much giving credit for the attempt, but it is more realistic to give discredit for the lack of the true jump which would be more correct and is far more important.

Of course, no one does a flutz on purpose. Whoever said that? That is not the point, and neither are the excuses for not doing a true lutz valid. In a SPORT, it should matter what it is that you are actually doing officially. Can you imagine judging a camel to sits spin where the skater forgets to do the sitspin because he/she is nervous of an edge change. hmm.

Berthe, I do appreciate your caring for the skater. I do too, but decisions have to be made to select a winner.

Joe

Don't know if this should be a separate thread but it does apply to the 6.0 (even CoP).

I keep hearing about need for faster spins but I do wonder if the spins should be somewhat insync with the music? Fast music for fast spins & "slow" spins for slower music.

Watching MK's "slow spin" at the Nationals, I fiind that it reflected the pace of the music but still remarks are should be faster & faster.
Mayhap it needed the choreography to be faster with faster music as I can't see a 4/4 or 3/4 time music accompaning a fast spin.

So, should the spin always be mucho fast no matter what? Are the judges concerned about that aspect?

I'm still finding it hard to correlate the music with the skaing movements/elements but hopefully, it'll come within this decade.

MK gets a lot of nitpicking. Just wait till the summer! Of course you are correct. The speed of anything should be comensurate with the tempo of the music. Maria Butryskaya did not execute fast camels, but imo, they were with the music and the best in the world. I'm just giving credit where it is due, I was not a fan of MB.

Joe

This whole thread reminds me of that old saying that I can't for the life of me recall exactly ~ something about "missing the beauty of the forest due to focusing too much on the trees" ~ in other words, it's about the whole picture man, at least for me it has always been (no lie).

Whatever moves you, personally, should be a 6.0.......no need for somebody to tell you what you should feel according to him/her........too much analysis IMHO. Takes the pure magic, joy & beauty out of skating. Just let the skating move you; don't be dictated by outside forces. JMHO.

Peace Baby, Nadine (hippie here )

"ignorance is bliss"

MODIFIED TO ADD: upon reflection, "anal retentive" is what comes to mind when I think of this fixation with the flutz.

"the way I understand the flutz rule, judges are less likely to deduct than NOT to give credit for another flip that was supposed to be a lutz." - Philip Hersh

Joe...I understand what you are saying about the flutz. There basically seem to be 2 schools of thought on the lutz/flutz/flip.
1. If it is a jump that is intended to be a lutz, but the skater takes off on an inside edge, then it is a flutz.
OR
2. If it is a jmp that is intended to be a lutz, but it takes off on an inside edge, it is then a flip, because a that is what a flip jump is.

So basically it seems to be a matter of technique vs. intention.

I've head some describe a the difference between a flutz and a flip like this: If the skater starts on an outside edge then switches at the last second then its a flutz. but if they start on an inside edge or spend most of the entrance on an inside edge then they define it as a flip.

I tend to lean more towards #2 above, although on the boards I refer to the jump as a flutz, becuse if I were to say "skater x's flip" rather than "skater x's flutz" It would just confuse people. LOL Of course on some skaters its hard to discern whether its an inside or outside edge with out slo-mo, but usually If I can't tell with the naked eye then I say its a lutz.

Question: I think that it is probably true that a lutz is a required jump in the short program? And wonder if the lutz is also required in the long program.

Or do the required jumps vary and whether any there are "required" jumps in the long program at all.

The only required jump in the ladies SP is the double axel.

There are no required jumps in the LP.

In the SP, they must do a jump combination and a solo jump out of footwork. The top ladies do the triple Lutz/double toe combo and the 3flip out of footwork because those are the hardest, will gain the most points and that is what they need to do to finish on top, so they are "required" to do the Lutz if they want to finish anywhere near the podium, but it is not an official requirement.

Braveskater - Long before you were born a flutz was defined by skaters, not by fans and not by officials. It was a derrogatory term to put a skater down. Now however, he is forgiven for the error. times have changed!

It was simply that the skater took off from a flat (no edge) hence the fl plus the utz. Rocking over to an inside edge was doing a flip and who care'd if you did more than one.

When Tara came on the scene with the her low height bullet like rotations in the air she was executing a lutz a la back inside edge and as I recall quite a wide displace between the BI edge and the toe off leg.

Other figure skaters being much younger than my group called it a flutz and in some circles Tara was branded Queen of the Flutz.
The fans of Kwan loved it since MK was executing perfect lutzes at the time. I have at times noticed that MK takes off from the flat occasionally.

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.

Let's leave it to The Caller and His Gang. I doubt they will say flutz. I think they have the power to call it an "attemped Lutz", but I am not sure of that.

Citrus - There is no set rule in the LP about leaving out a jump but in the case of a missing lutz, that would raise eyebrows. In the LP I think it is wise to do one of a kind jumps and repeat 2 only if they are in combo.

Joe

Joesitz said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.

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

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.....

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.

Click to expand...

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.

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.

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'.

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

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

Joesitz said:

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?

Click to expand...

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

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