Asada's 3A: underrotated or not? | Page 4 | Golden Skate

Asada's 3A: underrotated or not?

David21

On the Ice
Joined
Jan 24, 2004
Yes question it, but to keep repeating over and over Mao's jumps were under rotated is annoying. We got it the first time


This thread (which I didn't start) is discussing Mao's underrotations. If you don't like to read anything about that topic, you are free to ignore this thread. :disapp:


"The callers" also gave < to her triple Axel in the SP. I think it's fair to question calls for being either overly strict or overly lenient. Though I question the point of calling a jump "underrotated" when it's a 1/8 turn short - you could just as well say it's underrotated when it's 10° short too.


The important question is at which point a skater should get punished for the "underrotation". Some people or judges are more strict than others. But when a skater underrotates a jump by about 1/4 and apparently *just* doesn't get the < sign from the callers, then it is quite clear to me that it is the judges who at least should be taking a -1 GOE reduction for the jump (how it is written in the rules: -1 for UR without < sign) but judges are obviously not doing that.
 

OS

Sedated by Modonium
Record Breaker
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
This thread (which I didn't start) is discussing Mao's underrotations. If you don't like to read anything about that topic, you are free to ignore this thread. :disapp:





The important question is at which point a skater should get punished for the "underrotation". Some people or judges are more strict than others. But when a skater underrotates a jump by about 1/4 and apparently *just* doesn't get the < sign from the callers, then it is quite clear to me that it is the judges who at least should be taking a -1 GOE reduction for the jump (how it is written in the rules: -1 for UR without < sign) but judges are obviously not doing that.

Can someone enlighten me with regards to the rule and point scoring changes for 1/4 UR prior to Vancouver and after Vancouver? Has the rules been loosened since?
 

Krislite

Medalist
Joined
Sep 22, 2010
Can someone enlighten me with regards to the rule and point scoring changes for 1/4 UR prior to Vancouver and after Vancouver? Has the rules been loosened since?

After Vancouver, under-rotation calls were divided into two:

1. a UR with "<", which means under-rotation between a quarter and one-half. This is far less punitive and the BV is reduced to 70%.
2. a UR with "<<", which is a full down-grade to a double when the jump is considered under-rotated by at least a half.

Up to Vancouver, the tech panel made no such distinction. anything under-rotated by more than a quarter gets a downgrade and a severe GOE penalty.
 

CarneAsada

Medalist
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
After Vancouver, under-rotation calls were divided into two:

1. a UR with "<", which means under-rotation between a quarter and one-half. This is far less punitive and the BV is reduced to 70%.
2. a UR with "<<", which is a full down-grade to a double when the jump is considered under-rotated by at least a half.

Up to Vancouver, the tech panel made no such distinction. anything under-rotated by more than a quarter gets a downgrade and a severe GOE penalty.
Adding to this: for a UR with <, the GOE deduction is between -1 and -2, but there are no restrictions on final GOE. For UR with <<, the GOE is -2 to -3 and the final GOE must be negative.

There was one change in the leadup to Vancouver that mattered - in 2009-10, they changed it so that the < mark was no longer visible to the judges. The BV was still marked down, but the judges could award GOE however they chose (but applying a deduction from -1 to -3). In the 2008-09 season, I believe the deduction was the same, but the overall GOE had to be negative.
 

OS

Sedated by Modonium
Record Breaker
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
After Vancouver, under-rotation calls were divided into two:

1. a UR with "<", which means under-rotation between a quarter and one-half. This is far less punitive and the BV is reduced to 70%.
2. a UR with "<<", which is a full down-grade to a double when the jump is considered under-rotated by at least a half.

Up to Vancouver, the tech panel made no such distinction. anything under-rotated by more than a quarter gets a downgrade and a severe GOE penalty.

Interesting, so all these 3A borderedlined 1/4 UR could have got downgraded prior to Vancouver to the equivalent score of a double axel with negative GOEs.
 

CarneAsada

Medalist
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
Interesting, so all these 3A borderedlined 1/4 UR could have got downgraded prior to Vancouver to the equivalent score of a double axel with negative GOEs.
If they did not get marked < in the recent competitions, they would not get downgraded prior to Vancouver. The definitions for 1/4 turn were not changed. If they were marked <, then yes, they would of course get the same credit as a 2A. Last Olympic season, Asada did have some otherwise nice-looking 3As (mostly in combination) downgraded (both at Worlds 2010, one in her 2010 4CC SP). The scoring of her Axels at 2010 Worlds might have been one of the reasons behind adding the < and << gradations as some considered it overly harsh.
 

szidon

On the Ice
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
After Vancouver, under-rotation calls were divided into two:

1. a UR with "<", which means under-rotation between a quarter and one-half. This is far less punitive and the BV is reduced to 70%.
2. a UR with "<<", which is a full down-grade to a double when the jump is considered under-rotated by at least a half.

Up to Vancouver, the tech panel made no such distinction. anything under-rotated by more than a quarter gets a downgrade and a severe GOE penalty.

The rule has constantly changed in favor of Asada. Since the 2010-2011 season, ladies can have either a double or a triple Axel in SP. (In the 2008-2009 season, the BV of 3A was increased from 7.5 to 8.2)
Given the only skater who tried 3A was Asada and she couldn't jump 3+3, it was evident such a rule change seemed to be targeted to favor Asada.

More than that, the rule was changed underrotated jumps were less penalized and judges have constantly ignored Asada's underrotation.

I think Asada is the most favored skater by the judges given the rule changes.
 

Barb

Record Breaker
Joined
Oct 13, 2009
Given the only skater who tried 3A was Asada and she couldn't jump 3+3, it was evident such a rule change seemed to be targeted to favor Asada.

If men are allowed, why not Mao?, if she has 3a it would be absolutely sexist not let her do it
 

Barb

Record Breaker
Joined
Oct 13, 2009
Is there any sport in the world to change the rule to benefit a specific athlete?

It is not Mao´s fault that she is the only woman doing 3a, it is not like the other girls are forbidden do it, but if she is doing it it is fair the change of the rule.
If Yuna would be the only one doing 3a I am sure you would not think it is unfair new rule
 

szidon

On the Ice
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
It is not Mao´s fault that she is the only woman doing 3a, it is not like the other girls are forbidden do it, but if she is doing it it is fair the change of the rule.
If Yuna would be the only one doing 3a I am sure you would not think it is unfair new rule

I'm not blaming Asada. What I mean is all the politicking whithin the ISU is ridiculous.
 

Barb

Record Breaker
Joined
Oct 13, 2009
I'm not blaming Asada. What I mean is all the politicking whithin the ISU is ridiculous.

Why not to think the ISU simply find out the previous rule was ridiculous. Basically you are implying the ISU, I guess because the japanese federation´s order are trying prop up to Mao. The JSF couldn't even get to ratify a good 3a in GPF in Japan with the tech specialist being Japanese :rolleye:
 

minze

Medalist
Joined
Dec 22, 2012
Why not to think the ISU simply find out the previous rule was ridiculous. Basically you are implying the ISU, I guess because the japanese federation´s order are trying prop up to Mao. The JFS couldn't even get to ratify a good 3a in GPF in Japan with the tech specialist being Japanese :rolleye:
This is from the people who claimed mao was practicing double footed 3A.
 

minze

Medalist
Joined
Dec 22, 2012
The rule has constantly changed in favor of Asada. Since the 2010-2011 season, ladies can have either a double or a triple Axel in SP. (In the 2008-2009 season, the BV of 3A was increased from 7.5 to 8.2)
Given the only skater who tried 3A was Asada and she couldn't jump 3+3, it was evident such a rule change seemed to be targeted to favor Asada.

More than that, the rule was changed underrotated jumps were less penalized and judges have constantly ignored Asada's underrotation.

I think Asada is the most favored skater by the judges given the rule changes.

Mao Asada how dare you be the only woman who attemps a jump? Just because you say something over and over does not make it true. If you bothered to check protocols you will see all the under rotations call Mao has gotten.
 

szidon

On the Ice
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Mao Asada how dare you be the only woman who attemps a jump? Just because you say something over and over does not make it true. If you bothered to check protocols you will see all the under rotations call Mao has gotten.

You didn't read all the post in this thread. This thread is about Asada's underrotated jumps which was not called as underrotated.
 

szidon

On the Ice
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Umm or is it about nitpicking the jumps of one skater.

Isn't it very unusual a skater who is a favorite for the Olympics tends to underrotate not only 3A but also quite a variety of jumps like 3T and even double jumps?
Plus, the judges have constantly overlooked the underrotation. It deserves to be discussed.
 

aftertherain

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 15, 2010
Isn't it very unusual a skater who is a favorite for the Olympics tends to underrotate not only 3A but also quite a variety of jumps like 3T and even double jumps?
Plus, the judges have constantly overlooked the underrotation. It deserves to be discussed.

Isn't it very unusual to have phrased the thread title the way you did when you are absolutely set one outcome and will never be convinced of the other?
 

David21

On the Ice
Joined
Jan 24, 2004
Isn't it very unusual a skater who is a favorite for the Olympics tends to underrotate not only 3A but also quite a variety of jumps like 3T and even double jumps?
Plus, the judges have constantly overlooked the underrotation. It deserves to be discussed.


Exactly.
 
Top