Page 14 of 114 FirstFirst ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 64 ... LastLast
Results 196 to 210 of 1710

Thread: Analyzing Sotnikova and Kim's footwork in the FS

  1. #196
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    129
    Quote Originally Posted by Blades of Passion View Post
    Here is the clearest video you can get online of Sotnikova's performance: http://skatingvideoclips.com/getfile...9&sid=f69801fb

    This link is best for viewing the performance with the least amount of commentary, though: http://www.speedyshare.com/GWRmH/Ade...OlympicsLP.wmv

    Gkelly and I had three areas of disagreement it seems:



    How can this count as a choctaw when she is on two feet? There isn't a step from one foot to the other here, there's a curve on two feet and then she changes edge and foot.



    It doesn't come out on a RBO edge, the turn is to an inside edge and then it slides over to an outside edge.



    And here, she has lost the inside edge before she turns, so it's a rocker.

    ----

    And then one rule that needs to be clarified:



    Edge changes have to be on a full curve to count as a step, though. Otherwise it's just fiddling back and forth on the edge and doesn't count for anything towards the level. She only does changes of edge on a curve in the clockwise direction.
    I don't even think we have to be this detailed to know that Adelina did not deserve gold. But it's interesting and it just makes the cheating case even stronger. You're doing a really great analysis on this.

  2. #197
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    332
    Quote Originally Posted by mskater93 View Post
    There is also a possibility that it was DESIGNED as a L3 (especially since she's gotten L2 and L3 all season until here) but it was miscalled.
    This was my initial and final impression on her choreography - I mentioned it in my deleted TextEdit file (...). After watching her FS, I thought she could've been more ambitious and go for Lv. 4, but it seemed that she brought out all of her current skills - so retracted; it's like expecting Yuna to do a +3 GOE 3Lo-combo program with a 90% consistency.

    ===

    So far, I've only seen 3, maybe 4 posters actually contributing to this thread's purpose, which is to provide detailed analysis according to the IJS rule book; none from those who call BoP as a hater. I really, I mean it sincerely, am interested in Lv. 4 analysis; yes, expect opposing views, but that's what this thread is about. I assume it's too much of a scary job for most people, so I don't blame on just the fact it's not done; I know because I never went back after my file got deleted midway done; never again will I try, at least in written form.

  3. #198
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    3,933
    Quote Originally Posted by Blades of Passion View Post
    Here is the clearest video you can get online of Sotnikova's performance: http://skatingvideoclips.com/getfile...9&sid=f69801fb

    This link is best for viewing the performance with the least amount of commentary, though: http://www.speedyshare.com/GWRmH/Ade...OlympicsLP.wmv
    Thanks for the links.

    Wow, there are a lot more different angles and edits out there than I expected, and none of them is the official replay. I don't think we're ever going to get a definitive answer on a few of these steps, or the contested jump calls.

    Which means that there are some gray areas, which doesn't speak strongly in favor of the clarity of Sotnikova's edge quality in those instances.

    I think the best we can conclude is that she was probably lucky to be given benefit of doubt on a few of the calls. What the motivation was for the tech panel (and judges) to be generous is an open question -- I don't think we're going to get a definitive answer there either. Believe what you want to believe.

    Edge changes have to be on a full curve to count as a step, though.
    OK -- I don't know the criteria for how deep or how long held the edge changes need to be to count.

  4. #199
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    217
    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly View Post
    I think the best we can conclude is that she was probably lucky to be given benefit of doubt on a few of the calls.
    But in order to give somebody the benefit of the doubt, there has to be doubt, and I don't remember Gracie being held up for 2 minutes while the judges fussed over Adelina's scores. And it's not only that - it's the notion that the same tech they used to call everybody elses mistakes during the competition, somehow failed when Adelina took the ice, leaving the technical panel with nothing but doubt about the elements in question, such that their only choice was to either give her the benefit of the doubt, or mark her down. Sorry, but it's just too much of a logial stretch for me to be charitable about the judge's intentions.

    Quote Originally Posted by Spinerette View Post
    ISU made their own grave and will be buried in it.
    Here Here

  5. #200
    Kisdom Title TMC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    1,394
    Quote Originally Posted by I♥Yuna View Post
    But in order to give somebody the benefit of the doubt, there has to be doubt, and I don't remember Gracie being held up for 2 minutes while the judges fussed over Adelina's scores. And it's not only that - it's the notion that the same tech they used to call everybody elses mistakes during the competition, somehow failed when Adelina took the ice, leaving the technical panel with nothing but doubt about the elements in question, such that their only choice was to either give her the benefit of the doubt, or mark her down. Sorry, but it's just too much of a logial stretch for me to be charitable about the judge's intentions.
    Very good point.

  6. #201
    Kisdom Title TMC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    1,394
    Quote Originally Posted by bebevia View Post
    So far, I've only seen 3, maybe 4 posters actually contributing to this thread's purpose, which is to provide detailed analysis according to the IJS rule book; none from those who call BoP as a hater. I really, I mean it sincerely, am interested in Lv. 4 analysis; yes, expect opposing views, but that's what this thread is about. I assume it's too much of a scary job for most people, so I don't blame on just the fact it's not done; I know because I never went back after my file got deleted midway done; never again will I try, at least in written form.
    I too am really sincerely interested in analysis of Lv Sp Stsq and all the other fs-related letter scombinations you can think of! I wish people could calm down (and I think they have a bit) and provide actual analysis instead of accusations.

    I was thinking about this thread last night in bed when I couldn't sleep (yeah that's how crazy I am), and I came up with an idea:
    Let's change the thread title to "Analyzing Ladies' Olympic Singles TES - Please limit analysis to Ms X, Ms Z, Ms Q and Ms T."
    Obviously we'd assign a letter to each skater and one that isn't in any of their actual names.
    This would, I'd hope, help people look past the person and only look at the performances in the most objective way possible.
    The posts would look a little something like this:
    "Ms Q received lv4 because of something, but I disagree with her GOE for this jump because as I see it it was UR and wrong edge on top of that. I would have given -# GOE"
    "I disagree, as I see it her edge change was doubtful, not blatant"
    Anyone using a) the actual names of the skaters included and/or b) extreme adjectives such as hate and/or c) personal attacs against other posters would be severely reprimanded by all and invited to leave the thread, go think about what they did, and come back when they can play with others again.

  7. #202
    At the rink. Again. mskater93's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,225
    Quote Originally Posted by drivingmissdaisy View Post
    So a regional TS is who choreographs designs L4 steps for her students and yet there's a possibility that Adelina's team planned level 3 for her? You really think her SS are awful.
    A L3 doesn't mean I think her SS are awful. Please don't cast some random opinion on me, I never said her SS were awful (overscored, yes, awful, no).

    All coaches/choreographers try to get their skaters to a L4 if at all possible. I know one of her Senior ladies has gotten her step sequence called as a L4 when it was executed perfectly. This skater also has struggled to get her jumps fully rotated and so has spent a great deal of time working to gain points elsewhere.

  8. #203
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    3,933
    Quote Originally Posted by I♥Yuna View Post
    But in order to give somebody the benefit of the doubt, there has to be doubt, and I don't remember Gracie being held up for 2 minutes while the judges fussed over Adelina's scores.
    Since I happen to have a tape of the live broadcast . . .

    It was just about exactly 3 minutes from the time Adelina hit her final pose to the time her scores were announced while she was in the Kiss-and-Cry.

    During that time this broadcast showed Adelina taking her bows, getting off and hugging her coach . . . replays of a couple elements . . . sitting in the K&C. Even though it was a US network, they did not focus on the US skater next to compete.

    That's a pretty typical amount of time, not enough for the audience to get impatient, but plenty of time for a few reviews, even a pass through the step sequence if they felt it necessary.

    However, "benefit of the doubt" on some elements could also mean "Looks good in real time, no need to review."

    And it's not only that - it's the notion that the same tech they used to call everybody elses mistakes during the competition, somehow failed when Adelina took the ice, leaving the technical panel with nothing but doubt about the elements in question, such that their only choice was to either give her the benefit of the doubt, or mark her down. Sorry, but it's just too much of a logial stretch for me to be charitable about the judge's intentions.
    This thread is only about technical panel calls, not judges.

    Are we going to apply the same scrutiny to other skaters' level 4 elements, to other skaters' borderline jumps, and see if maybe we would have given less credit than this tech panel in other cases as well?

    Who else might have gotten benefit of doubt, without public outrage because they didn't win?

  9. #204
    At the rink. Again. mskater93's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,225
    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly View Post
    Who else might have gotten benefit of doubt, without public outrage because they didn't win?
    I think the concern is more others did NOT receive the benefit of the doubt to the same degree.

  10. #205
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    270
    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly View Post

    This thread is only about technical panel calls, not judges.

    Are we going to apply the same scrutiny to other skaters' level 4 elements, to other skaters' borderline jumps, and see if maybe we would have given less credit than this tech panel in other cases as well?

    Who else might have gotten benefit of doubt, without public outrage because they didn't win?
    Quote Originally Posted by mskater93 View Post
    I think the concern is more others did NOT receive the benefit of the doubt to the same degree.
    Also, the notion of possible bias due to the tech controller being a Russian (and therefore not providing the same scrutiny to other skaters) so it almost seems like these elements were graded in real time without the use of equipment. Based on the shakiness or non-existence of these steps and turns, it seem odd that they were not given greater scrutiny.

  11. #206
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    253
    is everyone on the same page that BoP's "interpretation" of the rule was the correct one?

  12. #207
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    3,933
    I don't see any other interpretation as fitting the wording.

  13. #208
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    838
    I wasn't aware that skaters were given the benefit of the doubt on spin/footwork levels. Unlike with jumps, where skaters can underrotate up to 1/4 and still be given the benefit of the doubt, resulting in some debatable calls sometime, I thought that with spin/footwork levels, there was much less room for skaters to be given the benefit of the doubt--skaters either fulfilled the level requirements or they didn't. I can see how on occasion there's some wiggle room and debatable decisions to be made, but overall, spin/footwork calls seemed fair and justifiable but not generous, and they didn't appear to have any relation to reputation.

    Yuna Kim got a level 3 on her flying camel spin at 2013 Worlds SP, and it was totally deserved. Didn't matter that she was the reigning Olympic champion; her first position wasn't stable, she got dinged accordingly. That's fair. Akiko Suzuki really, really struggled in the Olympics team event FS with her footwork sequence (was it something with the ice? No ladies skater got a level 4 step sequence in the team event), and so even though it's Akiko Suzuki and she usually has wonderful footwork, I wasn't shocked to see the level 2 in the protocols.

    At the 2014 Olympics, in the ladies team event and ladies individual, the only skater who got a level 4 step sequence in more than one segment was Adelina Sotnikova.

    - Ladies team event: No level 4 step sequences were given out at all
    - Ladies individual SP: level 4 step sequence - Adelina Sotnikova, Akiko Suzuki
    - Ladies individual FS: level 4 step sequence - Adelina Sotnikova, Mao Asada, Carolina Kostner, and Kaetlyn Osmond

    If the technical panel was generous across the board, and giving multiple skaters the "benefit of the doubt" on level 4 step sequences, I would expect to see more level 4 step sequences called for other skaters. Certainly, Adelina Sotnikova is not the only skater capable of getting a level 4 step sequence or with a program constructed with the intention of getting a level 4. Akiko Suzuki, Mao Asada, and Carolina Kostner all received level 4 step sequences for both the SP and FS in at least one other ISU competition this season (Kostner = 2014 Europeans; Asada = 2013 GPF; Suzuki = 2013 Skate Canada). That is not to say that Kostner, Asada, and Suzuki did not make mistakes at the Olympics that prevented them from getting a level 4 step sequence in one segment at these Olympics. But it is fair to say that they were not given the benefit of the doubt in getting a level 4 step sequence in that segment...because they didn't.

  14. #209
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    5,285
    Quote Originally Posted by kslr0816 View Post
    is everyone on the same page that BoP's "interpretation" of the rule was the correct one?
    I interpret the rules as all 5 different turns must be executed in both directions, and all 3 different steps must be executed in different directions. As pointed out, certain turns like her LFI bracket were turned into rockers, but a technical caller might have given her credit for the bracket, for example.

    The reality is... it's simply not feasible to analyze 30 turns/steps and ensure the edges were correct, all for the sake of 0.6 points. And keeping track of whether 5 different turns and 3 different steps were both executed in each direction is damn near impossible, especially while assessing the other aspects of the footwork sequence. Even if you had a checkbox, that's 16 movements (along with all other movements executed in a footwork sequence).

    I mean, judges fail to recognize when skaters don't do preceding movements into their solo jumps in the short program. You think a tech specialist is going to recognize every minute aspect of a footwork sequence. Skaters would be waiting an extra 2 minutes in the Kiss and Cry just over a level call.

  15. #210
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    838
    Just for reference, regarding how generous/strict the technical panel is across the board:

    The only men's skaters who received level 4 step sequence in both the SP and the FS in the individual event were Patrick Chan, Denis Ten, and Daisuke Takahashi, as they were the only ones to achieve that in the FS. In the SP, though, 8 additional skaters received level 4 step sequences: Hanyu, Machida, Amodio, Brezina, Ge, Brown, Abbott, Majorov.

    In the men's team event, only Patrick Chan and Florent Amodio received level 4 step sequence in the SP. No level 4 step sequences in the FS.

Page 14 of 114 FirstFirst ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 64 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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