It's actually disturbing how you selectively ignore facts and apply your knowledge to support what is a simple biased opinion--you didn't like much in Kim's skating, you liked Sotnikova's. In the end, you're just the same as the hardcore fans of skaters you're dismissive of in believing what you want to believe, yet you flaunt an air of superiority and objectivity through it all. The fact that you claimed to be in favor of "fair arguments" regarding Sotnikova is pure hypocrisy when your own arguments have not been built on objectivity or fairness or with honest intentions in an honest debate.
I don't post on skating blogs by the way. If you know who I am, then surely you know that I spend most of my time on another forum, where these types of discussions generally aren't done, and certainly not in this manner when they are... Conspiracy theories are still fun, though. Humor me.
I've made it pretty easy to understand, so if you fail to its cause you choose not to.
Also, I've never been dismissive of Sotnikova's UR. I've only been interested in knowing why you people continuously harp on it while ignoring Yuna's URs that she clearly got away with. I mean, any excuse is believable when it comes to justifying clear faults in her technical elements yet the people who point them out (in a pretty undeniable fashion, mind you) or do it for another skater are Pro-Sotnikova Anti-Kim haters? A bit of a stretch, don't you think? You show them pictures and video, and they blatantly deny what is obvious. It's like showing someone a picture of a Cat and having them tell you it's a Giraffe, and then try to defend it.
My post broke it down pretty well for you. If you don't want to accept it that's on you. My last post pretty much summed up how I feel about discussing these matters here. If they can't win with facts or fail at geometry, people resort to battling with reports, instead :-) If you do not like the manner in which I post or the content of my posts, when it is unfavorable to your favorite skater, then IGNORE me. I don't have a problem with that.
I didn't change the subject of this thread.
It's as if you people completely ignore facts and then blame it on some sort of deep-seated bias while still pushing forth the same faulty arguments.
P.S. Everything you wrote in your post was wrong. That's why I was dismissive. It was DEAD WRONG.
Apparently you missed the previous Video and Photos that show that jump being clearly short and obviously UR. That's why I started my reply with those words, because I stopped reading your post at this sentence. Again, read my post, and reply to it and then go from there if you wish to continue conversing with me: about both Sotnikova's (which I have said was clearly UR, it's just that no one here disagrees with it so it doesn't really get much discussion due to that) or Yuna's URs (gets tons of debate cause people get hysterical when these things are pointed out about her) which were overlooked by the technical panel.And you've all missed a previous point made about Yu-Na Kim's landing on the second lutz--that by the time the blade was on the ice, she was within the 1/4 mark anyway.
For the last time. The moment the toe pick is on the ice, that's the point at which the landing is judged. The tech panel can [and do] easily gauge rotation by simply looking at the angle of the blade vs. the direction the jump travels in. The angle of the skate in relation to the direction of the jump determines how short of rotation the jump is. The judges don't wait for her to start gliding back before they check the rotation, they check rotation at the instance the toe pick touches the ice. If it was as others say it is, there would hardly ever be any jumps called UR in competition, since many skaters will actually UR and finish the rest of the rotation on the toe pick, even (and indeed, I've seen lower level skaters with doubles that did exactly this, they basically landed flat on the pick and didn't put the skate on its rocker until they had finished rotating... on the ice - it's still a UR jump, but nice try :-) ).
For the last time. The amount of pre-rotation on take-off is not factored in when determining if a jump is under-rotated. That is checked if the skater is thought to have pre-rotated too far to cheat the jump by removing too much rotation (more than allowed) at the front end of jump execution. The only thing that is checked is the angle at which the skate comes into contact with the ice relative to the direction of travel when it touches back down to the ice. Calling a jump UR for a landing being short has nothing to do with the take-off and the take-off is never taken into consideration. That whole line of thought is not only faulty, it's flat out wrong and judging by some other posts/threads on the forum it is also confusing some people.
I think this may deserve pictures to get the point across, and perhaps I'll do that if I feel the need to be artistically challenged.