Analyzing Sotnikova and Kim's footwork in the FS | Page 80 | Golden Skate

Analyzing Sotnikova and Kim's footwork in the FS

Status
Not open for further replies.

Vanshilar

On the Ice
Joined
Feb 24, 2014
Both from the same jump (a flip jump) and the direction of travel is basically about up the center of the screen caps (bottom to top), to give you an idea of the pivot action. Some skaters pivot more, some a little less. The jump can pivot to forwards and still be clean on the take-off. A lot of ladies skaters actually do this (Asada and Sotnikova, for example) on a lot of their jumps. Kim's flip is more similar to the one linked above - that take-off is actually conducive to a bigger jump. Some coaches call it a "power take-off." The fuller pivot sometimes work better for skaters who don't jump as high, but rotate well and want to get into their rotations ASAP.

The "full blade" jumping that people complain about (which only happens sometimes on badly tacked on doubles in combinations or by low level skaters, which are usually severely prerotated anyways i.e. toe axels), is nothing more than a screen cap of the skater's body absorbing the impact of the jump take-off. I can write a whole page on this, but I think the best way to see how ridiculous it sounds is to put on some figure skates and try to jump any decently sized double, triple, or quadruple jump off the skate rocker and not possibly give yourself a concussion after your skate flies forwards and you fall and bang your head on the ice.

You can pivot to forwards on practically any non axel jump and get no deduction or GOE fault. The judges won't even be bothered by it. They also won't think of it, because they know (many of them being former skaters themselves) what happens on a jump. There's a nice little saying among many coaches: "All jumps take-off forwards." It's true. The ENTRANCE EDGE may be backwards, but the actual TAKE-OFF of the jumps are more often than not closer to forwards than backwards.

On an axel you can go sideways or a smidgen past sideways.

There is no elite skater competing right now that I know with straight back and forward jump take offs. Not on triples and quads (or double axels). Most probably wouldn't consider it safe to jump that way. I don't personally know any coaches that teach jumping that way. Even back in the 1940s when Dick Button was doing Triple Loops for the first time, he pivoted to forwars on his take-off and many of those skaters had the same reaction with the ice in their skate/ankles on jump take-offs, because to try to stop that is to willfully risk injury (Ankle Sprains, Back Issues, Knee Issues, possibly even broken bones, and other types of overuse injuries).

Well, several things:

1. Seems like Yuna and Polina at least (I haven't looked at many of the skaters in detail) will do their lutzes and flips taking off still facing backward. As in, both the edge foot and the toe pick foot are still facing backward when they lift off the ice (as in, facing the backward half). While Mao, Adelina, Gracie, and probably others will do their lutzes and flips such that the edge foot lifts off still facing the backward half, but the toe pick foot will have rotated to be facing nearly directly forward by the time it leaves the ice. I'm puzzled by this. Certainly, on some jumps (like the salchow), pretty much everybody does the edge going backward, then pivot on toe pick until facing nearly directly forward before liftoff thing. But are the coaches for the former skaters so sadistic as to make them do an extra quarter or slightly more rotation in the air compared with the latter skaters, if points-wise there is no difference? Is there no advantage to taking off with the toe pick still facing in the backward half (rather than take the whole allowance and be facing nearly directly forward) at liftoff, either in terms of technique or in terms of points? If so, why do some skaters do it? Yes Trevor's site mentions that maybe coaches don't know about it, but these are the Olympics; I find it somewhat hard to believe that Olympic-caliber coaches don't know about these things. For example, in this thread, one of the points of discussion is whether or not it counts for anything that Yuna hardly pre-rotates and is still facing backward when she lifts off, in terms of how much she has to rotate in the air and the allowed under-rotation due to that. Again, I would find it very odd for her coach to tell her "yes I want you to do an extra quarter revolution compared to many other skaters" if it leads to possible under-rotations and points deductions for them. Why put in the extra effort?

2. I know the term has been mentioned a few times, but I'm confused as to what the "power take-off" thing (as opposed to a regular take-off) really means. Is it pivoting less on the toe pick for more power/height or something? I don't know if that will explain #1.

3. My question with full blade jumps is more about when the skater puts the full blade down for the toe pick foot, not the edge foot. Some skaters do it, some don't, but I don't know if there's any penalty for doing so. If not, why not? If so, where is it in the rules?
 

drivingmissdaisy

Record Breaker
Joined
Feb 17, 2010
It's unfortunate that the discussion in the other thread was deleted, where I was going into more detail. Hopefully it gets restored so I don't have to repeat it all again.

Well, basically what you said is "logically" (in other words, based solely on your interpretation of the rules), the skater should get credit at the end of the jump if they prerotated less than is permissible. To me, that is not logical at all when the rules states you have to be within 1/4 of the landing. Under your interpretation, a skater has to be with 1/4 turn of the landing unless they prerotate less than they can, which is not a logical conclusion to me. If it were, they would have written the rule to reflect that, something along the lines of needing to be in the air 2.25 rotations. Again, if you know of anywhere in the rules in which this is clarified, rather than simply your speculation, I'd be interested in reading it so I can understand the rule better. You seem to be dismissive of anyone who disagrees with you on this and it based merely on how you logically concluded the rule is to be interpreted.

From my perspective, the rule seems to be to penalize skaters who "hook" the landing, regardless of how much they prerotate the jump. In the 3Lz, the landing was hooked, and the weight is on the blade and her knee starts to bend well before 1/4. I'm not sure how anyone can look at the slow motion and not see the skate spin around on the ice. With your interpretation, Yuna can prerotate 1/4 (which she did) and land forward and do a 180 degree turn on the ice to get backwards and get full credit for the jump.
 

mich2

Match Penalty
Joined
Apr 19, 2014
Yes, he is (although a few details are still left out there). So why are you saying that Yu-Na's second 3Lutz was underrotated? It's very clearly shown how 2.25 rotations in the air for a Lutz is acceptable, given that people frequently takeoff forwards on their toepick and it isn't heresy to do so. Yu-Na was fully in the air for at least 2.5 rotations on her 3Lutz. She comes down "shorter" in comparison to the direction of where the takeoff started, but she doesn't pre-rotate much at at all. She's doing a lot more air rotation at the start of the jump, so it's very understandable that there may be less at the end of the jump.

It's unfortunate that the discussion in the other thread was deleted, where I was going into more detail. Hopefully it gets restored so I don't have to repeat it all again.
Maybe they deleted it because the discussion had nothing to do with ISU rules but everything with vanity.
 

Blades of Passion

Skating is Art, if you let it be
Record Breaker
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Country
France
the rules states you have to be within 1/4 of the landing.

The landing is directly related to where the takeoff is. Everything exists within a circle. Yu-Na's takeoff point is starting far earlier, thus her "acceptable landing point" is different than someone else who completely pre-rotates the jump.

With your interpretation, Yuna can prerotate 1/4 and land forward and do a 180 degree turn on the ice to get backwards and get full credit for the jump.

That is not what I'm saying, nor is it what Yu-Na did. Also, jumps turn 180 degrees on the ice during the landing no matter where you land. Landing forwards just tends to make it so the blade is digging into the ice more.

On the Lutz jump, the "textbook" technique says that you don't pre-rotate on your toepick much at all. Therefore, how can we accurately judge this jump? Many people completely pre-rotate on their toepick and are in the air for far less time. Should this technique receive a deduction?

I don't believe it should receive a deduction. Ice skating exists on curves and most other jumps require pre-rotation, up to a full 1/2 turn. However, you also can't punish people for having better technique and/or doing a jump such that they are pre-rotating less and thus creating more air rotation at the start of the jump. You logically must give extra leeway on the landing point for less pre-rotation. A one-half scale makes the most sense (ie - if you pre-rotate 1/4 turn less, you get 1/8 turn leeway on the landing).

Figure Skating is currently completely mislead, hence why things like measuring jump rotation have not been given an official standard at all by the ISU. The decisions are made inconsistently, often without proper knowledge, and all behind the scenes.
 

Components

Match Penalty
Joined
Apr 2, 2014
The jump must be within 1/4 on the landing. The air B.S. is a smokescreen and you know it.

Also, Yuna and Polina do not take off straight backwards on their Lutzes. Anyone with a computer can load up the video and clearly see that.

That Lutz was UR, it's that simple and I'm bored with the matter because it seems like people are trying to say otherwise just to justify their belief that she deserved to win.
 

Components

Match Penalty
Joined
Apr 2, 2014
With your interpretation, Yuna can prerotate 1/4 (which she did) and land forward and do a 180 degree turn on the ice to get backwards and get full credit for the jump.

That's exactly what he's saying, and it's illogical.

There are reasons beyond enforcing in air rotations why skaters are allowed to pivot that much on the take off, and have been doing so since the first triple jumps were being performed. The rule for landings is set in stone and has nothing to do with the take off. At all. The degree of take off pre-rotation does not affect how much a skater is allowed to hook a jump on the landing.

Any decent judge knows this. Even if Yuna had taken off completely backwards, that jump should still have been UR. Differences in technique do not give you a pass to UR over other skaters who got dinged on almost all their jumps for similar landings in the same exact competition.
 
Last edited:

Ultra

Rinkside
Joined
Jun 21, 2014
The rule for landings is set in stone and has nothing to do with the take off.

Yep, that's what I also said in that other thread before the mods gutted all our hard work.

Here is the absolute rule on jump underrotations, an interactive animation from the nytimes:

"A deduction is taken for underrotation on the landing when the right skate lands on the toe pick and completes a quarter or more of the remaining revolution on ice (relative to jump direction)"

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/02/23/sports/olympics/0223-downgrade.html#tab=1

Also, the 3F is just as UR as the 3Lz. There are plenty of coaches and specialists who saw that one as well.
 

Vanshilar

On the Ice
Joined
Feb 24, 2014
Also, Yuna and Polina do not take off straight backwards on their Lutzes. Anyone with a computer can load up the video and clearly see that.

That Lutz was UR, it's that simple and I'm bored with the matter because it seems like people are trying to say otherwise just to justify their belief that she deserved to win.

That's a nice strawman you got there. What I said was they take off while their skates are still facing the backward half. That's why I said they do an extra quarter rotation in the air, rather than half rotation, compared with skaters that pre-rotate until they're facing almost directly forward.

Here is the absolute rule on jump underrotations, an interactive animation from the nytimes:

We have a technical specialist in this thread and you're appealing to the New York Times?
 

Components

Match Penalty
Joined
Apr 2, 2014
That's a nice strawman you got there. What I said was they take off while their skates are still facing the backward half. That's why I said they do an extra quarter rotation in the air, rather than half rotation, compared with skaters that pre-rotate until they're facing almost directly forward.



We have a technical specialist in this thread and you're appealing to the New York Times?

They pivot at least a quarter rotation on the ice. The tech panel still UR'd one of Polina's jumps despite pre-rotating less than someone like Asada. This is a pretty clear indicator of what they're looking for on jump landings. They aren't counting in air rotations. They're looking at where the pick hits the ice on the landing.

Lutzes typically pivot less than flips and toe loops because it has a blocked take-off.
 

Vanshilar

On the Ice
Joined
Feb 24, 2014
They pivot at least a quarter rotation on the ice. The tech panel still UR'd one of Polina's jumps despite pre-rotating less than someone like Asada. This is a pretty clear indicator of what they're looking for on jump landings. They aren't counting in air rotations. They're looking at where the pick hits the ice on the landing.

Nope. On Polina's under-rotated jump, for example, she's traveling toward the camera from the upper left to the lower right (rotating counterclockwise), and her toe pick foot is roughly perpendicular to the camera on lift off, indicating she had pivoted less than a quarter rotation on the ice (in fact, you can already see the toe pick foot's left side when it hits the ice, so it was significantly less). She had over a quarter rotation's worth of leeway on her takeoff. She similarly had over a quarter rotation's worth of leeway for her flip that was in a combo as well.

You also forgot to mention that Polina so badly under-rotated that jump that she fell. So it's more like Mao's triple axel in the short program (which was also called for UR), as opposed to Mao's UR calls in the free skate.

Lutzes typically pivot less than flips and toe loops because it has a blocked take-off.

I'm curious then, is it that skaters with correct Lutz edge technique (such as Yuna, Polina, and Kostner) tend to pre-rotate less with the toe pick (even with their flips) than skaters that tend to flutz (such as Adelina and Mao)? Kostner seems to be another skater whose skates will still be facing the backwards half (have over a quarter rotation of leeway) on liftoff for some of the jumps and she usually doesn't flutz, right; from her 2014 Worlds SP, the replay of her triple flip-triple toe combo is of her coming fairly directly toward the camera during the flip, and it's pretty clear that she's not even close to sideways on her toe pick foot when it leaves the ice (although it's not close to directly backward either).

Maybe there's something in the body mechanics about having the correct edge control for the lutz and flip that causes skaters who do them correctly (or at least, have the right edge) to also pre-rotate less with the toe pick. I guess when I go through analyzing jump rotations I should also keep track of which jump (i.e. if certain jumps are pre-rotated more) and if that skater has correct edges and see if there's a correlation.
 

Components

Match Penalty
Joined
Apr 2, 2014
Nope. On Polina's under-rotated jump, for example, she's traveling toward the camera from the upper left to the lower right (rotating counterclockwise), and her toe pick foot is roughly perpendicular to the camera on lift off, indicating she had pivoted less than a quarter rotation on the ice (in fact, you can already see the toe pick foot's left side when it hits the ice, so it was significantly less). She had over a quarter rotation's worth of leeway on her takeoff. She similarly had over a quarter rotation's worth of leeway for her flip that was in a combo as well.

You also forgot to mention that Polina so badly under-rotated that jump that she fell. So it's more like Mao's triple axel in the short program (which was also called for UR), as opposed to Mao's UR calls in the free skate.
Polina UR'd a Toe Loop on the back half of her combination. She didn't fall on it, it was deemed UR. The Jump she UR'd and fell was, IIRC, a Triple Flip, and that wasn't even in the same program. So I'm not going to go on about this part of your post.

I was just using it as an example. People don't get brownie points for pivoting LESS on the take-off. You don't get to use the extra cushion on the landing to avoid a '<' on that jump.

I'm curious then, is it that skaters with correct Lutz edge technique (such as Yuna, Polina, and Kostner) tend to pre-rotate less with the toe pick (even with their flips) than skaters that tend to flutz (such as Adelina and Mao)? Kostner seems to be another skater whose skates will still be facing the backwards half (have over a quarter rotation of leeway) on liftoff for some of the jumps and she usually doesn't flutz, right; from her 2014 Worlds SP, the replay of her triple flip-triple toe combo is of her coming fairly directly toward the camera during the flip, and it's pretty clear that she's not even close to sideways on her toe pick foot when it leaves the ice (although it's not close to directly backward either).
Yes, and no.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbeq_M8Lgtg

^- That should answer your question.

Also see: http://icoachskating.com/comparing-triple-lutz-technique-lutz-analysis-trevor-laak/

I think it will do good to explain the differences between the two take-off techniques and why most women (certainly more than men) pivot further than men, especially on this jump.

That's my "No," cause you're trying to make a definitive correlation between the two that would lead one to believe that if you pivot all the way it means you flutzed (not saying you're saying that, but it sort of infurs such).

My "Yes" is cause it is easier to pivot all the way on a Flutz because it is more easily possible to open the hip which unblocks the lower body, allowing it to rotate more easily. So yea, a skater with a Flutz will likely rotate all the way more often, which is why I said Lutzes tend to pivot less than most other jumps.
 

Alain

Match Penalty
Joined
Apr 28, 2014
Figure Skating is currently completely mislead, hence why things like measuring jump rotation have not been given an official standard at all by the ISU. The decisions are made inconsistently, often without proper knowledge, and all behind the scenes.
You are saying Yuna couldn't win under the current ISU rules. Guess what- she didn't.

What I've read so far on this board were either tricking with math and score (by some mathguy), cheating with rotation (by you) or trolling with polictics (many posters). Not convinced.
 

Components

Match Penalty
Joined
Apr 2, 2014
The landing is directly related to where the takeoff is. Everything exists within a circle. Yu-Na's takeoff point is starting far earlier, thus her "acceptable landing point" is different than someone else who completely pre-rotates the jump.
Incorrect.

The landing is directly related to the direction of travel. That is how the judges know a UR jump from a non-UR jump, by measuring the angle at which the skate comes into contact with the ice on landing relative to the direction in which the jump is traveling. This is like... 8th grade mathematics, guy.

You're confusing a jump entrance with the take-off. They're not the same. The take-off is one point on the ice - the point where the skate leaves the ice. The Entrance is the Edge Entrance of the jump, which distinguishes one jump from another - the manner in which the skater approaches the take-off. While the entrance is on curves, the take-off is one point on the ice and the jump does not travel in a curve, but on in one direction across the ice - a straight line. The judges can evaluate the degree of pre-rotation and under-rotation by comparing the angle at which the skate leaves or touches the ice in relation to the line/direction in which the jump travels (which is not too hard to do if you're using pro software like Dartfish).

The fact that skaters enter on edges and have to exit on edges is why there is some leeway built into the take-off and the landing. The landing must be < 1/4 short, period. There is no funny math built into the system that says "if you prerotate less than half a rotation, you can underrotate by that extra amount and still not get deducted." It makes no sense.

That is not what I'm saying, nor is it what Yu-Na did. Also, jumps turn 180 degrees on the ice during the landing no matter where you land. Landing forwards just tends to make it so the blade is digging into the ice more.
The question isn't whether it turned x degrees on landing. The question is whether or not the point at which her skate touched the ice was within the margin of error in relation to the direction in which her jump was traveling. Jumps enter and land on circles, but the jump travels in a straight line in the air, which is why we can evaluate the landings in this way. See above. Again, 8th grade math.

On the Lutz jump, the "textbook" technique says that you don't pre-rotate on your toepick much at all. Therefore, how can we accurately judge this jump? Many people completely pre-rotate on their toepick and are in the air for far less time. Should this technique receive a deduction?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJRlnZ8qk98

First Triple Lutz done by a lady, unless you're going to claim that you cannot see what is obvious even in the bad video quality, she clearly pivots quite a bit before leaving the ice.

The reason why the "textbook" doesn't have to say anything about the pivot is because the pivot has existed on jumps since decades ago, right when people started doing jumps, doubles (for sure), and especially on triples. No one stated that the degree to which everyone pivoted was the same, there are different body types, etc. There is some variation, which is why your logic makes no sense. It's a natural occurrence when jumping for the same reasons you stated (and more). For one, the jump is entered on a curve, so the body is already rotating when you take-off. Because of this, the toe pick does pivot on the ice before the skater leaves the ice. No one said it had to be 1/2 a rotation. Sometimes it is less. However technical panels have always allowed upwards of half a rotation on the take-off, cause they understand basic physics, and anything more (like in Toe Axels) has always been penalized.

Likewise, jumps more than quarter rotation short generally are penalized. I say generally, because the rules do seem to be applied stricter to some than to others.

I don't believe it should receive a deduction. Ice skating exists on curves and most other jumps require pre-rotation, up to a full 1/2 turn. However, you also can't punish people for having better technique and/or doing a jump such that they are pre-rotating less and thus creating more air rotation at the start of the jump. You logically must give extra leeway on the landing point for less pre-rotation. A one-half scale makes the most sense (ie - if you pre-rotate 1/4 turn less, you get 1/8 turn leeway on the landing).
Again, jump trajectory is an arc along a straight line. Jumps do not travel on curves so you're being ridiculous with this illogical defense of clear UR.

Also, different technique does not equate better technique. Some of Tim Goebel's jumps used different technique than Plushenko's, and they were still ridiculously good.

The jump was UR, so clearly the technique failed her to some extent...

Figure Skating is currently completely mislead, hence why things like measuring jump rotation have not been given an official standard at all by the ISU. The decisions are made inconsistently, often without proper knowledge, and all behind the scenes.
Lol, gimme a break.
 

drivingmissdaisy

Record Breaker
Joined
Feb 17, 2010
Ice skating exists on curves and most other jumps require pre-rotation, up to a full 1/2 turn. However, you also can't punish people for having better technique and/or doing a jump such that they are pre-rotating less and thus creating more air rotation at the start of the jump. You logically must give extra leeway on the landing point for less pre-rotation.

If the rules says you have to be within 1/4 of the landing, I don't see how that is punishing good technique, nor do I see how that is even good technique if one is short on the landing when the rules explicitly says don't be short on the landing. Yuna had a great take-off but hooked the landing.
 

jaylee

Medalist
Joined
Feb 21, 2010
For example, in this thread, one of the points of discussion is whether or not it counts for anything that Yuna hardly pre-rotates and is still facing backward when she lifts off, in terms of how much she has to rotate in the air and the allowed under-rotation due to that. Again, I would find it very odd for her coach to tell her "yes I want you to do an extra quarter revolution compared to many other skaters" if it leads to possible under-rotations and points deductions for them. Why put in the extra effort?

I don't know why Yu-Na and her coaches made the choices that they did, but I would think that she does that technique because it's the proper technique.

In addition, a jump with less pre-rotation is typically more explosive since it gets into the air faster, and typically bigger in terms of height and distance than a jump by a skater who pre-rotates more. Under the current system, it's also typically rewarded with more +GOE. There's a big difference in real-time between a lutz by Yu-Na Kim versus that by Michelle Kwan, Kristi Yamaguchi, or Yulia Lipnitskaia, all of whom pre-rotated their lutz more in order to try and finish their rotations.

I think it's important that skaters who pre-rotate less are credited for that. Otherwise, that would encourage the skaters to pre-rotate to the maximum in order to avoid the appearance of a UR on the landing. And the jumps will be more pre-rotated, smaller, and less explosive. Why is the appearance of a UR on the landing more important than how many rotations were done in the air [and a skater has completed the exact same number of rotations as a skater who has no appearance of a UR on landing but pre-rotated more]?

The protocols DO support exactly what Blades of Passion has been arguing. If you review the protocols of every competition and which jumps got UR, some technical specialists DO give leeway on the landing of a jump if the skater pre-rotates less, and give less leeway on the landing of a jump when the skater pre-rotated the jump more. It's not perfectly consistent but the evidence is there to support what Blades of Passion has been saying.

It's the only reasoning that would explain Mao Asada's UR issues over the past quad. It must have to do with how much she pre-rotates--because she pre-rotates her jumps to the maximum, even sometimes possibly over the 1/2 turn allowance, she has little to no leeway on underrotating on the landing. Hence she usually gets dinged if there is the slightest UR on landing, whether or not it is actually at the 1/4 mark where skaters are supposed to get the benefit of the doubt. She rarely gets the benefit of the doubt. Why? It must be due to the pre-rotation. The best example is usually her 3F in the SP over the past few years. She pre-rotates her flip beyond the average quarter-turn that other skaters take, and hence, the technical caller won't give her any leeway on any underrotation on landing.
 

drivingmissdaisy

Record Breaker
Joined
Feb 17, 2010
Unlike Yuna, Mao's jumps (aside from the 2A) are always borderline <. She gets < calls a lot because she lands her jumps right at the 1/4 mark. Between Olympics and Worlds she has had < calls on the axel, flip, loop, and toe.
 

jaylee

Medalist
Joined
Feb 21, 2010
The technical specialist whose personal opinion is that the rule that they wrote shouldn't be interpreted how they wrote it?

The technical specialist in this thread didn't write the rule in question.

In any case, the rules are constantly evolving. Haven't you noticed? The ISU changes its mind about certain issues every year. The rules from 2010 don't apply anymore. They didn't always have 2 levels of underrotation levels, now they do. The penalty for incorrect edge take-offs has changed every few years. So there is plenty of room for disagreement when even the ISU changes its mind about matters every year.

Currently, the technical panel may only watch a skater's take-off in real time to determine if it is cheated. This could change, too, especially if more and more skaters decide to pre-rotate more in order to complete their jump.
 

Ultra

Rinkside
Joined
Jun 21, 2014
I think it's important that skaters who pre-rotate less are credited for that. Otherwise, that would encourage the skaters to pre-rotate to the maximum in order to avoid the appearance of a UR on the landing.

It doesn't matter what you or anyone thinks should be rewarded, only what the rules actually are.

Prerotation is not an unfair advantage; Underrotation is.

If you review the protocols of every competition and which jumps got UR, some technical specialists DO give leeway on the landing of a jump if the skater pre-rotates less, and give less leeway on the landing of a jump when the skater pre-rotated the jump more.

That is the disgusting reputation judging favoritism that has ruined figure skating. If the tech crews are not calling >¼ landing, they are not doing their job!
 

jaylee

Medalist
Joined
Feb 21, 2010
It doesn't matter what you or anyone thinks should be rewarded, only what the rules actually are.

Prerotation is not an unfair advantage; Underrotation is.

Prerotation is most definitely an unfair advantage if you reward skaters who clearly pre-rotate more in order to "complete" the rotations and avoid the appearance of a UR on landing while punishing skaters who clearly pre-rotate less if they have even the appearance of a UR on landing--even when the number of rotations completed in the air is the same between the two.

Btw, cheating the take-off IS in the rules as a downgradable mistake. So yes, it's not only an unfair advantage, pre-rotating too much (by a half-turn) is against the rules anyway.

The current rules dictate that technical panels can only review take-offs in real-time, whereas landings can be scrutinized in slow-mo. That means it's easier for skaters to cheat the take-off versus cheating a landing and get away with it. But that doesn't mean that the latter is an actually worse mistake than the former, that's just that the result of current limitations of time/resources/technology. If the focus switches 100% to underrotation on landing and 0% to pre-rotation, all skaters will start pre-rotating their jumps as much as possible and the ISU would crack down in response (not to mention, the jumps would start all looking really bad).

That is the disgusting reputation judging favoritism that has ruined figure skating. If the tech crews are not calling >¼ landing, they are not doing their job!

What are you talking about? This kind of "favoritism" has nothing to do with a skater personally and everything to do with technique. Arguing that underrotation should be punished while pre-rotation is not taken into account would encourage all skaters to cheat their take-offs--which is already explicitly against the rules.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top