Page 15 of 114 FirstFirst ... 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 65 ... LastLast
Results 211 to 225 of 1710

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

  1. #211
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    171
    Quote Originally Posted by bara1968 View Post
    How can this be seen as another Sot hate thread? I see an analysis, not one single hate comment from OP.
    the thread start is not a professional judge or specialist. and he/she only did this to Sotnikova, not anyone else. he/she is just making a subtle hate thread, but is still hate thread.

  2. #212
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    3,894
    Quote Originally Posted by jaylee View Post
    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.
    What I'm talking about is not so much official benefit of doubt when examining a turn with the same scrutiny as a jump rotation and then deciding it was exactly on the borderline so the call should go to the skater.

    What I'm talking about is taking the steps and turns at face value.

    For example, a skater goes into a turn on a forward outside edge with counterrotation, rotates outside the entry circle, and exits to continue curving down ice on the opposite curve as the entry edge, without holding the exit edge on one foot for very long or very deeply.

    That turn must have been intended as a counter, given the entry and the direction of travel afterward.

    A caller who is generous in general or inclined to be especially generous to this particular skater for political reasons will just count it as a counter and move on. I.e., benefit of the doubt.

    A caller who is nitpicky in general or inclined to nitpick this particular skater for political reasons will review that part of the step sequence, analyze whether the skater changed edge before the turn (making it an inside three turn) or exited on a brief back inside edge and then changed over to back outside (making it a bracket), or exited on a flat or almost immediately onto two feet (making it not count as any turn for purposes of gaining levels).

    So if the skater has clearly executed the turn as intended, there's no doubt and she gets credit for what she intended. If she has clearly not executed it as intended, there's no doubt and she doesn't get credit. If it's ambiguous, then there is wiggle room and room for honest disagreement.

    If the turns taken at face value watching live during the program add up to enough to qualify for the feature, there's no need to review.

    If there is a review and the video is inconclusive as to which edge the skater was on, then it comes down to the strictness of the panel.

    For us analyzing after the fact, with low-contrast video or different fans using different video angles, we may disagree about what we see in these gray area situations.

    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.
    So let's analyze those skaters' step sequences as well and see what we find.

    The other thing to keep in mind is that all four possible features are required for level 4. The most likely reason not to achieve it is not getting credit for the "complexity" of turns and steps as defined earlier -- 5 different turns and 3 different steps in each direction.

    But it's also possible that some skaters did get credit for complexity but did not get credit for executing the "clusters" of difficult steps as required, with continuous rhythm, or did not get credit for full upper body movement. (The rotation in each directions for 1/3 of the pattern is most likely to get credit as long as the skater executed all the planned steps and turns.)

    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.
    Well, if they made mistakes there may not have been any doubt. We would have to analyze what they actually did in those segments . . . and then we still might have doubt if the videos are not definitive.

  3. #213
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    270
    Quote Originally Posted by CanadianSkaterGuy View Post
    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.
    Then why bother? The tech panel should make sure they get their calls right. If we have to wait an extra minute or two, then so be it. Also, for the Worlds and Olympics, maybe the tech panel should be expanded to add extra officials. The tech panel could utilize specialists whose responsibility would to be limited to observing either jumps, spins or footwork/turns sequences. One of these areas would be their entire focus, with the Tech controller sitting above them to verify their calls. Major League Baseball adds extra umpires for the Postseason. Why not skating?

    If this is a case that there are not enough eyes on what's going on this should be corrected.

  4. #214
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    217
    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly View Post
    It was just about exactly 3 minutes from the time Adelina hit her final pose to the time her scores were announced [......] That's a pretty typical amount of time
    Well, I was making reference to the amount of time that Kim had to wait for Gracie's scores to come up, which is not typical ( I assume that when it takes that long, it's because there's some careful reviewing, disagreement, and decision-making going on. At least that's what the commentators always say lol).

    However, "benefit of the doubt" on some elements could also mean "Looks good in real time, no need to review."
    To me, "benefit of the doubt" means letting something slide in spite of a hankering doubt (a lingering questionmark). To say that a skill "looks good" enough to not even feel the need to review is to say they never had a doubt about the execution of that skill in real time (no lingering question marks in the first place).

    "Benefit of the doubt" is something that only makes sense for the skills that look iffy in real time. If they're iffy about it, then it's in doubt. If it's in doubt, it should be reviewed. If it's in doubt, and they don't review it, that's called "turning a blind eye" to a possible mistake (which indicates BIAS). If they do review it, and the replays cannot resolve their initial doubts, then they are left in a stalemate of doubt, and have to make a choice - give her "the benefit of the doubt", or not. If they encounter this situation for several different skaters, and choose to give the benefit of the doubt only to some of them, that also indicates bias.

    That said, I admit we have no idea what was reviewed or not All I'm saying is that the time they took to determine Adelina's scores seemed fairly typical, and logically, you can only draw so many conclusions from that.

    This thread is only about technical panel calls, not judges.
    Alrighty then I'll leave the judges out of it.

    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?
    Well, I think we should, don't you? Aren't you interested in objectivity and fairness, or should we scrutinize nothing, and simply accept, wholesale, whatever the technical panel puts foward just because "they're objective" and "they're the authority"?

  5. #215
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    3,894
    Quote Originally Posted by I♥Yuna View Post
    Well, I think we should, don't you? Aren't you interested in objectivity and fairness, or should we scrutinize nothing, and simply accept, wholesale, whatever the technical panel puts foward just because "they're objective" and "they're the authority"?
    Absolutely. I think this thread would be more valuable if several of us look at several skaters' step sequences and compare notes about what features we think they achieved.

    It's just time consuming to analyze each of them.

    The real tech panel has three people who each look at different things in real time. And then they may or may not review.

    One person working from video has the opportunity to rewatch several times to look for each of the different features.

    But the video might not be clear and might not be the same angle as the real panel had (live or in replay), so seeing something different doesn't necessarily mean that the person analyzing after the fact is right and the tech panel was wrong. Maybe we're wrong because our angle is more deceptive than the panel's. Or maybe we're right and they were wrong because their angle was deceptive.

    If several of us watch, from several angles, and share observations and interpretations of ambiguous moves, we'll get a better result than taking one person's analysis as truer than the original panel's.

    And if we do this for multiple skaters in the event, we can draw better conclusions about what the panel's limitations may have been than one person analyzing one skater's sequence.

  6. #216
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    217
    Quote Originally Posted by capcomeback View Post
    The tech panel could utilize specialists whose responsibility would to be limited to observing either jumps, spins or footwork/turns sequences. One of these areas would be their entire focus, with the Tech controller sitting above them to verify their calls. If this is a case that there are not enough eyes on what's going on this should be corrected.
    In thinking about the adjustments everyone makes during the season to improve their programs, it might be good for the skaters to submit an itemized list of the step sequences they intend to perform (like they do for BV's). If they do this the day before competition, it gives the tech specialists time to look them over, and determine who is attempting L3 or L4. They can then use the itemized list as a guide during competition (view replay in slow-motion and check boxes as they go along). That might make the process speedier.

  7. #217
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    830
    Quote Originally Posted by I♥Yuna View Post
    Well, I was making reference to the amount of time that Kim had to wait for Gracie's scores to come up, which is not typical ( I assume that when it takes that long, it's because there's some careful reviewing, disagreement, and decision-making going on. At least that's what the commentators always say lol).
    That was Ashley Wagner's scores that took a long time to come up, not Gracie Gold's.

    Ashley has somewhat of a reputation for underrotating, so I wasn't shocked that her elements took a bit of extra time to review. It was unfortunate that it happened prior to Yuna's turn.

    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly View Post
    What I'm talking about is not so much official benefit of doubt when examining a turn with the same scrutiny as a jump rotation and then deciding it was exactly on the borderline so the call should go to the skater.
    Thank you for your clarification and explanation, gkelly, it's appreciated.

    I'm all for analysis of all the other skaters. There does not need to be extra scrutiny or focus on any one skater's elements.

  8. #218
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    5,028
    Quote Originally Posted by capcomeback View Post
    Then why bother? The tech panel should make sure they get their calls right. If we have to wait an extra minute or two, then so be it. Also, for the Worlds and Olympics, maybe the tech panel should be expanded to add extra officials. The tech panel could utilize specialists whose responsibility would to be limited to observing either jumps, spins or footwork/turns sequences. One of these areas would be their entire focus, with the Tech controller sitting above them to verify their calls. Major League Baseball adds extra umpires for the Postseason. Why not skating?

    If this is a case that there are not enough eyes on what's going on this should be corrected.
    Competitions would be an hour or more longer if the technical panel actually took the time to analyze every aspect of the 4 or 4.5 minute program. It would literally take as much time to analyze the program and show the scores as it takes to announce the skater and have them skate.

    An umpire calling a ball or strike is a singular moment, that can take a minute to be reviewed. Now imagine the time it would take to review 30 singular moments packed together that are worth 3.3 points or 3.6 points depending on counting the right turns. "I counted 5 different turns in both directions" "Well, I counted 4 different turns" "Well I only saw 3 steps" etc. etc. etc. ... all this back and forth disagreement/discussion over 0.6 points in a 130 point skate.

  9. #219
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    270
    Quote Originally Posted by CanadianSkaterGuy View Post
    Competitions would be an hour or more longer if the technical panel actually took the time to analyze every aspect of the 4 or 4.5 minute program. It would literally take as much time to analyze the program and show the scores as it takes to announce the skater and have them skate.

    An umpire calling a ball or strike is a singular moment, that can take a minute to be reviewed. Now imagine the time it would take to review 30 singular moments packed together that are worth 3.3 points or 3.6 points depending on counting the right turns. "I counted 5 different turns in both directions" "Well, I counted 4 different turns" "Well I only saw 3 steps" etc. etc. etc. ... all this back and forth disagreement/discussion over 0.6 points in a 130 point skate.
    If it is one person's job to verify the step sequences and another person's job to verify jumps (edges UR's etc), then you don't have any back and forth (except with the Controller and that happens now anyway).

  10. #220
    At the rink. Again. mskater93's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,201
    Quote Originally Posted by bsfan View Post
    the thread start is not a professional judge or specialist. and he/she only did this to Sotnikova, not anyone else. he/she is just making a subtle hate thread, but is still hate thread.
    There is no such thing as a "professional judge or specialist". No one is paid (unless covertly)

  11. #221
    At the rink. Again. mskater93's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,201
    Quote Originally Posted by capcomeback View Post
    If it is one person's job to verify the step sequences and another person's job to verify jumps (edges UR's etc), then you don't have any back and forth (except with the Controller and that happens now anyway).
    Typically, the features are broken up for a step sequence between the members of the tech panel. One looks for 2 of the 4 possible features and the others each look for one and report in as "yes", "no", or "review"

  12. #222
    Size 7 Knife Boots Sam-Skwantch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    At the Rink
    Posts
    3,204
    Quote Originally Posted by capcomeback View Post
    If it is one person's job to verify the step sequences and another person's job to verify jumps (edges UR's etc), then you don't have any back and forth (except with the Controller and that happens now anyway).
    I would intentionally put my StepSequence right at the end and go sit in the kiss-n-cry laughing at the tech judge scrambling to figure out which edge I was on and single handedly delaying the event by 2mins hopefully intensifying the anxiousness of the next skater who is nervously awaiting their turn. Lol. I'm kidding of course but that's how my mind works. Sorry.

  13. #223
    Skating is art, if you let it be. Blades of Passion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Hollywood, CA
    Posts
    4,011
    Quote Originally Posted by CanadianSkaterGuy View Post
    The reality is... it's simply not feasible to analyze 30 turns/steps and ensure the edges were correct. 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).
    There are 3 people on the tech panel and they split up the duties of looking at the footwork sequence. It's one person's job to solely see what level the skater achieved in terms of this first criteria. It's the hardest job for sure.

    Another tech panel member usually looks for both criteria #2 and #3 together (did the skater do turns in both direction for 1/3 of the pattern each and use upper body movement for 1/3 of the pattern), as they are the easier ones to determine.

    And then the last tech panel member determines criteria #4 (were there two different combinations of difficult turns executed with clear rhythm).

  14. #224
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    205
    Quote Originally Posted by Blades of Passion View Post
    There are 3 people on the tech panel and they split up the duties of looking at the footwork sequence. It's one person's job to solely see what level the skater achieved in terms of this first criteria. It's the hardest job for sure.

    Another tech panel member usually looks for both criteria #2 and #3 together (did the skater do turns in both direction for 1/3 of the pattern each and use upper body movement for 1/3 of the pattern), as they are the easier ones to determine.

    And then the last tech panel member determines criteria #4 (were there two different combinations of difficult turns executed with clear rhythm).

    Thank you for this information, now it is clear to me.

  15. #225
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Too Close to the Equator.
    Posts
    1,150
    Quote Originally Posted by Sam-Skwantch View Post
    I would intentionally put my StepSequence right at the end and go sit in the kiss-n-cry laughing at the tech judge scrambling to figure out which edge I was on and single handedly delaying the event by 2mins hopefully intensifying the anxiousness of the next skater who is nervously awaiting their turn. Lol. I'm kidding of course but that's how my mind works. Sorry.
    One problem with your scenario though, the choreographic sequence need to be after the step sequence. That give them at least 30-45 seconds extra time to scratch their head. Anyway, love how your mind work.

Page 15 of 114 FirstFirst ... 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 65 ... 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
  •