Analyzing Sotnikova and Kim's footwork in the FS | Page 23 | Golden Skate

Analyzing Sotnikova and Kim's footwork in the FS

Status
Not open for further replies.

jennyanydots

On the Ice
Joined
Jul 1, 2013
Really? Yuna did say she made a mistake in her footwork, but I don't recall her saying what it was. Others have speculated what the mistake was, but I hadn't read an interview with her detailing it.

I read that somewhere too. Seriously, mistakes on turns and steps can happen quite easily considering all the rotations and counter rotations the body and feet have to do in sequence. People who actually skate can attest to this. One inadvertant wrong edge changes the type of turn/step, and if it's one of your paired CW/CWW turns/steps, there goes your level 4. There isn't any other way for the rules to be interpreted. If Adelina's SS was intended to be level 4, she obviously made mistakes. I don't understand why some people can't accept that the levels were called wrong. The only argument that can be made is that the SS listed in the OP wasn't correct. The only way to refute that is to breakdown the SS's yourself, not by having pages of arguments on grammar, linguistics and logic.
 

gkelly

Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Shouldn't take more than a couple of minutes since that's how much time the tech panel has to analyze.

But

1) there are three of them splitting the tasks

2) they know what they're doing -- they've already studied and used the rules enough to have memorized pretty much everything they need to look for

3) the tech specialists need to have been high-level skaters, so they have actually done most of these moves themselves, which helps in recognizing them on the fly

So if nothing else, they're going to be more efficient. They still might make mistakes at times, but far fewer than most of us who know what we're looking at but don't have experience doing them ourselves or calling them in real time.
 

Alba

Record Breaker
Joined
Feb 26, 2014
But

1) there are three of them splitting the tasks

2) they know what they're doing -- they've already studied and used the rules enough to have memorized pretty much everything they need to look for

3) the tech specialists need to have been high-level skaters, so they have actually done most of these moves themselves, which helps in recognizing them on the fly

So if nothing else, they're going to be more efficient. They still might make mistakes at times, but far fewer than most of us who know what we're looking at but don't have experience doing them ourselves or calling them in real time.


They also have super quality and slow-motion videos available.
 

drivingmissdaisy

Record Breaker
Joined
Feb 17, 2010
But

1) there are three of them splitting the tasks

2) they know what they're doing -- they've already studied and used the rules enough to have memorized pretty much everything they need to look for

3) the tech specialists need to have been high-level skaters, so they have actually done most of these moves themselves, which helps in recognizing them on the fly

So if nothing else, they're going to be more efficient. They still might make mistakes at times, but far fewer than most of us who know what we're looking at but don't have experience doing them ourselves or calling them in real time.

I was joking with my comment. What they are expected to do accurately in such a short time is inevitably going to lead to mistakes.
 

OS

Sedated by Modonium
Record Breaker
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
I was joking with my comment. What they are expected to do accurately in such a short time is inevitably going to lead to mistakes.

They wrote the rules.
They have historical stats to refer to therefore should know what to look for.
They are suppose to be the best in the world that is what qualifies them to judge at the most important competition in the world.
If they can't do it, what hope is there left for the sport? Should there be a panel of technical judges too to minimize these margins of error?

Is there any penalty for making costly judging error? Why not?
 

drivingmissdaisy

Record Breaker
Joined
Feb 17, 2010
They have historical stats to refer to therefore should know what to look for.

They do. However, they have to examine every move the skater did on the ice, as BoP and gkelly's analysis shows that doing a turn on an unintended edge can make it different from what was planned.
 

capcomeback

On the Ice
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
They do. However, they have to examine every move the skater did on the ice, as BoP and gkelly's analysis shows that doing a turn on an unintended edge can make it different from what was planned.

True. It should be pointed out that they caught other skater's mistakes including one Yuna made in her SP. She made no such mistake in her long and was only given Level 3? Why? :confused:
 

qwertyskates

Medalist
Joined
Nov 12, 2013
No, it's explicit that the ability to turn in both directions is more valued.

"Multidirectional skating" is one of the criteria for the Skating Skills component.

One of the features for step sequences with which skaters can earn higher than base level is to turn in each direction for at least 1/3 of the pattern.

A different feature for step sequences is the variety/complexity feature, with different definitions for the minimum requirements for level 1, 2, 3, or 4. Only for the level 4 requirements, "complexity" of turns and steps, is rotation in both directions required.

There are 6 and only 6 possible different kinds of turns.
The way "variety" is defined for level 3, it's necessary to do either 5 or 6 different kinds, but they could all be in the same direction.
For "complexity" for level 4, it's necessary to do either 5 or 6 different kinds and each kind must be done in both directions. That's part of what makes "complexity" (as defined in the step sequence feature rules) harder to achieve than "variety."



There's no way to interpret the rule as written to allow for 6 different kinds of turns being worth more than 5 different kinds in terms of the tech panel determining the level.
Either 5 or 6 can meet the requirement, but 5 must be performed in both directions.

If judges want to keep track of the number of kinds of turns and reward that the step sequence GOE or in the Skating Skills or Choreography components -- or Transitions for those turns that take place outside the step sequence -- they are free to do so. It's not an explicit criterion, so it probably wouldn't make a significant difference even for judges who do bother to keep track.


I think of it not in terms of ambidexterity, but in terms of controlling and performing rotations in one direction and then in the opposite, in the precision of execution, which demands greater skating skills.

If the Rule is so intractable about every one of those 5s & 3s being in both directions, was there a comparable case where the SS level was lowered based on the same type of "mistake" committed by Adelina?

I am not assuming at all that Adelina *did* make the mistake, as I have not looked at her SS in slow motion to judge for myself or encountered an unbiased, authoritative source.

It would also place this particular type of "mistake" in the larger context, to see how often this was called out for other skaters, and if this supersedes the other elements that define Level 4, including greater types performed, full upper body movement, difficult combinations, etc..
 

qwertyskates

Medalist
Joined
Nov 12, 2013
Looking forward to qwertyskates' rebuttal :laugh: :popcorn:
You are jumping the gun.
1. This is by no means PROOF that Adelina *did* make such a mistake, or that it was overlooked, or that anything untoward happened in the Tech judging.
2. I am interested to know if this particular interpretation has been applied to lower the levels of other performances, and how often has it been applied?
 

qwertyskates

Medalist
Joined
Nov 12, 2013
BTW, your use of the term "musicality" seems like an oxymoron within the context of Adelina's FS. Granted, her choreo was busy, but was not particularly "musical". Adelina did a lot of things well, but she did not seem up to bridging the gap between her choreography to the music she was skating to (Introduction and Rondo Capriccioso by Saint Saens). This kind of interpretive skill can take a long time to develop (as with Carolina Kostner, who was nowhere near the artistic skater she was at 17 that she is at 27).

I actually saw rather good matching of movements to music, much better in her Carmen than in Capriccioso. Granted, her form is a lot stronger, more athletic and powerful, not lyrical like Yuna or Caro - she did quick, complicated, large moves and combinations of turns and steps, not only in the SS, but before, after, in between her elements, which I enjoy watching as well. I even like her "ugly" spin positions! I do prefer bold experimentation over pleasing but run- of the mill types such as Lipnitskaia's, no matter how stunning her flexibility.
 

qwertyskates

Medalist
Joined
Nov 12, 2013
This is what I have been unable to express as clearly as I would have liked, so thank you qwertyskates. It seems odd to interpret a rule that is intended to promote a variety of turns and steps (and is ambiguously written) in a way that penalizes more variety.

This contradiction strikes me as odd too. The way I read it is that the inclusion of "both directions" is to increase the complexity, but not to penalize variety. If this were true then Adelina's choreography, according to BoP, not only committed the error for turns but also for steps (she didn't do each type once in both directions), which to me amounts to quite an epic failure of the Sochi Tech Panel, her coach, her Fed, her choreographer, etc.

I'm also puzzled that Yuna has received Level 3 not only this time but also for many of her past SS performances, if she did satisfy the criteria, and that this Complexity Rule is the most important criteria in determining Level 4. Why wouldn't her team protest the results? What made her SS Level 3? Her execution is immaculate after all.

The possible criteria that Yuna misses in her SS is the one about Combinations in Level Features(which includes Complexity):

Level features
1)
Minimum variety (Level 1)
, simple variety (Level 2), variety (Level 3), complexity (Level 4) of turns
and steps throughout
(compulsory)
2) Rotations in either direction (left and right) with full body rotation covering at least 1/3 of the pattern in
total for each rotational direction
3) Use of upper body movements for at least 1/3 of the pattern
4)Two different combinations of 3 difficult turns (
rockers, counters, brackets, twizzles, loops)
executed
with a clear rhythm
within the sequence


Is this the deal breaker?
 

Meoima

Match Penalty
Joined
Feb 13, 2014
I read that somewhere too. Seriously, mistakes on turns and steps can happen quite easily considering all the rotations and counter rotations the body and feet have to do in sequence. People who actually skate can attest to this. One inadvertant wrong edge changes the type of turn/step, and if it's one of your paired CW/CWW turns/steps, there goes your level 4. There isn't any other way for the rules to be interpreted. If Adelina's SS was intended to be level 4, she obviously made mistakes. I don't understand why some people can't accept that the levels were called wrong. The only argument that can be made is that the SS listed in the OP wasn't correct. The only way to refute that is to breakdown the SS's yourself, not by having pages of arguments on grammar, linguistics and logic.
Because they do not have enough patience to breakdown the SS themselves. Then again, they have the patience for 31 pages of debate.
The whole thing is funnier and more amusing than the event itself. I am sitting here with my ipad and popcorn. Like "wow, wow wow... How can you think of that? How? :popcorn::popcorn:
 

npavel

On the Ice
Joined
Nov 3, 2008
I know that Carolinas SP step sequence was designed to be level 4. In the team event she had an error and I think it's way she was called level 3. How about the sp at ladies event? Unfortunately I don't recognize the steps, so I can't check it out by myself, but I wonder did she missed the level?
 

TMC

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 27, 2014
OP is adamant that there must be >5 different turns, EACH of them must be performed in both directions, i.e. 5CW+5CCW = 10 turns. To some of us, the Tech Panel, judges, choreographers, etc., >5 means there can be 6 or more different turns, ALL of them performed in both directions, for example, 4CW+4(Same Type)CCW+1(Different Type)CW+1(Different Type)CCW = 10 turns but 4+2 Types = 6 Types in BOTH directions.

So there are 10 turns in total for both SS, but the latter showcases Greater Variety.

Math is hard!

I rang the ISU but they have no time to instruct over the phone (no wonder!), so got email addresses instead. Also emailing my local federation.

I'm having a hard time understanding this interpretation, qwertyskates (and Vanshilar's explanation of it), but I've tried. Before I click send: is this what you mean (Interpretation #3 just after #1 and #2, which I've written & list here again to referesh memory):

1)
5 different types of turns executed at least once.
- Each of those 5 different turns must be executed once in CW direction.
- Each of those 5 different turns must be executed once in CCW direction.
3 different types of steps executed at least once.
- Each of those 3 different steps must be executed once in CW direction.
- Each of those 3 different steps must be executed once in CCW direction.

For example:

Skater X performs 1 bracket, 1 counter, 1 rocker, 1 loop and 1 twizzle PLUS 1 mohawk, 1 choctaw and 1 cross roll. She performs each of these turns and steps once in CW direction AND once in CCW direction.

2)
5 different types of turns.
3 different types of steps executed at least once.
- Each of those 3 different steps must be executed once in CW direction.
- Each of those 3 different steps must be executed once in CCW direction.

Skater X performs 1 bracket, 1 counter, 1 rocker, 1 loop and 1 twizzle PLUS 1 mohawk, 1 choctaw and 1 cross roll. She performs each of these steps once in CW direction AND once in CCW direction.

3)
5 or more (out of 6) different types of turns.
- 5 different turns must be executed in the CW direction and 5 different turns must be executed in the CCW direction.
3 or more (out of 7) different types of steps.
- 3 different steps must be executed in the CW direction and 3 different steps must be executed in the CCW direction.

Example:

Skater X performs 1 bracket CW & CCW, 1 counter CW & CCW, 1 rocker CW & CCW and 1 loop CW & CCW, 1 twizzle in CW direction and 1 three turn in CCW direction PLUS 1 mohawk CW & CCW, 1 choctaw CW & CCW, toe step CW and 1 cross roll CCW.


1) Results in
- 10 turns (5 different types, each CW & CCW)
- 6 steps (3 different types, each CW & CCW)

2) Results in
- 5 turns
- 6 steps (3 different types, each CW & CCW)

3) Results in
- 10 turns (6 different types, 4 each CW & CCW, 1 CW and 1 CCW)
- 6 steps (4 different types, 2 each CW & CCW, 1 CW and 1 CCW)
 
Last edited:

Vanshilar

On the Ice
Joined
Feb 24, 2014
I don't think it's that the sum of CW attempts has to be the same as the sum of CCW attempts. It's simply that at least 5 CW turns are done, and at least 5 CCW turns are done (and similarly for the steps, with 3 instead of 5). You can have more of one than the other, these are just establishing the minimums. So there's no requirement that a given type of turn has to be done in both directions to count. Since there are 6 types of turns, then the interpretation is that the skater could do 1) 5 types of turns, each done in both directions, with or without doing the 6th turn (in either or both directions), or 2) 4 types of turns in both directions, another type of turn in one direction, and the 6th type of turn in the other direction, to count as level 4. That's the interpretation that's being argued, as I understand it.

This also implies that with 6 types of steps for example, you could do 3 types in one direction, and the other 3 types in the other direction, and still satisfy level 4 with this interpretation; no step would need to be done in both directions.
 

TMC

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 27, 2014
I don't think it's that the sum of CW attempts has to be the same as the sum of CCW attempts. It's simply that at least 5 CW turns are done, and at least 5 CCW turns are done (and similarly for the steps, with 3 instead of 5). You can have more of one than the other, these are just establishing the minimums. So there's no requirement that a given type of turn has to be done in both directions to count. Since there are 6 types of turns, then the interpretation is that the skater could do 1) 5 types of turns, each done in both directions, with or without doing the 6th turn (in either or both directions), or 2) 4 types of turns in both directions, another type of turn in one direction, and the 6th type of turn in the other direction, to count as level 4. That's the interpretation that's being argued, as I understand it.

This also implies that with 6 types of steps for example, you could do 3 types in one direction, and the other 3 types in the other direction, and still satisfy level 4 with this interpretation; no step would need to be done in both directions.

Ok, thanks for the clarification.

Would this be correct, then:

3)
5 or more (out of 6) different types of turns.
- At least 5 turns must be executed in the CW direction and at least 5 turns must be executed in the CCW direction.
3 or more (out of 7) different types of steps.
- At least 3 steps must be executed in the CW direction and at least 3 steps must be executed in the CCW direction.

Example:

Skater X performs 1 bracket CW & CCW, 1 counter CW & CCW, 1 rocker CW & CCW and 1 loop CW & CCW, 1 twizzle in CW direction and 1 three turn in CCW direction PLUS 1 mohawk CW, 1 choctaw CW, 1 toe step CW, 1 cross roll CCW, 1 chasse CCW and 1 change of edge CCW.

3) Results in
- 10 turns (6 different types, 4 each CW & CCW, 1 CW and 1 CCW)
- 6 steps (6 different types, 3 each CW & 3 each CCW)

Would you want to modify the above in any way?

Thanks.
 
Last edited:

gkelly

Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
3)
5 or more (out of 6) different types of turns.
- Those different types can be executed in any direction, as long as the sum of CW attempts is equal to the sum of CCW attempts.
3 or more (out of 6) different types of steps.
- Those different types of steps can be executed in any direction, as long as the sum of CW attempts is equal to the sum of CCW attempts.

There are more than 6 different possible types of steps. E.g., 7 types are listed in Communication 1790: toe steps, chasses, mohawks, choctaws, curves with change of edge, cross rolls, running steps

Some of these, such as running steps, don't even have a direction so they really couldn't be executed in "the other" direction -- unless backward running would be considered the other direction from forward running

I think this list is just examples. I can think of a few other types of steps that would probably qualify. E.g., stepping/turning on the heel of the blade, backward progressives, cross-behinds traveling forward, alternating cross in front traveling backward, etc.

I don't think it's that the sum of CW attempts has to be the same as the sum of CCW attempts. It's simply that at least 5 CW turns are done, and at least 5 CCW turns are done (and similarly for the steps, with 3 instead of 5). You can have more of one than the other, these are just establishing the minimums. So there's no requirement that a given type of turn has to be done in both directions to count. Since there are 6 types of turns, then the interpretation is that the skater could do 1) 5 types of turns, each done in both directions, with or without doing the 6th turn (in either or both directions), or 2) 4 types of turns in both directions, another type of turn in one direction, and the 6th type of turn in the other direction, to count as level 4. That's the interpretation that's being argued, as I understand it.

This also implies that with 6 types of steps for example, you could do 3 types in one direction, and the other 3 types in the other direction, and still satisfy level 4 with this interpretation; no step would need to be done in both directions.

Even so, this seems like an unlikely interpretation. By the way you've worded it in the part I bolded, it would meet the requirements for a CCW skater to do, say
2 CW three turns (the easiest turn),
2 CW brackets (second easiest turn, counterrotated so the edges would be CCW and might feel more secure),
1 CW rocker,
and in the preferred CCW direction save the turns that s/he cannot do in the non-preferred direction at all:
2 CCW twizzles
2 CCW loops
1 CCW counter

This only shows the ability to do 3 different kinds of turns in the bad direction, including the easiest type -- I don't think that would be the intention for level 4. I think for the highest level of steps they want to see most (5) of the different types of turns in the bad direction as well as the good direction.
 

TMC

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 27, 2014
There are more than 6 different possible types of steps. E.g., 7 types are listed in Communication 1790: toe steps, chasses, mohawks, choctaws, curves with change of edge, cross rolls, running steps

Some of these, such as running steps, don't even have a direction so they really couldn't be executed in "the other" direction -- unless backward running would be considered the other direction from forward running

This is why I wrote "out of 6", I'll change to 7.

I think this list is just examples. I can think of a few other types of steps that would probably qualify. E.g., stepping/turning on the heel of the blade, backward progressives, cross-behinds traveling forward, alternating cross in front traveling backward, etc.

I doubt this very much. If that were the case, surely they would have either listed all of the possible steps that would count towards the total, or added eg., for example - something like that. And that would be very vague for a technical rule. In the IJS tech handbook on the USFSA site only 6 are listed & running steps probably left out because of "lack of direction". Still, I'll add a question along the lines of "which steps are considered 'legal' in this context?"

This only shows the ability to do 3 different kinds of turns in the bad direction, including the easiest type -- I don't think that would be the intention for level 4. I think for the highest level of steps they want to see most (5) of the different types of turns in the bad direction as well as the good direction.

I agree. "Forcing" a skater to execute difficult steps in both directions means they wouldn't be able to take it easy by sticking only to the steps that are the easiest for them to perform. This means the sequence would be more complicated = more demanding = a level higher than level 3.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top