This thread about FS foot steps made whole lot sense to me, I think it is worth the effort to analyse both SPs from YK and AS.
Hah, easy for you to say, since you're not the one analyzing.
This thread about FS foot steps made whole lot sense to me, I think it is worth the effort to analyse both SPs from YK and AS.
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.
Hah, easy for you to say, since you're not the one analyzing.
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.
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.
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.
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.
You are jumping the gun.Looking forward to qwertyskates' rebuttal
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).
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.
Because they do not have enough patience to breakdown the SS themselves. Then again, they have the patience for 31 pages of debate.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.
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 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.