Medal Contenders (Favorites) For 2018 PyeonChang Olympics | Page 8 | Golden Skate

Medal Contenders (Favorites) For 2018 PyeonChang Olympics

Ophelia

Record Breaker
Joined
Dec 6, 2013
Anything subjective is going to be considered "moot as a standard of measurement" if people don't like the outcome.

There are different degrees of irrelevancy. Sure PCS is subjective, but if it had some consistency between competitions, it could be used as a proxy for the range where a skater's artistic capabilities falls in. Right now, it just skeedle-daddles all over the place.
 

CanadianSkaterGuy

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
This is a good example of why you can't compare PCS from event to event. In the team LP, you had only 5 skaters so there was plenty of room to spread marks around as needed, and no need to use the upper end of the spectrum. In the individual LP, you had 24 skaters in which to use that same spectrum, so both the lower end and higher end are going to be utilized more. In the case of medal contenders like Gracie and Julia who skate later in the evening, they are going to benefit from the judges placing their marks ahead of skaters who performed well earlier in the evening.

I agree that's what happens, but that is completely poor form. PCS shouldn't be scaled on a spectrum based on skate order, otherwise it a) forgives errors made by skaters who skate later on, b) it gives a false sense of whether a skater actually deserved the components they received, c) it prevents "lesser" skaters from being rewarded for much cleaner skates. PCS should be given based on the criteria asked of skaters. Otherwise you get skaters falling/popping jumps and still getting personal best PCS. It's absolutely ridiculous that Julia's FS was a personal best PCS and Gold's FS was a personal best PCS for her, when they were cleaner in the team FS. And how do you explain Kostner getting personal best PCS when the field was the same size as the Olympics and yet she was terrible in comparison. I understand why judges can give extra PCS for performance and interpretation (even though errors should mitigate that), but there's no reason transitions and choreography and skating skills should have increased from one to the other, especially with a fall (and the exact same choreography).

A skater should get personal PCS because they earned it, not because they benefited from skating later in a field of 24 skaters or whatever.
 

pangtongfan

Match Penalty
Joined
Jun 16, 2010
Indeed it was enough because PChan's BV was 80.37 and Yuzuru's BV was 88.52
Even a fall on the 4S, his BV was still much higher.
You can check it here: http://www.isuresults.com/results/gpf1314/gpf1314_Men_FS_Scores.pdf

Edited: and PChan's GOE (16.76) was much much higher than Hanyu(13.51).

Chan's GOE was actually generous. This suggests Hanyu not falling would have only barely beaten Chan on GOE (assuming some +GOE for his landed quad salchow). Chan's jumps were all clean but may were tight and no as well as he usually does, and Hanyu does alot of the jumps better anyway. The non jump elements arent much different either way. So no way should Chan have collected that many GOE points especialy in comparision to Hanyu that event.
 

skatedreamer

Medalist
Joined
Feb 18, 2014
Country
United-States
^^^ :yes: What CSG said (in post 149).

Theoretically, wasn't CoP supposed to eliminate the need for "leaving room" for later skaters, as was the practice under 6.0? It doesn't seem to have made much difference on that front.

I would think scores for choreography & transitions could vary between competitions b/c the judges are different (deja vu for subjectivity and the "human" factor). Still, the difference shouldn't be huge, assuming that the choreo is the same.
 
Last edited:

Esopian

Final Flight
Joined
Feb 18, 2014
For predictions, I really hope for Yulia, Kim Yuna or Mao to get on the podium for women (hopefully Mao and Yuna re-consider retiring). For men, hopefully Hanyu can repeat a OGM and perhaps another new skater will emerge by 2018, who knows.

The ongoing debate over GOEs and points given is really interesting to read, :thumbsup: I went through reading the pages from the beginning and the whole conversation got me thinking about the ISU judging system.

What makes Olympics so special is the fact that it only happens every four years; if it was a competition that happened every year, not that many people would look forward to it. It's great anticipating who'll be top 3 in each division, but overall a lot of things will change over the course of four years.

Two questions: Will Chan compete at the 2018 Olympics after getting silver in Sochi? Would he even be a contender for medals at that point? (referring to him aging)
 

CanadianSkaterGuy

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
^^^ :yes: What CSG said (in post 149).

Theoretically, wasn't CoP supposed to eliminate the need for "leaving room" for later skaters, as was the practice under 6.0? It doesn't seem to have made much difference on that front.

I would think scores for choreography & transitions could vary between competitions b/c the judges are different (deja vu for subjectivity and the "human" factor). Still, the difference shouldn't be huge, assuming that the choreo is the same.

Yeah it was supposed to allow skaters to be marked absolutely, rather than relatively. Although, it's apparent that judges still scale GOE to suit their favourites and hold back less established skaters (even ones who skate much more cleanly).
 

CanadianSkaterGuy

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
I dont know if I am in favor of giving no points for a jump you fall on. What I am in favor of though is a very hard penalty for multiple falls. So perhaps a 2nd fall getting -6s in GOE from the judges and an extra 3 points rather than extra 1 point off on top of that. A 3rd fall -10s in GOE from the judges and an extra 6 points off. A 4th fall -15s in GOE and an extra 10 points off on top of that (eg- at that point you might as well just skate off the ice, not almost win a grand prix event as Chan once did with 4 falls in his LP). This would have prevented alot of the debacles past, especialy ones involving a certain infamous Canadian skater. A skater would still feel it was worthwhile taking risks, I mean you could still fall once and step out/err in some non fall way on an addition jump or two, and not be hurt anymore than now. If you are taking risks that the odds of falling twice or more are good, or you simply happen to skate that bad that day, you should be hit hard regardless, and much harder than we have seen in some recent years.

If this was how scoring went, Hanyu would be Olympic silver medalist given his multiple falls in Sochi. And your favourite infamous Canadian skater would have won. ;)
 

Sandpiper

Record Breaker
Joined
Apr 16, 2014
Y'know, I wonder... would Chan have won Sochi under 6.0? I really think he could've. He would've been behind in the SP, no question, but that doesn't matter as long as he wins the LP. Hanyu had one extra clean triple in the LP, but the fact he fell twice (full-on splat on the 4S) would've killed both technical and presentation marks. Whereas Chan did have multiple errors but they were not as severe. Now, I personally think Hanyu performed the hell out of his program after those two falls, whereas Chan was deer-in-the-headlights the whole way through, culminating in a missed double axel and a botched final spin. However, I think the judges would find Hanyu's errors more egregious and place him below Chan in the free, giving Chan the gold.

(Note: Though I like Chan only slightly more than Pangtongfan does :laugh:, I actually wouldn't mind this possible 6.0 scenario where he wins. He and Hanyu were equally messy and it could've gone either way on the free).

Two questions: Will Chan compete at the 2018 Olympics after getting silver in Sochi? Would he even be a contender for medals at that point? (referring to him aging)
1) I personally don't think he'll be there, but who can say at this point? He says he wants to go for it but four years is a long time.

2) He'll be a contender for medals, but not gold, I think.
 

skatedreamer

Medalist
Joined
Feb 18, 2014
Country
United-States
Yeah it was supposed to allow skaters to be marked absolutely, rather than relatively. Although, it's apparent that judges still scale GOE to suit their favourites and hold back less established skaters (even ones who skate much more cleanly).

"Reputation" judging is even more frustrating to me than the "leaving room" concept. If an unknown skater performs better on a given day than the rest of the field, he/she should be rewarded for it. If Mr. Nobody out-skates Mr. Somebody, he wins -- why would a resume factor into the equation at all? Past performances, no matter how wonderful, shouldn't trump the present.

Just blowing off a little steam...
 

CanadianSkaterGuy

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
"Reputation" judging is even more frustrating to me than the "leaving room" concept. If an unknown skater performs better on a given day than the rest of the field, he/she should be rewarded for it. If Mr. Nobody out-skates Mr. Somebody, he wins -- why would a resume factor into the equation at all? Past performances, no matter how wonderful, shouldn't trump the present.

Just blowing off a little steam...

ITA. A "lesser" skater landing 7 triples should easily beat any other skater who lands 3 triples and falls. I know skating is more than jumps, but it's ludicrous that "lesser" skaters have to go clean with huge difficulty just to be considered on par with established skaters who can afford 3-4 errors.
 

CanadianSkaterGuy

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
No. Those bad step outs, some with hands down as well, would have been viewed as basically the same as a fall under 6.0, with the jump being totally discounted, and interrupting the program. He had 3 of those in the LP, and Hanyu had only 2, and Hanyu landed a much higher number of his difficult jumps that night. Hanyu was counted as a fall on a triple flip which was basically done the same as atleast 2 of Chan's misses, and lost a ridiculous 6 points for just barely putting his foot down between a jump sequence, which is why their score was virtually tied even with a much higher base value and Chan making more glaring to the eye mistakes than Hanyu. 6.0 would have actually helped Hanyu in comparision to Chan.

Fernandez and Ten would have probably beaten both in the LP anyway under 6.0. Fernandez had a whole bunch of IJS errors in his LP but not too bad of mistakes under 6.0 thinking. Machida and Takahashi may have even both in the LP under 6.0 too. I think there is a good chance Fernandez would have even won overall under 6.0, but either way Chan wouldnt have and would have been placed behind Hanyu in both programs IMO. Chan may well have finished lower than 2nd.

Chan had more errors, but given that Hanyu had more glaring errors, I think it would have been a split in favour of Chan, coming down to artistry. Let's pretend that 3 step outs are worse to 2 falls (although obviously that's wrong to equate stepouts with falls... I mean look at the mandatory deductions for a fall vs. a stepout). Hanyu would have theoretically had a technical mark edge by 0.1, but Chan would have received an artistic edge by 0.1 (or higher), and with tied scores, presentation is obviously the deciding factor. I'm betting a judge would have scored Hanyu something like 5.6/5.8 and scored Chan something like 5.5/5.9. I could have also pictured the judges giving both Hanyu and Chan a technical mark of 5.5 (since 2 falls back then was as bad as 3 stepouts), and then the obvious nod to Chan for artistry.

If anything, Hanyu in Sochi was saved by CoP base value, GOE and bonus. Back then, his fall on his 4S wouldn't have counted as though he had executed a perfect triple lutz (as it is now), it would have been a deduction of at least 0.2 (0.4 if we're going by mandatory SP deductions). His maximum technical mark in the FS would have had to be no greater than a 5.6, and Chan could have been anywhere from 5.4-5.6 depending on how harsh the judges wanted to be, but then made up for it with 0.1-0.2 higher than Hanyu in artistic presentation.

As much as he made errors and stepouts, he still stayed on his feet, and with his obvious artistic superiority over Hanyu (which of course you're too deluded by hate to acknowledge), I'm pretty sure Chan would have won under 6.0. Same goes for the GPF. And Machida would have won Worlds because Hanyu would (and should) have been 4th behind Verner under 6.0.
 

Sandpiper

Record Breaker
Joined
Apr 16, 2014
Hmm, let's try to look at it with 6.0 eyes:
Fernandez: 2 clean quads + 4 clean triples (-GOE on the axel, can't remember what he did on it, was it 6.0 clean? Not counting the 3S since it was repeated).
Ten: 1 quad + 8 triples
Hanyu: 1 quad + 6 credited triples, but would be 7 under 6.0; two falls
Chan: 1 quad + 5 triples
Machida: 1 quad + 7 triples; one fall
(Didn't include Takahashi because he couldn't land a clean quad in either program. That would've knocked him out in 6.0 as surely as it did in COP.)

I don't think there were mandatory fall deductions in the LP under 6.0, so considering SP deductions is pointless.

Ten's cleanish skate would be considered most suitable for 6.0, but both he and Machida wouldn't have made the final group after their SPs (Machida fell in the LP too). That would've hurt their marks. Thus... if this had been 6.0, would we have Javier Fernandez as Olympic champion? :think: He would've gotten a deduction for the Zayaking, but the alternatives were a guy with two falls (Hanyu) or a guy who seemed totally incapable of axel jumps (Chan).

Uncertain about Hanyu vs. Chan on the free. Hanyu had more content, but he also had a butt-on-the-ice situation on the 4S. And he fell over backwards on the 3F, irrc, and it definitely would've been the same splat as the 4S if he hadn't used his hands. The judges would've held him back in presentation marks (I don't quite agree with this, especially considering the version of Chan that showed up in Sochi, but that's what likely would've happened).

Chan's errors in the beginning were visible but not as disruptive. I do agree the judges would've been very unimpressed with the double axel though. :unsure: It's possible that final mistake would've made a bad overall impression. Still, I can see Chan placing ahead with 5.6/5.8 vs. Hanyu's 5.7/5.7.

I can see this happening:
Gold- Javier Fernandez: 3rd SP, 1st LP
Silver- Patrick Chan: 2nd SP, 2nd LP
Bronze- Yuzuru Hanyu: 1st SP, 3rd LP
 

AC96

Rinkside
Joined
Jan 12, 2014
This is a good example of why you can't compare PCS from event to event. In the team LP, you had only 5 skaters so there was plenty of room to spread marks around as needed, and no need to use the upper end of the spectrum. In the individual LP, you had 24 skaters in which to use that same spectrum, so both the lower end and higher end are going to be utilized more. In the case of medal contenders like Gracie and Julia who skate later in the evening, they are going to benefit from the judges placing their marks ahead of skaters who performed well earlier in the evening.

Please stop trying to excuse and validate improper judging. You keep using the same reasoning to explain Sotnikova's Sochi PCS but anyone on this board would be able to tell you PCS should never be influenced by skate order or how many skaters are in a given event; it should be scored according to what is put on the ice and absolutely nothing else. You raise the point that this subjective bias will always be present; I argue that the job of a judge is to overlook that bias and doing otherwise would be a failure of their responsibility.
 

HanDomi

Record Breaker
Joined
Feb 27, 2014
Hmm, let's try to look at it with 6.0 eyes:
Fernandez: 2 clean quads + 4 clean triples (-GOE on the axel, can't remember what he did on it, was it 6.0 clean? Not counting the 3S since it was repeated).
Ten: 1 quad + 8 triples
Hanyu: 1 quad + 6 credited triples, but would be 7 under 6.0; two falls
Chan: 1 quad + 5 triples
Machida: 1 quad + 7 triples; one fall
(Didn't include Takahashi because he couldn't land a clean quad in either program. That would've knocked him out in 6.0 as surely as it did in COP.)

I don't think there were mandatory fall deductions in the LP under 6.0, so considering SP deductions is pointless.

Ten's cleanish skate would be considered most suitable for 6.0, but both he and Machida wouldn't have made the final group after their SPs (Machida fell in the LP too). That would've hurt their marks. Thus... if this had been 6.0, would we have Javier Fernandez as Olympic champion? :think: He would've gotten a deduction for the Zayaking, but the alternatives were a guy with two falls (Hanyu) or a guy who seemed totally incapable of axel jumps (Chan).

Uncertain about Hanyu vs. Chan on the free. Hanyu had more content, but he also had a butt-on-the-ice situation on the 4S. And he fell over backwards on the 3F, irrc, and it definitely would've been the same splat as the 4S if he hadn't used his hands. The judges would've held him back in presentation marks (I don't quite agree with this, especially considering the version of Chan that showed up in Sochi, but that's what likely would've happened).

Chan's errors in the beginning were visible but not as disruptive. I do agree the judges would've been very unimpressed with the double axel though. :unsure: It's possible that final mistake would've made a bad overall impression. Still, I can see Chan placing ahead with 5.6/5.8 vs. Hanyu's 5.7/5.7.

I can see this happening:
Gold- Javier Fernandez: 3rd SP, 1st LP
Silver- Patrick Chan: 2nd SP, 2nd LP
Bronze- Yuzuru Hanyu: 1st SP, 3rd LP


And that's what I hated about 6.0. Judges could not even look on other executed technical elements after fall which is very unfair for me because fall for me doesn't discount a skater when he still does in rest of program more difficult things than for example someone with clean but simplier executed elements. And that's why I like COP. Because you can see on paper what elements they executed and how much they was scored for that
 

satine

v Yuki Ishikawa v
Record Breaker
Joined
Feb 13, 2014
And that's what I hated about 6.0. Judges could not even look on other executed technical elements after fall which is very unfair for me because fall for me doesn't discount a skater when he still does in rest of program more difficult things than for example someone with clean but simplier executed elements. And that's why I like COP. Because you can see on paper what elements they executed and how much they was scored for that

I agree.
I do wish the penalty for falling was more than 1 point though. I'd like a fall to have a slightly larger consequence.
 

Klarnet

On the Ice
Joined
Apr 7, 2014
Korean Fed is weak, so I don't really think Japanese or Russians are in big trouble there. However, Korea is pro-Amercian, so Americans might have strong positions there.

In men I wish some kid would grow up till then, although I doubt they will allow to create champion like Hanyu once again. Hanyu was meteoric indeed but he is awfully unstable, if there is anyone who can make it clean, they can easily pull Adelina and give Hanyu silver or bronze.

In ladies it is definitely Russian on top - Pogorilaya, Radionova or Yulia. Although Marin Honda will be like Adelina by then -16-17 years. Gold and Wagner might be still there by then, but not on the podium
 

WeakAnkles

Record Breaker
Joined
Aug 1, 2011
Meh, I think no one wants the skaters to mess-up in the Olympic. But for some reason, all of them just messed up in the same night. If your sister found it baffled, then it couldn't be helped because all the men just messed up that day. Same skaters, one month later in Saitama, no one in the top 5 fell in their long program. ;) who knows, it might be the schedule in Sochi played against the men.

And it's time to stop all the casual viewer card. It's the rules all skaters have agreed on at the first place, or else they shouldn't have competed at all. They know the rules, the coaches know the rules as well, and they still compete.
If casual viewers watch FS just for fun and don't bother digging the rules up, it couldn't be helped either.

It's like watching football just for the hot guy on the screen, whoever has better strategy doesn't matter. If you want to understand something, at one point just watching for fun isn't just enough.

Meh. One of the reasons the sport is disappearing from view is because the casual viewer is no longer tuning in, except for the Olympics. And they're certainly not going to shows. Without those casual viewers skating reverts back to being a coterie sport with not much of a revenue stream to support it.

Which is what's happening.
 
Top