Medal Contenders (Favorites) For 2018 PyeonChang Olympics

CanadianSkaterGuy · Jun 17, 2014

It would be awful to make quads worth 0 points for a fall, or any triple. Every skater will play it safe, and certainly very very few skaters will attempt to try harder, newer elements. That being said, a fall on a quad shouldn't be worth about as much as a 3A with a stepout, or a 3F that gets all +3s.

WeakAnkles · Jun 17, 2014

CanadianSkaterGuy said:
It would be awful to make quads worth 0 points for a fall, or any triple. Every skater will play it safe, and certainly very very few skaters will attempt to try harder, newer elements. That being said, a fall on a quad shouldn't be worth about as much as a 3A with a stepout, or a 3F that gets all +3s.

Skating is fighting its own history with this one, at least in the eyes of the general public. After watching so many Olympics where a favorite's medal chances were decimated due to a fall in a short program, how do you explain to the casual viewer that well now it's the rotation that really matters? Or that a one point deduction/penalty for a fall where top skaters are earning 200+ points over a competition is not just laughable? COP has been around now for more than a decade and trust me, the average person who only watches the Olympics (like say my sister, who was completely baffled by the scoring, particularly for the men, in Sochi) just don't get it. And frankly nor should they. To quote my nephew's favorite retort du jour: That's messed up.

drivingmissdaisy · Jun 17, 2014

wonderlen3000 said:
I do think a fall should be '-2' deduction instead of one, considering GOE can go up to +3.

I think -2 plus a mandatory -3 in GOE. It bothers me to see -2 GOE when a skater falls just because they did a creative entrance. I think no points on a jump is a bit harsh, but a fall is a fall and for me it should lose the max GOE possible.

Meoima · Jun 17, 2014

WeakAnkles said:
Skating is fighting its own history with this one, at least in the eyes of the general public. After watching so many Olympics where a favorite's medal chances were decimated due to a fall in a short program, how do you explain to the casual viewer that well now it's the rotation that really matters? Or that a one point deduction/penalty for a fall where top skaters are earning 200+ points over a competition is not just laughable? COP has been around now for more than a decade and trust me, the average person who only watches the Olympics (like say my sister, who was completely baffled by the scoring, particularly for the men, in Sochi) just don't get it. And frankly nor should they. To quote my nephew's favorite retort du jour: That's messed up.

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.

HanDomi · Jun 17, 2014

drivingmissdaisy said:
I think -2 plus a mandatory -3 in GOE. It bothers me to see -2 GOE when a skater falls just because they did a creative entrance. I think no points on a jump is a bit harsh, but a fall is a fall and for me it should lose the max GOE possible.

There is always -3 on fall I think, at least every time I saw -3 on fall

Meoima · Jun 17, 2014

HanDomi said:
There is always -3 on fall I think, at least every time I saw -3 on fall

Yes, all the falls get -3 and -1 deduction.

Sandpiper · Jun 17, 2014

There are a few outlier judges who give -2. Thankfully, that score usually gets dropped. I don't see any point in rewarding a creative entrance if you messed up the actual element.

Anyway, to clarify: Despite being the original poster who brought up the "0 points" thing, I don't believe falls should get 0. I was only saying that 6.5 vs. 0 is not negligible at all, and can decide many a competition. We should start by changing the fall penalty to -2 and having the GOE be a mandatory -3. -3 fall penalty for subsequent fall after the first, stacking up. I'm all for testing out this relatively small change rather than doing drastic stuff like 0 point falls.

Sam-Skwantch · Jun 17, 2014

I'm pretty sure Caro fell on her 3f-3t at worlds. She got four -2's and five -3's. :slink:

http://www.isuresults.com/results/wc2014/wc2014_Ladies_FS_Scores.pdf

Edit: looks like a fall to me. 1:10 mark.

http://youtu.be/smFBFBeK0rY

drivingmissdaisy · Jun 17, 2014

Sam-Skwantch said:
I'm pretty sure Caro fell on her 3f-3t at worlds. She got four -2's and five -3's.

Chan has gotten -2 for falls from judges a few times, at least in the past.

96skiluvr · Jun 17, 2014

drivingmissdaisy said:
Chan has gotten -2 for falls from judges a few times, at least in the past.

Yeah that I just cannot understand

Sam-Skwantch · Jun 17, 2014

I'm not going to lie. I honestly think if a combo has the first jump go well and the second is a fall I'm really not against a -2 but......I can see it either way. I really like the idea of increasing the point deductions as multiple falls occur but I wonder how long until someone counters with suggesting adding points for consecutive jumps landed. I guess maybe I just did.

Sandpiper · Jun 17, 2014

until someone counters with suggesting adding points for consecutive jumps landed. I guess maybe I just did.

I think this suggestion shows we have a problem. Jumps should be landed. Landing them isn't--or shouldn't be--some kind of miracle that gets big bonuses. I don't see what's the point of this, anyway. What's the difference between someone leaving their falls until the final two jumping passes (thus getting a huge "consecutive jumps bonus"?!) versus someone who fell once on their second jumping pass and once on their fourth jumping pass.

The subsequent fall deduction was for total falls in the program. Doesn't matter if you on the first and second jumping passes, or the first and fifth jumping passes. You still get -5 in total fall deductions either way.

drivingmissdaisy · Jun 17, 2014

Sandpiper said:
The subsequent fall deduction was for total falls in the program. Doesn't matter if you on the first and second jumping passes, or the first and fifth jumping passes. You still get -5 in total fall deductions either way.

For me, the increasing penalty doesn't make sense. The difference between a 1 fall and 2 fall program is the same as the difference between a 2 fall and a 3 fall program. If anything, the first fall is worse because it mars and otherwise clean program, whereas the second fall is already part of a tarnished outing.

Sam-Skwantch · Jun 17, 2014

I think this happens to some degree already in judging. Land seven triples in ladies and watch the pcs rise. The opposite draws lower PCS the more you fall. It's just not spelled it in the guidelines as some may wish to see. I'm not sure if it even needs to be :think:

CanadianSkaterGuy · Jun 17, 2014

Sam-Skwantch said:
I think this happens to some degree already in judging. Land seven triples in ladies and watch the pcs rise. The opposite draws lower PCS the more you fall. It's just not spelled it in the guidelines as some may wish to see. I'm not sure if it even needs to be :think:

Then how do you explain it when skaters like Lipnitskaia and Gold land 7 triples in the team FS and then their PCS rise for 6 triples (and a fall) in the individual FS?

drivingmissdaisy · Jun 17, 2014

CanadianSkaterGuy said:
Then how do you explain it when skaters like Lipnitskaia and Gold land 7 triples in the team FS and then their PCS rise for 6 triples (and a fall) in the individual FS?

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.

Ophelia · Jun 17, 2014

Or it's a good example of PCS being a free-for-all point grab with no benchmarks, which renders it moot as a standard of measurement.

drivingmissdaisy · Jun 17, 2014

lilahozi said:
Or it's a good example of PCS being a free-for-all point grab with no benchmarks, which renders it moot as a standard of measurement.

Anything subjective is going to be considered "moot as a standard of measurement" if people don't like the outcome.

Sandpiper · Jun 17, 2014

drivingmissdaisy said:
For me, the increasing penalty doesn't make sense. The difference between a 1 fall and 2 fall program is the same as the difference between a 2 fall and a 3 fall program. If anything, the first fall is worse because it mars and otherwise clean program, whereas the second fall is already part of a tarnished outing.

My thought is, the first fall is a mistake and it does mar the program, but it can be forgiven as one single error in an otherwise good performance. However, if you fall multiple times, the program as a whole starts looking exponentially sloppier. The increasing deductions is to account for the increasing sloppiness in the program. Ideally, this should be reflected in PCS and we wouldn't even need this, but currently sloppy programs aren't getting PCS hits or said hits aren't that severe. (See: Kostner gets higher PCS than Mao Asada for that mess of an LP at Worlds 2014).

karne · Jun 17, 2014

drivingmissdaisy said:
Chan has gotten -2 for falls from judges a few times, at least in the past.

Pretty sure he got a couple of -1s for a fall at Skate Canada a couple years back.

I don't care how pretty the rest of the jump was, if you fall, -3. Nothing else. No other bullet points. All other GOE wiped.

I would also support a rise in the deduction - but perhaps as a percentage of the base value of the jump, instead of a fixed rate. That way, falls at the lower levels where kids are doing singles aren't punished worse than falls at the higher levels where guys are doing quads, but the quad guys are appropriately punished, rather than a pathetic -1 like they are now.

Medal Contenders (Favorites) For 2018 PyeonChang Olympics

CanadianSkaterGuy

WeakAnkles

drivingmissdaisy

Meoima

Match Penalty

HanDomi

Meoima

Match Penalty

Sandpiper

Sam-Skwantch

“I solemnly swear I’m up to no good”

drivingmissdaisy

96skiluvr

Sam-Skwantch

“I solemnly swear I’m up to no good”

Sandpiper

drivingmissdaisy

Sam-Skwantch

“I solemnly swear I’m up to no good”

CanadianSkaterGuy

drivingmissdaisy

Ophelia

drivingmissdaisy

Sandpiper

karne

in Emergency Backup Mode

Similar threads

Connect with us