Page 9 of 13 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 LastLast
Results 121 to 135 of 182

Thread: Medal Contenders (Favorites) For 2018 PyeonChang Olympics

  1. #121
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    5,080
    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.

  2. #122
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Falling-again!-at an ice rink near you!
    Posts
    1,972
    Quote Originally Posted by CanadianSkaterGuy View Post
    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.

  3. #123
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    3,676
    Quote Originally Posted by wonderlen3000 View Post
    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.

  4. #124
    Love popcorn, hate horendous costumes Meoima's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    North of the world
    Posts
    4,437
    Quote Originally Posted by WeakAnkles View Post
    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.

  5. #125
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    579
    Quote Originally Posted by drivingmissdaisy View Post
    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

  6. #126
    Love popcorn, hate horendous costumes Meoima's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    North of the world
    Posts
    4,437
    Quote Originally Posted by HanDomi View Post
    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.

  7. #127
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    1,850
    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.

  8. #128
    Size 7 Knife Boots Sam-Skwantch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    At the Rink
    Posts
    3,295
    I'm pretty sure Caro fell on her 3f-3t at worlds. She got four -2's and five -3's.

    http://www.isuresults.com/results/wc..._FS_Scores.pdf

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

    http://youtu.be/smFBFBeK0rY

  9. #129
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    3,676
    Quote Originally Posted by Sam-Skwantch View Post
    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.

  10. #130
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    338
    Quote Originally Posted by drivingmissdaisy View Post
    Chan has gotten -2 for falls from judges a few times, at least in the past.
    Yeah that I just cannot understand

  11. #131
    Size 7 Knife Boots Sam-Skwantch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    At the Rink
    Posts
    3,295
    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.

  12. #132
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    1,850
    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.

  13. #133
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    3,676
    Quote Originally Posted by Sandpiper View Post
    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.

  14. #134
    Size 7 Knife Boots Sam-Skwantch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    At the Rink
    Posts
    3,295
    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

  15. #135
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    5,080
    Quote Originally Posted by Sam-Skwantch View Post
    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
    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?

Page 9 of 13 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 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
  •