1. A lot of talk about the necessity of having a quad to compete. It makes sense. With a value of 12, 14, etc. it’s a big element. But, with a hand down, a step out, an under.rotation, etc. how many points are skaters actually getting? How does this compare with the points for 3A and 3+3 combinations.
I looked at three competitions. The table compares the actual score for quad elements and high scoring 3 elements. The last column shows how much more score a skater earned for including a quad element over a 3 element.
Not sure why NHK turned out so different.
Competition Actual Score Quad Actual Score 3A, 3+3 Difference 4-3 GP Final 11.33 10.59 0.73 NHK 11.28 9.30 1.98 Canada 10.98 10.14 0.84
I expected the difference to be bigger. Did anyone else? If you do 1 quad in the short and two in the long you get 2.1 to 6 more points overall. Would you risk it or look for the extra points somewhere else (GOE, PCS)?
2. The quad has been around for 20 years. Yet, only a few skaters have landed them consistently – Pluschenko, Gabel, etc. Is the message that the quad is a specialty item like the headless scratch spin? You can either do the spin or you can’t. We don’t think less of a skater because she doesn’t have it. But, we do with skaters that don’t have a quad. Why is that?
3. Skating has become a lot about the tricks with each skater trying to find something others can’t do. Is this changing the sport – for example selecting skaters largely on jumping ability? It reminds me of the compulsory figures days. There were skaters like Trixie Schuba who won lots of competitions based on compulsories. But, she could barely do a basic repertoire of jumps, spins, etc. Without naming names we already have some competitors with lots of jumping ability but who really don’t skate very well.
Anyway, these are the things I’ve been thinking about the quad. Your thoughts?