2014 Finlandia Trophy

LittleBlueBird · Oct 17, 2014

karne said:
I did not say that I was sure Karen's 3F was an e. I said that's what I would have called it on that camera angle. The front angle may have told a different story. As to Emeri, that F is a ! at best, a really strict caller might give it an e. It was a little hard to tell because so much was wrong with the jump.

I am not a tech spec (though I have sat with my share of them and listened to the fascinating conversations they have), and I am still having some difficulty wrapping my head around the ! and e.

Yes, the video will be different. The video the tech panel uses is recorded expressly for that purpose. They cannot access different angles, however. So yes, it sometimes happens that they will get a side on shot of a skater when a head-on would serve better. So they go with what they have. But to accuse them of conspiring against Chen because of a side on angle - without knowing what angle the tech panel had to look at - is absurd.

I guess edge/under-rotated/downgraded calls are made before reviewing process, am I right? People make mistakes. I think ISU should do the same things just like many sports (Tennis, Football and Baseball) have already adopted nowadays - give skater/coach team to challenge at least once if they are not happy about particular call. This way, it is fair for some cases where tech panel does make wrong call. Also, it will make figure skating world more peaceful. In Karen's case, after challenging, if the result did come out an 'e' for her 3F. I will not say a thing. The cost of wrong edges, under-rotated and spin levels is big today and might be even bigger in the future. Hopefully, ISU is able to provide some system to make competition much fairer. Thanks for your answers and opinions.

karne · Oct 17, 2014

LittleBlueBird said:
I guess edge/under-rotated/downgraded calls are made before reviewing process, am I right?

Yes, they are, but they are not set in stone. When the program finishes, the tech panel goes in and looks at the elements and reviews the ones they think need reviewing. At events with video replay, they can replay the element, even in slo-mo, super-slo-mo, and frame-by-frame. Using this, they might decide that a jump was < instead of << (that it looked worse in real time than it was), or change a level on a spin, or even decide that an edge was worse than/not as bad as it looked.

Then, when the discussion is finished, the tech panel authorises the elements, the judges put in their final marks, and the score goes through and the panels get ready for the next skater.

TMC · Oct 18, 2014

karne said:
Yes, they are, but they are not set in stone. When the program finishes, the tech panel goes in and looks at the elements and reviews the ones they think need reviewing. At events with video replay, they can replay the element, even in slo-mo, super-slo-mo, and frame-by-frame. Using this, they might decide that a jump was < instead of << (that it looked worse in real time than it was), or change a level on a spin, or even decide that an edge was worse than/not as bad as it looked.

Then, when the discussion is finished, the tech panel authorises the elements, the judges put in their final marks, and the score goes through and the panels get ready for the next skater.

You can hear this if you listen to the commentators sometimes:
After Jeremy's long at Nats, Scott I presume says something like (paraphrasing) "they are probably going to have a look at that axel, make sure it's not underrotaded...".
This is why it sometimes takes a bit longer to get the scores. And yes it was underrotated. In fact, the top two FS men were pristine clean other than one ur on one 3A :biggrin:

2014 Finlandia Trophy

LittleBlueBird

karne

in Emergency Backup Mode

TMC

Similar threads

Connect with us