Grand Prix Analysis, Winners/Losers

FlattFan · Oct 3, 2016

miki88 said:
A skater is capable of demonstrating the most difficult transitions and the best basics. Patrick Chan is one example. Kostner shouldn't get one of the highest TR scores just based on quality when there are skaters that have both.

Kostner often get lower TR score than the top 3 girls. She should only get lower TR score than maybe Mao Asada at her best. So I disagree that she was overscored.
Remember before they changed the rule to let so many girls getting level 4 step sequence, only Kostner was able to manage to add enough steps and turns in her step sequence to earn level 4 consistently. You don't see it because it doesn't look like work for her. Everything looks very easy and clean.
Which of the girls have both? Now you're comparing a girl to a boy.

FlattFan · Oct 3, 2016

Biellmann said:
I'm sure many people don't even know what "skating skills" means. They watch and enjoy the performances, that's what it's all about

Up to a point. If you have good enough skating skills, your performance can be great for most casual viewers.
Try watching someone with skating skills below 7. Most of the time, they're struggling to do anything decent that requires edge work. They can gain speed with a lot of scratchy cross over, but it will look like work. When it look like work, it's hard to enjoy the performances. For example, I have season pass to ballet for the past 5 years, every time they put a soloist in as the main dancer, you can tell they are struggling to keep up. It takes away from the performance. Rarely do I ever see a soloist that did a good job, and usually within a year, they get promoted to principal dancer.

MaxSwagg · Oct 3, 2016

andromache said:
lol

PCS distribution are problematic across the board. Ashley gets inflated SS, Gracie gets inflated INT, Elena/Liza get inflated CH - in the end, for the most part, it works out. It really just looks like you want to pick on Ashley rather than acknowledging the problems of the judging as a whole. I doubt that the judges - who know more about skating than you or me - are getting "bamboozled." Instead they are deliberately using PCS to give skaters an overall ranking, much like under 6.0.

ETA: The direct implication of your posts is that Ashley's excellent interpretation tricks people into thinking she has great SS, and because you are not getting tricked, you're smarter than all of us fools.

You said that, me... Again, sounds like a person problem. And you still don't even get it.

andromache · Oct 3, 2016

Lol okay

Biellmann · Oct 3, 2016

FlattFan said:
Up to a point. If you have good enough skating skills, your performance can be great for most casual viewers.
Try watching someone with skating skills below 7. Most of the time, they're struggling to do anything decent that requires edge work. They can gain speed with a lot of scratchy cross over, but it will look like work. When it look like work, it's hard to enjoy the performances. For example, I have season pass to ballet for the past 5 years, every time they put a soloist in as the main dancer, you can tell they are struggling to keep up. It takes away from the performance. Rarely do I ever see a soloist that did a good job, and usually within a year, they get promoted to principal dancer.

People who are not that into figure skating don't know what they're watching. Few years ago, i was one of them. For me, every jump looked the same, i didn't know what they were doing on the ice, i didn't see the mistakes they were doing (only falls

), didn't even realized their speed, everything was looking fine and nice- and the same.
Don't expect from this kind of people to understand the performances or the elements or scores or whatever. It's a different world, a world they know nothing about :confused2:

mrrice · Oct 3, 2016

Biellmann said:
I'm sure many people don't even know what "skating skills" means. They watch and enjoy the performances, that's what it's all about

I think another good example that I was able to see close up quite a few times was when Joshua Farris and Jason Brown were rivals. Jason was often the crowd favorite and would lose still to Joshua. It was clear to me that Joshua was the better skater back then but, I could never convince my friends who loved Jason. They always said that Jason was "Robbed"

MaxSwagg · Oct 4, 2016

andromache said:
Lol okay

Yes, that's right.

Globetrotter · Oct 4, 2016

FlattFan said:
Kostner often get lower TR score than the top 3 girls. She should only get lower TR score than maybe Mao Asada at her best. So I disagree that she was overscored.
Remember before they changed the rule to let so many girls getting level 4 step sequence, only Kostner was able to manage to add enough steps and turns in her step sequence to earn level 4 consistently. You don't see it because it doesn't look like work for her. Everything looks very easy and clean.
Which of the girls have both? Now you're comparing a girl to a boy.

So again, you had simply highlighted that CaroK could get her TR scores while seemingly not packing a lot of in betweens, because of her strong basic SS. I suspect that the judges rewarded her TR more because of the sort of body movement in between elements which are actually very difficult as she needs to lean on her edges. It is just that Kostner makes them look easy and thus the casual viewer might think hey, how could this be scored so much? If you look at the very looooong StSq which the current Russian girls are pulling out just to get that level 4 (Medvedeva, Lenok etc) and compare with Kostner's Bolero or Ave Maria StSq, the difference is huge. Kostner's Ave Maria footwork looked almost too easy and you may even dismiss it until you watch closer and notice how sharp the turns are and how long she needs to hang on to that edge lean, it really is awfully tough. Sure, you can pack a lot of turns and steps to get a level 4 StSq but most of them takes > 60s to achieve. Only Asada and Kostner could get out a beautiful footwork sequence in ~40s and still get a Level 4. It is just tough that basic SS is not as appreciated these days. Even though PChan has great edges and speed, the bladework on ice was still obvious. The quietest blades I ever heard live were from Yuka Sato and Shizuka Arakawa and then Kostner.

MaxSwagg · Oct 4, 2016

Globetrotter said:
So again, you had simply highlighted that CaroK could get her TR scores while seemingly not packing a lot of in betweens, because of her strong basic SS. I suspect that the judges rewarded her TR more because of the sort of body movement in between elements which are actually very difficult as she needs to lean on her edges. It is just that Kostner makes them look easy and thus the casual viewer might think hey, how could this be scored so much? If you look at the very looooong StSq which the current Russian girls are pulling out just to get that level 4 (Medvedeva, Lenok etc) and compare with Kostner's Bolero or Ave Maria StSq, the difference is huge. Kostner's Ave Maria footwork looked almost too easy and you may even dismiss it until you watch closer and notice how sharp the turns are and how long she needs to hang on to that edge lean, it really is awfully tough. Sure, you can pack a lot of turns and steps to get a level 4 StSq but most of them takes > 60s to achieve. Only Asada and Kostner could get out a beautiful footwork sequence in ~40s and still get a Level 4. It is just tough that basic SS is not as appreciated these days. Even though PChan has great edges and speed, the bladework on ice was still obvious. The quietest blades I ever heard live were from Yuka Sato and Shizuka Arakawa and then Kostner.

Well, these days it seems as though we (or at least the judges) expect significantly more from men in terms of skating skills than women. The scoring at the most recent Championships is reflective of this, considering which ladies got the highest SS scores. As far as I'm concerned, Chan and Hanyu (and maybe even Javier) on their worst day could outstate all top 6 women from Boston on their best day with their eyes closed and hands tied behind their backs...

FlattFan · Oct 4, 2016

MaxSwagg said:
Well, these days it seems as though we (or at least the judges) expect significantly more from men in terms of skating skills than women. The scoring at the most recent Championships is reflective of this, considering which ladies got the highest SS scores. As far as I'm concerned, Chan and Hanyu (and maybe even Javier) on their worst day could outstate all top 6 women from Boston on their best day with their eyes closed and hands tied behind their backs...

No kidding. I said that before if Hanyu gets 9 on skating skills, the best woman would get 6 on skating skills using the same scale.
The problem with ISU is they don't have a scale for woman. Using the same bullet points, it's very hard to justify giving a bunch of girls 8s and 9s as if they can come close to what Chan and Hanyu can do that warrant 8s or 9s.

drivingmissdaisy · Oct 4, 2016

FlattFan said:
The problem with ISU is they don't have a scale for woman. Using the same bullet points, it's very hard to justify giving a bunch of girls 8s and 9s as if they can come close to what Chan and Hanyu can do that warrant 8s or 9s.

Why do we need to compare men and women in this way? The point of the scoring is to reflect excellence in that event. The best women should be able to achieve a 10, regardless of how that compares to what men do.

Raomina · Oct 4, 2016

drivingmissdaisy said:
Why do we need to compare men and women in this way? The point of the scoring is to reflect excellence in that event. The best women should be able to achieve a 10, regardless of how that compares to what men do.

But the IJS is not supposed to be an ordinal scoring system?

Globetrotter · Oct 4, 2016

MaxSwagg said:
Well, these days it seems as though we (or at least the judges) expect significantly more from men in terms of skating skills than women. The scoring at the most recent Championships is reflective of this, considering which ladies got the highest SS scores. As far as I'm concerned, Chan and Hanyu (and maybe even Javier) on their worst day could outstate all top 6 women from Boston on their best day with their eyes closed and hands tied behind their backs...

Chan and Hanyu yes, Javier not quite there yet. Of course they are all way ahead of our Russian girls and Wagner but I wouldn't rank Javier ahead of Mao and CaroK and even Gracie Gold. My theory on why the guys are working so hard on their SS and other components is because their tech is already at such high level with 4T and 4S being routinely pulled out by the top guys and even the middle of the pack. You can train a 4R/F/Lz, but the increase in BV is possibly not as good a return of investment as compared to working on 5 components. Up each by 0.5, you gain 5 points more in the LP. Work hard on the SS, it makes gaining the TR, PE, IN easier and you can tackle more complex CH.

For the ladies, let's just admit that at the top level, they are already maxed out in TES and nobody is consistently pulling out any quads or 3A regularly and still keep their other jumps consistent. Have the top ladies done anything more difficult than Midori Ito (3A) or Kristi Yamaguchi (3Lz3T) or Irina Slutskaya (3Lz3R)? The middle of the pack ladies are only slowly catching up with 3-3. Thus the threat on the top girls are not really quite there and they can still rely on their consistency and tech to win without bothering much on the components. At least not yet. I suspect that once the top juniors all armed with 3-3s graduate to senior ranks and start snapping, then that's when we see the incentive to push the PCS. Just take Wagner as example. She does not have the natural talent or tech but worked so hard on her PE/IN to make up. Since 3A and quads are not regularly featured among ladies, the incentive is to train harder on tech rather than components. In the end, it's all about which gives a better ROI, much as I personally dislike the mediocre SS

Globetrotter · Oct 4, 2016

drivingmissdaisy said:
Why do we need to compare men and women in this way? The point of the scoring is to reflect excellence in that event. The best women should be able to achieve a 10, regardless of how that compares to what men do.

But we use the same BV in TES for both men and ladies. Why should components be any different? Seeing the high 8s given to Medvedeva and mid 8s to Wagner when Chan and Hanyu typically get just high 8s to low 9s, this just looks suspect considering that the SS of the ladies are really mediocre and deserve at best low to mid 7s.

FlattFan · Oct 4, 2016

drivingmissdaisy said:
Why do we need to compare men and women in this way? The point of the scoring is to reflect excellence in that event. The best women should be able to achieve a 10, regardless of how that compares to what men do.

When you have an absolute scale, the score has to be absolute. Regardless of gender, a triple toe has the base value of 4.1. The woman has to rotate a triple toe to get that 4.1.
If their skating skills are not up to snuff with the man, why should they get the man's score? The skating skills for both genders have the same requirements.

Your logic is the same as women's 2A have base value of men's 3A.

Mango · Oct 4, 2016

Biellmann said:
People who are not that into figure skating don't know what they're watching. Few years ago, i was one of them. For me, every jump looked the same, i didn't know what they were doing on the ice, i didn't see the mistakes they were doing (only falls), didn't even realized their speed, everything was looking fine and nice- and the same.
Don't expect from this kind of people to understand the performances or the elements or scores or whatever. It's a different world, a world they know nothing about :confused2:

This kind of elitist attitude will not help people want to learn more about the sport. Every sport has casual fans with little info about what's going on. Welcome them in, help them understand. The sport needs more fans who are knowledgeable and interested.

LRK · Oct 4, 2016

The tech is valued the same among men & women - but the PCS isn't, is it? Isn't the factoring different? So it is not really equal in any case.

FlattFan · Oct 5, 2016

LRK said:
The tech is valued the same among men & women - but the PCS isn't, is it? Isn't the factoring different? So it is not really equal in any case.

because it would be weird to have girls with TES 65 and PCS 95. So they have to have a .8 factor to keep TES and PCS closer together.
Maybe if they judge the girls with correct PCS compare to the men, they wouldn't need to factor in the .8 in the end.

Most girls would be 4 and 5 in SS, the best of the best will be 6-7.

MaxSwagg · Oct 5, 2016

LRK said:
The tech is valued the same among men & women - but the PCS isn't, is it? Isn't the factoring different? So it is not really equal in any case.

I think that was mostly for balancing the TES and PCS for the final score (doubly 50/50)?

LRK · Oct 5, 2016

Regardless of the reason, the fact is that higher PCS in fact nets the ladies fewer points than the men - hence saying that since the TES is valued the same then so should the PCS be valued the same for men & women is a logical fallacy when in fact it is not valued the same.

That is my whole point. Whether any/many of the ladies are getting too high PCS or not regardless of that is not something I feel qualified to discuss and don't really have an opinion on.

Grand Prix Analysis, Winners/Losers

FlattFan

Match Penalty

FlattFan

Match Penalty

MaxSwagg

Match Penalty

andromache

Biellmann

Match Penalty

mrrice

MaxSwagg

Match Penalty

Globetrotter

MaxSwagg

Match Penalty

FlattFan

Match Penalty

drivingmissdaisy

Raomina

Globetrotter

Globetrotter

FlattFan

Match Penalty

Mango

Royal Chinet 👑🍽️

LRK

FlattFan

Match Penalty

MaxSwagg

Match Penalty

LRK

Similar threads

Connect with us