Jump under the COP

[sk8tngcanuck]

Our skating coach recently went to a seminar designed to help coaches understand the CoP and how to utilize it to the skaters advantage. She learned alot about the CoP, but one of the most concerning issues to her is that there is no longer a decuction on a jump for cheating the entry. If, for example, a skater is going into a 3 toe and turns forward as they enter the jump, this is no longer a cheat. Only the exit and the landing are counted under the CoP.

I foresee this causing a problem, not so much at senior level, but perhaps at novice/jr. where they are trying to get credit for the triple, so they turn into it without penalty. As far as I am concerned, a cheat is a cheat period, and should be counted as such.

Opinions?

Canuck

[Joesitz]

Hey Canuck - In other words turning a triple toe into a double axel will be ok? Figure Skating judging is the only sport where mistakes are overlooked.

That's not the only problem with Jumps in CoP.:

There's the Flutz which is really a Flip.but the intention was to Lutz so only a -1 against a Jump which never happened.

Yet, the underrotated jump is not considered an attempt but a downgrade.

Then there are the Falls, Stumbles, Popped Jumps, Double Footed Landings which depending on the skater's fame are either overlooked or severely penalized.

Oh, the CoP is the answer to subjectivity. Worse, the fans eat it up. :sheesh:

Canuck, can you ask your Coach about what I mentioned?

Joe

[Ptichka]

Hmmm, I find this very odd. Here is the exerpt from CoP explanation:

Jumps
Four Phases : A - Preparation; B - Take-off; C - Rotation ( flight ); D - Landing
- 3
Minor problems in three or more phases described in ( -1 ) or major problems in two or more
phases described in ( -2 ) or any of the following individual errors :
- Severe change of edge on take-off of flip or lutz;
- Fall - a fall reduces the value of the element by 3 grades, arriving at the best possible GOE of -1
- 2
Minor problems in two phases described in ( -1 ) or major problem in one phase of the jump eg.
- Slightly under-rotated either on take-off or landing ( 1/4 turn or less );
- Moderate change of edge on take-off of flip or lutz;
- Touch with two hands;
- Step out of landing;
- Land on two feet
- 1
Minor problem in one phase of the jump eg.
- Touch down with one hand;
- Touch down with one foot;
- Long preparation phase ( telegraphed );
- Short change of edge in take-off of lfip or lutz;
- Weak landing ( land on wrong edge or toe, etc. )
BASE
All jump phases completed satisfactorily; ie. average length preparation phase;
- Adequate height and distance;
- Organized/vertical air position, completed revolution;
- Clean landing;
- Sufficient flow in and out
+ 1
Good technique on at least three phases of the jump described in base value or
- A jump of base value with varied position in the air or delay in rotation;
- Good flow in and acceptable flow out of the jump
+ 2
Good or very good technique and execution in all phases of the jump
- Consistent flow in and out of the jump
+ 3
Superior in all jump phases
eg. unexpected or difficult entry phase, great height/distance, strong flow in and out and superior
extension on landing

From the description it appears that pre-rotating would be "Slightly under-rotated either on take-off( 1/4 turn or less )", incurring a -2. If the jump is pre-rotated by more than 1/4 turn, it is just downgraded.

As to fluzing/ liping. It all depends on how much of a cheat it is, as it can be a deduction between -1 and -3. I am not sure how the judges are to differentiate between "slight", "moderate", and "severe".

Finally, I don't think anyone ever claimed that CoP is objective. However, it is easier to call the judges on it (or at least would have been had they had the courage to take the secrecy out of it). The judge (in theory) now has to explain every mark, as in "I marked the lutz so high because it had complex footwork going into it, and superior height; I believe this counterbalanced a slight change-of-edge"; before, a judge could just say, "Sure, she doesn't do a real lutz, but her overall skating is so superior that I put her in first".

[berthes ghost]

I am not sure how the judges are to differentiate between "slight", "moderate", and "severe".

Easy:
"slight": MK
"moderate": Sasha
"severe": Sarah

[Chrystia Mee]

Easy:
"slight": MK
"moderate": Sasha
"severe": Sarah

THat is hilarious!

Sorry, it's been a long day already, but that just made me laugh out loud!

[Joesitz]

Hmmm, I find this very odd. Here is the exerpt from CoP explanation:
As to fluzing/ liping. It all depends on how much of a cheat it is, as it can be a deduction between -1 and -3. I am not sure how the judges are to differentiate between "slight", "moderate", and "severe".

I think it will depend on how biased they are. It is human to cheat for a compatriat, for an ethnic soul buddy, for a personal favorite. so this will continue

Finally, I don't think anyone ever claimed that CoP is objective. However, it is easier to call the judges on it (or at least would have been had they had the courage to take the secrecy out of it). The judge (in theory) now has to explain every mark, as in "I marked the lutz so high because it had complex footwork going into it, and superior height; I believe this counterbalanced a slight change-of-edge"; before, a judge could just say, "Sure, she doesn't do a real lutz, but her overall skating is so superior that I put her in first".

This definitely is theory. I think judges may be called up to explain but we will never hear of any questions raised about the judging.

Complex footwork and superior height are already subjective statements. If skater A does complex footwork and jumps high but the judge's favorite does the same bet you a cookie who gets +3 and who gets +2. Somehow this rationale seems to be that there will only be one skater that can do these tricks.

And 'slight', 'moderate', and 'severe' are already subjective unless of course all the judges agree on the plus awards or for that matter, the minus awards. We already know they don't. If you think about it, an attempted lutz which goes from bo edge to a flat (the original definition of a flutz) or it changes edge completely to a bi edge, another jump. hmmm. I could think that as being fancy edging into a flip.

Getting rid of the 'secrecey' would help to reduce this further, imo.

Let's see what happens.

Joe

[sk8tngcanuck]

Joe,

According to our coach, as long as the jump takes off on the correct edge, it is still counted as that jump. A triple toe where a skater picks in, and turns forwards as she enters the jump would still be counted as a triple toe because the edging and technique were correct. It is also NOT considered under rotated UNLESS the skater lands forward and has to do a 3 turn to complete the jump.

The focus on jumps is to be the correct edge entry, and the exit and landing position.

In regards to the much discussed flutz, if the blade is on an inside edge on the take off, it is considered a triple flip, and thus subject to the zayak rule.

Our club is hosting a clinic by David Howe in the fall, with a focus on helping the skaters to understand the CoP and to use it to their advantage. He will be bringing videos and things for the off ice portion of the clinic, so I am very interested to sit in on that 2 hour session and hear all about it in much more detail, and I will certainly be sharing with all of you.

Canuck

[floskate]

Thanks for posting all this info guys. I've downloaded it but not bothered to study much yet. So landing position gets a nod, which I'm glad about and should help Michelle especially. But although Shizuka has wonderful flow on her landings, she's not that well extended - unless TT sorts this out this summer, so could this potentially hurt her in any way?

[Joesitz]

Joe,

According to our coach, as long as the jump takes off on the correct edge, it is still counted as that jump. A triple toe where a skater picks in, and turns forwards as she enters the jump would still be counted as a triple toe because the edging and technique were correct. It is also NOT considered under rotated UNLESS the skater lands forward and has to do a 3 turn to complete the jump.

[If you check out Pitchka's post which I believe comes from the ISU on this, you will note that the four phases of the Jumps are:Preparation, Take off; Rotation and Landing. Infractions to these 4 phases of Jumps can be judged as .slight, moderate and severe. So, it appears to me, that it is more than just.clling the jump.a name because the take off and landing are correct.

In regards to the much discussed flutz, if the blade is on an inside edge on the take off, it is considered a triple flip, and thus subject to the zayak rule.

I would agree with that interpretation but most fans consider that the judges understand that there is an intent to lutz so they judge it as a lutz (not a flip) with a slight, moderate or severe mark down of the lutz.

As to underrotated jumps, the Caller does not see the ATTEMPT only the result which is an overrotated jump. Why the judges let the Flutz go by with an attempt and the underrotated jump as not an attempt has never really been addressed as faras I know.

Our club is hosting a clinic by David Howe in the fall, with a focus on helping the skaters to understand the CoP and to use it to their advantage. He will be bringing videos and things for the off ice portion of the clinic, so I am very interested to sit in on that 2 hour session and hear all about it in much more detail, and I will certainly be sharing with all of you.

He's a good coach to take such interest.
Canuck

Joe

[Joesitz]

A skater has just attempted a Triple Lutz. After 2 rotations he stops the rotation; his landing become shaky; he falls but he gets up fast and continues.

Can anyone analyze this situation (not common but it does happen). What will the Caller and judges do to credit or discredit this move?

Joe

[Ptichka]

I'd guess a doube lutz with -3 for a fall.

[Joesitz]

Pitchka - Would it affect the Presentation score?

Joe