The "wrong edge" call in JGP events

[dwiggin3]

The edge of the takeoff is only one of several basic aspects of a jump. If you go to -3 for the wrong edge error, then you have to go to -3 for every error which violates a basic aspect of a jump, which is pretty much every error. I view that as excessively harsh, and I think most judges, coaches and competitors feel likewise.

To focus only on the wrong edge error because the edge defines the name of the jump is obsessively pedantic. The skater took off, they rotated three times, they landed. They deserve some amount of credit, and certainly more credit than if they had fallen (which also gets the GoE of -3 you would like to give the wrong edge error).

As for your question about how often the wrong edge reduction in GoE is taken -- based on the competitions I have judged this season and the protocols I have looked at I would say with little exception every time the Technical panel has called it. And sometimes even when the Technical Panel hasn't called it.

(And it's a slippery slope when the ice isn't flat.)

LOL...ice is slippery. However, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I don't see the point in rewarding a skater any points for a jump whose hallmark is a specific edge and you feel they should get some credit for doing a portion of the jump - so, we'll disagree.

 

[GoldMedalist]

Why shouldn't you get credit, is the better question.

You judge sport based upon what someone has accomplished. Doing a Triple Lutz with an edge flaw shows more than someone who didn't attempt the jump at all.

 

[Mathman]

I think the heart of this debate is something more fundamental. Figure skating is one of the very few sports that gives "partial credit" for a valiant try.

Almost all other sports follow Yoda's maxim: "Do or do not; there is no try."

If football, it is quite admirable if you throw a long pass down the field and get three quarters of the way to the goal line. But you don't get any points for it.

I'm not saying that skating can't follow its own road -- but the scoring system will be open to open to criticism from sports fans who wonder whether this (or any "judged" sport) is really a sport.

When is a Lutz a Lutz? The consensus seems to be that, yes, the outside edge take-off is part of it, but there is also the question of how you prepare for the jump and especially the "counterrotation" at take-off.

However, the counterrotation occurs precisely because you are on the outside edge. If you switch over to the inside edge, that means that briefly the rotation of your entry arc IS going in the same direction as the revolutions in the air. What's Lutzy about that?

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

It's apparent there are those who see the Flutz as an official jump and will defend its intention of being a lutz, the definition of which does not include intent. duh.

However,given this innovation of the definition of a Lutz, why can not the penalty be more severe for not doing an official Lutz? automatic 3 points deduction? and then judged with GoEs for a flutz - whoops, I mean intended lutz.

The Sport is very easy for the elements which get the most points. A triple loop for instance, if a skater does a half skid loop on the ice before taking off for the 2-l/2 jump and if the skater falls within the 25 percent ruling, the skater has now completed 2.25 of a triple. I suppose that is within the mathematical realm of figure skating. Yeah, we don't want to hurt these little kids.

Then there are the staunch purists of the elements. A lutz takes off on a back outside edge. If it doesn't it is not a lutz. Hard to argue that. Rules are Rules even in the form of definitiions. But that would make the sport too hard for these kids. We have to lower the standard otherwise it will become a grown up sport.

Joe

 

[gkelly]

I think the heart of this debate is something more fundamental. Figure skating is one of the very few sports that gives "partial credit" for a valiant try.

Well, consider that at the beginning of the sport, the primary thing that was being judged was attempts at drawing perfect circles on the ice with their blades. Of course you can't expect anyone to succeed at that 100%, so the judging has to be based on how close did they come to perfection, not yes or no with nothing in between. That qualitative aspect has always been part of the sport.

It is, to a large degree, in the nature of any judged sport.

It isn't really relevant to compare to sports where points are only awarded for binary events -- either they occur (the ball goes in the goal) or they don't. The nature of what the contestants are trying to achieve and how it's determined what they did or did not achieve is entirely different.

You can find other sports that have more relevant similarities, or other analogies within even the most disparate sports that are more relevant than comparing something that is entirely binary with something that is entirely or primarily qualitative. So why even bring up meaningless analogies just to imply that one side is right and the other is wrong?

 

[gsrossano]

It's apparent there are those who see the Flutz as an official jump and will defend its intention of being a lutz, the definition of which does not include intent. duh.

No one sees the flutz as an official jump. We see the flutz for what it is, a jump with an error that deserves less than full credit, but still some credit.

However,given this innovation of the definition of a Lutz, why can not the penalty be more severe for not doing an official Lutz? automatic 3 points deduction? and then judged with GoEs for a flutz - whoops, I mean intended lutz.

Because the reward for doing it right compared to a flip is so little. Thus, the penalty for doing it wrong should not exceed the reward for doing it right. Currently, the reward for doing it (a 3Lz) right is 0.5 more than a 3F, and the penalty for doing it wrong is 0.5 less than the flip.

The Sport is very easy for the elements which get the most points. A triple loop for instance, if a skater does a half skid loop on the ice before taking off for the 2-l/2 jump and if the skater falls within the 25 percent ruling, the skater has now completed 2.25 of a triple. I suppose that is within the mathematical realm of figure skating. Yeah, we don't want to hurt these little kids..

The view of someone who has never landed even a cheated triple loop?

Then there are the staunch purists of the elements. A lutz takes off on a back outside edge. If it doesn't it is not a lutz. Hard to argue that. Rules are Rules even in the form of definitiions. But that would make the sport too hard for these kids. We have to lower the standard otherwise it will become a grown up sport.

It's not about hard or easy or grown up or not grown up. It's about whether or not a sport should give partial credit, for partial accomplishment. If one feels partial credit should not be given, no amount of discussion will change that opinion. Likewise for those who feel partial credit is appropriate for some errors.

Being of the mind that partial credit is appropriate for some errors, having the reward for the correct edge equivalent to the penalty for the wrong edge, as is the case, seems fair to me. Those who do it on the wrong edge get less points. Those who do it on the correct edge get more points. What is not fair about this?

Also, I find it a bit ironic that those of rigid mind who insist the wrong edge take off should be scored a flip, would end up giving the skater more points even though the jump has a clear error. They hate the fact the jump has an error and consider it an outrage against sport, yet would score the element with more points by insisting it be called a flip with a correct take off edge! We need to punish the skaters for taking off on the wrong edge, so let's give them more points! That will teach 'em.

 

[feraina]

Last I checked, diving and gymnastics were very muchs scored and judged like skating. In many sports, the individual athletes are judged for how fast they move (swim/run/cycle/ski/etc; jumping is related, as is shooting), so picking a winner is trivial when you have high-resolution technology. In many other sports, the athletes play what is essentially a game against another side, so all the ball games are good examples.

But in a few sports, like diving, gymnastics, and skating, (also freestyle skiing, now that I think about it), you're judged for _how_ you move. It's not only whether you can do a triple or a quad, but exactly how "perfectly" you achieve it, plus all the spins, spirals, footwork seq's, and the in-betweens. There are so many elements to this "how" question that the judging is inevitably complicated and subjective, and often contentious. But I think most of us enjoy skating precisely because of its complexity, and its proximity to art, right?

 

[GoldMedalist]

If football, it is quite admirable if you throw a long pass down the field and get three quarters of the way to the goal line. But you don't get any points for it.

Football is a team game.

In FS, because it's individuals vs. individuals and not one specific goal (being the fastest or throwing a javelin the farthest or whatever it may be), absolutely everything they do must be compared to each other in a very specific manner.

Figure Skating already had a point-based score system, it was simply a very sloppy one. Judges started skaters off with whatever kind of base mark they wanted to and then deducted points in basically whatever manner they wished. Then on top of that was the poor ordinal ranking system once the scores were figured out.

It's like a decathlon...there are so many different aspects to the competition that are all specifically measured and then combined to form the overall score.

 

[Mathman]

Again, this is a consequence of judging down to what the audience can see (and what young skaters can feel).

As explained by a judge on another forum, younger skaters first learning jumps are often unaware of which edge they are on most of the time. Therefore, the traditional entries to the different jumps are meant to facilitate the skater being on the right edge and aren't meant to define the jump at all and theoretically once the skater is more edge aware could use different kinds of set ups (as long as the edge is right at the moment of take off).

What's happened now is that the traditional set-ups are being incorporated into the definition of the jump because that's something audiences can see.
I'd love to see a skater who can lutz and flutz (a la Hughes) call the flutz a "flip from a backward outside inside change of edge".

Thank you for this insight, Mafke. This post was hugely useful to me in understanding the issues, and provided a point of view that I had not considered before.

So why even bring up meaningless analogies just to imply that one side is right and the other is wrong?

It was not my intention to imply that one side is right and the other wrong. It was my intention to point out that different sports have different philosophies of scoring. And that football fans might not like the ISU judging system.

Actually, my own personal opinion is that Yoda is an idiot (life is a lot more like figure skating than like football).

 

[SeaniBu]

This has been a great TOC

Thus, the penalty for doing it wrong should not exceed the reward for doing it right. Currently, the reward for doing it (a 3Lz) right is 0.5 more than a 3F, and the penalty for doing it wrong is 0.5 less than the flip.

.........

Also, I find it a bit ironic that those of rigid mind who insist the wrong edge take off should be scored a flip, would end up giving the skater more points even though the jump has a clear error. They hate the fact the jump has an error and consider it an outrage against sport, yet would score the element with more points by insisting it be called a flip with a correct take off edge! We need to punish the skaters for taking off on the wrong edge, so let's give them more points! That will teach 'em.

I see "both" of these points for points.

If I think about it, the fact it is called, or known as, or whatever - is not enough for a skater to just say " OK, I will just screw up on purpose for points AND I am fine with it."
I really "thinkibu" that the skaters integrity is going to drive desire to complete the real jump and it's designation in the "truest" fashion of the sport. I they didn't have such integrity, I truly believe they wouldn't be where they are.

IOW I doubt the skaters feel pride in "trying to fake the judges out (into thinking they really meant to do a Lutz unflutzed." just to gain some points.
These are athletic competitors.
"Cheating" to win happens.
Often enough for "issues?"
At times sprits are dampened.
And we reach for the tissues.

- isn't the best thing to do with the tisue , is throw it away and learn and move on?

But what I think the Judging is doing with the designation is quite fair AND seems "punishing."
I doubt any skater wants to be known for not having a "real Lutz."
Flip designations are rather harsh. And the fact it comes up as Less than the downgraded designation of a Flip to add.
Ouch.

Seems fair to me ~
?

 

[antmanb]

The wrong edge error is just one of a host of possible errors in jumps. Got to say I don't understand the obsession with this one error. But anyway, in terms of relative value, comparing an adequate Lutz and flip (GoE of 0) with the same jumps with only a wrong edge take off (GoE of -1) you have

Lutz 6.0
Flip 5.5
Lutz wrong edge 5.0
Flip wrong edge 4.5

So a wrong edge Lutz is currently worth less than a true edge flip. Other than those who want to crucify the skater with the wrong edge, what more do you want? The skater pays for the error. Do you want to go to -2 for the wrong edge? Is the wrong edge more, less or as serious as a two footed landing (-2 GoE)? A jump with a major (more than 1/4) cheat (-2 GoE)? A fall on the landing (-3 GoE)?

Evaluating jumps (and elements) involves evaluating shades of grey. It is not a yes/no decision.

I didn't think the GOE reduction for a wrong take off edge was -1 i thought the rules said it's anything from -1 to -3 depending on the severity of the problem?

If a skater does get only -1 for a flutz then they still recieve 5 points - that's the same as an satisfactory loop, more than a satisfactory salchow or toeloop and the same as a +1 Toe loop. Should a flawed triple lutz really be worth more than a superior triple toe-loop?

Ant

 

[antmanb]

Why shouldn't you get credit, is the better question.

You judge sport based upon what someone has accomplished. Doing a Triple Lutz with an edge flaw shows more than someone who didn't attempt the jump at all.

I don't think they have though accomplished more.

Suppose skater A goes out and lands a double axel and one triple each of toe-loop, salchow, loop and flip. Skater B goes out and lands exactly the same content as skater B but attempts a triple lutz. She sets up on a straightline entry skating forward, executes a LFI mohawk, crosses left foot over right directly onto an inside edge holds the inside edge, rocks over to a very shallow outside edge, kicks her picking leg high into the air behind her pushing her onto a deep inside edge that is held for a few feet, picks in and rotates three times and lands.

What exactly has skater B shown she can do that skater A can't? Skater A demonstrated four triple jumps, all perfectly executed. Skater B showed the same perfectly executed four triple jumps and then did a very flawed and messy take off on a triple lutz, barely managed to even get onto an outside edge, let alone take off from it. Why should that count more for her?

Ant

 

[hockeyfan228]

The points CoP gives out is IN line with what many sports have been doing for some time. :scratch:

For judged sports, that is certainly true, particularly since gymnastics changed from deducting from a perfect "10" without any way to regain those points with extra credit. How many years ahead of figure skating were they?

In diving, there are minimal requirements. Greg Louganis hit his head on the board, and flopped into the water, and he still recevied points, because his entry wasn't feet first, one of the few things that will nullify a dive. He got credit for what he did do, however minimal.

As for non-judged sports, as long as you don't break rules, it doesn't matter what your form is. You can slip forwards and make a mess of it as long as you clear the steeplechase. You can knock down every hurdle. You can land on your head in high jump. You can do a huge bellyflop sliding into home.

 

[antmanb]

When is a Lutz a Lutz? The consensus seems to be that, yes, the outside edge take-off is part of it, but there is also the question of how you prepare for the jump and especially the "counterrotation" at take-off.

However, the counterrotation occurs precisely because you are on the outside edge. If you switch over to the inside edge, that means that briefly the rotation of your entry arc IS going in the same direction as the revolutions in the air. What's Lutzy about that?

I'm one of the people who thinks that a flutz is not a flip - it is a flawed lutz. I also believe that the penalty for a flutz should be harsher (i don't think a flutz should ever be able to score as much as any other triple).

The argument about the "counterrotation" going into a jump is slightly flawed in as much as every jump has to have counterrotation going into it otherwise you won't be able to rotate it - that's why every jump has a check on the take off - you counter rotate to set up the jump and at the point of take off you release that counterrotation or check to give you the rotation. Look at the arms in the flip and and the lutz - there really isn't any difference in what the upper body is doing it is waist down that the differences should be occurring. The chronic flutzers like bobek, cohen and sarah hughes - all alligned their bodies and their blades in practically identical ways in both their flips and "lutzes". They entered the jump differntly but for the one or two seconds after the entry turn was completed everything happened the same. Cohen in particular - if someone had the computer wizadry to show her lutz and flip from the point of starting the knee bend to jump and reach back with the pic you wouldn't be able to tell either jump apart at all.

Ant

 

[hockeyfan228]

If football, it is quite admirable if you throw a long pass down the field and get three quarters of the way to the goal line. But you don't get any points for it.

If you attempt that fourth down as a running play/pass and fail you get no points. Even in that case, you've put the other team at a disadvantage, because they now have to go 3/4 of the way down the field to score.

But you have gotten close enough for a field goal, which gives you half credit, and the odds of making the field goal are very great.

 

[hockeyfan228]

Cohen in particular - if someone had the computer wizadry to show her lutz and flip from the point of starting the knee bend to jump and reach back with the pic you wouldn't be able to tell either jump apart at all.

Ant

I don't think you need computer wizardry to see this in Cohen's technique any more than you need it to see her flutz.

The only physical way to tak off on an outside edge when your pick leg is directly behind the shoulder or outside the shoulder is to bend over the ankle completely on the working foot. The great lutzers do a counterbalance.

I agree with grossano 100% that the issue with determining an appropriate deduction is that the scale of values does not represent true relative difficulty between elements. This would be the easiest thing to fix philosophically, but the hardest thing to fix politically.

And I mean for the majority -- there will allways be some skater who finds it very easy to do a harder element than an easier one (Yamaguchi's 3Lo vs. her 3Sa, for example.)

 

[Mafke]

And I mean for the majority -- there will allways be some skater who finds it very easy to do a harder element than an easier one (Yamaguchi's 3Lo vs. her 3Sa, for example.)

I think you mean Yamaguchi's (very true) lutz versus her salchow, her loop was far from sure.

 

[Mafke]

And I'll repeat once more, while the lutz may be more difficult in theory, in practice especially in competition, the flip is every bit as hard (maybe more so). I really think they should get the same base value.

 

[hockeyfan228]

I think you mean Yamaguchi's (very true) lutz versus her salchow, her loop was far from sure.

Yes, typo

 

[Mathman]

What exactly has skater B shown she can do that skater A can't? Skater A demonstrated four triple jumps, all perfectly executed. Skater B showed the same perfectly executed four triple jumps and then did a very flawed and messy take off on a triple lutz, barely managed to even get onto an outside edge, let alone take off from it. Why should that count more for her?

I'm not sure I understand this example. Which of the two skaters do you think should win the (tech portion of the) contest?

Are you saying that the second skater's Lutz (which was not a flutz, but still not very good) should receive 0 points?