2021-22 Russian Women's Figure Skating

[sclloyd]

She likely slipped the way she did because her toe goes in on an angle rather then straight back. For example it would be highly unlikely for Liza to slip on the take off the same way. But because Anna’s foot has already started the rotation by 1/4 when she picks she is more susceptible to this type of mishap.

This is why I think her “unpointed” toe on the camels is like an anatomy/genetic thing and don’t really knock her for it.

 

[wakuwaku]

But my question: is it fair? There‘s a reason why, when you finish your rotation on the ice during landing, your jump gets called underrotated and BV deducted. So, why wouldn‘t it be the same during take-off?

I think that‘s actually what should be looked at, for Anna‘s jumps but for everyone else‘s as well. Does it make jumping 4Lz and 4F and whatnot easier? Then, yes, absolutely, create a rule that enforces loss of BV for excessive pre-rotation. At the moment, though, the judges don‘t care, so the coaches and skaters won‘t either.

See my post here https://www.goldenskate.com/forum/threads/2021-22-russian-womens-figure-skating.88316/post-2869518
The question is not that judges/ISU don't care - they just can't have technical ability to do it and they don't feel any need to do it either since it brings nothing to the table in terms of money/popularity/tickets-selling.
That, and equaling prerotation with underrotation is not valid comparison as well. Prerotation is unavoidable to some extent while underrotations are not. Prerotation can't be seen by naked eye in real time while UR are often obvious. Prerotation do not ruin visible quality of a jump (Samarin's or Valieva's quads are one of the highest ever jumps) while UR are often leads to fall, bad landing, step out etc. - resulting in spoiling whole performance quality i.e. PCS. Considering that many judging criterias are subjective things where beauty of element/performance is assessed - visible quality is the most important. Because skaters are selling their programs to viewers - not their jumping technique minutiae that can be seen only in slo mo.
Also, while UR is clear sign of low height or low rotation speed - prerotation is measure of how much force skater applied to attain peak rotation speed as early as possible and keep it as long as possible. It's not way to "steal" turns as it is with UR - it's way to generate torque force. Blaming prerotation for stealing is the same as blaming launching rocket for making crater in ground when rising in the air. It's just unavoidable derivative of that technique - not its main goal. Main goal is jumping with means of rotation speed and not brute strength. Which can't be attained with classic technique - with its usual delayed rotation (1/3 of jump's time is wasted to mostly lift the body vertically up in air with slow rotation - and peak rotation speed is attained only when skater is going down already). Making complex jumps with classic technique available only for very few very strong unique people. And that is not what good technique should do. Good technique is efficient technique - that will make hard tasks easier for weak people. From that sense Anna's quads are pure technical jumps done with means of precision and timing while Nathan's quads are athletical jumps done mostly with exceptional strength of muscles and ligaments working against highly ineffective classic technique with its delayed rotation - created specifically for single and double jumps.
What you are suggesting is basically denying any progress for optimizing technique akin to banning jumping with back in "high jump" discipline or banning start from crouching position in sprint discipline - because our ancestors didn't do it like that and did it more "fair". Then you should advocate for banning modern jumps like two-foot salchovs or loops - or triple axels with using toe catching ice as leverage. Noone jumped single jumps like that in classic era, right? But proclassic crowd are only against one certain optimization to make complex jumps more stable and accessible - while other much more obvious optimizations are seen as nothing wrong.

" This is exactly what I was saying— Anna doesn’t use the edge to assist in the jump the way Morisi does so it’s just picking technique, it doesn’t actually change the jump. Therefore the full blade has nothing to do with how you evaluate pre-rotation, or as the ISU puts it “forward takeoffs”. While it’s common that full blade assist take offs are associated with forward take offs, this isn’t always true. Anna seems to be okay with takeoff from the foot perspective, she just twists her body a lot so it looks like she has really bad pre-rotation.

Then you should stop to label her jumps as "full blade assist". To call things for what they are and do not call for what they are not is simple. Give it a try Then noone would argue with you anymore.

 

[Ziotic]

This is why I think her “unpointed” toe on the camels is like an anatomy/genetic thing and don’t really knock her for it.

That “unpointed” toe is hideous and her spins with camels do not deserve the GOE they get.

It’s honestly one of the main reasons I just can’t enjoy her skating. Even all the leg kicks and flailing….just POINT THAT TOE

 

[Draculus]

Making complex jumps with classic technique available only for very few very strong unique people. And that is not what good technique should do. Good technique is efficient technique - that will make hard tasks easier for weak people. From that sense Anna's quads are pure technical jumps done with means of precision and timing while Nathan's quads are athletical jumps done mostly with exceptional strength of muscles and ligaments working against highly ineffective classic technique with its delayed rotation - created specifically for single and double jumps.

Though I do agree with a lot of what you said - such definition of 'efficiency' is problematic. One of the most 'efficient' in this sense way to get money - is to steal (you can get a lot very 'efficient' - in a small amount of time with relatively small efforts).
And the obvious question here - where to put a limit and why there (even in economy/business there is a huge gray zone here). Imagine tomorrow one skater invents new efficient way to jump multirotational jumps without fully breaking contact between blade and ice. And it will be so efficient that finally quints are done. Would it be ok with you?

 

[lurkerghost1]

How many quads are Anna and Maiia going for at nationals?

 

[Dawn825]

I was trying to stay out of it, but this post is bananas.

The question is not that judges/ISU don't care - they just can't have technical ability to do it and they don't feel any need to do it either since it brings nothing to the table in terms of money/popularity/tickets-selling.
That, and equaling prerotation with underrotation is not valid comparison as well. Prerotation is unavoidable to some extent while underrotations are not. Prerotation can't be seen by naked eye in real time while UR are often obvious. Prerotation do not ruin visible quality of a jump (Samarin's or Valieva's quads are one of the highest ever jumps) while UR are often leads to fall, bad landing, step out etc. - resulting in spoiling whole performance quality i.e. PCS. Considering that many judging criterias are subjective things where beauty of element/performance is assessed - visible quality is the most important. Because skaters are selling their programs to viewers - not their jumping technique minutiae that can be seen only in slo mo.

So why does skating need judges? "If it looks ok to the audience then it looks ok to me" just makes you an audience member. If the judges are just audience members, who are not supposed to use any tools or rules to evaluate a performance, then skating is a show and everyone who participates should be paid.

Also, while UR is clear sign of low height or low rotation speed - prerotation is measure of how much force skater applied to attain peak rotation speed as early as possible and keep it as long as possible. It's not way to "steal" turns as it is with UR - it's way to generate torque force. Blaming prerotation for stealing is the same as blaming launching rocket for making crater in ground when rising in the air. It's just unavoidable derivative of that technique - not its main goal. Main goal is jumping with means of rotation speed and not brute strength. Which can't be attained with classic technique - with its usual delayed rotation (1/3 of jump's time is wasted to mostly lift the body vertically up in air with slow rotation - and peak rotation speed is attained only when skater is going down already). Making complex jumps with classic technique available only for very few very strong unique people. And that is not what good technique should do. Good technique is efficient technique - that will make hard tasks easier for weak people. From that sense Anna's quads are pure technical jumps done with means of precision and timing while Nathan's quads are athletical jumps done mostly with exceptional strength of muscles and ligaments working against highly ineffective classic technique with its delayed rotation - created specifically for single and double jumps.

Anna is not doing a more efficient jump, she is just doing an easier one. Everyone has seen the video comparing Anna's "lutz" to Boyang's. Imagine looking at Boyang's lutz and thinking "What a fool! Why is he taking off from such a deep outside edge on his left foot? Doesn't he know how much easier it would be to jump from an inside edge on his right foot? Why is he only using the his toe pick to take off? Doesn't he know how mush easier it would be to use the ball of his blade? Why is he doing four full revolutions in the air? Doesn't he know how much easier it would be to do half a revolution on the ice and only three and a half in the air?" Yes he knows this. Everyone knows this. A lutz is supposed to harder than a loop, that is why it is worth more points than a loop.

To call things for what they are and do not call for what they are not is simple.

Anna's (among many others) lutzes and flips should not be called lutzes and flips because they do not take off backward from the toe pick. Very simple. By your argument, they should not be called loops either because she doesn't take off from the edge of the blade. That sounds reasonable. But. You cannot call the jump what it is because it doesnt not resemble any currently named jumps.

Good technique is efficient technique - that will make hard tasks easier for weak people.

Yes. Eteri has discovered that the easiest way to do a hard quad lutz is to not do the hard part, which is the quad lutz, and only do the easy part, which is writing "quad lutz" on the protocol sheet. Well done.

 

[macy]

I was trying to stay out of it, but this post is bananas.

So why does skating need judges? "If it looks ok to the audience then it looks ok to me" just makes you an audience member. If the judges are just audience members, who are not supposed to use any tools or rules to evaluate a performance, then skating is a show and everyone who participates should be paid.

Anna is not doing a more efficient jump, she is just doing an easier one. Everyone has seen the video comparing Anna's "lutz" to Boyang's. Imagine looking at Boyang's lutz and thinking "What a fool! Why is he taking off from such a deep outside edge on his left foot? Doesn't he know how much easier it would be to jump from an inside edge on his right foot? Why is he only using the his toe pick to take off? Doesn't he know how mush easier it would be to use the ball of his blade? Why is he doing four full revolutions in the air? Doesn't he know how much easier it would be to do half a revolution on the ice and only three and a half in the air?" Yes he knows this. Everyone knows this. A lutz is supposed to harder than a loop, that is why it is worth more points than a loop.

Anna's (among many others) lutzes and flips should not be called lutzes and flips because they do not take off backward from the toe pick. Very simple. By your argument, they should not be called loops either because she doesn't take off from the edge of the blade. That sounds reasonable. So what should we call this new ultra efficient jump that Anna has discovered? Some people have suggested flootz. Work for you?

Yes. Eteri has discovered that the easiest way to do a hard quad lutz is to not do the hard part, which is the quad lutz, and only do the easy part, which is writing "quad lutz" on the protocol sheet. Well done.

this entire post is exactly why they gave this "argument" zero merit.

 

[Jontor]

I was trying to stay out of it, but this post is bananas.

So why does skating need judges? "If it looks ok to the audience then it looks ok to me" just makes you an audience member. If the judges are just audience members, who are not supposed to use any tools or rules to evaluate a performance, then skating is a show and everyone who participates should be paid.

Anna is not doing a more efficient jump, she is just doing an easier one. Everyone has seen the video comparing Anna's "lutz" to Boyang's. Imagine looking at Boyang's lutz and thinking "What a fool! Why is he taking off from such a deep outside edge on his left foot? Doesn't he know how much easier it would be to jump from an inside edge on his right foot? Why is he only using the his toe pick to take off? Doesn't he know how mush easier it would be to use the ball of his blade? Why is he doing four full revolutions in the air? Doesn't he know how much easier it would be to do half a revolution on the ice and only three and a half in the air?" Yes he knows this. Everyone knows this. A lutz is supposed to harder than a loop, that is why it is worth more points than a loop.

Anna's (among many others) lutzes and flips should not be called lutzes and flips because they do not take off backward from the toe pick. Very simple. By your argument, they should not be called loops either because she doesn't take off from the edge of the blade. That sounds reasonable. But. You cannot call the jump what it is because it doesnt not resemble any currently named jumps.

Yes. Eteri has discovered that the easiest way to do a hard quad lutz is to not do the hard part, which is the quad lutz, and only do the easy part, which is writing "quad lutz" on the protocol sheet. Well done.

I find your post to consist of a lot of wishful thinking rules.
The whole proper Lutz debate seem to forget that the idea of the jump was that you jump in the opposite direction. No one does that anymore. You have to go back to the mid 90s to see "proper" Lutzes...

 

[Baron Vladimir]

Yes. Eteri has discovered that the easiest way to do a hard quad lutz is to not do the hard part, which is the quad lutz, and only do the easy part, which is writing "quad lutz" on the protocol sheet. Well done.

Yeah, and because Eteri discovered that, i hope in the next Olympic cycle the ISU will change the name of the jump to a Tutz instead of Lutz

 

[wakuwaku]

Imagine tomorrow one skater invents new efficient way to jump multirotational jumps without fully breaking contact between blade and ice. And it will be so efficient that finally quints are done. Would it be ok with you?

Why imagine? The way to jump like that is already exists - its called toe axel. That is what real stealing is and judges are definitely not ok with it and trying to punish it. Of course a jump can be defined as such only in case of air gap between blade and ice - so your example is not valid. But if we assume you meant a way to steal extra turn in a jump - that's what toe axel is. Why judges are punishing it whereas prerotations are given free pass? Because they understand that weight on the blade is important. If skater is constantly losing weight during time when blade touches ice -you can't call it stealing. If skater is turning blade on ice with full weight on it - it's stealing. The jump only begins when losing weight process begins - until that it's just entry to jump. How exactly judges are determining where jump begins only by eye then? They can't see actual weight on the blade, right? It's easy - they can see direction of a jump by its landing - therefore prerotation from backwards position to "direction of a jump" line is counted to number of rotations (and it's usually halfturn) - blade movement until then is counted as entry.
Ok, why not more - why not 300 degree prerotation? It would be even easier to jump if you "steal" even more - following your logic, right? Because its impossible to jump properly - to generate enough lifting force - with that degree of prerotation. You can't find any skater with so huge prerotation that takeoff is done with body almost backwards again - doing jump successfully. You start to lose height and rotation speed if you will be still on ice after certain point. So there is no point to talk about stealing if degree of "stealing" is limited.
Do not mix means with goals. Prerotation is a mean to jump (to lift body up in air with high rotation speed) - not its goal.

 

[wakuwaku]

So why does skating need judges? "If it looks ok to the audience then it looks ok to me" just makes you an audience member. If the judges are just audience members, who are not supposed to use any tools

But they are exactly that. Of course they have some qualification and knowledge - and means to give an assessments to elements - but in other sense they are mere spectators as well. They assess performance component exactly like common audience and they are not supposed to use (or using in practice) slo-mo tool at all. They give marks to elements in real time and they don't care about jumps technique little details. Just as an audience members. They using GOE criterias about beauty of a jump (height, distance, body position etc.) with the same approach mere audience member would assess it - because GOE criterias about prerotation are just not there. Athletes are making their programs for spectators. It will be very strange and bad for the main purpose of skating if great clean performances making standing ovation will be buried by judges based on invisible bureaucratic excuses and something bad-looking will be winning.

Imagine looking at Boyang's lutz and thinking "What a fool! Why is he taking off from such a deep outside edge on his left foot? Doesn't he know how much easier it would be to jump from an inside edge on his right foot?

It would be harder for Boyang to jump from inside edge - and we both know it. It's just his unusual foot physiology trait - there is nothing personal. For some people deep outside edge is not sign of difficulty - it's the only way they can jump it. Just like rippons for many skaters now. It's strange how many people are trying to make canon examples and rules to supporting only clear nature anomalies like few people with unusual foot structure, or their jumps being able to do with particular technique only because their bodies are ultra thin or ultra-short. Rules should be for majority of skaters - not only select few.

Why is he only using the his toe pick to take off? Doesn't he know how mush easier it would be to use the ball of his blade? Why is he doing four full revolutions in the air? Doesn't he know how much easier it would be to do half a revolution on the ice and only three and a half in the air?"

If that's so easy or so easier - why so few women and men are jumping prerotated 4Lzs? But I agree with your thought about foolishness. Indeed, as Boyang results shows - classic technique is his enemy - not ally. Both in terms of low jumping stability and injuries. One can't help but wonder "Why praise classic technique so much if majority of skaters using it - spending more time as Zamboni doubles than skaters?" What the point of "proper" jump if it's going to look ugly even landed because of inevitable step-out or too slow and long preparation?

Anna's (among many others) lutzes and flips should not be called lutzes and flips because they do not take off backward from the toe pick. Very simple.

Until there will be ISU official jumps definition in rules including statement about need of only backward take off for lutz/flip - your claims would mean nothing. Oh, and ISU videos are not argument either - in their last new official Flip video one of the skaters they showed as canon example - jumped almost 180 degree prerotated Flip https://youtu.be/d2-bGthzIOI?t=101 (check in slo-mo at 1:41 there).

Yes. Eteri has discovered that the easiest way to do a hard quad lutz is to not do the hard part, which is the quad lutz, and only do the easy part, which is writing "quad lutz" on the protocol sheet.

Again. If it's so easy - why only few women and men are capable to jump prerotated 4Lz in the whole world?

 

[[email protected]]

Bringing Boyang as an alternative to Anna over and over again shows the weakness of "friends of TT". I would think of just one even more ridiculous example: Kolyada. He showed the world a perfect 4Lz, a masterpiece. The problem is that he did it just once. Other attempts were either falls or pops. So much for "perfect technique" argument when the embodiments of this perfect technique are among the least stable skaters.

 

[Scott512]

Anna going for a rusnats 4 peat! Good luck. And she's healthier than last Russian nationals too.

 

[Draculus]

Of course a jump can be defined as such only in case of air gap between blade and ice - so your example is not valid.

The jump only begins when losing weight process begins - until that it's just entry to jump.

I would say it is a contradiction.
if gap between blade and ice is so crucial to jump definition, then jump starts when this gap appears. Until that it's just an entry to the jump.
And the advantage in this approach is that it's very easy to identify it (good definition), but 'moment when losing weight process begins' is very obscure (bad definition).

Ok, why not more - why not 300 degree prerotation? It would be even easier to jump if you "steal" even more - following your logic, right? Because its impossible to jump properly - to generate enough lifting force - with that degree of prerotation.

Well, as I said in my previous message, 'imagine if'. Skater does 2 full turns on the ice before gap between blades and ice appears and then make another 2 turns in the air. Is it quad? According to your definition - yes. I know that nobody does it - but what would you say if somebody does?

You can't find any skater with so huge prerotation that takeoff is done with body almost backwards again - doing jump successfully. You start to lose height and rotation speed if you will be still on ice after certain point. So there is no point to talk about stealing if degree of "stealing" is limited.

Are you ok with applying this logic to stealing money from your pocket? "There is no point to talk about stealing money from pocket if degree of stealing is limited"?

 

[Azikin]

Anna going for a rusnats 4 peat! Good luck. And she's healthier than last Russian nationals too.

OK, let me add something to this argument, although I didn't want to chime in originally but now I have to.

GO ANNA!

 

[wakuwaku]

if gap between blade and ice is so crucial to jump definition, then jump starts when this gap appears. Until that it's just an entry to the jump.
And the advantage in this approach is that it's very easy to identify it (good definition), but 'moment when losing weight process begins' is very obscure (bad definition).

It's not what I meant at all. Jump consists of many phases where blade should touch the ice. Preparation, entry, picking phase, prerotation phase, landing phase. However there should be some air gap eventually between blade and ice among these phases - to qualify this as jump. Your initial "what if" example didn't include that air gap.

Skater does 2 full turns on the ice before gap between blades and ice appears and then make another 2 turns in the air. Is it quad? According to your definition - yes.

According to my definition - no. Pls read me carefully. I said that movements on ice until start of losing weight is counted as entry (i.e. not added to rotations count). You can't lose weight on blade during 2 full turns on ice - it's physically impossible.

And the advantage in this approach is that it's very easy to identify it (good definition), but 'moment when losing weight process begins' is very obscure (bad definition).

Well, considering Earth as centre of universe or planets having perfectly circular orbits is very easy definition as well. Does that mean this definition is close to truth though - or maybe difficult and obscure ones are more closer to truth?

Are you ok with applying this logic to stealing money from your pocket? "There is no point to talk about stealing money from pocket if degree of stealing is limited"?

Yes, I am ok with it ) If a thief was able to put his arm in my pocket - he would take all money there is - not just part of it. If it's just part I lost from my pocket - I wouldn't think it was theft but some miscalculation I did or payment I forgot about.
"Stealing" turns should make jump easier - else it wouldn't be stealing, right? The more you steal - the easier it should get. However you can't consider prerotation as stealing because it's not like that at all - there is unavoidable point when prerotation instead of help becomes hindrance. Which means it's not stealing but something else.
There are lot of examples when prerotated jumps still are not done succesfully despite them presumably being easier whereas jumps in classic technique are done successfully. If you watch nonEteri skaters with prerotated jumps - you should notice they have big amount of problems with jumps despite them being prerotated. It seems whole training process is more important for stability than technique.
Also, even skaters with classic technique tends to do toeloop jumps in combos prerotated (contrary to single 3T - which usually are less prerotated). Prerotation is not some awful cunning trick skaters are trying to get away with hiding it from judges - like you want to sell it here. It's pretty normal, obvious, mundane and unavoidable way to do jumps when you don't have enough speed, for example. Which is exact case with combo jumps. Such jumps shouldn't be penalised unless ISU wants to make combos eternally negative elements. And if so - any prerotated jump shouldn't be penalised or its rotation considered as "stolen".

 

[florin]

I was trying to stay out of it, but this post is bananas.

"bananas"? wakuwaku's post is a rare example of a balanced, logical, reasoned position here.

bananas it's this strange obsession with prerotation and equating it with UR

 

[Scott512]

OK, let me add something to this argument, although I didn't want to chime in originally but now I have to.

GO ANNA!

This is a great opportunity for Anna to cement her opportunity for Europeans and the Olympics.

 

[Dawn825]

Putting in Nationals predictions was hard!
I think Valieva and Scherbakova are a pretty easy one-two. I have a feeling Petrosyian is going to do really well, there's a bit of buzz behind her and she's likely going to be one of TTs top seniors next year. I also have a bad feeling about Trusova...
I forgot Akatieva wasnt going to be there, are she and Zhilina doing Junior Nationals?

 

[florin]

I'm watching a new interview with Eteri. I like her specific humor - when she speaks with this constant slightly sarcastic smile in a calm tone (you know, without accentuating by voice - "now I'm going to make a joke!"), but I laugh at it. As in this moment about her new dog:

The dog was given to me by Sasha Trusova. She got a dog of this breed. I flirted with Sasha - "give me this dog, why do you need it, you already have five or six dogs". One day she came with a dog carrier bag, put it on ice and said "here, this is a dog for you". At first I thought she was just letting me play with her own, but then it turned out that this is my own dog. And I realized that you can't joke with Sasha.

When she said - "you can't joke with Sasha" - I burst out laughing