- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
Relative difficulty of types of jumps: triples versus quads
- Thread starter Mathman
- Start date
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2006
Inspired by @Mathematician 's post earlier, I looked at my data on women's quads. 106 women since 1990 when Surya Bonaly attempted the first ones.
First jump types and success rates
4T: 66 skaters and 27 got good jumps (41%)
4S: 58 skaters and 25 got good jumps (43%)
4Lo: 6 skaters and 1 with good jumps (17%)
4F: 4 skaters and 3 got good jumps (75%)
4Lz: 12 skaters and 7 got good jumps (58%)
4T and 4S is the most popular combination with 22 of the 27 who have attempted two different ones, then 4T and 4Lz twice, 4Lo & 4Lz once and 4F & 4Lz once.
3 different quads by two: Lukashova 4S 4Lz 4T, Petrosyan 4T 4Lo 4F (order by number of jumps)
4 different quads by three: Prineva with 4Lz 4T 4F 4Lo. Samodelkina 4S 4T 4Lz 4Lo. Trusova 4T 4Lz 4S 4Lo (order by number of jumps)
Just based on these numbers, things look similar to men: most do 4T or 4S and then 4Lz is third. 4Lo and 4F are not popular, but 4F works better than 4Lo for those who try.
I thought the idea of different ages and different jumps was interesting and plotted the skaters according to their jumps and ages.
Then roughly by age group at start with bold those who have attempted quads in 2024 or 2025. In a range, the latter is the age at latest/last known attempt.
4T as only jump: 36 skaters (no date of birth for Yana Yatsenko - if you know, let me know!)
Start at 11 to 13 year olds: 20
(Sadaba 11, Lebedeva Daria 11, Chernobavskaya 11-12, Berestovskaya 11-13, Dokukina 12, Kachanova 12, Krivonosova 12, Kurlina 12, Lodoba 12, Parsegova 12, Sarycheva 12, Titova Ekaterina 12, Astashenkova 12-13, Glagolevskaya 12-14, Shimada 12-16, Nosova 13, Shcherbinina 13, Tarakanova 13, Tuguzbayeva 13, Vasilyeva 13)
Start as 13-14 to 15 years old: 10
(Kravchina 13-14, Ponteleenko 13-14, Zakharova 13-15, Zinina 13-15, Sadkova 13-16, Chereneva 14, Labutina 14, Levito 14, Trofimova 14, Khusnutdinova 15)
Start at 16 or later: 5
(Sinitsyna 16-17, Chiba 17, Sumiyoshi 18-21, Sakamoto 19, Tuktamysheva 23)
4S as the only jump: 33 skaters (no date of birth for Anastasia Bykova - if you know, let me know!)
Start at 9 to 13 year olds: 19
(Korchaznikova 9-11, Askarova 10, Stotskaya 10-12, Dmitrieva 11, Tsaregorodtseva 11, Anashkina 11-12, Lubkova 12, Martynenko 12, Orekhovskaya 12-13, Pogrebitskaya 12-13, Zigorenko 12-13, Lebedeva Milana 12-14, Milto 12-14, Titova Sofia 12-14, Gorbacheva 12-17, You Young 12-17, Monogarova 13, Nasybullina 13, Rebrova 13)
Start as 14 to 15 year old: 8
(Korobitsina 14, Tsipukhina 14-15, Ando 14-21, Agaeva 15, Denisova 15, Muravyova 15, Paramonova 15, von Felten 15)
Start at 16 or later: 5
(Hicks 16, Cohen 17, Yamashita 17, Kihira 17-18, Tursynbaeva 19)
No great differences here as far as I can see?
The other types as only quad:
4Lo: Safonova 20-21
4Lz: Sarafanova 12-13, Ezhova 13, Liu 14, Nelyubova 14-15
Then those who jump two quads, usually 4T and 4S, and their ages, 22 skaters.
8 are doing predominantly 4Ts
(Zaikina 10-11, Zhilina 11-14, Marasanova 12-14, Kalin 12-16, Akatyeva 12-17, Pleskacheva 13-14, Mazur 13-15, Valieva 13-15)
6 are doing predominantly 4Ss
(Gordeeva 10-15, Litvincheva 11-12, Streltsova 11-12, Kostyleva 11-13, Utkina 11-13, Andreeva 14)
8 are doing roughly the same number of both
(Sopova 10, Chistyakova 11, Bazylyuk 11-13, Kalugina 11-14, Khromykh 13-15, Kisel 14, Dzepka 14-15, Bonaly 16-22)
No clear preferences here either as far as I can see except maybe the 4T preferring skaters continuing later with quads? (Though so many of them are still active that it is not a very reliable conclusion.)
2 do 4T 4Lz, both with more 4Ts (Dvoeglazova 12-16, Lagutova 13-14)
1 4Lo 4Lz (Morozova 12-13)
1 4F 4Lz (Shcherbakova 14-17)
3 different quads
4S 4Lz 4T (Lukashova 11-13)
4T 4Lo 4F (Petrosyan 14-17)
4 different quads
4Lz 4T 4F 4Lo (Prineva 10-14)
4S 4T 4Lz 4Lo (Samodelkina 11-16)
4T 4Lz 4S 4F (Trusova 13-18)
So maybe this: those who jump more than one type of quad tend to keep on jumping maybe a little bit longer than the ones who try only one?
Only few try quads of any type after 15 years of age, let alone when they would qualify for senior with the current rules. (Later on jump quality also tends to be low.)
And Sinitsyna did try two 4Ts, she did not only talk about it
. And like all of those women who continue skating after quitting with the quads, she still jumps triples.
E
First jump types and success rates
4T: 66 skaters and 27 got good jumps (41%)
4S: 58 skaters and 25 got good jumps (43%)
4Lo: 6 skaters and 1 with good jumps (17%)
4F: 4 skaters and 3 got good jumps (75%)
4Lz: 12 skaters and 7 got good jumps (58%)
4T and 4S is the most popular combination with 22 of the 27 who have attempted two different ones, then 4T and 4Lz twice, 4Lo & 4Lz once and 4F & 4Lz once.
3 different quads by two: Lukashova 4S 4Lz 4T, Petrosyan 4T 4Lo 4F (order by number of jumps)
4 different quads by three: Prineva with 4Lz 4T 4F 4Lo. Samodelkina 4S 4T 4Lz 4Lo. Trusova 4T 4Lz 4S 4Lo (order by number of jumps)
Just based on these numbers, things look similar to men: most do 4T or 4S and then 4Lz is third. 4Lo and 4F are not popular, but 4F works better than 4Lo for those who try.
I thought the idea of different ages and different jumps was interesting and plotted the skaters according to their jumps and ages.
Then roughly by age group at start with bold those who have attempted quads in 2024 or 2025. In a range, the latter is the age at latest/last known attempt.
4T as only jump: 36 skaters (no date of birth for Yana Yatsenko - if you know, let me know!)
Start at 11 to 13 year olds: 20
(Sadaba 11, Lebedeva Daria 11, Chernobavskaya 11-12, Berestovskaya 11-13, Dokukina 12, Kachanova 12, Krivonosova 12, Kurlina 12, Lodoba 12, Parsegova 12, Sarycheva 12, Titova Ekaterina 12, Astashenkova 12-13, Glagolevskaya 12-14, Shimada 12-16, Nosova 13, Shcherbinina 13, Tarakanova 13, Tuguzbayeva 13, Vasilyeva 13)
Start as 13-14 to 15 years old: 10
(Kravchina 13-14, Ponteleenko 13-14, Zakharova 13-15, Zinina 13-15, Sadkova 13-16, Chereneva 14, Labutina 14, Levito 14, Trofimova 14, Khusnutdinova 15)
Start at 16 or later: 5
(Sinitsyna 16-17, Chiba 17, Sumiyoshi 18-21, Sakamoto 19, Tuktamysheva 23)
4S as the only jump: 33 skaters (no date of birth for Anastasia Bykova - if you know, let me know!)
Start at 9 to 13 year olds: 19
(Korchaznikova 9-11, Askarova 10, Stotskaya 10-12, Dmitrieva 11, Tsaregorodtseva 11, Anashkina 11-12, Lubkova 12, Martynenko 12, Orekhovskaya 12-13, Pogrebitskaya 12-13, Zigorenko 12-13, Lebedeva Milana 12-14, Milto 12-14, Titova Sofia 12-14, Gorbacheva 12-17, You Young 12-17, Monogarova 13, Nasybullina 13, Rebrova 13)
Start as 14 to 15 year old: 8
(Korobitsina 14, Tsipukhina 14-15, Ando 14-21, Agaeva 15, Denisova 15, Muravyova 15, Paramonova 15, von Felten 15)
Start at 16 or later: 5
(Hicks 16, Cohen 17, Yamashita 17, Kihira 17-18, Tursynbaeva 19)
No great differences here as far as I can see?
The other types as only quad:
4Lo: Safonova 20-21
4Lz: Sarafanova 12-13, Ezhova 13, Liu 14, Nelyubova 14-15
Then those who jump two quads, usually 4T and 4S, and their ages, 22 skaters.
8 are doing predominantly 4Ts
(Zaikina 10-11, Zhilina 11-14, Marasanova 12-14, Kalin 12-16, Akatyeva 12-17, Pleskacheva 13-14, Mazur 13-15, Valieva 13-15)
6 are doing predominantly 4Ss
(Gordeeva 10-15, Litvincheva 11-12, Streltsova 11-12, Kostyleva 11-13, Utkina 11-13, Andreeva 14)
8 are doing roughly the same number of both
(Sopova 10, Chistyakova 11, Bazylyuk 11-13, Kalugina 11-14, Khromykh 13-15, Kisel 14, Dzepka 14-15, Bonaly 16-22)
No clear preferences here either as far as I can see except maybe the 4T preferring skaters continuing later with quads? (Though so many of them are still active that it is not a very reliable conclusion.)
2 do 4T 4Lz, both with more 4Ts (Dvoeglazova 12-16, Lagutova 13-14)
1 4Lo 4Lz (Morozova 12-13)
1 4F 4Lz (Shcherbakova 14-17)
3 different quads
4S 4Lz 4T (Lukashova 11-13)
4T 4Lo 4F (Petrosyan 14-17)
4 different quads
4Lz 4T 4F 4Lo (Prineva 10-14)
4S 4T 4Lz 4Lo (Samodelkina 11-16)
4T 4Lz 4S 4F (Trusova 13-18)
So maybe this: those who jump more than one type of quad tend to keep on jumping maybe a little bit longer than the ones who try only one?
Only few try quads of any type after 15 years of age, let alone when they would qualify for senior with the current rules. (Later on jump quality also tends to be low.)
And Sinitsyna did try two 4Ts, she did not only talk about it
. And like all of those women who continue skating after quitting with the quads, she still jumps triples.E
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2022
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2023
Inspired by @Mathematician 's post earlier, I looked at my data on women's quads. 106 women since 1990 when Surya Bonaly attempted the first ones.
First jump types and success rates
4T: 66 skaters and 27 got good jumps (41%)
4S: 58 skaters and 25 got good jumps (43%)
4Lo: 6 skaters and 1 with good jumps (17%)
4F: 4 skaters and 3 got good jumps (75%)
4Lz: 12 skaters and 7 got good jumps (58%)
4T and 4S is the most popular combination with 22 of the 27 who have attempted two different ones, then 4T and 4Lz twice, 4Lo & 4Lz once and 4F & 4Lz once.
3 different quads by two: Lukashova 4S 4Lz 4T, Petrosyan 4T 4Lo 4F (order by number of jumps)
4 different quads by three: Prineva with 4Lz 4T 4F 4Lo. Samodelkina 4S 4T 4Lz 4Lo. Trusova 4T 4Lz 4S 4Lo (order by number of jumps)
Just based on these numbers, things look similar to men: most do 4T or 4S and then 4Lz is third. 4Lo and 4F are not popular, but 4F works better than 4Lo for those who try.
I thought the idea of different ages and different jumps was interesting and plotted the skaters according to their jumps and ages.
Then roughly by age group at start with bold those who have attempted quads in 2024 or 2025. In a range, the latter is the age at latest/last known attempt.
4T as only jump: 36 skaters (no date of birth for Yana Yatsenko - if you know, let me know!)
Start at 11 to 13 year olds: 20
(Sadaba 11, Lebedeva Daria 11, Chernobavskaya 11-12, Berestovskaya 11-13, Dokukina 12, Kachanova 12, Krivonosova 12, Kurlina 12, Lodoba 12, Parsegova 12, Sarycheva 12, Titova Ekaterina 12, Astashenkova 12-13, Glagolevskaya 12-14, Shimada 12-16, Nosova 13, Shcherbinina 13, Tarakanova 13, Tuguzbayeva 13, Vasilyeva 13)
Start as 13-14 to 15 years old: 10
(Kravchina 13-14, Ponteleenko 13-14, Zakharova 13-15, Zinina 13-15, Sadkova 13-16, Chereneva 14, Labutina 14, Levito 14, Trofimova 14, Khusnutdinova 15)
Start at 16 or later: 5
(Sinitsyna 16-17, Chiba 17, Sumiyoshi 18-21, Sakamoto 19, Tuktamysheva 23)
4S as the only jump: 33 skaters (no date of birth for Anastasia Bykova - if you know, let me know!)
Start at 9 to 13 year olds: 19
(Korchaznikova 9-11, Askarova 10, Stotskaya 10-12, Dmitrieva 11, Tsaregorodtseva 11, Anashkina 11-12, Lubkova 12, Martynenko 12, Orekhovskaya 12-13, Pogrebitskaya 12-13, Zigorenko 12-13, Lebedeva Milana 12-14, Milto 12-14, Titova Sofia 12-14, Gorbacheva 12-17, You Young 12-17, Monogarova 13, Nasybullina 13, Rebrova 13)
Start as 14 to 15 year old: 8
(Korobitsina 14, Tsipukhina 14-15, Ando 14-21, Agaeva 15, Denisova 15, Muravyova 15, Paramonova 15, von Felten 15)
Start at 16 or later: 5
(Hicks 16, Cohen 17, Yamashita 17, Kihira 17-18, Tursynbaeva 19)
No great differences here as far as I can see?
The other types as only quad:
4Lo: Safonova 20-21
4Lz: Sarafanova 12-13, Ezhova 13, Liu 14, Nelyubova 14-15
Then those who jump two quads, usually 4T and 4S, and their ages, 22 skaters.
8 are doing predominantly 4Ts
(Zaikina 10-11, Zhilina 11-14, Marasanova 12-14, Kalin 12-16, Akatyeva 12-17, Pleskacheva 13-14, Mazur 13-15, Valieva 13-15)
6 are doing predominantly 4Ss
(Gordeeva 10-15, Litvincheva 11-12, Streltsova 11-12, Kostyleva 11-13, Utkina 11-13, Andreeva 14)
8 are doing roughly the same number of both
(Sopova 10, Chistyakova 11, Bazylyuk 11-13, Kalugina 11-14, Khromykh 13-15, Kisel 14, Dzepka 14-15, Bonaly 16-22)
No clear preferences here either as far as I can see except maybe the 4T preferring skaters continuing later with quads? (Though so many of them are still active that it is not a very reliable conclusion.)
2 do 4T 4Lz, both with more 4Ts (Dvoeglazova 12-16, Lagutova 13-14)
1 4Lo 4Lz (Morozova 12-13)
1 4F 4Lz (Shcherbakova 14-17)
3 different quads
4S 4Lz 4T (Lukashova 11-13)
4T 4Lo 4F (Petrosyan 14-17)
4 different quads
4Lz 4T 4F 4Lo (Prineva 10-14)
4S 4T 4Lz 4Lo (Samodelkina 11-16)
4T 4Lz 4S 4F (Trusova 13-18)
So maybe this: those who jump more than one type of quad tend to keep on jumping maybe a little bit longer than the ones who try only one?
Only few try quads of any type after 15 years of age, let alone when they would qualify for senior with the current rules. (Later on jump quality also tends to be low.)
And Sinitsyna did try two 4Ts, she did not only talk about it
E
Are you counting attempts or actual ratified jumps? Also your first table is based on percentages of athletes who successfully landed at least one, rather than analyzing attempts themselves per athlete? Further we similadly see figures exhibiting athletes names with just at least one attempt? Do I understand this correctly?
For example at first glance I already see you mention 6 women with a 4Lo. Who other than Adeliia rotated this in competition? Including falls, I can not find video.
There are a lot of skaters you mention, especially juniors, who I was never aware landed such content as is suggested. I see names of skaters again just with at least an attempt, but no success rates or relative amount of rotated jumps. I don't know if all of those are even ratified performances? Let me know if I'm missing something.
What are the parameters on your data and how exactly are you interpreting it?
Me: I am looking at contemporarily relevant success rates of rotated jumps and relationships or potential disparities between triple and quadruple iterations of each, per age group, in nationally ranked competition.
Could you provide a similar rough abstract or thesis statement? So we're on the same page. Both regarding the purpose of your data collection and its application, and how you might filter it to accomodate potentially new applications or perspectives in case of issues not considered during original collection.
Let me know how your perspective and goals differ, and why I might be misinterpreting your method. Your data is valuable but it seems it is gathered with intentions other than mine. You are interesting just in tracking the highest total collection of quads or general jumps? Is that so? This is very nice for discovering long-term trends and progress in the sport! However, the 4T and 4S being so comparable, I imagine consideration of loose attempts (I dont know what constitutes an attempt for your data) and only providing athlete names given single attempts (again, attempts where? in ratified ranked competition?) versus comprehensive first-order jump data is not meaningful in regards to my goals or methodology (if thats what you're doing). You need stricter paramters to understand their relative difficulty and actually meaningful age-correlation, again it seems you're maybe applying gross data to a niche issue without the warranted filtering? (IMO)
Are you tracking attempts in training too or something?
Last edited:
I've done it frame by frame. 2.5Lo is we're being very lenient. The twist of the blade is on the landing very much an almost 90 degree twist of the blade then does another almost 180 degree twist after this.
Of course half a rotation is allowed before take off and is effectively included, but take off is another 90 degrees after this threshold. I guess it's a little more confusing with the loop, but she was travelling diagonally in a south-east direction (facing the north-west), then by the time she takes off she is facing a north-east direction (270 degrees). The just over 2 rotations when she touches the ice again
Last edited:
Illegal? By what rules?
Keeping in mind that tech panels rules specifically do not permit reviewing suspected prerotation in slow motion, let alone frame by frame.
More than 180 degrees is illegal.
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2023
Good suggestion, thank you. An unfiltered numbering of total attempted quads partitioned by age group could be useful, if anyone provides that please mention me!
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2023
The rulebook is incomplete. There is no such thing as standardized jump technique.
The hivemind can do literally whatever it wants. This is not a skating-isolated phenomena. What can not be done however is your attempted reasoning with it while not simultaneously utterly wasting your time.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
People will always blame the group for the transgressions of the individual and the individual for the transgressions of the group. 
I think it's just natural selection. Tribes that think that way come into dominance and tribes that don't think that way become extinct.
I think it's just natural selection. Tribes that think that way come into dominance and tribes that don't think that way become extinct.
Last edited:
Maybe this needs to be addressed. This thread has been quite educational because we're all trying to decipher the rules and coming to completely different conclusions. Maybe there needs to be specific rules applying to the type of jump whether a lutz or a loop for instance. If a lutz is done correctly only a contortionist could prerotate, but it's quite easy to hide a prerotation with a loop with that arc of the body movement (and with a salchow). We don't really know where the jump starts.
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2023
Uwoa and I had an insane discourse about this on Discord. I ended up writing a 15 page treatise on font size 10 in google docs breaking it down: "Applying Occams'z Razor in Deriving Principles of Figure Skating Jump Rotation Analysis". @AxelLover was a part of this also. In summary the work argued my original (now revised) position that entry and exit should be defined based on when there is a loss or gain of distinct edge. She did manage to find some issues in my method. I still though think her perspective is also incomplete. We went back and forth for a few days after that. No consensus was reached. I have a lot of ideas brewing in my mind about standardizing rotation and I've nuanced my perspective on this a lot. For example, Uwoa convinced me that entry and rotation initiation can and should be defined before any part of the blade leaves the ice; before I would be against such a suggestion but now I am very sure its most accurate. Of course a standard pre-rotation allowance would be implemented in conjunction with that per jump variety (as you suggest). I'll say I was before and still am 100% sure defining rotation by the last or first partial contact (depending on take-off/landing) (this was Uwoa's position) is fallacious. Rotation standardization is a project I hope to begin within the next couple of months, though I have some other things at the forefront currently.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
Alas, I won't be able to read it.
I have to admit that it's a tricky business. The skater is turning on the ice, continues to turn in the air, and keeps on turning on the landing. I think of the following experiment. We set a top spinning on the floor. Then we snatch the floor out from under it. It continues spinning until it lands of the floor of the apartment below, where it continues to spin. Modern technology could make very precise measurements of all this.
But it would be a boring endeavor, neither sport nor art, I lean more toward the direction of "how does it look to the eyes of expert and experienced judges" as the lesser of two evils, even while recognizing that the battle against bias and dishonesty will never be won.
As much as I like numbers, the best thing about post #21 above is the videos of Valieva's quad. Intensely satisfying, surpassingly beautiful.
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2023
It would be an onerous read anyways. Some were unimpressed with the linguistic drudgery.Alas, I won't be able to read it.
Your thought experiment isnt totally analogous because the top doesn't have a defined orientation. There would be no such thing as an under or over rotation. The question concerning skating is at what point in the entry do we begin deducting degrees from what is intended to be a multiple of 360, plus 180 for an Axel, and at what point do we stop counting any further movement from the same expected value.
The skater doesn't continue spinning like the top when they land. In your experiment we don't have the question of what it means for the top to finish spinning, just what it means to lose then gain contact with a surface (which is also less complex for the top, since its just a point, rather than a blade with multiple points, and also multiple percentages of contact made with the ice over time during a complex landing; at which point is it a full landing and further rotation is nullified we have no consensus).
If we consider what constitutes the beginning of top-spin we wouldn't have an issue either, whether its the moment it gains angular momentum at all or the moment the external inductive force ceases and the top is only maintaining its own motion. Either one is distinctly defined and measurable at some point in time. With skating no such thing has been accomplished because the skater's movement is extremely complex: at what point is the skater gliding or preparing and at what point is the skater now rotating a jump? Consider also the reverse order questioning regarding finishes. These questions concern "cheated jumps" and URs which seem to be an enormous point of contention for those detail oriented skating fans, and it seems people operate under different definitions or understandings. There is no standard at all. The rulebook is weak.
Absolutely. Jumping in skating should be aesthetics first. I completely agree with you. I am careful not to mechanicalize art despite also enjoying numbers as you do. That being said, it seems like a different question of GOE or even PCS (as it contributes to the holistic impression of the program, even if we don't consider jumps directly for PCS) rather than the parameters by which rotation is actually defined (which I think is a question approachable in a completely technical manner).
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
Not to nitpick, but I think that it would be a trivial matter technologically to determine whether the top under-rotated or over-rotated a quad. Between the instant that the first floor is snatched away and the instant when she lands on the next floor below, how many degrees of rotation did she achieve? Was it 1440?
But yeah, figure skaters are not spinning tops. If they were, they would be big and round instead of (sometimes alarmingly) thin. A spherical top will spin forever, but if you try to spin a pencil on its tip you're out of luck..
In figure skating, the take-off point is when the skater's weight is no longer supported by contact with the ice and the landing point occurs when it is again. The air time is what's in between. In principle this would be easy to determine by unobtrusive and inexpensive pressure sensors attached to the boot. (Yuzuru Hanyu write his maters thesis on this topic.)
And speaking of luck, be careful that you don't don't over-rotate a quad by 1 degree, because 1441 is an example of an "unlucky number, like 13. What's unlucky about it? If you are the 1441st kid on the playground and your friends decide to choose up 2 teams of 720, or 3 teams of 480, or 4 teams of 360, or 5 teams of 288, or or 6 teams of 240, or 9 teams of 160, or 10 teams of 144, or 4 teams of 120, or 15 teams of 96, or 16 teams of 90, or 18 teams off 80, or 20 teams of 72, or 24 teams of 60, or 30 teams of 48, 32 teams of 45, or 36 teams of 40,... or 480 hockey teams, or 288 basketball teams, or to pair off into 720 couples -- you are always the one who is left out.
Your only chance of making a team is if they choose up 131 football teams of 11.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2008
There's one basic thing that needs to be defined in the rules, at the very least: all jumps can pre-rotate 1/2 turn on the picking foot and any amount past that needs to be deducted from the allowed landing point. A jump should always land at least 1/4 further around the circle than where it left the ice (except the Axel, which should land at least 1/4 past the entry angle, defined as the moment where the free leg starts swinging through during the takeoff).
For jumps that pre-rotate less, there's then a discussion that needs to be had about giving leeway to the landing point. If you look at someone like Takahashi, he frequently got dinged for underrotation on his toeloops, but some of that was undeserved. He actually got more rotation than a lot of other jumps that could be be seen as "not <", because he didn't turn as much on the ice during his takeoff. Not just on his toepick foot either, also on the skating foot. And if you look at certain Triple Lutz/Flip jumps with 0 pre-rotation, landing slightly short of the "1/4 turn mark" means they did 2.7 rotations in the air - far more more than an "acceptable" 2.25 rotation Triple Lutz/Flip that turned 1/2 on the takeoff and landed 1/4 short.
The GOE guidelines for jumps needs to be revamped too, there is not nearly enough of an emphasis on amplitude, lifting into the air before rotating / explosiveness off the ice, and completing the rotations entirely in the air (slowing down the rotation before landing). At this point one of the GOE bullet points probably also needs to explicitly include "minimal amount of pre-rotation", along with required training on how to see it. Judges clearly can't be trusted otherwise to properly ascertain these qualities.
For jumps that pre-rotate less, there's then a discussion that needs to be had about giving leeway to the landing point. If you look at someone like Takahashi, he frequently got dinged for underrotation on his toeloops, but some of that was undeserved. He actually got more rotation than a lot of other jumps that could be be seen as "not <", because he didn't turn as much on the ice during his takeoff. Not just on his toepick foot either, also on the skating foot. And if you look at certain Triple Lutz/Flip jumps with 0 pre-rotation, landing slightly short of the "1/4 turn mark" means they did 2.7 rotations in the air - far more more than an "acceptable" 2.25 rotation Triple Lutz/Flip that turned 1/2 on the takeoff and landed 1/4 short.
The GOE guidelines for jumps needs to be revamped too, there is not nearly enough of an emphasis on amplitude, lifting into the air before rotating / explosiveness off the ice, and completing the rotations entirely in the air (slowing down the rotation before landing). At this point one of the GOE bullet points probably also needs to explicitly include "minimal amount of pre-rotation", along with required training on how to see it. Judges clearly can't be trusted otherwise to properly ascertain these qualities.
You're mistaken about both her takeoff and landing points, and don't show good knowledge about mechanics and counting rotation with these comments. Someone gliding into a jump is not necessarily the direction the jump rotation has to start, and a "twist" on the landing (which in this case wasn't even caused by a big turn on the ice, rather her landing going slightly to the inside edge) is not indicative of the total rotation.
There is far more "thorough" footage of this jump out there, which you continue to not look at. She landed at least 1/4 past the point where she left the ice, it was a sufficiently completed jump, and not hard to see on the Eurosport coverage that has a better, closer camera view.No-one on the internet probably posts as thorough footage as I do.
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2023
True. The orientation would be defined by its take-off. Also, the top is a rigid body, so all points have the same period, but a skater is not so. I guess you would just be looking at the blade though (some people suggest the whole body's position is relevant).
Interesting. I was not thinking of this issue dynamically. I've thought of a gyro but not a pressure sensor (so I was still thinking geometrically). How would the device measure the pressure specifically for jumps? I imagine there is a lot of variance with the skater's weight distribution anywhere throughout the program. What reading would it be giving when a take-off occurs? I suppose the jump reading would have a specifically drastic spike, and a long period, but the skater is also turning very quickly so I think you would have to define it as being right at the start of the spike in reading or else it would be too easy to get away with over-rotations (or under-rotations) especially if you train your technique specifically for that device. Hm, I really do think the dynamic approach allows for a lot of potential sneaky techniques and maneuvers... which would affect aesthetics severely. It will take a lot of practical testing and trouble-shooting. My skepticism increases the more I ponder this, but I am still very open to it. I do like the idea of your definition's contingency on weight distribution, it just sounds really difficult to implement strictly and accurately (not taking the measurement itself, but making sure it actually reflects what we intuitively expect from a good jump).
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2016
I just found this discussion so let me join. Just a few points:
- When discussing the difficulty of the lutz versus the flip one more thing that also can come into play is that men seem to have edge problems on the flip more often than on the lutz. Naturally, you will choose to go for 4Lz instead of 4F if you have edge issues with the flip. But there are definitely more reasons besides this, for example the greater BV of the lutz. I also believe there's something to the hypothesis that it's easier to generate height on the lutz.
- Anna Shcherbakova was discussed here for her preference of 4Lz and 4F over 4T. Don't forget she actually used to jump only 4T originally (in practice when she was about 13) but then broke her leg. She stated in a recent interview that the injury was the actual reason for ditching the 4T and going for 4Lz and 4F.
- I agree with @Blades of Passion that the relatively high success rate of 4Lz and 4F compared to 4Lo can be at least partially credited to the fact that most skaters haven't been using the old-school low-prerotation technique for flips and lutzes in the past ten years anymore.
- Ideally I would like the jump rotation to be measured in the following manner (my dream scenario): identify the "first" moment the skater is not in touch with the ice with any part of his blades (nor his body). Then identify the "first" moment the skater is in contact (in any way) with the ice again. Then count the exact amount of rotation done by the hips/pelvis/stomach (the center of gravity) of the skater between the two moments. Looking at the landing blade is not sufficient imo because you can twist/turn out your foot to make it look like you rotated more than you actually did (the same applies to the head and even the upper torso to an extent).
- My favorite Kami 4T from the jumping tournament in 2022:
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
When I first took an interest in figure skating as a newby spectator, naturally I couldn't tell one jump from another. My friends told me that you can always tell an Axel because the skater is facing the wrong way. This was only moderately helpful because of pre-rotation on toe-loops.
But I could always tell a Lutz! The stater is curving THIS way, and then miraculously he leaps into the air and starts rotating THAT way. It seemed to defy the laws of physics (conservation of angular momentum).
As for edges, I remember back when Yuna Kim fans and Mao Asada fans would shout back and forth like a Greek chorus, "FLutzer!! "'Lip Jumper,!!!"
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2017
@Blades of Passion
Which skaters do not pre rotate a 4Lutz and a 3Lutz?
Which skaters do not pre rotate a 4Lutz and a 3Lutz?
