Some scientific analysis of Mao's 3A

[starrynight]

The point is, my bot, THIS SEASON, the Korean's 3-3 isn't exactly like a man.

What's wrong with this guy?

 

[mylastduchess]

Okay Why The Heck does every Mao thread, becomes a Mao vs. Yuna thread, and vice versa?

There should be a rule that you can't mention the other skaters name, to not start a flame war!

 

[FlattFan]

Well, I believe being called a bot by F-fan marks you as one who supports the facts, the principles, and the truth.

Hehe, I wasn't at all serious about what I wrote.

Bots said: Mao degraded this season. Her 3A sucked.
Well, you can say the same about your precious this season.

Bots said: Mao jumped like a woman. Yuna jumped like a man.
Bots then supported "the facts, the principles, and the truth" with commentaries by Curt, Peggy, some European dignitary, princess Grace of Monaco.

Well, if commentary is what you called "fact" then Mao's 3A is textbook perfect and is like a man, too.

It's very amusing. Ok, I'll stop. Peace out.

 

[evangeline]

So....Yuna fans think that Mao can't do a decent 3A, and Maobots believe that YuNa can't land a decent 3-3.

In other news, the sky is blue. And water is wet.

 

[miki88]

So....Yuna fans think that Mao can't do a decent 3A, and Maobots believe that YuNa can't land a decent 3-3.

In other news, the sky is blue. And water is wet.

Come to think of it, I think there is a thread on Yuna's 3-3 and whether Mao can do a 3A. So guys, if you want to debate that, go search for those threads. Peace

 

[starrynight]

Come to think of it, I think there is a thread on Yuna's 3-3 and whether Mao can do a 3A. So guys, if you want to debate that, go search for those threads. Peace

Because the same double standard applies to Yuna's 3-3. If she were a guy, I don't think she would get huge GOEs for her 3-3. It's because she's a woman who can jump as good as guys on difficult jumps that she gets the judge's attention.

You are the one who brought up the issue of Kim's 3-3 GOE in this thread.

 

[miki88]

I was referring to an earlier post by Silverlake.

So for Yuna to be able to do a 3-3 better than guys makes sense because she isn't at a disadvantage being a girl, and in some ways her being significantly lighter and shorter than most of the guys could play to her advantage.

So in essence, I wasn't the first one to bring up Yuna's 3-3 to this thread.

 

[starrynight]

I was referring to an earlier post by Silverlake.



So in essence, I wasn't the first one to bring up Yuna's 3-3 to this thread.

In essence, you mentioned Kim's 3-3, whether you were the first or not, which you particularly ordered others not to do in this thread.

 

[miki88]

In essence, you mentioned Kim's 3-3, whether you were the first or not, which you particularly ordered others not to do in this thread.

I think there is a thread on whether Yuna can do a 3-3 and a thread on whether Mao can do a 3A. I didn't mean this thread should have no mention of Kim's 3-3; I just thought this discussion was turning into a debate on Yuna's 3-3 vs Mao's 3A, which could be done in another thread. Sorry if I wasn't so clear before, cuz I thought I was simply replying to a funny post in a joking manner. Never thought it would be taken so seriously and never thought I was ordering anyone.

 

[starrynight]

I think there is a thread on whether Yuna can do a 3-3 and a thread on whether Mao can do a 3A. I didn't mean this thread should have no mention of Kim's 3-3; I just thought this discussion was turning into a debate on Yuna's 3-3 vs Mao's 3A, which could be done in another thread. Sorry if I wasn't so clear before, cuz I thought I was simply replying to a funny post in a joking manner. Never thought it would be taken so seriously and never thought I was ordering anyone.

Silverlake's post, which you said you simply referred to, was not debating about Kim's 3-3 GOE, and you were so clearly engaged in the "debate" regarding Kim's jumps by introducing the GOE issue. I guess if you do apologize, it should be for your untenable blaming of others rather than your writing skill.

 

[miki88]

Thank you for making me go back and check to see why I had thought of mentioning Yuna's 3-3 to begin with. My mistake for mentioning Silverlake's post; she was actually replying to your post, which mentions Kim 3-3.

So many commentators including Scott and Peggy compliment Kim's 3-3 is much better than mens' in its height, distance, and air position. But Asada's 3A quality is seriously less than any men's 3A in its rotations, skidding, and take-off position, but mostly she gets every credit if she lands it. That's why I think the point for "un-true" 3A sometimes seems just ridiculous.

If you go back and read my post, I was clearly talking about the gender factor in judging and using Yuna's 3-3 as an example. In no way did I state that her 3-3 was not good or that she did not deserve those GOE. So I did not engage my self in the comparison between Kim's 3-3 and Mao's 3A, if that's what you mean.
From this quote, you were clearly setting up the debate between these two skaters, so it's no surprise Flattfan responded the way he/she did. So I think you should apologize for turning this into another Kim vs Yuna thread. And if you think I was blaming others.... then you certainly don't get sarcasm:sheesh:

 

[prettykeys]

Hey, I got it. You're saying:

X=Vx-gt
Y=Vyt-0.5gtxt

Actually, that makes sense.

While trying to re-read your formula, I came across:

http://www.physicsclassroom.com/mmedia/vectors/mr.cfm

I was under the assumption that Yuna's hang time was longer than Mao's, but if Yuna's jump is wider, maybe Yuna's hang time is actually shorter?

Does anyone know what Yuna's hang time is?

*ahem* To bring the discussion back to the original topic...

I know you were already corrected on the notion, but I wanted to elaborate on it.

In an idealized conception, with the external influence of only Earth's gravity (and ignoring the slight curvature of the Earth), it is a basic principle of physics that vertical velocity is independent of horizontal velocity.

That is, if a bullet were fired parallel to the surface of a make-belief-straight Earth in a vacuum, it would hit the ground (due to gravity) at the same time as if it were merely dropped.

So yes, assuming that Mao and YuNa's Axel heights are comparable (and thus their hang times), it is most likely that Mao rotates her Axel faster.

I'm actually curious how people feel regarding Mao's 3Axel and its technique to other ladies' 3Axels. It would seem like a much more interesting discussion and comparison.

But as a more general question, for you super-physics-buffs who may be out there: Do you think it requires more force or height to fully rotate a 3Axel that has a strong horizontal trajectory? (e.g. the Frisbee-like 3Axel of Ilia Kulik.) My gut instinct tells me so, because while the Axel is being rotated in the air, at some points it will have to fight "against" a stronger opposing horizontal velocity...

 

[ryoko]

What's wrong with this guy?

the guy makes me SICK.
just full of hatred and jealousy I guess.

 

[starrynight]

you were clearly setting up the debate between these two skaters, so it's no surprise Flattfan responded the way he/she did. So I think you should apologize for turning this into another Kim vs Yuna thread. And if you think I was blaming others.... then you certainly don't get sarcasm:sheesh:

I was responding and referring to Hurrah's post in which he set up the debate and compared Kim and Asada in an unsavory way. Well, you excused yourself and justified your comment on Kim's 3-3 by reference to Silverlake, right? Why not me?

Can't you see that implying that Mao's triple axel is not really a true axel because it is less powerful than Kulik's is like implying that Yuna's toe jumps are not really true toe jumps because they are less powerful than Kulik's? Or saying that Sugar Ray Leonard was not a true boxer because he was less powerful than Mohammed Ali?

You were adding some ingredient by introducing Kim's 3-3 GOE and comparing it with Asada's 3A quality. You blame people while you do the same thing.

As for your sarcasm, you first said it was intended for a fun joke and now you are saying that it was a sarcasm. How can I get your so-called "sarcasm", when you don't even know what you're talking about?

 

[dlgpffps]

The point is, my bot, you said a lot about Mao's 3A THIS SEASON.
Well, THIS SEASON, the Korean's 3-3 isn't exactly like a man.

OK I have an objection to bot behavior as well, but I think you're stepping out of line with your derogatory comments and sneering, condescending tone. This is not how you talk to people, irrespective of how different their opinions may be. In my eyes, you differ very little, if any, from the blind fans you so feverishly criticize, as you are unbending in your stance, blind in your analysis and rude in your behavior. In fact, you come across as a Mao bot, who just so happens to have greater command of the English language and likes to nitpick obviously foreign fans' English. And when you refer to skaters, would you call Mao "the Japanese" or Flatt "the American" or Plushenko "the Russian"? One's nationality is a fact, indeed, but the way you use "the Korean", as an indirect reference to Yu-na Kim is rude however one sees it. The nasty tone is evident to all readers. Your words simply add oil to fire, inciting greater bot frenzies and nastier arguments. If you know bot arguments are ridiculous and unfounded, why not just ignore them in the first place?

I hope I never have to post a comment like this ever again.

 

[FlattFan]

OK I have an objection to bot behavior as well, but I think you're stepping out of line with your derogatory comments and sneering, condescending tone. This is not how you talk to people, irrespective of how different their opinions may be. In my eyes, you differ very little, if any, from the blind fans you so feverishly criticize, as you are unbending in your stance, blind in your analysis and rude in your behavior. In fact, you come across as a Mao bot, who just so happens to have greater command of the English language and likes to nitpick obviously foreign fans' English. And when you refer to skaters, would you call Mao "the Japanese" or Flatt "the American" or Plushenko "the Russian"? One's nationality is a fact, indeed, but the way you use "the Korean", as an indirect reference to Yu-na Kim is rude however one sees it. The nasty tone is evident to all readers. Your words simply add oil to fire, inciting greater bot frenzies and nastier arguments. If you know bot arguments are ridiculous and unfounded, why not just ignore in the first place?

I hope I never have to post a comment like this ever again.

Are you serious? MSNBC wrote, and I quote, "American beat Kwan" for their headline in 1998.
If you like to walk on eggshell all the time, fine by me. But what's this tone you use to talk to me? Isn't this exactly what you're accusing me of?

 

[hurrah]

*ahem* To bring the discussion back to the original topic...

I know you were already corrected on the notion, but I wanted to elaborate on it.

In an idealized conception, with the external influence of only Earth's gravity (and ignoring the slight curvature of the Earth), it is a basic principle of physics that vertical velocity is independent of horizontal velocity.

That is, if a bullet were fired parallel to the surface of a make-belief-straight Earth in a vacuum, it would hit the ground (due to gravity) at the same time as if it were merely dropped.

So yes, assuming that Mao and YuNa's Axel heights are comparable (and thus their hang times), it is most likely that Mao rotates her Axel faster.

I'm actually curious how people feel regarding Mao's 3Axel and its technique to other ladies' 3Axels. It would seem like a much more interesting discussion and comparison.

But as a more general question, for you super-physics-buffs who may be out there: Do you think it requires more force or height to fully rotate a 3Axel that has a strong horizontal trajectory? (e.g. the Frisbee-like 3Axel of Ilia Kulik.) My gut instinct tells me so, because while the Axel is being rotated in the air, at some points it will have to fight "against" a stronger opposing horizontal velocity...

Hi prettykeys. Yes, I would prefer for the discussion to go there....

I guess if I were to compare Mao's triple-axel to Midori's or Tanya's, theirs' were far more spectacular-looking, but I'm not sure that this means that their triple-axels were technically-superior. I think Midori and Tanya had superior muscular strength, but I think the ability to rotate quickly is a technical skill, and the ability to spring high enough into the air to complete three and a half rotations without brute muscle strength is also a technical skill.

Also, Mao's triple-axels are 'spectacular' in their own way. Her's is not an in-your-face athletic feat, it's an aesthetically-pleasing athletic feat.

So one important advantage of Mao's triple-axel technique is that because it doesn't require bulky muscles, the skater can remain thin and flexible and have his/her body available to do all the other figure skating skills that are required, particularly under COP.

Ah, and another super important advantage of Mao's technique---however she's doing it---is that it's probably far less burdensome on the body. Tanya (who, as we know, went on to become a professional wrestler or something) was probably was far more physically durable than Midori, but Midori broke her ankle twice practicing her triple-axel, so her technique was very, very taxing on her body, and she had to severely limit the amount of practice she put into her triple-axel, whereas Mao seems to be able to practice her triple-axel far more.

I think this is really an issue that needs addressing. People talk about skater's good/bad technique, and what's considered good technique seems to often be equated with that which results in huge/high/wide jumps, but it's also important to consider technique in terms of how physically burdensome it is to the skater's body.

 

[starrynight]

Are you serious? MSNBC wrote, and I quote, "American beat Kwan" for their headline in 1998.
If you like to walk on eggshell all the time, fine by me. But what's this tone you use to talk to me? Isn't this exactly what you're accusing me of?

MSNBC apologized its mistake implying that Kwan was not American enough. Hopefully F-fan stops short of getting into a racial/nationalistic slur.