Good point about the combo mathman. Another problem I see is the ratio between the base values and the GOE. GOE can easily override the base value differences, esp with their recent policy to reward GOE more generously. GOE could be factored relative to the base value of each jump. I think it fine that a flawed quad/3A scores less than a decent 3A/3Z. Perhaps the good thing about the current system is that it encourages the skater to really master the basics. But a decent quad/3A scoring the same as or less than a well-excuted 3A/3Z sounds a bit strange to me.
Stojko opposes the ladies result
- Thread starter yangjie
- Start date
I think the way Mao usually performed her 3(f)lutz is better then some others at the top tier who did the jump at the Olympics . I think the way Mao usually performed her 3-3 would have been ratified at the Olympics. I feel sorry for her for these things because hers were put under extreme Scrutiny. I also think that if the 3A was allowed to be the Axel in the short that alone would have boost Mao's self esteem. She put so much of herself into that 3A 
The rise in self esteem might have made her programs less dark and moody. Oh well the right programs won the medals. Yu Na is a deserving Olympic champion. My favorite of the quad probably. Well Mirai but I'm thinking of her as more next quad.
The rise in self esteem might have made her programs less dark and moody. Oh well the right programs won the medals. Yu Na is a deserving Olympic champion. My favorite of the quad probably. Well Mirai but I'm thinking of her as more next quad.I expected nothing less than for Elvis to pipe up about the ladies result. He never disappoints. The problem is "it's getting old, Elvis". We all know what you think and personally, I don't really care. It's shame his music career attempt didn't work out so we wouldn't have to hear his whining.
The truth is......figure skating is much more than just jumping. I do appreciate Mao Asada. I would have been happy to see her win the gold but frankly Yuna Kim was so much better. She presented the whole package. Mao made some sloppy landings and awkward movements. Yuna was very smooth and just a little more elegant in her presentation. In my opinion, Yuna is scads ahead of the competition in presentation. She is just a gorgeous skater in my opinion. I'm thrilled she won.
Elvis----please leave the building!
Dizzy
The truth is......figure skating is much more than just jumping. I do appreciate Mao Asada. I would have been happy to see her win the gold but frankly Yuna Kim was so much better. She presented the whole package. Mao made some sloppy landings and awkward movements. Yuna was very smooth and just a little more elegant in her presentation. In my opinion, Yuna is scads ahead of the competition in presentation. She is just a gorgeous skater in my opinion. I'm thrilled she won.
Elvis----please leave the building!
Dizzy
I rewatched Kim's LP again, and it was just as good as when I watched it live on TV. If what you are saying is true, I'm puzzled then why Kim and Orser were super surpised on the 150 point. Kim was saying 130-140 point at best...so how come your assessment is much higher? Could the GOE and PCS be subjective in this case as well?
I would say that 10 point difference in estimate came from "overscoring" that almost all skaters received in this event.
I don't think I agree with some people's suggestion in previous posts that not having quads/3As automatically=lower technical quality. For both men and ladies, if having some of the more difficult combination jumps (excluding ones with quads&3As) with height and distance, transitions in and out of jumps, dazzling (dazzling, not frantic) footwork sequences and actually skating the music (beyond wearing themed costumes and hitting a couple of notes here and there) is easy, why aren't more skaters doing it?
I don't think I agree with some people's suggestion in previous posts that not having quads/3As automatically=lower technical quality. For both men and ladies, if having some of the more difficult combination jumps (excluding ones with quads&3As) with height and distance, transitions in and out of jumps, dazzling (dazzling, not frantic) footwork sequences and actually skating the music (beyond wearing themed costumes and hitting a couple of notes here and there) is easy, why aren't more skaters doing it?
I think they have been always gracious in K&C in most times, as the manner dictates. And honestly, I don't think there are any figure skater who'd be arrogant enough to say that world record is deserving, may be except Plush?
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2010
I would agree, Yu-na presented a better package. But we do know she is beatable; remember in 2009 at this very same venue, for Four Continents? Mao Asada did beat Yu-na Kim in the free skate; it was by virtue of Yu-na's short program did she win the competition.
haha that would be nice. I am sure that there are many who want to work with Mao. It would be a joy and rewarding challenge to work with a talented student. But is he willing to come to Japan regularly?
Japan is such a lovely place to visit though.
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2003
I don't consider this 'spouting off' at all. He is expressing his opinion, as is everyone else. Just because you don't like his opinion does not make it a bad thing for him to say that difficult jumps should be rewarded more. Yu na's scores were inflated in both SP and LP. She deserved to win, but not by that much. Mao's triple axel-2toe should have been rewarded more. This whole system needs to be revamped to encourage skaters to challenge themselves. I think that's the point Elvis is trying to make and he is consistent in what he says. Would you rather he promotes athleticism in the mens event and say contradictory things in the ladies event ? I respect him for expressing his opinion, no matter how unpopular it is with people in the USA and Canada. Elvis is speaking up for the sport he loves, regardless of what country a skater is from.
BTW, those who say that only Yu na is the most complete skater, need to compare her spirals with Mao's. Yu na's are only average. Mao has gorgeous lines, better posture, better spins than Yu na. I do believe Yu na is more developed artistically and Mao is still trying to find herself in that area, but how can you not be impressed with a lady who landed 3 triple axels in a competition, two of them in combination? On top of it she has the beautiful lyrical quality to her skating. She did make a couple of mistakes in the LP and lost points, but she is a great skater, and a complete one too. Yu na is not the only one.
I agree. Both ladies are quite excellent in both technique and artistry.
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2004
I don't know - I was just pointing out that the ISU has never changed it's rules based on the fact that one person in the world has performed a particular jump.
I also think that the SP, at least pre-mid-90s was used more like say the original dance in that there were elements that every elite skater could do in their sleep (like required double loop). So it allowed for a more comparable level playing field. However, since the point of the SP nowadays isn't particularly clear, it is literally a shorter version of the LP and the LP has become far more prescriptive, then the requirement of that more level playing field together with getting rid of "mandatory" elements and giving more choice to the skaters...perhaps it should be optional 2 or 3 axel for the women (or pehaps just scrap the SP since it serves little to no purpose...but that's for another thread!). In reality right now it would only benefit Mao, and you have to ask yourself if that wouldn't be seen as a little strange to be changing the rules to benefit one skater.
Ant
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2009
You could argue that any judgement criteria will benefit one skater---the skater that wins under that system.
If the rule says that the winner is determined by who runs the fastest 100-meter, then the person who can run the fastest 100-meter benefits from that rule, and on, and on, and on.
I think you can only decide on the rules based on if it can be considered fair. Is it fair to give someone who's way ahead of the pack in terms of being able to rotate more quickly in the air, the chance to use that ability to have more chance at winning?
Or, you could consider what the best rules are from the point of view of promoting advancements in the sports. It's far harder to do a triple-axel with steps preceding it, or as a combo. If you want to encourage female skaters to incorporate this technique, giving them the option to do it the easiest way means that they are more likely to practice it. Being able to put in a triple-axel in both short and long means that more skaters wiould be willing to devote their time training for it.
Or, you could argue that since men are allowed to do it, why not women? And just end it there.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2004
I don't think that's a valid argument because many different people can win under any system, clearly that is the case since we haven't had one skater win every single competition. The proposal to change the SP requirements for the ladies would beenfit one skater and only one skater at the moment. Can you give any other examples of rules and how they might be changed where only one skater would benefit from the rule?
The only other rule change i can think of that might fit in to this category was the rule change on repetition of triples and double axels in pairs right before the Torino Olympics. In short the rule said that even if you did a triple (or double axel) in combination you could not repeat the same triple (or double axel) again later in the programme. The rule seemed to be extremely biased in favour of Totmianina and Marinin who were doing SBS 3S and 3T in their LPs. I believe that there were a couple of other couples showing two different triples in the LP, but Shen & Zhao were doing two 3Ts. The rule had it's supporters that explanied that the rule was for the benefit of the pairs - pushing the limits of the pairs to include more than one type of triple. Others felt it was unfair politicking by the Russian fed in order to get their pair who at the time had no chance of beating S&Z artistically by changing the rules to favour their team technically. As it happens because of the way the rule was worded S&Z decided to try 3T/3T (as the rule said you could do the same triple twice if it was in combination with itself, hence the 2A/2A sequences you see in pairs now) and that's how he reptured his achilles tendon.
Anyway other than that rule (which in addition to the Russians benefitted a couple of other pairs) I can't think of a single rule change that would benefit just one skater such as changing the SP requirement for women.
But skating isn't simply a who ever skates the fastest wins. So the comparison is not helpful.
The rulse have been written with (at least an attempt at) fairness in mind. What you are asking for is a change in the rules that benefits one skater, and one skater only - is that fair? That's up for debate, but you assessment that someone who is "way ahead of the pack in terms of being able to rotate more quickly" should follow with - on one jump only, because in terms of rotating 3/3s that is not the case and the combination jump is the biggest technical point getter in the SP.
Those are all things that are up for debate though I'm not sure that the ISU goes into their thought process on COP with advancement of the sport in mind as it's sole purpose. I would suspect taht ISU looks at the COP in terms how can the scoring system be best used to fairly determine the winner of skating competitions. Triple axels were first landed what 20 years ago? There has always been the option to include them in the LP - it is a big point getter even now under COP (argue with the value increase as much as you like but 8.2 compared to the next triple of 6 is a big point getter). Still women are not including them. I don't think giving the option in the SP would encourage skaters to do it any more than it does now. Look at the men - they can do quads in the SP but a skater starts by encorporating them into the LP first. If the skaters gets compfrtable with them there, they put them in the SP. That's precisely what Mao has done with the 3A. But unless more ladies skaters come out with the triple axel in the LP i cannot see the ISU changing their rules, and personally i'm happy with that. For me figure skating is not about one element - either the quad or the triple axel.
Obviously you can argue that, but the ISU has never seen it that way - the men's demands in the SP have always been different from the ladies. The list of examples is long, but simply from the solo triple from steps being a solo double or triple for the ladies for a long time. Number of rotations in the combination (including the quad now), Junior ladies requirements being different from junior men. The argument that the ladies should have the same requirements as the men has never been a flyer with the ISU, more's the pity since i'd rather have the ladies have the option to ditch layback spins and sprial sequences in the SP!
Ant
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2009
I'm afraid I'm not conversant enough with the rule system to give specific examples, and I realize that figure skating is not speed skating; in figure skating, the winner is decided by a complex set of rules that set the criteria. But I would argue that every singular rule will benefit one skater, the skater who can fulfil that rule the best.
But you are saying that in this case, it is clearer implementing this rule would only benefit Mao (for the time being) because no one else can do a triple-axel. To this, I would say that it seems that any rule change that would encourage triple-axel attempts for women are opposed in terms of: well, it would only benefit Mao. And my response to this is that this argument is made from a myoepic perspective.
Mao did not lose the Olympics because she did the triple-axel; she lost because she did not have the lutz and 3-3's despite having the triple-axel. Even if the value of the triple-axel were to go up a couple of points---which I think it should purely because I think it is that much more difficult to do and should be reflected numerically---Mao still needs the lutz and 3-3's to become the champion.
Mao is the only woman now who can do the triple-axel, and it is actually in her personal interest that the triple-axel is systematically discouraged from being mastered by others, so that she has sole possession of the points associated to the triple-axel. As soon as she masters the lutz and 3-3's that garner good GoEs---and I think it is entirely possible that she'll do that, she'll become unbeatable against those who may have good lutz/flip and 3-3's but no triple-axel.
So this perspective---that rule changes that make the triple-axel easier to attempt would only benefit Mao---is valid only for another year or two. When Mao masters the lutz/flip and 3-3's, the present system that discourages triple-axel attempts and thus makes it difficult for others to master, is more beneficial for Mao.
Anyway, Mao can already do the triple-axel-double-toe combo, and I think it is possible for her to do the triple-axel from steps---she already did it one season. So for Mao, the rule change under discussion is quite irrelevant.
While I am Mao's fan, I just think a system that seems to systematically discourage and even punish skaters for mastering the most difficult jumps is too strange.
Also, while I am on the topic of rule changes, I've thought and argued that the zayak rule should be applied to the double-axel, particularly since I think it helped in a huge way for Yuna to win against Mao. However, even the present rule, that the double-axel jump can be incorporated three times, is, in the long run, better for Mao. It will help Mao avoid the triple salchow if she so wishes, and still garner huge base points.
But from the point of view of encouraging advancements in the sports, the zayak rule should be applied to the double-axel because it will encourage women skaters to attempt a more technically challenging program. And help reflect the difficulty of the triple-axel against the double-axel.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
The most startling example of a proposed rule change to benefit one skater only came up in the 2005-2006 season.
Fifteen-year-old Mao Asada beat everybody in sight (in particular Arakawa, Cohen and Slutskaya, the eventual Olympic podium.) There were a lot of people who argued that the age restriction rule should be set aside in Mao's case, on the grounds that if you're the best, you're the best -- what does age have to do with it?
Fifteen-year-old Mao Asada beat everybody in sight (in particular Arakawa, Cohen and Slutskaya, the eventual Olympic podium.) There were a lot of people who argued that the age restriction rule should be set aside in Mao's case, on the grounds that if you're the best, you're the best -- what does age have to do with it?
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2004
But that isn't a benefit - the rules are what they are and all the skaters compete to win. Every single skater "benefits" from the rules because if there were no rules there would be no event. Do you not think Rochette benefitted from the rules as the winner of the Bronze medal? You seem to suggest only the winner can benefit from the rules?But that is simply not true - the rules apply fairly and equally to all skaters, the winner under any system is not the only beneficiary of the rules. There isn't any one single rule that benefits only one single skater and that is the whole point of the scoring system. The rules have been drafted (and amended - in particular see the increase in value for all of the quads, the triple axel and the double axel) with an even playing field in mind. Everyone knows the rules in advance and tailors their programmes to their strengths and weaknesses. The rules "are what they are" if you will, and if changes are made to those rules, they go to committe and a committee decides on it. The current rules do not favour any one skater over another as has been seen by the results of competitions this season.
The myopia is all yours my friend! For starters i am not arguing against encouraging skaters from doing triples axels at all. I have explained that the ISU has never changed it's short programme requirements just because one skater in the world is able to complete a particular element. I have explained the history of the 3A and quad allowances in the Men's SP to show that I do not think the ISU is going to change the axel requirements in the SP for the ladies because history tells us they won't. The didn't fall over themselves to allow ladies to do a quad when Ando landed a quad salchow. Ultimately though i have no vested interest in what the ISU does with the decision because even if only one skater does the harder element that is now allowed, every skater has to put down the elements they can do in order to win the points so the result still comes down to who skates the best with the most diffcult overall content, that is judged qualitatively by the judges.
In addition to this I have also explanied why raising the value of the triple axel (and the quad) skews the points for those particular elements in a way that to me is unnacceptable. The quad toe-loop already is currently worth nearly twice a base value triple loop. I don't think that, that particular element should have so much emphasis placed on it. Similarly I have explained how the same is true of the triple axel - it currently worth more than twice a base value triple toe-loop, to raise it any higher puts it in a siilar bracket to the quad and I don't think that is right. It has nothing to do ith Mao, however, since you raise the point the only argument I have heard for increasing the value of the triple axel is Mao.
Mao didn't lose the Olympics, she WON the silver medal. Again - if the value of the triple axel was raised, then the converse effect would be that the men would no longer have to risk 3/3s in their programmes if they know that they can complete a 3A/2T and come away with more points. By trying to plug a perceived unfairness in ladies (unfairness to just the one skater i hasten to add), you would skew the difficulty of the men's programme. That seems nonsensical to me if you are an advocate of raising the bar and advancing the sport....unless of cuorse the effect on the Men's competition is of no concern because you are only a fan of the ladies event.
But that is the case right now too. If she did have a 3/3 and a 3S and 3Lz then under the current system she would be the only woman in the world able to do a programme with e.g. the same jump content as Lysacek. If that was the jump layout she had used, there is not question she would have won he TES hands down...she didn't do that, but increasing the point value of the 3A, or allowing a 3A in the SP would not have made any difference. As you rightly point out she needs more jumps and harder jump combinations....that is it, no need to "fix" something that isn't broken in the first place. I've written in several places the changes i fell woul dbe useful to the scoring of combos and sequences, and some re-jigging of the Zayak rule that i think would benefit all skaters going forward, but to my mind the raising of the points of any jump triple or quad is not the answer. I'm ambivalent about the allowing of 3As in the SP for ladies at the moment but am fairly sure the ISU is unlikley to consider taht change any time soon.
So then let's leave the system as it is, allowing skaters, coaches and choreographers to get their heads around the system, what skaters need to do to achieve their best and let the judges decide who does what best on any given day.
I agree - let her do the 3A from brackets in the SP so that she can maximise on the combination jump with a 3/3 and do the comparatively easy (for her) double axel with superior qualities and difficult entries and exits so that she maximises her points unde the rules. I never understood why this wasn't her tactic this year, but as you rightly point out, she is more than capable of doing so, and leaving the scoring system as is will push her to push herself in this regard - something all of the skaters are trying to do.
But as you have pointed out yourself the system doesn't discourage or punish the most difficult jumps. If you mean, a skater lands one jump and should automatically win by default, then you are right, there isn't a bonus element that one skater can do and then not complete the rest of the programme but still win. The point is to do what you can do and earn the highest points you can. One element does not a good skater make, e.g. Tim Goebel. A cumulative scoring system means you need to do alot of high content (not just one single element) and do them all well in order to come out on top. There is nothing that discourages skaters from trying elements. I have yet to hear of a male skater busting a gut to get a quad axel because, after all the points for it are immense.
The only things actively discouraged by COP are those things which are banned. Anything else that is expected in a programme has a point total and it is down to the skater whether they go for a particular element based on their ability to do so.
Do you think the Zayak rule should be changed so that the men can do their routines with 8 quad toe-loops, or the ladies could do four or five triple axels? Obviously that would be harder to do than anything we see under the current system? But i think that question draws out whether the system shoudl reward the most difficult thing at all costs, or balance difficulty with well-roundedness etc etc. If it's difficulty we want, we could scrap the PCS and music and simply go for faster, higher, longer. Some people are in favour of this but I personally am not.
Ant
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2009
I never said the rule changes should be applied to both men and women. Anyway, men and women have different rules.
I do feel that the results of this Olympics did indicate that GoEs have too much weight in the overall score. GoEs gave such a huge benefit to Yuna that she could have fallen once or twice and she still would have won! Another case in point. People couldn't understand why Yukari did not win against Caro a few years back, and it was that Caro got alot of GoEs simply because her jumps were big and the fact that she fell didn't affect the score as much as Yukari's underrotation.
And another thing is, the argument that encouraging skaters to try for the more difficult jumps will make the sport more dangerous is one that I think is debatable. It could be that the present weight of the GoEs will make the sport dangerous. The kind of speedy, huge jumps that are demanded to get good GoEs are the style of jumping that will wear out the body most quickly in the long run, I think. So as of now, GoEs award skaters for putting themselve through most physical stress. I think it can be argued that while it's important to award quality in jumps, if you award it to the point that that becomes the end-all, you'll invite shorter figure skating careers.
As for raising the value of the triple-axel (for women) and quads for men, whether that's fair and valid can be best determined by comparing scores against different jump elements. It comes down to asking what the actual difficulty of 3-axel against 3-lz (for women), or 3lz-3t against 3a-2t, or any quad over other triples, and that determining should be done by skaters themselves.
Anyway, I do agree that a balance is needed and the more I think about the scoring system, the more I understand why there are so many discrepancies in the present system.
I do feel that the results of this Olympics did indicate that GoEs have too much weight in the overall score. GoEs gave such a huge benefit to Yuna that she could have fallen once or twice and she still would have won! Another case in point. People couldn't understand why Yukari did not win against Caro a few years back, and it was that Caro got alot of GoEs simply because her jumps were big and the fact that she fell didn't affect the score as much as Yukari's underrotation.
And another thing is, the argument that encouraging skaters to try for the more difficult jumps will make the sport more dangerous is one that I think is debatable. It could be that the present weight of the GoEs will make the sport dangerous. The kind of speedy, huge jumps that are demanded to get good GoEs are the style of jumping that will wear out the body most quickly in the long run, I think. So as of now, GoEs award skaters for putting themselve through most physical stress. I think it can be argued that while it's important to award quality in jumps, if you award it to the point that that becomes the end-all, you'll invite shorter figure skating careers.
As for raising the value of the triple-axel (for women) and quads for men, whether that's fair and valid can be best determined by comparing scores against different jump elements. It comes down to asking what the actual difficulty of 3-axel against 3-lz (for women), or 3lz-3t against 3a-2t, or any quad over other triples, and that determining should be done by skaters themselves.
Anyway, I do agree that a balance is needed and the more I think about the scoring system, the more I understand why there are so many discrepancies in the present system.
