maybe controversial but want to know...ladies bronze vancouver

[rtureck]

Is that the criterion? That her upper body was "prepared to rotate?" Doesn't she have to actually begin the rotation to count as an attempt?

I wonder about the same too. I remember 13 y/o MK or was she 14 then did the same, prepared for a triple toe, missed the take off then stroked down the rink and attempted a triple toe. Dick Button was all AWWWW about how brilliant little MK was. The judges definitely did not punish her for an attempted jump.

I think the fact that Skate Canada did not even raise a single question means Mao did not do enough to definitively demonstrate that was a jump attempt. I disagree with the sentiment of another poster that Skate Canada was shying away from controversy. Canada was very adamant about trying to win as many medals as possible, why would they back down from a challenge or potential controversy.

BAck to topic which is about bronze and not the silver. I think Joannie deserved the bronze, even though Mirari was charming and had the best spin among all the ladies that night.

 

[Mathman]

I still wonder about that [Rachael's Flatts scores].

Seeing Rachael's 200 score at US Natls felt almost absurd to me. She has never approached such a score in Intl competitions.

Wel, without the two downgrades she would have scored 190 at the Olympics compared to 200 at U.S. Nationals, which is about right, figuring a 10-point home-girl inflation at nationals. So it all comes down to the same question, were the callers at the Olympics excessively strict on Rachael, compared to other skaters?

As for international competition, I thought Rachael's score of 116.11 for her long program at Skate America was about right for that excellent performance. By that standard, all the scores at the Olympics were inflated (especially Kim's -- she deserved to win, but she has had better performances in her career which received lower scores.)

Equally interesting was that Mirai's scores at US Natls and the Olympics were almost identical. :think:

Mirai received downgrades at U.S. nationals (much to the shock of everyone who saw her great LP performance), but none at the Olympics. So the downgrades at Nationals balanced the national score inflation and she ended up about the same.

I do think that the international judges buffaloed the U.S. judges into over-scrutinizing Mirai's landings at U.S. Nationals. Mirai had received downgrades in both of her Grand Prix events, so it seemed like the tech specialists at U.S. nationals figured, well, we better go along with the program. (Then the international panel pulled another switcheroo and gave Mirai a clean bill of health at the Olympics -- that's skating :indiff

Do you really believe Flatt deserved a better score after seeing her skate in Vancouver? Was she as good as the top four?

I thought Rachael was properly scored, with the exception of the two downgrades, which cost her about 8 points. Actually, I could go either way on the downgrades, but I thought they were no more under-rotated than some other skaters jumps that the tech panel let slide.

No, I did not think Rachael was as good as the top four. I thought she deserved fifth.

In fact, I thought Rachael's Olympic LP was marvellous -- exceeded only by Mirai's, Joannie's, Mao's and Yu-na's.

Bottom line. Under the CoP the calls of the tech specialist pretty much completely determine who wins or loses. (Just my opinion, of course.)

 

[wallylutz]

Bottom line. Under the CoP the calls of the tech specialist pretty much completely determine who wins or loses. (Just my opinion, of course.)

Well not really, some skaters seem to never get UR calls at all. In fact, I can't recall a single case in the last two seasons that Joannie actually received any UR or edge call whatsoever at an ISU competition, except at the World Team Trophy, if you can call that a regular competition. Some skaters though, can't seem to get on the good side of the Tech Specialist, ever, namely Miki Ando for example. I think she got scared of UR calls that she probably won't try another Triple-Triple for a long time.

 

[rtureck]

Some skaters though, can't seem to get on the good side of the Tech Specialist, ever, namely Miki Ando for example. I think she got scared of UR calls that she probably won't try another Triple-Triple for a long time.

Mikii do come across as being "scared". I think getting downgraded by tech spechialist can be a double edge sword. Mirai was downgraded at nats and she was determined to fix her jumps, in that case the downgrade is a motivating factor.

Anyway under current system, 3/3 is just one of many ways a skater can get points. The system rewards overall skating excellence in many different aspects of skating.

 

[Wrlmy]

I wonder about the same too. I remember 13 y/o MK or was she 14 then did the same, prepared for a triple toe, missed the take off then stroked down the rink and attempted a triple toe. Dick Button was all AWWWW about how brilliant little MK was. The judges definitely did not punish her for an attempted jump.

I think the fact that Skate Canada did not even raise a single question means Mao did not do enough to definitively demonstrate that was a jump attempt. I disagree with the sentiment of another poster that Skate Canada was shying away from controversy. Canada was very adamant about trying to win as many medals as possible, why would they back down from a challenge or potential controversy.

BAck to topic which is about bronze and not the silver. I think Joannie deserved the bronze, even though Mirari was charming and had the best spin among all the ladies that night.

but ladies could use up to eight jumping passes back then. I'm not sure the judges would've ratified the triple toe had it been her ninth jumping pass.

 

[Phoenix347]

Seeing the outcry about how Mirai should have won the bronze medal already, can you imagine the furor that would have ensued if the technical panel had disallowed Mao's last jumping pass (2A) due to the fact that she attempted the toe-loop twice and ended up with Mao getting the bronze medal?? That would have destroyed any kind of satisfaction that Joannie would have gotten from the silver medal. There would have been a lot of accusation about "Canadian favoritism."

 

[blue_idealist]

Seeing the outcry about how Mirai should have won the bronze medal already, can you imagine the furor that would have ensued if the technical panel had disallowed Mao's last jumping pass (2A) due to the fact that she attempted the toe-loop twice and ended up with Mao getting the bronze medal?? That would have destroyed any kind of satisfaction that Joannie would have gotten from the silver medal. There would have been a lot of accusation about "Canadian favoritism."

Ohh God that would have been bad.. it just wouldn't seem right to have Joannie over Mao

 

[rtureck]

but ladies could use up to eight jumping passes back then. I'm not sure the judges would've ratified the triple toe had it been her ninth jumping pass.

Now speaking from the POV of a casual fan and without the benefit of studying the rules etc.
Well, that is the challenge of sport like fs, or gymnastics, no matter how objective the rules seem, there is always a judgment call. Seriously, e.g. jump landings with 1/4 of a turn on ice is oK but 9/32 turn is not. I think even with instant replay slow mo, but without actually looking at the tracing on ice, can they really tell it is 1/4 of a turn or 9/32? SPo in case of close call, benefit of doubt goes to the skater. I think skaters who are well prepared know the take the correct strategy. And in a lp, they put in another jump. If the first jump is being called a real attempt, the judges won't count the second, but if the first is given the benefit of the doubt of not counting as a real attempt then they get points for the second jump. I think in olys lp, Mao did not do enough to let the tech specialists to definitively count that as an attempt, or the tech ppl made a judgment call. I donot believe Corp sponsors etc has anything to do with the call. If we want to talk sponsors, the biggest sponsor of olys 2010 was a national sponsor: Canada. I do not believe Skate Canada will let this one go if indeed they have a case. I don't believe in conspiracy theory.
Anyway, I have a question for those of you who are knowlegablewith the rules etc. Earlier in this thread there is a mention of Mao's questionable 3t was similar to YuNa's questionable layback in her sp at worlds. To me there is a difference, Mao did not give up trying, therefore she added the 2a, but YuNa did not try to do another layback. If Yuna gave layback another try and was denied the credit then we can "cringe" and cried aboutthe injustice. Since YuNa herself already considered she had attempted a layback, and didnot try another one, then obviously the juges won't give her the layback credit.

 

[gkelly]

Just to clarify something about the rules.

Under the 6.0 judging system there were no maximum limits on the numbers of jumps or spins that could be attempted in long programs. There were only limits on the number of triples that could be repeated and on the number of combinations/sequences performed. So skaters were free to pack their programs with as many elements or attempts as they wanted and it was up to each judge to reward what they felt deserved rewarding under the rules and penalize what they felt deserved penalty. Skating around setting up the same jump multiple times might get the skater credit for a difficult jump if s/he finally managed to land it, but the resulting lack of variety in the choreography and kinds of technical content might cause judges to consider the program "unbalanced" and reflect that in the second mark. A quick second attempt at a missed element without much additional setup would not need much penalty under that system.

Short programs have always allowed only one attempt per required element. You miss it the first time, and the second attempt doesn't count; depending on the nature of the attempts, under 6.0 doing so might lead to deductions for both a badly failed or omitted element and also for an extra element.

Under IJS, the limits in the long program are now almost as strict as in short programs, although there is a bit more flexibility in the kinds of spins or jumps that can fill the total number of spin and jump slots.

 

[rtureck]

Just to clarify something about the rules.

Under the 6.0 judging system there were no maximum limits on the numbers of jumps or spins that could be attempted in long programs. There were only limits on the number of triples that could be repeated and on the number of combinations/sequences performed. So skaters were free to pack their programs with as many elements or attempts as they wanted and it was up to each judge to reward what they felt deserved rewarding under the rules and penalize what they felt deserved penalty. Skating around setting up the same jump multiple times might get the skater credit for a difficult jump if s/he finally managed to land it, but the resulting lack of variety in the choreography and kinds of technical content might cause judges to consider the program "unbalanced" and reflect that in the second mark. A quick second attempt at a missed element without much additional setup would not need much penalty under that system.

Short programs have always allowed only one attempt per required element. You miss it the first time, and the second attempt doesn't count; depending on the nature of the attempts, under 6.0 doing so might lead to deductions for both a badly failed or omitted element and also for an extra element.

Under IJS, the limits in the long program are now almost as strict as in short programs, although there is a bit more flexibility in the kinds of spins or jumps that can fill the total number of spin and jump slots.

Thanks for clarifying. Actually MK did another attempt on the 3t without disrupting the choreography. So like Dick Button said smart girl.

I thougt sp and lp have different rules, so thanks for clarifying. I remember Tara and Johnny talked about YuNa's missed the marks on 3 required elements, and she couldn't make those elements up. At olys the famous Scott Hamilton did not said Mao missed her 3t and couldn't have another jumping pass. So I think lp even under current rules do allow more flexibility. So YuNa world sp, and Mao olys lp situation are different then?

 

[museksk8r]

Ohh God that would have been bad.. it just wouldn't seem right to have Joannie over Mao

And why not? Joannie beat Mao 4 times in their last 7 match-ups (at 2008 Trophee Eric Bompard, the 2009 4CC, the 2009 Worlds, and the 2009 Japan Open). Asada took the 2008-2009 GPF, the 2009 World Team Trophy, and placed ahead of Rochette at the Olympics (though I still think Joannie should have won the Olympic silver medal).

 

[Bennett]

Thanks for clarifying. Actually MK did another attempt on the 3t without disrupting the choreography. So like Dick Button said smart girl.

I thougt sp and lp have different rules, so thanks for clarifying. I remember Tara and Johnny talked about YuNa's missed the marks on 3 required elements, and she couldn't make those elements up. At olys the famous Scott Hamilton did not said Mao missed her 3t and couldn't have another jumping pass. So I think lp even under current rules do allow more flexibility. So YuNa world sp, and Mao olys lp situation are different then?

It depends on how far you see Mao's toe loop attempt was as an attempt. She clearly attemped it, but botched it during the set up of the jump when the toe was stuck in the ice wrongly. As MM put it, it was more like an attempt of an attempt. And if that one had to be hit for what is suggested, it seems a pretty nerdy application of the rule to me when it's already nerdy enough.

 

[dlgpffps]

Seeing the outcry about how Mirai should have won the bronze medal already, can you imagine the furor that would have ensued if the technical panel had disallowed Mao's last jumping pass (2A) due to the fact that she attempted the toe-loop twice and ended up with Mao getting the bronze medal?? That would have destroyed any kind of satisfaction that Joannie would have gotten from the silver medal. There would have been a lot of accusation about "Canadian favoritism."

True. I'm glad there was a thorough discussion of the attempt rule, though. It was enlightening. Just wonder what would have happened if Joannie had jumped that last 2A and won silver in Mao's stead. I still see controversy. Mao's fans would have trumped the "three 3As" card; Joannie's, overall excellence and the "whole package." It could've been as ugly as Lysacek vs. Plushenko with the same reasoning for both sides. I'm glad that had not happened, just as glad as I am that Mao did not lose to Yu-na with a clean performance. That would have been very, very ugly.

 

[Mathman]

Thanks for clarifying. Actually MK did another attempt on the 3t without disrupting the choreography. So like Dick Button said smart girl.

In fact, Michelle practiced two versions of her long programs during those years. If she landed her triple toe/triple toe combination at the beginning, then she did a split jump at the musical climax near the end. If she missed the second triple and only did a triple toe/double toe, then she did a solo triple toe instead of the split jump.

To me there is a difference, Mao did not give up trying, therefore she added the 2a, but YuNa did not try to do another layback. If Yuna gave layback another try and was denied the credit then we can "cringe" and cried about the injustice.

This actually happened to Rachael Flatt last year (I forgot which competition.) She started her layback, lost her edge before doing even one rotation, recenterd, and then did the complete layback spin.

The tech specialist ruled that the first aborted three-quarters revolution was her layback. Since she did not do the required number of revolutions she received 0 credit. And also 0 cerdit for her real layback a second later, because the layback box had been filled.

 

[prettykeys]

This is a very interesting analysis.

Specifically with respect to sports, there is also the idea of "playoff rules." In the playoffs (or in the last two minutes of the championship game), the audience wants the game to be decided by the players, not by a referee's whistle. So the officials let stuff go that they would normally call during the regular season.

As sunny0760 mentions, the technical specialist were indeed pretty lenient at the Olympics, except for Rachael Falatt. hwell:

lol...agree with everything. Do you think it's good or fair? I'm not sure about it either way. It sounds like a good idea, but I don't like to see dirty plays either (I don't watch much hockey so I don't know how bad it is. I do watch soccer occasionally and I hate to see pushing/shirt-tugging and very aggressive and dangerous lunges at the ball.) As for leniency in figure skating, I'm on the fence as well. Being overly lenient means compromising quality and undervaluing skaters who have consistent, clean technique that takes time and effort to get right.

The call on Rachael Flatt at the Olympics was certainly unexpected, but something happened at Worlds, too. A ! on a 3Lz in her SP and then an underrotated 3F in her 3F-2T. So, was she always clean, or were things overlooked before that judges are scrutinizing more closely now? Or did something happen to her to diminish the consistency of her jumps?

A huge concept in judicial law. In the U.S., unspecified "penumbral" rights of the people are guaranteed by the Ninth Amendment to the Constitution. This concept was famously invoked in the Roe versus Wade case that struck down a Texas state law forbidding abortions. The right of a woman to abort a pregnancy in the first trimester was ruled (two Justices dissenting) to be included in the unwritten penumbral right to privacy established by the Fourteenth Amendment.

I didn't know there was a separate set of "penumbral" rights for Americans! That's so interesting, I love it. Makes me wonder if I should have studied Law...maybe in another life.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hart-Fuller_debate

That's a reference to the debate we studied in that class. When the application of a rule/law is unclear for a certain situation, does one investigate the meaning of the writing, or the possible intent, for guidance?

Very interesting thoughts, thanks for sharing. I appreciate your perspective, it's refreshing to read. Personally, I think your reasoning makes quite a bit of common sense. You'd think a girl who did three Triple Axels should at least get a Silver, it seems to make the most common sense. That's what I kept telling myself at the event so that I didn't have to feel miserable re: the outcome knowing what I know on that very emotional evening.

For sure, although if Joannie had been cleaner in her LP, then we may have seen a girl with three 3A's lose even the Silver.

 

[wallylutz]

Earlier in this thread there is a mention of Mao's questionable 3t was similar to YuNa's questionable layback in her sp at worlds. To me there is a difference, Mao did not give up trying, therefore she added the 2a, but YuNa did not try to do another layback. If Yuna gave layback another try and was denied the credit then we can "cringe" and cried aboutthe injustice. Since YuNa herself already considered she had attempted a layback, and didnot try another one, then obviously the juges won't give her the layback credit.

Sorry, first of all, you need to get the facts right. That's not what happened at all. She did proceed to perform a layback spin after the failed turn, see here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ZLjmxcCRfI&feature=related#t=1m19s

She did a full fledge layback spin after that botched attempt.

BTW, just to clarify, I brought up the layback spin in Kim's 2010 SP as a rhetorical question because someone was being obstinate about Asada's botched 3T was just, you know, "skating backward with no actual purpose" and then claim that skaters make all kinds of turns all the time. I said, well, if we are going that route, as stupid as that may sound, then Kim must have been just trying a new choreography with that turn on ice. Of course, Kim's misstep in her 2010 SP is a botched spin, no doubt about it.

 

[Mathman]

Seeing the outcry about how Mirai should have won the bronze medal already, can you imagine the furor that would have ensued if the technical panel had disallowed Mao's last jumping pass (2A) due to the fact that she attempted the toe-loop twice and ended up with Mao getting the bronze medal?

That would have destroyed any kind of satisfaction that Joannie would have gotten from the silver medal. There would have been a lot of accusation about "Canadian favoritism."

I think Joannie would have been quite content to grab the silver medal and run, accusations and Internet outrage notwithstanding.

This happens all the time in CoP judging. Everybody in the arena and millions watching on TV are certain that one skater performed the best. But then the tech specialist reviews the slo-motion and says, "Haha, fools, the joke's on you. That skate was, in fact, crap, according to the CoP."

This happened at U.S. Nationals, for instance. After Mirai Nagasu's sLP, everyone in the place, including Mirai, knew that she had skated great and won the championship. But no, in reality she skated poorly (so says the CoP) and barely hung onto the second Olympic spot.

This leaves the audience feeling like they have been the victims, once again, of an elaborate practical joke. In my opinion, skating has taken an inward turn. The CoP is a fine system for skaters, parents, coaches, ISU officials and skating insiders. But something is missing from the equation.

 

[Mathman]

lol...agree with everything. Do you think it's good or fair? I'm not sure about it either way. It sounds like a good idea, but I don't like to see dirty plays either (I don't watch much hockey so I don't know how bad it is...)

Interestingly, in the playoffs the players tend to clean up their acts voluntarily. There is no silly glove-dropping, cheap shots just to please the audience, revenge fights, etc. All of this goes on during the regular season because the fans expect it.

But during the playoffs, the players are there to win the Stanley Cup, not to provide a circus for the fans.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hart-Fuller_debate

That's a reference to the debate we studied in that class. When the application of a rule/law is unclear for a certain situation, does one investigate the meaning of the writing, or the possible intent, for guidance?

Thanks for that reference! So, basically, the CoP takes the positivist position, while 6.0 judging weighed in on the side of natural law.

 

[silverlake22]

So essentially, it could have gone either way. Mirai was a bit underscored in the SP and Joannie a bit overscored in the LP. I would have had Mirai beat Joannie in the LP, but overall I think Joannie actually deserved to beat Mirai, but only by a couple points (not 10+ like she did). But you know what, the Olympics were in Canada, Joannie's mom died, she skated well and the only skater who could have arguably beat her was 16 and a bit juniorish, and not obviously better, so I think it was ok. Joannie's bronze in Vancouver was much less controversial IMO than Laura's bronze in Torino or Alissa's gold at 09 nats or Carolina's silver at 08 Worlds. I think it was fine.

 

[rtureck]

She did a full fledge layback spin after that botched attempt.

It seems like rules are striaighter in the sp.

BTW, just to clarify, I brought up the layback spin in Kim's 2010 SP as a rhetorical question because someone was being obstinate about Asada's botched 3T was just, you know, "skating backward with no actual purpose" and then claim that skaters make all kinds of turns all the time. I said, well, if we are going that route, as stupid as that may sound, then Kim must have been just trying a new choreography with that turn on ice. Of course, Kim's misstep in her 2010 SP is a botched spin, no doubt about it.

LOL, Mao got the benefit of the doubt from the tech guys. As a skater, she can only try and not to give up, how the tech guys and judges call it is out of her hands. She gave a try and won a silver. I honestly do not think the tech guys were thinking about corp or national sponsorship when they made the call. Since Skate Canada did not raise a question, maybe they knew they did not have much of a case. Skate Canada did not back down in Salt Lake, and if they had a case in VAncouver, I don''t think they would back down.

(And I regret bringng up the Salt Lake mess)