Can Takahashi Close The Gap On Patrick Chan?

[skatinginbc]

Hi, sisters and brothers, ladies and gentlemen (Is that still politically correct? or should I say "women and men"?)

I just created a thread regarding different judging systems. If you would like to continue our discussion on the "no-credit" system, please visit that thread. Thanks. Looking forward to hearing from you all. :yay:

 

[Bluebonnet]

(Well, actually, there might be a way to create a CoP system where Patrick becomes beatable. If CoP gave points for SEX APPEAL, Dai might win. )

Gee, finally, you've touched a little about the most important thing! But don't be too confident. Height is very important. Patrick might win!

 

[hurrah]

Gee, finally, you've touched a little about the most important thing! But don't be too confident. Height is very important. Patrick might win!

I bet Lysacek fans would love that!

 

[spikydurian]

I am not talking about Patrick!! Why do Patrick fans think that everything is about hating Patrick?

Hurrah, you cannot blame Patrick fans like me for thinking so if there is constant nitpicking on Patrick no matter what he does. Using this analogy: if you see your XYZ constantly criticizing A at every opportunity, what will be your conclusion (assuming you don't know both of them well)? XYZ 'hates' A. XYZ dislikes A. Reason? God knows.

 

[deedee1]

2A+1Lo+3S
2A+1Lo+2F
3T+1Lo+3S
3A+1Lo+3F

The jump after the half loop will be double or triple salchow or flip.
The first jump can be anything. The women are more likely to use a double axel or easier triple; the top men are more likely to use a harder triple.

At lower levels, the jumps will be doubles, or single axel. When I skated in the 1970s, I remember seeing single axel-half loop-double salchow from skaters around intermediate level.

Or did you mean sequences with other intervening jumps other than half loop? Those would still receive the 0.8 multiplier under the IJS rules.

gkelly, thanks a lot for posting these videos!

That's the one by Plushy doning 3A+1Lo+3F I remebered. So cool!

His Carmen at SLC Olympics was not my cup of tea, but watching this video now, I am all smilimg. It is nice to see that young Evgeni attacking the program 'in full throttle'. I forgot how much speed he used to have before those awful injuries.

Btw, I am for the partial credit for falls, too.
But there needs to be a sort of penalty for multiple falls. Its not pretty in performance-wise, so that should reflect on the total scores; such as multi deductions, e.g. -1 of 1st fall, -2 for 2nd fall. Or, minus from PCS, especially from skating skill, e.g. -0.3 each of falls.

 

[let`s talk]

Patrick winning with multiple falls over perfect Daisuke has never happened

It has and you know that. LP in GPF. Oh, wait. He fell only once, so it doesn't count as "mutiple" . But that's beside the point. He wins with multiple falls because the system allows unnamed judges to munipulate with CoP. He fell here, they will give him a higer credit there in order to compensate the points he lost on falls. As the result we see super CoP for slow and unoriginal spins, crappy landings and blah-blah. The second source of his wins with multiple falls is PCS. Falls distruct the programs, ruine the image, especially if the true one was never there. Yet Chan's presentation score is free to go untouchable. And, the most hillarious part is to give ridiculous score for morning-working-out-hands-up-hands-down program that has a litlle or nothing connection with the music. On the same rink the audience see a flawless sensual handsome skater with no falls and with the ability to express each note of the music on the ice. Then they see the result. Yawn.

The main result of CoP is the programs stopped being valued as one and whole Unit. They are now sets of required elements for money and some music just to make it look less boring. The result is- empty seats in the audience.

 

[Skater Boy]

Closing the Gap..and stopping the crap lol

It has and you know that. LP in GPF. Oh, wait. He fell only once, so it doesn't count as "mutiple" . But that's beside the point. He wins with multiple falls because the system allows unnamed judges to munipulate with CoP. He fell here, they will give him a higer credit there in order to compensate the points he lost on falls. As the result we see super CoP for slow and unoriginal spins, crappy landings and blah-blah. The second source of his wins with multiple falls is PCS. Falls distruct the programs, ruine the image, especially if the true one was never there. Yet Chan's presentation score is free to go untouchable. And, the most hillarious part is to give ridiculous score for morning-working-out-hands-up-hands-down program that has a litlle or nothing connection with the music. On the same rink the audience see a flawless sensual handsome skater with no falls and with the ability to express each note of the music on the ice. Then they see the result. Yawn.

The main result of CoP is the programs stopped being valued as one and whole Unit. They are now sets of required elements for money and some music just to make it look less boring. The result is- empty seats in the audience.

I have seen this debate about Patrick Chan on other sites. It does seem like he "hated" or his skating by many. I am an armchair coach I guess or judge lol but I can see why he wins. He does COP well. If he falls he gets up quickly so it doesn't effect his PCS as much but the real reason he wins is he has done the math, has decent spins, great inbetweens and choreography and probably one of the toughest jump line up including a triple lutz loop triple salchow along with the quads. his main weakness besides the triple axel which has gotten better is his artistry in that he is not a extrovert and a lot of people love the drama of an extrovert yet at the same time by analogy I don't find the ice dancers including Davis and White being "penalized" so much for not having that drama or ability to mesmorize by personality (they do mesmorize by skating skills) such as Russians of yesteryear. Remember folks Lambiel and Buttle made errors and were "held" up and rightfully so by PCS because they are amazing skaters in respect to PCS.

I know this is an unpopular position but if you take a look at the 2002 Salt Lake City Scandal in pairs. It can be seen how B and S from Russia could have won. Even if you ranked them second or even third which wouldn't be the case since they and the Canadians were ahead of the rest clearly in techical merit if you found they won on artistry that was the tie breaker. Likewise with PCS and really good skating skills of the likes of Chan that's how he could still win.

I think we all have skaters we love, neutral or "hate" (hopefully their skating). I can see how Evan won the Olympics and the close scores suggests Plushy could have won. Likewise I can see how Tak can win - I am not so sure he is sexy but what do I know - more flamboyant and that's not enough for gold imho (LOL). We can debate rule changes but really what is fair - depends on your take. When I think of all the changes to the scoring system you realize history would have been changed depending which scoring rule you applied. Kira Ivanova may have won gold in the old days when school figures were the end all be all so to speak. Liz Manley and Brian Orser would have won gold in 1988 and 1984 at the Olympics if you went more on the free skate. Kerrigan would have probably beaten Baiul (mind you skaters may have designed their programs for COP had they known that was the test to be applied) under COP, and the list goes on.

I don't think we will ever have the perfect scoring system - because we aren't perfect - at least I'm not. Have a great day everyone!!!!

 

[DianaSelene]

I know this is an unpopular position but if you take a look at the 2002 Salt Lake City Scandal in pairs. It can be seen how B and S from Russia could have won.

Which they did and rightfully so.

 

[Violet Bliss]

It has and you know that. LP in GPF. Oh, wait. He fell only once, so it doesn't count as "mutiple" . But that's beside the point. He wins with multiple falls because the system allows unnamed judges to munipulate with CoP. He fell here, they will give him a higer credit there in order to compensate the points he lost on falls. As the result we see super CoP for slow and unoriginal spins, crappy landings and blah-blah. The second source of his wins with multiple falls is PCS. Falls distruct the programs, ruine the image, especially if the true one was never there. Yet Chan's presentation score is free to go untouchable. And, the most hillarious part is to give ridiculous score for morning-working-out-hands-up-hands-down program that has a litlle or nothing connection with the music. On the same rink the audience see a flawless sensual handsome skater with no falls and with the ability to express each note of the music on the ice. Then they see the result. Yawn.

The main result of CoP is the programs stopped being valued as one and whole Unit. They are now sets of required elements for money and some music just to make it look less boring. The result is- empty seats in the audience.

Others and myself have explained why Patrick won deservedly. Short answer to your claim that he has won with multiple falls over a perfect Daisuke, for which you only managed to bring up one faulty example, the GPF 2012: 1. Patrick won the event without multiple falls. 2. Daisuke was far from perfect. He messed up his SP very badly, and his LP lags almost 5 points in BV vs Patrick's so that with a very flawed 4T, he was commendable to have lost the LP by just one point. But it was a fair and close win.

Patrick Chan has not won with multiple falls over a perfect Daisuke Takahashi.

 

[skatinginbc]

Patrick Chan has not won with multiple falls over a perfect Daisuke Takahashi.

Here is the question: Can Patrick Chan win with multiple falls over a perfect Daisuke?

 

[Violet Bliss]

Here is the question: Can Patrick Chan win with multiple falls over a perfect Daisuke?

I've said before, it depends on the falls. I can see maximum a random fall and a fall on a fully rotated jump and everything else as perfect as Dai. 5 points is about the difference in their LP BV which would be what such falls would wipe out. Actually, the GPF LP is an example of that, with one point to spare for a random fall which however would likely affect the PCS as past examples have shown. The perfect Dai must also include a successful 4T+3T in the SP as he did at the Nats, which Patrick does quite regularly.

All in all, I can see Patrick possibly winning with one fall, no worse than on a fully rotated quad. Anything more or additional flaws elsewhere would almost certainly put him behind a perfect Dai with his current BV.

 

[skatinginbc]

Here is the question: Can Patrick Chan win with multiple falls over a perfect Daisuke?

Actually, the more practical question would be: Can Daisuke produce two perfect programs?

 

[Boeing787]

Actually, the more practical question would be: Can Daisuke produce two perfect programs?

It's going to be very hard. Last time he did so (with programs of such level of difficulty) was back in 2008 4cc. Even for Patrick it's not an easy task, simply because programs today are so complex and difficult.

 

[Mathman]

[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DC48Tblt2nY%t=1m21s]3A+1Lo+3F

Under CoP scoring Plushenko's first three jumping passes (4T+3T+3Lo, 4T, 3A+half-loop+3F) have a base value of 43.4.

The current scoring has already been tremendously successful in encouraging quads.

Do you mean in comparison to the 6.0 ordinal system, or in comparison to the CoP of two years ago?

 

[ImaginaryPogue]

Which they did and rightfully so.

I don't know. The win they deserved wasn't the one they got in the end.

 

[Mathman]

Well, that's what the debate is about. A fall on a quad his deemed different than a fall on a double axel, which is different than a fall while stroking. I think that's a fair and accurate take on figure skating. Others do not.

I think this is kind of a 6.0-ish way of looking at things.

In the IJS you don't start with the base value of your program and then go up or down from there. You start at 0 and get points for each thing that you do.

Under the "0 points for a failed element proposal" if you fall on a quad attempt, you lose nothing. You also gain nothing.

 

[ImaginaryPogue]

My issue, Mathman, is that no one's willing to follow the "0 points for a failed element" proposal to it's logical conclusion. If they were, it would be a different debate.

 

[DianaSelene]

Under CoP scoring Plushenko's first three jumping passes (4T+3T+3Lo, 4T, 3A+half-loop+3F) have a base value of 43.4.



Do you mean in comparison to the 6.0 ordinal system, or in comparison to the CoP of two years ago?

Too bad he can't do that today. He'd beat Chan in no time.

 

[DianaSelene]

I don't know. The win they deserved wasn't the one they got in the end.

It is too bad the scandal ruined their victory.

 

[Boeing787]

Too bad he can't do that today. He'd beat Chan in no time.

Really? COP limits the number of jumps a skater can do. After these jumps, there are not many jumps he can do, and his SS and TR marks won't be as high as Patrick's. He might still beat Patrick, but not "in no time", not that he'd have the gold in his bag.

eta: under COP, he can only do one three-jump combination. so the 3A+1/2Lo+3F has to go. Oops, his chance of beating Patrick gets even slimer.