Finlandia - Voronov's marks

[Sandpiper]

Oh for heaven's sake people. Weren't you all complaining before that Javi could not count and it was his fault for not knowing the rules so he Zayaked on Salchows? Now suddenly it's the big bad stupid ISU making stupid rules. Well, I don't think it's stupid at all. It's just an extension of the current Zayak rule.

I've stated from the beginning that I think Javi should've gotten his 3S downgraded to a 2S, so I'm certainly applying no double standards. The point of Zayak is to convince people to not repeat jumps. No one's going to purposefully repeat a triple if it gets downgraded to a double; no one's going to repeat a combination if all you count is the first jump. There's no point in invalidating the whole jumping pass.

Zayak has now become the surefire way to sink a favourite. Used to be falls, but that's all okay now...

 

[gkelly]

If the judges can consistently apply it so easily,

They don't. The judges just mark what they see (GOEs based on the quality of the element as executed). I'm sure many of them make no effort to keep track of how many of each element the skater did, since that's no longer in their job description.

The computer applies the rule vetting and the tech panel confirms. The judges are not involved in the decision at all. (Unless they happen to catch a mistake, perhaps due to software not being up to date, and inform the referee, who informs the tech panel. But that's not the normal procedure.)

If an element gets asterisked/thrown out, then the the GOEs the judges gave that element just don't show up in the protocol.


Under 6.0, with the Zayak rule in the free program and the required elements limitations in the short program, it was up to the judges to take appropriate deductions, but we had no way to be sure from the scores whether they actually did so.

Zayak has now become the surefire way to sink a favourite. Used to be falls, but that's all okay now...

Well, it's not something that the officials responsible (tech panel) can apply selectively assuming the software is working properly. The skater does what the skater does. The tech panel calls what the skater does. The software throws out the elements according to the rules.

Although I think there is a provision to give benefit of the doubt to the skater in ambiguous cases.


My personal opinion is that I'd like the rules/software to be written in such a way that the penalty for extra repeats should be whatever loses the skater the least number of points. But that would involve more judgment calls by the tech panel and so could introduce more room for error.

 

[Sam-Skwantch]

Is there a document that spells out the current Zayek rule as applied under CoP today?

Personally I feel like on potentially grey area calls like a doubled triple which was clearly planned as a triple, the judges should have discretion on if the double was intentional or not, and majority wins. Insert a Zayek button on their monitors and review the first 2t to see the intent. I don't like rules that are applied without taking the situation at hand into consideration.

I think the goal of Zayek is to encourage more jumps to be attempted yet the way the rule is being used now..simply to punish primarliy... I fear that the original notion of encouraging more is getting lost in the shuffle. I think both edge calls and doubled jumps need to be left to a situational bases that the judges determine the intent and not a broad rule that ignores the moment and scenario at hand.

 

[gkelly]

Is there a document that spells out the current Zayek rule as applied under CoP today?

It's the "Repetitions" section of Rule 612, paragraph 2 in the Special Regulations and Technical Rules for Single & Pair and Ice Dance, here: http://www.isu.org/en/single-and-pair-skating-and-ice-dance/special-regulations-and-technical-rules

Relevant ISU communications and other documents are on this page:
http://www.isu.org/en/single-and-pa...ce/isu-judging-system/single-and-pair-skating
As excerpted in ISU Communication 1874:

Rule 612 (former Rule 512), paragraph 2
Repetition of double jumps (Free Skating Singles):
Any double jump (including double Axel) cannot be included more than twice in total in a Single’s Free Program (as a Solo Jump or a part of Combination / Sequence).

Rule 612 (former Rule 512), paragraph 2
Repetition of triple/quadruple jumps (Free Skating Singles):
Of all the triple and quadruple jumps only two (2) can be executed twice. If at least one of these executions is in a jump combination or a jump sequence, both executions are evaluated in a regular way. If both executions are as solo jumps, the second of these solo jumps will receive 70% of its original Base Value.

From the Technical Panel Handbook Single Skating:

Any double jump (including double Axel) cannot be included more than twice in total in a Single’s Free Program (as a Solo Jump or a part of Combination / Sequence).

Of all the triple and quadruple jumps only two (2) can be executed twice. If at least one of these executions is in a jump combination or a jump sequence, both executions are evaluated in a regular way. If both executions are as solo jumps, the second of these solo jumps will be marked with the sign “+REP” and will receive 70% of it’s original Base Value. Triple and quadruple jumps with the same name will be considered as two different jumps. No triple or quadruple jump can be attempted more than twice. If a third repeated jump is executed in a combination or sequence, the entire combination or sequence will be treated as an additional element and therefore not considered (but this element will occupy a jump element box if one is empty).

There are some additional clarifications and examples in the tech panel handbook and in the Single Skating, jump elements PDF under FAQ at the top of the page linked above.

 

[Sam-Skwantch]

I wish there was a tip jar here at GS for Gkelly. Thanks.

Will we ever see or has there been a coach that yells out "Zayek..Zayek...Zayek" across the rink to warn their students of impending doom if they don't change there layout. Is that even allowed?

 

[Blades of Passion]

Will we ever see or has there been a coach that yells out "Zayek..Zayek...Zayek" across the rink to warn their students of impending doom?

This perfectly sums up the state of figure skating right now.

 

[Icey]

or hold up a very large picture of Elaine. Of course, some of the younger skaters might not recognize her!!!!!!!!

 

[Sam-Skwantch]

Are you suggesting something like a photo on a protest/picket sign? The whole crowd could cheer along. Lol.

 

[gkelly]

Elaine is a coach now. Should she hold up a picture of herself?

 

[Sandpiper]

Elaine is a coach now. Should she hold up a picture of herself?

Nah, she should just run around the rink during every performance to throw off her skater's competitors--they'll panic and think they Zayaked!

 

[DexterK]

Icey, that is hilarious, just the image of say, Frank or Orser reaching down and grabbing the ol' Zayak poster being shown in slow motion just before the broadcast goes to kiss and cry. I am still laughing.

 

[AnnaTheMusician]

Hahhah You are marvellous!!

 

[karne]

Or, maybe you should be blaming the skaters for not being able to count instead of the ISU.

Seriously for years everyone's had a cow about Oda not being able to count, but now suddenly it's the ISU's fault?

 

[TMC]

Or, maybe you should be blaming the skaters for not being able to count instead of the ISU.

Seriously for years everyone's had a cow about Oda not being able to count, but now suddenly it's the ISU's fault?

I don't think it is about counting this time. First of all, this is sudden in the sense that it is a new rule, starting this season. Secondly, it is excessively punitive.

I've had no complaints about the Zayak rule so far, but this is taking it too far in my opinion. It seems to be designed to limit double-jump repetitions at the juvenile/novice/intermediate/whatever young skater level. I'm not sure how sensible it is to apply the same rule to the senior level. Nobody does a third 2jump in a planned 3-3 combo on purpose.

Say Joshua is first by 0.01 points after the short at Worlds and plans to do a 4T-3T, a 3F-3T, and a 3Z-2T-2L towards the end in his free.

He pops the 3Ts after the quad and flip into a 2T. It's just not his day! Now he's going for the three-jump-combo, and he's already rattled because he's popped two jumps and he has the added pressure of having to change that planned 2T into a 3T. He has been practicing and practicing the 3-jump-combo, so his muscle memory and timing are perfectly in tune. Now he has to make that extra revolution and he knows that if he can't, he will lose the entire combo. So he's even more nervous. He goes into the jump, he's tired and extremely stressed, and unfortunately he can't make the 3T. His whole combo, which is worth a lot of points, is invalidated. He certainly didn't do the 2T on purpose, he just couldn't do a 3T like he should have. Because of this, he drops to 4th after the free.

Still think it's fair?

 

[Shayuki]

I don't mind it at all.

Honestly, a skater should be able to adapt on the fly to his mistakes. If he can't, that's his problem. He should have went over all the scenarios beforehand.

 

[karne]

Say Joshua is first by 0.01 points after the short at Worlds and plans to do a 4T-3T, a 3F-3T, and a 3Z-2T-2L towards the end in his free.

He pops the 3Ts after the quad and flip into a 2T. It's just not his day! Now he's going for the three-jump-combo, and he's already rattled because he's popped two jumps and he has the added pressure of having to change that planned 2T into a 3T. He has been practicing and practicing the 3-jump-combo, so his muscle memory and timing are perfectly in tune. Now he has to make that extra revolution and he knows that if he can't, he will lose the entire combo. So he's even more nervous. He goes into the jump, he's tired and extremely stressed, and unfortunately he can't make the 3T. His whole combo, which is worth a lot of points, is invalidated. He certainly didn't do the 2T on purpose, he just couldn't do a 3T like he should have. Because of this, he drops to 4th after the free.

Still think it's fair?

Yes, I still think it's fair. Just as I thought it was fair that he lost the 2012 Junior World title because the tech panel did not count the hop at the end of his 3F-2T as a 1Lo, and he thought they might, so he didn't do his planned three jump combo. It was unfortunate, but fair.

 

[gkelly]

He pops the 3Ts after the quad and flip into a 2T. It's just not his day! Now he's going for the three-jump-combo, and he's already rattled because he's popped two jumps and he has the added pressure of having to change that planned 2T into a 3T. He has been practicing and practicing the 3-jump-combo, so his muscle memory and timing are perfectly in tune. Now he has to make that extra revolution and he knows that if he can't, he will lose the entire combo.

He doesn't have to do 3Lz+3T+2Lo as his three-jump combo, or even 3Lz+3T on its own. In fact, he'd be stupid to try unless he had been practicing it as much as the other difficult combos and is confident he can do it -- and later in the program as well according to your scenario.

Unless that's a specifically worked-out backup plan, going for a combo harder than the one he had planned is foolish.

A better backup plan in that scenario, to avoid losing the whole planned element, would be 3Lz+1T+2Lo, or even just 3Lz on its own (or 3Lz+1T, if he already has a solo 3Lz elsewhere).

Any of these would require thinking on his feet, which is the main problem with this rule. But as a general principle, if the program isn't going well to begin with and it's necessary to switch to a backup plan to avoid a whole element getting thrown out, it makes more sense to replace the planned element with something easier/safer that will still get full credit, and hopefully positive GOE, than with something even riskier.

 

[TMC]

He doesn't have to do 3Lz+3T+2Lo as his three-jump combo, or even 3Lz+3T on its own. In fact, he'd be stupid to try unless he had been practicing it as much as the other difficult combos and is confident he can do it -- and later in the program as well according to your scenario.

Unless that's a specifically worked-out backup plan, going for a combo harder than the one he had planned is foolish.

A better backup plan in that scenario, to avoid losing the whole planned element, would be 3Lz+1T+2Lo, or even just 3Lz on its own (or 3Lz+1T, if he already has a solo 3Lz elsewhere).

Any of these would require thinking on his feet, which is the main problem with this rule. But as a general principle, if the program isn't going well to begin with and it's necessary to switch to a backup plan to avoid a whole element getting thrown out, it makes more sense to replace the planned element with something easier/safer that will still get full credit, and hopefully positive GOE, than with something even riskier.

In my opinion as well.

ETA Of course he doesn't have to, but he's already lost a bunch of points popping those 3Ts, so he can either try the 3T and catch up on points a bit, or play it safe and go for a 1T. In this scenario, his options are 2T, 2T, 3T = more points & 2T, 2T, 1T = less points. And those points might be the difference between gold and silver.

The thing I don't get is that this rule is almost planned to punish popping jumps - when they already lose points doing that. Why would anyone do a 3rd double on purpose, knowing they'd lose the whole combo?

To the viewer who is already confused about the scoring, it must be extra baffling to see someone do a clean program with a cool 3-jump combo (zero points!), only to lose to someone who does rotate the correct amount of times but also falls multiple times...

 

[Skater Boy]

I don't remember seeing any users complaining about Javi's inability to count being his own fault. I DO recall- and was a part of -many that criticized the specific nuances of the Zayak rule & being unhappy that his triple jump was credited with 0 points, as opposed to simply being downgraded to a double.

I guess some could argue that for whatever reason his body timing can do triple sals but not double (as odd as that sounds) so one could manipulate the jump combos. Ijust don't know if we can make everone happy.

 

[gkelly]

The thing I don't get is that this rule is almost planned to punish popping jumps - when they already lose points doing that.

I don't think that's the intention. I think the intention is to discourage skaters from planning three or four double toes or double loops because they only use one kind of double jump at the end of all their combinations. (And it's not just lower-level skaters who do this -- Mao Asada, for example, often did only double loops in her combinations.)

The penalty for skaters who plan but pop triples of the same takeoff as their planned doubles is an unfortunate side effect. However, that can have significant consequences even for world-class medal contenders and therefore the rule might be rethought if it's clear that medals are frequently being lost on technicalities.

Why would anyone do a 3rd double on purpose, knowing they'd lose the whole combo?

Now that they know the new rule, they shouldn't plan it on purpose.

In the heat of the moment, though, they might not remember what they've already done and how that effects what they plan to do next, or muscle memory might take over, or the popped jump might end up being the third double of that type.