- Joined
- Dec 28, 2006
By all means, then, let's remove all risk from programs so that everyone goes clean. Clearly Stephane shouldn't bother with a 3A, and neither should Patrick Chan, for whom it's still a risk. Laura Lepisto doesn't need to work on getting a triple lutz even semi-consistent: she should always leave it out! I'm sorry, but that's a terrible idea. Skaters should take risks; they should be calculated risks rather than stupid ones, but if people only focus on going clean, skating will be boring.While it might be thrilled (sic) to see a skater attempt the quad, the most important thing for a skater is consistency (sic) executing a clean program when it counts. That’s what wins championships.
Also, her argument was not very clear. She suggests that maybe quads should be worth more, but then ends with: While it might be thrilled (sic) to see a skater attempt the quad, the most important thing for a skater is consistency (sic) executing a clean program when it counts. That’s what wins championships.
By all means, then, let's remove all risk from programs so that everyone goes clean. Clearly Stephane shouldn't bother with a 3A, and neither should Patrick Chan, for whom it's still a risk. Laura Lepisto doesn't need to work on getting a triple lutz even semi-consistent: she should always leave it out! I'm sorry, but that's a terrible idea. Skaters should take risks; they should be calculated risks rather than stupid ones, but if people only focus on going clean, skating will be boring.
BTW, can a 3A-3T really get as much as 18.2? I think Jenny's wrong on that one.
Obviously I was exaggerating . Really, this was not one of Jenny's better efforts - as we both noted, she could have done a better job of stating her argument (if she had one - she was firmly on that fence). There were also errors and omissions, and some proof-reading wouldn't have gone amiss.I agree I think she well and truly sat on the fence and didn't really come down one way or the other.
I think you're making a leap from Jenny's article that she herself didn't make though.
Indeed - neither Jeffrey nor Evan could have beaten some of the other top guys if they would have gone clean and skated their planned programs well; in Evan's case, even with the other guys making mistakes it was pretty close. The "do whatever you need to skate clean" tactic doesn't necessarily work, and means that a skater becomes dependent on others making mistakes or not skating the programs to their full potential.The observation that Jenny missed which is the most important is that while the theory of cleanest programme wins is correct, the reality is - who does a clean programme these days? Not many. It just happens that the last two mens champions managed it that one time, at the same time that the guy with more points on the table because of having a quad made mistakes. But aside from that clean skates are rare under COP.
OK, I understand and respect that you're a fan of Evan, but you don't have to defend him against everything, and this one is really a stretch .Joubert is consistent in attempting it but he's not been consistently clean in those attempts as you also stated.
From that standpoint, up until Worlds when he was forbidden to do it, Evan has been consistent in the attempt as well. Without the stress fracture he may have been more successful with it, too, last season.
Brian Joubert, Yannick Ponsero, Patrick Chan, Nobunari Oda, Evan Lysacek - they have all expressed opinions on the matter; strong opinions, in some cases. And they stand to lose a lot more than Jenny does for doing so, because it can affect the way they are perceived by judges and fans. Quite a few journalists have also weighed in. What's the point of writing a column if you're not adding anything new and not committing to anything?As for Jenny sitting on the fence about it, isn't that exactly where most are sitting right now?
I know, the unequal GOE thing makes no sense to me. If the system is going to punish bad execution more than for other jumps, it should reward good execution on the same scale. BTW, had that been the case, Yannick Ponsero would've medalled at Euros.I also agree it's not being rewarded as highly as it should be and is being punished more severely than necessary. What's up with that?
Weighing pros and cons is a juggling act. As for Jenny sitting on the fence about it, isn't that exactly where most are sitting right now?
I suggest skaters take the emphasis away from this one element, and instead focus on skating a balanced, sound performance –... That’s what wins championships.
I know, the unequal GOE thing makes no sense to me. If the system is going to punish bad execution more than for other jumps, it should reward good execution on the same scale. BTW, had that been the case, Yannick Ponsero would've medalled at Euros.
Now that we have found something to agree about, let's go argue about music choices .
I think it is to prevent the Buttle Syndrome. To prevent skaters from throwing in the quad even thought they cant do it just to get the points and extra jump(zayack rule).
I agree that negative quad GOEs should be worth more than 1, for the exact reason you pointed out. However, if a skater did well on what is a very difficult jump, the positive GOEs should likewise be higher. Since few skaters get very high GOEs on quads, I don't think it's going to throw anything out of whack.I think it is to prevent the Buttle Syndrome. To prevent skaters from throwing in the quad even thought they cant do it just to get the points and extra jump(zayack rule). I think is was the smartest idea the ISU had. It was a way to increase the quad value but also keep the balance between difficulty and quality.
In realty a quad to is worth 9.8 + (extra triple toe)zayack rule 4.0 + the Pcs bonus that quads seem to get + 2.5 for a grand total of 16.3. Any more and the quad would be all you need aka 2006 torino. So I think the balance is pefect . The quad give you the winning edge if you take advantage of it. but if forget about rest of skating you give your edge up.
Nothing new in this blog. Many skating fans have already stated the same ideas long ago.
While I am wishing that my favorite skaters win no matter what way they take, I am not thrilled with the position of skating a clean program and not risking in the Olympic year.
It was so unfortunate to this sport that the last two year worlds have won without a quad. The quad cannot stand alone to win a competition, but it is an important measure to separate the ordinaries and the greats. It ought to be highly emphasized. Given the current quad skaters' general abilities on other elements, the jumps other than the quad, spins, footworks, etc, I have to say that if every one skates clean, the winner must be a quad skater. If a competition won by a non-quad skater, it means that those quad skaters must have faltered in some degrees, therefore, it must be a bad competition.
I think it is to prevent the Buttle Syndrome. To prevent skaters from throwing in the quad even thought they cant do it just to get the points and extra jump(zayack rule).