No, they're not examples of taste one way or another. They're examples of world champions having sloppy skates (or not, depending on your definition) in Olympic-year fall competitions.
Hersh on Scoring at Natls
- Thread starter janetfan
- Start date
No, they're not examples of taste one way or another. They're examples of world champions having sloppy skates (or not, depending on your definition) in Olympic-year fall competitions.
- Joined
- May 15, 2009
I have no problem with your answer - and don't agree with this biz about having a "full set of triples" or a 3x3 as what defines a great skater.
My point was that to give credit to a couple of skaters for having proper technique on the lutz and flip and disregard those who don't seems to be more a matter of preference.
I know those jumps are important because of their deserved point value. But as you pointed out, Yuna gets by very well without a 3 loop and Joannie does very well without a 3x3.
There is alot more to skating than two jumps. I feel the same way about the quad. For me it is only a part of the equation yet it seems CoP automatically gives most quad jumpers higher pcs. If you disagree with that take it up with Jeremy because he said it recently in an interview. I have noticed it too and agree with Jeremy. Reputaion scoring in the Cop is no different than it was in 6.0
To dismiss 6.0 by saying they had no deductions or way of considering elements seems to show that you don't understand 6.0. Do you think they just picked their favorites and did not consdier what they saw on the ice?
I am seeing some pretty wacky scoring under CoP and to think it never gets it wrong or that 6.0 was always wrong is just not right. I don't care if you win an argument with me - but please be a bit more realistic.
Did Tara beat Michelle in '98? Did Tara get away with a little "cheating"?
Did Caro really deserve Silver at '08 Worlds or were many of her msitakes in her LP overlooked?
Did Yuna UR her 3x3 at the GPF or was that just a tech caller mistake - a pretty bad one at that - and made worse because it came against the WC in a major ISU event. Will the CoP show us such inadequate judging in Vancouver?
Every system will get it wrong at times because as gkelly frequently points out "judges are human" and I would add there is such a thing called human nature which includes politics, and greed.
Last edited:
Last time I checked neither Joannie or Carolina are world champions. Mao and Yu-na are. Of course there is more to skating than those two jumps. But it doesn't mean that the people who do those two jumps propery shouldn't be rewarded for them, and the people who don't do those jumps properly shouldn't be deducted for them. That's basic fairness.
And with the lutz and the flip, its not just a "proper technique issue" Its called that the rules state the lutz is suppose to take off from the outside edge and the rules state the flip is suppose to take off from an inside edge. That's the rules and how the jumps are suppose to be defined. So if thats what the rules say those jumps are, in order to receive full credit, the skaters should do the jumps that way. Period.
Mao was a world champion with her 3flutz and the 3flutz issues. I think the penalty rules are more than fair.
- Joined
- May 15, 2009
Last time I checked - the rules have changed since Mao won her WC, no?
Did Michelle get away with a little "cheating" on her second triple loop? Did Chen get away with a little on a couple of her jumps?
Would Nagano results have been different if all the underrotated jumps were downgraded? Or would other qualities of the of the performance have made up for them?
- Joined
- May 15, 2009
I can't answer that because I don't remember (and am a closet Kwan uber).
Funny though, I had similar thoughts about many missed calls at '08 Worlds.
As I remember, there weren't many "missed " UR/edge calls at '08 Worlds. Mao still got them (probably about the same number she's getting now).
Last edited:
Huh? Mao was getting deducted for the lutz that year, and so the new rules about the ! might have actually helped her. Although I doubt it because she had a severe flutz The issue was she decided to fix her flutz and so she lost the flutz completely right now it seems. If she had kept it the way it was she'd still be getting 4 points for it every time just about.
Apparently she decided to change her technique on her flip. Not because she was getting penalized for it but for other reasons. As for her 3flip/3loop she was having issues getting it credit in 2007-2008 too. Heck she even got it downgraded in the long that year. Mao's 3flip/3toe was credited but she dropped it. Then you can add in that Mao has never had a reliable 3sal. And I think we can all conclude that Mao's issues aren't just the rule changes.
But the point is even though her 3flip/3loop didn't get credit and she got deducted for a 3flutz, Mao still managed to win a World championship. Heck she even did this without landing her 3axel. The biggest issue between then and now is back then Mao wasn't putting all of her eggs in the 3axel basket.
Even Yu-na still managed to win a world championship by an overwhelming margin over Rochette, even though Yu-na got an ! and Rochette got no edge calls. The only difference was that Joannie by doing the 3flip correctly is entitled to get slighly more points. Was is this so offensive or wrong? Its the correct thing for the ISU to do.
- Joined
- May 15, 2009
See, that is part of MY problem. When i see a skater losing balance on almost every jump, with hands down on the ice and step outs, etc. I can't help but not notice such sloppy skating. The fact that CoP rewards such lack of technique is part of what is confusing to me.
A system that actually considers technique so closely has some incomprehensible "rules" to me.
Knowing that I may be wrong according to CoP '08 version of the rules I had a different podium for the Ladies.
I see it differently and don't overlook what CoP does. I can't force myself to think a skater did good when they fall - and i don't care how many rotations they completed in the air. The jump will always be worse than "cheated" - because the jump failed.
I thought Kostner's scores were ridiculous. And that is one area where I want to see COP changed. I think that if a skaters fall multiple times or have multiple errors in their skate, that it should be reflected in their PCS marks. That is one area where I Think 6.0 was superior...Same goes for Patrick Chan's PCS at times when he has multiple errors in his programs. I take real issue. I think there at least should be some mark in the PCS which goes into the quality of the whole program performance. Where skaters can be rewarded for not having obvious errors. The fact that Mao barely won over Kostner was ridiculous to me...In general I think if they can start mandating that PCS must go down for programs with all kinds of errors...
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2005
Let's leave the myth that Yu Na lips to the bots. Yu Na's 3 flip may not take off on a deep inside edge, but that is perfectly acceptable technique. She takes off on the flat like Michelle Kwan used to, and to accuse Kwan of lipping is to accuse her of being capable of a real 3lutz, and that would be insane. In fact, if you just showed me Yu Na's 3flip without the footwork going in, and insisted to me that it's a lutz, I'd call it a clear flutz. A real 3lutz always presses down on the ankle before springing for the takeoff, and indeed, that is what Yu Na does on her 3lutz, which looks vastly different from her 3flip. For actual lippers, their two jumps look identical before takeoff.
And Joannie and Caro aren't the only elite skaters with a full set of basic triples. You can add Miki Ando to the list now. I watched her SP at the GPF, and to my shock, the girl has an actual 3flip now. She used to be a chronic lipper, but she appears to have fixed it.
And Joannie and Caro aren't the only elite skaters with a full set of basic triples. You can add Miki Ando to the list now. I watched her SP at the GPF, and to my shock, the girl has an actual 3flip now. She used to be a chronic lipper, but she appears to have fixed it.
Huh? I have no idea what you're talking about. In fact, I tend to prefer COP programs better because of the complex steps, jumps etc. To me, the artistry and technical aspect of the programs seem more improved. In comparison to COP where the skater is doing something every minute, you see skater of 6.0 era just skating around and being very lax. Just compare the programs of the 80s and 90s to ones now and you'll a huge difference in quality.
- Joined
- May 15, 2009
Thankyou for such fair comments beka.
The truth is CoP is still new and does not have a long history. It is certainly easier to find many, many more problematic podiums under 6.0 because of it's longer history.
I think most posters think CoP needs alot of tweaking but hopefuly it will come in time.
For me a big step would always involve the secrecy issues. Why not make it like other "real sports" and use multiple camera angles and show us the slow-mo replays instead of so much K & C time.
If I had seen Mirai's urs in slow-mo , maybe a couple of angles too, instead of watching her talking with Carroll in the K & C I think I would have had a different reaction to her marks. I think many would have.
Through my 6.0 rose tinted glasses Mirai won.
It may sound ridiculous to many but Mirai's skating moved me emotionally. Her skating won my heart
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2005
First of all, I understand 6.0 very well thank you (I competed under it for 10 years). And no they did not pay attention to under-rotation or edge calls - so in a sense they weren't paying attention to what was happening on the ice. Lots of times they were freaking out about how to compare the skaters, what marks to give them, and where to place them. If they did take into consideration edge calls and under-rotations do you think Tara Lipinski or Sarah Hughes would be Olympic champions? Absolutely not.
This is something that needs to be taken up with NBC - and has nothing to do with the COP or ISU. NBC created the perfect storm when they had Scott and Sandra pretty much declaring Mirai the winner, didn't show the replays, and then ran out of time and went off the air. Like I said before, NBC needs to learn how to broadcast an event in the COP era and stop pretending it's the 6.0 era.
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2005
6.0 is gone. Dead and buried. We have the COP now and we can try to improve it.
The scoring deduction for under rotations are ridiculous. The de facto point loss is far bigger than for any other kind of mistake, and yet it's one of the hardest to spot.
At the same time, bad posture and crummy positions are supposed to be part of the PCS and GOE, but glossed over in Rachael's case. Perhaps a bit of horsewhipping would improve the judges' consistency and attention to detail.
The scoring deduction for under rotations are ridiculous. The de facto point loss is far bigger than for any other kind of mistake, and yet it's one of the hardest to spot.
At the same time, bad posture and crummy positions are supposed to be part of the PCS and GOE, but glossed over in Rachael's case. Perhaps a bit of horsewhipping would improve the judges' consistency and attention to detail.
- Joined
- May 15, 2009
Now for my most outrageous comment of the day.........(drum roll please
)I like Scott
I like Sandra
And Dick Button is my favorite
Maybe that explains alot to some of you
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2004
Why cant people accept that fully rotating a jump is far more difficult than cheating on it? Now I don't skate at all but it is obvious that turning completely in the air than cheating is a very important difference- it is not very fair to Rachel to keep banging on about what people felt and the crowd reaction etc. She has had underrotations in the past and edge calls and must have worked extremely hard to get rid of it. And arguably that is harder to do than donning on a red suit and skating to Carmen.
How many people watch gymnastics these days and can argue why one person gets higher base marks than others? Do they need explanations at the end of events to explain why the fitter looking gymnast scored lower or one with no bobbles did not win? No. What about synchronised swimming? Can people make out the difficulty of jumps in platform diving?
The basic point is Flatt is a better jumper than Mirai, which means that she spent more energy in the program to get the points. SHe must be rewarded. I dont know why people are dissing her when they should be proud of her for getting her technique right, which is very hard to do.
How many people watch gymnastics these days and can argue why one person gets higher base marks than others? Do they need explanations at the end of events to explain why the fitter looking gymnast scored lower or one with no bobbles did not win? No. What about synchronised swimming? Can people make out the difficulty of jumps in platform diving?
The basic point is Flatt is a better jumper than Mirai, which means that she spent more energy in the program to get the points. SHe must be rewarded. I dont know why people are dissing her when they should be proud of her for getting her technique right, which is very hard to do.
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2005
It takes even more energy to stand up straight throughout all the rigors of a skating program. I'd like to see skaters who do that get rewarded for that, even a little, before I'm ever going to pretend that a 4 point deduction is remotely justified for landing a jump at 91°.
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2006
Why? Because Mirai is a much better all-around skater than Rachael. People sum up Rachael's skating with one word: jumps. When they talk about Mirai, they talk about all her elements, including her jumps, as well as the extra factors that most people (both fans and experts) want to see in skating that ought to be counted properly in PCS but don't seem to be. "Why can't people accept" that it's much better (and harder) to be a complete skater than a one-element skater?
If you want respect for Rachael, then you probably shouldn't dismiss other skaters' performances as "donning on a red suit and skating to Carmen."
Similar threads
