Well yea, that kind of technique on the toe loop is definitely horrendous - the dreaded toe-axel. I was talking about edge jumps though.
Flutzing
- Thread starter Marrymeyunakim
- Start date
Well yea, that kind of technique on the toe loop is definitely horrendous - the dreaded toe-axel. I was talking about edge jumps though.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2005
I know that, but Joe is implying that there's NO pre-rotation on picking jumps, even though on toe loop and flip there is about 1/4.
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2003
Can't help but agree with you. I would suggest one can take off anyway one wishes and call it whatever one wishes and accepted by the officials of competitive skating and scored as plain old Jumps - no names, with any kind of air rotations. We have to get rid of the definitions of different jumps so that we will be headed back up the slippery slope with a chair lift. OK?
btw - Wikipedia actually uses the term counter-rotation. It's actually more than implied. For non skaters: After toeing off; a skater can either turn to the left or to the right. One way will give the skater a ToeLoop; the Other way will force him to counter rotate. If a skater changes his edge, it is not a Lutz by definition - not even a ToeLoop either.
Well, shallow and wobbly are GoE minuses. But one may be able to counter rotate from a Flat. I said may be. In which case it is a first class Flutz. It unfortunately, does not have the back outside edge also required by definition for a Lutz.
a True Lutz and a True Axel, Flip, ToeLoop, Loop, Salchow all have definitions from their Take-Offs. In Sport, one must be exact. No pampering permitted.
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2004
Well i've seen top level coaches in the UK spend a lot of time impressing on their students that they should not pre-rotate their jumps since the COP came in.
One particular coach will always check the tracings of salchows and loops of every sakter she has from adults doing single salchows right through to seniors doing triple loops. Her thoughts are if there is more than a 1/4 turn on the ice on the take off then you risk getting some form of downgrade. She taught a group class in a skating camp I attended (before the more recent < and << changes) and the fear for adults was if it was too pre-rotated than you end up with no points at all for a 1S< or 1Lp<, and if you add a dreaded toe-waltz jump, good luck getting any points
Ant
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2003
On Pre-Rotations. There is a conflict with the ice and the air. I believe an Edge Jump may prerotate on the ice but must make up for that prerotation in the air. A skater who prerotates 1/2 turn on ice and air turns only 1-1/2 did not do a double. A skater, imo, should land on the spot he took off on with the requisite number of air turns. To me, it is more of a distraction than an UR. 
On cheating toe-offs. I must confess, I didn't know they existed until it was brought to my attention of a skater's half turn body before toe-ing off for a 3TL. I think we called it a toeaxel. Indeed, that is a horrendous cheat. I can only ask if the Tech Panel catches these things and if the Judges actually score these as minuses. Do they show up in the protocols? Didn't Evan have some sort of a wonky 3Axel take off before the Olys?
This should not be confused with the Wrong Edge Takeoff which only applies to the Lutz, as far as I know. All other Jumps must follow their definitions.
On cheating toe-offs. I must confess, I didn't know they existed until it was brought to my attention of a skater's half turn body before toe-ing off for a 3TL. I think we called it a toeaxel. Indeed, that is a horrendous cheat. I can only ask if the Tech Panel catches these things and if the Judges actually score these as minuses. Do they show up in the protocols?
Didn't Evan have some sort of a wonky 3Axel take off before the Olys?This should not be confused with the Wrong Edge Takeoff which only applies to the Lutz, as far as I know. All other Jumps must follow their definitions.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
So here is my question. It is about the definition of the Lutz jump, with no pampering.
A skater approaches the jump in the manner that usually characterizes a flip (a curving path into three-turns or whatever). His edge wobbles weakly back and forth but the slo-motion replays show that at the exact moment of take-off he takes off from a clear outside egde. His blade is not curving away in the opposite direction to any significant degree, so he does not achieve any discernable counter-rotation.
You are the caller. Do you call "Lutz?" .
In that case, I'm quite sure that the tech panel will call "flip" and "e."
Here's an example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpOKM8P_Msc
Here's an example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpOKM8P_Msc
Last edited:
On Pre-Rotations. There is a conflict with the ice and the air. I believe an Edge Jump may prerotate on the ice but must make up for that prerotation in the air. A skater who prerotates 1/2 turn on ice and air turns only 1-1/2 did not do a double. A skater, imo, should land on the spot he took off on with the requisite number of air turns. To me, it is more of a distraction than an UR.
This is a common misconception, but it would actually be terrible figure skating technique to do what you propose. The skating leg (picking toe or jumping leg) prerotates every jump, between 1/4 and 1/2 turn. It is impossible to do a double or triple jump without some degree of this sort of prerotation occurring. If the skater were to do this natural, desired pre-rotation and then rotate 2 (double) or 3 (triple) full turns in the air, the jump would be badly over-rotated.
Here is a great video that illustrates what I'm talking about with regards to toeloops. Watch very carefully where the skater's feet are when he/she takes off -- the picking toe is approaching forward. Note that this isn't the same thing as a toe axel, where the skater's entire body turns forward and the knee kicks up (like an axel) before takeoff.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2005
On Pre-Rotations. There is a conflict with the ice and the air. I believe an Edge Jump may prerotate on the ice but must make up for that prerotation in the air. A skater who prerotates 1/2 turn on ice and air turns only 1-1/2 did not do a double. A skater, imo, should land on the spot he took off on with the requisite number of air turns. To me, it is more of a distraction than an UR.
On cheating toe-offs. I must confess, I didn't know they existed until it was brought to my attention of a skater's half turn body before toe-ing off for a 3TL. I think we called it a toeaxel. Indeed, that is a horrendous cheat. I can only ask if the Tech Panel catches these things and if the Judges actually score these as minuses. Do they show up in the protocols?
There's a certain amount of pre-rotation "allowable" on the toe loop which is the same as a Salchow. I check my pick mark (the correct term for the toe loop, flip, and Lutz is a "pick jump" in our local vernacular here and it's typically called the "pick" or "pick in" not "toe off") of the take off on my double toe and it looks like the check mark on my double salchow take off and this is acceptable and correct. These have never been marked as negative GOEs (the two foot problem I sometimes have on the back end DOES get hit with - GOE). If I pre-rotated to forward and toe-axeled the take off, yes, I would get hit with at least a < and - GOE depending on the cleanliness of the landing (if marginal, I'd probably get << instead). Tech panels are very tough on toe-axels. I've seen it at my level, on single toe loops receiving no credit in jump combos, and on higher level skaters. Most coaches that are worth their pay have gone back to correct that mess for most skaters when at all possible and have made the skaters who are unable or unwilling to fix it aware that this is going to get nailed.
As for the flip, there's a certain amount of "allowable" pre-rotation as well and it should look similar to the "flag" on the loop. While I am not currently at a level that a 2Lo and 2F are allowable, it doesn't mean I don't work on them and I do have singles of both jumps in my program which get 0 and + GOE.
Lysacek was getting consistent -1 and -2 on the 3A for his poor technique.
Also, you can WET on a flip as much as you can a Lutz. Yuna Kim was "e" called on her flip multiple times when it was the first 1/2 of her 3+3.
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2008
that was a great video to understand the discussion, thanx! I couldnt understand what prerotation in toelooks meant before.
Is there a video to see a clear toe axel to understand whats wrong?
On Pre-Rotations. There is a conflict with the ice and the air. I believe an Edge Jump may prerotate on the ice but must make up for that prerotation in the air. A skater who prerotates 1/2 turn on ice and air turns only 1-1/2 did not do a double. A skater, imo, should land on the spot he took off on with the requisite number of air turns. To me, it is more of a distraction than an UR.
On cheating toe-offs. I must confess, I didn't know they existed until it was brought to my attention of a skater's half turn body before toe-ing off for a 3TL. I think we called it a toeaxel. Indeed, that is a horrendous cheat. I can only ask if the Tech Panel catches these things and if the Judges actually score these as minuses. Do they show up in the protocols?
This should not be confused with the Wrong Edge Takeoff which only applies to the Lutz, as far as I know. All other Jumps must follow their definitions.
Your explanation of how a skater should make up lost rotations on pre-rotation in the air actually sounds a little dangerous. Think about it. The overall direction your body travels while it is in the air is in the direction in which you were skating before the pre-rotation - so for a loop, your body would travel in the direction in which you were skating backwards on that right back outside edge. Because of this pre-rotation that is necessary on the takeoff, your body takes off facing a slightly different direction. If you were to complete 3 rotation from that exact takeoff point, then you would land with your blade right smack against the direction you were travelling in initially and wouldn't that cause you to fall or something? It would be grossly over-rotated.
Honestly, on edge jumps, I consider (when I watch skating and when I do my own jumps) takeoffs to be closer to the direction in which I'm traveling down the ice rather than the exact point when my skate leaves the ice. I can't imagine that pre-rotation to be more than 1/4-1/3 of a whole rotation though. Maybe I'll measure it next time.
There is also definitely a certain amount of pre-rotation on toe jumps but this is where we can argue about whether there is too much or too little pre-rotation. On the toe and flip, there will be pre-rotation as you start swinging your body into the jump. On the lutz, not as much.
antmanb - thanks that's actually really interesting! I'm not really sure if that's a regional difference in coaching styles or if it's just my coach that's doing things differently.
With regards to the definition of jumps, all jumps are defined by takeoff edge, period. So if a lutz doesn't take off from a clear outside edge, it's not a lutz. A "flutz" is really a lutz (EDIT: sorry guys, meant to say flip here) but it just describes a jump attempt that starts out as a lutz and changes edge into an inside edge.
Mathman, I would personally say that jump is a lutz (based on how jumps were defined in the first place). But I agree with gkelly in giving that jump an "e" on a "flip." That's just how scoring is technically done. I guess kind of like Arakawa and Ando? It's tricky when a skater goes into a jump with the intention of doing one jump and ends up really doing another.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
That is the dilemma that the CoP cannot come to terms with no matter how they tinker. Let's look at what you just said.
(a) Jumps are defined by take-off edge, period.
(b) A "flutz" is really a Lutz (that takes off from an inside edge).
(a) and (b) cannot be reconciled.
If we follow the definition (Lutz = outside edge, flip = inside edge period), then a skater who had an error on his flip would be rewarded for that error by receiving the base value for a Lutz.
This follows the definition, but defies the common sense rule that in sports you should not be rewarded for screwing up.
Oh shoot, sorry, I meant "a flutz is really a flip" - that makes much more sense doesn't it. haha!
:
Last edited:
That's not true.
Even with the strictest definition, jumps are defined by takeoff edge, presence or absence of toepick assist, and direction of rotation in the air relative to the direction of travel on the takeoff edge.
We could say that they're also defined by the number of rotations in the air, but that relates to whether to call them single-double-triple-quadruple and not the actual name of the jump.
The best jumps are going to meet their definitions perfectly.
But there are all sorts of errors that can creep in, mildly or severely or anywhere in between.
So then the question arises, what kinds of errors can change the name of the jump? And how severe do they have to be to cross the line from "intended jump with error that diminishes some of the defining characteristics of the jump and blurs the line between the intended jump and a different jump with a different name" to "not the intended jump at all but a different jump entirely"?
Hey gkelly, I think you took my post too literally without the context. Of course those other criteria play into defining jumps (I mean I've been skating myself for awhile too
) but I brought that statement into the discussion to voice my opinions about the whole lutz vs. flutz vs. flip debate. I also didn't mean that the takeoff edge is the only criterion for defining a jump either - sorry if that wasn't clear.No problem.
The clarification part of my post is for readers who don't skate and are still trying to figure it out.
The question part at the end is for folks who are familiar with the continuum of all different kinds of jump mistakes:
If a jump as executed imperfectly falls somewhere between a perfect example of Jump Y and a perfect example of Jump Z, and we know that it was intended as Y, where do we draw the line to start calling it Z instead?
The clarification part of my post is for readers who don't skate and are still trying to figure it out.
The question part at the end is for folks who are familiar with the continuum of all different kinds of jump mistakes:
If a jump as executed imperfectly falls somewhere between a perfect example of Jump Y and a perfect example of Jump Z, and we know that it was intended as Y, where do we draw the line to start calling it Z instead?
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
Oh shoot, sorry, I meant "a flutz is really a flip" - that makes much more sense doesn't it. haha!
OK, but I still have the same question.Should a skater get credit for a Lutz if he screws up his flip?
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
It seems like we should be able to come to a resolution to this question without going around and around in the same circles every time this question comes up.
So what you are saying is, if you think that the take-off edge is the thing that, by definition (period!), determines the name of the jump, then you just don't know anything about skating.
This being the case, what is the argument about and why are people shouting at each other?
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2003
Very good post, kate. Perhaps all edge jumps should be preannounced that each of them have legal allowances for their takes offs but not for their landings. I'll accept that, but I won't be happy with it.
Thats the type of Video which should be shown on the Jumbothon. Super.
thank you mskater for that info. It's the terms "allowable", "intended", and I would add "partial credit" and perhaps numerous other sundry objects that prevent skaters from adhering to definitions. I see that as making figure skating a 'sissy sport'. Well, so be it.
I am aware of the LIP and it is included with the similar but different problems of the flutz. I think the ISU should have an official list of exceptions to perfect definitions.
Every thing in Sport is dangerous. How many people are riddled with athritus because of sport? Add danger to the list of sundry items that make it a sissy sport.
Ya got it gal! Brava. but the WET fans will not like that.
Not at all. My point was that if you think that the takeoff edge is the only thing that determines the name of the jump, then either you don't know enough about skating, or more likely you just weren't precise enough in articulating the definition.
Since this comes up most of the time with regards to lutzes (witness the title of this thread), let's look at a triple lutz as an example.
The definition of triple lutz is not "takes off from a back outside edge, period." There are many kinds of jumps that take off from back outside edge. That definition is incomplete.
The definition of a triple lutz (and feel free to edit for greater elegance) would be something like
"takes off from a back outside edge traveling in one direction, with a toe assist from the toepick of the other foot, changes rotational direction at the instant of takeoff, and rotates three times in the air in the direction opposite to the direction of the takeoff edge."
A perfect triple lutz will meet all of those points of the definition.
There are several ways in which an attempt at a triple lutz could be imperfect.
There could be a problem on the landing alone, including a significant problem such as a fall. That doesn't change the name of the jump, but it does effect how much the jump is worth, in ways that are fairly specifically spelled out under IJS (and short program deductions under 6.0).
But the definition I just offered above doesn't say anything about the landing, so errors on the landing don't have an effect on the definition.
Then there are errors, of several kinds, that represent failures in the takeoff and rotation details that do contribute to the definition. My question is, how bad do those errors have to be before they change the definition of the jump? Do smaller errors of those kinds need to change the name of the jump, or can they just affect the point value?
One way that a triple lutz attempt could fail to be a successful triple lutz would be by rotating less than three times in the air.
If a skater plans to do a triple lutz, which ideally rotates slightly more than exactly three times, but instead rotates slightly more than exactly two times, it's not a triple lutz anymore, it's a double lutz, right?
OK, well, what if rotates exactly 2.5 times in the air? or 2.7? Somewhere in between a triple lutz and a double lutz. What do we call it?
We know what the IJS rules call it. If it's 2.5 revolutions or less, but clearly more than 2, this year it'll be called 3Lz<<. Downgraded triple lutz.
In 2003-04, during the first year of testing the new judging system, it would have been called 2Lz. In casual conversation, under any judging system, a commentator or other observer might say "That was barely more than a double" or "that was an overrotated double."
For purposes of the Zayak rule, it does matter whether the jump is considered a double or a triple. So judges under 6.0 or technical specialists under IJS need to be able to draw the line somewhere between attempted triple and double.
If the rotation is only 2.7 rotations in the air, under IJS this year it will be called 3Lz<, underrotated triple lutz, and will earn 70% of the base value. In casual discussion, especially if the jump was landed on one foot, people might refer to it as "a cheated triple lutz."
If the rotation is 2.8 rotations in the air, it will be called 3Lz and can get full credit, or -GOE from judges who penalize the slight underrotation. In casual discussion it might be called just "triple lutz" or it might be called "cheated triple lutz" or "slightly cheated triple lutz."
There's a range of underrotation error and a range of penalty. There's also a range of names by which triple lutz attempts with various degrees of underrotation might be called. But they all fill the same slot in terms of counting repeated jumps.
Then there are less common errors of toepick technique by which the skater does not take off from a back outside edge witha toe assist from the toepick of the other foot. Maybe the skater accidentally put too much of the of the "picking" foot on the ice, not the toepick but the lower part of the blade. Let's say she manages to get three revolutions and land cleanly anyway. Is it still a triple lutz? For purposes of calling the jump, assigning a base mark, and counting it against repetitions, the answer will probably be yes: it will be called as 3Lz and the judges will reduce the GOE if they see the error.
But if the last thing to leave the ice (for a counterclockwise jumper) was not the left back outside edge but instead the brief right back outside edge of the picking foot, in casual conversation an observer might say "That wasn't really a triple lutz -- she didn't pick correctly. It was more of a triple loop."
Or suppose the skater starts on a left back outside edge, puts the toe of the right foot in the ice, changes edge to a left back inside, and then jumps, taking the weight off the picking foot before the gliding foot, so that the last thing to leave the ice is the LBI edge.
I've done that on single lutz attempts. And more than one coach has said to me "That's not really a lutz. It's more like a salchow." In discussing it, we could jokingly call it a salchow, or a "slutz," or "a flutz with a really weak pick." In an IJS competition it would be called as 1Lz e and I would expect -3 GOE. There's a reason there's no lutz attempt in my programs.
But the judges wouldn't consider it a salchow or even a flip -- it's a really bad lutz.You won't see one that bad at the elite level, with triples, because it would be really hard to generate anywhere close to three revolutions with that kind of technique. Maybe the worst attempts from Sarah Hughes would come close.
In those examples, parts of the full definition of the lutz jump were not met by the flawed attempts. The ways in which the jumps were flawed made the takeoff or amount of rotation similar in some ways to a jump with a different name. But there's no expectation that as soon as the tiniest bit of error comes in that has the tiniest bit in common with another jump, that totally cancels out everything else about the jump that does meet the definition.
So again I ask, how bad does the error have to be before we stop calling the jump as a flawed attempt at the intended jump and start renaming it to the different jump that it has something in common with.
The renaming can happen on a colloquial level well before it becomes official if everyone knows that there's a degree of joking involved.
Last edited:
