Can Takahashi Close The Gap On Patrick Chan? | Page 5 | Golden Skate

Can Takahashi Close The Gap On Patrick Chan?

spikydurian

Medalist
Joined
Jan 15, 2012
I'm really interested to know the impact of figure skating boards on figure skater/figure skating popularity. I only joined before Vancouver Oly and I can tell you that what I read definitely made a difference re: my perception of certain skaters. Re: Patrick, my image of him is that he has extraordinary skating skills, and his Federation recognizes this talent and have lobbied effectively so that he's almost guaranteed a win however he skates that day. What I have seen in competition confirms what I have eked from reading this board, and that doesn't make me want to be his fan. Nevertheless, I can see that he is a very nice person so I really don't blame him personally when he gets awarded for a multiple fall performance. But again, gaining this perception does not make me want to be his fan. I think that's just human nature.
Anyway, getting back to the topic, I don't need CoP to tell me that Dai is an artist on the ice like no one else.

Your comments that Patrick's win is a result of lobbying by his Federation is unfair and baseless. If Patrick's federation is so powerful, all Canadians will be winning. When Gashinki won the bronze in the last Worlds, there were accusations the Russian federation lobbied for his win. Or that when Evan won the Olympics, the Americans stole the gold from Plushenko. The conclusion is that some people find ways to discredit the other side when their favourites lost which is unfortunate. I hope the skaters have more reasoning power to think through their strengths and weaknesses, the marking system and work on improving themselves. Patrick worked on his quads and only started winning then. He did not medal at the last Olympics. Perhaps if you are right that his federation lobbied for his win, then they should have done so from the very beginning. It shows they are not that effective as you think so, aren't they?
 

hurrah

Medalist
Joined
Aug 8, 2009
Your comments that Patrick's win is a result of lobbying by his Federation is unfair and baseless. If Patrick's federation is so powerful, all Canadians will be winning. When Gashinki won the bronze in the last Worlds, there were accusations the Russian federation lobbied for his win. Or that when Evan won the Olympics, the Americans stole the gold from Plushenko. The conclusion is that some people find ways to discredit the other side when their favourites lost which is unfortunate. I hope the skaters have more reasoning power to think through their strengths and weaknesses, the marking system and work on improving themselves. Patrick worked on his quads and only started winning then. He did not medal at the last Olympics. Perhaps if you are right that his federation lobbied for his win, then they should have done so from the very beginning. It shows they are not that effective as you think so, aren't they?

I guess it seems hard to believe, but my main interest is in encouraging a more reliable judging system, but then of course, if you're a Patrick-fan, that's all nitpick thinking because the present system is just fine. Your argument that Canadian federation did not lobby for Patrick because he did not win Vancouver is not convincing to me because it could be that they started lobbying for him after the Olympics. And when I saw accusation of the Russian Federation lobbying for Gachinski during Worlds, I thought there might be something in that. And I thought there was something in the accusation that American Federation lobbied on behalf of Lysacek as well. All of these conjectures did have an impact on my personal dis/inclination to support them as a fan.

I find it believable that Patrick gets lots of Federation support because I remember reading on this board that Patrick gave an interview where he said he didn't need a quad (before the point increase occurred) because his Federation supported him or something along that line. I don't see his victories where he didn't fall as a consequence of Federation lobby. I think it was at Russian Cup that he fell three times and it didn't affect his PCS and I saw that as a product of Federation lobby.

Please remember that I was writing about the perception I formulated regarding Patrick to talk about the impact of what is written in these boards on skater's marketability and/or figure skating world's popularity.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 16, 2009
I wonder where this thread is going. But I can at least say that Dai beats Chan in terms of marketability and he has already made a tons of money by endorsement.
As Kurt always says, Dai is not a skater, but he is a rock star in Japan. His injury and comeback from it pushed him into a hero status rather than a sports figure, even though he lost quads.

I still believe that Dai can catch up with Chan, if he can land quads and, this is a big AND if judges starts to appropriately judge artistic aspect of this sports. I really do not understand why they behave that they do not know anything about artistry at all these days in judging man's skating. I was totally shocked to see that Patrick won in Fs over near perfect Dai at GPF.

Dai's team believes that quads will be back, considering that his triples and 3a became much better after the bolt was removed and according to Utako-sensei, it is a matter of time,since Dai had reliable quads in the past.

In the nutshell, Dai needs two things, quads and fair judging. I believe quads will be easier to attain than the latter. The latter maybe a work of Japanese Skating Federation, not anybody else's.

I do agree that what Daisuke has is so extraordinary that there ought to be a way to reward that aspect of skating more lavishly. I hope his quads return dependably, but he's already amazing to watch, and if he comes in second rather than first, I'll still be thrilled. I'm just happy I get to see him at his best, and that he keeps improving. That was supposed to be a career-ending injury. Thank goodness it wasn't, and one of the things that makes Dai so appealing is that he didn't make his comeback out of sheer luck. Can you imagine the hard work he put in? No wonder he's a rock star in Japan.
 

Bluebonnet

Record Breaker
Joined
Aug 18, 2010
I was totally shocked to see that Patrick won in Fs over near perfect Dai at GPF.

Just want to point out that this near perfect Dai had only BV of 78.79, but Patrick had BV of 83.75. Almost 5 points higher than Daisuke's. That was more than a 3Lz with a fall.

I don't need a poll to know that Daisuke is hot!

Not to me. Daisuke is too flamboyant to be hot and sexy to me. See how different people's perspectives are?:)

I don't need CoP to tell me that Dai is an artist on the ice like no one else.

CoP doesn't tell you and has not been intending to tell you who is the best artist.;)
 
Last edited:

skatinginbc

Medalist
Joined
Aug 26, 2010
Just want to point out that this near perfect Dai had only BV of 78.79, but Patrick had BV of 83.75. Almost 5 points higher than Daisuke's.
Dai received positive GOEs in every element except 4T. Patrick had negative GOEs in three elements (4T, 4T2T, 3Lz), including a fall. Dai had clearly better execution than Chan that day, but the scoring system is designed as such that unless the start value is comparable, "they may compete, but they cannot win." The emphasis on the difficulty level is disproportionally huge against the quality (execution) and artistry aspects of skating.
 

hurrah

Medalist
Joined
Aug 8, 2009
Dai received positive GOEs in every element except 4T. Patrick had negative GOEs in three elements (4T, 4T2T, 3Lz), including a fall. Dai had clearly better execution than Chan that day, but the scoring system is designed as such that unless the start value is comparable, "they may compete, but they cannot win." The emphasis on the difficulty level is disproportionally huge against the quality (execution) and artistry aspects of skating.

Really!? When did CoP begin to privilege difficulty before quality? After changes made post-Vancouver? Is this rule definitely applicable to all skaters or only to some skaters?
 
Last edited:

ImaginaryPogue

Record Breaker
Joined
Jun 3, 2009
hurrah - YES. The changes made post-Vancouver diminished the GOE lost on flawed high level elements and increased the base value. It is applicable to all skaters.
 

Bluebonnet

Record Breaker
Joined
Aug 18, 2010
I find it believable that Patrick gets lots of Federation support because I remember reading on this board that Patrick gave an interview where he said he didn't need a quad (before the point increase occurred) because his Federation supported him or something along that line.

Where was it? This is, to say it mildly, untrue and misleading.

I think it was at Russian Cup that he fell three times and it didn't affect his PCS and I saw that as a product of Federation lobby.

So Daisuke's three falls in his LP at Japan Nationals which didn't affect his PCS could be seen as the product of his coach and his team lobbying, or his federation lobbying for him over other Japanese skaters?;)
 

ImaginaryPogue

Record Breaker
Joined
Jun 3, 2009
I guess it seems hard to believe, but my main interest is in encouraging a more reliable judging system, but then of course, if you're a Patrick-fan, that's all nitpick thinking because the present system is just fine. Your argument that Canadian federation did not lobby for Patrick because he did not win Vancouver is not convincing to me because it could be that they started lobbying for him after the Olympics. And when I saw accusation of the Russian Federation lobbying for Gachinski during Worlds, I thought there might be something in that. And I thought there was something in the accusation that American Federation lobbied on behalf of Lysacek as well. All of these conjectures did have an impact on my personal dis/inclination to support them as a fan.

I find it believable that Patrick gets lots of Federation support because I remember reading on this board that Patrick gave an interview where he said he didn't need a quad (before the point increase occurred) because his Federation supported him or something along that line. I don't see his victories where he didn't fall as a consequence of Federation lobby. I think it was at Russian Cup that he fell three times and it didn't affect his PCS and I saw that as a product of Federation lobby.

Please remember that I was writing about the perception I formulated regarding Patrick to talk about the impact of what is written in these boards on skater's marketability and/or figure skating world's popularity.

If you could find a quote, that would be great. He did say he didn't need a quad to win, which was true (Lysacek and Buttle made it true), and he certainly said some cringeworthy stuff leading up to the Olympics, but can you find an article where he specifically mentions he didn't need a quad (before the point increase occured - aka, pre Vanocuver) because of federation support.

Out of curiousity, when Abbott falls twice and it doesn't affect his PCS, do you also see that as the product of Federation lobbying? Or if Oda? Or Denis Ten?
 

hurrah

Medalist
Joined
Aug 8, 2009
Thanks for the reply. I knew about the changes but I thought they were pretty fair, and I hardly thought they indicated that the system now privileged difficulty over quality. I mean, there's so much danger of under-rotation on difficult jumps still that it seems still pretty unrewarding to do them. Look at Mao's triple-axel. If she under-rotates, the base value goes down to 6.0 and there's always some unnecessarily harsh minus GOEs, so her under-rotated triple-axel is still barely more than a double-axel.
 

ImaginaryPogue

Record Breaker
Joined
Jun 3, 2009
Thanks for the reply. I knew about the changes but I thought they were pretty fair, and I hardly thought they indicated that the system now privileged difficulty over quality. I mean, there's so much danger of under-rotation on difficult jumps still that it seems still pretty unrewarding to do them. Look at Mao's triple-axel. If she under-rotates, the base value goes down to 6.0 and there's always some unnecessarily harsh minus GOEs, so her under-rotated triple-axel is still barely more than a double-axel.

Right, but look at this for an example

4T: 10.3 is the BV (used to be 9.8). A fall is -3 (used to be -4.8). And then the -1 GOE. So now, a fall on a quad contributes 7.3 points (6.3 w/ the fall deduction) whereas before is contributed 5.0 points (4.0 w/ the fall deduction). For comparison, a solid but unspectacular triple lutz gives you a BV of 6.0 points.

It's true that under-rotating jumps carries a significant penalty still, but even that's been negated. Dai scored 0.0 points on his quad in Vancouver (UR + fall + -GOE), In Colorado, he scored 3.2 (UR + fall + -GOE).

Additionally, they changed the wording of the GOE bullets, making it easier to get positive GOEs for elements that don't look like they deserve it.
 

Bluebonnet

Record Breaker
Joined
Aug 18, 2010
If you could find a quote, that would be great. He did say he didn't need a quad to win, which was true (Lysacek and Buttle made it true), and he certainly said some cringeworthy stuff leading up to the Olympics, but can you find an article where he specifically mentions he didn't need a quad (before the point increase occured - aka, pre Vanocuver) because of federation support.

hurrah can't find it because Patrick has never said that!
 

skatinginbc

Medalist
Joined
Aug 26, 2010
Really!? When did CoP begin to privilege difficulty before quality? After changes made post-Vancouver? Is this rule definitely applicable to all skaters or only to some skaters?
In diving, the total score for each element is the execution score multiplied by the degree of difficulty. So in theory, one who receives the lowest score 0 for execution would have a zero score for that element.
In figure skating, one can receive the worst execution score possible (all maximum negative GOEs) and yet still receives part of the base mark. That says something funny about CoP, doesn't it? In appearance, it seems to reward both difficulty and quality, but when you look deep into it, you shall see it is the difficulty level that matters the most.
 
Last edited:

Bluebonnet

Record Breaker
Joined
Aug 18, 2010
In diving, the total score for each element is the execution score multiplied by the degree of difficulty. So in theory, one who receives the lowest score 0 for execution would have a zero score for that element.

It'll be funny to receive 0 on execution unless the diver is standing there and not doing any movement.

In figure skating, one can receive the worst execution score possible (all maximum negative GOEs) and yet still receives part of the base mark. That says something funny about CoP, doesn't it? In appearance, it seems to reward both difficulty and quality, but when you look deep into it, you shall see it is the difficulty level that matters the most.

The same as in diving. If the skater didn't do that movement, he/she won't receive the difficulty value on it. It'll be 0.

If there is any down grading, under rotation, or edge call, the base value will also be affected and reduced. What's your point? Shouldn't difficulty level matter the most? Should quad jumps values be more closer to triple jumps values? We've done it and been there already, specifically between 2008 - 2010.;)
 
Last edited:

skatinginbc

Medalist
Joined
Aug 26, 2010
It'll be funny to receive 0 on execution unless the diver is standing there and not doing any movement.
In diving, the execution is scored on a 10-point scale based on Approach, Flight, and Entry
0: Failed
½ - 2: Insufficient
2 ½ – 4 ½: Not good
5 – 6 ½ : Satisfactory
7- 8: Good
8 ½ - 9 ½: Exceptional
10: Perfect
Here is an example of a failed dive: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zrDmkQ0l1Q
 

Bluebonnet

Record Breaker
Joined
Aug 18, 2010
...but the scoring system is designed as such that unless the start value is comparable, "they may compete, but they cannot win."

It's supposed to be like this. Otherwise, an all triple skater would easily outskate a quad skater. A double jump skater would easily outskate a triple jump skater, and so on...
 

hurrah

Medalist
Joined
Aug 8, 2009
If you could find a quote, that would be great. He did say he didn't need a quad to win, which was true (Lysacek and Buttle made it true), and he certainly said some cringeworthy stuff leading up to the Olympics, but can you find an article where he specifically mentions he didn't need a quad (before the point increase occured - aka, pre Vanocuver) because of federation support.

He didn't say that? Well, my recollection is very vague, but I thought I should make an attempt to remember, so I did a quick google search. I came up with a link to an article that no longer is available:

http://www.metronews.ca/vancouver/s...-quickly-rises-to-top-of-men-s-figure-skating

I don't remember what the article said exactly but it was an article where Kurt Browning and Lori Nichol are lavishing praising him, and then I think it may be that some posters on the board were annoyed saying that the Canadian Skating Federation was overselling him. Patrick did say that the quad was unnecessary so that might have gotten tied in my impression as Patrick saying that he didn't need a quad because his federation was supporting him. In my memory, it's mixed with some threads about Patrick's relationship with Elvis Stojko as well. Didn't he call him an 'old man' or a 'has been' or something like that? Or was that Plushenko?

Out of curiousity, when Abbott falls twice and it doesn't affect his PCS, do you also see that as the product of Federation lobbying? Or if Oda? Or Denis Ten?

So are you saying that Abbot, Oda and Denis Ten have done performances where they had two falls and there was no difference in PCS they got for a performance they did without falls on previous occasions, and that they beat out a skater of relatively similar calibre who skated with no falls at the competition and won?
 
Last edited:

Boeing787

On the Ice
Joined
Oct 21, 2011
In my memory, it's mixed with some threads about Patrick's relationship with Elvis Stojko as well. Didn't he call him an 'old man' or a 'has been' or something like that? Or was that Plushenko?

Evidently you don't have a good memory.
 
Top