Osmond vs. Kim in PCS, a huge gap? | Golden Skate

Osmond vs. Kim in PCS, a huge gap?

wallylutz

Medalist
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
In the Canadian Championships sub-forum, a member had the following comment :

Yuna has quite a bit more advantage than only her 3Lz+3T against Kaetlyn, especially in the free skate. Kaetlyn's LP has no 3/3, repeats only the Flip and the Toe, whereas Yuna repeats the Lutz and Salchow. And of course there's a huge PCS gap, though Worlds being in Canada may narrow it a little bit. Kaetlyn also has a mild Flutz. Interestingly, both of them omit the 3Loop.

The bold & underlining was done by me. It got me thinking. Why "of course there's a huge PCS gap"? My reading of the member's post and tone is that because it's Yu Na, the Olympic Champion, since Krislite did not give any specific reasons. In other words, the "of course" comes from reputation as opposed to actual skating. Very often, fans criticized judges for seemingly giving marks based on reputation. What I have noticed is that fans do the same thing, if not far more often than judges. The same member kindly posted a link to Yu Na's clean FS at the most recent Korean Nationals here :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O59GUx8iJMI

After watching it, I was very surprised how simplistic the choreography is compared to many of Yu Na's past work. So I posted my comments here and got a rebuttal, which I like to examine and solicit others' take on :

http://www.goldenskate.com/forum/showthread.php?39724-Sr-Ladies-SP&p=699377&viewfull=1#post699377


In my post, I have three main points: 1) Yu Na lacked difficult transitions between her elements. 2) Her choreography is overly simple and not challenging enough for what she is capable of 3) Her Interpretation stayed at the same level throughout the performance and failed accentuate the highs and lows of her chosen music

In response, member jaylee, had the following rebuttals for each of the above 3 points so I am going to fact check them for discussion purpose:

1) Yu Na lacked difficult transitions between her elements

Rebuttal :
She has steps preceding the 3F, back spiral preceding her second lutz (and a mini-spread eagle immediately exiting out of it), a spread eagle into the 2A combo, Ina Bauer into the final 2A. Her solo 3S exits directly into her footwork, which is important because transitions are not just about difficult entrances but about not having lots of set-up in between elements. Most skaters would not set up a jump right before their footwork. Along those lines, the choreographed spiral sequence into the Ina Bauer into the 2A is impressive for seamlessly linking a series of elements.

1A) "She has steps preceding the 3F"

Really? What steps? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O59GUx8iJMI#t=0m34s

1b) "back spiral preceding her second lutz (and a mini-spread eagle immediately exiting out of it)"

Back spiral? Is this the back spiral referenced? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O59GUx8iJMI#t=2m04s If so, that ain't a spiral as the free leg never went above the hip and the position was not maintained for even half a second. In a spiral, it is very important the tension of the position be maintained in the upper body as well but there was no such tension in that "split second spiral", too short, no tension and free leg below the hip. Mini-spread eagle : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O59GUx8iJMI#t=2m11s That is not a spread eagle, not even by adding the qualification that it is a "mini". By definition, a spread eagle needs to be on either inside or outside edge with clear gliding movement. The video clip showed the edge is flat in an almost standing-still position - it is simply standing on two foot.

1c) "a spread eagle into the 2A combo" Agreed on this one, there is a SE preceding this element : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O59GUx8iJMI#t=2m26s

1d) "Ina Bauer into the final 2A" Agreed on this one, there is a IB preceding this element : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O59GUx8iJMI#t=3m39s

1e) "Her solo 3S exits directly into her footwork" This is factually correct but the subsequent interpretation of its value is incorrect. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O59GUx8iJMI#t=1m16s Going into a step sequence upon exiting a jump does not add value to the transition of the program given that this component criteria specifically evaluates the linkage between two elements. There is no linkage between the two elements to speak of here. I think the confusion here is the GOE bullet points on jumps in which Communication 1724 p. 10 allows difficult steps or elements immediately preceding a jump (e.g. performing a jump upon existing a spin) to be counted as one of the feature bullet point. Even then, the rules called for the steps or spins to be preceding the jump, not after the jump. There would be no positive GOE feature added to this jump either unless the order of the elements were reversed - the jump was executed immediately upon exiting the step sequence.

Of the 7 jumping passes, I counted only 2 cases of moves in the field preceding the jump / jump combo elements. To see if I was missing anything, I expand my evaluation to include the 3 spins in the program to see if more of them are being preceded with steps or moves in the field :

Spin 1 : FCCoSp : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O59GUx8iJMI#t=0m43s No, there was no transition into the spin at all.
Spin 2 : LSp : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O59GUx8iJMI#t=2m51s No, there was no transition into the spin at all or out of it.
Spin 3: CCoSp : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O59GUx8iJMI#t=3m44s No, there was no transition into the spin at all.

Conclusion : There is a serious lack of in-between skating in this program. Of the 10 jump and spin elements, only two of which are shown to be preceded with connecting steps and/or moves in the field. The video clips above were cut from the clip provided by Krislite demonstrate that the vast majority of Kim's elements were either executed one immediately after the other or were simply preceded by stroking. Hence, I gave that a 6.5 for TR, which I think is fair. Plushenko and Joubert have had very similar issues and despite their reputation, they should not be gifted on the TR marks neither should Kim.

As for points 2) and 3) regarding her choreography and interpretation, I am simply going to open it up for people to comment and tell us what they think. My view is that the choreography is a little too simple compared to her past work and the facial expression appeared to stay the same level throughout.

Do you feel Kim has a huge PCS advantage over Osmond based on their respective national long program performance? Since Krislite did not specify what "huge PCS gap" is, I am going to assume by huge, it is meant the difference would be at least 10+ points of difference in the overall PCS. Do you feel that is the case, based on their respective most recent performance at their nationals and why?
 

let`s talk

Match Penalty
Joined
Sep 10, 2009
OMG! Bashing Yuna thread! :rofl: Must be worthy waiting... :popcorn:



Some people have so much free time... :bang:

Alas... :cry:
 

Moment

Final Flight
Joined
Jan 18, 2013
The choreography and transitions do not look simple to me at all. It's just that she does them so quickly. The half-spiral she does before a 3Lz lasts about less than a second.
 

aftertherain

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 15, 2010
OMG! Bashing Yuna thread! :rofl: Must be worthy waiting... :popcorn:

I disagree. It's not bashing. Wallylutz makes a fair point and has clearly outlined + either agreed or disagreed with the points made. I'm actually interested in other posters' rebuttals or agreements.
 

Nadia01

Final Flight
Joined
Nov 10, 2009
Wallylutz -- yes, you're right. Everything Yuna does is amateurish and juniorish, and oh-my-gosh, why cant' judges see how easy EVERYTHING SHE DOES is? How in the world does she manage to earn any points? Are judges simply too blind to see that she does NOTHING worth giving points to? She should get ZERO on every element for TES and ZERO for PCS as well for doing such an amateurish and simplistic program that even a novice girl can do with her eyes closed.

The fact that Yuna gets high scores is the definitive proof that the judges are corrupt, and competitions are rigged from the very beginning.
 
Last edited:

Mrs. P

Uno, Dos, twizzle!
Record Breaker
Joined
Dec 27, 2009
For me, it's tough to say how Yuna who came back just a month ago would do vs. a skater who has several months to refine her programs. So I'm not going to.

But, I do think that Yuna at her peak (and I don't believe she's there yet) does have an edge in PCS over Kaetlyn. Kaetlyn has grown leaps and bounds this season, but I still think she lacks the nuances/refinement that a polished Yuna program has.
 

Nadia01

Final Flight
Joined
Nov 10, 2009
What performances are we supposed to be comparing here? Can someone give a link to Osmond's LP at Canadian Nationals, please?

For now, here is Osmond's LP at Skate Canada

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Njge-_4uiVQ

Kaetlyn wins points for spunk and enthusiasm. Wallylutz does have a point that we have not seen Yu-na put her heart and soul into her performance yet. Still, based on what we have seen this season so far, Yu-na has to be the regarded as the front runner going into worlds.


You can see Osmond's LP from Nats here

http://video.tsn.ca/?dl=figure_skating/latest/1/0/847437/clip/258

I do not believe it's geo-restricted, so you should be able to watch it fine, even if you're not in Canada. I was able to, and I'm not in NA.

And her Nats protocols

http://results.skatecanada.ca/2012-2013/2013CDNS.cfm?strLang=E
 
Last edited:

wallylutz

Medalist
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
What performances are we supposed to be comparing here? Can someone give a link to Osmond's LP at Canadian Nationals, please?

For now, here is Osmond's LP at Skate Canada

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Njge-_4uiVQ

Kaetlyn wins points for spunk and enthusiasm. Wallylutz does have a point that we have not seen Yu-na put her heart and soul into her performance yet. Still, based on what we have seen this season so far, Yu-na has to be the regarded as the front runner going into worlds.

Sorry Mathman, I forgot to provide the link : Kaetlyn Osmond - FP

If you have trouble accessing the first link, please use this one instead although this youtube link is from the Challenge as opposed the actual National Championship : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xgObMFqkWU

There is no doubt Yu Na is the frontrunner going into the Worlds but that's beside the point of this thread. The question here is does Yu Na enjoy a huge PCS advantage, defined as equal or greater than 10 points, over Osmond at this point based on their most recent performance?
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
^ Thank you both. (Unfortunately I deleted my post to go search the Canadian's folder to see if it had been posted. Oh well. :) )

Very nice.

Edited to add The Challenge performance was super. Technical mistake do distract from the overall effect of the program.. (Plus, the video from Nationals was so high def that my computer couldn't download it fast enough to keep up.)

I do not have the expertise to judge skating skills and transitions, but the performance itself held my interest throughout.
 
Last edited:

pangtongfan

Match Penalty
Joined
Jun 16, 2010
Yes, and anyone who doubts for a moment there will be one is delusional and out to lunch. End of thread, next topic please.
 

YunaBliss

On the Ice
Joined
May 11, 2010
Is this a joke? This is like comparing a NBA rookie [insert your favorite] to LeBron James... :p

Based on her recent performances, Osmond appears to be a good, promising skater with a lot talent (Sochi will be exciting!), but as of now, she can't compare to Yuna... who is one of the greatest female skaters of any generation. I personally find Osmond's spunk and exaggerated smiles (and those silly body shakes in her SP) rather shallow and juniorish, and while preferring more "enthused" outburst of emotion over more subtle and nuanced approach to skating may be a matter of personal taste, no one yet can match the fluidity and effortlessness with which Yuna performs her programs, especially her jumps. This is where Yuna beats every other skater hands down.
 

Krislite

Medalist
Joined
Sep 22, 2010
In the Canadian Championships sub-forum, a member had the following comment :

The bold & underlining was done by me. It got me thinking. Why "of course there's a huge PCS gap"? My reading of the member's post and tone is that because it's Yu Na, the Olympic Champion, since Krislite did not give any specific reasons. In other words, the "of course" comes from reputation as opposed to actual skating. Very often, fans criticized judges for seemingly giving marks based on reputation. What I have noticed is that fans do the same thing, if not far more often than judges. The same member kindly posted a link to Yu Na's clean FS at the most recent Korean Nationals here :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O59GUx8iJMI

My claim that Osmond would not get the same PCS at Worlds against the likes of Yuna is simply based on what ISU judges have given these respective skaters in previous recent competitions (excluding Nationals). For Yuna the most recent case is NRW Trophy, where she averaged in the upper 8's despite her mistakes in the LP, while Kaetlyn averaged a 7 at Nebelhorn Trophy in her free skate. If you insist that Canadian nationals scores is not in any way inflated relative to international competitions, that's your prerogative.

I'm not basing this on reputation, but on the reasonable assumption that judges tend to be consistent and conservative with their PCS scores on skaters over several competitions, rarely varying them by much over course of a season. So I would be shocked if Osmond scored within 8 to 9 at Worlds even if she is clean. Skating skills, interpretation and choreography do not vary significantly in such a short period of time. It's the GOE's that vary more based on actual execution.

After watching it, I was very surprised how simplistic the choreography is compared to many of Yu Na's past work. So I posted my comments here and got a rebuttal, which I like to examine and solicit others' take on :

http://www.goldenskate.com/forum/showthread.php?39724-Sr-Ladies-SP&p=699377&viewfull=1#post699377


In my post, I have three main points: 1) Yu Na lacked difficult transitions between her elements. 2) Her choreography is overly simple and not challenging enough for what she is capable of 3) Her Interpretation stayed at the same level throughout the performance and failed accentuate the highs and lows of her chosen music

In response, member jaylee, had the following rebuttals for each of the above 3 points so I am going to fact check them for discussion purpose:

1) Yu Na lacked difficult transitions between her elements

Rebuttal :

1A) "She has steps preceding the 3F"

Really? What steps? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O59GUx8iJMI#t=0m34s

1b) "back spiral preceding her second lutz (and a mini-spread eagle immediately exiting out of it)"

Back spiral? Is this the back spiral referenced? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O59GUx8iJMI#t=2m04s If so, that ain't a spiral as the free leg never went above the hip and the position was not maintained for even half a second. In a spiral, it is very important the tension of the position be maintained in the upper body as well but there was no such tension in that "split second spiral", too short, no tension and free leg below the hip. Mini-spread eagle : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O59GUx8iJMI#t=2m11s That is not a spread eagle, not even by adding the qualification that it is a "mini". By definition, a spread eagle needs to be on either inside or outside edge with clear gliding movement. The video clip showed the edge is flat in an almost standing-still position - it is simply standing on two foot.

1c) "a spread eagle into the 2A combo" Agreed on this one, there is a SE preceding this element : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O59GUx8iJMI#t=2m26s

1d) "Ina Bauer into the final 2A" Agreed on this one, there is a IB preceding this element : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O59GUx8iJMI#t=3m39s

1e) "Her solo 3S exits directly into her footwork" This is factually correct but the subsequent interpretation of its value is incorrect. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O59GUx8iJMI#t=1m16s Going into a step sequence upon exiting a jump does not add value to the transition of the program given that this component criteria specifically evaluates the linkage between two elements. There is no linkage between the two elements to speak of here. I think the confusion here is the GOE bullet points on jumps in which Communication 1724 p. 10 allows difficult steps or elements immediately preceding a jump (e.g. performing a jump upon existing a spin) to be counted as one of the feature bullet point. Even then, the rules called for the steps or spins to be preceding the jump, not after the jump. There would be no positive GOE feature added to this jump either unless the order of the elements were reversed - the jump was executed immediately upon exiting the step sequence.

Of the 7 jumping passes, I counted only 2 cases of moves in the field preceding the jump / jump combo elements. To see if I was missing anything, I expand my evaluation to include the 3 spins in the program to see if more of them are being preceded with steps or moves in the field :

Spin 1 : FCCoSp : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O59GUx8iJMI#t=0m43s No, there was no transition into the spin at all.
Spin 2 : LSp : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O59GUx8iJMI#t=2m51s No, there was no transition into the spin at all or out of it.
Spin 3: CCoSp : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O59GUx8iJMI#t=3m44s No, there was no transition into the spin at all.

Conclusion : There is a serious lack of in-between skating in this program. Of the 10 jump and spin elements, only two of which are shown to be preceded with connecting steps and/or moves in the field. The video clips above were cut from the clip provided by Krislite demonstrate that the vast majority of Kim's elements were either executed one immediately after the other or were simply preceded by stroking. Hence, I gave that a 6.5 for TR, which I think is fair. Plushenko and Joubert have had very similar issues and despite their reputation, they should not be gifted on the TR marks neither should Kim.

Why wouldn't her moves before the 3Flip count as transition? They are steps; now as far as difficulty that's debatable, but how anyone would say they don't count as transitions I don't understand. The same with the move before the 3Lutz, it may not technically be a spiral, but it's still a transition; in particular it at least counts as a body-movement transition.

As for points 2) and 3) regarding her choreography and interpretation, I am simply going to open it up for people to comment and tell us what they think. My view is that the choreography is a little too simple compared to her past work and the facial expression appeared to stay the same level throughout.

Do you feel Kim has a huge PCS advantage over Osmond based on their respective national long program performance? Since Krislite did not specify what "huge PCS gap" is, I am going to assume by huge, it is meant the difference would be at least 10+ points of difference in the overall PCS. Do you feel that is the case, based on their respective most recent performance at their nationals and why?

I believe that the "huge gap" is how it will turn out before the international judging panel. If we were to take their two LP's at their nationals and assume they were in the same ISU competition, I would have no doubt Yuna would lead Kaetlyn in PCS by a huge margin, and not just because of Kaetlyn's errors in the LP.

Let's not conflate two things that I said in my previous aforementioned post. I said Osmond is not getting PCS in the range of 8 to 9.5 at Worlds and that there's a "huge" gap between her and Yuna. I certainly didn't claim that you or other judges/forum members would agree with this. I stand by my word: I highly doubt that Kostner, Asada et al, none of whom average the kind of PCS Osmond got at Canadian nationals, would be scored below Osmond in PCS, and that Osmond would get PCS scores like Yuna. And I'm not just saying this because of their reputation. They have superior skating skills and musical interpretation that will shine through even with errors. I'm pretty confident that at Worlds Osmond will not equal or surpass them in PCS even if she is clean.
 
Last edited:

wallylutz

Medalist
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Is this a joke? This is like comparing a NBA rookie [insert your favorite] to LeBron James... :p

I guess you forgot there is a rookie by the name of Jeremy Lin. :p

Based on her recent performances, Osmond appears to be a good, promising skater with a lot talent (Sochi will be exciting!), but as of now, she can't compare to Yuna... who is one of the greatest female skaters of any generation. I personally find Osmond's spunk and exaggerated smiles (and those silly body shakes in her SP) rather shallow and juniorish, and while preferring more "enthused" outburst of emotion over more subtle and nuanced approach to skating may be a matter of personal taste, no one yet can match the fluidity and effortlessness with which Yuna performs her programs, especially her jumps. This is where Yuna beats every other skater hands down.

Can you please elaborate a little more your points? Because what you seem to suggest is Yu Na is by far better because of her reputation and what does execution of jumps has to do with PCS except the cleaniness criterion?
 

OS

Sedated by Modonium
Record Breaker
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Impartial ISU Judge vs Pro Canada Politician, a huge gap?

This thread is obviously more about pulling up Kaetlyn's PCS through a 'debate' to save her the trouble of earning them 'on ice' over a course of a career of proven results - like everybody else.

To engage in a debate with a headstrong rogue English professor, he'd able to win the argument on why Shakespeare is no more relevant than the popularity of Dan Browns of today. Problem is he can't change history. Which has to be earned over a body of work, factually proven, written about, learnt, acknowledged, evolved not relative to his perspective but to how the rest of the world perceives them.

Does he have the right to challenge these conventions? Absolutely. However I do question how an ISU judge who has continues to demonstrate such strong national biases on internet figure skating forums over prolong periods are able mark competitions with complete impartial judgement. Perhaps he should start to address the imbalance a little closer to home, on why the Canadian Nationals's results continues to have a notorious reputation of inflation. On why so many disagree with many of the marks historically, and whether he think this Carmen FS performance was infact marked correctly.

We can then compare his expertise of this FS to the one at worlds in 2 months, to see how relevant his expertise really is.
 

little_meatball

Rinkside
Joined
Jan 21, 2013
1A) "She has steps preceding the 3F"

Really? What steps? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O59GUx8iJMI#t=0m34s

I counted at least 3 steps: LBO to RFI Choctaw to LBO Choctaw, a couple of strokes, and then another Choctaw (RBO to LFI), then 3turn into 3F. I don't understand why you think there are no steps.

1b) "back spiral preceding her second lutz (and a mini-spread eagle immediately exiting out of it)"

Back spiral? Is this the back spiral referenced? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O59GUx8iJMI#t=2m04s If so, that ain't a spiral as the free leg never went above the hip and the position was not maintained for even half a second. In a spiral, it is very important the tension of the position be maintained in the upper body as well but there was no such tension in that "split second spiral", too short, no tension and free leg below the hip. Mini-spread eagle : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O59GUx8iJMI#t=2m11s That is not a spread eagle, not even by adding the qualification that it is a "mini". By definition, a spread eagle needs to be on either inside or outside edge with clear gliding movement. The video clip showed the edge is flat in an almost standing-still position - it is simply standing on two foot.

I agree that the movement before the jump entry does not count as a back spiral, but it's not stroking or gliding, either. Also immediately exiting the jump is a RBO loop (not loop jump) --- one could argue about its quality but it is not doubt choreographically intended to be a loop. I'm not jaylee, so I don't know what she/he referred to as "mini-SE."

1e) "Her solo 3S exits directly into her footwork" This is factually correct but the subsequent interpretation of its value is incorrect. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O59GUx8iJMI#t=1m16s Going into a step sequence upon exiting a jump does not add value to the transition of the program given that this component criteria specifically evaluates the linkage between two elements. There is no linkage between the two elements to speak of here.

Either I have misunderstood you here or you have misunderstood the criteria for Transitions component. It is supposed to evaluate the intricacy and difficulty of anything about connecting moves. I am not a judge but I have been told by at least one judge that it is more difficult to go from a jump landing to a spin or step sequence with no stroking or crossovers or just obvious rest. Most skaters lose speed upon landing a jump, but starting the next technical element, be it a spin or a step seq, you need some momentum to get started. The lack of any momentum generating moves (simple stroking or crossovers) signifies higher technical abilities. Therefore indeed if a skater CAN go from a jump landing to a spin/steps without push push push she would be rewarded for TR difficulty.

Do you feel Kim has a huge PCS advantage over Osmond based on their respective national long program performance? Since Krislite did not specify what "huge PCS gap" is, I am going to assume by huge, it is meant the difference would be at least 10+ points of difference in the overall PCS. Do you feel that is the case, based on their respective most recent performance at their nationals and why?

PCS consists of 4 components beyond transitions. Perhaps the most crucial one is skating skills, which cannot be accurately and reliably assessed without seeing a performance live. I suggest caution when making armchair but definitive judgment about PCS from TV impression.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

jaylee

Medalist
Joined
Feb 21, 2010
After watching it, I was very surprised how simplistic the choreography is compared to many of Yu Na's past work. So I posted my comments here and got a rebuttal, which I like to examine and solicit others' take on :

Les Mis is definitely not as simple, choreographically or in terms of transitions, as Miss Saigon or Scheherazade, both of which served Yu-Na respectably to multiple wins in each of those seasons, including the world title in 2009. It's simpler than Gershwin (which was very complex) and Homage to Korea, which the judges didn't reward or appreciate anyway.

http://www.goldenskate.com/forum/showthread.php?39724-Sr-Ladies-SP&p=699377&viewfull=1#post699377

In my post, I have three main points: 1) Yu Na lacked difficult transitions between her elements. 2) Her choreography is overly simple and not challenging enough for what she is capable of 3) Her Interpretation stayed at the same level throughout the performance and failed accentuate the highs and lows of her chosen music

In response, member jaylee, had the following rebuttals for each of the above 3 points so I am going to fact check them for discussion purpose:

1) Yu Na lacked difficult transitions between her elements

Rebuttal :

1A) "She has steps preceding the 3F"

Really? What steps? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O59GUx8iJMI#t=0m34s

She is not just stroking into her 3F.

1b) "back spiral preceding her second lutz (and a mini-spread eagle immediately exiting out of it)"

Back spiral? Is this the back spiral referenced? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O59GUx8iJMI#t=2m04s If so, that ain't a spiral as the free leg never went above the hip and the position was not maintained for even half a second. In a spiral, it is very important the tension of the position be maintained in the upper body as well but there was no such tension in that "split second spiral", too short, no tension and free leg below the hip. Mini-spread eagle : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O59GUx8iJMI#t=2m11s That is not a spread eagle, not even by adding the qualification that it is a "mini". By definition, a spread eagle needs to be on either inside or outside edge with clear gliding movement. The video clip showed the edge is flat in an almost standing-still position - it is simply standing on two foot.

Call it whatever you want, it's a move that counts as a transition. Is it a crossover? No, it's not. She's not the only skater to have used this move as a transition. See a similar one being performed here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=NhXa9JYtwLY#t=108s

As for the spread eagle, well, she's not just standing on two feet, they are pointed outwards. She does need to get on more of an edge to make it a true spread eagle, I'll give you that, but she is gliding.

1c) "a spread eagle into the 2A combo" Agreed on this one, there is a SE preceding this element : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O59GUx8iJMI#t=2m26s

1d) "Ina Bauer into the final 2A" Agreed on this one, there is a IB preceding this element : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O59GUx8iJMI#t=3m39s

Thank you. You said that the "lack of difficult transitions was impossible to miss," but somehow, you missed these.

By the way, she could have had these moves NOT connect directly to the elements and simply in between, but because she takes off directly from the spread eagle and Ina Bauer, that makes those transitions MORE difficult.

Per this ISU video, which clearly states that an Ina Bauer directly into a double axel is more difficult than a standalone Ina Bauer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=OdYqYD6RsSA#t=155s

Oh, look, who's that skater that they featured? :cool:

1e) "Her solo 3S exits directly into her footwork" This is factually correct but the subsequent interpretation of its value is incorrect. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O59GUx8iJMI#t=1m16s Going into a step sequence upon exiting a jump does not add value to the transition of the program given that this component criteria specifically evaluates the linkage between two elements. There is no linkage between the two elements to speak of here.

Part of having good transitions is not having a lot of crossovers and strokes in between elements. It's about seamless integration of one element into another without stroking. A skater who goes from her salchow and goes directly into footwork should get a better TR score than a skater who lands the salchow, does a few crossovers before beginning her footwork sequence.

I think the confusion here is the GOE bullet points on jumps in which Communication 1724 p. 10 allows difficult steps or elements immediately preceding a jump (e.g. performing a jump upon existing a spin) to be counted as one of the feature bullet point. Even then, the rules called for the steps or spins to be preceding the jump, not after the jump. There would be no positive GOE feature added to this jump either unless the order of the elements were reversed - the jump was executed immediately upon exiting the step sequence.

I never argued that the 3S would get +GOE under the bullet guidelines for following it with the footwork.

Of the 7 jumping passes, I counted only 2 cases of moves in the field preceding the jump / jump combo elements. To see if I was missing anything, I expand my evaluation to include the 3 spins in the program to see if more of them are being preceded with steps or moves in the field :

Spin 1 : FCCoSp : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O59GUx8iJMI#t=0m43s No, there was no transition into the spin at all.
Spin 2 : LSp : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O59GUx8iJMI#t=2m51s No, there was no transition into the spin at all or out of it.
Spin 3: CCoSp : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O59GUx8iJMI#t=3m44s No, there was no transition into the spin at all.

Conclusion : There is a serious lack of in-between skating in this program. Of the 10 jump and spin elements, only two of which are shown to be preceded with connecting steps and/or moves in the field. The video clips above were cut from the clip provided by Krislite demonstrate that the vast majority of Kim's elements were either executed one immediately after the other or were simply preceded by stroking. Hence, I gave that a 6.5 for TR, which I think is fair. Plushenko and Joubert have had very similar issues and despite their reputation, they should not be gifted on the TR marks neither should Kim.

No, there is not. The only transitions you are including in your definition are moves in the fields/difficult entrances that immediately precede the element, and you are only counting them in terms of quantity but not taking into account their difficulty. Yu-Na is NOT just stroking in between elements--she's got SOMETHING preceding her flip and lutz, therefore it's a skating move. I don't care what you call it, it's not nothing.

Transitions are not only about difficulty (and within difficulty they are not only about difficult entrances) and quantity, but also about intricacy and variety. Here's the ISU example on intricacy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=dnXGtSK9hCw#t=14s

Oh, who's that skater again? :p And in one of Yu-Na's weaker programs, to boot.

In her current FS, Yu-Na deserves a lot of credit for the seamless way that her choreographed spiral sequence leads into an Ina Bauer into the 2A, not just for the Ina Bauer itself but how it's all integrated together. Again, each of those elements--the choreographed spiral sequence, Ina Bauer and 2A--could have been standalone elements, but they're not. She deserves credit for that, credit which you're not giving her.

You also need to weigh the difficulty of each transition, which you are not doing. A skater with spread eagles and Ina Bauers in between elements but not connected to a jump should get a lower TR score than a skater who connects them to a jump, which Yu-Na did in this case.

Here's another ISU video on transitions, this time focusing on body movement transitions.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJ7iGKKOGMo

When you're using your whole body, that also counts as part of transitions. And that's what Yu-Na does throughout her program--she is using her whole body. The example that I also cited was also another example of a whole body movement--when the music changes tempo and she looks up, raises one arm and lifts the opposite leg; then raises the other arm and then the other leg, continuing to look up. Is it a move in the field? No. But according to the ISU video above, it's certainly an example of full body transitions. Which you're not crediting her for.

I just think you're picking on the wrong skater for the wrong area. :laugh: Akiko Suzuki's transitions? Legitimate area of weakness. Carolina Kostner? Yes, both in her FS last season and in her FS this season. Mao Asada in 2009-2010? Yup (and to some degree, her transitions are still not a strength, but they're better than before). Yu-Na Kim? Nope.

I wonder that you're picking on Yu-Na instead of Kostner or Asada; it must be because you think she's a bigger threat. Therefore this treatment is kind of flattering in a bizarre but not entirely unexpected way.

In the years leading up to the 2010 Olympics, you heard a lot about Yu-Na's lack of a triple loop and a lot about Joannie Rochette's complete set of 5 triples/attempting 7 (never mind that she never hit them all _cleanly_ in a major important international event), because that was Joannie's advantage versus Yu-Na. Rochette was more of an athlete than an artist, so picking at Yu-Na's PCS was not going to work in that case.

Now you have Kaetlyn Osmond, who at this point is a good jumper but definitely her strength is in her performance ability; she lacks a loop so you can't use that against Yu-na anymore, she does not have a difficult triple/triple, she does not have a true lutz. She hasn't skated a clean FS in a major competition all season long. Osmond does have great transitions though so the first thing to do is go after the top competitor's transitions and try to make it seem like they are worse than they are.

Of course, no one really appreciated Yu-Na's transitions in Gershwin or Homage, but never mind that.

Do you feel Kim has a huge PCS advantage over Osmond based on their respective national long program performance? Since Krislite did not specify what "huge PCS gap" is, I am going to assume by huge, it is meant the difference would be at least 10+ points of difference in the overall PCS. Do you feel that is the case, based on their respective most recent performance at their nationals and why?

Quite frankly, I think this might have been an interesting discussion on its own without your myopic focus on transitions, which at the end of the day are only one component in PCS. I like Osmond and her skating and I think she has a bright future, but stuff like this from her uber supporters is a real turn-off. Let her earn her scores and wins. There's no need to put down the competition.
 

prettykeys

Medalist
Joined
Oct 19, 2009
Do you feel Kim has a huge PCS advantage over Osmond based on their respective national long program performance? Since Krislite did not specify what "huge PCS gap" is, I am going to assume by huge, it is meant the difference would be at least 10+ points of difference in the overall PCS. Do you feel that is the case, based on their respective most recent performance at their nationals and why?
I guess it depends on how the person defines a "huge PCS gap". In my opinion, a realistically expected 5-point PCS gap in the FS is huge. It means that one skater can pretty much fall on a jump one time more than the other and they would be roughly scored the same. That's a fairly large cushion.

Transitions - I agree with you in that Kaetlyn does not have much of a disadvantage in this area. Her transitions are plentiful and well-incorporated into her Carmen routine.

Skating Skills - YuNa. She glides better, with more power and variation in speed.

Choreography - I'd give them a tie

Interpretation - YuNa (IMO). Kaetlyn does have a bit of a cutesy teeny-bopper touch to her Carmen which makes it a little juniorish, although the sass works well in her SP.

P/E - Hmm. This depends on the judges and what they are looking for. I agree that YuNa is still only half-baked compared to her highest potential, but she's still executing her movements quite well. Kaetlyn is a natural, captivating performer but she is still a bit rough here and there. I'd say, thus, YuNa still has somewhat of an edge but it's not a clear-cut one. But, I do think when YuNa executes all her technical elements well (e.g. jumps), this mark is amplified--because she does those so well--so if she's able to go clean, her mark should definitely trump clean Kaetlyn's.

Thus, if they both skate well and fairly clean, YuNa could have something like a 5-point PCS lead over Kaetlyn. Definitely realistic.
 
Last edited:

prettykeys

Medalist
Joined
Oct 19, 2009
BTW - as for the "rookie" comment - never underestimate the newcomers just because they're newcomers! YuNa was once the new kid on the block, too...and she charged outta the gates. ;)

That's one thing I don't like to see when it happens...when someone who is new gets underscored or is underappreciated just because the judges and fans aren't as familiar with them instead of evaluating them based on what they are putting out on the ice. YuNa herself was a victim of this, too. Yeah, I know it happens to most "rookies", but it doesn't make it right.
 
Joined
Mar 11, 2011
How about analyzing every top 10 ladies skater's FS transitions? That'll explain something.

BTW - as for the "rookie" comment - never underestimate the newcomers just because they're newcomers! YuNa was once the new kid on the block, too...and she charged outta the gates. ;)

That's one thing I don't like to see when it happens...when someone who is new gets underscored or is underappreciated just because the judges and fans aren't as familiar with them instead of evaluating them based on what they are putting out on the ice. YuNa herself was a victim of this, too. Yeah, I know it happens to most "rookies", but it doesn't make it right.


Which skaters from strong federations, i.e. Kaetlyn from SC, do not have disadvantage in any way.
 
Last edited:
Top