Skaters who can dominate both in IJS and 6.0.

Bruin714 · May 31, 2013

In the 6.0 era, clean programs meant much more than in the COP era. Kwan definitely has the advantage here. Kim rarely skates a completely clean program, and would hurt her a lot. Kwan beat Slutskaya and Cohen many times because she skated clean. One or two mistakes was enough to lose the title.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Kwan had at least a dozen clean programs while Kim maybe 5 her whole career. I do agree that with the triple lutz-triple toe combo and bigger jumps, Kim has an advantage in terms of the technical mark, even with just 6 triples instead of 7.

Even then, I think a majority of World Championships would look like this.

Kwan: 5.8/5.9
Kim: 5.9/5.8

With a clean performance, Kim might earn a 5.9 and beat a clean Kwan, but again, this would be rare (5.9/5.9). However, with just one error, Kim's scores would likely be reduced by .1 either in the technical mark and/or presentation mark. Either way she loses.

pangtongfan said:
As to some of the earlier comments Kim from Vancouver or London would definitely have a chance, a good one, to beat even the Kwan of Vancouver under 6.0 IMO. Irina Slutskaya at those Worlds managed only 5 clean triples, had a mistake, a sloppy performance that was below her season standards, and relatively weak presentation that is below both Kwan and Kim, and still won 3 judges, and had the higher technical marks. Kim even with 6 triples would get the higher technical marks no problem vs Kwan's 7. While I would agree Kim overall is a more devastating COP skater than 6.0, the judge under 6.0 would actually credit some of her very difficult triple-triples more than COP does. The judges would give huge value to her triple lutz-triple toe and reward it much more highly than a mere triple toe-triple toe and it would more than make up the difference of a triple loop. That is presuming Kim wouldnt even add a triple loop and probably land it if she felt it was important. Kwan when COP was introduced took out her triple loop as well, lol! Add to that Kim's jumps are much bigger and of higher quality, her spins are better, and her footwork are on par, and she generally skates with more speed, and she would easily win the technical mark. Slutskaya's much weaker (relative to Kim's best performance) 2001 Worlds performance even beat Kwan in the technical mark, presumably mostly since the judges felt a triple salchow-triple loop value over a triple toe-triple toe was enough to make up for all the other deficiencies of the performance. As for the presentation mark if Slutskaya was holding her own, Kim would be just fine there too. I actually found Kwan at the 2000 Worlds even better than 2011 but here Slutskaya with only 6 triples attempted, no triple-triple attempt, a big pop open, and one of the most generic Carmens I ever saw, still took marks off a perfect 7 triple, triple-triple, and again had higher technical marks than a skating with more speed and attack than I ever saw her Kwan, so again Kim at her best with her trusty mammoth triple lutz-triple toe combo I dont see being shut of a chance of winning even if she did only 6 triples, lol!

6.0 between Kwan and Kim both at their best and in general (keeping in mind the general consistency level of both and that most times they dont skate their best level despite being two of the most consistent skaters ever) would be very close either way though I agree. However that is the difference, Kwan vs Kim under 6.0 is a very close battle, but Kim at her best vs Kwan at her best under COP would be a blowout and Kwan would lose badly in that scenario. Notice how we are only debating who would win in these hypothetical competitions under 6.0, nobody even dares to propose under COP as it isnt even worth discussing. For Kwan to dominate under COP she would certainly have to avoid people like Kim and Asada at their best, and even Slutskaya at her best as it was already pretty clear their rivalry would have been very different under COP than it was under 6.0 (not that Irina was ever an easy opponent for Michelle even under 6.0). Even Cohen would have defeated Kwan many more times under COP than 6.0, and possibly Arakawa (although not too often only since she was a skater who dropped bombs on the ice 80% of her competitions), and probably some others too. I like Kwan alot but between her and Kim which skater would be more capable of dominating under both COP and 6.0, it is Kim easily, as Kim being a dominant force and winning most all competitions she skated her best under 6.0 (just as Kwan of course was under 6.0 and Kim of course was under COP) is much easier to imagine than the reverse being true for Kwan under COP.

let`s talk · May 31, 2013

Bluebonnet said:
That's because his programs were designed to fit CoP with massive transitions.

Because it's much easier to do transitions, then fall on jumps (still get rewarded handsomely) than to do less transtitions, then perform a jump and stay on the feet. Transitions for Chan is a very conveniet excuse for his falls that CoP unfortunately allows him to apply. CoP is a scam that costs this sport too much- reputation and popularity.

Bluebonnet · May 31, 2013

let`s talk said:
Because it's much easier to do transitions, then fall on jumps (still get rewarded handsomely) than to do less transtitions, then perform a jump and stay on the feet. Transitions for Chan is a very conveniet excuse for his falls that CoP unfortunately allows him to apply. CoP is a scam that costs this sport too much- reputation and popularity.

You are not suggesting that skaters like Chan who could do massive transitions could not do programs with less transitions, aren't you? Until CoP is changed after Sochi Olympics, what Chan has done was the winning combo, whether you like it or not. You have given CoP too much power which it doesn't own. CoP haters loved to blame the system for all the problems. I very much doubt that 6.0 could keep the popularity of this sport if it was not abandoned.

let`s talk · May 31, 2013

Bluebonnet said:
You are not suggesting that skaters like Chan who could do massive transitions could not do programs with less transitions, aren't you?

Of course he could, and he could zamboni the ice as well. So could the others- do with less transitions and yet stay on the feet.

Until CoP is changed after Sochi Olympics, what Chan has done was the winning combo, whether you like it or not. You have given CoP too much power which it doesn't own. CoP haters loved to blame the system for all the problems. I very much doubt that 6.0 could keep the popularity of this sport if it was not abandoned.

What a silly rant with no facts to back it up. :laugh:

Keep your posts constructive. If it's possible. :sarcasm:

emdee · May 31, 2013

torren said:
Why patrick chan is considering in this thread? he will be much weaker under 6.0 than IJS

We come back to your question which was who CAN dominate.
IMO he CAN dominate.

That is why we are considering him in this thread.

If you didnt want Patrick to be named your title could have been:
Other than Patrick Chan, who can dominate etc etc

jenaj · May 31, 2013

CanadianSkaterGuy said:
Surya had under-rotations and was more than half a rotation short of her 3F+3T (3F+3T<<, second 3Z<, and even the 3S in the combo was a close-call). But she was far more ambitious than Chen in attempting the 3-3 combos, the 2A-2A sequence, and Chen doubled her second lutz. Chen only executed 5 triples, but they were solid and with good flow (except maybe the flip). But perhaps the judges noted Bonaly's under-rotations, and didn't credit her with attempting such high technical content. But IMO, their clean triple quota was close.

I think 14 year old Michelle's clean, 7 triple program should have beaten both Bonaly and Chen in the long program. This is an example of where Michelle might have benefited from IJS-type scoring.

Mathman · May 31, 2013

glennprince3 said:
I will say this: ordinals and 6.0 had the obvious advantage of being easily digested by the viewing public. Conversely, the other perverse advantage is that the audience might boo or ooh or ahh at abnormal scoring, but the computing of 2 scores and mentally trying to figure out where that would arrange that particular skater across 9 judges was nearly impossible, thus there was an air of credibility (legitimate or not) that accompanied that system.

That second point is very interesting. I agree. No matter how much we hollered about our favorite skater being robbed, in our secret hearts we figured that the judges probably knew what they were doing.

Actually, factored placement weren't too hard to figure out (you didn't really have to do it in your head -- pencil and paper was fine.

). What was complicated about ordinal judging was, what happens when no skater gets a clear majority of ordinals? That almost never happened at the very top (or bottom), but it could lead to some screwy results in the middle placements.

Mathman · May 31, 2013

deedee1 said:
To answer this particular question, we rather NEED to consider and pick up those who actually did dominate/stay on top for a number of years in either system, I think.

Good point. The only way the question makes sense is to take a skater who DOMINATED his/her/their particular era, and then ask whether of not that skater/team would have been equally dominant under the other system. This narrows the discussion down to a small handful of skaters.

Michelle Kwan was the dominant lady of her era, winning 5 world championships and 3 silvers in the eight-year span 1996-2003. Yuna Kim won 2 world championships and two silvers, plus Olympic gold, in the five-year span 2009-2013, even taking a year off. (And this doesn't count the 2014 Olympics.

) Furthermore, she won the biggest events by record-setting scores and record-setting margins over the field.

Does Patrick Chan belong on the list? Absolutely. (We need a little Chan love here.

.) He won three world championships in a row in his "era," (2011-2013), setting several scoring records in the meantime. He was not the only good skater during that time, no more were Kwan and Kim. And we can carp about the fact that some of his victories featured flawed performances. Still, it is what it is.

Just taking these three for the moment, we can try to guess whether Chan might have skated differently and been a whiz in the 6.0 era, and whether Michelle's star would have shone as bright under CoP. But for Yuna, IMHO her actual programs -- what she skated, not what we might imagine for her -- would have fared very well under either system. (Just my opinion, of course.)

pangtongfan · May 31, 2013

CanadianSkaterGuy said:
Surya had under-rotations and was more than half a rotation short of her 3F+3T (3F+3T<<, second 3Z<, and even the 3S in the combo was a close-call). But she was far more ambitious than Chen in attempting the 3-3 combos, the 2A-2A sequence, and Chen doubled her second lutz. Chen only executed 5 triples, but they were solid and with good flow (except maybe the flip). But perhaps the judges noted Bonaly's under-rotations, and didn't credit her with attempting such high technical content. But IMO, their clean triple quota was close.

Under 6.0 underrotations and minor two foots werent a huge deal. Falls and major stumbles out of jumps were, but underrotatoins and minor two foots were much less of a big deal than under 6.0. I am quite sure the judges viewed Bonaly`s technical quota that day much higher, and the marks indicate this. Most judges gave Bonaly a 5.9 and Chen a 5.7. Chen won by much higher presentation marks. Had the judges ruled Bonaly`s underrotations and two foots in that particular long program as negating the jump Kwan who did 7 whistle clean triples would have been viewed as technically superior that day, and the marks indicated they did not feel that way.

pangtongfan · May 31, 2013

Mathman said:
Just taking these three for the moment, we can try to guess whether Chan might have skated differently and been a whiz in the 6.0 era, and whether Michelle's star would have shone as bright under CoP. But for Yuna, IMHO her actual programs -- what she skated, not what we might imagine for her -- would have fared very well under either system. (Just my opinion, of course.)

Of those three though Kim is by far the one most likely to dominate under both systems. Yes we can speculate but most of us are in agreement Chan`s liableness to mistakes and falls would not stand up well in 6.0, and the various reasons Kwan is more suited to 6.0 than COP have been covered ad nauseum so wont even go into that again (although her 96-2001 would be reasonably well suited to COP and give her a shot at winning sometimes depending who she faced). Someone like Plushenko is even more obvious than Kim though as he actually did prove he could and would dominate under both systems, so in case there isnt even a bit of speculation required.

Why are we only focusing on singles skaters though. What about the dancers and pairs. Anyone have some ideas which they feel would be best suited to dominate in both systems. As I mentioned I feel Shen & Zhao, Totmianina & Marinin, and Gordeeva & Grinkov are the best examples for pairs and Klimova & Ponomarenko, Torvill & Dean, and Gritschuk & Platov for dance. Savchenko & Szolkowy and Volsozhar & Trankov tend to make quite a few mistakes and this would not hold up well in 6.0. Sale & Pelletier and Berezhnaya & Sikharulidze did not have the element difficulty or consistency for COP. Virtue & Moir would do pretty well in both. Davis & White dont really create the drama, passion, or overall impression on the ice needed for 6.0.

pangtongfan · May 31, 2013

jenaj said:
I think 14 year old Michelle's clean, 7 triple program should have beaten both Bonaly and Chen in the long program. This is an example of where Michelle might have benefited from IJS-type scoring.

This is true. Although as a young skater still developing her artistry she probably would have been held back in PCS. Even Bonaly would get slightly generous PCS comparatively based on reputation. Some of her jumps wouldnt get the GOE either as they didnt carry enough flow out back then, which she improved on alot next year.

I thought Chen still deserved to win that year. Her artistry was light years superior to both Kwan and Bonaly that particular year. Bobek would have won easily if she held it together, especialy after that first triple lutz-triple and being the clear leader after the short, and Markova would have medalled that year had she skated cleanly as well.

Bluebonnet · May 31, 2013

let`s talk said:
Of course he could, and he could zamboni the ice as well. So could the others- do with less transitions and yet stay on the feet. What a silly rant with no facts to back it up. Keep your posts constructive. If it's possible. :sarcasm:

Good, then everyone stay on the feet. :biggrin:

My posts were always constructive. It seems that you've often run out what to say except personal attacks.

jenaj · May 31, 2013

Mathman said:
Just taking these three for the moment, we can try to guess whether Chan might have skated differently and been a whiz in the 6.0 era, and whether Michelle's star would have shone as bright under CoP. But for Yuna, IMHO her actual programs -- what she skated, not what we might imagine for her -- would have fared very well under either system. (Just my opinion, of course.)

There are so many things to consider that it is really hard to judge. Yu Na's short programs have almost always been excellent--clean, with a 3-3. She would likely have controlled her own destiny, as they say, in most competitions under 6.0. But up until this season, she had trouble skating a long program without mistakes. This would have left the door open for someone to beat her by placing first in the long. Granted, it would have had to be someone pretty good--someone like Michelle, for example. Also, the old qualifying rounds in Worlds might have held her back somewhat, not to mention the Grand Prix events where skaters had to do two long programs!

venlac · May 31, 2013

kim was weaker in LP than SP. yes, but she still almost always have been had better LP than her competitors,
kim's SP was often perfect, and in LP she usually had 1~2 mistakes. her competitiors like mao, caro, ando had usually more mistakes than her.

kim's rank in LP, in worlds or olympics
2007 - 3rd / 2008- 1st / 2009-1st / 2010 olympics - 1st / 2010-1st / 2011-2rd / 2013-1rd

Why is strict standards apply to only her?
because She's also just one skater, not a machine as her haters say, She also has weakness point, yes. but when compare with other top skaters, her weakness points are very fewer and very small.

pangtongfan · May 31, 2013

Bruin714 said:
In the 6.0 era, clean programs meant much more than in the COP era. Kwan definitely has the advantage here. Kim rarely skates a completely clean program, and would hurt her a lot. Kwan beat Slutskaya and Cohen many times because she skated clean. One or two mistakes was enough to lose the title.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Kwan had at least a dozen clean programs while Kim maybe 5 her whole career. I do agree that with the triple lutz-triple toe combo and bigger jumps, Kim has an advantage in terms of the technical mark, even with just 6 triples instead of 7.

Even then, I think a majority of World Championships would look like this.

Kwan: 5.8/5.9
Kim: 5.9/5.8

With a clean performance, Kim might earn a 5.9 and beat a clean Kwan, but again, this would be rare (5.9/5.9). However, with just one error, Kim's scores would likely be reduced by .1 either in the technical mark and/or presentation mark. Either way she loses.

There are only 2 Worlds or Olympics Kwan received predominantly 5.8s for technical merit in the long program and those were 2003 and 1996. In 2001 she had a mix of 5.7s and 5.8s on technical and 5.8s and 5.9s on presentation, so even there more judges gave her something below 5.8, 5.9 overall. So already the basis of all judges giving Kwan 5.8 technical and 5.9 presentation is not really entirely accurate, and that is without even skating against Yu Na Kim. Kim also was virtually perfect in 3 of the 7 World or Olympic events she was in- 2009 Worlds (just one small mistake under 6.0), 2010 Olympics, 2013 Worlds. The 4 times she wasnt she lost anyway so she wouldnt need Kwan for that. Kwan herself has messed up quite a few times to lose Worlds and Olympics too- 1997, 1999 Worlds, 2002 Olympics and Worlds, 2004 Worlds, 2005 Worlds (ok yeah I know you are going to say she was never winning here anyway which is true, but she still didnt skate well), and about the same ratio of times Kim has, but obviously just competed in many more. Then then are her Grand Prix final victories, which Kwan who won that event only once (and fell in the short program in winning that one) wouldnt have interfered with any.

Lastly Kim would have no problem getting 5.9s for presentation against Kwan. Lipinski and Slutskaya even got a share of them, and they are poorer presentation skaters than Kim is. Under 6.0 technical merit tended to carry the 2nd mark anyway unless someone was really poor. Slutskaya could easily have 6 World and Olympic Golds today vs only 3 for Michelle had she skated cleanly at the 2000 and 2001 Worlds, and 2002 and 2006 Olympics, and that is despite that she is about half the artist Kwan is, and that Kwan was generally very consistent technically, which pretty much proves my point. One big difference between Slutskaya and Kim though (apart from Kim being a better skater in pretty much everyway) is Kim always does a clean triple-triple in each competition she is in, and a big and difficult one that far exceeds Kwan`s triple toe-triple toe. That was a big thing under 6.0 and in fact was more heavily rewarded by judges under 6.0 than COP where rules dont even credit the more difficult combos. Slutskaya often just practiced and talked up the 3-3 and didnt even do it, in addition to usually making mistakes on top of that too. Under 6.0 Kim with her triple lutz-triple toe and triple flip-triple toe would often make up for a mistake or two in the judges eyes if needed, and in fact would do this more easily under 6.0 than she does under COP if anything, despite that in general she is a more dominant COP skater.

Moment · May 31, 2013

Thanks pangtongfan for raising a very interesting point about Tara and Irina. I find it funny other posters base their posts on their presumed "Michelle Kwan is a better artist" notion, which I don't agree on anyway, rather than past results of 6.0.

spikydurian · Jun 1, 2013

Bruin714 said:
In the 6.0 era, clean programs meant much more than in the COP era. Kwan definitely has the advantage here. Kim rarely skates a completely clean program, and would hurt her a lot. Kwan beat Slutskaya and Cohen many times because she skated clean. One or two mistakes was enough to lose the title.

Both Kim and Kwan can dominate in 6.0 and IJS because both are highly talented and skillful skaters. In IJS, you need to maximise your skills to win points. In 6.0 it's a slightly different game. Whatever systems, both Ks would and will dominate. All they have to do is to adjust their training and choreography to maximise points in whichever system they are competing in.

Olympia · Jun 1, 2013

spikydurian said:
Both Kim and Kwan can dominate in 6.0 and IJS because both are highly talented and skillful skaters. In IJS, you need to maximise your skills to win points. In 6.0 it's a slightly different game. Whatever systems, both Ks would and will dominate. All they have to do is to adjust their training and choreography to maximise points in whichever system they are competing in.

Agreed. I can't imagine a splendid skater like Kim being lost in the shuffle during the 6.0 era. I mean, it's not as if she's some sort of jumping bean who lumbers around the ice between leaps. She's a musical, graceful, complete skater. If she'd been around in the 1990s and had had the chance to get the right coaching, she would have been as spectacular then as she is now. For one thing, I bet that some of her falls were caused by the need to have unusual transitions and jump entries--she wouldn't have had to risk those in 6.0. She would have trained to the skills she needed. Does she look like the kind of person who couldn't have carried that off?

As for Kwan, assuming physical health, she would have managed the same success adapting in the opposite direction. Her blade-to-ice skills would have carried the same weight for her as Chan's have for him. She would have found a way to excel in the other needed skills. Maybe she would have had a shorter career, but she would have made her mark. And I would have been her fan!

venlac · Jun 1, 2013

Olympia said:
Agreed. I can't imagine a splendid skater like Kim being lost in the shuffle during the 6.0 era. I mean, it's not as if she's some sort of jumping bean who lumbers around the ice between leaps. She's a musical, graceful, complete skater. If she'd been around in the 1990s and had had the chance to get the right coaching, she would have been as spectacular then as she is now. For one thing, I bet that some of her falls were caused by the need to have unusual transitions and jump entries--she wouldn't have had to risk those in 6.0. She would have trained to the skills she needed. Does she look like the kind of person who couldn't have carried that off?

falls..? she don't have trouble with fall than others now. she is one of the skaters who fall rarely in competiton.
if it is whether she will need to have less flaws in 6.0, i agree. although she is the most consistent skater now in Ladies. And Maybe she will also need 7 triples.
when i think about only possibility, I think she is capable to make them, instead have difficult elements which needs in COP.

jaylee · Jun 1, 2013

spikydurian said:
Both Kim and Kwan can dominate in 6.0 and IJS because both are highly talented and skillful skaters. In IJS, you need to maximise your skills to win points. In 6.0 it's a slightly different game. Whatever systems, both Ks would and will dominate. All they have to do is to adjust their training and choreography to maximise points in whichever system they are competing in.

I pretty much agree with this.

Also, seems like there are two different ways of looking at the situation. One is looking at how a skater did under their scoring system by looking at their competitions/fields holistically and pondering how results would've been different if the scoring system was different (but not the field). The other way is to transplant one "dominant" skater from IJS (or 6.0) and try to determine how they'd do versus a field from a particular competition under 6.0, which is a lot more complicated.

For example, most of Yu-Na's competition placements would likely have stayed the same under 6.0. Why? Because of the way in which she won. She usually placed top 3 in the SP and won the FS for most of her wins. That would've been key to similar wins under 6.0 as well. A lot of those segment wins would be the same under 6.0, though not all (and it's tough to figure out how exactly they would've judged those segments differently).

But it's a lot tougher to just pick one IJS performance against a 6.0 performance and figure out how the judges would've scored them.

Overall, I do think that while there are exceptions, it's easier to see a skater who was dominant under IJS as dominating under 6.0, but not necessarily vice versa. IJS is just more specifically demanding than 6.0.

But if Michelle Kwan had trained under IJS her entire career, her spins likely would've been a bit stronger (though it's hard to tell how much--Michelle's natural strengths was just not in spinning and 6.0 helped conceal that). Had Yu-Na been under 6.0, she likely would've attempted the triple loop more often.

Interestingly, while triple/triples aren't given enough credit in IJS versus 6.0 in the FS, they do give a boost in the SP because the skater earns additional points in base value for that triple/triple that carry over to the FS and the overall placement. Under 6.0, a 3/3 in the SP could help the ladies in terms of placement versus the field, but there was no point advantage that carried over, only the placement mattered. So had Irina, Michelle, Sarah Hughes, Tara Lipinski all been under IJS in their prime, I wonder how many of them would've gone for 3/3s in the SP.

Skaters who can dominate both in IJS and 6.0.

Bruin714

let`s talk

Match Penalty

Bluebonnet

let`s talk

Match Penalty

emdee

jenaj

Mathman

Mathman

pangtongfan

Match Penalty

pangtongfan

Match Penalty

pangtongfan

Match Penalty

Bluebonnet

jenaj

venlac

pangtongfan

Match Penalty

Moment

spikydurian

Olympia

venlac

jaylee

Similar threads

Connect with us