The Quadruple Jump for the Ladies in Sochi

FlattFan · Jul 9, 2013

Mathman said:
Are these truly the only reasons why the short program exists? If the short program serves no other purpose than these then it certainly should be eliminated. These goals can easily be accomplished in other ways (like rankings), and the ISU could save the money.

That is the logical reason.
How do you accomplish it any other way? Rankings don't tell you who has broken tibia.
ISU is not in a business to save money. Plus, it's fun to have the SP. Even between sad arias, there is an intermission. There should be a SP to build up suspense.

Mathman · Jul 9, 2013

FlattFan said:
Plus, it's fun to have the SP. Even between sad arias, there is an intermission. There should be a SP to build up suspense.

Now we're getting somewhere! :rock:

babyalligator · Jul 9, 2013

Mathman said:
I think Karl Mao Kim stands for the triumvirate of Karl Marx, Mao ze-dong, and Kim il-sung.

I think that's the most I've laughed today. Thank you for that!

Olympia · Jul 9, 2013

If you remember that a large part of any major sports competition is theater, it makes sense to have a short program as well as a long. As FlattFan points out, it builds suspense. But that's not all. It creates audience recognition for one competitor or another, and it gives viewers a stake in what's going to happen in the next round. Without the short program, Olympic skating would be nothing more than a four-minute walk-on in a crowded field of sports, and it would soon be lost in the shuffle. "Folks, here comes the world champion. She's got a very high personal best points score. I can't explain that to you folks at home, but it's very important. And...she's completed her program. Next!" That's the way to make skating duller than curling. Soon they'd be showing it in the midnight-to-4 A.M. feed.

Krislite · Jul 9, 2013

I do like this idea of the SP sorting out the skating order in the LP and building suspense beforehand. However, for it to work well the judging system should minimize the variance in SP scores so that you don't get a situation where the whole competition is won in the SP (a la Chan in 2013 Worlds).

This is why restricting the SP elements works for this purpose because it levels the playing field in the SP. If we allow quads and solo triple Axels in the ladies SP, where it is extremely rare, then the competition can be won in the SP alone. If all the top ladies can do 3/3's and 2Axels, then limiting them to that layout means that if they all skate well in the SP their spread will be narrower than if we allow quads and triple axels in the SP. This helps to build "suspense," while simultaneously enabling superior skaters to build a lead (but not an insurmountable one).

FlattFan · Jul 9, 2013

Then just use the SP as placement test for the LP only. Although how many times have Yuna Kim built insurmountable lead in the past? Probably just as much as Chan in 2013.
If Mao didn't get to do 3A, the lead would be even more insurmountable.

Why not go back to basic and rotate the solo jump, have a 2A, and have a 2Lo in the combo.
If 3F is the required element for the year, you can do 3Lz-2Lo as your combo, or 2Lo-3Lo as your combo. But see, that's restrictive to those who can do 3x3.

In the end, SP is what it is. You want to bring your best to the SP so you can have better placement in the LP. It's like a warning shot. Mao is telling them, "watch out little girls, I got the 3A"

Don't see anything wrong with Mao putting the 3A in the SP. It's a competition, you bring your best. If other girls complain about it, go learn the 3A. Problem solved.

Mathman · Jul 9, 2013

OK, I think wee are closing in on it.

Are we all agreed that the purposes of the short program are

(a) to have fun

(b) to create suspense, and

(c) to seed the long program?

Then the question becomes, how can we have the most fun and create the most suspense? (The seeding part is fairly obvious -- nothing much to discuss there.)

gmyers · Jul 10, 2013

I agree the point spread should be minimized and that a uniform mandatory jump must be put back into it! Like there is a required axel allow a 3 axel but then everyone must do a lutz of some kind! Mandatory!

gmyers · Jul 10, 2013

Mathman said:
I think Karl Mao Kim stands for the triumvirate of Karl Marx, Mao ze-dong, and Kim il-sung.

I just saw this because It was quoted and it posted just 2 minutes before mine and it's hilarious!!

CanadianSkaterGuy · Jul 11, 2013

gmyers said:
Sp should be a test of skills by the best scores can be from 3t+3t, 3 loop and 2a which shows all jumps as placeholder elements and real points cominG from all other things in Tes and pcs.

That favours skaters who have strong 3L, and doesn't credit skaters who can do harder 3-3 combos. (Although I suppose Kostner would love this!)

To me, the SP + FS is to show consistency in a skater. If they happen to do poorly in the SP they can make it up in the FS, or they can put out a strong SP to make up for a FS that might have errors. In a sense, it's like 2 vaults in gymnastics that average out.

Also, I think it's an opportunity for skaters to show their versatility when it comes to expression and interpretation. I think many more skaters take risks in their SP as far as music choices and displaying an "attitude" or something "contemporary" whereas the FS tends to be a safer, tried and tested piece of music or a classical type piece that a skater attempts to put their own stamp on.

Take Suzuki for example... you wouldn't see her Kill Bill SP done as an LP, just like her "O" LP music works much better when it has time to build.

Someone once said to me that the SP conveys ability and an attitude

(hence why you see a lot of tangos or saucy music being chosen for SPs), while the LP conveys artistry and a story (hence why you get classical, flowy music and greater expressiveness).

Mathman · Jul 11, 2013

If we are really serious when we say that one purpose of the short program is to build suspense, then the add-up-the-points model runs counter to this purpose.

With factored placements, no matter how well you skated in the short program there were still two others who could "win the long, win the gold," having placed second or third in the short program. There was also an outside chance that all the stars would align right so that the fourth or fifth place skater could snag the top prize.

Now it often happens that a skater's short program lead is so great as to kill interest in the long program altogether.

CanadianSkaterGuy · Jul 11, 2013

Mathman said:
If we are really serious when we say that one purpose of the short program is to build suspense, then the add-up-the-points model runs counter to this purpose.

With factored placements, no matter how well you skated in the short program there were still two others who could "win the long, win the gold," having placed second or third in the short program. There was also an outside chance that all the stars would align right so that the fourth or fifth place skater could snag the top prize.

Now it often happens that a skater's short program lead is so great as to kill interest in the long program altogether.

That's usually the case if one skater is seen as far superior to the rest of the field. In the middle of the pack, however or when placements are separated by just a few points it can certainly build suspense.

The problem with factored placements (as we've seen) is that it usually relegates skaters to a particular placement with not much room for movement, or opportunity to win -- and actually relying on other skaters to do poorly to still win, instead of your own strong performance allowing you to move up or win.

I agree that the SP is now just a shortened version of the LP, particularly because skaters who do poorly from a technical standpoint can still be held up on their PCS, and given the original purpose of the SP (or that it was referred to as "the technical program"), it seems counter-intuitive for the system/judges/whatever to permit this to happen.

gkelly · Jul 11, 2013

CanadianSkaterGuy said:
That's usually the case if one skater is seen as far superior to the rest of the field. In the middle of the pack, however or when placements are separated by just a few points it can certainly build suspense.

The problem with factored placements (as we've seen) is that it usually relegates skaters to a particular placement with not much room for movement, or opportunity to win -- and actually relying on other skaters to do poorly to still win, instead of your own strong performance allowing you to move up or win.

Agreed.

I agree that the SP is now just a shortened version of the LP, particularly because skaters who do poorly from a technical standpoint can still be held up on their PCS, and given the original purpose of the SP (or that it was referred to as "the technical program"), it seems counter-intuitive for the system/judges/whatever to permit this to happen.

So do we want the SP to be more do-or-die technically, with little room to be held up on PCS or for 6 good elements to make up for 1 complete failure?

How could this be accomplished?

The penalties for failed elements could be larger in the SP than in the LP.

Should the choice of elements allow skaters to push the envelope technically (e.g., two quads for men, triple axel for women), with the recognition that it's a risk to attempt inconsistent elements, but the rewards are great if successful?

If the SP is the place to push the difficulty, then maybe the requirements for the spins and edge skills need to be higher too, skills not every senior skater can accomplish, in order to let the best technicians rise to the top -- unless they make mistakes. E.g., require certain features that would qualify the elements as at least level 2, or 3, or 4, whereas in the freeskate they are optional.

Build in required edge skills not only in the step sequence, and design a more objective way to measure them than one score for "Skating Skills." Get rid of or reduce the value of the other components.

Then the freeskate could be the place to showcase individual strengths and presentation skills and choreography.

Or should the SP be the place where everyone does pretty much the same thing and quality, not difficulty, determines who has the lead heading into the freeskate where anything goes in terms of difficulty?

CanadianSkaterGuy · Jul 11, 2013

It's a fine line, because obviously you don't want everyone doing the exact same skills. I would like to see less of an emphasis on PCS in the SP. I know already the FS has essentially twice as many points for PCS, but in the SP the contribution of PCS to the total score (and thus the resulting placement) is a bit too significant, IMO. Reducing the emphasis of PCS in the SP would bring the field's scores closer together (avoiding a runaway and creating more suspense) as well as reward the technical merits of a skater, which is the SP's "intention". It's really sad to see in the SP a 'lesser' skater do a 3Z+3T, 3F and 2A get a lower score than a senior skater who falls or has less technical content. Perhaps deductions should be more severe in the SP and points for elements have greater value towards the overall score (which is essentially the same as mitigating the value of PCS in the SP).

mskater93 · Jul 11, 2013

Then the SP should consist of TES, SS, and TR

gkelly · Jul 11, 2013

I'd be fine with the artistic aspects of the sport downplayed in the short program and given freer rein, at least as optional focus available to skaters for earning points, in the free program.

Let's say we define the short program as the technical program. I'd hate to see actual skating technique take a backseat there to completing elements.

Which is why I think either
*the Skating Skills component should be retained and weighted more highly than that component alone now is compared to the TES

OR, if the SP were to be TES only, then

*there needs to be more than one step sequence worth of points available for blade/edge skills.

How that could be accomplished could be an interesting discussion.

gmyers · Jul 11, 2013

CanadianSkaterGuy said:
That favours skaters who have strong 3L, and doesn't credit skaters who can do harder 3-3 combos. (Although I suppose Kostner would love this!)

To me, the SP + FS is to show consistency in a skater. If they happen to do poorly in the SP they can make it up in the FS, or they can put out a strong SP to make up for a FS that might have errors. In a sense, it's like 2 vaults in gymnastics that average out.

Also, I think it's an opportunity for skaters to show their versatility when it comes to expression and interpretation. I think many more skaters take risks in their SP as far as music choices and displaying an "attitude" or something "contemporary" whereas the FS tends to be a safer, tried and tested piece of music or a classical type piece that a skater attempts to put their own stamp on.

Take Suzuki for example... you wouldn't see her Kill Bill SP done as an LP, just like her "O" LP music works much better when it has time to build.

Someone once said to me that the SP conveys ability and an attitude (hence why you see a lot of tangos or saucy music being chosen for SPs), while the LP conveys artistry and a story (hence why you get classical, flowy music and greater expressiveness).

A bad typo in my post lead to the wrong reponse!

Sp should be a test of skills by the best scores can be from 3t+3t, 3 loop and 2a which shows all jumps as placeholder elements and real points cominG from all other things in Tes and pcs.

In the above by should be BUT. SP should be a test of technical skills in jumps BUT jumps can be 3t 3loop and 2A! That's not doing anything. That is literally using the jumps in the SP as placeholder elements where no skills are put to the test at all. 3T 3loop and 2a are not serious. SP must include flip and or lutz!

gkelly · Jul 11, 2013

gmyers said:
In the above by should be BUT. SP should be a test of technical skills in jumps BUT jumps can be 3t 3loop and 2A! That's not doing anything. That is literally using the jumps in the SP as placeholder elements where no skills are put to the test at all. 3T 3loop and 2a are not serious. SP must include flip and or lutz!

I assume you mean triple flip and triple lutz, for senior ladies.

Do you want one set of rules for Worlds and other top events where top world-class skaters might enter and others are trying to catch them, and a separate set of rules for, e.g., senior B events?

If you said "3T+2T, 3S, and 2A" as placeholders, then you would have a point. That's the minimum required by the current senior ladies' SP rules.

But there are plenty of decent, average senior-level skaters who cannot do any triple-triple combination and cannot do more than one, or cannot even rotate one, out 3Lo, 3F and 3Lz.

They're not likely to contend for world or Grand Prix medals with that jump content. But 3T+2T, 3S, 2A, and level 1 on all elements works out to a base mark of 19.8 -- only 0.2 points less than the SP minimum qualifying score for Euros and 4Cs. If they can complete that content successfully and also get just slightly positive GOE on at least one element, or execute at least one spin or step sequence of level 2 or higher, they can qualify for the continental championships. If they can execute that jump content and some higher level spins and steps with a bunch of +1s, they can qualify for Worlds. Harder jumps, and hardest spins and steps, will score better and place better. But the the minimum skills needed to compete as a senior lady at all are not nearly as high as the minimum skills needed to win medals at televised events.

And even skaters who haven't met the minimum scores for Euros/4Cs are still allowed to compete at senior B events.

Just go to a rink where senior skaters trying to qualify international events are practicing alongside younger or less gifted skaters who aren't at senior level (yet?), and then see if you really think 3T+3T and 3Lo are not doing anything, put no skills to the test at all.

gmyers · Jul 11, 2013

gkelly said:
I assume you mean triple flip and triple lutz, for senior ladies.

Do you want one set of rules for Worlds and other top events where top world-class skaters might enter and others are trying to catch them, and a separate set of rules for, e.g., senior B events?

If you said "3T+2T, 3S, and 2A" as placeholders, then you would have a point. That's the minimum required by the current senior ladies' SP rules.

But there are plenty of decent, average senior-level skaters who cannot do any triple-triple combination and cannot do more than one, or cannot even rotate one, out 3Lo, 3F and 3Lz.

They're not likely to contend for world or Grand Prix medals with that jump content. But 3T+2T, 3S, 2A, and level 1 on all elements works out to a base mark of 19.8 -- only 0.2 points less than the SP minimum qualifying score for Euros and 4Cs. If they can complete that content successfully and also get just slightly positive GOE on at least one element, or execute at least one spin or step sequence of level 2 or higher, they can qualify for the continental championships. If they can execute that jump content and some higher level spins and steps with a bunch of +1s, they can qualify for Worlds. Harder jumps, and hardest spins and steps, will score better and place better. But the the minimum skills needed to compete as a senior lady at all are not nearly as high as the minimum skills needed to win medals at televised events.

And even skaters who haven't met the minimum scores for Euros/4Cs are still allowed to compete at senior B events.

Just go to a rink where senior skaters trying to qualify international events are practicing alongside younger or less gifted skaters who aren't at senior level (yet?), and then see if you really think 3T+3T and 3Lo are not doing anything, put no skills to the test at all.

A flip or lutz should be mandatory and it doesn't have to be triple. Just some attempt would be good and if it didn't make sense to do anything but triple flip or lutz that would be a good development. Like one skater does 2lz or 2f combined with 3t others do 3f 3lz + 3t or solo that would be good!

If a skater does any 3lz or 3f in a long program do it in the short too. I am specifically thinking of skaters who do triple lutz or flip in lp who don't do them in sp programs! Forget that. They Are doing that just to take it easy in the sp! It is not about younger skaters or beginners vs the world level! It is about being safe and using sp jumps as placeholder easy almost guaranteed 100% likely to land.

TontoK · Jul 11, 2013

I don't mind a mix of the old OLD short program requirements with CoP.

For example, you could require a jump combination wherein one jump MUST be a double loop. It's restrictive, but also leaves room. Any of the triples with a 2L tacked on... or do the 2L first, and add 3T or 3L to the back end, or any 2/2 combination where one jump is a 2L. Skaters choice.

Another example (granted a slanted one... since it's a pet peeve of mine): A layback spin, wherein the skater is prohibited from touching the skate at any time. There are ways to gain levels without the "B", but few skaters explore them.

So, there are ways to gain levels... but there are technical restrictions as well.

The Quadruple Jump for the Ladies in Sochi

FlattFan

Match Penalty

Mathman

babyalligator

Olympia

Krislite

FlattFan

Match Penalty

Mathman

gmyers

gmyers

CanadianSkaterGuy

Mathman

CanadianSkaterGuy

gkelly

CanadianSkaterGuy

mskater93

gkelly

gmyers

gkelly

gmyers

TontoK

Hot Tonto

Similar threads

Connect with us