Analyzing Sotnikova and Kim's footwork in the FS | Page 10 | Golden Skate

Analyzing Sotnikova and Kim's footwork in the FS

Status
Not open for further replies.

caelum

On the Ice
Joined
Nov 8, 2013
I was actually more upset about the GOE on her step sequence than anything. She had very poor edging and overall quite sloppy. In terms of the level, I haven't bother to count formally, it just looked like a level 3 to me (sometimes you can just look and know). Assuming BoP work is correct, then under my understanding of the rules it should be called level 3. By the way, this shouldn't be surprise to anybody. She hasn't got a level 4 step sequence at any competition this season - and that includes Russian nationals of all places. Thanks for formally doing the work though BoP.
 

jaylee

Medalist
Joined
Feb 21, 2010
Apparently as of 2007 (based on a 2007 post on GS), if the technical panel calls a change of edge, for example, the judges are required to give negative GOE; which points to the existence of communication between the tech panel and the judges.

The rules changed a couple of times since then, actually.

Current rules: http://static.isu.org/media/108107/1790-sptc-sov_levdiff_2013-2014.pdf

For a SEVERE WRONG EDGE TAKE-OFF F/Lz (sign “e”), final GOE must be negative, with the reduction being -2 to -3.

For an UNCLEAR EDGE TAKE-OFF F/Lz (sign “e”), the final GOE is not restricted to being negative, but the reduction is -1 to -2 (so, after taking into account positive qualities of the jump, then applying the reduction, the GOE might end up being 0 or -1).

For an UNCLEAR EDGE TAKE-OFF F/Lz (no sign), the final GOE is similarly not restricted to being negative, but the reduction that must be applied is -1.

The circumstances also belie the notion of tech panel's "incompetency." To the contrary, the tech panel was exceedingly competent in getting what they wanted.

In the SP: Adelina receives lvl 4, everyone else lvl 3
In the FS: All the top contenders received lvl 4 except for Yuna who received lvl 3.

No, I would not go that far. Blades of Passion provided factual observations in a case for why Adelina should have received level 3 in the FS. That proves nothing regarding the accuracy of the footwork levels in the SP or Yuna's level 3 footwork in the FS.

Basically, your argument is out of scope, and trying to expand the original argument to support a too broad generalization weakens your position. It doesn't strengthen it.
 

wootie

Match Penalty
Joined
Dec 21, 2013
The scoring is mostly gut instinct. The judges give + or - GOEs based on what they, in the moment, think a component deserves. Sadly, a judge can simply see what he or she wants to see and judge accordingly, which is obviously what happened with a lot of the scoring in Sochi. While it's nice that the ISU has tried to make figure skating more fair, really they've just devised another system in which you can cheat as much (or more) and do it all anonymously.
 

verysmuchso

On the Ice
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Just to clarify, for those who are confused:

Judges get to see the e calls and < and << calls on the jumps after the program is over and before they send their marks.

They do not get to see the level calls.

And yes, Sam-Skwantch, I have a VCR/DVD player that's about 8 years old and I never did figure out how to record on DVDs so if I want to make a recording I make it on tape.
VHS rocks if you could see all that! Thanks gkelly for your analysis!
 

Sam-Skwantch

“I solemnly swear I’m up to no good”
Record Breaker
Joined
Dec 29, 2013
Country
United-States
Just to clarify, for those who are confused:

Judges get to see the e calls and < and << calls on the jumps after the program is over and before they send their marks.

They do not get to see the level calls.

And yes, Sam-Skwantch, I have a VCR/DVD player that's about 8 years old and I never did figure out how to record on DVDs so if I want to make a recording I make it on tape.

Thanks for the insight. I absolutely respect the VCR usage. I watch tapes my parents made from the 80's sometimes on mine. The commercials are usually the highlights though. :cool:
 

ILuvYuna

On the Ice
Joined
Feb 27, 2014
As I understand it, the judges do not know what level has been called when they key in the GOE. Isn't this right?

My point is simply that it adds up.

Six tenths is half the 1.24 lead that she garnered on this skill, and while it may seem like nothing in hindsight from a grande-scheme perspective, it is miles and miles away from the mindset of the moment:

Imagine that Adelina is about to skate. You know that she is currently in 2nd between Kim & Kostner, and both have consistently scored higher than Adelina throughout the season <-- there you have the incentive to pad Adelina's score as much as you possibly can; it's because in order to move into the lead, you have to score it better than Kosnter, who just had the skate of her life, and because the reigning world champion and defending olympic champion is in form and has yet to skate = THAT is mindset of the moment (vs. trying to downplay the .6 on the basis that it doesn't make a difference in hindsight).

Like I said before, corruption cannot be proven, but all things considered, I don't see how it can be ruled out as a possibility (myself, I find it very hard to ignore the apparent incentives and opportunities they had to cheat - that and I'm pretty cynical about homo sapiens in general :p).
 

jaylee

Medalist
Joined
Feb 21, 2010
I was actually more upset about the GOE on her step sequence than anything. She had very poor edging and overall quite sloppy. In terms of the level, I haven't bother to count formally, it just looked like a level 3 to me (sometimes you can just look and know). Assuming BoP work is correct, then under my understanding of the rules it should be called level 3. By the way, this shouldn't be surprise to anybody. She hasn't got a level 4 step sequence at any competition this season - and that includes Russian nationals of all places. Thanks for formally doing the work though BoP.

I agree. I mean, she was ahead of the music at the beginning (she was better with hitting those opening notes in her Europeans FS), and then the rest of the footwork seemed off from the music and her upper body movement lacked clarity and control of movement throughout. :slink:
 

YesWay

&#22235;&#24180;&#12418;&#12363;&#12369;&#12390;&#
Record Breaker
Joined
Sep 28, 2013
So it might mean being generous on the gray areas (the second twizzle?), but I can see how a caller could give her credit for threes, rockers, twizzles, loops, and counters in both directions, as well as toe steps (if those hops count as steps), choctaws, and edge changes in both directions.
Hm. So... no solid, undeniable consensus... that the steps were definitely level3 and not level4?

In that case, I have no further interest in this thread - it's not going to go anywhere...
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
OK, here's what I saw for the steps. I'm not going to look back at what BoP called until after I post them.

RFI double three CCW

*whole post*

Can you see all this in real time from the TV coverage? :bow: :bow: Or do you have to play it over and over? :(Still :bow: )

Aren't there times when the television shot doesn't even show the skater's feet?
 

drivingmissdaisy

Record Breaker
Joined
Feb 17, 2010
Sotnikova's sloppy step sequence received massive +GOE and her Choreography score was the highest of the competition. :disapp:

Sotnikova's step sequence was judged +2 or +3 by every judge. Every. Single. Judge. (EDIT: Oops! Except one who gave her +1) :) Do you think you might be biased when you see something "sloppy" that 9 judges see as an element that is very well executed? Six judges scored her CH as 9.5 or 9.75, and eight scored her 9 or above. Even the outlier was a very high 8.75. Maybe you should rewatch the program and try to determine what you are missing that virtually every judge in Sochi was seeing before making such a desperate effort to "uncover the truth," as you proclaim to be doing in your first post.
 

gkelly

Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
I have to pause and restart in order to write it down while I'm watching -- I can't write as fast as the skater can turn and step.

Then I have to rewind to see the lead-in to the step the skater was in the middle of when I hit Pause.

And sometimes I have to rewind and rewatch multiple times to figure out exactly what the skater was doing if there was something tricky about what s/he was doing or if the contrast of blade against ice was not clear in the video.

The resolution on youtube is usually quite bad, and also on the nbcolympics site. If I keep pausing and rewinding there, the feed gets slower and choppier the more I try to watch it.

I don't have the ability to do a smooth slow motion of videos recorded at normal speed. IIRC I could do that on a previous VCR, which would be very useful for this purpose.

I would trust the tech panel's live and high-res slow motion more than my own or anyone else's viewing on youtube.

Yes, sometimes the camera angle doesn't show the feet at all, in which case it can be impossible to know for sure what edge the skater is on. Fortunately that wasn't the case here.

What can be a problem is if the camera angle changes in the middle of a turn, or if the free foot obscures what the skating foot is doing from the viewing angle (the latter could also be an issue for the actual tech panel).

Different broadcasts use different camera angles -- I find it interesting that NBC did not use the same shots as NBCSN -- and the official video replay may be different from all of them. For some moves one angle may be more accurate than another. Sometimes a broadcast may be deceiving as to what the skater really did, other times the official video could be deceiving. If we only get to watch one angle of low-resolution video, we can't always know whether it is more accurate or less accurate than what the technical panel saw.

We also don't usually know whether or not the tech panel actually reviewed an element or were satisfied with the live call.
 

Ven

Match Penalty
Joined
Mar 17, 2013
"Oops, sorry I ruined your life dream."

There's absolutely no reason anything should be missed with the high-def replays available to them. You either know what you're doing or you don't. There are tough calls to be made on whether or not a jump should be called underrotated, or a spin position should count, or a step should count, but there should certainly not be anything "missing" from the picture.

And in this case the calls were not tough with Sotnikova. She clearly had an underrotated jump and she clearly had a Level 3 step sequence. She's even had a history of making these mistakes (of always making this mistake, ie - a technique problem, in the case of the 3Lutz+3Toe combo).



Unfortunately that's not how the sport is being judged right now. One of the many big problems that needs to be fixed. Sotnikova's sloppy step sequence received massive +GOE and her Choreography score was the highest of the competition. :disapp:

BoP you make excellent points in this whole thread.

Drivingdaisy and gmyers are some of the worst posters on this forum. They spew the same repetitive lies over and over again, clearly trying to push some kind of agenda.
 

Blades of Passion

Skating is Art, if you let it be
Record Breaker
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Country
France
Here is the clearest video you can get online of Sotnikova's performance: http://skatingvideoclips.com/getfil...33a142efbc4b8e17c2&clip=09b24869&sid=f69801fb

This link is best for viewing the performance with the least amount of commentary, though: http://www.speedyshare.com/GWRmH/AdelinaSotnikovaTSN2014OlympicsLP.wmv

Gkelly and I had three areas of disagreement it seems:

RBI choctaw CW

How can this count as a choctaw when she is on two feet? There isn't a step from one foot to the other here, there's a curve on two feet and then she changes edge and foot.

RFO counter CCW (clearly comes out on a RBO edge but free foot comes down immediately after, so a strict caller might not count it)

It doesn't come out on a RBO edge, the turn is to an inside edge and then it slides over to an outside edge.

LFI bracket CW

And here, she has lost the inside edge before she turns, so it's a rocker.

----

And then one rule that needs to be clarified:

I can see how a caller could give her credit for toe steps, choctaws, and edge changes in both directions.

Edge changes have to be on a full curve to count as a step, though. Otherwise it's just fiddling back and forth on the edge and doesn't count for anything towards the level. She only does changes of edge on a curve in the clockwise direction.
 

Spinerette

On the Ice
Joined
Feb 15, 2014
The intricacies and the different rules in the IJS has actually hurt ISU in this cheating incident. It's much more difficult to cover up cheating incidents with the IJS than with the 6.0 system. The IJS is very good at exposing a skater's weakness. But the IJS also proves that it doesn't matter how good scoring systems are it's the way you apply these rules. In the case of Adelina, the IJS only proves how blatant the cheating was and how generous the scoring was for Adelina. ISU made their own grave and will be buried in it.
 

Spinerette

On the Ice
Joined
Feb 15, 2014
Here is the clearest video you can get online of Sotnikova's performance: http://skatingvideoclips.com/getfil...33a142efbc4b8e17c2&clip=09b24869&sid=f69801fb

This link is best for viewing the performance with the least amount of commentary, though: http://www.speedyshare.com/GWRmH/AdelinaSotnikovaTSN2014OlympicsLP.wmv

Gkelly and I had three areas of disagreement it seems:



How can this count as a choctaw when she is on two feet? There isn't a step from one foot to the other here, there's a curve on two feet and then she changes edge and foot.



It doesn't come out on a RBO edge, the turn is to an inside edge and then it slides over to an outside edge.



And here, she has lost the inside edge before she turns, so it's a rocker.

----

And then one rule that needs to be clarified:



Edge changes have to be on a full curve to count as a step, though. Otherwise it's just fiddling back and forth on the edge and doesn't count for anything towards the level. She only does changes of edge on a curve in the clockwise direction.

I don't even think we have to be this detailed to know that Adelina did not deserve gold. But it's interesting and it just makes the cheating case even stronger. You're doing a really great analysis on this.
 

bebevia

On the Ice
Joined
Jun 22, 2011
There is also a possibility that it was DESIGNED as a L3 (especially since she's gotten L2 and L3 all season until here) but it was miscalled.
This was my initial and final impression on her choreography - I mentioned it in my deleted TextEdit file (...). After watching her FS, I thought she could've been more ambitious and go for Lv. 4, but it seemed that she brought out all of her current skills - so retracted; it's like expecting Yuna to do a +3 GOE 3Lo-combo program with a 90% consistency.

===

So far, I've only seen 3, maybe 4 posters actually contributing to this thread's purpose, which is to provide detailed analysis according to the IJS rule book; none from those who call BoP as a hater. I really, I mean it sincerely, am interested in Lv. 4 analysis; yes, expect opposing views, but that's what this thread is about. I assume it's too much of a scary job for most people, so I don't blame on just the fact it's not done; I know because I never went back after my file got deleted midway done; never again will I try, at least in written form.
 

gkelly

Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Here is the clearest video you can get online of Sotnikova's performance: http://skatingvideoclips.com/getfil...33a142efbc4b8e17c2&clip=09b24869&sid=f69801fb

This link is best for viewing the performance with the least amount of commentary, though: http://www.speedyshare.com/GWRmH/AdelinaSotnikovaTSN2014OlympicsLP.wmv

Thanks for the links.

Wow, there are a lot more different angles and edits out there than I expected, and none of them is the official replay. I don't think we're ever going to get a definitive answer on a few of these steps, or the contested jump calls.

Which means that there are some gray areas, which doesn't speak strongly in favor of the clarity of Sotnikova's edge quality in those instances.

I think the best we can conclude is that she was probably lucky to be given benefit of doubt on a few of the calls. What the motivation was for the tech panel (and judges) to be generous is an open question -- I don't think we're going to get a definitive answer there either. Believe what you want to believe.

Edge changes have to be on a full curve to count as a step, though.

OK -- I don't know the criteria for how deep or how long held the edge changes need to be to count.
 

ILuvYuna

On the Ice
Joined
Feb 27, 2014
I think the best we can conclude is that she was probably lucky to be given benefit of doubt on a few of the calls.

But in order to give somebody the benefit of the doubt, there has to be doubt, and I don't remember Gracie being held up for 2 minutes while the judges fussed over Adelina's scores. And it's not only that - it's the notion that the same tech they used to call everybody elses mistakes during the competition, somehow failed when Adelina took the ice, leaving the technical panel with nothing but doubt about the elements in question, such that their only choice was to either give her the benefit of the doubt, or mark her down. Sorry, but it's just too much of a logial stretch for me to be charitable about the judge's intentions.

ISU made their own grave and will be buried in it.

Here Here :thumbsup:
 

TMC

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 27, 2014
I♥Yuna;885137 said:
But in order to give somebody the benefit of the doubt, there has to be doubt, and I don't remember Gracie being held up for 2 minutes while the judges fussed over Adelina's scores. And it's not only that - it's the notion that the same tech they used to call everybody elses mistakes during the competition, somehow failed when Adelina took the ice, leaving the technical panel with nothing but doubt about the elements in question, such that their only choice was to either give her the benefit of the doubt, or mark her down. Sorry, but it's just too much of a logial stretch for me to be charitable about the judge's intentions.

Very good point.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top