Analyzing Sotnikova and Kim's footwork in the FS

gkelly · Mar 14, 2014

I started a new thread for judge assignment questions etc.

I hope the links answer some of your questions. I'd just have to read in detail in order to summarize -- you could go ahead and do the reading yourself.

Mista Ekko · Mar 14, 2014

Mao88 said:
I agree - that's why the silent majority are ignoring you and all the other Yuna fans.

In terms of you Yuna fans mission to convince the world she was wuzrobbed - me thinks this sums it up nicely

My friends would DIE (!) when they hear i'm being called a Yuna fan :laugh:

Considering i was pissed off for a whole year when she decided to come back and steal Asada's Olympic title.

OS · Mar 14, 2014

Mao88 said:
I agree - that's why the silent majority are ignoring you and all the other Yuna fans.

In terms of you Yuna fans mission to convince the world she was wuzrobbed - me thinks this sums it up nicely

I know you think you are being clever, but do you even understand the movie? Even though it is always called Mission Impossible but what ALWAYS happens in the end?
Not quite what you are going for is it?

Mathman · Mar 14, 2014

GKelly said:
They can easily estimate what their total PCS would be for a skater before factoring. For the men, where the PCS factors are 1.0 for the short program and 2.0 for the freeskate, all they need to do is add up the five components for the short and double the total for the free. For other disciplines with other factors, they'd have to do another step of math to figure out their totals. They can only guess at the TES though.

For ladies, divide the desired total score by 24.

If you want her to score 210 points for the whole competition, give her 210/24 = 8.75 in PCSs across the board, and hope the TES keeps pace.

SP = 35+35=70, LP =70+70=140.

Alba · Mar 14, 2014

Ven said:
You guys are all missing the point. CoP was created to hide cheating.

It can't be. This sport it was never 100% based on objectivity, and never will be, or could be. A sport with such a big art elements in it can't work like that. We either accept it or not. No system in the world can change that.
Program Component can't be 100% right for everybody. It simply can't be.
Therefore, you have a lot of room for interpretation and for cheating. Even with tech. elements, which one might think it's easier to see and judge, you still have room for manoeuvre with the GoE's.

What they can do though it's minimise the "damage". They have the experience of the old system and of the new one.
Something better in between can be found, maybe? They can alo clean the house, for example judges that are found to fix events, or any other inappropriate behaviour should not be permitted to judge in ISU internation competitions anymore.
The problem is that the majority of people involved don't want this, because it suits them and their interests.

usethis2 · Mar 14, 2014

I agree with Alba. It may never be 100% objective, but we can mitigate the damage. Art isn't always subjective, and it takes skills to express yourself. No one would give me a medal if I skate on the ice to Swan Lake. What people sometimes mistake is that judges are not exactly measuring "art" but they are supposed to measure the ability to create appearance of expression. That is what interpretation means under ISJ. Judges need not be moved (though it'd help if that's the case) in order to judge artistry.

Vanshilar · Mar 14, 2014

Blades of Passion said:
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

Is there some way to get an account to fsvids.net, or is there another link to that first video? I'm trying to find video footage that is continuous during the step sequence; the second video cuts to a different camera near the beginning of the sequence. For some reason for the first video it just keeps giving me an error when I try to register an account at fsvids.net to download the video, so I don't know if it's a "closed" forum or something.

YunJung · Mar 15, 2014

gmyers said:
It is about hatred of sotnikova! Either prove a judge was corrupt or stop posting all these hate Adelina threads!

Do you really want people to hate Adelina? Your comments makes people want to do.

Vanshilar · Mar 15, 2014

Blades of Passion said:
As requested, I have written down all of the movements in Yu-Na Kim's LP footwork sequence:

Oh maybe this is just my ignorance of figure skating but why are there 2 #2's and 2 #41's?

Also Yuna makes a pause at around the 2:05 mark. Could the technical panel have ruled that it was the end of the step sequence and thus ignored everything that came after? I'm not familiar with how step sequences are usually scored.

Regarding the earlier question about why would a skater put so many more steps in than needed to fulfill a step sequence level, I can think of several off the bat: Just in case the skater makes a mistake, he/she can still have enough steps to satisfy a given level; because it fits better with the music, since the requirements just specify a minimum but skaters can fit extra steps to match the music; (speculating) for higher GOE's. Obviously the last one didn't happen in this case.

Blades of Passion · Mar 15, 2014

Vanshilar said:
maybe this is just my ignorance of figure skating but why are there 2 #2's and 2 #41's?

Just silly mis-types by me when numbering the list. I'll fix it, thank you!

Vanshilar said:
Is there another link to that first video?

Here you go - http://www.mediafire.com/download/gc7i06oz5l863zh/2013-14_OG_Sotnikova,_Adelina_LP_(RUS)_(NBCHD).ts (probably a long download time, FYI)

Vanshilar · Mar 15, 2014

Blades of Passion said:
Here you go - http://www.mediafire.com/download/gc7i06oz5l863zh/2013-14_OG_Sotnikova,_Adelina_LP_(RUS)_(NBCHD).ts (probably a long download time, FYI)

Cool, got it, thanks! That video has pretty good detail -- the best I've seen of the skate.

qwertyskates · Mar 15, 2014

Is this another Adelina bashing thread to "prove" somehow that there's a lapse or corruption in judgment in awarding Adelina her high points?

I agree with DMD that Adelina's Step Sequence is correctly awarded Level 4 based on the Rule that BoP cited.

This is the Rule without commas.

"Complexity must include at least 5 different types of turns and 3 different types of steps all executed at least once in both directions."

The Complexity Rule sets the MINIMUM DIFFERENT no. of turns is = or >5, or no. of steps = or >3, executed at least once in both directions, which means that the variety of turns and steps must be performed at least once in both directions. It seems this emphasizes VARIETY of Turns (Ts) and Steps (Ss), the MINIMUM DIFFERENT TYPES of Turns and Steps in both directions. Adelina did 6 different types of Turns, and she did them both clockwise and counterclockwise, so the demand for complexity/variety is satisfied.

To me, the emphasis of "Complexity" is about Different Types, ie. Variety, and executed in both directions. This sets the minimum, so the more different types of turns and steps performed, the higher the complexity and variety.

Blades of Passion · Mar 15, 2014

You are incorrect. *yawn*

But hopefully we see some changes to the step sequence rules.

qwertyskates · Mar 15, 2014

Blades of Passion said:
You are incorrect. *yawn*

But hopefully we see some changes to the step sequence rules.

Actually, you can't be the only one who is scrutinizing Adelina's win as it seems "millions" and "the majority of the world" (according to the copious threads and repeat posters here) feel Yuna Kim should win, yet of all these millions, including Korean skating officials, none has criticized the judging of Adelina's step sequence based on your interpretation of this rule.

So either the rest of the skating world (including many here like MDM and myself), pro, neutral or against Adelina, is correct, or you alone are correct.

I do agree that the Rules should be written more clearly. If they meant each type of turn and step must be executed in both directions, then they should write it like that. However, in a running sentence that all of them must be executed in both directions leaves the room for interpretation as per Adelina's Step Sequence.

Glen Parry · Mar 15, 2014

qwertyskates said:
Actually, you can't be the only one who is scrutinizing Adelina's win as it seems "millions" and "the majority of the world" (according to the copious threads and repeat posters here) feel Yuna Kim should win, yet of all these millions, including Korean skating officials, none has criticized the judging of Adelina's step sequence based on your interpretation of this rule.

So either the rest of the skating world (including many here like MDM and myself), pro, neutral or against Adelina, is correct, or you alone are correct.

I do agree that the Rules should be written more clearly. If they meant each type of turn and step must be executed in both directions, then they should write it like that. However, in a running sentence that all of them must be executed in both directions leaves the room for interpretation as per Adelina's Step Sequence.

Possibly this is the main thing this entire thread demonstrates, i.e. that there is potential for interpretation of this rule in more than one way?

BoP has, regardless of the insertion of punctuation that doesn't exist in the original text (and giving the benefit of the doubt that this was not done with malicious intent), interpreted the rule to have one meaning and has vigorously defended that interpretation, some times to, what I'm sure is unintentionally, the point of seeming rude.

Others have disagreed with this interpretation.

Much though I hate to say this in relation to a sport in which there will always be a subjective element to the judging; sorry, but even 30 years ago my personal taste leaned towards the more athletic & less "arty" programs, except in ice dance (& even then I preferred those routines where you could actually identify something resembling the dance that was meant to be skated), but the only way to resolve this would be to bring in the lawyers & get them to rewrite the rules in such a complicated & detailed fashion as to require holding a law degree be a prerequisite of sitting on a judging panel.

Vanshilar · Mar 15, 2014

Googling around, another source gives additional information about the interpretation of this:

https://www.usfigureskating.org/content/First Aid Singles.pdf

"Must include at least 5 different types of turns and 3 different types of steps all executed at least once in both directions. None of the types of turns and steps can be counted more than twice. “Both directions” refers to rotational direction not only for turns, but also for steps, e.g. mohawks, choctaws, chassés, change of edge. Skating forward and skating backward is not a change of rotational direction. "

It has the ISU logo on it but I don't know if that means the additional words are part of the "official" rules. At any rate, I don't really understand the confusion, it's standard English. What do you think "at least once in both directions" means, especially when it's modifying "all executed"? What do you think "all" is referring to? Why would it need to state "at least once"?

qwertyskates said:
Actually, you can't be the only one who is scrutinizing Adelina's win as it seems "millions" and "the majority of the world" (according to the copious threads and repeat posters here) feel Yuna Kim should win, yet of all these millions, including Korean skating officials, none has criticized the judging of Adelina's step sequence based on your interpretation of this rule.

So either the rest of the skating world (including many here like MDM and myself), pro, neutral or against Adelina, is correct, or you alone are correct.

I do agree that the Rules should be written more clearly. If they meant each type of turn and step must be executed in both directions, then they should write it like that. However, in a running sentence that all of them must be executed in both directions leaves the room for interpretation as per Adelina's Step Sequence.

So in other words, BoP is wrong simply because he's the first one to actually look at the step sequence in detail (not only to think of doing so but to actually take the time to do it). I guess all of research is wrong then, I should notify my Ph.D. advisor immediately. Actually, I had considered the "other" technical aspects (footwork and spins) that seemed odd the day of the Olympics, but I'm nowhere near qualified to judge them, so I waited for people more qualified (and willing to take the time) to do it. Based on the number of people in this thread who are actually looking at the step sequence, instead of smearing "hate" all over, it seems like very few people in fact have both the ability and the willingness to take a detailed look at the step sequence. It's telling that they're coming to the same conclusion while the hate-mongers are not bothering to refute the evidence, but instead trying to insert their own interpretation of the rules. Has anyone answered yet why under either interpretation Yuna should get level 3? After all, the purpose of the rules is to hold all skaters to the same yardstick.

qwertyskates · Mar 15, 2014

Glen Parry, I agree that the execution is probably related to the agenda of that Rule, i.e. Complexity, and there's subjectivity in its interpretation.

Vanshilar said:
Googling around, another source gives additional information about the interpretation of this:

https://www.usfigureskating.org/content/First Aid Singles.pdf

"Must include at least 5 different types of turns and 3 different types of steps all executed at least once in both directions. None of the types of turns and steps can be counted more than twice. “Both directions” refers to rotational direction not only for turns, but also for steps, e.g. mohawks, choctaws, chassés, change of edge. Skating forward and skating backward is not a change of rotational direction. "

It has the ISU logo on it but I don't know if that means the additional words are part of the "official" rules. At any rate, I don't really understand the confusion, it's standard English. What do you think "at least once in both directions" means, especially when it's modifying "all executed"? What do you think "all" is referring to? Why would it need to state "at least once"?

So in other words, BoP is wrong simply because he's the first one to actually look at the step sequence in detail (not only to think of doing so but to actually take the time to do it). I guess all of research is wrong then, I should notify my Ph.D. advisor immediately. Actually, I had considered the "other" technical aspects (footwork and spins) that seemed odd the day of the Olympics, but I'm nowhere near qualified to judge them, so I waited for people more qualified (and willing to take the time) to do it. Based on the number of people in this thread who are actually looking at the step sequence, instead of smearing "hate" all over, it seems like very few people in fact have both the ability and the willingness to take a detailed look at the step sequence. It's telling that they're coming to the same conclusion while the hate-mongers are not bothering to refute the evidence, but instead trying to insert their own interpretation of the rules. Has anyone answered yet why under either interpretation Yuna should get level 3? After all, the purpose of the rules is to hold all skaters to the same yardstick.

Do you have to be rude? From your text, "at least once and not counted more than twice (which to me indicate their numbers performed in the Step Sequence, "at least once and not more than twice" sounds to me again that they value variety more than repetition) in both directions" still doesn't imply that EACH turn and step *must* be executed in both directions. Instead, as written, "ALL turns and steps (which could be more than 5 and 3) executed in both directions" is open to interpretation as per Adelina's skate.

The emphasis on "Complexity", "Different Types", "at least once but not more than twice" sounds to me that Variety is valued above repetition, and that's where Kim's step sequence fell short of Adelina's.

If the comma has been placed as per BoP, then the meaning is closer to his/her interpretation. If it is placed before "in both directions", then Adelina's interpretation makes sense. Since there is no comma, it should not be stated with certainty that Adelina's award of Level 4 is suspect.

Once again, this is another thread to make her win dubious, yet there is *no basis* whatsoever to this rumour mongering.

Yeah, you and many of the other posters really reek of "hate", the venom just comes fast and furious, not only at Adelina but also those posters who do not agree with your opinions. And yes, they're opinions, not FACTS, since you have not offered any proof beyond doubt to support your nasty allegations of cheating, foul play, etc. The onus is on you to provide the proof, not simply hearsay, since you are making allegations. Adelina and the judges are innocent until proven guilty, this is how the system works. Looks like you and millions of these Yuna's fans do not agree to this way of justice.

kozure · Mar 15, 2014

Sigh, I don't like for this to be my first post here, but it seems that some insist on being obtuse, stubborn even, in their refusal to accept what is a straightforward matter of reading the English language. I won't speculate on the reasons why.

In order to get the reading that these people want, the rule would have to say:

"Complexity must include at least 5 different types of turns and 3 different types of steps all executed at least once in either direction." (emphasis added)

But the rule doesn't say that. It states:

"Complexity must include at least 5 different types of turns and 3 different types of steps all executed at least once in both directions." (emphasis added)

The absence of a comma after "steps" does not introduce ambiguity into the meaning of the above sentence; all a comma does is to make the sentence easier to read. "Both," whether or not a comma is placed in the statement of the rule, is conjunctive; it means "one direction and the other direction too." "Both," whether or not a comma is placed in the statement of the rule, is NOT disjunctive; it does not mean "one direction or the other direction."

Don't believe me? Look up the definition of "both" at dictionary dot com or in any other dictionary and here's what you'll find:

both [bohth]:
adjective
1. one and the other; two together: He met both sisters. Both performances were canceled.

What's more, these people choose to ignore a long-standing member of this forum who actively competes in figure-skating and provided a clarification of the rule that supports BoP's non-interpretation of the rule (as Mathman also stated, it's not BoP's interpretation; it's simply the rule full-stop):

mskater93 said:
My coach (who is a US Regional-level TS and receives clarifications constantly via email and goes to tech school at least 1X per year) understands the rule to be as BoP does - 5 and 3 in EACH direction - when constructing step sequences for her skaters.

In addition, here is the link to USFS for the rules (only because it's easier to find than the correct communication on ISU's page):
1) Minimum variety (Level 1), simple variety (Level 2), variety (Level 3), complexity (Level 4) of turns and steps throughout (compulsory)
2) Rotations (turns, steps) in either direction (left and right) with full body rotation covering at least 1/3 of the pattern in total for each rotational direction
3) Use of upper body movements for at least 1/3 of the pattern
4) Two different combinations of 3 difficult turns (rockers, counters, brackets, twizzles, loops) quickly executed with a clear rhythm within the sequence

With clarification below:
Types of turns (executed on one foot) : three turns, twizzles, brackets, loops, counters, rockers.
Types of steps (executed on one foot whenever possible) : toe steps, chasses, mohawks, choctaws, curves with change of edge, cross-rolls, running steps.
Minimum variety must include at least 5 turns & 2 steps, none of the types can be counted more than twice.
Simple variety must include at least 7 turns & 4 steps, none of the types can be counted more than twice.
Variety must include at least 9 turns and 4 steps, none of the types can be counted more than twice.
Complexity must include at least 5 different types of turns and 3 different types of steps all
executed at least once in both directions.
Use of upper body movements means the visible use for a combined total of at least 1/3 of the pattern of the step sequence any movements of the arms, head and torso that have an effect on the balance of the main body core.
Two combinations of difficult turns are considered to be the same if they consist of the same turns done in the same order, on the same edge and on the same foot.

mskater93 said:
When tech school and clarification memos to tech panel members push that it means 5 CW and 5 CCW and 3 CW and 3CCW and 3 sets of "clusters" for L4, then that is what is meant. As I stated when I cut and pasted the rules and the source, my coach IS a Regional TS and in designing her skaters' leveled steps (and in calling leveled steps at competitions), she makes sure it is 5/5 and 3/3 MINIMUM or else it doesn't get called. I suspect that if Sotnikova was trying to get a L4, either her bracket was supposed to be a counter or her counter was supposed to be a bracket (as those were the mis-matched turns).

jennyanydots · Mar 15, 2014

Maybe education systems need to be reformed before we can get to the ISU. Apparently basic reading comprehension is a real issue for some people. I don't think it can be explained any clearer.

qwertyskates · Mar 15, 2014

kozure said:
kozure said:

Sigh, I don't like for this to be my first post here, but it seems that some insist on being obtuse, stubborn even, in their refusal to accept what is a straightforward matter of reading the English language. I won't speculate on the reasons why.

In order to get the reading that these people want, the rule would have to say:

"Complexity must include at least 5 different types of turns and 3 different types of steps all executed at least once in either direction." (emphasis added)

But the rule doesn't say that. It states:

"Complexity must include at least 5 different types of turns and 3 different types of steps all executed at least once in both directions." (emphasis added)

The absence of a comma after "steps" does not introduce ambiguity into the meaning of the above sentence; all a comma does is to make the sentence easier to read. "Both," whether or not a comma is placed in the statement of the rule, is conjunctive; it means "one direction and the other direction too." "Both," whether or not a comma is placed in the statement of the rule, is NOT disjunctive; it does not mean "one direction or the other direction."

Don't believe me? Look up the definition of "both" at dictionary dot com or in any other dictionary and here's what you'll find:

both [bohth]:
adjective
1. one and the other; two together: He met both sisters. Both performances were canceled.

What's more, these people choose to ignore a long-standing member of this forum who actively competes in figure-skating and provided a clarification of the rule that supports BoP's non-interpretation of the rule (as Mathman also stated; it's not BoP's interpretation; it's simply the rule full-stop):

Click to expand...

Wow, so many apparently "new" posters who know exactly how and when to jump into the discourse...

The reason "Both" and not "Either" is used is of course clearly related to Variety and Complexity. If "Either" is used, then ALL the different turns and steps can be done in ONLY ONE DIRECTION, once or twice, and the skater will not be penalized for lack of Variety in Direction, since "EITHER DIRECTION" is fine.

"Both" means that there must be execution in "BOTH DIRECTIONS", which adds Variety, but it doesn't state definitively that "EACH TYPE" must be in "BOTH DIRECTIONS".

One English lesson deserves another, but let me phrase this almost exactly like the Complexity Rule instead of the red herrings you throw about, how about this:

Complexity of Diet - you must eat at least 5 different vegetables and 3 different fruits at least once from both of these Dietary Tables (say, 1st Table is about the "Highest % Fiber", 2nd Table is about the "Highest % Vitamins").

If "EITHER of these Dietary Tables" is used, it is possible to select all or most from only ONE table.

Does it mean you *must* choose the same type of vegetable or fruit, EACH from BOTH tables?

Of course not! Complexity means the more types the better, a balanced selection from BOTH Tables is required. It means you shouldn't eat a variety ONLY from ONE Table. That is all.

Analyzing Sotnikova and Kim's footwork in the FS

gkelly

Mista Ekko

OS

Sedated by Modonium

Mathman

Alba

usethis2

Vanshilar

YunJung

Vanshilar

Blades of Passion

Skating is Art, if you let it be

Vanshilar

qwertyskates

Blades of Passion

Skating is Art, if you let it be

qwertyskates

Glen Parry

Vanshilar

qwertyskates

kozure

jennyanydots

qwertyskates

Similar threads

Connect with us