Analyzing Sotnikova and Kim's footwork in the FS | Page 82 | Golden Skate

Analyzing Sotnikova and Kim's footwork in the FS

Status
Not open for further replies.

Components

Match Penalty
Joined
Apr 2, 2014
The takeoff is always taken into consideration. That's why skaters' triple toe loops are downgraded when they do toe axels. Its also why it is so very difficult to get credit for a triple loop as the second jump in a combination-the mechanics of the jump lead to it being excessively pre-rotated, on average. Any slight ur on landing and the jump is downgraded.

The following is from the Technical Panel Handbook

http://static.isu.org/media/104198/tp_handbook_singles_2013-14_version_13-07-18.pdf

You 100% misunderstood what I wrote.

Congratulations.

When examining a cheated takeoff. The panel doesn't look at the landing and say (it was overrotated, so just give her the jump she still got x.y rotations in the air).

When examining the cheated landing, the don't look at the take off and say (she took off early, just give her the jump cause she got x.y rotations in the air).

If the take off is too far, the jump is UR regardless of the landing.

If the landing is short, the jump is UR regardless of the take off.

When examining one or the other, the other end is not examined and used to justify or debunk the call. They are examined in isolation of each other.

Hope that clears that up.

I'm more than aware the take off is checked it it looks cheated, and how it is checked. I just explained all this up thread.
 

Components

Match Penalty
Joined
Apr 2, 2014
Why do people constantly attack others and not respond to the content in the posts instead.

Character Assassination is not a substitute for substance...
 

Mrs. P

Uno, Dos, twizzle!
Record Breaker
Joined
Dec 27, 2009
Fwiw, just because people aren't saying anything doesn't mean they accept the result. Some just chose to not invest precious time to do so. You know what they say about insanity....
 

Blades of Passion

Skating is Art, if you let it be
Record Breaker
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Country
France
The landing is directly related to where the takeoff is. Everything exists within a circle. Yu-Na's takeoff point is starting far earlier, thus her "acceptable landing point" is different than someone else who completely pre-rotates the jump.
Incorrect.

The landing is directly related to the direction of travel. That is how the judges know a UR jump from a non-UR jump, by measuring the angle at which the skate comes into contact with the ice on landing relative to the direction in which the jump is traveling.

No it is not incorrect. If you are only looking at the direction of travel then you are NOT assessing the jump correctly. Spinning around on your toepick during the takeoff makes a jump easier. It doesn't matter that you were traveling in a certain direction when the jump started, the fact is that you didn't leave the ice until a certain point. A jump means going up into the air. The direction of travel can also be anywhere. You set set-up for a Loop jump going "backwards", for example, and then ride the edge and curve around before actually pressing into the ice for the takeoff (where the pre-rotation will happen).

Plus, as I've said before, a Lutz with "ideal" entry curves away from the direction of a rotation. You stated before in your picture that Yu-Na's Lutz takeoff was parallel to the camera - that is false. She does the Lutz with ideal technique and thus her blade curves away from the camera. If you've ever actually done these jumps before then you would know it's much harder to do it with the correct technique.

Again, everything in skating exists within a circle and a jump means going up into the air. You seem to think skating exists as a linear function and jump entries are always the same for any given jump. That's not true. Measuring the rotation of a jump MUST take into consideration the entirety of the takeoff. Someone who doesn't turn to forwards on their toepick is factually getting more rotation in the air and make the jump more difficult. You can not debate this point. Therefore, if you think logically and objectively, the conclusion is pretty obvious. When someone is getting 2.5+ rotations in the air and you're trying to call it as underrotated, and someone else is getting 2.25 rotations (or less even, since you're advocating that extra pre-rotation on the takeoff doesn't matter) and you're calling that latter jump as "sufficient", then there is clearly a problem.

Imagine we are both competing in a timed marathon that is 5 miles long. I begin the marathon at the actual start of the 5 miles and you are allowed to start 1 mile ahead of me (thus making it so you only have to run 4 miles). It takes me 60 minutes to run it. It takes you 55 minutes. Did you "do better" than me, just because measuring solely the end result said that it only took you 55 minutes as opposed to 60 for me? No, of course not. I did more work than you, ran more miles than you, and comparatively ran my miles faster than you did.
 

Components

Match Penalty
Joined
Apr 2, 2014
No it is not incorrect. If you are only looking at the direction of travel then you are NOT assessing the jump correctly. Spinning around on your toepick during the takeoff makes a jump easier. It doesn't matter that you were traveling in a certain direction when the jump started, the fact is that you didn't leave the ice until a certain point. A jump means going up into the air. The direction of travel can also be anywhere. You set set-up for a Loop jump going "backwards", for example, and then ride the edge and curve around before actually pressing into the ice for the takeoff (where the pre-rotation will happen).

Plus, as I've said before, a Lutz with "ideal" entry curves away from the direction of a rotation. You stated before in your picture that Yu-Na's Lutz takeoff was parallel to the camera - that is false. She does the Lutz with ideal technique and thus her blade curves away from the camera. If you've ever actually done these jumps before then you would know it's much harder to do it with the correct technique.

Again, everything in skating exists within a circle and a jump means going up into the air. You seem to think skating exists as a linear function and jump entries are always the same for any given jump. That's not true. Measuring the rotation of a jump MUST take into consideration the entirety of the takeoff. Someone who doesn't turn to forwards on their toepick is factually getting more rotation in the air and make the jump more difficult. You can not debate this point. Therefore, if you think logically and objectively, the conclusion is pretty obvious. When someone is getting 2.5+ rotations in the air and you're trying to call it as underrotated, and someone else is getting 2.25 rotations (or less even, since you're advocating that extra pre-rotation on the takeoff doesn't matter) and you're calling that latter jump as "sufficient", then there is clearly a problem.

Imagine we are both competing in a timed marathon that is 5 miles long. I begin the marathon at the actual start of the 5 miles and you are allowed to start 1 mile ahead of me (thus making it so you only have to run 4 miles). It takes me 60 minutes to run it. It takes you 55 minutes. Did you "do better" than me, just because measuring solely the end result said that it only took you 55 minutes as opposed to 60 for me? No, of course not. I did more work than you, ran more miles than you, and comparatively ran my miles faster than you did.

You can try as many bad analogies as you want, but that won't make it any less invalid as its always been.

And don't misinterpret what I said. I've clarified at least 2-3 times what I meant when I said the take-off doesn't matter when evaluating the landing.

The jump only needs either a take-off that is too pre-rotated or a landing that is too short to be deemed UR. One or the other is all that is needed.

Pre-rotating less does not give the skater the right to UR too much and still get credited a full triple. That's like saying they can take-off straight backwards and land forwards and do a three turn, and get credit for the full triple. It's literally, exactly, what you're saying.

The direction of travel is the base by which the angles (on the take-off and landing, are compared to determine if the landing was short on any end. If your landing is short, it doesn't matter how much you pre-rotate, the jump is going to get UR'd. This is reliable because the skate travels in a straight line in the air, not a curve as you somewhat inferred upthread.

Both Sotnikova nad Kim got away with them (Kim moreso, actually). The UR on Sotnikova's combination was not any worse than Yuna's second Lutz, and probably wasn't even as severe when you look at the HD video in slow motion of both jumps..

The judges gave preferential treatment to both skaters. Kim got lucky that she is as reputable as she is. Any other skater would have gotten at least 2-3 URs in that program as she performed it (there is reason to question at least 4 of her landings). Kexin from China got murdered, for example. The judges gave her some help. Without it, if her jumps had actualy been fairly judged, she likely would have gotten a bronze medal because those errors would have made it quite hard for her to stay ahead of Kostner in the overall standings.

I don't care what your opinion is. I care what the rules are and whether or not the jumps in question were on the right/wrong edge or fully rotated based on the rules. That Lutz wasn't, and she has a few other jumps that were more than questionable (at least 1 other that was certainly short, with two extremely close calls).

The way she performed doesn't surprised me at all. She looked tired and spent the whole time she was there, and she was muscling some of her jumps visibly to try to get them around.
 

drivingmissdaisy

Record Breaker
Joined
Feb 17, 2010
Therefore, if you think logically and objectively, the conclusion is pretty obvious. When someone is getting 2.5+ rotations in the air and you're trying to call it as underrotated, and someone else is getting 2.25 rotations (or less even, since you're advocating that extra pre-rotation on the takeoff doesn't matter) and you're calling that latter jump as "sufficient", then there is clearly a problem.

So what's the point of having rules that you can't prerotate more than half, and you have to be within 1/4 turn on the landing? You interpretation does not support these at all. Do you even see the inconsistency of what your saying, which is "just rotate 2.25 times any way you can"?
 

MiRé

Match Penalty
Joined
Nov 12, 2012
So what's the point of having rules that you can't prerotate more than half, and you have to be within 1/4 turn on the landing? You interpretation does not support these at all. Do you even see the inconsistency of what your saying, which is "just rotate 2.25 times any way you can"?

The rule SUGGESTS 2.25 revolutions, and the judges did NOT ding UR for Yuna's jump because they know better than you to reward a skater that rotates more than 2.25 revolutions, which is the minimum revolutions ISU suggests. It's idiotic to think someone would argue about murdering a skater with UR when in fact he/she rotated more than the requirement.

Why do people constantly attack others and not respond to the content in the posts instead.

Character Assassination is not a substitute for substance...

and Proxy posting is prohibited in GS and look where you are :rolleye:
 

drivingmissdaisy

Record Breaker
Joined
Feb 17, 2010
The rule SUGGESTS 2.25 revolutions, and the judges did NOT ding UR for Yuna's jump because they know better than you to reward a skater that rotates more than 2.25 revolutions, which is the minimum revolutions ISU suggests. It's idiotic to think someone would argue about murdering a skater with UR when in fact he/she rotated more than the requirement.

I can't believe we are arguing about this. There IS NO REQUIREMENT that a jump rotates 2.25. There IS A REQUIREMENT that it doesn't prerotate more than half (Yuna passes this with flying colors) AND that it is within 1/4 of rotation on the landing (Yuna does not pass this). I'm not sure how this is confusing you.
 

MiRé

Match Penalty
Joined
Nov 12, 2012
I can't believe we are arguing about this. There IS NO REQUIREMENT that a jump rotates 2.25. There IS A REQUIREMENT that it doesn't prerotate more than half (Yuna passes this with flying colors) AND that it is within 1/4 of rotation on the landing (Yuna does not pass this). I'm not sure how this is confusing you.

It's SIMPLE MATH. 3 - (MAXIMUM Pre-rotation) 1/2 - (MAXIMUM LANDING) 1/4 = 2.25 REVOLUTIONS in the air. Of course it's not LITERAL, but it's THERE if you just THINK a little bit which you REFUSE to. And to think a skater to receive UR when rotating MORE than 2.25 is RIDICULOUS. I'M not sure how this is confusing you.
 

Components

Match Penalty
Joined
Apr 2, 2014
I can't believe we are arguing about this. There IS NO REQUIREMENT that a jump rotates 2.25. There IS A REQUIREMENT that it doesn't prerotate more than half (Yuna passes this with flying colors) AND that it is within 1/4 of rotation on the landing (Yuna does not pass this). I'm not sure how this is confusing you.

They're doing that thing where they take the same failed argument, reword it, and try it again to see if it works. Lol...
 

jaylee

Medalist
Joined
Feb 21, 2010
I don't care what your opinion is. I care what the rules are and whether or not the jumps in question were on the right/wrong edge or fully rotated based on the rules.

Do you, really? It appears like you care about whether or not the jumps in question were on the right/wrong edge or fully rotated depending on the skater being discussed.

You only ever acknowledge Sotnikova's UR when countering about Kim's second lutz. You refer generally to both skaters having gotten away with calls but you focus on specifics and details for Kim, whereas you have rarely ever specific acknowledged Sotnikova's non-calls on the edge of the lutz or footwork levels. You have ignored whatever is inconvenient to your argument, and emphasized and exaggerated whatever is convenient.

You have not applied the same level of scrutiny to other skaters, including Sotnikova, that you have to Kim. It's like you're wearing a special pair of goggles that only allows you to "see" and allege flaws in Kim's skating. You are the equivalent of Kim supporters who--incorrectly--refuse to give credit to Sotnikova for anything.

You claim you care about fair criticism but your criticisms have not appeared so. Let's look at the wording from your previous post.

Also, I've never been dismissive of Sotnikova's UR. I've only been interested in knowing why you people continuously harp on it while ignoring Yuna's URs that she clearly got away with.

Interesting how you reserve the wording "clearly got away with" for Kim, and not specifically Sotnikova. Basically, you say that Sotnikova has a UR; Kim got away with hers. Didn't Sotnikova "clearly get away with" a UR? It's a little detail in wording, but it says a lot about bias. Yes, I'm sure you meant nothing by that, because you claim that you just care about the rules and fair criticism. However, truly fair posters don't need to proclaim their objectivity and fairness.

Blades of Passion has been consistent over the years on how he sees pre-rotation and underrotation. It is not something he fabricated after the Sochi Olympics to defend Kim and only Kim. Whereas it appeared from your posts that you selectively target certain skaters on whether they received the "right" calls.

I have no problem with someone who thinks Sotnikova's victory is justified in of itself. gkelly is a great example of someone who has consistently and objectively justified the overall judging (and implicitly Sotnikova's win), defended the rules, offered legitimate explanations for non-calls, without ever applying an uneven level of scrutiny to any one skater. The same is not true of your posts.
 

Components

Match Penalty
Joined
Apr 2, 2014
This conversation has run its course for me. We're all repeating ourselves at this point. No more push notifications, please 🙏
 

drivingmissdaisy

Record Breaker
Joined
Feb 17, 2010
You only ever acknowledge Sotnikova's UR when countering about Kim's second lutz. You refer generally to both skaters having gotten away with calls but you focus on specifics and details for Kim, whereas you have rarely ever specific acknowledged Sotnikova's non-calls on the edge of the lutz or footwork levels.

Well we are talking about the < at the moment. The assertion is that Adelina underrotated her 3T but Yuna didn't her 3Lz. We can't talk about everything at once. If Adelina was <, and I think it was, Yuna's was also <, which I also think it was. It failed the rule that you cannot turn more than 1/4 on the ice, which Adelina's also failed. If you want to believe that this rule doesn't apply when a jump is not prerotated as much as it can be, then you may. From my perspective, if there were to be exceptions to the 1/4 rule they could have been included, but they were not. Again, my perspective is that the rule is designed to address jumps with "hooked" landings. If you are ok with a "hooked" landing and think it's good technique when a skater does it when they don't prerotate much, then that is what you believe. I don't see how one would think a jump landed forward would be considered clean, but pre-rotating 1/4 turn and landing forward perfectly achieves the 2.25 revolutions that BoP and others thinks makes an acceptable jump.

At the end of the day, the SP panel of non-Russian judges and the LP panel that leaned slightly pro-Russian had Adelina almost on par with or ahead of Yuna on PCS and GOE. I'm not sure where you think that panel, especially the SP panel, would view Adelina favorably for any reason other than her skating, but if you think the composition of that SP panel is in any way problematic then it will be impossible to ever create a FS judging panel that will please you. (Well maybe you wish the panel from South Koreans nationals were judging, but that isn't going to happen.)
 

Alain

Match Penalty
Joined
Apr 28, 2014
Nah, drivingmissdaisy has flip-flopped her stance so much to suit her pro-Sotnikova arguments (and has been called out on it several times) that it makes one's head spin.
What I read on this board:
#1. People why reply about Sotnikova's UR say that Yuna had UR as well but judges chose not to be strict to both girls. Fair game to me.
#2. People who say that Sotnikova had UR but Yuna didn't. In case with her the rule of 1/4 landing is not in apply because it is not.

Clear as a day who is flip-flopping. Personal attacks on multiple posters doesn't help.
 

Meoima

Match Penalty
Joined
Feb 13, 2014
What I read on this board:
#1. People why reply about Sotnikova's UR say that Yuna had UR as well but judges chose not to be strict to both girls. Fair game to me.
#2. People who say that Sotnikova had UR but Yuna didn't. In case with her the rule of 1/4 landing is not in apply because it is not.
Clear as a day who is flip-flopping. Personal attacks on multiple posters doesn't help.
:agree: technically the same with what I see. Neither fan of both ladies. :popcorn:
 

Vanshilar

On the Ice
Joined
Feb 24, 2014
Polina UR'd a Toe Loop on the back half of her combination. She didn't fall on it, it was deemed UR. The Jump she UR'd and fell was, IIRC, a Triple Flip, and that wasn't even in the same program. So I'm not going to go on about this part of your post.

So you're talking about her lutz-toe loop combo in the short program? But for that jump she was clearly pre-rotating; in fact, from the replay that focused on her skates (which was almost head-on with her line of travel), it seems like she actually pre-rotated past directly forward (so it should have been downgraded to a toe-axel), and she only did 2 rotations in the air, less than the 2 1/4 minimum. I was looking for lutz/flip jumps since those seem to be the ones where some skaters are still facing the backward half on takeoff. If anything, the lutz immediately preceding that jump that Polina did also looks fairly underrotated (especially when looking at the replay which focuses on the skates) but only the toe loop was called for underrotation, which would lead credence to less pre-rotation meaning more leeway on underrotation; her skates are still pointing in the backward half when she takes off for that jump. (Or it could just be within the leeway that judges give for underrotations.)

Yes, and no.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbeq_M8Lgtg

^- That should answer your question.

Also see: http://icoachskating.com/comparing-triple-lutz-technique-lutz-analysis-trevor-laak/

I think it will do good to explain the differences between the two take-off techniques and why most women (certainly more than men) pivot further than men, especially on this jump.

That's my "No," cause you're trying to make a definitive correlation between the two that would lead one to believe that if you pivot all the way it means you flutzed (not saying you're saying that, but it sort of infurs such).

My "Yes" is cause it is easier to pivot all the way on a Flutz because it is more easily possible to open the hip which unblocks the lower body, allowing it to rotate more easily. So yea, a skater with a Flutz will likely rotate all the way more often, which is why I said Lutzes tend to pivot less than most other jumps.

So if I understand the link correctly, it's what you were talking about regarding the "power take-off" i.e. one of the techniques for the lutz gives more power (i.e. height) but results in less pre-rotation. It's a tradeoff then (more height but then the skater has more rotation that needs to be done in the air) so it will depend on the strengths of each skater as to which technique they should use (more power but more in-the-air rotation needed to complete the jump, or less power but less in-the-air rotation needed). Is that an accurate summary? Would answer my #1 and #2, though not #3 (skaters who put the full blade down on their toe pick foot, but it looks like the third guy in the lutz video does it that way and Trevor didn't seem to think there's anything wrong with that).

If you review the protocols of every competition and which jumps got UR, some technical specialists DO give leeway on the landing of a jump if the skater pre-rotates less, and give less leeway on the landing of a jump when the skater pre-rotated the jump more. It's not perfectly consistent but the evidence is there to support what Blades of Passion has been saying.

I guess something along these lines was more what I was expecting. Now the rules (since everyone seems to be so fond of appealing to them) says "The quarter and half mark of landing are the border lines to identify cheated jumps" (although it doesn't specify where this is measured from). It also says "In all doubtful cases the Technical Panel should act to the benefit of the skater" (without specifying what this means). Although internet pundits use video freeze frames for evidence (almost always incorrectly from what I've seen), I remember something about how the judges don't or there are limits on how they use slow-motion replay (as opposed to video running in real-time), but too lazy to look it up right now. At any rate, I would expect something along the lines of, anything within (for example) 15 degrees of the allowed 90 degrees of underrotation will usually not be called as being underrotated, and that this may vary by jump, because the judges are looking at video in real-time and/or with a limited camera angle (i.e. the available camera angle makes underrotation difficult to determine) and they give benefit of the doubt. In short, they call UR if it's clearly UR, but the issue for the internet is quantifying what "clearly UR" means when people are throwing video screen grabs around.

I'm not sure why you single out Mao, she has URs that don't get called as well. Although the one that comes to mind directly is her triple axel and she obviously doesn't take the full pre-rotation allowance on that one -- so perhaps more UR is allowable for that jump. At this point, nobody has pointed to any evidence for this or even data about this, instead all I've seen is internet statements of position (i.e. "this is how it is and I'm right and you're wrong) without any sort of support.

As an aside, I should point out that a lot of the discussion here relies on agreed-upon interpretation of the rules. For example, Dorispulaski pointed out what the rules state on cheated (overly pre-rotated) takeoffs, but I'm not aware of any rule that says that "clear forward" is defined as if the skate rotates past directly forward (i.e. the direction of travel); that's just based on our internet interpretation. Not that it's incorrect, but some posters seem to like say "interpretation" as the catch-all for "I'm right and you're wrong".

Technical errors are not subjective, they are 100% mathematically provable.

I'd be more convinced if somebody actually did the math, but a video of screen grabs and made-up numbers isn't math -- it's putting images and made-up numbers into a video.

The UR on Sotnikova's combination was not any worse than Yuna's second Lutz, and probably wasn't even as severe when you look at the HD video in slow motion of both jumps.

So. What would you be willing to bet on this?

Any other skater would have gotten at least 2-3 URs in that program as she performed it (there is reason to question at least 4 of her landings). Kexin from China got murdered, for example.

Admittedly I haven't kept up with the internet controversy on this, but what are those 4 jumps? (Similarly, other than Adelina's 3T in her lutz combo and the 2Lo stepout, I'm not aware of internet controversy about any of her other jumps. Most of what I've heard about Yuna is the solo 3Lz.)

Also, I looked at Kexin's free skate -- pretty much every jump seems to have been underrotated, even the ones that weren't called for it. I don't know why she and her coach don't work more on fully rotating her jumps.
 

Components

Match Penalty
Joined
Apr 2, 2014
Last post on the matter.

The tradeoff of the power takeoff is that if you are a slower rotator you run the risk of UR. The extra height is used to give more time to rotate the jump. Quads rarely use that technique because it slows down the time it takes to pull into the jump for most skaters. It's all about efficiency. Yuna can do this cause she rotates slower (or rather, has a slower snap into her rotations), which demands more airtime i.e. more pop on the take off. She needs the extra time to get the jump collected, cause you kind of have to get to a certain position in the jump and in the air before you can snap them, otherwise you risk the jump going off kilter/thrown off its axis which is very dangerous and an inefficient way to rotate them.

Still, that technique doesn't allow a skater to UR the landing and get away with it. Many elite skaters who tried it would like to disagree with the stuff being peddled in this thread, since they've done what is said to be "okay" here and suffered the calls for it.

In Yuna's case it's not necessarily the rotating speed itself, but the fact that she took a bit long[er] to get into her rotations (longer than normal and her jumps are often already walking the line without that to mess with them). You can see the delay in real-time. When that happens, it almost always has an impact on the jumps full rotation because the skater can't magically rotate at a higher optimal speed than they usually do, she is snapping into her optimal rotations LATER (meaning that extra time the take-off gave her was eaten up to some extent by her taking longer to get to her optimal rotation speed in-air), and with the way she lands her jumps (usually with a hook, albeit an "acceptable" hook) normally it was already bound to cause an issue on that landing. That isn't necessarily surprising, since the jump was in the back half of the program and she was likely tiring at that point. She was clearly drained at the end of the performance and didn't look as energetic as usual in Sochi.

The jump landed short and that's pretty much that. The video available is just too good to try to refute it, which is why others have resorted to trying to say her use of a power take-off gives her the right to UR the jump and not get called on it, which is patently false as many men's skaters (and a few other women) would like their points back if that was the case. Lol.

I'm willing to bet $500 on the rotation debate between the two jumps. They are very similar in degree of UR. I'd settle for a pair of MK Phantoms, though, if you prefer. I have both programs on my PC and have seen both landings at quarter speed. The degree of UR on the Toe Loop back half and Yuna's second Lutz is pretty much the same - that's the only reason why some people (like myself) took exception to the lopsided way in which that jump was attacked, compared to Yuna's obvious UR. However, I'm flabbergasted that I get attacked for being "biased" while people are breaking their fingers trying to find an acceptable explanation (none exists) to excuse the UR on that Lutz, which was visible in real-time, while complaining that an almost identical UR from another skater was not called as well.

The judges had enough chances to ding Yuna Kim in that FS, to the point that a case can be made for her finishing in 3rd place. If they were out to get her that badly, they'd have done it, and it would have been 100% defendable.

The problem with Kexin's situation is that Murakami followed her and got away with a number of URs. Reputation matters. A number of people noticed it and weren't shy about it. This "problem" is bigger than Adelina and Yuna, or Mao, or Kostner, or Wagner, or whatever other "top" skater someone wants to throw in. If Kexin URs, the judges won't hesitate to murder her, but the same panel of judges were content with letting a slew of more reputable skaters UR without a deduction (some were called but the GOEs were limited (sometimes negative), but Sotnikova and Yuna got too much GOE for those jumps, both of them).

Adelina's other jumps aren't up for debate because she lands most of them almost straight backwards. There isn't anything to review. The 2Lo was over rotated almost half a revolution. It wasn't two footed (the take-off was clean, just off-axis), so I'm not sure where that came from. She stepped out of it. If she had rotated another quarter rotation she ran the risk of the technical panel calling it a triple and eliminating the entire jump pass. That would have given Kim the win as she would have lost over 8 points on that jump pass in that situation. Also, If Kim had done a +2 GOE Triple Loop in her program, she could have won the title outright.

We discussed Yuna other [allegedly UR] jumps up thread. Refer to those posts. There is video available, as well. As for your other technical question regarding the explanation of the entrances that I gave upthread, all that information is upthread and I'm not really interested in entertaining speculation, guessing, or "winging it" of any sorts. There is no full blade jumping in that video. I thought we went over this earlier in the thread - how the skate reacts with the ice on a jump take-off. What you're seeing is a figment of your imagination. It does not exist, so stop perpetuating it. Saying it 1,000x won't make it any less false than it is. No one jumps like that, except maybe newbies doing half-jumps or small singles with no speed or power. I don't care what crafty faux screen caps you come up with, look at a jump take-off in motion and you'll clearly see no one is jumping off the rocker of their skate the way you imply.

In no situation is it proper to UR more than 1/4 turn on the landing and call it a clean jump (regardless of who is skating, and in my mind the rules apply equally to EVERYONE - they both should have gotten a UR and GOE deductions for the errors). It does not matter if you use more or less pivot on the take-off. More women than men use the full pivot, but even men who typically jump the way Yuna does [with a lower amount of pivot in the skate on take-off] will get a UR if they land over a quarter under. The only precedent for that being ignored is: A.) She's Yuna Kim, and B.) The judges ignored Sotnikova's, so at least ignoring Kim's made it a little more fair for her from a TES point of view. If both were deducted, Sotnikova would have still won (she would have won with the 'e' call on her Lutz as well, easily) and Kim would have been at risk for dropping to third, under Kostner (who also received, IMO, generous GOEs especially on her spins).

We did the math. It's just that people are smoke screening it with their opinions and preferences, personal attack, name calling, and filibusters.

There is no need to continue discussing the matter if it's going to continue to be toxic. Do you have any math to share?
 
Last edited:

drivingmissdaisy

Record Breaker
Joined
Feb 17, 2010
Adelina's other jumps aren't up for debate because she lands most of them almost straight backwards.

Maybe this is a better way to explain it: more than a 1/4 turn on the ice means the jumps isn't landed backwards (or is landed more forwards than backwards). Regardless of how much a skater prerotates, not landing a jump backwards is not ideal and, if you rotate more than 1/4, you aren't landing the jump backwards. That's the only other way I can think the explain the < rule.
 

Ultra

Rinkside
Joined
Jun 21, 2014
The video available is just too good to try to refute it

That's exactly what I thought as well. It is the textbook underrotation clip, everything about it is perfect: The ultra high fps, the perpendicular perspective, the camera tracking, the zoom in on the little dust cloud when she touches down... We finally got lucky.
 

MiRé

Match Penalty
Joined
Nov 12, 2012
That's exactly what I thought as well. It is the textbook underrotation clip, everything about it is perfect: The ultra high fps, the perpendicular perspective, the camera tracking, the zoom in on the little dust cloud when she touches down... We finally got lucky.

Funny how obsessed you are with Yuna Kim's jumps. I mean, looking at your youtube feeds, you are clearly a nationalistic person. Why are you such a sad human being? Does liking "Yuna Kim cheat jumps" make you feel better or something? Or are you just one of those people who's still mad Asada got silver in 2010 Vancouver? Why don't you do an in-depth analysis on Asada's jumps in Vancouver. You'll maybe find out she should be stripped of her silver medal given the lee-ways the judges gave her on her 3A, 3A-2Lo, and her 3Lo. Not to mention, her 3A in 2014 Worlds SP should have been called UR as well but your videos don't mention anything about that.

Don't get me wrong, I do not agree with your "opinions" in ANY way. But I agree with you on one thing. "everything about it is perfect" the way Yuna landed her beautiful 3F and her 3Lz, where she has no EDGE problems unlike 90% of the ladies, and because of your ever so kind "ultra high fps" I was able to see how much she actually rotates in the air, unlike 90% of the ladies (whom you seem to support) who has trouble rotating the bare minimum of 2.25 revolutions.

It was wonderful to find out what kind of person you are judging by the videos you liked on your own channel. Perhaps next time you should be careful about what you do on public. You have no credibility.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top