Analyzing Sotnikova and Kim's footwork in the FS

gkelly · Mar 21, 2014

There's also a lot of on-the-job training and proving oneself before one would be chosen to call the Olympics.

They're not going to choose someone who just came out of a seminar and never called an international event.

And the tech panels are chosen by the ISU not the national federations.

drivingmissdaisy · Mar 21, 2014

gkelly said:
And the tech panels are chosen by the ISU not the national federations.

If that is the case, it is even less likely that incompetent people would be picked to call the freakin' Olympics.

Blades of Passion · Mar 21, 2014

You're talking about things unrelated to the thread. You're also making incorrect assumptions now; please don't put words in my mouth. Furthermore, the point is that the protocols are wrong. 4 wrong calls were made by the technical panel. Sotnikova receiving +3 GOE's on her step sequence is also nonsensical to anyone who understands step sequences.

drivingmissdaisy · Mar 21, 2014

Blades of Passion said:
You're talking about things unrelated to the thread. You're also making incorrect assumptions now; please don't put words in my mouth. Furthermore, the point is that the protocols are wrong. 4 wrong calls were made by the technical panel. Sotnikova receiving +3 GOE's on her step sequence is also nonsensical to anyone who understands step sequences.

Your entire argument rests on (a) Vanessa Gusmeroli is either incompetent or crooked or (b) the Finnish judge whose last name ends in "ova" conspired with the Tech Controller to overturn all of Gusmeroli's proper calls. I don't find either plausible.

Blades of Passion · Mar 21, 2014

gkelly said:
There's also a lot of on-the-job training and proving oneself before one would be chosen to call the Olympics.

Eh, there's no additional on-the-job learning. There is only the constant application of what has already been taught, rather than a continual broader understanding of skating. Of course, callers should become better and faster at identifying the elements if they are doing it frequently. But anyone who has an extensive understanding of skating+CoP and practices identifying elements will gain that same skillset.

drivingmissdaisy said:
Your entire argument rests on (a) Vanessa Gusmeroli is either incompetent or crooked or (b) the Finnish judge whose last name ends in "ova" conspired with the Tech Controller to overturn all of Gusmeroli's proper calls. I don't find either plausible.

Completely incorrect. As has been said many times now, EACH member of the technical panel splits up the duties in calling the step sequences. They are EACH individually responsible for determining the level. Any one of them could have made a mistake. It could have been that a different person made the mistake on each step sequence. But we don't know right now. What the skating community deserves is for each of the technical panel members to be questioned about exactly what calls they made.

With regards to Sotnikova's lutz edge and underrotation, it did require 2 out of 3 of the tech panel to agree. But we still don't know which 2 (or if it was all 3).

Either way, 4 wrong calls were made that directly benefited Sotnikova. Exactly what conclusion should be drawn from that? You'd have to be brainless or ignorant to not question the possibility of cheating, considering the long history of it and who it happened to (a Russian skater with a chance for Gold in a Russian Olympics).

capcomeback · Mar 21, 2014

drivingmissdaisy said:
Your entire argument rests on (a) Vanessa Gusmeroli is either incompetent or crooked or (b) the Finnish judge whose last name ends in "ova" conspired with the Tech Controller to overturn all of Gusmeroli's proper calls. I don't find either plausible.

or Gusmeroli was calling spins, not footwork. It's silly to speculate on who is responsible if we don't know (unless an investigation is completed and released). Still, mistakes were made on the panel and that needs to be addressed no matter who called or controlled.

Additionally, Vanessa would have not been directly responsible for the GOE's issued by judges. Adelina's flutz/ur'ed toe was seemingly caught by one judge (as opposed to the tech caller) who gave her a -1 GOE. Another was not so sure so they did not award her any GOE bonus.

gkelly · Mar 21, 2014

capcomeback said:
or Gusmeroli was calling spins, not footwork.

All tech panel members evaluate all elements.

During the step sequence, one member of the panel (usually the TS) calls the variety/complexity, and the other two divide up the other three features.

During the spins, they would also each look for different features.

pangtongfan · Mar 21, 2014

vegarin said:
Did you just accuse BoP of all people to be a Yuna fan? It looks like you're getting a bit desperate, there.

drivingmissdaisy has called me a biased Yu Na hater 8 months ago when I argued she wasnt nearly as good as Kwan, and now calls me a Yu Na bot just because I side with 99% of people by not agreeing with Sotnikova's obviously corruption based win. Hilarious.

capcomeback · Mar 21, 2014

gkelly said:
All tech panel members evaluate all elements.

During the step sequence, one member of the panel (usually the TS) calls the variety/complexity, and the other two divide up the other three features.

During the spins, they would also each look for different features.

Thanks for clarifying!

Vanshilar · Mar 22, 2014

So here's my attempt at looking through Yuna's short program. I'm only going to do the turns for now, since I haven't only gone through the steps yet. Since I'm new at this, feel free to let me know if there are any turns that you disagree with. I essentially used the gif I posted earlier, although for a few of them I did refer back to the video. But the gif was good enough for most of the turns.

Basically, it looks like Yuna does at least one in each direction for all 6 turns, and also does two combinations of turns, so it should fulfill those requirements for a level 4 step sequence. It remains to be seen if Yuna fulfills the step requirement, the rotation in either direction requirement, and the use of upper body movements requirement.

Yuna was scored a level 3 for this step sequence.

My calling of the turns is below. I gave the time index based on when the short program started. For reference, for my gif, the first image was at 1:41.5 and the last image was at 2:26.4. I also highlighted the combination turns that fulfill the level 4 requirement.

Code:

Time   Direction Turn    Edge    Notes
1:43.9 CounterCW 3-turn  LFO-LBI
1:47.3 CW        Rocker  RBI-RFI (Exit edge hard to tell, might be 3-turn)
1:53.6 CounterCW Bracket LFI-LBO
1:55.4 CounterCW Rocker  LFO-LBO
1:57.3 CW        3-turn  LBO-LFI
1:57.8 CW        Twizzle
1:58.3 CW        Twizzle
[highlight]2:04.4 CounterCW Counter RBI-RFI
2:05.3 CounterCW Twizzle
2:05.7 CounterCW Twizzle[/highlight]
2:06.1 CounterCW Twizzle
2:06.4 CounterCW 3-turn  RBO-RFI
2:07.2 CounterCW Rocker  RFI-RBI
2:10.4 CW        3-turn  RFO-RBI
2:11.3 CW        Loop    RBI-RBI
2:14.2 CounterCW Rocker  LFO-LBO
2:15.5 CounterCW Loop    LBI-LBI
[highlight]2:22.0 CW        Rocker  LBO-LFO
2:23.0 CW        Bracket LFO-LBI
2:23.8 CW        Counter LBI-LFI (Hard to tell due to camera angle)[/highlight]

Turn    CW CCW
3-turn   2   2
Twizzle  2   3
Bracket  1   1
Loop     1   1
Counter  1   1
Rocker   2   3

Blades of Passion said:
For #26/#27, she does pretty clearly leave the inside edge before doing the turn. Probably tricky to see if you haven't done these kinds of movements yourself, but try to spot how the edge flattens out and starts changing direction before the turn. There isn't counter-rotation happening there.

Hmm I guess it's a bit harder to tell since I'm using the path that the skate takes as a guide for this turn, rather than that and the angle of the leg, because Yuna is fairly upright here. (I don't blame her, she only spent about 0.6 seconds from the previous turn to this one.) Incidentally, I tried looking at Adelina's short program as well, but even though I've spent twice the time on it already compared with looking at Yuna's SP, I still have a bunch of unclear calls since Adelina is fairly upright for a lot of them, and she tends to change edges right before a turn so I'm not sure how to count that. It doesn't help that the only video I have of Adelina's SP is 480x360 resolution and is of someone filming the television.

usethis2 · Mar 24, 2014

I am sorry to interject here with my short knowledge, but without knowing the names of turns and whatnot it is evident to me how much Yuna has improved her skating compared to this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8hV4UYlp68Q&feature=player_detailpage#t=242

Even the above performance looks so much better than Adelina's, in terms of execution. (I have no clue as to the level)

mateusp1 · Mar 24, 2014

usethis2 said:
I am sorry to interject here with my short knowledge, but without knowing the names of turns and whatnot it is evident to me how much Yuna has improved her skating compared to this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8hV4UYlp68Q&feature=player_detailpage#t=242

Even the above performance looks so much better than Adelina's, in terms of execution. (I have no clue as to the level)

Carolina's Scheherazade had better step sequence than Yuna's. But, regarding the overall look of the program, Yuna's was better.

wolkenschloss · Mar 25, 2014

Blades of Passion said:
Sotnikova receiving +3 GOE's on her step sequence is also nonsensical to anyone who understands step sequences.

Even though I cannot identify separate movements like rocker and Choctaw, Sotnikova's step seq. did'nt look like smooth and effortless as that of Kim, Asada and Carolina. Her movements didn't come along with Capricio by Saint-Saëns.

JayW · Mar 25, 2014

wolkenschloss said:
Even though I cannot identify separate movements like rocker and Choctaw, Sotnikova's step seq. did'nt look like smooth and effortless as that of Kim, Asada and Carolina. Her movements didn't come along with Capricio by Saint-Saëns.

Agree. Adelina's stsq was bumpy jumpy. The smoothness was not there. On the other hand, Caro and Yuna have more smoother and effortless stsqs.

gkelly · Mar 25, 2014

wolkenschloss said:
Even though I cannot identify separate movements like rocker and Choctaw, Sotnikova's step seq. did'nt look like smooth and effortless as that of Kim, Asada and Carolina. Her movements didn't come along with Capricio by Saint-Saëns.

That should be reflected in the Grade of Execution.

mskater93 · Mar 25, 2014

gkelly said:
That should be reflected in the Grade of Execution.

But it didn't appear to be reflected in GOE if Sotnikova got +3's

ILuvYuna · Mar 25, 2014

^Not everyone gave her 3's lol :points:

I♥Yuna;892691 said:
Adelina's Scores: Suspicious vs. Not-so-much
STEP SEQ......BV..........7.......5.......2......1.... .......GoE/Actual/GoE........6.......3........4.......8.......9
StSq4..........3.90..........3.......3.......3......2...........1.93/1.70/1.40.........3.......1.......2......2.......2
[...]
(Notice most of the 3's for the step sequence that was called wrong are coming from the cheating block = they're trying to capitalize on the higher multiplier of L4. Also, notice that the only +2 (from the cheating block) for this wrong-call element, came from Judge 1. This is because it was Judge 1's job to score "safely" on everything - he/she scored 2's practically straight down the line. By "safe" I don't mean lowering the chances that they'll get caught, I mean increasing the likelihood that it will not be dropped, thus, ensuring that a decent high score will count towards the final GoE points for every element.)

Mathman · Mar 25, 2014

By "safe" I don't mean lowering the chances that they'll get caught, I mean increasing the likelihood that it will not be dropped, thus, ensuring that a decent high score will count towards the final GoE points for every element.

A better strategy for two or more people cheating together is just to give straight highest possible scores across the board. Only one score is dropped.

ILuvYuna · Mar 25, 2014

^maybe they're not that smart? :laugh:

Or maybe they're afraid to get caught if they're so obvious* :yes:. Or even better, maybe there's no conspiracy and about 4 of the judges were just sincerely blown away by Adelina, and sincerely not impressed with Yuna?

gkelly · Mar 25, 2014

I♥Yuna;892772 said:
Or even better, maybe there's no conspiracy and about 4 of the judges were just sincerely blown away by Adelina, and sincerely not impressed with Yuna?

Or somewhere in between -- no conspiracy, some judges sincerely blown away by Adelina more than by Yuna, others comparably impressed with both but more generous to Adelina, consciously or unconsciously, because they preferred the result where she won (maybe for nationalistic reasons, maybe because of personal feelings about these young women beyond what they actually put on the ice, whatever).

As for the level calls, I think it is possible that they were made honestly. That Kim honestly didn't get credit for upper body movement in the FS step sequence. That in real time, from the angle the panel was watching, whoever counted turns and steps for Sotnikova came up with IDs closer to my analysis than Blades of Passion's and gave her the feature, and neither of the other panel member felt the need to review the sequence to question it. If they watched again in slow motion for a different angle they might rethink whether she really achieved "complexity of turns and steps" as defined. Or stand by their initial determination, if video from the official angle confirmed their original count.

Analyzing Sotnikova and Kim's footwork in the FS

gkelly

drivingmissdaisy

Blades of Passion

Skating is Art, if you let it be

drivingmissdaisy

Blades of Passion

Skating is Art, if you let it be

capcomeback

gkelly

pangtongfan

Match Penalty

capcomeback

Vanshilar

usethis2

mateusp1

wolkenschloss

JayW

gkelly

mskater93

ILuvYuna

Mathman

ILuvYuna

gkelly

Similar threads

Connect with us