Are Spins Underscored and Undervalued in Figure Skating?

CanadianSkaterGuy · Mar 18, 2014

TMC said:
Whaaaaaaaatttt I hadn't even realised this?

Thanks CSG! What would you say makes a perfectly executed layback spin? I mean the kind that would accumulate the points of a 3s for both ladies and men?

I was referring to a level 4 layback with +3 from every judge earns 4.2 points, which is the base value of a 3S. Perfectly executed obviously referring to nice positions, excellent centering/speed, more than the required rotation, and all the other +GOE bullet points.

I agree that the solution is actually dinging skaters - even the most popular, elite skaters - for poor spins or spins with errors, with -1 and -2's and then saving the +3's for spins that are ACTUALLY perfectly executed. I highly disagree with increasing the scale from -5 to +5 as it makes it even more subjective and prone to judging bias. -3 to +3 is a range of 7, which to me is perfectly adequate as long as it is being utilized correctly.

With many elements, not just spins, the judges are giving GOE like candy to the top skaters and actually marking down lower-tier skaters, instead of applying the same critical eye to everyone.

CarneAsada · Mar 18, 2014

pangtongfan said:
If anything they are overvalued. If there is even a single semi legitimate skating related win for Sotnikova's farcial Putinized win it would be that her spins were probably better than Kim and Kostner. If we suspend reality for a moment and pretend it was an even somewhat skating based win, that would mean having superior spins (to two skaters who also had very good spins, and Sotnikova is no Ruh, Cohen, Hamill, Lipnitskaya, Manley, Kreig, in spinning ability either) overcame having inferior jumps, inferior footwork (in reality despite the scores), inferior skating skills, inferior choreography, sloppy and ugly positions and lines, inferior interpretation. So based on that spins in fact have too much value, atleast for women.

Except Sotnikova didn't "win" on the strength of her spins. She actually "won" thanks to her incredible +3 GOE jumps including a Lutz off the correct edge and no underrotations! And of course her 74 PCS, the 2nd-highest of all time!

Sam-Skwantch · Mar 18, 2014

CanadianSkaterGuy said:
I was referring to a level 4 layback with +3 from every judge earns 4.2 points, which is the base value of a 3S. Perfectly executed obviously referring to nice positions, excellent centering/speed, more than the required rotation, and all the other +GOE bullet points.

I agree that the solution is actually dinging skaters - even the most popular, elite skaters - for poor spins or spins with errors, with -1 and -2's and then saving the +3's for spins that are ACTUALLY perfectly executed. I highly disagree with increasing the scale from -5 to +5 as it makes it even more subjective and prone to judging bias. -3 to +3 is a range of 7, which to me is perfectly adequate as long as it is being utilized correctly.

With many elements, not just spins, the judges are giving GOE like candy to the top skaters and actually marking down lower-tier skaters, instead of applying the same critical eye to everyone.

After posting this thread I wasn't sure what reaction I would see but I think this is the most rational. It seems bad spins are not only overlooked but quite regularly actually rewarded. :eek:

I also like the idea of added levels for spins. That's fine if you want to ding Yulia and other youngsters for their deficiencies in skating skills and artistic flow. Should we not give credit where credit is due and award them points on the areas they excel and push the sport?

CanadianSkaterGuy · Mar 18, 2014

pangtongfan said:
For men maybe they didnt have enough once up a time. Someone like Lambiel who is a light years better spinner than Sotnikova never get any credit or help in results for his spins. It was if they didnt exist. So for women far too much, for men maybe too little.

I'd actually disagree with "light years"... Sotnikova has greater variety/difficulty in her spin positions (albeit typical of female skaters compared to men), and holds her positions for many more rotations than Lambiel does. Lambiel's actual centering and speed is usually superior, but not enough to make him "light years" of a better spinner. Compared to the other MEN, Lambiel had excellent variety of positions, but I wish he'd have actually held his various positions a bit longer (which he's certainly capable of) -- case in point: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F893u_lTNVw Note how many of his spin positions wouldn't have been counted as they aren't held for 2 rotations (the final position isn't held long enough to be counted in any of his first 3 spins).

At least the CoP is forcing skaters to actually SHOW their spin positions.... in the past, a camel spin would be held for like a rotation before the skater went into the sit.

CanadianSkaterGuy · Mar 18, 2014

Sam-Skwantch said:
I also like the idea of added levels for spins. That's fine if you want to ding Yulia and other youngsters for their deficiencies in skating skills and artistic flow. Should we not give credit where credit is due and award them points on the areas the excel and push the sport?

Yeah, but then wouldn't you get skaters doing 9 spin positions for getting higher and higher levels? I think extra spin variations are wonderful and should be incorporated into the GOE, but there's an extent to which you can credit skaters.

The good thing about spin scores is that at lower levels where skaters aren't doing triples, they become much more significant which does push younger skaters to learn spins properly and start doing difficult spins and variations from a young age. As a teen, I didn't practice spins very often because I saw jumps as much more valuable and I'm sure I would have put more effort if they were actually scored and had worth, which they are now. Now that I get points for it and good spins can really boost my score since my program is mostly just doubles, I devote much more time in my session to attempting creative features and getting more rotations in my basic positions.

zamboni step · Mar 18, 2014

CanadianSkaterGuy said:
Yeah, but then wouldn't you get skaters doing 9 spin positions for getting higher and higher levels? I think extra spin variations are wonderful and should be incorporated into the GOE, but there's an extent to which you can credit skaters.

The good thing about spin scores is that at lower levels where skaters aren't doing triples, they become much more significant which does push younger skaters to learn spins properly and start doing difficult spins and variations from a young age. As a teen, I didn't practice spins very often because I saw jumps as much more valuable and I'm sure I would have put more effort if they were actually scored and had worth, which they are now. Now that I get points for it and good spins can really boost my score since my program is mostly just doubles, I devote much more time in my session to attempting creative features and getting more rotations in my basic positions.

Looking at Julia's spins though most of them qualify for higher levels even though they don't have an endless amount of variations. Her CCoSp is a level 6 really, her layback is sometimes a level 5 and her flying camel actually is just a level 4. I think it's unfair she has so much more difficulty in her spins which clearly costs her some quality centering wise. But saying her spins are worth less than say, Sotnikova's (Other than FCSp) because Julia travels is like saying a huge 3A with a step out should be worth less than a nice 3L. Note I said "Nice", not great.

zamboni step · Mar 18, 2014

pangtongfan said:
The spins was a big part of her controversial win (and one of the few things that could justify some of her higher scores). She did gain many more points on spins than Kostner and Kim.

Deservedly so, her spins are far superior and more original. The judging on the other elements was far more questionable than the judging of the spins.

CanadianSkaterGuy · Mar 18, 2014

I don't think anyone denies that Julia's spins are worth as much, if not more than Sotnikova's spins, and arguably more than the rest of the field.

Good for Julia for ensuring that all her positions are "difficult variations" but that's to ensure it achieves a maximum level. If she wants to omit the broken foot, that is totally her prerogative. She's not the only skater who's exceeding the requirements of level 4 spins.

The "problem" with spins is that there's several extra ways to gain levels. This is to ensure a fair playing field because not every skater can do a Biellmann or a crossfoot properly.

Should a skater get a level 10 for doing:
- back camel (1) in a sideways position (2)
- donut spin (3)
- back I-spin 8 rotations (4, 5)
- to forwards leaning camel (6)
- to a change of edge camel (7)
- to a flying sit on the same foot (8)
- to an upright crossfoot (9)
- ...and then a camel spin in the reverse direction just for good measure. (10) :laugh:

zamboni step · Mar 18, 2014

CanadianSkaterGuy said:
I don't think anyone denies that Julia's spins are worth as much, if not more than Sotnikova's spins, and arguably more than the rest of the field.

Good for Julia for ensuring that all her positions are "difficult variations" but that's to ensure it achieves a maximum level. If she wants to omit the broken foot, that is totally her prerogative. She's not the only skater who's exceeding the requirements of level 4 spins.

The "problem" with spins is that there's several extra ways to gain levels. This is to ensure a fair playing field because not every skater can do a Biellmann or a crossfoot properly.

Should a skater get a level 10 for doing:
- back camel (1) in a sideways position (2)
- donut spin (3)
- back I-spin 8 rotations (4, 5)
- to forwards leaning camel (6)
- to a change of edge camel (7)
- to a flying sit on the same foot (8)
- to an upright crossfoot (9)
- ...and then a camel spin in the reverse direction just for good measure. (10)

If someone could do all that without it deserving -3s across the board, then they're the greatest spinner of all time. But they could have gotten a level 11 with a clear acceleration without changing position or foot.

I only question the two changes of foot in this spin, I'm sure that's not allowed. But if someone could do all the other features then yes, they should be fully rewarded with a huge base value. Jumps don't have a cap to their increase in base value as they get more difficult, why should spins?

Vanshilar · Mar 19, 2014

pangtongfan said:
The spins was a big part of her controversial win (and one of the few things that could justify some of her higher scores). She did gain many more points on spins than Kostner and Kim.

I don't know if the spins were a big part of it though. Adelina's spins had very little travel and seemed to be faster to me, so I think their points are justifiably higher (without having looked into the details of how they should be scored), as an average TV-watching layman. Hence not the controversial part of her skate. I don't think they're what made the difference in the judging, certainly not the big difference in terms of what many viewers saw/felt versus the scores given out.

My understanding is, aren't good spins supposed to help get good jumping technique? Then it would be better to put more emphasis on spins while the skater is still learning and before the techniques become ingrained, before the skater starts doing the more difficult jumps -- to incentivize making sure the fundamentals are solid.

CanadianSkaterGuy · Mar 19, 2014

zamboni step said:
If someone could do all that without it deserving -3s across the board, then they're the greatest spinner of all time. But they could have gotten a level 11 with a clear acceleration without changing position or foot. I only question the two changes of foot in this spin, I'm sure that's not allowed. But if someone could do all the other features then yes, they should be fully rewarded with a huge base value. Jumps don't have a cap to their increase in base value as they get more difficult, why should spins?

Nope, it's just one... the crossfoot can be done forwards (I believe Fernandez has done it like that)... and of course, a reverse direction spin is fine (see Miyahara).

Jumps don't have an cap to their increase in base value as they get more difficult but they do have a cap to how many jumping passes you get. Although that's a bit of apples and oranges. A triple axel will always be a triple axel - and then skaters gain or lose point based on execution of it - but a FCCoSp can have a variety of features that differ from one skater to another and is then given bonus/deductions based on execution. I don't think they can be compared, and that's just the tip of the iceberg for explaining that.

You know the 3-complex-turns-with-rhythm combination in footwork sequences? The level requirement is to do 2 of them, but many skaters choose to incorporate 3 or 4 in their footwork, in case one ends up on the wrong edge, so the level feature is still achieved. I kind of see extra levels in spins the same way, like a "failsafe"... a skater can choose to do 5 or 6 features if they like, but under the current set of rules, they're doing more than what is necessary in order to ensure the level is 4. That way, if a position isn't achieved, or 8 rotations don't happen, the spin can still get a maximum score. Plus, they are also rewarded for more than the required positions/rotations with GOE. Might not seem like enough points for it, but the point isn't to create level 6 and 7 spins.

I mean, footwork sequences are laboured enough with skaters trying to achieve the turns/steps necessary for a level 4... providing higher levels for spins beyond level 4 would likely lead to laboured spins with skaters attempting every single position and feature in the book. A skater wouldn't have to worry about -3's across the board for a spin like the one I suggested, because an achieved level 10 spin even with -3's across the board it would still be higher than a well executed level 4. You see it already with skaters attempting a Biellmann even if they can't do one well and would probably execute a level 3 better, or holding a sit forever to 8 rotations, just so they can get the higher level 4. Now imagine if you had level 5 and 6.

CanadianSkaterGuy · Mar 19, 2014

pangtongfan said:
Look I am not disputing that Sotnikova's win was a farce and the scoring was terrible in too many areas to count. I am just pointing out that if there is one legitimate place she picked up points that contributed largely to her win it was spins, which were legitimately better than Kim and Kostner (although still overscored, while theirs were still underscored somewhat, and the gap there was even exagerrated).

Don't forget base value (61.45 to Kim's 57.49 and Kostner's 58.49), and it still would have been higher if the 3T was called as UR.

kwanatic · Mar 19, 2014

Well that was one area Adelina clearly had both Yu-Na and Carolina beat. Her spins were much better than both ladies. Adelina>>>>> Carolina >/= Yu-Na

Adelina's spins had excellent speed and centering as well as unique/strong positions (lovely stretch and flexibility). I think each of her spins was worth +2...maybe a +3 for that contorted camel simply b/c no one else in the world does that spin and (IMO) exclusivity should equal an automatic +1.

I put Carolina ahead of Yu-Na b/c while Yu-Na's spins are faster, her positions aren't as aesthetically pleasing as Carolina's. Carolina has better stretch through her legs which give her camel positions a much better line; her layback spin has a better leg position and her catchfoot position looks better to me as well. Yu-Na's absolute best position in her layover camel...the rest of her positions fall b/w decent and good. She does have nice speed and centering on all of her spins though, so I'd say her spins (along w/ Carolina's) are all worth +1.

zamboni step · Mar 19, 2014

CanadianSkaterGuy said:
Nope, it's just one... the crossfoot can be done forwards (I believe Fernandez has done it like that)... and of course, a reverse direction spin is fine (see Miyahara).

Jumps don't have an cap to their increase in base value as they get more difficult but they do have a cap to how many jumping passes you get. Although that's a bit of apples and oranges. A triple axel will always be a triple axel - and then skaters gain or lose point based on execution of it - but a FCCoSp can have a variety of features that differ from one skater to another and is then given bonus/deductions based on execution. I don't think they can be compared, and that's just the tip of the iceberg for explaining that.

You know the 3-complex-turns-with-rhythm combination in footwork sequences? The level requirement is to do 2 of them, but many skaters choose to incorporate 3 or 4 in their footwork, in case one ends up on the wrong edge, so the level feature is still achieved. I kind of see extra levels in spins the same way, like a "failsafe"... a skater can choose to do 5 or 6 features if they like, but under the current set of rules, they're doing more than what is necessary in order to ensure the level is 4. That way, if a position isn't achieved, or 8 rotations don't happen, the spin can still get a maximum score. Plus, they are also rewarded for more than the required positions/rotations with GOE. Might not seem like enough points for it, but the point isn't to create level 6 and 7 spins.

I mean, footwork sequences are laboured enough with skaters trying to achieve the turns/steps necessary for a level 4... providing higher levels for spins beyond level 4 would likely lead to laboured spins with skaters attempting every single position and feature in the book. A skater wouldn't have to worry about -3's across the board for a spin like the one I suggested, because an achieved level 10 spin even with -3's across the board it would still be higher than a well executed level 4. You see it already with skaters attempting a Biellmann even if they can't do one well and would probably execute a level 3 better, or holding a sit forever to 8 rotations, just so they can get the higher level 4. Now imagine if you had level 5 and 6.

No, you had them change from a back I to a forward camel, and then another change foot for the change of direction, you can't change direction without changing foot.

That may be true but I have a feeling if spins were rewarded more for difficulty and penalized as heavily for errors as jumps then skaters would work harder on their spins.

Vanshilar · Mar 19, 2014

pangtongfan said:
Look I am not disputing that Sotnikova's win was a farce and the scoring was terrible in too many areas to count. I am just pointing out that if there is one legitimate place she picked up points that contributed largely to her win it was spins, which were legitimately better than Kim and Kostner (although still overscored, while theirs were still underscored somewhat, and the gap there was even exagerrated).

Oh yup we're in agreement then

kwanatic · Mar 19, 2014

pangtongfan said:
I would put it more like Adelina >> Kim > Kostner. Kostner does not have better spins than Yu Na (and I dont agree with you on positions, Kostner's layback is one of the worst I have seen), and Adelina's spins were definitely better but it is not like you are comparing a GOAT spinner to a weak one.

To each his own. I find Adelina to be far superior to both, not just a little bit. She's not an all-time great but she was definitely one of the top spinners in the field at that event. Yu-Na and Carolina didn't rank in the top 10 IMO: Sotnikova, Lipnitskaya, Asada, Gold, Wagner, Li, Edmonds, Lee, Park and Daleman are all better spinners than those two.

I find Carolina's lines to be much better in her spins than Yu-Na's b/c of her better extension. I don't like to nitpick on Yu-Na's feet (b/c they're not that big of a deal overall) but her spins are the main area where her lack of extension and toe point are obvious. I think Carolina's layback is better positioned in terms of arms and legs, though Yu-Na's back is better. She used to have better lean, more speed and better positioning. I heard the Biellmann and other positions hurt her back so she stopped doing them during her hiatus.

I wouldn't say Yu-Na or Carolina are weak spinners but that's definitely not a strength in their skating.

zamboni step · Mar 19, 2014

kwanatic said:
To each his own. I find Adelina to be far superior to both, not just a little bit. She's not an all-time great but she was definitely one of the top spinners in the field at that event. Yu-Na and Carolina didn't rank in the top 10 IMO: Sotnikova, Lipnitskaya, Asada, Gold, Wagner, Li, Edmonds, Lee, Park and Daleman are all better spinners than those two.

I find Carolina's lines to be much better in her spins than Yu-Na's b/c of her better extension. I don't like to nitpick on Yu-Na's feet (b/c they're not that big of a deal overall) but her spins are the main area where her lack of extension and toe point are obvious. I think Carolina's layback is better positioned in terms of arms and legs, though Yu-Na's back is better. She used to have better lean, more speed and better positioning. I heard the Biellmann and other positions hurt her back so she stopped doing them during her hiatus.

I wouldn't say Yu-Na or Carolina are weak spinners but that's definitely not a strength in their skating.

Kostner's spins are better than Wagner, although I'd consider Kexin a superior spinner compared to either of them. I assume by "Lee" you mean Brooklee Han?

skatedreamer · Mar 19, 2014

pangtongfan said:
I would put it more like Adelina >> Kim > Kostner. Kostner does not have better spins than Yu Na (and I dont agree with you on positions, Kostner's layback is one of the worst I have seen), and Adelina's spins were definitely better but it is not like you are comparing a GOAT spinner to a weak one.

Is a Goat spin related to a Camel spin? :biggrin:

Sorry, couldn't resist. I assume you meant "great" spinner. It takes one to know one, you see -- if I'm a "queen" of anything, typos would be it!

mskater93 · Mar 20, 2014

GOAT=Greatest of All Time

kwanatic · Mar 20, 2014

zamboni step said:
Kostner's spins are better than Wagner, although I'd consider Kexin a superior spinner compared to either of them. I assume by "Lee" you mean Brooklee Han?

I think Ashley has a better layback and more positions and I like her flying sit spin too. ITA, Kexin is better than both (the list wasn't necessarily in order). And yes, I meant Brooklee Han...don't know why I put Lee :slink:

. She's a lovely spinner.

skatedreamer said:
Is a Goat spin related to a Camel spin?

Are Spins Underscored and Undervalued in Figure Skating?

CanadianSkaterGuy

CarneAsada

Sam-Skwantch

“I solemnly swear I’m up to no good”

CanadianSkaterGuy

CanadianSkaterGuy

zamboni step

zamboni step

CanadianSkaterGuy

zamboni step

Vanshilar

CanadianSkaterGuy

CanadianSkaterGuy

kwanatic

Check out my YT channel, Bare Ice!

zamboni step

Vanshilar

kwanatic

Check out my YT channel, Bare Ice!

zamboni step

skatedreamer

mskater93

kwanatic

Check out my YT channel, Bare Ice!

Similar threads

Connect with us