What held back Asada's PCS? | Page 2 | Golden Skate

What held back Asada's PCS?

minze

Medalist
Joined
Dec 22, 2012
First, I do think that the beginning of Mao's free skates are a bit bland.. She seems to take a lot of time to do her triple axel(s), her combo. Her gentler stroking doesn't help her I think. I also think that Mao using less speed in her program is because she is uncomfortable with it.

Second, I think Mao has been plagued with the title of being the "technical skater", as was with Midori Ito, when she is in fact, artistic. All the focus on her triple axel by the community lowers her PCS I think. Because God forbid someone be great technically and artistically..

Actually No Mao is not know as a technical skater only. Often commentators recognize her musicality and aristry. 2013 Worlds British commentaros said "best step sequence of the competition" If you are not an arsist cant perform Nocturne the way Mao does. If dont believe me give that program to a true technical skater who has a lot of work to do like Gracie Gold and see the results.
 

minze

Medalist
Joined
Dec 22, 2012
For me, I don't think her LP music was the best showcase for her talents. The music is big and intense and she isn't an intense skater. I prefer seeing her skate to balletic music in the LP because her skating is light and airy and is a better match for that, rather than heavy symphonic pieces.

Some people may not like the her intense programs, but after watching that step sequence at the Olympics: Mine Opinion Mao can perform almost anything. I think long time Mao fans just prefer her doing lyrical pieces and maybe the judges do to.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2009
Actually No Mao is not know as a technical skater only. Often commentators recognize her musicality and aristry. 2013 Worlds British commentaros said "best step sequence of the competition" If you are not an arsist cant perform Nocturne the way Mao does. If dont believe me give that program to a true technical skater who has a lot of work to do like Gracie Gold and see the results.

Agreed. Mao has one of the most beautiful styles of any skater of the last eight years. I wouldn't love her so much if she were just a technical skater. And I'm sure it's not just me. Her positions, flow, and lightness across the ice are all beautiful and bring out the music. She uses both her face and body expressively. Carolina is a lovely skater, of course, but she's not the only artist out there.
 

hurrah

Medalist
Joined
Aug 8, 2009
Honestly, I think Mao does need to master her control over edges just that little bit more and learn to skate using more secure and deeper edges just that little bit more. She has made great strides already, but I think it should go up just one more notch, and as long as she remains injury-free the next few years, I think she can totally get there. We all know she has the perseverence and patience and talent and diligence to do it. I think that is where Yuna and Caro are superior to her. However, there are, in fact, aspects of Mao's skating where she is already superior to both Yuna and Caro, too. And her PCS this season was a bit too low, really. It should already have been a bit higher at Worlds, and of course, Olympics (free skate) score was a travesty.

Regarding artistry, well, Mao certainly can vary her speed very well and can even JUMP TO THE MUSIC, which is absolutely NOT Caro's strength. She only started landing jumps when Lori started making programs where she could ignore the music.
 

gotoschool

Medalist
Joined
Mar 5, 2014
Not really. She improved her expression and projection, but she was always an artist throughout her career. Watch any of her SPs from 2006-07 to 2008-09 which are some of the best SPs of the Vancouver quad.

I agree. I really don't understand all these artistic and technical insults of Mao's performances, especially when she just won her third World title, broke the SP world record, won both the SP and LP, and scored only two points lower in overall score than Kim did last year at Worlds, even with what many consider to be erroneous tech calls and no Asian judges on the tech or SP and LP scoring panel. What more does she have to do to prove herself?

In my opinion, the scoring system itself is geared to a more consistently extroverted orientation of artistic expression with lavish smiles characteristic of the West, as opposed to Asada’s more capricious expression ranging from subtle vulnerability to fiery resolve. I believe this Eastern dualism has perplexed judges throughout her career, even as it has enthralled her fans. I believe the subtlety, fluidity and delicacy with which she moves her hands and body like an undulating wave from jump to jump are not as obviously artistic, and hence her choreography and interpretation scores are lower than Kim’s and often Kostner’s. The hand gestures in particular remind me of the refined complexity of a Japanese tea ceremony. Kim's style is different from Mao's, not better or worst, but has generally been more conducive to the judging system. As one poster said, when I watch Kim skate I think of America, but when I watch Asada skate, I think of Japan. I believe this is why she is such a phenomenal sensation in her home country even when she doesn’t skate well because she fully embodies the Japanese aesthetic tradition. I also contend that she has had this highly artistic and innate, balletic nature to her skating from the very beginning, like in Czardas at Worlds in 2007, since she began ballet at 3 or 4 years old. Her artistic expression is such a natural extension of her every movement that it can almost go unnoticed, and I believe that no other skater in history has had such a consummately erect posture even when they are not skating, as is shown in her interviews.

The spell Mao casts is often more of a slow trance that rewards the viewer who is willing to take the time to enter and understand her own personal world as in the Sochi LP, instead of actively soliciting the audience. However, her I Got Rythmn SP routine from 2012-2013 shows how wonderful she is at being child-like and carefree. Her more outward expressivity in that program shows her true versatility and I believe justifies her receiving higher PCS score.

But since the composition of the judging panels and the rewards for artistic merit are slanted more to the Western style (there were NO judges from Asia on the World's SP or LP panel), I feel this puts her PCS score at a disadvantage because it is a highly subjective assessment that is more liable to cultural prejudice, political pressures or even outright rigging. I don’t believe that either the more demonstrative or the more dualist style are objectively better, merely different. Furthermore, her lack of a Western coach to help lobby for her higher scores could possibly lower her scores, as evidenced by her being quite harshly scored by a North American and European tech panel in her home country. A few of the calls received widespread criticism on this forum and contradicted the calls of commentators.

Though Kim is slightly faster than Mao, thus deserving of a slightly higher SS score, I did notice that Mao's PCS score increased dramatically in the Long Program at Worlds from an average of 69.7 during the Grand Prix season to 72.7 in her Worlds LP. It is interesting to note though that Asada’s PCS score in the Worlds LP was actually higher than Kim’s in her world record LP in Vancouver!!!! Consistent with this, I noticed that during her World’s LP skate, Asada’s speed was faster, especially in the spins, than it was at Sochi, and in the middle section I noticed that she was able to both spin faster and stop at the exact instant when the music did.

Nobody has yet mentioned that Kostner’s PCS scores were consistently lower than Mao’s throughout the 2013 Grand Prix season. Besides, the ultra high PCS scores of Kim and Kostner (74+) in Sochi and at Worlds were an aberration that coincided with the scoring controversy and corruption, while Asada’s remained consistent in Sochi at a criminally low 69.6, totally unjustified for such a magnificent performance. Before that Kim was near Asada's present level in the Worlds LP and Kostner was lower. Though her results at Worlds show that she is catching up fast.

Some posters have also mentioned that PCS is based on consistency of performance, reputation, and placement in the skating order, as opposed to the actual performance itself, which could also help to explain the rise, as she has had the three best skating scores of her career in succession. The strength of her recent performances and her unprecedented degree of crowd support (she received the most tweets of any Olympic athlete) will likely keep her PCS high or even raise it more, if she can remain consistent. So it should be at least 72 or 73 for the LP, if she continues, which is just as high as Kim's before the Sochi fiasco. Her current number one ISU ranking will also place her atop the PCS scoring heap, especially if Carolina Kostner retires or a more equitable judging panel is put in place. The difference in the LP PCS is already minuscule. How ironic that she is thinking of retirement just as everything is falling into place for her future success with her overall score at Worlds 2014 almost tied with Kim’s for 2013.
 

JayW

Final Flight
Joined
Dec 8, 2013
Mao is artistically impressive and technically stunning. I have been rooted Mao since her junior year, she is never lack of artistry. She is naturally tuned to feel the ice. The evidences are in every programs she skated, even in her darkest time.

The low PCS in Sochi is wrong, plain and simple. My best guess is:

1) Politiking and wrong doing by judges! - I wanted to smash those faces with a big fat rotten cake when I saw her Sochi LP score.
2) Skating order.
3) Her reputation of being inconsistent.
 

jcsamex

Rinkside
Joined
Jan 11, 2014
I'm no expert but If I have to compare Asada's skating skills to those of Kostner's and Kim's, I'd have to say the first one seems to be a little fragile when getting into or out of jumps and going across the rink. Her crossovers seem a little weaker to me whereas Kostner has deep, clean and secure edges, acquiring more speed with fewer strokes in comparison.

I've always thought Kim's PCS were too generous (especially those regarding skating skills). In my book, she is better than Asada on that field but not better than Kostner.
 

OS

Sedated by Modonium
Record Breaker
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
..Kostner’s PCS scores were consistently lower than Mao’s throughout the 2013 Grand Prix season...

Though Kim is definitely slightly faster than Mao hence deserving a slightly higher SS score, I did notice that Mao's PCS score increased dramatically in the Long Program at Worlds from an average of 69.7 during the Grand Prix season to 72.7 in her Worlds LP. It is interesting to note though that Asada’s PCS score in the Worlds LP was actually higher than Kim’s in her world record LP in Vancouver!!!!

Another thing I don't like about the PCS. It is easy to ensure PCS boosting by ensuring you have as much home advantage/friendly competitions as much possible, and that is something only a powerful federation only like Japan, US, Russia, Canada can afford to provide for their skaters. It is something all skaters want, but only a few can get. Everyone else, you better be doing something exceptionally special or the judges will use it as an excuse not to award you.

The system is inherently flawed to allow artificial momentum building at home events. In which case, Kostner can do many b events in Europe to boost her PCS, Mao and Hanyu in Japan, Patrick in N. America etc. In the 2013-14 Olympics season campaign, out of all ladies, Mao really has the best advantage to have all friendly competitions geared to boost her PCS when she had Japan Open, NHK, GPF and of course the world championship all in Japan (of course she is all 1st there) so of course she has the highest PCS ever at the end of it all, plus a new WR with the new 3A point change with its own GOE scale value and be allowed as a single jump not a combo, plus higher PCS in FS than Yuna at Vancouver. The judges has been kind to her here so I failed to see the problem.

Perhaps the thread complaint was not that it was low but why did it not beat Kostner. I'd say if is marked correctly, it should! Problem is there are also truth in how an European biased panel can change things, not just with Kostner's mark but arguably was to ensure Yulia's mark don't drop, after all she is the new European Champion and ISU don't want to shoot themselves in the foot with what went on at Sochi.
 

CarneAsada

Medalist
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
The system is inherently flawed to allow artificial momentum building at home events. In which case, Kostner can do many b events in Europe to boost her PCS, Mao and Hanyu in Japan, Patrick in N. America etc. In the 2013-14 Olympics season campaign, out of all ladies, Mao really has the best advantage to have all friendly competitions geared to boost her PCS when she had Japan Open, NHK, GPF and of course the world championship all in Japan (of course she is all 1st there) so of course she has the highest PCS ever at the end of it all, plus a new WR with the new 3A point change with its own GOE scale value and be allowed as a single jump not a combo, plus higher PCS in FS than Yuna at Vancouver. The judges has been kind to her here so I failed to see the problem.
Lol? Asada actually had to skate well to win each event. As you might recall, she placed 3rd at her own Nationals. She did not have the highest PCS ever at Worlds in Saitama. That award goes to Yuna Kim in Sochi (who incidentally had higher PCS than TES in her LP, which would be a great crime to you if committed by anyone else I'm sure :laugh:). The judges being "kind" to Asada is hardly reality when she did a record-breaking (in a real way, not a judged way that hands out so-called world records to 6-triple free skates or claims a new one every time the same SP is skated cleanly) free skate in Sochi yet scored below both Kim and Sotnikova. Here at Worlds, every commentator thought her 3A in the FS deserved credit. Several posters on this board disagreed with the call on that and her 3-3. I would hardly call a technical panel that went out of its way to reduce the Japanese skaters' TES by 10 or 20 points "kind" or "home-cooked." Finally, we have discussed the 3A point change "issue" several times in the past. You conveniently neglect to mention that the 3A used to have the same GOE rewards as a 2A yet had much stiffer GOE punishments (-1.4, -2.8, -4.2) (a huge flaw of the Vancouver CoP that should have been corrected whether Mao Asada existed or not); now it has a greater +GOE reward and stiffer -GOE penalty, which is as it should be. The conclusion of one poster in a previous discussion (not me, and not a particularly devoted Mao fan either) was that it should be worth 10 points, so in the end a 3A is still undervalued. :)
 

gotoschool

Medalist
Joined
Mar 5, 2014
Another thing I don't like about the PCS. It is easy to ensure PCS boosting by ensuring you have as much home advantage/friendly competitions as much possible, and that is something only a powerful federation only like Japan, US, Russia, Canada can afford to provide for their skaters. It is something all skaters want, but only a few can get. Everyone else, you better be doing something exceptionally special or the judges will use it as an excuse not to award you.


The system is inherently flawed to allow artificial momentum building at home events. In which case, Kostner can do many b events in Europe to boost her PCS, Mao and Hanyu in Japan, Patrick in N. America etc. In the 2013-14 Olympics season campaign, out of all ladies, Mao really has the best advantage to have all friendly competitions geared to boost her PCS when she had Japan Open, NHK, GPF and of course the world championship all in Japan (of course she is all 1st there) so of course she has the highest PCS ever at the end of it all, plus a new WR with the new 3A point change with its own GOE scale value and be allowed as a single jump not a combo, plus higher PCS in FS than Yuna at Vancouver. The judges has been kind to her here so I failed to see the problem.

Perhaps the thread complaint was not that it was low but why did it not beat Kostner. I'd say if is marked correctly, it should! Problem is there also truth in how a European biased panel can change things, not just with Kostner's mark but arguably was to ensure Yulia's mark don't drop, after all she is the new Euroean Champion and ISU don't want to shoot themselves in the foot with what went on at Sochi.

The judges weren't exactly kind to Mao. They dropped her tech score from 76 to 65 by calling URs on a triple axel that Pluschenko said was beautiful and that even Eurosport announcers called "clean as a whistle" and "I'm sure she's got it" even after looking at it on slow-mo replay, not to mention another triple / triple they called clean. All the judges were North American or European. Mao had no score inflation. Rather she was judged too strictly in tech scores. And as far as inflating her PCS by entering Japanese competitions, it "helped" her get the fifth highest PCS score at Sochi for what many consider to be one of greatest free-skate performances in history. With gifts like that thieves are a blessing. I haven't criticized Kim in my post and have even written on other posts how much she deserved to get a Gold at Sochi. Kim has received higher PCS that Mao did at Worlds in other competitions and Mao has worked hard to earn her PCS.
 

David21

On the Ice
Joined
Jan 24, 2004
The judges weren't exactly kind to Mao. They dropped her tech score from 76 to 65 by calling URs on a triple axel that Pluschenko said was beautiful and that even Eurosport announcers called "clean as a whistle" and "I'm sure she's got it" even after looking at it on slow-mo replay, not to mention another triple / triple they called clean. All the judges were North American or European. Mao had no score inflation. Rather she was judged too strictly in tech scores.


How about the triple axel in the SP which was about 1/4 underotated and still generously got credit from the caller and positive GOEs from the judges? Or what about the positive GOEs for underrotated jumps she got in the LP?
People in this thread have called Mao's LP from Sochi "perfect" even thogh many of her jumps were underrotated, weren'tcalled and got generous GOEs from the judges as well. Mao isn't too strictly scored in TES.
 

yyyskate

Record Breaker
Joined
Aug 1, 2013
Mao's GPs and GPF are all to help her building momentum. there is no doubt about that. However, these momentum seemed so trivial when it comes to against Russia Fed. Mao's under-rotation thing seems become another way of how judges manipulate competition result. I never understand Mao's under-rotation call nowadays. But I had a feeling that, if Mao cleaned her SP in Sochi, somehow she will got more under-rotation calls in her LP (the exact same performance)....
 

CarneAsada

Medalist
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
How about the triple axel in the SP which was about 1/4 underotated and still generously got credit from the caller and positive GOEs from the judges? Or what about the positive GOEs for underrotated jumps she got in the LP?
People in this thread have called Mao's LP from Sochi "perfect" even thogh many of her jumps were underrotated, weren'tcalled and got generous GOEs from the judges as well. Mao isn't too strictly scored in TES.
Her triple Axel deserved credit in the SP. Duh. And her triple Axel in the LP was actually more rotated, yet it got called, completely against the rules. Prior to the tech panel judgments, Mao had nearly 22 points in TES from her first two jumping passes alone (i.e. big positive GOE), and as the judges gave her flat zero GOE after the downgrades they clearly took the calls into account. I'm sure when Kostner underrotated her 3-3 by nearly a quarter in her 2013 Worlds LP (with a less secure landing than either of Mao's 3Axels here, btw) you weren't talking about how the judges were "generous" in giving her credit or nearly straight +1s. Or for that matter when she fell on her 3F-3T attempt in this year's Worlds and yet 4 judges gave her -2 GOE. :laugh:

Mao's GPs and GPF are all to help her building momentum. there is no doubt about that. However, these momentum seemed so trivial when it comes to against Russia Fed. Mao's under-rotation thing seems become another way of how judges manipulate competition result. I never understand Mao's under-rotation call nowadays. But I had a feeling that, if Mao cleaned her SP in Sochi, somehow she will got more under-rotation calls in her LP (the exact same performance)....
Lol, does anyone? On occasion they give her things like half the jumps she did at 2013 NHK Trophy, and then on other occasions they downgrade jumps that while not landed completely backwards were definitely within 1/4 like her 3A in the GPF SP. Basically depends on whether the tech panel has had their coffee or not.
 

pangtongfan

Match Penalty
Joined
Jun 16, 2010
Mao was way underscored at worlds LP with a bunch of ridiculous and phantom < calls. A couple deserved, but the rest were terrible. I hope she continues but I wouldnt blame her for wanting to get out of this dirty sport which has often treated her poorly. She is such a fighter though that she might continue anyway, especialy as she seems at peace with herself and thrilled with her own skating, and that is what is most important to her, not the old foolish seniles who deem her PCS 5 points inferior to Flopnitkova, deem her clean short program with a triple axel combination 5 points inferior to Yu Na Kim in Vancouver, and so on.
 

FS_rrb

On the Ice
Joined
Nov 13, 2012
How about the triple axel in the SP which was about 1/4 underotated and still generously got credit from the caller and positive GOEs from the judges? Or what about the positive GOEs for underrotated jumps she got in the LP?
People in this thread have called Mao's LP from Sochi "perfect" even thogh many of her jumps were underrotated, weren'tcalled and got generous GOEs from the judges as well. Mao isn't too strictly scored in TES.

The triple axel in the short was obviously rotated enough. From the technical panel point of view, the decision to call it rotated was right. From the judges point of view, some may argue that a jump cheated by almost 1/4 should not receive +2 but, honestly, no skater is receiving negative GOE for a slight underotation unless two-foot landings or other noticeable mistakes are involved. If you check some of the men's triple axels, you'll see how they prerotate the jump as much or more than Mao, and in many case the blade touches the ice again after having rotated 3-3.25 turns in the air. And yet, I'm sure that no technical judge is replaying those axels in super slow-motion to check the rotation because everyone expects men to jump triple axels quite "easily".

The problem when you scrutinize some particular elements aiming to find mistakes is that you actually end up finding one thing or another. I'm sure this is what happened with Mao's 3-3 in the LP. Okay, the flip was very close, but I'm quite sure the technical panel was checking the rotation in the loop and finally ended up noticing the problem in the flip. And I think that the fact that the technical score decreased in 11 points is an indication of bad judging...how on Earth a so-called technical expert and a bunch of judges who are supposed to be experts too can be so wrong when watching a performance live in front of them? I know that sometimes you need to replay some jumps to check the landings but this was just ridiculous.

BTW, as for Sochi LP...which jumps were underotated and weren't called? As far as I know she got her 3F-3L and 2A-3T called...
 

Components

Match Penalty
Joined
Apr 2, 2014
Relative perception.

See this is the problem I have with PCS since the very beginning and really think this part of the COP need to be fixed. The numbers themselves are meaningless UNLESS is relative to other competitors during the season, and relative how they did they did on the day, at previous competitions, but it is rarely ever applied correctly due to limited time factor that increases human error. There are too much wiggle room for manipulation. Whenever there are wiggle room, you bet there are certain judges will take maximum advantage of anonymity.

The general impression I had seeing Mao live is she looks great on camera, great at close ups as she hold her positions well with excellent ballet posture, but skated smaller with the likes of Kostner and Kim in direct comparison. I won't go into the criticism i have of her program construct in recent years, where for me the performance is only in the step sequence, the rest about setting jumps up, so of course that affect her PCS. I have always thought Kostner's speed is greatly exaggerated since it is one thing to be capable of great speed during step sequences but if she deliberately slowed down for the rest of the program like in recent years with clever choice of music and simplified movement, what is the point of having great speed? Are points suppose to be rewarded based on what is performed or how the skaters are perceived? It is a particular problem with Patrick and Hanyu's marks in recent years as well. It makes them beyond reach of most upcoming skaters even if they skated perfect. By the way, the cross over argument is misleading, because it comes down to style and the mechanics of speed. There's a reason Yuna's difficult combos have the highest and furthest trajectory and flow when it is done properly. Her 96% success rate (including missed/aborted attempts 88%) up to 2013 season in delivering difficult 3/3s more than support the good practice and in theory, and that is why many young skaters with true lutz follow that approach (Gracie, SoYoun, Nathalie, Anna to name a few etc)

Actually Mao shouldn't have to do anything and she should see her PCS rise up automatically if she continue. Especially Kostner and Kim are no longer in the race. Kostner's PCS has improved during Kim's absence and Mao's technique adjusting slump, and it never came down largely because Kim did not take part during the GP series for 2 years so the judges never had the proper recalibration process. I'd even argue Kostner is needed in Europe as a benchmark for the Russian babies to boost their PCS (if what happened at Sochi is to believed).

At recent WC FS in Japan, it is completely outrageous Carolina is still awarded 10s for composition/choreography and 9.75 for interpretation consider what she brought that day.

I personally think if PCS is to applied accurately, the judges can continue to do what they are doing, but there must be a separate factoring process according to the success/failure rate of program and possibly the entire competition. There're bell curve in some exams, why not in figure skating competitions too? The best performed program deserve better awards regardless of reputation.

May be an algorithm can be devised to take in consideration of things like falls, UR, edge calls, difficulty, ice coverage, complexity etc.
For example - a simplified algorithm can be something like if the skater is only able to fulfill 80% of their program successfully (Something like BV+ 1GOE average.) Then what ever PCS they get from the judges should by factored by 0.8 and that should be their factored PCS. If the skater were able to exceed the average grade execution with 100% of their BV + average of +2 GOEs, then the PCS can get factored by something like 1.02 for example.

This simple algorithm only illustrate the rough 'principle' behind the idea. I am not a mathematician but there should be an ideal algorithm to take in account of difficulty and higher levels as well. It should encourage skating clean and greater presentation and ideally with difficulty (even if it may not result in positive GOEs). Overall the idea is to encourage more audience friendly programs and better presentation due to the bell curve.

In February people were saying Kostner deserved to Win the Olympics with an easy (but 7 Triple) program and some wonky landings in her second half jumps (and weak spins). Now, people are questioning her high PCS and pointing out the exact issues others have pointed out in her skating:

1. Ridiculously telegraphed jumps (if you add all her telegraphs up, a whole chunk of her program is basically jump setups with literally no choreography or "performance quality"). Significantly more than a lot of other skaters (contenders).
2. She does a lot of Transitions, but a lot of them are on or to/from TWO FEET.
3. She skates fast (like Yuna Kim), but she uses a METRIC TON OF CROSSOVERS and quite a bit of TWO FOOTED skating to achieve that.

This is why, looking at the PCS criteria, it has always struck me as odd that some skaters were able to get these huge scores. It's almost as if there was a different rulebook written specifically for them while everyone else had to throw in everything and the kitchen sink just to get decent PCS scores.

Personally, the PCS scoring seems less objectionable once you get to 5th (I include 4th place because it often includes a skater who does amazingly, but is held back so a veteran can get onto the podium) and lower in the standings, but the judges really go to town on using them to "place" skaters on the podium.

What they need to do is combine Perf/Exec and Choreography into one PCS criteria and make the other categories even more technical. Also, the technical callers need to be as strict on Edges/Turns as they are in Ice Dance. Decrease the Weight of PCS a bit and then it will be less of an issue.

Even with a flawless performance, those issues should affect Kostner's score, but they never do. When she was injured the and couldn't do harder jumps the judges went out of their way to keep her in contention by boosting her PCS and it made her formidable once she got the Lutz and Flip (and could increase her technical BV) back because they didn't bring them back down to earth.
 

David21

On the Ice
Joined
Jan 24, 2004
The triple axel in the short was obviously rotated enough. From the technical panel point of view, the decision to call it rotated was right. From the judges point of view, some may argue that a jump cheated by almost 1/4 should not receive +2 but, honestly, no skater is receiving negative GOE for a slight underotation unless two-foot landings or other noticeable mistakes are involved. If you check some of the men's triple axels, you'll see how they prerotate the jump as much or more than Mao, and in many case the blade touches the ice again after having rotated 3-3.25 turns in the air. And yet, I'm sure that no technical judge is replaying those axels in super slow-motion to check the rotation because everyone expects men to jump triple axels quite "easily".


I'm only saying what should happen based on the rules of CoP. If you say that other skaters get away with cheated jumps as well then I agree with you but two wrongs don't make a right. Fact is also that Mao gets more calls than other skaters because she tends to underrrotate her jumps more than other skaters.

The problem when you scrutinize some particular elements aiming to find mistakes is that you actually end up finding one thing or another. I'm sure this is what happened with Mao's 3-3 in the LP. Okay, the flip was very close, but I'm quite sure the technical panel was checking the rotation in the loop and finally ended up noticing the problem in the flip. And I think that the fact that the technical score decreased in 11 points is an indication of bad judging...how on Earth a so-called technical expert and a bunch of judges who are supposed to be experts too can be so wrong when watching a performance live in front of them? I know that sometimes you need to replay some jumps to check the landings but this was just ridiculous.


Yeah, how can they be so wrong? They have super-slo mo technical euquipment and get it right more often than wrong that's for sure. It must be a world-wide conspiracy that poor Mao who seldomly underrotates by a little is getting > calls so often. ;) Or maybe the real problem is Mao's jumping "technique"?


BTW, as for Sochi LP...which jumps were underotated and weren't called? As far as I know she got her 3F-3L and 2A-3T called...


She underrotated plenty of jumps as far as I remember..the triple axel for sure and also her double loops in combo and got away with it. Let's talk seriously for a moment...Mao even regularly underrotes her double loops in her 3 jump combo which is simply embarassing for a top skater. Her jumping is simply not good, her jumps are lacking in distance and rotation and considering all that, the judges tend to be very lenient towards her in the GOEs for her jumps. She is (1) benefitting from her reputation as a top skater and (2) benefitting from the fact that the judges cannot detect her smaller underrotations and therefore do not adjust the GOE according to rules. Any complaints that Mao is hard done by the judges for her underrotations are to me completely ridiculous because the opposite is true.
 
Top