They didn't win the FD at their first event though, Moore and Klaber did. Don't forget, M/Z were 3rd in the FD. Their free dance really isn't up to par, and the judges see that. Don't know what Marina was thinking.
2014 Croatia Cup JGP Free Dance
- Thread starter dorispulaski
- Start date
They didn't win the FD at their first event though, Moore and Klaber did. Don't forget, M/Z were 3rd in the FD. Their free dance really isn't up to par, and the judges see that. Don't know what Marina was thinking.
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2010
Just saw the last group ... I'm not generally one to believe in conspiracy theories, but the scoring for this event is really fishy. The Parsons and M/Z came in with very similar scores (neither were close in scores with Y/M btw), but it's hard to believe that in this event the Parsons scores shot up by almost 10 points from their last JGP event and, even harder to believe, M/Z's scores simultaneously dropped over 10 points and they lost the FD to the Ukrainians (esp. without major errors). I'm not much for technique, but it still seems like both Russian teams were held down on levels (e.g. I don't get why Y/M's twizzles were downgraded to level 2 in both their sd and fd here, when the same ones garnered level 4s in their last event).
I think in this case it is not irrational to question possible behind the scenes motivations. Going into this event, the Parsons were effectively the only Americans still with a chance (albeit slim) of making the finals. However, for that to happen, they needed to basically either beat Y/M, or get second but have M/Z finish below 4th. I really had thought the possibility of either event happening was close to nil, but this actually got pretty close to coming to fruition!
IMO the tech controllers did everything they could (in terms of fudging the gray areas etc.) to give the Americans a fighting chance of getting a dance team into the finals - keeping the Parsons within striking distance of Y/M and giving the Ukrainians (and to a lesser extent, the Hungarians) a boost over M/Z. In the end, the Ukrainians were thisclose to knocking M/Z to 5th, which really would've been a travesty. Just because a potential attempt at score fixing FAILED (Y/M were just too good, and the field here wasn't deep enough (unlike say, Estonia) to bury M/Z), doesn't mean it can't be speculated.
To clarify, I actually like the Parsons a lot (they have my second favorite junior fd this year) - way more than M/Z. They really were unlucky this year in their assignments, and I wished they could've gotten to the finals, but just NOT as a result of suspect judging.
In other news, Y/M's fd is hands down my favorite this year - just fantastic!
Oh, come on! If I remember correctly, all top 3 FD scores were on par. Around 82 points (which is around 3 points HIGHER than Parsons' PB until this event). Less than 1 point difference between top 3. It's up to nuances who'll win when difference is this small. So I think your point is invalid. OR all top 3 FDs aren't 'up to bar'. You decide how to call it.
They were so happy after the performance. They thought they did great. And after that they were absolutely shocked in K&C when their marks were announced. :no:
After watching all five couples once again…
Yanovskaya & Mozgov:
In the beginning Anna was less sharp then in Tallinn, on the contrary Sergei was more visible than in Tallinn. This time the couple looked sometimes slower. They had nice gradation towards the end of program. Very good dance.
I would say the couple realised that judges and technical specialist want to put Americans above them, so they knew that they had no chance for even minor mistake. Probably thanks to it the impression from the dance in Tallinn was a little bit stronger. But it is important to learn to skate no matter how conditions and judges looks like, although I understand that it is hard for any skater to skate in such situation.
Parsons & Parsons:
Fluent from the beginning to the end no matter how music is, an attemp to be more dynamic at the end of the music. I don’t know how to describe these two. I see very nice technique and edges, but in terms of Presentation and Interpretation I see nothing. They are nice to watch like two people having nice edges and elegant moves, but I didn’t mention in what time two skaters became dance couple, started to react to each other and interpret the Notre Dame music differently than Latin Short Dance program.
Moscheni & Lukacz:
I would say that it is nice program like many other skaters have nice programs. I see easy choreography which is suitable for the couple with such average Skating Skills. In time when the couple tries to get faster, they sometimes loose control over their skates, sometimes it look like running across the ice with no attempt to glide or execute some good edges. Adam was slow for the dynamic parts in first three minutes, in last thirty seconds he was dynamic, which looked much better.
Gaistruk & Olejnik:
I liked it, it was different and impressive, nice flexibility in movements. The couple was nicely gliding also having better Skating Skills than Hungarians. For me they were better in Presentation than M&L and P&P.
Morozova & Zhirnov:
The music is dynamic and strong and the couple skates powerfully and with great dynamics. In last thirty seconds it was evident that they were getting a little bit tired, but they still kept dynamic gestures. While most of couples have problems expressing fast and dynamic music and the power inside of music, this couple is doing it with easiness.
This couple was in the hardest situation through the whole competition. They were the only one Gold Medalists who had to compete with another Gold Medalists from the same country – and they got the best junior team of past two seasons – Yanovskaya & Mozgov. All other Russian Teams followed the graphic “Team who fights for Final“ + “Team who doesn’t have chance for Final“, so points were not taken from couple number 1 and Russian Federation was fully concentrated on supporting “favourites“.
After Short Dance it was visible where Technical Panel and judges want to see the couple and who is prefered to get into the Final instead of second Russian couple. In such conditions Morozova & Zhirnov were able to concetrate greatly and showed even stronger performance than in Ljubljana. The fact that even after such performance Technical Panel and judges gave such points shows that skating of the Russian couple was really the last thing what Technical Panel and judges were interested in.
Frankly all couples need to improve and journey to senior level great quality is long, but this time both Russian couples showed the best Presentation from all competitors in my eyes and surprisingly Free Dance of second Russians Morozova & Zhirnov is the program which I will remember like the strongest moment in the competition (and unfortunately another dance which wasn’t paid as it deserved).
Yanovskaya & Mozgov:
In the beginning Anna was less sharp then in Tallinn, on the contrary Sergei was more visible than in Tallinn. This time the couple looked sometimes slower. They had nice gradation towards the end of program. Very good dance.
I would say the couple realised that judges and technical specialist want to put Americans above them, so they knew that they had no chance for even minor mistake. Probably thanks to it the impression from the dance in Tallinn was a little bit stronger. But it is important to learn to skate no matter how conditions and judges looks like, although I understand that it is hard for any skater to skate in such situation.
Parsons & Parsons:
Fluent from the beginning to the end no matter how music is, an attemp to be more dynamic at the end of the music. I don’t know how to describe these two. I see very nice technique and edges, but in terms of Presentation and Interpretation I see nothing. They are nice to watch like two people having nice edges and elegant moves, but I didn’t mention in what time two skaters became dance couple, started to react to each other and interpret the Notre Dame music differently than Latin Short Dance program.
Moscheni & Lukacz:
I would say that it is nice program like many other skaters have nice programs. I see easy choreography which is suitable for the couple with such average Skating Skills. In time when the couple tries to get faster, they sometimes loose control over their skates, sometimes it look like running across the ice with no attempt to glide or execute some good edges. Adam was slow for the dynamic parts in first three minutes, in last thirty seconds he was dynamic, which looked much better.
Gaistruk & Olejnik:
I liked it, it was different and impressive, nice flexibility in movements. The couple was nicely gliding also having better Skating Skills than Hungarians. For me they were better in Presentation than M&L and P&P.
Morozova & Zhirnov:
The music is dynamic and strong and the couple skates powerfully and with great dynamics. In last thirty seconds it was evident that they were getting a little bit tired, but they still kept dynamic gestures. While most of couples have problems expressing fast and dynamic music and the power inside of music, this couple is doing it with easiness.
This couple was in the hardest situation through the whole competition. They were the only one Gold Medalists who had to compete with another Gold Medalists from the same country – and they got the best junior team of past two seasons – Yanovskaya & Mozgov. All other Russian Teams followed the graphic “Team who fights for Final“ + “Team who doesn’t have chance for Final“, so points were not taken from couple number 1 and Russian Federation was fully concentrated on supporting “favourites“.
After Short Dance it was visible where Technical Panel and judges want to see the couple and who is prefered to get into the Final instead of second Russian couple. In such conditions Morozova & Zhirnov were able to concetrate greatly and showed even stronger performance than in Ljubljana. The fact that even after such performance Technical Panel and judges gave such points shows that skating of the Russian couple was really the last thing what Technical Panel and judges were interested in.
Frankly all couples need to improve and journey to senior level great quality is long, but this time both Russian couples showed the best Presentation from all competitors in my eyes and surprisingly Free Dance of second Russians Morozova & Zhirnov is the program which I will remember like the strongest moment in the competition (and unfortunately another dance which wasn’t paid as it deserved).
Comparison of previous JGP Component Marks (first JGP competition and Croatia Cup):
(Component mark, Skating Skills, Transitions, Performance, Choreography, Interpretation)
Y&M:
47.88 8.00 7.79 8.00 8.11 8.00 (JGP in Estonia)
48.00 7.89 7.79 8.07 8.07 8.18
P&P:
41.26 6.89 6.82 6.89 6.89 6.89 (JGP in Japan)
42.63 7.32 6.96 7.14 7.11 7.00
M&L:
40.28 6.64 6.50 6.82 6.75 6.86 (JGP in Estonia)
43.69 7.14 7.11 7.43 7.29 7.43
G&O:
36.58 6.14 5.82 6.07 6.21 6.25 (JGP in Germany)
40.09 6.68 6.46 6.68 6.79 6.79
M&Z:
41.46 6.85 6.60 7.15 7.00 6.95 (JGP in Slovenia)
41.39 6.89 6.71 6.93 6.96 7.00
Surprisingly while Russian couples stayed on the same place with Component mark, Parsons improved and Moscheni & Lukacz and Gaistruk & Olejnik improved by a miles in Component mark.
Especially jump of Parsons and Hungarian couple over Morozova & Zhirnov is very visible and even Ukrainian couple got on the level of marks of young Russian couple.
How this could happen especially in Skating Skills is a mystery. The depth between both Russian couples + Parsons against the rest of the field is more than visible.
Grade of Execution – GOE:
Y&M earned thanks to GOE 8.32 points.
P&P earned 5.42 points.
M&L earned 7.13 points.
G&O earned 3.90 points.
M&Z earned 3.52 points (at JGP in Slovenia they got almost 7 points for as good execution like here).
Twizzles GOE:
The best marks: 1. Y&M – 1.20 points, 2. M&L – 0.77 points, 3. M&Z – 0.69 points, 4. P&P and G&O – 0.60 points
Real execution of Twizzles:
…Yanovskaya made a piruette in the second set and during first set she was flirting with minor knee action making the Twizzle looks like Three Turns…
…Moscheni keeps regular knee action during Twizzles, mainly in the first Set – this is called Three Turns, and Lukacs went through toe pick (so called scrapped I think) in the first Set…
…Rachel Parsons didn’t keep the position of free leg in the second set, Michael Parsons was also fighting in the second set to keep position…respect for having different Twizzles in both programs…
…Gaistruk was doing a piruette during second set and she visibly lost control during first set…
…Morozova didn’t look too sure in the second set…
Overall all couples had Twizzles from rather lower speed, the best speed (the least slow) going into the Twizzle probably in case of Gaistruk & Olejnik, the best ice coverage looked to be in case of Parsons.
Not even one Twizzles looked superb, I wouldn’t get +3 and probably even +2.
Usually Gaistruk & Olejnik would get minus score for such executed Twizzles, I don’t see any “skating“ reason why should Parsons and Morozova & Zhirnov got lower GOE than Yanovskaya & Mozgov and Moscheni & Lukacz thanks to quality of executing.
Two Step Sequences GOE:
The best marks: 1. Y&M – 3.30 points, 2. M&L – 2.67 points, 3. P&P – 1.73 points, 4. G&O – 1.42 points, 5. M&Z – 0.94 points
Real execution of Step Sequences:
…Yanovskaya & Mozgov…nicely done, deep edges, good quality of skating, in Midline steps Anna lost speed in Twizzles and she was looking for Sergei
…Parsons…nice flow, deep edges, it all looked effortless…
…Moscheni & Lukacs…slow in Serpentine steps and more than ever poorer Skating Skills visible, in Diagonal steps the couple finally gets speed, but only thanks to many running steps, some cross-overs and three turns…
…Gaistruk & Olejnik…nice flow, nicely done, the couple doesn’t control spacing between each other very well…
…Morozova & Zhirnov…first Circular steps in very good speed, deep edges, flow, loosing speed in the second part of the Diagonal steps…
Parsons had the best quality of execution of Step Sequences, closely followed by Yanovskaya & Mozgov, then some distance to Morozova & Zhirnov, some half a point followed by Gaistruk & Olejnik. I didn’t find any reason why should Moscheni & Lukacz deserve any plus points for Step Sequences, even Sthork & Rand are able to execute better steps (after many and many years of practising of course).
Two Lifts GOE:
The best marks: 1. M&L – 2.23 points, 2. Y&M - 2.22 points, 3. P&P – 1.72 points, 4. G&O – 1.37 points, 5. M&Z – 1.03 points
Real execution of lifts:
…Yanovskaya & Mozgov…well done, looked sure in those elements…
…Parsons…well done…
…Moscheni & Lukacz…well done…
…Gaistruk & Olejnik…well done, impressive and difficult position in Rotation lift…
…Morozova & Zhirnov…well done…
All couples executed difficult lift, they executed them cleanly and nicely. Where judges got more than one point difference between execution of those elements… I don’t understand on what judges were looking.
Spin GOE:
The best marks: 1. P&P – 0.94 points, 2. Y&M and M&L – 0.77 points, 4. M&Z – 0.60 points, 5. G&O – minus 0.29 points
Real execution of spin:
…Yanovskaya & Mozgov…good…
…Parsons…very nice…
…Moscheni & Lukacz…nice…
…Gaistruk & Olejnik…bad…
…Morozova & Zhirnov…nice…
I would put all four couples (without G&O) closer in points, they all showed nice spins.
My brain stops thinking realising that Hungarian couple earned over 7 point on GOE…this is around the GOE Medalists got at last Junior World championships. Are judges really serious saying with their marks that Moscheni & Lukacz are on the level of element‘s execution like Hawayek & Baker, Yanovskaya & Mozgov?
The similar GOE like Hungarians here got Shibutanis, Gilles & Poirier, Paul & Islam at last Senior World Championships.
If Hungarian couple is really that great in executing elements, they should be medal contenders for Junior World Championships this year and they should also run quickly into senior stage to finish in top ten at World Championships….
(Component mark, Skating Skills, Transitions, Performance, Choreography, Interpretation)
Y&M:
47.88 8.00 7.79 8.00 8.11 8.00 (JGP in Estonia)
48.00 7.89 7.79 8.07 8.07 8.18
P&P:
41.26 6.89 6.82 6.89 6.89 6.89 (JGP in Japan)
42.63 7.32 6.96 7.14 7.11 7.00
M&L:
40.28 6.64 6.50 6.82 6.75 6.86 (JGP in Estonia)
43.69 7.14 7.11 7.43 7.29 7.43
G&O:
36.58 6.14 5.82 6.07 6.21 6.25 (JGP in Germany)
40.09 6.68 6.46 6.68 6.79 6.79
M&Z:
41.46 6.85 6.60 7.15 7.00 6.95 (JGP in Slovenia)
41.39 6.89 6.71 6.93 6.96 7.00
Surprisingly while Russian couples stayed on the same place with Component mark, Parsons improved and Moscheni & Lukacz and Gaistruk & Olejnik improved by a miles in Component mark.
Especially jump of Parsons and Hungarian couple over Morozova & Zhirnov is very visible and even Ukrainian couple got on the level of marks of young Russian couple.
How this could happen especially in Skating Skills is a mystery. The depth between both Russian couples + Parsons against the rest of the field is more than visible.
Grade of Execution – GOE:
Y&M earned thanks to GOE 8.32 points.
P&P earned 5.42 points.
M&L earned 7.13 points.
G&O earned 3.90 points.
M&Z earned 3.52 points (at JGP in Slovenia they got almost 7 points for as good execution like here).
Twizzles GOE:
The best marks: 1. Y&M – 1.20 points, 2. M&L – 0.77 points, 3. M&Z – 0.69 points, 4. P&P and G&O – 0.60 points
Real execution of Twizzles:
…Yanovskaya made a piruette in the second set and during first set she was flirting with minor knee action making the Twizzle looks like Three Turns…
…Moscheni keeps regular knee action during Twizzles, mainly in the first Set – this is called Three Turns, and Lukacs went through toe pick (so called scrapped I think) in the first Set…
…Rachel Parsons didn’t keep the position of free leg in the second set, Michael Parsons was also fighting in the second set to keep position…respect for having different Twizzles in both programs…
…Gaistruk was doing a piruette during second set and she visibly lost control during first set…
…Morozova didn’t look too sure in the second set…
Overall all couples had Twizzles from rather lower speed, the best speed (the least slow) going into the Twizzle probably in case of Gaistruk & Olejnik, the best ice coverage looked to be in case of Parsons.
Not even one Twizzles looked superb, I wouldn’t get +3 and probably even +2.
Usually Gaistruk & Olejnik would get minus score for such executed Twizzles, I don’t see any “skating“ reason why should Parsons and Morozova & Zhirnov got lower GOE than Yanovskaya & Mozgov and Moscheni & Lukacz thanks to quality of executing.
Two Step Sequences GOE:
The best marks: 1. Y&M – 3.30 points, 2. M&L – 2.67 points, 3. P&P – 1.73 points, 4. G&O – 1.42 points, 5. M&Z – 0.94 points
Real execution of Step Sequences:
…Yanovskaya & Mozgov…nicely done, deep edges, good quality of skating, in Midline steps Anna lost speed in Twizzles and she was looking for Sergei
…Parsons…nice flow, deep edges, it all looked effortless…
…Moscheni & Lukacs…slow in Serpentine steps and more than ever poorer Skating Skills visible, in Diagonal steps the couple finally gets speed, but only thanks to many running steps, some cross-overs and three turns…
…Gaistruk & Olejnik…nice flow, nicely done, the couple doesn’t control spacing between each other very well…
…Morozova & Zhirnov…first Circular steps in very good speed, deep edges, flow, loosing speed in the second part of the Diagonal steps…
Parsons had the best quality of execution of Step Sequences, closely followed by Yanovskaya & Mozgov, then some distance to Morozova & Zhirnov, some half a point followed by Gaistruk & Olejnik. I didn’t find any reason why should Moscheni & Lukacz deserve any plus points for Step Sequences, even Sthork & Rand are able to execute better steps (after many and many years of practising of course).
Two Lifts GOE:
The best marks: 1. M&L – 2.23 points, 2. Y&M - 2.22 points, 3. P&P – 1.72 points, 4. G&O – 1.37 points, 5. M&Z – 1.03 points
Real execution of lifts:
…Yanovskaya & Mozgov…well done, looked sure in those elements…
…Parsons…well done…
…Moscheni & Lukacz…well done…
…Gaistruk & Olejnik…well done, impressive and difficult position in Rotation lift…
…Morozova & Zhirnov…well done…
All couples executed difficult lift, they executed them cleanly and nicely. Where judges got more than one point difference between execution of those elements… I don’t understand on what judges were looking.
Spin GOE:
The best marks: 1. P&P – 0.94 points, 2. Y&M and M&L – 0.77 points, 4. M&Z – 0.60 points, 5. G&O – minus 0.29 points
Real execution of spin:
…Yanovskaya & Mozgov…good…
…Parsons…very nice…
…Moscheni & Lukacz…nice…
…Gaistruk & Olejnik…bad…
…Morozova & Zhirnov…nice…
I would put all four couples (without G&O) closer in points, they all showed nice spins.
My brain stops thinking realising that Hungarian couple earned over 7 point on GOE…this is around the GOE Medalists got at last Junior World championships. Are judges really serious saying with their marks that Moscheni & Lukacz are on the level of element‘s execution like Hawayek & Baker, Yanovskaya & Mozgov?
The similar GOE like Hungarians here got Shibutanis, Gilles & Poirier, Paul & Islam at last Senior World Championships.
If Hungarian couple is really that great in executing elements, they should be medal contenders for Junior World Championships this year and they should also run quickly into senior stage to finish in top ten at World Championships….
Step Sequences:
Levels Style A:
Level 2:
Step Sequence is not interrupted more than 25% of the pattern in total, either through Stumbles, Falls or any other reason
AND
Footwork includes at least 5 Difficult Turns:
- one of which being a Twizzle or Double Twizzle;
- out of which any one Type cannot be taken into consideration more than 2 times);
- out of which 2 must be different Types of One Foot Section Turns included in a one foot section
AND (for Step Sequence in Hold only)
At least 1 Change of Hold is included
AND
At least 2 different Dance Holds are included.
Level 3:
Step Sequence is not interrupted more than 10% of the pattern in total, either through Stumbles, Falls or any other reason
AND
Footwork includes at least 7 Difficult Turns:
- one of which being a Double Twizzle;
- out of which any one Type cannot be taken into consideration more than 2 times);
- out of which 3 must be different Types of One Foot Section Turns included in a one foot section
AND
Turns are multidirectional
AND (for Step Sequence in Hold only)
At least 2 Changes of Hold are included
AND
At least 2 different Dance Holds are included
Morozova & Zhirnov: Level 1
Daria – Mohawk, Rocker, Bracket, Double Twizzle, Chocktaw, Rocker, Bracket
Mikhail – Mohawk, Rocker, Chocktaw, Bracket, Double Twizzle, Chocktaw, Rocker, Counter, Bracket
…opening turn – Mohawk – second edge was not visible behind the boards but from body posture it is on 99 % that there was an edge done well, last turn – Bracket – opening edge is taken from camera angle where edge can’t be seen properly and second edge is not visible, but once again angle between ice and their bodies can’t be get any other way then keeping deep edges…
…One Foot Section Turns – Daria – Rocker + Bracket + Double Twizzle, Mikhail – Bracket + Double Twizzle, Rocker + Counter + Bracket
…change of holds – Foxtrot hold - Waltz - Killian - Hand in Hand - Waltz hold – enought for Level 3…
…possible mistakes - in Daria’s Chocktaw second edge was not very well visible…in Mikhail’s case second edge in Rocker which was opening edge for Counter in the same time was not done with visible edge…last Bracket opening edge is not visible thanks to camera angle…
…being sooo strict: and not counting not only Mikhail‘s Rocker and Counter but also Daria’s Chocktaw and last Bracket…number of clean turns – Daria – 5, Mikhail – 6…it would also mean that Mikhail didn’t execute clean 3 turns in One Foot Section and that they both missed one (in Mikhail’s case) or two (in Daria’s case) clean turn to get Level 3…so with VERY strict judging they should get Level 2…
Yanovskaya & Mozgov: Level 2
Anna – Counter, Rocker, Bracket, Double Twizzle, Chocktaw, Chocktaw, Mohawk, Counter, Rocker, Doule Twizzle
Sergei – Chocktaw, Counter, Bracket, Double Twizzle, Chocktaw, Mohawk, Rocker, Counter, Bracket, Rocker, Double Twizzle
…this is Level 4 structured Step Sequence if cleanly done, which was not fully clean this time
…holds – Hand in Hand - Foxtrot - Killian - Hand in Hand – Killian – Foxtrot – Hand in Hand – Waltz – 3 changes of hold (Hand in Hand hold is not taken like change of hold)
…One Foot Section Turns – Anna – first opening four turns…Sergei – last four turns in Step Sequence
…possible mistakes: Anna’s edge in second part of first turn – Counter (which reduced her One Foot Section Turns from 4 to 3 cleanly done turns), for both Anna and Sergei – first edge in Mohawk, first edge in Sergei’s first Bracket done close to judges…
…being SOOO strict and putting down Anna’s Counter and Mohawk by both of them and Sergei’s first Bracket…number of clean turns by Anna – 8, Sergei – 9….so enough for Level 3
Levels Style B:
Level 2:
Step Sequence is not interrupted more than 25% of the pattern in total, either through Stumbles, Falls or any other reason
AND
Footwork includes at least 3 different Types of Difficult Turns (one of which being a Twizzle or Double Twizzle)
AND
At least 2 Change of Hold is included
AND
At least 2 different Dance Holds are included.
Level 3:
Step Sequence is not interrupted more than 10% of the pattern in total, either through Stumbles, Falls or any other reason
AND
Footwork includes at least 4 different Types of Difficult Turns (one of which being a Double Twizzle)
AND
Turns are multidirectional
AND
At least 3 Changes of Hold are included
AND
At least 3 different Dance Holds are included
Morozova & Zhirnov: Level 1
Daria – Chocktaw, Rocker, Bracket, Double Twizzle, Mohawk, Counter
Mikhail – Rocker, Mohawk, Chocktaw, Double Twizzle, Mohawk, Counter
…turns were multidirectional
…holds – from Tango – Waltz hold to Hand in Hand to Killian hold to Tango hold to Hand in Hand hold then Killian hold to Tango hold then Foxtrot hold to Killian hold…all those changes in holds were clearly recognized, but counted changes are Waltz – Killian, Killian – Tango, Tango – Killian, Killian – Tango, Tango – Foxtrot, Foxtrot – Killian…there is a strange notice in ISU rules that hold must be held long enought, but not mention how long this “long enought“ means...but Parsons had also some clearly recognized, but short holds and it was counted like Level 3, so probably “long enough“ is not very long…
…possible mistakes – Mikhail’s Mohawk didn’t look to be in edge (maybe thanks to camera angle, but it was not seen on the video), Mohawk done together – first edge didn’t look to be done well (maybe angle of camera once again)…
… being SOOOO strict and not counting possible mistakes - clean turns: Daria – 5, Mikhail – 4…it is still Level 3…
Moscheni & Lukacs:
…if I would be sooo strict (like in case of Russians above) I could probably put down almost half of turns…which would be probably still enought for at least Level 2, I guess…
Gaistruk & Olejnik:
…some really nice edges, some very mild edges under warning of putting down…
Levels Style A:
Level 2:
Step Sequence is not interrupted more than 25% of the pattern in total, either through Stumbles, Falls or any other reason
AND
Footwork includes at least 5 Difficult Turns:
- one of which being a Twizzle or Double Twizzle;
- out of which any one Type cannot be taken into consideration more than 2 times);
- out of which 2 must be different Types of One Foot Section Turns included in a one foot section
AND (for Step Sequence in Hold only)
At least 1 Change of Hold is included
AND
At least 2 different Dance Holds are included.
Level 3:
Step Sequence is not interrupted more than 10% of the pattern in total, either through Stumbles, Falls or any other reason
AND
Footwork includes at least 7 Difficult Turns:
- one of which being a Double Twizzle;
- out of which any one Type cannot be taken into consideration more than 2 times);
- out of which 3 must be different Types of One Foot Section Turns included in a one foot section
AND
Turns are multidirectional
AND (for Step Sequence in Hold only)
At least 2 Changes of Hold are included
AND
At least 2 different Dance Holds are included
Morozova & Zhirnov: Level 1
Daria – Mohawk, Rocker, Bracket, Double Twizzle, Chocktaw, Rocker, Bracket
Mikhail – Mohawk, Rocker, Chocktaw, Bracket, Double Twizzle, Chocktaw, Rocker, Counter, Bracket
…opening turn – Mohawk – second edge was not visible behind the boards but from body posture it is on 99 % that there was an edge done well, last turn – Bracket – opening edge is taken from camera angle where edge can’t be seen properly and second edge is not visible, but once again angle between ice and their bodies can’t be get any other way then keeping deep edges…
…One Foot Section Turns – Daria – Rocker + Bracket + Double Twizzle, Mikhail – Bracket + Double Twizzle, Rocker + Counter + Bracket
…change of holds – Foxtrot hold - Waltz - Killian - Hand in Hand - Waltz hold – enought for Level 3…
…possible mistakes - in Daria’s Chocktaw second edge was not very well visible…in Mikhail’s case second edge in Rocker which was opening edge for Counter in the same time was not done with visible edge…last Bracket opening edge is not visible thanks to camera angle…
…being sooo strict: and not counting not only Mikhail‘s Rocker and Counter but also Daria’s Chocktaw and last Bracket…number of clean turns – Daria – 5, Mikhail – 6…it would also mean that Mikhail didn’t execute clean 3 turns in One Foot Section and that they both missed one (in Mikhail’s case) or two (in Daria’s case) clean turn to get Level 3…so with VERY strict judging they should get Level 2…
Yanovskaya & Mozgov: Level 2
Anna – Counter, Rocker, Bracket, Double Twizzle, Chocktaw, Chocktaw, Mohawk, Counter, Rocker, Doule Twizzle
Sergei – Chocktaw, Counter, Bracket, Double Twizzle, Chocktaw, Mohawk, Rocker, Counter, Bracket, Rocker, Double Twizzle
…this is Level 4 structured Step Sequence if cleanly done, which was not fully clean this time
…holds – Hand in Hand - Foxtrot - Killian - Hand in Hand – Killian – Foxtrot – Hand in Hand – Waltz – 3 changes of hold (Hand in Hand hold is not taken like change of hold)
…One Foot Section Turns – Anna – first opening four turns…Sergei – last four turns in Step Sequence
…possible mistakes: Anna’s edge in second part of first turn – Counter (which reduced her One Foot Section Turns from 4 to 3 cleanly done turns), for both Anna and Sergei – first edge in Mohawk, first edge in Sergei’s first Bracket done close to judges…
…being SOOO strict and putting down Anna’s Counter and Mohawk by both of them and Sergei’s first Bracket…number of clean turns by Anna – 8, Sergei – 9….so enough for Level 3
Levels Style B:
Level 2:
Step Sequence is not interrupted more than 25% of the pattern in total, either through Stumbles, Falls or any other reason
AND
Footwork includes at least 3 different Types of Difficult Turns (one of which being a Twizzle or Double Twizzle)
AND
At least 2 Change of Hold is included
AND
At least 2 different Dance Holds are included.
Level 3:
Step Sequence is not interrupted more than 10% of the pattern in total, either through Stumbles, Falls or any other reason
AND
Footwork includes at least 4 different Types of Difficult Turns (one of which being a Double Twizzle)
AND
Turns are multidirectional
AND
At least 3 Changes of Hold are included
AND
At least 3 different Dance Holds are included
Morozova & Zhirnov: Level 1
Daria – Chocktaw, Rocker, Bracket, Double Twizzle, Mohawk, Counter
Mikhail – Rocker, Mohawk, Chocktaw, Double Twizzle, Mohawk, Counter
…turns were multidirectional
…holds – from Tango – Waltz hold to Hand in Hand to Killian hold to Tango hold to Hand in Hand hold then Killian hold to Tango hold then Foxtrot hold to Killian hold…all those changes in holds were clearly recognized, but counted changes are Waltz – Killian, Killian – Tango, Tango – Killian, Killian – Tango, Tango – Foxtrot, Foxtrot – Killian…there is a strange notice in ISU rules that hold must be held long enought, but not mention how long this “long enought“ means...but Parsons had also some clearly recognized, but short holds and it was counted like Level 3, so probably “long enough“ is not very long…
…possible mistakes – Mikhail’s Mohawk didn’t look to be in edge (maybe thanks to camera angle, but it was not seen on the video), Mohawk done together – first edge didn’t look to be done well (maybe angle of camera once again)…
… being SOOOO strict and not counting possible mistakes - clean turns: Daria – 5, Mikhail – 4…it is still Level 3…
Moscheni & Lukacs:
…if I would be sooo strict (like in case of Russians above) I could probably put down almost half of turns…which would be probably still enought for at least Level 2, I guess…
Gaistruk & Olejnik:
…some really nice edges, some very mild edges under warning of putting down…
Spin:
Definition:
If the angle between the thigh and shin of the skating leg is more than about 120 degrees, the position shall be considered as an Upright or Camel Position depending on the other criteria that characterize these positions.
If the waist line is not horizontal and/or the core of the body is more than 45 degrees above the horizontal line the position shall be considered as an Upright Position. If the angle between the thigh and shin of the skating leg is less than about 120 degrees, the position shall be considered as a Sit Position.
A Difficult Variation shall be considered for Level when held for at least 2 rotations in a Spin or 3 rotations in a Combination Spin.
Level 3 or 4 shall be considered only when each partner performs at least one of the Difficult Variations given credit for Level.
In a Combination Spin, Level 3 or 4 shall be considered only when each part of the Combination Spin includes at least one of the Difficult Variations given credit for Level.
Level 3:
OPTION 1 (same spinning direction)
3 different Difficult Variations from 3 different Basic Positions
OPTION 2 (different spinning direction)
2 different Difficult Variations from 2 different Basic Positions
Level 4:
OPTION 1 (same spinning direction)
4 different Difficult Variations from 3 different Basic Positions (at least 2 being performed by partners simultaneously).
OPTION 2 (different spinning direction)
3 different Difficult Variations from 3 different Basic Positions
Gaistruk & Olejnik: Level 3 (doing Option 2 spin)
Alexei:
…in the first part of the spin he makes almost two rotations having angle between thigh and shin more than 120 degrees, Alexei’s core of the body is less than 45 degrees – so the first part is Camel Basic Position… but than he goes down to 90 degrees between thigh and shin transforming Camel into Sit Basic Position…and he changes twice the position of free leg from extended to bent a little to bent a lot in knee…
…so his free leg position is not fixed at all during first part of the spin…so no difficult pose for this part because he is not able to keep even one difficult variation for three rotations in any Basic Pose
…in the second part of the spin Alexei tries a difficult variation in Upper Basic Position – with “Leaning away from the other partner with the axis from knee to upper back more than 45 degrees from the vertical“ – but he is not able to perform it…
…plus he is not able to finish full three rotations in attempt of this Variation…
...overall no Difficult Variation done by Alexei
Valeria:
…in the first part of the spin Valeria is doing Camel Basic Position with “Body nearly horizontal with the heel of the boot pulled by the hand above the level of the head“ like a Difficult Variation…BUT first she lifts free leg above the head, but she puts her body to horizontal about ¼ of turn later, so only since that time the Position with Variation is fixed and can be counted – she makes almost two rotations in it and goes away…
…so this Difficult Variotion can’t be counted because she didn’t execute proper number of rotations in it (3 rotations in combo spin)…
…in the second part of the spin Valeria executes Upper Body Position with “Split with both legs straight and the boot/skate of the free leg held up higher than the head“ like a Difficult Variation…BUT she makes only two rotations since the position is fixed…so also this Difficult Variation can’t be counted…
…overall the couple didn’t execute even one Difficult Variation in necessary number of rotations…so the Level is none because even for Level 1 you need at least one Difficult Variation in any Basic Position…
The couple got Level 3 and some judges gave GOE 0, althought it was very visible that the couple is travelling the whole spin.
HOW IS IT POSSIBLE THAT TECHNICAL SPECIALIST GAVE LEVEL 3 WHILE EVEN ONE DIFFICULT POSE WAS NOT MET????
Morozova & Zhirnov: Level 2 (doing Option 1 spin)
Daria:
…in the first part of the spin Daria is doing Camel Basic Position with “Body nearly horizontal with the heel of the boot pulled by the hand above the level of the head“ like a Difficult Variation…she keeps that pose for 4 rotations…Difficult Variation should be counted…
…in the second part of the spin she is in Sit Basic Position having “Free leg bent or straight directed backward with thigh of skating leg at least parallel to the ice“ – she keeps this for 3 rotations…and then goes into “Upper Basic Position with Full layback with upper body arched back from the waist towards the ice or sideways with upper body bent to the side from the waist towards the ice“ – she keeps this for 3,5 rotations…two Difficult Variations counted…
Mikhail:
…in the first part of the spin Mikhail has Sit Basic Camel Position with “Free leg bent or straight directed forward with thigh of skating leg at least parallel to the ice“ - he executes 3,5 rotations…enought for counting a Difficult Variation
…in the second part of the spin Mikhail has Sit Basic Position once again with “Free leg bent or straight directed to the side with not more than 90 degrees between thigh and
shin of skating leg“…
…BUT he keeps this for a little more than 2,5 rotations….then he goes to Upper Basic Position and he tries to lean away but it is not 45 degrees – so no Difficult Variation counted in this part…
Overall the couple executed 4 difficult Variations in three Basic Positions, the couple spend time simultaneously in both Sit and Upper Basic Spin Position, so it should be Level 4 spin.
How did it happen that they got Level 2 only, I don’t know.
Rotational Lift:
Morozova & Zhirnov: Level 3
…the couple executes One Arm Rotational Lift performing three rotations in it, but to get Level 4 they needed Extra Feature (one rotation on one foot by lifting partner, fully extended arm to the front by lifting partner or changes the level of skating leg by lifting partner) – none of this Features were met this time, so the lift was Level 3 only…and it was right…
Definition:
If the angle between the thigh and shin of the skating leg is more than about 120 degrees, the position shall be considered as an Upright or Camel Position depending on the other criteria that characterize these positions.
If the waist line is not horizontal and/or the core of the body is more than 45 degrees above the horizontal line the position shall be considered as an Upright Position. If the angle between the thigh and shin of the skating leg is less than about 120 degrees, the position shall be considered as a Sit Position.
A Difficult Variation shall be considered for Level when held for at least 2 rotations in a Spin or 3 rotations in a Combination Spin.
Level 3 or 4 shall be considered only when each partner performs at least one of the Difficult Variations given credit for Level.
In a Combination Spin, Level 3 or 4 shall be considered only when each part of the Combination Spin includes at least one of the Difficult Variations given credit for Level.
Level 3:
OPTION 1 (same spinning direction)
3 different Difficult Variations from 3 different Basic Positions
OPTION 2 (different spinning direction)
2 different Difficult Variations from 2 different Basic Positions
Level 4:
OPTION 1 (same spinning direction)
4 different Difficult Variations from 3 different Basic Positions (at least 2 being performed by partners simultaneously).
OPTION 2 (different spinning direction)
3 different Difficult Variations from 3 different Basic Positions
Gaistruk & Olejnik: Level 3 (doing Option 2 spin)
Alexei:
…in the first part of the spin he makes almost two rotations having angle between thigh and shin more than 120 degrees, Alexei’s core of the body is less than 45 degrees – so the first part is Camel Basic Position… but than he goes down to 90 degrees between thigh and shin transforming Camel into Sit Basic Position…and he changes twice the position of free leg from extended to bent a little to bent a lot in knee…
…in the second part of the spin Alexei tries a difficult variation in Upper Basic Position – with “Leaning away from the other partner with the axis from knee to upper back more than 45 degrees from the vertical“ – but he is not able to perform it…
...overall no Difficult Variation done by Alexei
Valeria:
…in the first part of the spin Valeria is doing Camel Basic Position with “Body nearly horizontal with the heel of the boot pulled by the hand above the level of the head“ like a Difficult Variation…BUT first she lifts free leg above the head, but she puts her body to horizontal about ¼ of turn later, so only since that time the Position with Variation is fixed and can be counted – she makes almost two rotations in it and goes away…
…in the second part of the spin Valeria executes Upper Body Position with “Split with both legs straight and the boot/skate of the free leg held up higher than the head“ like a Difficult Variation…BUT she makes only two rotations since the position is fixed…so also this Difficult Variation can’t be counted…
…overall the couple didn’t execute even one Difficult Variation in necessary number of rotations…so the Level is none because even for Level 1 you need at least one Difficult Variation in any Basic Position…
The couple got Level 3 and some judges gave GOE 0, althought it was very visible that the couple is travelling the whole spin.
HOW IS IT POSSIBLE THAT TECHNICAL SPECIALIST GAVE LEVEL 3 WHILE EVEN ONE DIFFICULT POSE WAS NOT MET????
Morozova & Zhirnov: Level 2 (doing Option 1 spin)
Daria:
…in the first part of the spin Daria is doing Camel Basic Position with “Body nearly horizontal with the heel of the boot pulled by the hand above the level of the head“ like a Difficult Variation…she keeps that pose for 4 rotations…Difficult Variation should be counted…
…in the second part of the spin she is in Sit Basic Position having “Free leg bent or straight directed backward with thigh of skating leg at least parallel to the ice“ – she keeps this for 3 rotations…and then goes into “Upper Basic Position with Full layback with upper body arched back from the waist towards the ice or sideways with upper body bent to the side from the waist towards the ice“ – she keeps this for 3,5 rotations…two Difficult Variations counted…
Mikhail:
…in the first part of the spin Mikhail has Sit Basic Camel Position with “Free leg bent or straight directed forward with thigh of skating leg at least parallel to the ice“ - he executes 3,5 rotations…enought for counting a Difficult Variation
…in the second part of the spin Mikhail has Sit Basic Position once again with “Free leg bent or straight directed to the side with not more than 90 degrees between thigh and
shin of skating leg“…
Overall the couple executed 4 difficult Variations in three Basic Positions, the couple spend time simultaneously in both Sit and Upper Basic Spin Position, so it should be Level 4 spin.
How did it happen that they got Level 2 only, I don’t know.
Rotational Lift:
Morozova & Zhirnov: Level 3
…the couple executes One Arm Rotational Lift performing three rotations in it, but to get Level 4 they needed Extra Feature (one rotation on one foot by lifting partner, fully extended arm to the front by lifting partner or changes the level of skating leg by lifting partner) – none of this Features were met this time, so the lift was Level 3 only…and it was right…
If Technical specialist would give appropriate levels - the Base Value of elements would change:
Y&M got 32.20 points - taking Circular Step Sequence like Level 3 they would get 33.70 – I didn’t find any reason why would be Level in Twizzles put down for two Levels – with Level 3 Twizzles the would get 34.70 points in base value
P&P got 36.00 points
M&L got 32.00 points
G&O got 30.20 – with no Difficult Variation which is needed even for Level 1 in Spin and with Twizzles Level 2…the couple would loose 6.6 point - they would have 23.60 points
M&Z got 27.50 points – with putting appropriate Levels in Spin and both Step Sequences they would get 6.502 points more – they would have 34.00 points
So only thanks to wrong Technical Specialist‘s decisions Ukrainian couple was able to get 6.6 points more while Morozova & Zhirnov got 6.50 points less and Yanovaskaya & Mozgov got 2.50 points less.
Y&M got 32.20 points - taking Circular Step Sequence like Level 3 they would get 33.70 – I didn’t find any reason why would be Level in Twizzles put down for two Levels – with Level 3 Twizzles the would get 34.70 points in base value
P&P got 36.00 points
M&L got 32.00 points
G&O got 30.20 – with no Difficult Variation which is needed even for Level 1 in Spin and with Twizzles Level 2…the couple would loose 6.6 point - they would have 23.60 points
M&Z got 27.50 points – with putting appropriate Levels in Spin and both Step Sequences they would get 6.502 points more – they would have 34.00 points
So only thanks to wrong Technical Specialist‘s decisions Ukrainian couple was able to get 6.6 points more while Morozova & Zhirnov got 6.50 points less and Yanovaskaya & Mozgov got 2.50 points less.
Nice to know. So I'm not the only one
Thanks for such detailed analysis. Now I want to forget this event ever existed. And I hope Morozova and Zhirnov will forget it too.
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2014
Oh dear.
Get your
ready for when those who still haven't got over the Adelina vs. everyone else StSq level controversy find this thread.......
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2012
I re-watched it, trying to understand why there are some people who really like it while I don't, and I have to admit that the first half is good and that the construction of the program itself is not bad at all, but there were two main reasons that gave me a negative impression:
-it is actually too "generic" for me: typical Russian, with a lot of emphasis on pathos, drama and arm movements; non necessarily a negative thing of course, but in this case it does not stand out among all these programs, it doesn't really have a theme, a clear style, something similar to what happened to Bobrova/Soloviev with their 2012 FD: not a bad program, but it didn't have impact, it didn't make them "different" in any way... The same could be said about the Parsons or McNamara/Carpenter FDs this season, of course (I didn't actually find these programs stylistically interesting either)
-their strength could be the fast-paced music, but in the end they look extremely tired (especially he) and they're not able to cope with the rhythm, especially because of that awkward transition when he's dragging her around just before the end
These are just stylistic observations, I'm not talking about the technical aspect: they could have been held down by the technical panel, of course, and I don't really want to discuss about it (especially because I'm always sceptical about the conspiracy theories)
I re-watched it, trying to understand why there are some people who really like it while I don't, and I have to admit that the first half is good and that the construction of the program itself is not bad at all, but there were two main reasons that gave me a negative impression:
-it is actually too "generic" for me: typical Russian, with a lot of emphasis on pathos, drama and arm movements; non necessarily a negative thing of course, but in this case it does not stand out among all these programs, it doesn't really have a theme, a clear style, something similar to what happened to Bobrova/Soloviev with their 2012 FD: not a bad program, but it didn't have impact, it didn't make them "different" in any way... The same could be said about the Parsons or McNamara/Carpenter FDs this season, of course (I didn't actually find these programs stylistically interesting either)
-their strength could be the fast-paced music, but in the end they look extremely tired (especially he) and they're not able to cope with the rhythm, especially because of that awkward transition when he's dragging her around just before the end
These are just stylistic observations, I'm not talking about the technical aspect: they could have been held down by the technical panel, of course, and I don't really want to discuss about it (especially because I'm always sceptical about the conspiracy theories)
And I disagree again
It did have impact on me. In fact, I'm re-watching only 3 FD from this season so far: Y/M, W/P from Nebelhorn (yes, it's messy, but it grew on me a lot) and their FD from their first event. I think the music, costumes and their presentation creates the right atmosphere on the ice. I don't know how to describe it but I feel the dance. She said that her character in this dance is evil and from the different world 'behind the Mirror'. The guy is good and he's frightened by her. During the dance she's trying to take him to her world, and he can't control himself because of her magic. Then he realizes what's going on and trying to fight her. He's winning in the end and both of them are staying in their own worlds on the different sides of the Mirror. I think the plot is there, it's not on the surface but it's not non-existent either. If you want you can read more detailed version of the story here: http://www.allsportinfo.ru/index.php?id=85952
You don't like it, ok, I get it. But I think it's completely wrong thing to say that the dance is not 'up to bar'. And you know, they scored about 82 points with this FD on their first event. Not bad for some 'random skating', huh?
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2012
Ok, that's fine, we just explained our different points of viewAnd I disagree again
She said that her character in this dance is evil and from the different world 'behind the Mirror'. The guy is good and he's frightened by her. During the dance she's trying to take him to her world, and he can't control himself because of her magic. Then he realises what's going on and trying to fight her. He's winning in the end and both of them are staying in their own worlds on the different sides of the Mirror. I think the plot is there, it's not on the surface but it's not non-existent either. If you want you can read more detailed version of the story here: http://www.allsportinfo.ru/index.php?id=85952
You don't like it, ok, I get it. But I think it's completely wrong thing to say that the dance is not 'up to bar'. And you know, they scored about 82 points with this FD on their first event. Not bad for some 'random skating', huh?
My words were maybe too harsh, and probably misleading: I was referring exclusively to the last part of this performance, not to the program or to the skaters themselves with "random skating". Reading the story, though, made the program more interesting for sure! We'll see how it develops 
Ok, that's fine, we just explained our different points of view
Oh, you are really nice
I really hope you will like it when it counts (in Barcelona, for example), and I hope their version of this dance in JGPF will be more polished. Now I'm just happy they're going to Barca, and I hope I will have a chance to take a picture with them. For now, lets just agree to disagree
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2003
- Country
-
Just saying, but the deduction for pirouettes is as follows (from the current Tech Panel manual)
1 or 2 pirouettes out of 4 rotations - deduction drop ONE level
3 or 4 pirouettes out of 4 rotations - deduction drop TWO levels
And there are several ways for tech levels from 2 events to disagree
1. First event had a forgiving panel, and second a tough panel. No conspiracies needed. This often happens when there are significant rule changes- panels on the later event are more up to speed on applying new rules.
2. One or the other event had biased judging
3. Skaters skated well at first event, not as well at second event
A combination of the above.
Frankly, Y&M should have lost twizzle levels in their first event, too IMO.
I have to look at the spins and steps, but this panel was tough on everyone's twizzles. In the SD, only one team got level 4, and it was the BLR team- and they had some of the new options: face to face with a crossing pattern AFAIR
BTW, any team that thought it deserved a higher level.on a particular skill could have challenged the tech panel's level assignment.
The most fruitful place to look for bias in tech panels is to scrutinize teams that have levels undeservedly high, rather than undeservedly low, because there is no mechanism to challenge another team's overly generous scores.
1 or 2 pirouettes out of 4 rotations - deduction drop ONE level
3 or 4 pirouettes out of 4 rotations - deduction drop TWO levels
And there are several ways for tech levels from 2 events to disagree
1. First event had a forgiving panel, and second a tough panel. No conspiracies needed. This often happens when there are significant rule changes- panels on the later event are more up to speed on applying new rules.
2. One or the other event had biased judging
3. Skaters skated well at first event, not as well at second event
A combination of the above.
Frankly, Y&M should have lost twizzle levels in their first event, too IMO.
I have to look at the spins and steps, but this panel was tough on everyone's twizzles. In the SD, only one team got level 4, and it was the BLR team- and they had some of the new options: face to face with a crossing pattern AFAIR
BTW, any team that thought it deserved a higher level.on a particular skill could have challenged the tech panel's level assignment.
The most fruitful place to look for bias in tech panels is to scrutinize teams that have levels undeservedly high, rather than undeservedly low, because there is no mechanism to challenge another team's overly generous scores.
Last edited:
You forgot that other than russian teams did 'great' with the same mistakes. Try to analyze hungarian, ukrainian and US pairs' FDs with the same thoroughness too. I'd like to know your opinion.
And tech panel 'toughness' still doesn't explain PCS jumps. I mean 3-4 points jumps obviously mean something, don't you think? I'm more than sure that hungarian and ukrainian pair will not see this high PCS on their next events. I bookmarked this topic, will se at the Worlds or even sooner. I'm not even talking about +GOE marks of some of the teams.
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2003
- Country
-
The other Russian team here was Morozova and Zhirnov.
They did not do great in the SD.
Re twizzles, they got level 2. Certainly one of the levels was lost because Zhirnov lost hold of his foot.
Last edited:
I meant other teams, not russian. Hungarians, ukrainians and Parsons. They all made same mistakes but their levels were higher. And I mean not only their twizzles.
Similar threads
- Sticky
- Sticky
- Sticky