Understanding Spins in Protocols 2015 2016

kwanatic · Aug 22, 2014

Got a question for you IJS savvy people:

So, I'm looking at the protocols for JGP Courchevel and I'm a little confused by some of the element codes. What's the deal with the combination spin? It used to be CCoSp4 for a level 4 combination spin with a change of foot. Now it's CCoSp3p4 or CCoSp3p3...

Here's Evgenia Medvedeva's combo spin: on the protocol it's given a CCoSp3p4: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWPSW76THRo&list=UUbv3gsBXzIwotCt2JGySfJA#t=15

Do both portions of the spin receive a level now? Like the spin on the left leg earned a level 3 and the spin on the right leg earned a level 4?

Sam-Skwantch · Aug 22, 2014

It's weird. I've been :bang:

a lot. To the best of my knowledge it is this.

CCoSp3p4 means. Change foot, Combination Spin, 3 positions, Level 4. There is now a V1 or V2 which indicates 1 or 2 requirements not met and a lowered BV. So that is why they now note the positions because you can do them and still not recieve full credit. Does that make sense??

In the case of a V1 or V2 you'd see this in the protocols.

CCoSp3p4V1 or V2

kwanatic · Aug 22, 2014

Sam-Skwantch said:
It's weird. I've been a lot. To the best of my knowledge it is this.

CCoSp3p4 means. Change foot, Combination Spin, 3 positions, Level 4. There is now a V1 or V2 which indicates 1 or 2 requirements not met and a lowered BV. So that is why they now note the positions because you can do them and still not recieve full credit. Does that make sense??

In the case of a V1 or V2 you'd see this in the protocols.

CCoSp3p4V1 or V2

but I think I get it.

Using Medvedeva's as an example, I counted 5 positions: forward sit spin--broken leg variation--change foot to back camel--back sit spin--up to upright I-spin. I suppose that counts as 3 basic positions (sit, camel, upright). So does that mean the highest level you can get is CCoSp3p4 (level 4 spin w/ all 3 positions)?

gkelly · Aug 22, 2014

kwanatic said:
So does that mean the highest level you can get is CCoSp3p4 (level 4 spin w/ all 3 positions)?

That's my understanding.

And yes, the 2 or 3 refers to basic positions in a combination spin -- two different sitspin variations, for instance, would not count as two separate positions.

Jombi · Dec 24, 2015

Hello! I'm tring to learn how to assign spin levels and I think I need some help.
First of all, does anyone happen to have an up-to-date document with the rules? I'm using this one but it's from a couple of season ago.
Then I'd like to ask if anyone is available to tell me what kind of feature I'm missing from the following spins.

Hopefully someone will have the time to indulge me

thank you in advance!

Case study n.1
Casella LSp4

What I see (level 3):
-8 revs
-difficult variation (haircutter)
-biellmann

Casella FSSp3 & CCoSp3p3

What I see (level 2):
-difficult variation (broken leg)
-difficult variation

What I see (level 4):
-backward entrance
-difficult variation (in the camel)
-difficult variation (donut)
-difficult variation (A spin)
-difficult variation (I spin)

Which are the features I'm not noticing?

Case study n.2
Shiraiwa LSp3 and LSp4

Where is she losing a level? number of rotations?

to be continued...

gkelly · Dec 24, 2015

Look here for the latest technical panel handbook and the latest ISU communication (currently no. 1944) listing the level features:
http://www.isu.org/en/single-and-pa...ce/isu-judging-system/single-and-pair-skating

Backward entrance is no longer a feature.

Sorry, I haven't had a chance to study the current rules in detail and also study your examples.

C_T_T_ · Dec 27, 2015

Jombi said:
Hello! I'm tring to learn how to assign spin levels and I think I need some help.
First of all, does anyone happen to have an up-to-date document with the rules? I'm using this one but it's from a couple of season ago.
Then I'd like to ask if anyone is available to tell me what kind of feature I'm missing from the following spins.

Hopefully someone will have the time to indulge me thank you in advance!

I can try

Jombi said:
Case study n.1
Casella LSp4

What I see (level 3):
-8 revs
-difficult variation (haircutter)
-biellmann

-8 revs in side position
-change of position from sideways to backwards
-haircutter
-Biellmann

Jombi said:
Casella FSSp3 & CCoSp3p3

What I see (level 2):
-difficult variation (broken leg)
-difficult variation

-Flying entry-sit position in air
-Sit front (head to knee/ cannonball position)
-Sit side (broken leg)
-Sit behind attempted but didn't achieve 2 rotations in a low enough position so not awarded.

Jombi said:
What I see (level 4):
-backward entrance
-difficult variation (in the camel)
-difficult variation (donut)
-difficult variation (A spin)
-difficult variation (I spin)

Which are the features I'm not noticing?

-Camel Upward
-Camel sideways (donut)
-Upright forward (A spin)
-Upright straight (I spin)

The first and last positions are very close on rotation so one of those hasn't been awarded. Back entrance no longer counts as a difficult entry this year.

Jombi said:
Case study n.2
Shiraiwa LSp3 and LSp4

Where is she losing a level? number of rotations?

to be continued...

I'm not sure on this one. I would give them both level 4 with the same features as above.

Jombi · Dec 27, 2015

C_T_T_ said:
I can try

Oh thank you, thank you!! This is extremely useful! :agree: Thank you also gkelly for the pdf!

What about these ones? (I think I've got them but just for confirmation)
Chen CCSp4. He's got a level 4 because:

-change of edge
-camel upward
-change of foot with a jump
-camel forward (half-biellmann)

but in the jgp final he did CCSp3. Although it doesn't look like a mistake but almost like it is a planned level 3. Is it correct or am I missing some features?

-change of edge
-change of foot with a jump
-camel upward

Flying sit now. Chen FSSp4. It's a level 4 because:
-flying entry (sit position)
-sit forward
-jump within a spin
-sit sideways

Same spin in the jgp final FSSp3: in these one he loses a level because he doesn't get credit for the final variation (sit sideways), right? So it's a planned level 4 but not properly executed?

C_T_T_ said:
-Sit behind attempted but didn't achieve 2 rotations in a low enough position so not awarded.

So is it 2 revolutions the minumum to get credit for a difficult variation?

C_T_T_ · Dec 27, 2015

Jombi said:
Oh thank you, thank you!! This is extremely useful! :agree: Thank you also gkelly for the pdf!

What about these ones? (I think I've got them but just for confirmation)
Chen CCSp4. He's got a level 4 because:

-change of edge
-camel upward
-change of foot with a jump
-camel forward (half-biellmann)

but in the jgp final he did CCSp3. Although it doesn't look like a mistake but almost like it is a planned level 3. Is it correct or am I missing some features?

-change of edge
-change of foot with a jump
-camel upward

Yes that's right. He may also be attempting a difficult entry with the stars going into the spin but I have never managed to get a clear explanation of what counts.

Flying sit now. Chen FSSp4. It's a level 4 because:
-flying entry (sit position)
-sit forward
-jump within a spin
-sit sideways

Same spin in the jgp final FSSp3: in these one he loses a level because he doesn't get credit for the final variation (sit sideways), right? So it's a planned level 4 but not properly executed?

For me the broken leg is fine, it's the sit front that is short.

So is it 2 revolutions the minumum to get credit for a difficult variation?

Yes, that's correct and you only start counting when the position counts so when the sit spin is low enough or the leg is high enough in the camel etc. Flying entries, jumps with in the spin etc must also be followed by 2 rotations in a position to count.

You also need to keep an eye for repeated features as you can only get credit for 1 difficult position from each category per program. eg. Cannonball and pancake are both sit forward so only the first one attempted counts as a feature.

Jombi · Dec 27, 2015

C_T_T_ said:
You also need to keep an eye for repeated features as you can only get credit for 1 difficult position from each category per program. eg. Cannonball and pancake are both sit forward so only the first one attempted counts as a feature.

Oh good to know! I thought he was the exact same variation that couldn't be repeated (broken leg, broken leg) not the category! :hslap:

Anyway you're a treasure!! Final set of spins, I promise (well, for today at least :laugh:

)
1.) Samohin CSSp4 and CSSp3

-camel upward
-change of edge (at the limit with the revs so it gets level 3?)
-change of foot with a jump
-camel forward

2.) Samohin CCoSp3p4 and CCoSp3p3

Level 4
-jump within a spin
-non-basic spin variation
-sit forward
-All 3 basic positions on the second foot (camel, sit, upright)

I thought he lost a level because he didn't hit the camel position for enough revolutions to make count the "all 3 basic pos on 2nd foot" feature but then it'd be CCoSp2p instead of CCoSp3p.. so it must be something else ???

3) FSSp4
- flying entry (sit position)
- sit sideways
- sit behind
- 8 revolutions (on sit behind)

FSSp2

- flying entry (sit position) ---> some problems
- sit sideways ---> too high?
- sit behind

Does he lose a level because of the problem in the flying entry or because the sit variation is too high? Or for something else I'm neglecting entirely?

C_T_T_ · Dec 28, 2015

Jombi said:
Oh good to know! I thought he was the exact same variation that couldn't be repeated (broken leg, broken leg) not the category! :hslap:

Anyway you're a treasure!! Final set of spins, I promise (well, for today at least )

These are interesting examples-I'm starting to doubt myself! :scratch2:

1.) Samohin CSSp4 and CSSp3

-camel upward
-change of edge (at the limit with the revs so it gets level 3?)
-change of foot with a jump
-camel forward

Yes, I agree.

2.) Samohin CCoSp3p4 and CCoSp3p3

Level 4
-jump within a spin
-non-basic spin variation
-sit forward
-All 3 basic positions on the second foot (camel, sit, upright)

I thought he lost a level because he didn't hit the camel position for enough revolutions to make count the "all 3 basic pos on 2nd foot" feature but then it'd be CCoSp2p instead of CCoSp3p.. so it must be something else ???

There aren't two rotations in the sit position after the jump so he won't get credit for that. I agree that the camel is also too short for me.

3) FSSp4
- flying entry (sit position)
- sit sideways
- sit behind
- 8 revolutions (on sit behind)

FSSp2

- flying entry (sit position) ---> some problems
- sit sideways ---> too high?
- sit behind

Does he lose a level because of the problem in the flying entry or because the sit variation is too high? Or for something else I'm neglecting entirely?

I don't have a problem with flying entry and that would be marked with 'V' if there was no clear jump or the position wasn't achieved. The broken leg is borderline so it must have been that which wasn't awarded.

Jombi · Dec 28, 2015

C_T_T_ said:
There aren't two rotations in the sit position after the jump so he won't get credit for that. .

Oh right, good catch!
"Studying" spins makes me look like this :laugh:

Thanks for making some clarity!

More spins!!!

1) Aliev CCoSp3p4

What I see (level 3):
-difficult entry
-sit forward
-all 3 basic position on second foot

Maybe the upright variation counts? Also not sure about the difficult entry..

Gumennik CCoSp3p3 riga

I see more or less 300 features:
- change of edge
- Y variation --> borderline?
*change of foot*
- sit behind ---> borderline?
- difficult change of position ---> does it classify as such? It certainly looks difficult

- haircutter
- biellmann --> edge not stable?

What counts and what doesn't? Here's the corresponding CCoSp3p4, maybe it helps (sit behind and biellmann look long enough?).

Also this spin makes me wonder:
1) Let's say he gets credit just for the change of edge before the change of foot: at that point even if he hits all the other features on the second foot, he should still receive level 3 right? Because of the rule "the maximum number of features on one foot for spins with a change of foot is 2"?

2) what does classify as a difficult change of position? Would this one count (Farris, from upright to sit)?

C_T_T_ · Dec 29, 2015

Jombi said:
1) Aliev CCoSp3p4

What I see (level 3):
-difficult entry
-sit forward
-all 3 basic position on second foot

Maybe the upright variation counts? Also not sure about the difficult entry..

Yes a crossfoot counts as a difficult variation of upright straight as long as the weight is equally distributed on both feet. That is definitely a difficult entry.

Gumennik CCoSp3p3 riga

I see more or less 300 features:
- change of edge
- Y variation --> borderline?
*change of foot*
- sit behind ---> borderline?
- difficult change of position ---> does it classify as such? It certainly looks difficult
- haircutter
- biellmann --> edge not stable?

What counts and what doesn't? Here's the corresponding CCoSp3p4, maybe it helps (sit behind and biellmann look long enough?).

Also this spin makes me wonder:
1) Let's say he gets credit just for the change of edge before the change of foot: at that point even if he hits all the other features on the second foot, he should still receive level 3 right? Because of the rule "the maximum number of features on one foot for spins with a change of foot is 2"?

Hmm....I'm not sure. I would have that level 4. Comparing the level 3 spin to the level 4 spin, I think he just takes a moment to steady himself before going into the biellmann. As you have said, he can only get credit for 2 features on each foot so I'd guess he didn't get credit for the Y position. That is definitely a difficult change of position!

2) what does classify as a difficult change of position? Would this one count (Farris, from upright to sit)?

Again, there isn't a clear check-list for this. The handbook says 'requiring significant strength, skill and control and having an impact on the ability to execute the position change'. The most common one which is easy to see is going from a sit or upright into a camel, usually a catchfoot.

That one of Joshua's is fine for a difficult change but he doesn't hold the sit long enough in that particular clip. The positions need to be held for 2 rotations before and after the change. The sit position itself would be a feature but if you look back earlier he already used sit front in his CSSp.

Jombi · Jan 2, 2016

Thanks again C_T_T. I'd be lost without you!

New year, new spins!

Yamamoto CCSp4
-difficult entry
-change of edge
-camel sideways
-camel forward

CCSp3, still seeing a level 4
-difficult entry
-change of edge --> 2 revolutions borderline? or the free leg drops a bit and invalidates the feature?
-camel sideways
-camel forward --> 2 revolution borderline?

CCSp no value
no basic position reached within first 2 revolutions?

Also in this spin there aren't 6 revolutions on the first foot.. in general should that be reflected in GOEs (like a mandatory -1,-2..)?

C_T_T_ · Jan 3, 2016

Jombi said:
Thanks again C_T_T. I'd be lost without you!

New year, new spins!

No problem, happy new year

Yamamoto CCSp4
-difficult entry
-change of edge
-camel sideways
-camel forward

CCSp3, still seeing a level 4
-difficult entry
-change of edge --> 2 revolutions borderline? or the free leg drops a bit and invalidates the feature?
-camel sideways
-camel forward --> 2 revolution borderline?

The COE is too short for me.

CCSp no value
no basic position reached within first 2 revolutions?

'The change of foot in any spin must be preceded and followed by a spin position with at least three (3) revolutions.' I think it has no value because his leg drops and goes back up but no position has be held long enough to count as a change foot spin.

Also in this spin there aren't 6 revolutions on the first foot.. in general should that be reflected in GOEs (like a mandatory -1,-2..)?

Yes, if he'd held the camel for 3 rotations and then changed feet, the spin would have counted for the technical panel but the judges would take that into account in their GOE. I'm not familiar enough with the judging part to answer that question without looking up the relevant ISU communication. I'll have a look later when I have more time.

gkelly · Jan 3, 2016

"Less than required revolutions" is a -1 to -2 GOE reduction for spins.

It's probably applied more in short programs (where the requirements are stricter). And it could be offset by positive bullet points especially if the spin is only 1-2 revolutions short.

Jombi · Jan 5, 2016

James Min FCCOSp no value
Why?

The spin seems ok regarding this point: "In Free Skating a clear visible attempt of a spin combination which results in a spin with only 1 basic position with not less than 2 revolutions will be called by the Technical Panel as a spin combination no value" so maybe this is the reason "The spin combination must include a minimum of two different basic positions with 2 revolutions in each of these positions and only one change of foot with not less than six (6) revolutions on each foot"?
So basically the same as Yamamoto in my previous example? we're not counting the first revolutions because no position is hold long enough?

gkelly · Jan 5, 2016

Hmm.

This requirement for flying spins seems to apply:

Basic landing position must be reached within the first 2 revs after the
landing and from the moment this position is initially reached it must be held

for 2 revs after the landing.

But the penalty for not reaching or not holding the landing position or both is a V code, not discounting the spin entirely.

I don't see anything in the tech panel handbook to suggest that they don't even call it as an attempted flying entry. (If that were the case it would make sense he gets no credit because he has another CCoSP elsewhere in the program.)

So my guess is that they didn't think he achieved the basic sit position on the second foot. That would leave only a simple basic upright position on the first foot and only non-basic positions on the second foot.

C_T_T_ · Jan 5, 2016

The camel doesn't count as its not held and the sit spin is too high so it can't be a combination spin if there isn't at least 2 basic positions.

Jombi · Jan 5, 2016

gkelly said:
So my guess is that they didn't think he achieved the basic sit position on the second foot. That would leave only a simple basic upright position on the first foot and only non-basic positions on the second foot.

C_T_T_ said:
The camel doesn't count as its not held and the sit spin is too high so it can't be a combination spin if there isn't at least 2 basic positions.

Thank you both! I guess this spin wasn't that mysterious after all! Just for me :laugh:

So what about this one? Shouldn't this spin get dinged for the same reason?

Tsoglin FCCoSp2p1
-flying entry --> no credit for the air position
-camel upward --> no credit
-camel forward --> ok, level 1
-change of foot with a jump --> no credit
-sit sideways --> ???

Ok obviously in this case they gave him credit for both the basic positions (camel and sit) but to me the sit position doesn't look much better than the Min's one. I guess I need to train my eyes more

The thing I don't understand though is how he can receive credit for the basic sit position but not for the variation (since they're the same thing in this case and he didn't attempt another sit sideways earlier in the program). In other words either he gets FCCoSp2p2 or FCCoSp no value.

Understanding Spins in Protocols 2015 2016

kwanatic

Check out my YT channel, Bare Ice!

Sam-Skwantch

“I solemnly swear I’m up to no good”

kwanatic

Check out my YT channel, Bare Ice!

gkelly

Jombi

gkelly

C_T_T_

Jombi

C_T_T_

Jombi

C_T_T_

Jombi

C_T_T_

Jombi

C_T_T_

gkelly

Jombi

gkelly

C_T_T_

Jombi

Similar threads

Connect with us