2015 Skate America Mens SP Oct 23

Ice Dance said:

Well, people almost always become controversial after they win. Trying to think of a winner whom someone doesn't think was overscored in some portion of the competition, and it's not coming to me.

I appreciate Shoma quite a lot, but I'm not sure why people want to rush in to build up another version of Chan/Hanyu-flation. He's talented. He's getting great scores. He missed a jump in the short and had several scratchy landings in the free. Why not wait for a truly outstanding performance before pushing the huge PCS marks? He'll get them if he skates well. That's pretty obvious. As it is, if he reels off a bunch of solid competitions in a row, his scores will probably skyrocket just like Hanyu's did and then we'll all be griping when he finishes second after falling 5 times. I really think the sport can do without another "unbeatable" athlete. Last year, I really felt like the excitement returned to the men's event because even the best had to put up a great performance. Shoma had a good performance. It wasn't great. He has it in him. He doesn't need inflated scores to get the job done. Just confidence. And less pressure to win, rather than more, really does help. I think second place here is great for him heading forward into the rest of the GP season.

Click to expand...

This is so correct. I am surprised that these judges are so swayed by these untried skaters; they ae supposedly the ISU top. It's been the lead story in the ladeies for several years and seems to happening with Shoma. These junior-ish skaers come on the scene. Because of their size, ratio of fat/muscle, etc. technical things come easier; they get big numbers. Worse are PCS scores. Do these ISU judges really think Shoma and Medeveda (sp) skate like Chan, Kim or Kostner. If so, I'd go for that free eye exam! It must be dispiriting for the adults with adult bodeis who have spent years learning to hold an edge and control a landing to be clipped by some spining top.

Shoma is 'some spinning top'? That just sounds rude to me.

I would really like to know why he is so 'junior-ish'? What exactly makes him look like a junior? I don't mean things he can work on- every skater has that- I mean what makes him look out of place in Seniors?

karlowens2 said:

It must be dispiriting for the adults with adult bodeis who have spent years learning to hold an edge and control a landing to be clipped by some spining top.

Click to expand...

So Shoma can't hold edges and control his landings? Are you sure about that?

TheGrandSophy said:

Shoma is 'some spinning top'? That just sounds rude to me.

I would really like to know why he is so 'junior-ish'? What exactly makes him look like a junior? I don't mean things he can work on- every skater has that- I mean what makes him look out of place in Seniors?

Click to expand...

Nothing. He's just tiny and looks young, so people like to throw around random meaningless words that have nothing to do with his actual ability as a skater.

I thought Shoma was quite impressive. I don't think the teenage vs adult thing is as pronounced in the men's division. In fact, with the bigger jumps in the men's I think it favours adults more than teenagers.

TheGrandSophy said:

Shoma is 'some spinning top'? That just sounds rude to me.

I would really like to know why he is so 'junior-ish'? What exactly makes him look like a junior? I don't mean things he can work on- every skater has that- I mean what makes him look out of place in Seniors?

Click to expand...

It is hard to describe. here's what look juniorish is to me. 1. Several jumps weren't landed correctly - 'saves', bent over, swizzles on end, etc. - speaks to not fully devloped technique. Yes some were good, but it's random 2) The connecting bits, for example between spin positions, arren't really fleshed out- jerky looking 3) choregraphic arm waving - in places convincing, in others just something to do until the next jump 4)rushing to the next element - not holding things out, cutting off a sequence of steps to get on to the next, not able into get to the deep edge soon enough before the next step. This is what PCS is supposed to capture. But, the judges ofen use it as a fudge factor . up or down to get the rankings they want. (Sotnikova getting 8 & 9 in Sochi when she was really 6.5, 8 skater) One thing that made Kim and Cohen so special is that they could hit a position or edge immediately - so you had that great long effect, beautiful.

Blades of Passion said:

Thanks for listing the current CoP GUIDELINES for how to score jumps. Those bullets are not how jumps should actually be scored most accurately and thankfully they are indeed just guidelines.

And yes he did have it matched to the musical structure. The jump comes right in the absence of the higher piano notes in the melody, while there are descending alternating beats inbetween when the jump is happening. The entrance, takeoff, and exit of the jump define those piano notes while the space inbetween is exactly where the jump happens. It can also be argued that the jump was effortless throughout. He is a bit forward with the upper body and a bit up on the toepick at the start of the landing, but he pulls into a good flowing exit position with no actual effort. The movement is fluid and looks normal, as if it was intended, not like a fight.

Click to expand...

You're pulling at straws here. That was not effortless throughout. And let's be honest here, Pitkeev could have attempted the quad at any point in the program (whether in the absence of musical notes or right on musical notes) and you would argue that it matched the musical structure.

As far as saying a "bit on the toe pick"... The landing was definitely over the toe pick, not on an outside edge with his body leaning towards the ice and almost putting a hand down. That is not "effortless". And it certainly wasn't effortless enough for him to do the intended combo off of. Although I suppose you would suggest Adian's 2nd FS quad was "just a bit of a minor tiny little step out" which deserved -1 and 0 GOE. :sarcasm:

As for current COP guidelines - yes, those are the guidelines (by definition, general rules) for judges to score accordingly. It's the rules. Rules that have to be adhered to, arguably even moreso in the short (technical) program.

It's fine if Adian does the exact same easy, simple setup into his quad in the FS (which he does) but in the SP judges are clearly looking for distinct, preceding steps - not a basic, run of the mill quad set up. It's obvious that Adian's intention was to do the quad-triple combo first (which doesn't require steps) and then a solo lutz (which he does do legit preceding steps leading into). He just got nailed by the judges by not being able to combo his less-than-perfect quad -- which he would have done in combination if it *actually* were as "effortless throughout" as you'd said -- and so it was treated as a solo jump with some judges calling him out on the lack of steps (and some simply scored him 0 for the scratchy landing and lack of meeting standard GOE criteria).

Obviously the lesson is that Pitkeev needs to incorporate preceding steps leading up to BOTH his quad combo (in case he's unable to manage a combo), AND his lutz (in case he lands the planned opening combo and it becomes a solo jump, as planned). He's not the first skater to make this blunder where his planned combo without preceding steps ends up as a solo jump (in the SP), and he's accordingly deducted.

I get that Adian's your new fave and all ("HE WON!" the SP, after all...), but try to treat him objectively and not justify his errors with questionable statements like, "GOE criteria are merely just guidelines..."

karlowens2 said:

It is hard to describe. here's what look juniorish is to me. 1. Several jumps weren't landed correctly - 'saves', bent over, swizzles on end, etc. - speaks to not fully devloped technique. Yes some were good, but it's random 2) The connecting bits, for example between spin positions, arren't really fleshed out- jerky looking 3) choregraphic arm waving - in places convincing, in others just something to do until the next jump 4)rushing to the next element - not holding things out, cutting off a sequence of steps to get on to the next, not able into get to the deep edge soon enough before the next step. This is what PCS is supposed to capture. But, the judges ofen use it as a fudge factor . up or down to get the rankings they want. (Sotnikova getting 8 & 9 in Sochi when she was really 6.5, 8 skater) One thing that made Kim and Cohen so special is that they could hit a position or edge immediately - so you had that great long effect, beautiful.

Click to expand...

Er, Shoma is a solid 8s skater when he gives a good performance like he did here. The skating skills (especially), quality of transitions, choreography, interpretation...it's all very much superior to Max. If this is your criteria for "juniorish" skating (not saying I disagree), Max is more junior-ish than Shoma...by a lot.

CanadianSkaterGuy said:

I get that Adian's your new fave and all ("HE WON!" the SP, after all...), but try to treat him objectively and not justify his errors with questionable statements like, "GOE criteria are merely just guidelines..."

Click to expand...

He's not my fave and I have always been one of the most objective around. The guidelines are indeed just that - guidelines. Not even very accurate ones, but I've talked about that at length. Please stop making such exaggerated, misleading statements. You keep saying things like "you think a step-out of a jump deserves 0 GOE for your favorites." It's not true at all and it is tiresome to read and respond to.

Adian's quad in the SP could easily be called as +1 GOE in isolation. The eurosport commentators noted "he was so relaxed in that." The jump had good height and the rotation was all the way completed in the air, which is good quality to have. The entry and exit were both very well controlled, even if he does lean forward a bit and get a bit up on the toepick at the start of the landing. Those lesser qualities simply keep the jump from higher GOE, it doesn't mean the jump was especially flawed. And yes he did do footwork leading into the jump entry, he just paused a bit too long beforehand which is cause for less GOE in the SP.

Let's break it down, splitting the differences for GOE scores, which can be expected from a tech panel (and should be allowed for each individual judge to begin with):

4Toe, -.5 GOE = 9.7
4CSp4, +2 GOE = 4.2 (love his entry and how instantly he hits the position, perfect centering throughout, good speed, nice lines)
CSSp4, 0 GOE = 3.0
3Axel, +1.5 GOE = 10.85 (bonus section of SP)
3Lutz+3Toe, +1 GOE = 12.03 (bonus section of SP)
CCoSp3 (2 pos), 0 GOE = 2.0 (okay yes he was slightly too high up for half a revolution of sit spin position, an unfortunate deduction)
StSq3, +1.5 GOE = 4.05

SS = 8.0 (good edges, control, ability to build speed)
TR = 7.5 (could be more difficult and numerous, but there are a solid amount)
PE = 8.25 (confident, clean, pays attention to how to use his body, gives understated emotion)
CH = 7.75 (very nice, has purpose and you can see it, I will deduct for the sit-change-sit and spin combo being a bit clunky, they detracted from the overall picture)
IN = 7.75 (very good at portraying the delicate nuance of the music with some fire underneath; small deduction for finishing behind the music but he was still moving in character and giving a nice low position that works well here, plus the sound his blades made was actually not so bad as a postscript)

85.08


And now Max Aaron's performance:

4S+3T, +1 GOE = 15.8 (solid jump combo, but slightly spinny takeoff and lacking the flow out for a higher score)
3A, +2 GOE = 10.5
CCSp3, +1 GOE = 3.3 (almost looks out of control on entrance but he gets it together. Not a great spin but solid enough and there is an attempt at better line)
3Lz, +1.5 GOE = 7.65 (bonus section of SP)
FSSp4, +1 GOE = 3.5 (another solid spin, nothing great, but it's well controlled and again an attempt at better line)
StSq3, +.5 GOE = 3.55 (most of this is two-foot, not great edges or a real dance quality or excitement being displayed, but he does control it well enough)
CCoSp3, +1 GOE = 3.5 (why does he repeat the pike sit spin? He already did it in the flying sit, which means no credit here. Spin is fine otherwise, aside from lackluster ending)

SS = 7.5 (not very deep edges most of the time, doesn't finish off some of the turns and steps with great flow, but does maintain his speed overall)
TR = 7.0 (program isn't devoid of transitions but there aren't a ton and they are all rather simple)
PE = 7.5 (a pretty good performance but there isn't a ton of connection to what he is doing, no full commitment. Everything tends to look like work, even though it's all cleanly executed)
CH = 7.0 (the movement is quite limited. Lots of generic arms and movements. Nothing remarkable. It's superficially "nice", not much more)
IN = 6.75 (a banal interpretation. It's not awful, but he gives very little genuine emotion or depth or any real highlights outside of the jumps. He ignores the music at the end and finishes behind. The best interpretation in the whole program is how he controls the end of first spin and goes into the next movement)

83.55

Thank you for that detailed, *completely* unbiased analysis. Two things:
1) I still disagree.
2) Max still won.