0 points for double jump in SP. It's wrong?

karne · Jun 2, 2016

Sam-Skwantch said:
I think of Mao in Sochi and think yes...she made an error but should she have been eliminated from medal contention considering her many other amazing attributes. H-E-double hockey sticks NO!

Yes, because she failed to complete the required elements for the short program. Her other "amazing attributes" do not give her a free pass to flout any rules. It is not the ISU's fault that she couldn't deliver on the night.

Sam-Skwantch said:
Then again I think edge calls carry far too much weight in terms of how much they punish them. I don't like the idea of these technical flashes to determine an entire event. Says the poster who causes drama with jumpamatron videos. I'm actually one of the most lenient posters on the matter I think.

Let the judges judge and remove power from the TP!!!

No, no, no! Edge calls should be MORE harshly punished. So should URs and <<. We should NEVER be in a situation where a planned downgrade fall is worth enough points to win a skater a title. EVER! The ISU should be encouraging better technique, and to do that, they need to really get harsh on the UR, <<, e and !. If a skater does them, well too bad, better get to work fixing them. Because these problems CAN be fixed - it's just that at the moment, for some people, there is no incentive to.

KatGrace1925 said:
The rule is fair because it is across the board but it is stupid. It's not like the points awarded from the double would put them above someone who lands all the tripples.

I say give them their points for what elements they do, it's actually annoying to me to watch.

Would you stake your life on that claim? Because I sure wouldn't. Oh no, not at all. Can you imagine if someone perennially overscored like Hanyu or Chan popped the solo jump to a double and it was still worth points? They'd just give it all +3 GOE and still have him over 90.

And actually, I can give you an example of where the jumping pass being invalidated was not even effective enough.

Men's SP standings at Worlds 2015:

16. Maxim Kovtun
Jumps: 4S-3T, 2T (invalid), 1A (invalid)

17. Brendan Kerry
Jumps: 4T, 3Lz-3T, 3A

The only thing giving Kovtun points for those jumps does is make the injustice worse.

drivingmissdaisy · Jun 2, 2016

I do think that the rule should reflect that a lot of skaters from smaller countries are not able to do two different triples. Like another poster said, these skaters will still finish below those who can but at least they can try to present the most difficulty they are able to.

Blades of Passion · Jun 3, 2016

karne said:
Edge calls should be MORE harshly punished. So should URs and <<.

No they definitely should not. The rules already overpunish these things, creating vast score differentials on a coin flip. Negative GOE grades are where the big loss of points should come from, not nearly enough points are deducted in that manner right now. If an underrotated jump is noticeably bad then more points should be taken off via that method.

karne said:
We should NEVER be in a situation where a planned downgrade fall is worth enough points to win a skater a title.

A planned downgrade with a fall isn't worth ****. Planning a Quad Toe like that scores you the same as a single axel, which is totally pointless. Someone who did a program with no Quad and a planned 2Axel instead or even just a 2Lutz instead would get more points.

gkelly · Jun 3, 2016

karne said:
Can you imagine if someone perennially overscored like Hanyu or Chan popped the solo jump to a double and it was still worth points? They'd just give it all +3 GOE and still have him over 90.

If they went back to what the SP rules were a couple years ago, a popped/doubled solo jump would get mandatory -3 GOE. So it would be low base value minus the GOE.

Still, it is something, and what little base value would be left after subtracting the GOE would at least give skaters who double the jump about a point more than those who single -- and singles would be worth a few tenths more than nothing (e.g., A no value for a waltz jump or coming out forward).

Either way, those one or two points don't make a whole lot of difference to someone who is significantly stronger on the other six elements and in PCS, and who can make up lost ground with a stronger freeskate.

The effect of the rules on elite skaters is different from the effect on skaters who barely qualify as seniors, who are forced to compete as seniors after age 19 whether they have the skills or not. What rules can best serve both ends of the spectrum and all the skill levels in between?

And also, to a large extent, on men vs. women. Most senior men can at least rotate some triples. But what if the senior men's SP required the solo axel to be triple? That would be a problem for quite a few below the top levels.

Sam-Skwantch · Jun 3, 2016

karne said:
No, no, no! Edge calls should be MORE harshly punished. So should URs and <<. We should NEVER be in a situation where a planned downgrade fall is worth enough points to win a skater a title. EVER! The ISU should be encouraging better technique, and to do that, they need to really get harsh on the UR, <<, e and !. If a skater does them, well too bad, better get to work fixing them. Because these problems CAN be fixed - it's just that at the moment, for some people, there is no incentive to

Well I think others may agree that having a panel of 9 judges who don't agree on the scoring of an element ranging from +3 to -3 is a better safeguard than having one know it all who controls everything. Especially when we consider and acknowledge that from event to event the consistency of tech panels suffer from an incredibly inconsistent variance on the senior GP.

drivingmissdaisy · Jun 3, 2016

gkelly said:
The effect of the rules on elite skaters is different from the effect on skaters who barely qualify as seniors, who are forced to compete as seniors after age 19 whether they have the skills or not. What rules can best serve both ends of the spectrum and all the skill levels in between?

This is a great point. The women can do a 3A in the SP and only two women are attempting the jump currently. There are far more senior women who aren't able to do one or two different triple jumps. The rules should accommodate these various skill levels, not just those who do the most difficult elements. I don't think a rule should promote a skater rotating and falling on a triple jump they aren't able to land merely to get some points.

karne · Jun 3, 2016

Sam-Skwantch said:
Well I think others may agree that having a panel of 9 judges who don't agree on the scoring of an element ranging from +3 to -3 is a better safeguard than having one know it all who controls everything. Especially when we consider and acknowledge that from event to event the consistency of tech panels suffer from an incredibly inconsistent variance on the senior GP.

Um, there are three people on the tech panel, not one.

DexterK · Jun 3, 2016

There are junior ladies who can the 5 triple jumps, not counting Axel obviously, many of them. The reason they can is because it is understood that they can not be competitive without them. As we know, figure skating is a sport and promoting/allowing SP technical content reminiscent of the late 80's/early 90's for senior ladies is a step in the wrong direction to put it mildly.
If you are a senior lady and you haven't progressed beyond a double axel...I'm not so sure competitive figure skating at the senior level is appropriate for you at this time.

Sam-Skwantch · Jun 3, 2016

karne said:
Um, there are three people on the tech panel, not one.

Of course I'm aware of that but the fact remains that one person has the power to be quite influential. Especially the caller who is far more more powerful than a single judge. Although two out of three on the panel can overrule calls my point still remains that panels are quite inconsistent. Just look at how some skaters perform a jump the exact same way and from event to event the edge calls and UR's don't match up. That's the point I was actually making.

moriel · Jun 3, 2016

The rule is good imho.
Also, I don't see why all standards should be lowered because some skaters cannot meet them.
What next? Give same points for all jumps, regardless rotations? Because you know, triples and quads are rewarded with so many points that its unfair, many skaters try them and fall all time (men and quads), and it denies them a chance to skate clean and show off better their artistic sides and blablabla. So, whats next, a jump pass score regardless rotations?

Those ladies are free to not try it, btw. As they all fail like you described, there would be no difference if they all just didn't try the triples.

Imho if a lady cannot get her triples for the SP, maybe competing at international senior level is not the best choice for her.
And i'm sure internal competitions could be re-shaped for the local needs, as it was done in USA. The thing is, i bet the polish fed doesnt want to do it, because they want their skaters internationally competitive. And for that, they must have some triple, if not all.

drivingmissdaisy · Jun 3, 2016

moriel said:
The rule is good imho.
Also, I don't see why all standards should be lowered because some skaters cannot meet them.
What next? Give same points for all jumps, regardless rotations?

You are equating giving credit for doubles in the SP with giving a 3T and a 4T the same amount of points?

MaxSwagg · Jun 3, 2016

Why don't they just let the judges evaluate UR and edge calls as well as GOE. I'm sure there are many instances where one judge think the jump is < and another thinks it isn't. Then the computer could just average those evaluations (giving the skater something between full BV and <BV). The technical panel can just evaluate spin/StSq/lift/Ds levels...

moriel · Jun 3, 2016

drivingmissdaisy said:
You are equating giving credit for doubles in the SP with giving a 3T and a 4T the same amount of points?

Well, currently we have:

2T - 0 bv
3T - 4.3 bv
4T - 10.3 bv

What was said is that it is unfair to give 0 points for a 2T for people who cannot do a 3T, because then skaters keep trying 3T to get at least some points.
Just extending this logic, which leads to funny results =)
I don´t understand why people complain about a 4 points difference between 2T and 3T in SP, but find ok the 6 points difference between 3T and 4T. Because many skaters who cannot do quads also keep going for them and splatting.

drivingmissdaisy · Jun 3, 2016

moriel said:
I don´t understand why people complain about a 4 points difference between 2T and 3T in SP, but find ok the 6 points difference between 3T and 4T. Because many skaters who cannot do quads also keep going for them and splatting.

There is a much bigger difference in difficulty between 3T/4T than 2T/3T. Possibly over 10,000 skaters have landed a 3T in competition, whereas maybe fewer than 300 have landed a 4T.

BravesSkateFan · Jun 3, 2016

I like the rule. It was actually one of my favorite rule changes when it was implemented. If a skater doesn't perform the element as required then they should receive no points for it.

LiamForeman · Jun 4, 2016

Ares said:
They will not compete internationally as they are too weak. I am afraid that they are not going to improve enough no matter how hard they may train, the fundamentals are poor. I doubt that those girls are complacent with that but there's nothing they can do in that matter. I get that ISU wants to see triple jumps (duh) and that there are requirements / restrictions but that should not be at the cost of actual performance especially in less developed in that sport countries like Poland where right now general level regressed. It discourage some athletes. Those who can't do triples or pop them are disadvantaged enough vs those who can.

You say your skaters are too weak to compete internationally. So what's the problem? They can all just do an invalid double jump and improve the rest of their skating to compete against their competitors in Poland. I like the fight those skaters have who go for the triples, but if it mars their performance then they better have others skills to make up for it. I'm perfectly fine not seeing these skaters at senior competition and think this rule should remain.

KatGrace1925 · Jun 4, 2016

karne said:
Yes, because she failed to complete the required elements for the short program. Her other "amazing attributes" do not give her a free pass to flout any rules. It is not the ISU's fault that she couldn't deliver on the night.

No, no, no! Edge calls should be MORE harshly punished. So should URs and <<. We should NEVER be in a situation where a planned downgrade fall is worth enough points to win a skater a title. EVER! The ISU should be encouraging better technique, and to do that, they need to really get harsh on the UR, <<, e and !. If a skater does them, well too bad, better get to work fixing them. Because these problems CAN be fixed - it's just that at the moment, for some people, there is no incentive to.

Would you stake your life on that claim? Because I sure wouldn't. Oh no, not at all. Can you imagine if someone perennially overscored like Hanyu or Chan popped the solo jump to a double and it was still worth points? They'd just give it all +3 GOE and still have him over 90.

And actually, I can give you an example of where the jumping pass being invalidated was not even effective enough.

Men's SP standings at Worlds 2015:

16. Maxim Kovtun
Jumps: 4S-3T, 2T (invalid), 1A (invalid)

17. Brendan Kerry
Jumps: 4T, 3Lz-3T, 3A

The only thing giving Kovtun points for those jumps does is make the injustice worse.

If a woman wins with a double it is probably because her PCS is good. I don't like the points not counting personally. It becomes more and more a jumping competition every year and less and less an artistic competition. I love the sport either way but I will never love these kind of rules.

andromache · Jun 4, 2016

karne said:
No, no, no! Edge calls should be MORE harshly punished. So should URs and <<. We should NEVER be in a situation where a planned downgrade fall is worth enough points to win a skater a title. EVER! The ISU should be encouraging better technique, and to do that, they need to really get harsh on the UR, <<, e and !. If a skater does them, well too bad, better get to work fixing them. Because these problems CAN be fixed - it's just that at the moment, for some people, there is no incentive to.

I largely agree with your entire post, with this exception: I don't want to see URs and wrong edges penalized more harshly than they already are, unless falls become more harshly punished as well, proportionately. A planned downgrade fall is bad, but so is a planned fully-rotated fall (such as Yuzu's 4S in 2014). A nicely landed UR or wrong-edge jump should always be worth more points than a rotated/correct-edge fall because it doesn't have as large of a negative impact on the performance.

Layback11 · Jun 4, 2016

I think it's a good rule. It forces skaters to have triples, which advances the technical level of the sport.

(This coming from an über of the person who has had no end of issues with that rule this season...hehe.)

4everchan · Jun 4, 2016

i don't think it forces anyone to have triples.... most ladies would have a 3T and a 3S.. it just penalizes those who pop jumps. pretty much, useless rule iMHO as a popped jump is already a very low scoring element...

0 points for double jump in SP. It's wrong?

karne

in Emergency Backup Mode

drivingmissdaisy

Blades of Passion

Skating is Art, if you let it be

gkelly

Sam-Skwantch

“I solemnly swear I’m up to no good”

drivingmissdaisy

karne

in Emergency Backup Mode

DexterK

Sam-Skwantch

“I solemnly swear I’m up to no good”

moriel

drivingmissdaisy

MaxSwagg

Match Penalty

moriel

drivingmissdaisy

BravesSkateFan

LiamForeman

William/Uilyam

KatGrace1925

andromache

Layback11

4everchan

Similar threads

Connect with us