Pre-rotate vs Under-rotate

NymphyNymphy · Jul 17, 2018

This has always bothered me:

Based on ISU's rules backward-facing jumps executed with a forward entry are downgraded but these entries are not looked at in slow motion.

Why is it that entries are not looked at in slow motion but landings are? Theoretically, shouldn't entries be the first thing TP should look at for rotation?

Why is a skater that pre-rotates less but lands slightly before the quarter mark given a UR but a skater who pre-rotates half a turn or more (and actually does less rotation in the air) but lands clean does not? I've noticed most of the top ladies commit this forward entry downgrade especially with their toe-loops. Does it really take out that much time to slow down the entry and check to see if the skater's blade leaves the ice forward?

acapenci · Jul 17, 2018

Its easy to jump, but its much harder to land...

Shayuki · Jul 17, 2018

Aesthetically, I don't think it makes nearly as big of a difference. And turning on the toe pick is quite different from hooking the landing, I believe. Still do wish a bit of attention was paid to the blatant ones, though.

yume · Jul 17, 2018

That takes to much time to slow-mo apparently. That's why many ladies with 2,50 or even 2,25 rotations are called good triples jumpers.

drivingmissdaisy · Jul 17, 2018

From a practical perspective, I think a concern would be that looking at take-offs in slow motion would further slow down judging of events. That adds more to the plate of the replay operator, the technical panel, etc.

However, I agree that the policy should be reexamined. There are some skaters who egregiously prerotate and still get full credit and +GOE. Replay on take-offs might also help with better edge calls, as those can be very hit-or-miss even in the biggest events.

narcissa · Jul 17, 2018

Aesthetically, I think there's a huge difference. Always wondered why Satoko, Evgenia, and Shoma's jumps look so unsatisfying to me...there's no "oomph" to them even when their landings look just fine. And IMO it's because they prerotate a lot, sometimes more than 270 degrees. Prerotated jumps are just not big, and they rarely get much distance either, whereas skaters like Karen Chen and Mirai Nagasu can have huge, beautiful, aesthetically pleasing underrotated jumps.

Prerotation seems to be purely a technique issue, whereas underrotations are also a technique issue, but are also caused by many other things like delayed rotation, slow rotation, lack of control of the jump, tiredness, injury etc. And skaters can sometimes underrotate and sometimes jump perfectly fine, whereas prerotators basically always prerotate.

TripleAxelQueens3 · Jul 17, 2018

I think judges should really crack down on prerotation more. A prerotated jump could very well be an underrotated jump, and if underrotated jumps get deductions, why shouldn’t prerotated jumps get deducted?

cohen-esque · Jul 17, 2018

I think that the idea is that all jumps have some PR: they don’t just leave the ice and you do a perfect 360 revolutions (+++ however many revs) jump all in the air. So the idea is to penalize really obvious, egregious cases of PR that can be easily seen.

But I think they should re-examine this. I noticed on some replays of Satoko’s Lutz— in a few of them— she pretty much skims her foot a little off the ice, spinning on her toepick, and then she finally actually begins to push off the pick when she’s facing (more than sometimes) forward. That’s at least as egregious as a toe Axel in terms of PR and by the rules is worthy of “<<“... but you can’t tell the difference in real time between how she does it and a typical spinny toe jump where they just reach really far back.

yume · Jul 17, 2018

Is it possible for those who have delayed rotation or normal pre-rotation to learn excessive pre-rotation? Because ISU will punish them if they do 2,5 rotations with an UR but will reward them if do 2,5 rotations with an excessive PR.

chopinskate · Jul 17, 2018

yume said:
That takes to much time to slow-mo apparently. That's why many ladies with 2,50 or even 2,25 rotations are called good triples jumpers.

2.50 rotations in the air is good air time for triples, still.

yume · Jul 17, 2018

chopinskate said:
2.50 rotations in the air is good air time for triples, still.

Pecisely, those rotations are not totally in the air for some

RafaelAstro · Jul 17, 2018

Is very rare that the panel penalizes prerotated jumps, but sometimes they do it, for example in the sp of Donovan Carrillo (4cc 2018) the panel marked his combination as underrotated even when his landing looked clean, but if you look at his take off you will se a huge prerotation, so I assume they put that mark to him for that. I think the panel should look closely the jumps of every skater because there are ones that jumps in the same way and get positive goe...

mrrice · Jul 17, 2018

RafaelAstro said:
Is very rare that the panel penalizes prerotated jumps, but sometimes they do it, for example in the sp of Donovan Carrillo (4cc 2018) the panel marked his combination as underrotated even when his landing looked clean, but if you look at his take off you will se a huge prerotation, so I assume they put that mark to him for that. I think the panel should look closely the jumps of every skater because there are ones that jumps in the same way and get positive goe...

IMO, Pre-rotations are much harder to for the judges, especially the non-tech judges to see in real time. You can hear an under-rotation from the back row of an arena. I think even coaches have a hard time with pre-rotation problems because they're easily masked.

CanadianSkaterGuy · Jul 17, 2018

yume said:
Is it possible for those who have delayed rotation or normal pre-rotation to learn excessive pre-rotation? Because ISU will punish them if they do 2,5 rotations with an UR but will reward them if do 2,5 rotations with an excessive PR.

Nobody gets "rewarded" for prerotation - skaters do not get extra BV or higher GOE when they do prerotated jumps compared to them doing those same jumps regularly rotated. You can say "skaters are not getting deducted for pre-rotated jumps", but it is incorrect to say they are being "rewarded" for pre-rotation.

Also another prerotation thread? Really? Can't wait for people to start posting video examples - not in order to single any particular skaters out or anything..... :rolleye:

Simply put: most people care way more about the landing of jumps rather than how the take offs are. It's nice that the ISU is cracking down technical issues and pre-rotation should be factored into reduced GOE but I personally don't find it as egregious as others do, nor do I think skaters should be deducted on BV for pre-rotation (except for toe-axels). If we scrutinized jumps that could be flagged for pre-rotation, judging in the kiss and cry would last forever and tech specialists would have even greater power to sway competition results based on calls or non-calls. Not every has all the time in the world to do a frame by frame post-mortem on YouTube.

TripleAxelQueens3 · Jul 17, 2018

cohen-esque said:
I think that the idea is that all jumps have some PR: they don’t just leave the ice and you do a perfect 360 revolutions (+++ however many revs) jump all in the air. So the idea is to penalize really obvious, egregious cases of PR that can be easily seen.

I heard somewhere that a certain degree of prerotation is allowed in jumps, and edge jumps allow for 180 degrees (I think) prerotation at maximum.

CanadianSkaterGuy · Jul 17, 2018

TripleAxelQueens3 said:
I heard somewhere that a certain degree of prerotation is allowed in jumps, and edge jumps allow for 180 degrees (I think) prerotation at maximum.

The thing is, this is not delineated in the rules. The stuff about cheated takeoff never mention this 180 degrees. A tech specialist could deduct any jump that had even minimal pre-rotation and you'll see protocols littered in < calls. People talk about the 180 degrees but judges don't have the time to pull out protractors on each frame, and generally a skater should be given the benefit of the doubt... much to the chagrin of some fans who would love to see certain skaters (most coincidentally, rivals of their own faves) get deducted more points.

schizoanalyst · Jul 17, 2018

CanadianSkaterGuy said:
The thing is, this is not delineated in the rules. The stuff about cheated takeoff never mention this 180 degrees.

How, exactly, would you be forward on take-off if you didn't turn 180 degrees?

CanadianSkaterGuy · Jul 17, 2018

schizoanalyst said:
How, exactly, would you be forward on take-off if you didn't turn 180 degrees?

I'd say a skater can still be forwards even if their blade is not pointing 180 degrees away from the direction of their jump entry. Like, once the skater has turned more than 90 degrees from the direction of a skater's backwards entry (lutz/flip/toe/loop/salchow) to the jump takeoff, doesn't that mean the skater's boot is now facing "forward"? Of course, certain jumps like the loop and salchow always have the skater's blade having some pre-rotation - many pre rotate up to 180 degrees which would definitely constitute a forwards takeoff even though many agree it's part of the technique.

In an RBO-RFI 3turn, at what point is the skater facing "forwards"? Is it at the end of the 3 turn as the skater is gliding along 180 degrees from where they were at the start of the turn or are they forwards at the point immediately when the skater shifts into the inside edge after the middle of the 3turn, right after the cusp of the turn?

For toe/flip/lutz takeoff does that mean skaters shouldn't be allowed to turn more than 90 degrees from the toe picking in directly backwards to the moment the skater leaves the ice? Because any more than that means the skater is now taking off more forwards than backwards?

Does "clearly facing forward" mean 180 degrees? Or 135 degrees? Or 91 degrees at point of takeoff? It's still really nebulous.

However at least landings are less ambiguous than pre-rotation (1/4 turn, ie 90 degrees, or less for "clean"; 91-180 degrees - 1/2 turn - for <, 181 or more for <<). And even then, the rules don't really specify if that means the landing is the moment when the toe pick touches the ice or the ball of the blade or the full blade.

Jump rules on Page 20: https://www.isu.org/inside-single-p...-technical-panel-handbook-single-skating/file

chopinskate · Jul 17, 2018

So we need to establish a point where the jump starts before measuring these things? And the ISU needs to step it up and prescribe that in its guidelines? And it hasn't yet? Isn't this what a lot of people usually complain about, not just in relation to their faves vs non-faves as you say?

cohen-esque · Jul 18, 2018

chopinskate said:
So we need to establish a point where the jump starts before measuring these things? And the ISU needs to step it up and prescribe that in its guidelines? And it hasn't yet? Isn't this what a lot of people usually complain about, not just in relation to their faves vs non-faves as you say?

For simplicity’s sake I wish the ISU would just say “no more than 180.” It’s the most intuitive standard for “forward takeoff.” When they train the tech specialists they can always allow a little bit of discretion/wiggle room for minor cases over that margin where there’s clearly no weight being put on the pick/blade.

I’d also let them watch in slow-mo; they’re already allowed for edge calls and that’s a takeoff issue, so why not?

Of course, as of now, there is no clear standard, although you know a blatant toe axel when you see one and so does a tech panel. Edit: in fact, I really believe the ISU just intends this to be the standard: “know it when you see it.”

Pre-rotate vs Under-rotate

NymphyNymphy

acapenci

Shayuki

yume

🍉

drivingmissdaisy

narcissa

TripleAxelQueens3

sasha trusova is superior

cohen-esque

yume

🍉

chopinskate

yume

🍉

RafaelAstro

mrrice

CanadianSkaterGuy

TripleAxelQueens3

sasha trusova is superior

CanadianSkaterGuy

schizoanalyst

CanadianSkaterGuy

chopinskate

cohen-esque

Similar threads

Connect with us