2015-16 SOV Tables for Singles and Pairs released

[cathlen]

That's basically what I'm feeling. But more angry. It's like they want to give advatage to skaters who don't have quads at all and jump clean triples. I'ts gonna be discouraging for skaters to attempt quads since it's better to have UR quads than do full rotation and fall. Why additional -GOE for quads? Do they want less quads in competition? Future season looks less fun now... Sometimes I really rather don't know

 

[Lydia1703]

I think it may be so that popping a quad into a triple is less costly. With the higher penalty for falls on quads, we may start seeing more quads popped into triples. By giving them a small increase in value, they make popping less hurtful and more appealing than rotate and fall. Likewise the increase in the 3T might mean we see more 3-3s as the 3T is now a more attractive jump to repeat. We may start seeing more 3-3s and fewer 3-2s as a result.

And skaters need to do Maths properly because they are now in higher risk of a Zayak fest, maybe :think:

 

[Hanmgse]

I like that falls are more penalized, but why increase the base value for unde-rotated quads?

 

[xibsuarz]

Seems like the ISU either goes all the way in or none at all, if they wanted less falls, penalizing them harder would have been enough. I get it that they may want to avoid the most disruptive mistake, but this is still a sport and the change in BV for UR promotes poor technique. This will very likely discourage quads from many skaters.

 

[alia jackson]

I disagree, I'd rather have seen a heavier penalty for URs and <<. The ISU should be trying to encourage proper technique, not allow people to get away with bad technique by making the penalty less.

I don't understand why they raised the base value for 3T and 3S, I don't remember skaters having any trouble on them or anything? It's really random and I don't think it makes much sense

Lol what. So there is addition -GOE for quad falls but not for triples? They should have just done -2 or -3 for falls across the board. How is a fall on a quad more disruptive than a fall on a triple? Or a double? Or on no jumps at all???

And an that increase in UR BV? If they wanted to support skaters going for cheated jumps instead of falling, they should have just increase the penalty for falls instead of increasing it to 8.0 for UR. The message they're sending is, "try not to fall, so learn to land URed quads if you can't do them properly". They should have kept the BV for URed quads as is (or even lower it) and penalize falls in general more heavily in deductions and make it clear "land your jumps and rotate them properly".

With this new ruling what are the score like for the following examples:

(1) Jason's 4T<< and 3A< of 4CC SP

(2) Adam's 4Lz<< and 3Lz+3T<< of 4CC SP

(3) Yuzu's 4S to 2S and 4T fully rotated but fall of Worlds FP

(4) Javi's 4S fully rotated but fall of Worlds FP

 

[CanadianSkaterGuy]

They appear to have done so for quads. . . as that was such an issue this season!

LMAO. Oh ISU... focusing on what counts.

 

[CanadianSkaterGuy]

With this new ruling what are the score like for the following examples:

(1) Jason's 4T<< and 3A< of 4CC SP

(2) Adam's 4Lz<< and 3Lz+3T<< of 4CC SP

(3) Yuzu's 4S to 2S and 4T fully rotated but fall of Worlds FP

(4) Javi's 4S fully rotated but fall of Worlds FP

(1) Jason's scores would still be essentially the same - the 4T<< is considered a 3T (it would have a higher base value of 0.2 though so instead of 2 points, he'd get 2.2 points); the 3A< would be almost the same (5.9 points and -GOE, instead of 6.0 points and -GOE)

(2) Adam's 4Z<< would be a triple because of the downgrade and get the same points. the 3Lz+3T<< would be worth 0.2 points more because of the 3T being worth more

(3) 2S still worth the same; 4T(fall) would be worth 6.3 points (instead of 7.3 points) and then there's still the 1 point deduction with the fall, so it's worth 5.5 points

(4) Javier's 4S(fall) would be worth 6.5 instead of 7.5, and then the 1 point deduction, so it's really worth 5.5 points.


I basically see (3) and (4) as a 2 point deduction for falls on quads instead of 1.

 

[alia jackson]

Thanks CSG.

So 4T/4S UR (8.0/8.1 and -GOE) worth more than 4T/4S fully rotated but fall (5.3/5.5). And 3A UR (5.9 and -GOE) almost the same as 4T/4S fully rotated but fall (5.3/5.5) :shocked:.

Why the need to work hard to go for full rotation or master the technique if UR is rewarded as such

 

[Skater Boy]

The BV for quad throws is still not enough.

It might be a little compilcated that a 3T in pairs skating is more worth than in single skating.

I agree. The throw quads are not worth enough. WHy not make them the same as in singles. IN comparison the pairs lifts are worth so much compared to the throws. THe lifts arguable are far more affected by the size of skaters in pairs.

 

[Skater Boy]

Lol what. So there is addition -GOE for quad falls but not for triples? They should have just done -2 or -3 for falls across the board. How is a fall on a quad more disruptive than a fall on a triple? Or a double? Or on no jumps at all???

I'm assuming that they want skaters to challenge the technicals but make fans happy(er)? And an that increase in UR BV? If they wanted to support skaters going for cheated jumps instead of falling, they should have just increase the penalty for falls instead of increasing it to 8.0 for UR. The message they're sending is, "try not to fall, so learn to land URed quads if you can't do them properly". They should have kept the BV for URed quads as is (or even lower it) and penalize falls in general more heavily in deductions and make it clear "land your jumps and rotate them properly".

Also, what is that increase in BV for 3T about? Now we'll be seeing even MORE ladies go for 3T-3T and there's barely any initiative for them to go for harder combos in the SP.

Maybe I'll feel better about it once I've had my morning coffee but right now I'm not feeling it.

Adam Rippon must be doing the happy dance

 

[FSGMT]

Thanks CSG.

So 4T/4S UR (8.0/8.1 and -GOE) worth more than 4T/4S fully rotated but fall (5.3/5.5). And 3A UR (5.9 and -GOE) almost the same as 4T/4S fully rotated but fall (5.3/5.5) :shocked:.

Why the need to work hard to go for full rotation or master the technique if UR is rewarded as such

There's no real "reward" in any case: a good 3Lz is actually better than both, so And I'm not really sure that a clean UR jump is necessarily easier to master than a fully-rotated quad with a big mistake such as a fall... But, then, of course, each case is different and when we say these things we just have in mind some specific examples, while these rules have to be applied to all skaters, not necessarily the best one that we follow closely

 

[alia jackson]

This is what I've been thinking about this new rule. Chances of US men to win medals are higher now. For example Jason already has high PCS even without quad, he can medal or win gold if top guys rotated but fall even if he UR quads.

 

[Sackie]

In the long run is it really going to matter. The judges will still find a way to keep their favs at the top. They brought in the Edge calls and all of a sudden some of the top skaters who always got edge calls were no longer getting any. It created miracles that they fixed the problem almost overnight!

 

[Sandpiper]

I like the new quad values. It's good to see messy jumps being appropriately penalized. I already thought UR was punished too much, so I have no objections there either.

The raised values of toeloop and salchow are a little baffling. I guess the popped quad explanation is the most plausible and logical one, though I think whatever 'good' it can do for the men (likely cancelled out due to Zayak) will be outweighed by the not-so-good side effects on the ladies' field.

I'm cool with increased values in pairs. On the fence about whether they should be increased further. (Imo, only if GOE gets scored appropriately--no "bonus" GOE for a team that does quads, unless their elements are genuinely good).

 

[noidont]

I can just imagine a room of talking heads with agenda and at the end just to end the turmoil (or more likely, just to seem polite), all of their agendas end up on the paper.

 

[CanadianSkaterGuy]

Adam Rippon must be doing the happy dance

Well, that depends... if his 4Z is << then even the less severe UR rules won't help him.

 

[LRK]

Lol what. So there is addition -GOE for quad falls but not for triples? They should have just done -2 or -3 for falls across the board. How is a fall on a quad more disruptive than a fall on a triple? Or a double? Or on no jumps at all???

I'm assuming that they want skaters to challenge the technicals but make fans happy(er)? And an that increase in UR BV? If they wanted to support skaters going for cheated jumps instead of falling, they should have just increase the penalty for falls instead of increasing it to 8.0 for UR. The message they're sending is, "try not to fall, so learn to land URed quads if you can't do them properly". They should have kept the BV for URed quads as is (or even lower it) and penalize falls in general more heavily in deductions and make it clear "land your jumps and rotate them properly".

Also, what is that increase in BV for 3T about? Now we'll be seeing even MORE ladies go for 3T-3T and there's barely any initiative for them to go for harder combos in the SP.

Maybe I'll feel better about it once I've had my morning coffee but right now I'm not feeling it.

I don't know, but it does seem that people complain more about "quad falls" than simply "falls". I've seen plenty of only triple programs with falls in them - but it's always the quads that are blamed for men's events being messy. And the same when Liza started to go for a 3A - suddenly people were concerned about her falls - she who had had no single fall before that for the entire season - and that over considerably more competitions than the other ladies, most of whom had had more falls than she. Apparently, falling on easier elements is at most slightly regrettable - but falling on harder elements is Really, Really Bad.

 

[CanadianSkaterGuy]

This is what I've been thinking about this new rule. Chances of US men to win medals are higher now. For example Jason already has high PCS even without quad, he can medal or win gold if top guys rotated but fall even if he UR quads.

As mentioned in the above post with Rippon, it's important for Brown to ensure the quad isn't a << (same goes for his 3A). That will be key.

 

[Blades of Passion]

I think it may be so that popping a quad into a triple is less costly. With the higher penalty for falls on quads, we may start seeing more quads popped into triples.

Turning a Quad Toe into a Triple is still one of worst things you can do in the LP, because it means you have to turn your planned 3Toe into a 2Toe or else you are running into zayak violations. With the ridiculous zayak rule for doubles that we have now, it may even mean you have to turn your planned 3Toe into a 1Toe, or else you are still zayaking. It's all so stupid.

If you are going for a Quad in your LP, you still MUST rotate it no matter what. It's better to underrotate and fall than it is to pop.

 

[Rissa]

Holy crap, there is no pleasing people, is there.

All that whining that a fallen quad gives too much of an advantage? Now it gives less but it's still not right.

All that whining that underrotated-but-clean-jumps are worth way too little? Now they are worth more but it's still not right.

All that whining that combos should be worth more? Now witht the raised base value of -3T and -3S they will be worth more but it's still not right.

This is some kind of a twilight zone.