Good or Bad? New Scale Base Value changes, -4.0 deduction on Quads?

[OS]

So i have been thinking of how the 3T3T Base Value change may impact the ladies field coming season in particularly with everyone competing with Liza and all those with 3t3t and 2A3t in their typical layout.

0.44 boost in the SP + 0.44 boost in the LP = 0.88 scoring advantage over all. If Liza does her typical 3A layout with 3T3T and 3lz with all level 4 levels on everything, her new SP TES will be 37.06. (Note she didn't get level 4 in her flying sit spin at WC2015, which happens to be 0.4 difference to a level 4. With this new scale value changes of +0.44, she doesn't need level 4 and will receive a better score regardless.)

This vs someone like Mao with her World Record SP BV consist of 3A, 3F, 3lo+2Loop, levels 4s on everything is worth 34.69 having 2.37 difference. (Hard to catch up Liza unless judges has the guts to mark Liza at least 0.5 less in every single PCS category. Which imo is appropriate, but as we know that is not how PCS are judged for whatever reason). Note that at Mao's best and favoured competition she received 8.12 GOE at WC2014 with one of her best SP ever skating at home. Vs Liza who had 7.87 GOEs at WC2015. With this newly added 0.44 for Liza's TES in Short AND 0.44 in Long, it will wipe out any differences, Liza doesn't even need level 4, let alone a decent program even when compete in Japan.

Now let's look at Satoko's Silver at WC2015 with 3lz3, 3F, 2A, all level 4s on everything. BV 32.86 +0.2 contains the typical jumping element popularized from Vancouver by Yuna. Now the BV scoring difference is 37.06 - 33.06 = 4.0 points. Which is massive in ladies short program. Making the difference to catch up on GOEs and PCS very unlikely against the current reigning champion. Even by someone like Carolina and Yuna who get the best GOEs and PCS.

Interesting,I have noticed the staple of skaters who benefited the most from easy scoring GOEs 3T3T+Tanos. On top of that 2A3T = 7.6 increased in BV now. It happened one of the biggest scoring elements for Adelina at Sochi, where she received 8.14 (After half way mark) + 1.8 GOEs (5x3s, 4x2s Goes), now it is worth 8.36 + 1.8 in BV =10.16 would make it a massive advantage (consider Polina's opening difficult 3lz3T only got 10.9 including positive GOEs).

Heh, if i didn't know any better, someone at ISU seems to be unnecessarily worried about possibility of someone's return for PeongChang 2018. This new change boost additional 0.62 to Sotnikova's BV at Sochi, and 0.88 at WC2015 for Liza for both their short and long, as well as all those with over popularized 3t3t+tanos.

--------

My question is to the forum may be controversial (and I am sure GKelly will try to put me at ease.) This is the nth time I have seen scale value changes that seems to be politically driven (based on those who gains and loss) than what is genuinely good or fair for the sport. We have now reached a point when a 3T3T (8.6 x 1.1 + 2.1 = 11.56, after half way point with +3 GOEs, or 10.86 with +2GOes) has a high percentage of chances to to beat a 3lz3t(10.1 BV) and 3flip3loop (10.4 BV) just by placement of it in the program, discounting everything else. How can this not be seen as anti competition? or anti difficult? Is seeing 3t3t with bunch of tanos genuinely better for the sport and makes it more difficult or does it seem over valued? Is this sort of thing possible under the 6.0 system?

Especially consider the change of value widened the gap by 0.88 from the current leader of the sport to her nearest rival (Likely Mao if she keep the 3A) when she already received unprecedented scoring advantages due to the 3A as a single and not combination jump in a technical program? Does this seem a fair and valid change?

So how can one even begin to strategize catching up with Liza? Has ladies event basically become a game of 3A / 3T3T+Tano or go home? For example how hard is it really to put 3lz3t, 3f, 2A in the 2nd half and back load all your heavy scoring elements for some shameless numbers crunching. It seems still not enough.

3lz3t 11.11 (1.1 bonus)
3F 5.83 (0.53 bonus)
2A 3.63 (0.33 bonus)

ie/ No way to catch up the 4.0 points difference.

[Edited: Correction made regarding the scoring gap, the 0.88 difference I am refering to Liza's nearest rival in technical content which is Mao in her last SP outing.

Edited with 3T increased value for Satoko.]

 

[Li'Kitsu]

The gap for Liza isn't even widened by 0,88 points - others are doing 3Ts too. Most ladies repeat the 3T in the LP and gain as much as Liza does. In the SP, except for Mao pretty much every lady has at least one 3T too. The higher BV doesn't just apply to some skaters, but to all of them. Again, I don't like this change, but I see it as useless more than harmful.

 

[hurrah]

Obviously, the new value increase of the 3-toe loop is good news for someone like Elizaveta who can land a 3t-3t in the latter part of the program, but in the free program, it hardly matters, TBH. The value increase of the toe loop and salchow will be advantageous to anyone who can do a 3-toe loop and 3-salchow in combination, but not overly so, because 3-axel, 3-lutz, 3-flip, 3-loop still have higher values.

I do hope, however, that PCS will go down somewhat if a skater keeps on doing more toe loops rather than other jumps. I hope they make some kind of a rule to reward skaters who can not only do 3-toe loop but 3-salchow and 3-loop in combinations. If anything, I think 3-loop in jump combination need to be rewarded more, since so few skaters have the skills to even go for it.

 

[OS]

The gap for Liza isn't even widened by 0,88 points - others are doing 3Ts too. Most ladies repeat the 3T in the LP and gain as much as Liza does. In the SP, except for Mao pretty much every lady has at least one 3T too. The higher BV doesn't just apply to some skaters, but to all of them. Again, I don't like this change, but I see it as useless more than harmful.

You are right, I edited the post. What I mean to say the changes widen the BV value by 0.88 overall between leading contenders, or specifically 0.44 due to fact Mao generally don't include a 3T3T in her arsenal, and 99.9% of ladies skaters won't benefit with include 3T3T as their 2nd difficult combo because they don't have the 3A. For example. An argument can be made 3F3Loop is even more rarer and difficult to achieve than 3T3T in the 2nd half with a Tano, and it is a jump that should be rewarded more due to greater risk of failure as well as rarily, but it was not in this case. Instead ISU chose to reward MORE for the easiest and most popular way crunch big points by one particular federation of skaters, and more importantly, specific skaters. Consider Julia and Liza all started the season getting huge inflated marks despite of 3T3T as their hardest opening combo, I don't see how the rest of field can catch up even they are the ones with harder combos.

 

[hurrah]

Let's just wait for the season to start and see what kind of PCS the judges give out. If Liza could get 7s and 8s last season with what she was putting out, in comparison, Mao ought to easily be able to get 9s. And Carolina as well, if she returns, out to be getting 9s, too.

And you know, all of this only matters for the SP anyway. If Liza or any skater wants to do a 3t-3t in the FP, then as far as I'm concerned, they are very welcome to do so (and waste points).

And any skater is welcome to include a 3axel in the short, I believe.

 

[NaVi]

BV 32.86 contains the typical jumping element popularized from Vancouver by Yuna

You keep making the mistake of not adding the changed 3T base value for skaters who do 3T combinations besides 3T+3T.

 

[Sam-Skwantch]

I don't understand what jump layout has to do with PCS and I don't see any connection between the two. Do I need to go back and review the criteria for awarding PCS because I'm not aware of any component where jump difficulty is factored in.

I agree with Hurrah in saying "let's wait" to see how the PCS scores are handed out. Actually...I'm more interested in how the skaters perform and less about what they've done in the past or even how the judges score them. I don't think just because you attempt a more difficult layout you should somehow get higher PCS. By that I mean there should be more than one way to win an event and ambitious Jump content should only be one.

 

[hurrah]

I keep saying that I hope the jump layout will have some impact on PCS.

Anyway, about the 3t-3t in the short, even with the increase in base value, I don't think it pays in the long run to do it in the short for the skater if the skater's rivals are doing harder combos, because, in order for the skater to be competitive in the FP, she has to do a harder combo than a 3t-3t, such as 3f-3t, 3lz-3t, to keep up with the combined base value of her rivals in the fp. So, by planning a 3t-3t in the short, the skater puts herself in a position where she has to practice not only 3t-3t but 3f-3t (for example), thereby risking stress fractures, what not.

 

[OS]

You keep making the mistake of not adding the changed 3T base value for skaters who do 3T combinations besides 3T+3T.

Oops you are right! Post edited with the difference of 0.2 for Satoko's optimised 3lz3t layout. Now it is just 4 points that separate them now. Interestingly, if you go by Sochi results. Yuna vs Adelina's SP scores now only separate by 0.08 with a 3lz3t vs 3t3t program with the new value increase.

As far as i am aware. PCS have no official correlation to difficulty, but I have always thought a well balanced program should definitely include a well spread out of difficulty elements? Otherwise skater could theoretically do bunch of doubles without much effort and focus their entire performance on interpreting the music, timing and choreography and get 9s/10s. Or lump all their similar element altogether because it is easier to execute without much thought.

 

[gmyers]

Why is it a bad thing that Max Aaron and Maxim Kovtun are "completely irrelevant" to skating, with the way they've actually been skating?

You seem very confused. In 2013 Max was actually skating with great excitement and doing his jumps cleanly for the most part. He became boring with his skating after that season and the execution of his jumps went downhill. If he actually had good execution on the jumps, with decent programs and good performances, then he will beat a quadless Jason Brown.

The point was that there was no reason to attack quads the way the isu has because mainly quad people are irrelevent.

 

[gmyers]

I think there is an ongoing effort to balance reward for these most difficult jumps with reward for good skating and complete programs.

It's like a seesaw balance scale, with each rule change shifting the weight first toward one end, then the other.

I think most of the changes over the years have moved things closer to equilibrium.

Of course, people who care mainly about jumps above all else, or people who care primarily about what happens on the ice and little about what happens in the air, will each feel things are tilted too far toward the opposite side. By "people" I mean skaters/coaches, and judges, and fans.

I don't think the ISU technical committee (or whoever initiates the rule changes) is taking either extreme position, either that quadless champions are unacceptable or that the sport would be better off without quads.

But I do think that they don't always anticipate all possible repercussions of rule changes that were designed to have one effect on one specific problem and end up having other ripple effects elsewhere in the sport. So then they have to adjust the rules again to compensate.

I disagree because rules are blunt. -4 only for falls on quads.

 

[gkelly]

I disagree because rules are blunt. -4 only for falls on quads.

No. 4.0 points for GOE of -3 on quads only.

There are many reasons why an element might receive -3 GOE. Fall is only one possibly reason. Others could be any combination of telegraphing/lack of preceding steps in a short program, step out, two-foot landing, hand(s) down, etc. Not to mention underrotation (<) or edge problems on a hypothetical quad flip or lutz, which could also affect the base value of the element.

All falls -- whether on quads, easier jumps, other elements, or no element at all -- get the same fall deduction. And that is 1.0, across the board.

It's possible to lose 4.0 on a bad quad without falling at all.

Those who fall will also lose an additional 1.0 -- whether the fall is on the bad quad or on crossovers in a completely different part of the program.

 

[Rissa]

My thoughts exactly. To be honest, I don't understand at all the -4 only for quads, but I also find it hard to believe that the ISU is trying to discourage quads. And I know that one more point doesn't make all that much of a difference in scores/placements, but the logic (or lack thereof) behind the change irks me.

I think I do get the logic. It's to diminish slightly the score of those bad-quad programs at the very top. If the very top guys fall, it's most often on quads (as gkelly pointed out, it's not just about falls, but I think this is going to be the case most of the time). The difference is not big enough to discourage guys from going for quads (does anyone think Javier is going to stop doing quads because he might receive 2 points less for a program? Or even Maxim Kovtun?) but the final score might look marginally more fair. Even if it doesn't affect the final placement.

If the rule had been in place at the last Olympics, Hanyu's LP would have been behind mistake-ridden-but-no-fall Patrick's LP, which I suppose could seem fairer to many. Going from -3 to -4 is not sufficient to make a difference if someone is clearly in the lead, but it might make a difference when the score is really close.

 

[jkun]

Why does the exception for 3T-3T combo in the short program even exist? Actually curious...

 

[burntBREAD]

Why does the exception for 3T-3T combo in the short program even exist? Actually curious...

What exception? Do you mean doing a combo of the same jump? Because 3Lo-3Lo is legal in SPs as well.

 

[gmyers]

No. 4.0 points for GOE of -3 on quads only.

There are many reasons why an element might receive -3 GOE. Fall is only one possibly reason. Others could be any combination of telegraphing/lack of preceding steps in a short program, step out, two-foot landing, hand(s) down, etc. Not to mention underrotation (<) or edge problems on a hypothetical quad flip or lutz, which could also affect the base value of the element.

All falls -- whether on quads, easier jumps, other elements, or no element at all -- get the same fall deduction. And that is 1.0, across the board.

It's possible to lose 4.0 on a bad quad without falling at all.

Those who fall will also lose an additional 1.0 -- whether the fall is on the bad quad or on crossovers in a completely different part of the program.

Most direct route to -3 goe is a fall so that's what I meant. I know 2 foot ur downgrade and more can also lead to negative 3.

I think I do get the logic. It's to diminish slightly the score of those bad-quad programs at the very top. If the very top guys fall, it's most often on quads (as gkelly pointed out, it's not just about falls, but I think this is going to be the case most of the time). The difference is not big enough to discourage guys from going for quads (does anyone think Javier is going to stop doing quads because he might receive 2 points less for a program? Or even Maxim Kovtun?) but the final score might look marginally more fair. Even if it doesn't affect the final placement.

If the rule had been in place at the last Olympics, Hanyu's LP would have been behind mistake-ridden-but-no-fall Patrick's LP, which I suppose could seem fairer to many. Going from -3 to -4 is not sufficient to make a difference if someone is clearly in the lead, but it might make a difference when the score is really close.

Fernandez hanyu chan etc may never stop doing quads but does brown ever start. Does Nguyen keep them in. And does brown win in Boston?

 

[Rissa]

Fernandez hanyu chan etc may never stop doing quads but does brown ever start. Does Nguyen keep them in. And does brown win in Boston?

With one point of a difference for a fall? Nguyen will keep them in and add more. I will be very very surprised if Nam doesn't include a quad in his SP this upcoming season. If Jason Brown was planning to add a quad this season anyway, he will not get scared over 1 more negative point if he falls. If we don't see a quad from Jason this season it will not be because of the rules change but for the same reasons he hasn't done it so far.

Uh, about Jason winning in Boston? No he doesn't. Whether he adds the quads or not and whether the GOE on a fall is -3 or -4. Podium, perhaps. Winning, no.

 

[xibsuarz]

With one point of a difference for a fall? Nguyen will keep them in and add more. I will be very very surprised if Nam doesn't include a quad in his SP this upcoming season. If Jason Brown was planning to add a quad this season anyway, he will not get scared over 1 more negative point if he falls. If we don't see a quad from Jason this season it will not be because of the rules change but for the same reasons he hasn't done it so far.

Uh, about Jason winning in Boston? No he doesn't. Whether he adds the quads or not and whether the GOE on a fall is -3 or -4. Podium, perhaps. Winning, no.

Nam has said that he will have a quad in the SP for sure next season and Jason is practicing it already in some competitions, I think it was Broadmoor open? It's just one more point loss if they fall on the quad, while their scoring potential rises much more, they need that to compete with the numbers Javier, Yuzuru, Denis and Patrick can get. I mean, the difference at Worlds between the top 3 was small, but there was almost 20 points between Denis and Jason, both Nam and him need the quads to close on that gap.

 

[Ice Dance]

JMHO but I think it's a whole lot more likely that gap only gets closed if at least two of the top four close it for Nam & Jason. (Remember Jason was 20 points behind after each of those guys fell and Yuzu & Denis had yet more deductions along the way. So the medalists still have at least a one-fall cushion on top of those 20 points).

I worry that Jason's scoring potential may go down by adding elements he can't rotate--as it did at 4CC's. Nam, OTH, I definitely see getting closer to the top guys in the area of TES. Question is will he be able to skate lights out once getting close to them is a reality? He's going to have to work on the second mark. Wouldn't it be fun if he just hit solid at Skate Canada and made Patrick & Yuzuru have to come on strong? (Because--they don't always at this point in the season). I mean, really, Nam should have a lot less pressure.

 

[Blades of Passion]

A lot of it will depend on the PCS. Remember that Jason lost nearly 8 points at Worlds, as compared to his perfect WTT performance, because of that late-program 3Axel getting a << call. Just shows how little the risk is worth under this scoring system. It's so difficult to put a 3Axel late in a program but it's only worth .25 more points (if you fully rotate) as compared to putting in early in the program and a 3Lutz later on. If the other guys have flawed performances and the judges actually score Jason higher on PCS for perfect performances, then he should be able to place ahead with no Quad. Jason's showing at WTT could have been enough to put him ahead of Denis Ten at Worlds, with different PCS judging and the extra bit of deduction that quad mistakes will now get.

However, Jason will pretty much need a Quad to get on the podium. The field is getting deeper and it's too unlikely that enough of the others will falter harder enough to allow a no-Quad skater on the podium (at least with the way the judges score). Gogo Jason, get that planned 4T< , we believe in it!