GP Final Analysis and Predictions

[lavender]

Liza has to earn her PCS from the ground up because she is new. That's how it works in skating. Every skater went through a phase like that. Personally, I'm not impressed by her artistically, though she's better than Leonova, who is overmarked on PCS.

Yeah maybe things will calm down next year like it did for Kanako Murakami unless she becomes like Kim or Mao.

 

[DianaSelene]

Yeah maybe things will calm down next year like it did for Kanako Murakami unless she becomes like Kim or Mao.

But everything calmed down with Murakami because she started to show poorer results than last year. She didn't medal at all in the GP this year. If Tuktamysheva at least medals next year a few times, she will still be talked about.

 

[fallingsk8er]

I like making predictions so here goes:
Ladies:
1. Elizaveta Tuktamisheva - One of the most exciting skaters we've seen in a few years. The crowd and judges will love her if she's clean.
2. Alissa Czisny - Defending GP champ will probably make minor jump mistakes ...and her music is always a snoozer....But the judges like her.
3. Mao Asada - Will she land her triple axel and/or her triple salchow? ...if so she can win.
4. Akiko Suzuki - I hope she does well but I think she needs others to make mistakes to be on the podium.
5. Caroline Kostner - She'll probably have a few mistakes on the jumps.... but very elegant.
6. Alena Leonova - Her programs and costumes dont seem to be on par with the other top ladies.
Men:
1. Patrick Chan - He's so good her can miss one of his quads and still win
2. Daisuke Takahashi - Not quite as good as Chan but will skate well.
3. Javier Fernandez - Mounting his charge toward the world podium.
4. Yuzuru Hanyu - New kid on the block wont get the scores he deserves.
5. Michal Brezina - I predict he will mess up near the end of the LP.
6. Jeremy Abbott - Could be 3rd but quad appears to be MIA.

 

[lavender]

But everything calmed down with Murakami because she started to show poorer results than last year. She didn't medal at all in the GP this year. If Tuktamysheva at least medals next year a few times, she will still be talked about.

Yep that's why I said maybe or maybe she will be like Mao and Kim.

 

[evangeline]

Yes she is suppose to have level4 for her non jump elements (though I am not expert in these, but i find then questionable when her 2nd LP performance was visibly slower and tentative with less flows as well. Akiko and Carolina Kostner for me is more worthy of level 4 as they showed more attack, pace, flow and speed as well as coverage. I often hear praise for Mao being so light on ice..but physically she is the skinniest ladies skaters right now, so no wonder she is light on ice (?!) Surely had she been more attacking and more powerful, it would be more praise worthy or convincing?

You clearly do not know what Level 4 elements really are. It doesn't matter if your non-jump elements are tentative/slow/ice coverage sucks/whatever--that is reflected in GOE points and PCS. It is irrelevant to the awarding of levels. A skater is rewarded level 4s if they manage to cram in the right amount of features for the element (e.g. for footwork: use of upper-body movement, half the pattern on one foot only, combo of different turns executed in both directions, etc).

 

[mskater93]

For Liza to get higher PCS, she needs to start using the entire ice surface.

For those of you who are complaining Liza's PCS is too low, you should really pay attention to what Doris wrote! Someone else wrote "it's not within her control how her program is choreographed" but it is the responsibility of her coach to ensure that the program picks up all the points it can and he did not do this from a CH standpoint with the ice coverage. She could also skate it "bigger" if she was able.

 

[dwiggin3]

Men -
Dance - Even with hometown bonus, I think Davis/White will take it. People simply like their program more this year.
1. Davis/White
2. Virtue/Moir
3. Pechalat/Bourzat
4. Weaver/Poje
5. Bobrova/Soloviev
6. Shibutani/Shibutani

Not a fan of DW SP...Love the FD. I think VM will win...both the SP and FD are fantastic!

 

[OS]

You clearly do not know what Level 4 elements really are. It doesn't matter if your non-jump elements are tentative/slow/ice coverage sucks/whatever--that is reflected in GOE points and PCS. It is irrelevant to the awarding of levels. A skater is rewarded level 4s if they manage to cram in the right amount of features for the element (e.g. for footwork: use of upper-body movement, half the pattern on one foot only, combo of different turns executed in both directions, etc).

You are right, oversight on my part and i never claimed to be an expert so just want to learn more on just why are the judge seeing different thing from what I am seeing. I do know it has something to do with minimum requirement standard, but exactly what that is I don't quite understand when compare them side by side. For example she had Straight line footwork of level 3 at NHK, But when you compare to hers score in COR, it has been upgraded to level 4 and she gained 3.9 + 1.10 vs NHK doing the exact same thing 3.30 + 0.93. I look at these 2 side by side, and I am just lost. Can you tell me exactly what is the difference and why it has been upgraded? As far as I can see the choreography hasn't changed.

Please also tell me why with so many little mistakes through out her LP at COR that obviously affect the flow and her presentation, which I found to be a world of difference from her NHK performance has hardly affect her PCS? ( only 1.37 difference, surely that should affect SS, PE as well as IN) Cheers!

(Oh and it still does't explain the lack of difficult jump elements comparatively to others, along with her less clean performance with negative GOEs. Or is Mao the new PCHAN but without the quads, or the 3:3 or 3A for that matter.)

-----------

Mskater93, I agree about the ice coverage part, but I noticed this type of choreography 'oversight' is very 'common' right now with the new generations not just to Liza, e.g Artur, Florent, Alena's programs, although they may skated bigger that Liza, but the actual ice coverage (or rather the distance and use of arena) comparatively to their competitor is smaller. It is understandable since Risk vs Scoring factors. Bigger ice coverage, more tiring, more prone to mistakes on everything else. Less ice coverage, hardly reflected in the overall CH score, the maximum loose out is some where 1 to 3. That is fine when you can gain it back in spades from successfully complete your other elements scores successfully without tiring it out with positive GOEs. That was one of my criticsms of the scale of values seems faulty, so no wonder we rarely see balanced choreography, because the points rewarded for it vs the risks is just not worth it.

Actually I have no problem with Liza's PCS, but I do have some issues with others who put up imo sub par performances from what they are capable of to deserve those marks.

 

[seniorita]

i think Liza was asked in press conference and she is aware of her ice coverage ( the journalist tried to make a joke of it that she didnt reach his side- in my opinion not very successful) and said she will try to improve it by next year. I think Mishin in an interview said that the main goal for this season is Liza to be consistent and confident. So I guess she does go as far as she can right now. And Mishin probably has a plan for each season. It is interesting that he got Liza to seniors right away while Arthur was kept in juniors for a while while he could have been in seniors earlier. So i believe he knows what each season can be done.

 

[chloepoco]

Okay, I know this is not going to be a popular opinion, but it is just the way I see it.

I respect Mao and likes some of her early work (as well as her Olympic season program performed at WC2011), but can't help notice the blatant biases strongly favouring her over the other competitors supported by her strong (&rich) federation and ISU who seems determined to prop her up contrary to what is delivered. Although I still enjoy her exhibition like Jupiter which is free from these politicking. Having analysed all the scores from the top ladies, it seems this year ISU is determined to push her through to as some sort of entitled leading lady: 2 times world champion (though neither times won SP or LP on her both competitions).

Her program is overmarked based on neither deliver the technical content or performance. Mao artistry has always been questionable (artistry is not one type of static beauty, though beauty certainly is one of the vocabularies of artistry). I think Mao has always been great when she is skating as herself. She is somewhat an innocent sheltered girl without much life experience who has always been put on a pedal stall, well protected, revered and adored by her country. When she does ethereal or charming, her performance resembles those little sweet darling girls performing to their loving parents who probably never said one critical thing to them except full of love, praises and support. Materials outside these narrow realms I am not yet convinced. Until recent Jupiter indicate she can do stuff outside her comfort zone, but she need to experience it to really get it. Lack of creativity and imagination could make her artistically stagnant unless a firm hand in guiding her to explore and experience things outside her comfort space.

r

While I agree with you that technically, she needs to improve, especially her jumps, I don't see how anyone can say Mao's artistry has always been questionable. Of course, artistry is subjective, but even so, I would think most people would say Mao has artistry.

Also, I don't know where you got the blatant biases strongly favouring her over the other competitors supported by her strong (&rich) federation and ISU who seems determined to prop her up contrary to what is delivered from. Also, the entitled leading lady comment.

 

[Mrs. P]

While I agree with you that technically, she needs to improve, especially her jumps, I don't see how anyone can say Mao's artistry has always been questionable. Of course, artistry is subjective, but even so, I would think most people would say Mao has artistry.

Also, I don't know where you got the blatant biases strongly favouring her over the other competitors supported by her strong (&rich) federation and ISU who seems determined to prop her up contrary to what is delivered from. Also, the entitled leading lady comment.

Also that same federation (JSF) and ISU definitely not prop her up as they had no problem last year:
1.) "Letting" Mao place 8th at NHK Trophy
2.) Excluding her from the GPF for the last two years.
3.) Letting Miki Ando beat her at Japanese Nationals and at 4CC.
4.) Letting Miki Ando, Yuna Carolina Kostner, Alena Leonova and Alissa Csizny from beating her at Worlds last year.

I realize you are talking about GP this year but: Akiko could have beat her at NHK if she did just did a tad better in the FS and Leonova and Adelina definitely did not deserve to beat her at COR given their lack of artistry and/or mistakes (in Adelina's case).

And I think it's absolutely terrible that you're comparing her to Patrick Chan -- she is not getting inflated scores. She is more than 20 POINTS off her PB overall, ten points off her SP PB and 9 points off her LP PB.

Also while she isn't doing 3A, 3-3 or a quad; she is at least attempting all the triples and at least getting 4 of 6 ratified (lutz has had edge calls and the Axel is MIA for now). That's not the case with all the girls in this competition.

 

[mskater93]

You are right, oversight on my part and i never claimed to be an expert so just want to learn more on just why are the judge seeing different thing from what I am seeing. I do know it has something to do with minimum requirement standard, but exactly what that is I don't quite understand when compare them side by side. For example she had Straight line footwork of level 3 at NHK, But when you compare to hers score in COR, it has been upgraded to level 4 and she gained 3.9 + 1.10 vs NHK doing the exact same thing 3.30 + 0.93. I look at these 2 side by side, and I am just lost. Can you tell me exactly what is the difference and why it has been upgraded? As far as I can see the choreography hasn't changed.

Please also tell me why with so many little mistakes through out her LP at COR that obviously affect the flow and her presentation, which I found to be a world of difference from her NHK performance has hardly affect her PCS? ( only 1.37 difference, surely that should affect SS, PE as well as IN) Cheers!
-----------

Mskater93, I agree about the ice coverage part, but I noticed this type of choreography 'oversight' is very 'common' right now with the new generations not just to Liza, e.g Artur, Florent, Alena's programs, although they may skated bigger that Liza, but the actual ice coverage (or rather the distance and use of arena) comparatively to their competitor is smaller. It is understandable since Risk vs Scoring factors. Bigger ice coverage, more tiring, more prone to mistakes on everything else. Less ice coverage, hardly reflected in the overall CH score, the maximum loose out is some where 1 to 3. That is fine when you can gain it back in spades from successfully complete your other elements scores successfully without tiring it out with positive GOEs. That was one of my criticsms of the scale of values seems faulty, so no wonder we rarely see balanced choreography, because the points rewarded for it vs the risks is just not worth it.

Actually I have no problem with Liza's PCS, but I do have some issues with others who put up imo sub par performances from what they are capable of to deserve those marks.

Step sequence leveling is based on checking off criteria to get the features to get to the specific level. The likely difference between NHK and CoR (and the cause of your perception that it was tentative) was clarity in the variety of turns. To get a level 4, you need complex variety of turns (basically all types in both CW and CCW directions: three, bracket, twizzle, loop, counter, rocker) versus variety (at least 5 different types in both direction of turns for L3) versus simple variety (4). There was probably 1 or 2 turns at NHK that were, in the opinion of the tech panel, indeterminant which dropped her level to 3. She probably was more precise in her turns at CoR. I would need to look at the step sequence at each competition back to back to give you the exact cause of the improvement in level. I know some skaters at Regionals and Sectionals who got their step sequences called L1 because some turns were imprecise which dropped them below 4 different types of turns (basically counters and rockers were more 3 turns than what they were intended which dropped the variety).

PCS is not something that can be compared from event to event, even though people all seem to think so and try to. It's more of a placeholder like the presentation mark under 6.0 (or at least, it's treated that way by the judges) and really depends on where the first skater's PCS mark falls on where the better skaters end up. Also, judges like to be in the marking corridor so they aren't questioned after the event. Yes, you can complain about that all you'd like but the judges have to be (somewhat) like sheep to stay on panels and not be questioned.

Liza's ice coverage is WORSE by far than the other skaters you mentioned and is not really noticeable on TV because of how they follow the skater with the camera. From people who were at SC, some friends of mine made comments of how she only used about 2/3 of the rink to skate versus the other skaters there, who, while may not have completely covered the ice, had much better ice utilization than she did. Not only does this affect the CH PCS mark, it also affects the SS mark and the TR mark. Also, she's probably skating "smaller" than the other ladies in the group which will affect the IN and PE mark which are much more subjective. She's trying to make up for it right now on the TES mark, which is her team's decision and maybe the right way to start.

 

[OS]

While I agree with you that technically, she needs to improve, especially her jumps, I don't see how anyone can say Mao's artistry has always been questionable. Of course, artistry is subjective, but even so, I would think most people would say Mao has artistry.

Also, I don't know where you got the blatant biases strongly favouring her over the other competitors supported by her strong (&rich) federation and ISU who seems determined to prop her up contrary to what is delivered from. Also, the entitled leading lady comment.

May be I don't consider artistry like everyone else. To some maybe as long as long as she fulfill their version of the idealised beautiful skater, it would qualify her as artistic. For me that is just projection what you feel is artistic, but nothing to do with true artistry itself which should be abstract, free, lucid and subjective to what the performer are trying to express with originality, meanings and deliberated thoughts with clarity. Like what Daisuke has been doing year after year, try out different things, different version of the truth, exploration and expressing new meanings, variations beyond the self. Something Jeremy is doing when he started to choreographed his own work last year and seems to start to project what he feel is uniquely beautiful meditative skating in its bare necessity. And actually Patrick is begin to enjoying doing as well, and Hanyu is also ahead of the game exploring with feelings, emotions and musicality and let that affect their performances.

I'd say Mao is a lovely and beautiful skater, but may be that is because she is like that to begin with. Her natural style as evident in her earlier days is still more or less as her style today that ALSO happens to match the archetypes ethereal skater because of her classic ballet training,. This may makes her a classic beautiful skater, but not truly an artistically matured skater in the grand scheme of things. IMO Tat tried to push her to develope her artistry through diversity and experimentation. Problem with these things is, they can be costly excercises to someone who's not naturally expressive (beyond the self convincingly) and competition wise it proved too costly and the scale of ambition did not fair well with her desire to remain competitive, thus her Lieberstraume 2 years in a row now.

My problem is also given the state of her scores as it is, why should Mao need to improve her jump content at all?!

Given ISU has basically given her the approval with this type of content can already give her sufficient threshold to lead and benchmark her future scores when she could just have to focus on going clean with her 3-4 triple triple jumps (without 3A or 3:3) with positive GOEs, less mistakes; while everyone else has to put in 6 triples, a few 3:3 and they still won't able to catch up! Surely that doesn't sound right and seems some sort of double standard going on?

If I am wrong or appear unfair in my assessment, please feel free to correct. It wasn't intentional, but i just don't understand how skewed her mark and how that makes the ladies field look. I would prefer people point out just how great her program is to justify the score other than it is beautiful skating (which it is), but it shouldn't be the main criteria in this sport without the technical difficulty in particular the jumping content to support it.

-------

Mrs.P... last year was a different story. They had Miki with an optimised COP program taking advantaged of the 10% bonus which she can jump her way through without the 3:3, while Mao visibly was not herself and her jumps were being 'fixed' and were missing. It was beyond what one can do to justifiably prop her to do when they also have Kanako and Akiko. (And actually she had 3 triples there too in her LP.)

 

[Mrs. P]

My problem is also given the state of her scores as it is, why should Mao need to improve her jump content at all?!

Given ISU has basically given her the approval with this type of content can already give her sufficient threshold to lead and benchmark her future scores when she could just have to focus on going clean with her 3-4 triple triple jumps (without 3A or 3:3) with positive GOEs, less mistakes; while everyone else has to put in 6 triples, a few 3:3 and they still won't able to catch up! Surely that doesn't sound right and seems some sort of double standard going on?

The same could be said for Carolina Kostner who actually had less jump content last year and she managed to win one GP and medal at the other event and the GPF. And she continues to do well without all the triples.

Mirai doesn't have a 3-3, a salchow and a flutz and still won silver at TEB.

Alena doesn't really have a lutz and keeps getting away with doing 3 flips.

I think it's clear that ISU have given a benchmark for ALL skaters to do well without a full arsenal of triples, not just Mao. That's why the tech content has been so poor. At least Mao is trying to do all six triples.

And it's not like Mao won by a million points at COR. She only beat Alena by 2 points. That's hardly a ringing endorsement from the judges. And also if the ISU is so *** bent on winning then why did she lose to Akiko at NHK?

Also one more note on these inflated scores you claim: Mao hasn't broken her PB in the LP since 2007---when she did two 3-3s.

 

[OS]

The same could be said for Carolina Kostner who actually had less jump content last year and she managed to win one GP and medal at the other event and the GPF. And she continues to do well without all the triples.

Mirai doesn't have a 3-3, a salchow and a flutz and still won silver at TEB.

Alena doesn't really have a lutz and keeps getting away with doing 3 flips.

I think it's clear that ISU have given a benchmark for ALL skaters to do well without a full arsenal of triples, not just Mao. That's why the tech content has been so poor. At least Mao is trying to do all six triples.

And it's not like Mao won by a million points at COR. She only beat Alena by 2 points. That's hardly a ringing endorsement from the judges. And also if the ISU is so *** bent on winning then why did she lose to Akiko at NHK?

Also one more note on these inflated scores you claim: Mao hasn't broken her PB in the LP since 2007---when she did two 3-3s.

But my point is Mao had 3 clean triples while Alena had 6 (1 under rotated). btw I have problem with Carolina too (but that is for another thread )

Akiko brought a 3:3 at her SP along with her 6 triples for the LP (1 e on flip, 1 < on combo), again Mao only had 3 clean triples there at her LP.

Mao isn't using her 2007 content, otherwise I wouldn't be complaining Her current LP content is only going for 4 triples, 2 in combination and without 3:3 or 3A and she scored the highest LP of the season, even with negative GOEs.

 

[gmyers]

COP doesn't care how you accumulate points. You get tons of GOE on two triple salchows and a triple loop and double axels that's just fine! But you do need great level 4 spins and high PCS to get away with that. Great speed going into a triple salchow then a three jump combo of 3T and doubles that's all just fine! Only certain of the highest scoreres in PCS can water their jumps down to 80's levels and still do well. There is no standard in technical scoring just scoring.

 

[Mrs. P]

But my point is Mao had 3 clean triples while Alena had 6. btw I have problem with Carolina too (but that is for another thread )

Akiko brought a 3:3, again Mao only had 3 clean triples there.

Mao isn't using her 2007 content, otherwise I wouldn't be complaining Her current LP content is only going for 4 triples, 2 in combination and without 3:3 or 3A.

Akiko only had four clean triples, per your definition and her base value was nearly six points later. And she only did the 3-3 in the SP where she beat Mao by EIGHT POINTS. And all this is moot because Akiko WON!

Also Mao's PCS was equal to Alena's in the SP and only three points in the LP at COR.

But my point about 2007 is that she got a 133 for a 7 jump program with two 3-3 and a 3A. She's getting 125 now for less jump content. The scores progression seem pretty logical to me and doesn't really point to this inflation you keep insisting on.

Sorry, I just don't buy it. We'll just have to agree to disagree at this point.

 

[burntBREAD]

But my point is Mao had 3 clean triples while Alena had 6 (1 under rotated). btw I have problem with Carolina too (but that is for another thread )

Akiko brought a 3:3 at her SP along with her 6 triples for the LP (1 e on flip, 1 < on combo), again Mao only had 3 clean triples there at her LP.

Mao isn't using her 2007 content, otherwise I wouldn't be complaining Her current LP content is only going for 4 triples, 2 in combination and without 3:3 or 3A and she scored the highest LP of the season, even with negative GOEs.

Mao's going for 6 triples. A lutz, two flips, a loop, a salchow, and a toe.

 

[Becki]

My predictions:

*Edit* Changed my predictions with Mao withdrawing.

Men
1. Daisuke Takahashi
2. Patrick Chan
3. Yuzuru Hanyu
4. Javier Fernandez
5. Jeremy Abbott
6. Michal Brezina

Ladies
1. Akiko Suzuki
2. Elizaveta Tuktamysheva
3. Carolina Kostner
4. Alissa Czinsy
5. Alena Leonova

 

[Mathman]

Welcome to Golden Skate, Becki. Thanks for posting.