Unfortunately Mao had stumbled in free. that's why. She made some mistakes in free. She must be overwhelmed cause she had to perform right after Kim.
Highest scores ever recorded-Ladies (part II)
- Thread starter FSGMT
- Start date
Unfortunately Mao had stumbled in free. that's why. She made some mistakes in free. She must be overwhelmed cause she had to perform right after Kim.
What are you talking about? Mao was perfect in the Sochi LP except for the UR calls (one of which was definitely unfair). And Yuna skated last.
I think they were talking about Mao's 2010 Olympics FS
and I agree with 3F-3Lo call being unfair earlier this year, should have been clean, Mao's step sequence got less GOE than Adelina's too, what a shame
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2014
THIS is atrocity!! And I am not even Mao's fan.
I can't even believe they got the same step sequence level. =_=;
:disapp:
For the record, if we're talking "greatest figure skating performances," I don't think Mao's Sochi LP necessarily should come on top. It's one of my personal favourites, but there's ample room to pull for many of Yuna's performances. But in a thread about scores in an athletic competition (of which subjective artistry is just one part), Mao's Sochi LP should be the highest score.
I meant Vancouver LP.
Tell me about it. Mao and Sotnikova with the same stsq level? That's just bad jokes. :disagree: Sotnikova's stsq is not even near to Mao, Kostner, Kim, and Akiko.
Well, I meant Sochi LP. Giving Mao WR for her Vancouver LP would be a pretty ridiculous, even with the two 3As.
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2011
I don't know how often I heard that already. It's not about quantity, it's difficulty. Mao wasn't just doing more jumps than the other ladies, she did harder jumps than the others.
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2014
Wow! Now, that's something I didn't know!
This is ridiculous
Now they can get away with arguments like "Yuna's spins were weaker", " She had one combo less" and so on.
But the fact that Adelina got
1. A higher component score than Koster
2. Higher GOEs on her step sequence than Mao and
3. A wayyyy higher LP score than Mao's amazing, technically most difficult LP in Sochi ?!
These are things that can't be "explained".. and I could go on.
But don't even wanna go there again!
I also agree that it's pretty unfair/hard to break old records under new rules.
This is a semi-tangent, but I thought Asada's strategy was to up her jump content (and stubbornly stick to the 3A) to compensate for her lower GOE and PCS.
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2013
I agree, that's why when I made my list for TES, I only included any scores received during the calendar years 2013 & '14. All on these scores were under the same rules, with the sames possible layouts, and the same way of judging GOE.
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2014
Mao's 3A's aren't a compensation for anything, especially when they were failing her. To her, no program is complete with out the triple axel. Someone mentioned this in another thread, but for skaters such as Mao and Hanyu its not just about out skating the competition, but also about conquering yourself (Hanyu even has that printed on his training outfit). They'll never stop pushing the limit because they are always striving to beat themselves rather than just others. If they fail, they stand up and keep trying. They are never at a standstill. Its one of the reasons I admire skaters like Mao and Carolina.
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2014
Agree on the no ur for the 3F-3L and on Mao getting the World record score
I really don't understand this quality over quantity argument in reference to Mao's jumps because the scoring system itself seems almost bipolar, especially in Mao's last 3 skates of the season. Specifically, Mao in her Sochi LP did not get one jump over +1 GOE and she had a ur called on her 3 loop and her 3T. In the Worlds SP, she had well over +1 GOE on most of her jumps with no urs, particularly the triple axel at around +1.86, which was obviously better than the one at Sochi. Then, in the Worlds LP by far the most bizarre of all, she had her first triple axel and triple flip / triple loop initially given well over +1 GOE, then they were subsequently downgraded to doubles with 0 GOE by the tech crew. I know at least 2 of the 3 were. Now, the performances themselves were all outstanding, with one minor slip on the 2A in the Worlds LP, but the judging runs the gamut and is highly suspect or erroneous, in my view. So, it is unclear in the first place if judges think Mao has good quality to her jumps or not.
One thing I noticed that I don't think the scoring system seems to take into account very much is Mao's excellent posture (no hunching or slouching), the beautiful symmetry and tightness of her spirals which has been mentioned in many places in reference to her triple axel, and the fluidity and intricacy of her movement in and out of her jumps, which improved dramatically in Mao's performance this last season. This is something a friend of mine who isn't a fan of any particular skater verified when he said that Mao had the most beautiful jumps at Sochi. In addition to the outstanding technical content and amazing step sequence, I believe it is this constant flowing motion combined with a lot of skating on one leg she somehow was able to develop through her ballet training that caused people to be so captivated with her Sochi performance. This is objectively observable, if you compare it to performances from say the last Olympics in 2010. At Sochi, I believe these factors should have contributed to a higher GOE and helped to compensate for Mao's lower height and distance on her jumps, which are still higher than Lipnitskaya's but not compared to Kim or Sotnikova's. Furthermore, Mao's one leg skating and the use of fewer crossovers to build speed should have been reflected in higher PCS. Since she got a 5th place finish in PCS at SOchi, these obviously weren't. For all these reasons in addition to the 3F / 3L that should not have been called ur, I believe Mao was shortchanged on scores and thereby lost her chance to get a world record score. To be honest, I did not see a ur on the 3T either, but I may be wrong. But none of the top three received calls, so in the name of consistency she shouldn't have either.
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2014
:scratch: I've never understood why the judges don't have to mark what bullets they think a jump checks in order to support their GOE allotment. Obviously marking a jump as having good height/distance, difficult entry, etc. is still somewhat subjective, but GOE does have more solid guidelines (at least when compared to PCS), so why not list why the skaters were awarded certain GOE? It would hold the judge more accountable for the grade (as much as an anonymous judge can be held responsible) and it would give the skaters more constructive feedback on what they can do to improve the quality of their jumping passes.
So true. Those skating in the final group that even have less then great skates still can get higher PCS marks then those who had great skates but skater in an earlier group. They can even get a higher PCS score then they got from a great skate.
And GOE is just for giving the skaters you like a better score. If you like the skater or they are form a certain country you give them +3. If they are not one of your favs they get a 0 even when the element is outstanding. Just look at the GOE the RUS pairs S/K received for their spin at worlds that was totally out of sink: -.06! A less favorable pair would have received -2s or 3s across the judges.
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2014
She would have been scored a little higher, but using your 6.0 analogy in a new light, room would have to be left for Sotnikova to move up and pass her if Mao skated first, or it would have happened like it did with Kim, since the competition was "set up" to end that way. Of course, she would not have been allowed to get the World record under any circumstances. I am just saying she deserved to get the record.
Similar threads
