Kimmie Messiner article

[Mathman]

She seemed to pitch last season just right to peak perfectly in time for worlds, if i were her i'd stick to the same training plan and see what happens.

However, I don't think that was her deliberate plan last year -- to blow off the Olympics in order to peak a month later at Worlds.

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

She seems to be the only one with the arsenal to compete with the Asian arsenals. Carolina hasn't really shown it with clean programs. Joannie can get a 3Tx3T. Sasha, if she skates, will play it safe and rely on her wow moves. All the up and coming Ladies, imo, will try the 3Tx3T. Some will make it others not. Once we get the top jumpers in place, we then go to the Whole Package.

Hopefully we don't get a splatsfest because it will be one heluva Worlds for the Ladies.

The Men too, should be a blockbuster attempt to knock out Lambiel. We will see more Quad attempts this coming season. Some will make it others not. Splatsfest remains to be seen.

Joe

 

[Skye]

Thanks for clearing that up. If more ladies start including a triple Axel in their repertoire, I wonder if they will change the SP rules to allow a triple or double Axel, like the men.

Very interesting that a single Axel is permitted as the "Axel jump" in the LP. As I have been learning on the "flutz" thread, the CoP is trying to be consistent in not penalizing a later element for a mistake on an earlier one. If you single your double Axel attempt you get a "deduction" of 2.5 points (0.8 instead of 3.3), but they don't in addition take away credit for your last jump (say, an additional 5.0 for a Salchow in the second half of the program).

Otherwise, you would lose more points (a total of 7.5 points in this scenario) than the element is worth in the first palce (3.3).

Believe it or not, the ISU has actually put some thought into its rules.

MM, I'm sort of feeling stupid but could you explain what you mean by this? ASAIK, the Zayak rule is only applied to triples and quads, so why would popping a double Axel into a single have any chance whatsoever of turning into a double penalty?

 

[antmanb]

However, I don't think that was her deliberate plan last year -- to blow off the Olympics in order to peak a month later at Worlds.

True enough but despite working to peak in time for the Olympics, she wasn't quite ready but did peak for worlds, i'd be tempted to push her to peak in February again, hoping that the pattern is the same!!

Ant

 

[antmanb]

MM, I'm sort of feeling stupid but could you explain what you mean by this? ASAIK, the Zayak rule is only applied to triples and quads, so why would popping a double Axel into a single have any chance whatsoever of turning into a double penalty?

I think it was still working on the basis that an axel type jump was attempted (there's that evil word again!).

If the rules say you have to do an axel type jump, mandatory in the LP, then a strict interpretation of that might be - Skater X fell on her opening double axel and went on to complete six triples in her remaining six jumping passes, since she fell on teh double axel has she "done" an axel type jump or not? You might argue that fall means she didn't complete one and should have done, therefore you don't count the final triple since she should have done a clean double axel.

The underrotating thing works on a similar basis - if we talking a bout a "double or higher" axel being required in the LP. If a skater popped the double to a single, would you penalise that skater by not counting the final triple because a double or higher axel was not landed?

Its a complicated system...one that IMO does not get you any "better" results than the old one, but since it appears that its here to stay we might as well criticise it constructively and hope that it gets changed for the better (even though secretly i wish we could go back to 6.0)

Ant

 

[chuckm]

True enough but despite working to peak in time for the Olympics, she wasn't quite ready but did peak for worlds, i'd be tempted to push her to peak in February again, hoping that the pattern is the same!!

Ant

Kimmie was also undermarked in the PCS at the Olympics. Her PCS scores went up only after her excellent QR at Worlds.

Kimmie was 5th in the SP at both Worlds and Olympics, and she skated both programs very well. But look at the difference in the PCS scores:

7.14 6.71 7.11 6.96 7.00 Worlds SP
6.54 6.14 6.21 6.36 6.25 Olympics SP

 

[antmanb]

Kimmie was also undermarked in the PCS at the Olympics. Her PCS scores went up only after her excellent QR at Worlds.

Kimmie was 5th in the SP at both Worlds and Olympics, and she skated both programs very well. But look at the difference in the PCS scores:

7.14 6.71 7.11 6.96 7.00 Worlds SP
6.54 6.14 6.21 6.36 6.25 Olympics SP

That's one way of putting it, another would be to say that she was overmarked at Worlds (which i personally think was the case). I think her PCS at worlds were proof that the judges peg the PCS to the technical like they always did under 6.0.

Ant

 

[Mathman]

I think her PCS at worlds were proof that the judges peg the PCS to the technical like they always did under 6.0.

I think so, too. Nothing like two triple-triples to show the judges how great your choreography and transitions are.

 

[Mathman]

MM, I'm sort of feeling stupid but could you explain what you mean by this? ASAIK, the Zayak rule is only applied to triples and quads, so why would popping a double Axel into a single have any chance whatsoever of turning into a double penalty?

What Antman said.

It's not a Zayak rule thing, but rather the penalty for not doing an Axel jump.

I was just saying that if the rules for the LP had said, "you must do a double or a triple Axel," instead of "you must do an Axel jump," then you would be in big trouble if you singled your Axel. That would mean you didn't fulfill the requirement and the penalty would be to take away all credit for your last jump (because it was a Salchow rather than the required double Axel).

BTW, in the recent "Japanese Open" cheesefest, Yagudin got dinged by this rule. He didn't do an Axel jump at all, so they took away his last triple flip.

 

[antmanb]

What Antman said.

Including the part about secretly wishing we could have 6.0 back?!?!?!

Ant

 

[Skye]

Thanks guys, now I get it -- So that's why Yagudin's TES was lower than I had expected.

I find myself getting fond of the CoP the more I get to know it, even though I agree there can be some tweaking. (i.e. providing a mandatory -3 GOE as a solution to the flutz/lip problem)

 

[Mathman]

Including the part about secretly wishing we could have 6.0 back?!?!?!

Actually, I liked ordinal judging just fine. Figure skating is a judged sport. Ordinal judging faced this reality head on, while the hybrid NJS tries to tap dance around it.

Hence the question that motivated the other thread: “How are we doing so far under the new system?”

My overall impression is: “About the same as before.”

All of the questions that have come up – how severely should a flutz be penalized, how should the Zayak rule be applied to attempted quads, etc., etc. – are equally at issue under both systems. At the same time, I think the jury is still out as to whether the new system – with its callers appointed directly by the ISU, its random draw and anonymous judging – will have any effect one way or the other on cheating and politics.

I think it is also too early to tell what effect the CoP will have on the actual skating. If we can tweak it in such a way as to make skaters do a proper Lutz, or get down lower in their sit spin, or present choreography that better captures the character of the music – yay! But these things could have been addressed under ordinal judging, too.

So we’ll see.

In the meantime, we have all these beautiful numbers to arrange in columns and add up across and down and along the diagonal! As Joe says, this gives me something to hold my interest over the summer – bring on Campbells!

 

[hockeyfan228]

I was just saying that if the rules for the LP had said, "you must do a double or a triple Axel," instead of "you must do an Axel jump," then you would be in big trouble if you singled your Axel. That would mean you didn't fulfill the requirement and the penalty would be to take away all credit for your last jump (because it was a Salchow rather than the required double Axel).

I'm not sure this is the case. If the plan was for a 2A, and it was popped, then the 1A would get a -3 GOE (required deduction for not meeting the rotations requirement, like in the short program). Only if the 2A attempt were replaced with another, non-axel jump would the last jump not count.

 

[Mathman]

I'm not sure this is the case. If the plan was for a 2A, and it was popped, then the 1A would get a -3 GOE (required deduction for not meeting the rotations requirement, like in the short program). Only if the 2A attempt were replaced with another, non-axel jump would the last jump not count.

Hmm. Does this start to get into a grey area where the caller has to make a ruling on the skater's "intention?"?

What if you popped the double Axel attempt into a nothing at all? You just went up in the air, came back down facing forward and fell on your face.

Or what if you skated forward for two strokes and winked at the judges -- is that a "double Axel attempt"?

Another question. In the LP at Worlds Johnny Weir used only 7 of his 8 alowed jumping passes. Suppose that in his 7 jump elements he did not attempt an Axel jump at all. Is there a penalty?

Or could he say, my eighth pass was my Axel, only I just didn't do it, so 0 points for the Axel but no further deduction?

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

That's one way of putting it, another would be to say that she was overmarked at Worlds (which i personally think was the case). I think her PCS at worlds were proof that the judges peg the PCS to the technical like they always did under 6.0.

Ant

PCS scores for me are personal value judgements. The CoP tries to uniform them but there's too much human taste involved.

Kimmie's win in Calgary, imo, whether or not she was over or undermarked was justified as the best skater that evening.

Joe

 

[antmanb]

Hmm. Does this start to get into a grey area where the caller has to make a ruling on the skater's "intention?"?

What if you popped the double Axel attempt into a nothing at all? You just went up in the air, came back down facing forward and fell on your face.

Or what if you skated forward for two strokes and winked at the judges -- is that a "double Axel attempt"?

Another question. In the LP at Worlds Johnny Weir used only 7 of his 8 alowed jumping passes. Suppose that in his 7 jump elements he did not attempt an Axel jump at all. Is there a penalty?

Or could he say, my eighth pass was my Axel, only I just didn't do it, so 0 points for the Axel but no further deduction?

I think Hockeyfan was just hypothetically saying that if the number of rotations were specified int he long, then an obvious sanction for missing the number of rotations would be the one used in the SP where rotations are mandated.

As to the winking at the judges...ask Sandhu - he slipped off the take off edge of an axel, never left the ice but lost one of his jumping passes and had A0 put on his score sheet...watch those winking eyes skaters!

I think your assesment of someone only doing 7 jumping passes when there are 8 available is correct...i mean, if they can pretend there was combination done when there wasn't, the read slipping off a forward edge as an attempt at an axel, then another totally fictitious element is neither here nor there for CoP!!!

Ant

 

[antmanb]

PCS scores for me are personal value judgements. The CoP tries to uniform them but there's too much human taste involved.

Kimmie's win in Calgary, imo, whether or not she was over or undermarked was justified as the best skater that evening.

Joe

I never said it wasn't justified...my criticism is of the judges, not the performance which, for the avoidance of any doubt, I totally 100% unequivocally agree with Kimmie winning worlds - she was hands down the best perfoamcne of the night.

What i don't think is that it was performed sooooo much better than it was athe Olympics to warrant the much higher PCS marks. Like MM, i agree, there's nothing like landing two 3/3s to make the judges mark your transitions and choreography much higher - same as 6.0 - ask Goebel!

Ant

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

I never said it wasn't justified...my criticism is of the judges, not the performance which, for the avoidance of any doubt, I totally 100% unequivocally agree with Kimmie winning worlds - she was hands down the best perfoamcne of the night.

What i don't think is that it was performed sooooo much better than it was athe Olympics to warrant the much higher PCS marks. Like MM, i agree, there's nothing like landing two 3/3s to make the judges mark your transitions and choreography much higher - same as 6.0 - ask Goebel!Ant

Sorry. I saw your statement as something everyone should believe moreso than an opinion. But it is like I said about the judges, a personal value judgement.

And definitely, 2 3x3s preferably involving a lutz will up the PCS scores for the Ladies. I think that is more of a rule of thumb than an opinion, but it seems to work. The Men,.I believe will require Quads. As of now it seems toe Quads (one in combo) works for the PCS scores, too. We're still out for the wow Lutz Quad.

Joe

 

[antmanb]

Sorry. I saw your statement as something everyone should believe moreso than an opinion. But it is like I said about the judges, a personal value judgement.

And definitely, 2 3x3s preferably involving a lutz will up the PCS scores for the Ladies. I think that is more of a rule of thumb than an opinion, but it seems to work. The Men,.I believe will require Quads. As of now it seems toe Quads (one in combo) works for the PCS scores, too. We're still out for the wow Lutz Quad.

Joe

You see i'd like to believe that the PCS are up to the judges personal value judgment, but i suspect that George Rossano has a point that the judges are merely using the PCS like they did the 6.0 presentation score - like a place holder for the skater. The judges must individually recognise the difference between choreo, execution, transitions etc yet they tend to give the same (or near enough as) marks high 8s for a skater they think should be first and right the way down to the lesser skaters.

Ant

 

[chuckm]

When I posted Kimmie's SP scores, it was to show that she did nearly identical performances at Torino and Worlds, but was undermarked in Torino:

7.14 6.71 7.11 6.96 7.00 Worlds SP
6.54 6.14 6.21 6.36 6.25 Olympics SP

I do not think her Worlds SP scores were overmarked at all; they were fair for the performance she gave. I do agree that her FS performance was somewhat overmarked.