But Wally the issue is that while the base value of elements IS objective. There is also this thing called GOE and that is NOT objective. Chan gets high GOE because he does transitions into his jumps and high PCS for his transitions, isn't that a bit much? I personally feel its all a bit to much.. The reason I say this is we see Patrick getting this huge scores here, and at the Olympics for messy, messy skates. And he has yet in international competition to land 3 triple axel passes in one international competition? Lets not even get into quads.
It is true that GOE is often subject to interpretation but it is also a misconception that they aren't objective. The ISU have very specific guidelines that judges MUST follow when awarding GOE. The most notable one is fall = mandatory -3. Others include, less revolution than required in the SP is another automatic -3. Jump that receives a "e" from the technical panel must receive negative GOE. Anyway, the list goes on and on and went into great details, not just the negative aspect but also what constitutes positive aspects as well. In most cases, I found the judges' GOE have been quite fair, especially when there 9 people - the average tends to be fairly accurate to the reality and the rules.
Transitions is cornerstone of figure skating just as edge is to basic skating skill. Transitions make execution of elements much harder, which contribute to a skater's TES but it isn't the only thing being considered either. Patrick Chan probably would not have fallen on his Triple Loop today if his entry into that jump wasn't so unbelievably hard and ambitious. I was telling myself he was a little crazy for doing that and he paid a price for it.
Is it really asking to much that a men's champion be able to land a triple axel consistently? I don't want to see Kevin Vanderparen or Kevin Reynolds at this point winning competitions with their weak basic skating skills. Joubert is not a weak basic skater. But I also don't want to see people who can't do the more difficult jumps dominating men's singles either.
Patrick Chan isn't the World Champion and Yu-Na Kim, Mao Asada and Joannie Rochette have all fallen on a Double Axel this year, it doesn't make any of those women any less admirable because they fall on a Double Axel. So yes, I think you are being unreasonable to demand that skaters not to make mistakes on certain jumps. There is no such litmus test on skaters.
And as for well Kevin V's combination opened up two jumping passes, that is true. But here's the thing Kevin would have had the same base value if he did a single 4toe, a 3sal/3toe, and a double axel/3toe. In fact if one of the combinations was in the later half of the program, he would have gotten a HIGHER base value. Now of course he was unlikely to get the huge GOE he got for that incredible 4toe/3toe/3toe. But I think when you look at what I'm saying you can agree that the base value thing is ridiculous. As it is ridiculous that Plushenko's base value would have been the same if he had done a 4toe and a double axel/3toe in the long. Sure everyone knows the system, but that doesn't mean the system is right or fair.
You have a point, the detachment of difficulty level on the jump combination is an often raised objection. But you also failed to consider that jump combo does liberate valuable jumping passes that would otherwise be unavailable. The upside of IJS is that a jump combination, if used widely, would allow a skater to include more jumps than his/her competitors, which can add up significantly. Someone who managed to include 8 Triples already, could then think of ways to include the three double axel allowances into his program and milk the system to his advantage. Remember, men are limited to only 8 jumping passes in LP while women, only 7. KVDP's LP is poorly designed and careless. Besides, adding Triple jumps behind a jump that you don't plan to repeat is a waste. That's why Kevin Reynolds doesn't do Triple toe behind either of his two Quads in the LP. Why KVDP failed to grasp that, it says to me he is fairly uneducated about IJS or that the fact he coaches himself is really costing him valuable points. So overall, although it is true that IJS doesn't give higher difficulty points for combos, it does compensate in another way, which can be just as valuable if not more - provided the skater is smart enough to design his program in response to that.
I'm just tired of hearing that in men's singles skating-being an all around skater doesn't include having great jumps. While this isn't figure jumping, jumps are a HUGE part of the tradition of men's single's skating. The all around skater should be able to pull of the hard jumps, hard spins, and hard footwork. Like Daisuke tried to do tonight.
On that, I cannot agree with you. I think every World medalist in men's skating today cannot be where they are without being good jumpers. As discussed elsewhere, Chan's base value from his jumps are in fact pretty high, higher than even KVDP, a supposedly outstanding jumper. I think people who said Chan is inflated failed to consider he actually jumped very well in the jumps he actually does. His Triple Toe is often higher than his first jump (Triple Flip), which is quite amazing. His Triple Axels are huge and flow smoothly on exit when he lands them. His transitions into his Lutzes are out of this world, scarily difficult. Do you how many clean Triples Joubert did today? Two. He managed only two clean Triples in my opinion, three if you count his opening Axel as clean, which I don't. For the sake of argument, Joubert only had 3 clean Triples and got credit for a total 6 Triples attempts whereas the maximum is 8. While his Quads were great, the fact he is clean on only 50% of Triples ensured that he is going to lose to someone who is quadless like Chan but does 8 Triples in his program and landing most of them. Is Joubert suddenly more deserving just because he can land Quad yet misses his Triples? I think not.
Last edited: