Mens SP

[museksk8r]

Any jump is a risk because so much can go wrong with them. If it is a risk - it's the balance between getting the highest points for executing the hardest jump compared with the penalty for not executing it properly. I'm all for Brian getting those points when he actually lands it no he didn't fall - that's about the only thing he didn't do. He did under-rotate the triple toe - not enough for it to be downgraded. Look at the GEO criteria (which i finally managed to find on the ISU site! http://isu.sportcentric.net/db//files/serve.php?id=934):

The guidelines say for the combination jump:

Stepping out on the landing of the second jump -2 - GOE He clearly, undeniably stepped out of the second jump in the combination. That cannot be questioned - not a single judge should have awarded anything greater than -2, clearly they did as he only lost 2.2 points for the combo.

One/both jumps under-rotated up to 1/4 rev (not downgraded) -1 or -2.
More subjective but on the Eurosport footage Chris Howarth commented that he wanted to look at the triple toe to see if he got the rotation - the slow motion clearly showed he was less 1/4 rev short but he was short.

Touch down with one hand or free foot -1

Again - undeniably he touched down with his hand on the landing of the quad.

Weak landing (on toe, wrong edge) -1
He landed the quad on the toe hence the free hand down, and he landed the triple toe on the wrong edge - that caused the step out.

I fail to see why a jump combination with that many errors should come up still scoring more than the base value of any of the harder 3/3 combination.

Ant

:yes::agree:

 

[NatachaHatawa]

Just a theory - could it be that by rewarding Joubert the judges wanted to send a message to the skaters that it is better to risk the quad and stop playing it safe with clean 3A programs?

It is a very interesting theory, and one I think is completely valid. I would add some others (linked ):

Brian and Evan are more or less the last of a generation, a generation which is the last to have known the old judging system and a generation that is inspired by Yagudin, Goebel, Stojko, Abt and so on. When one looks at the current skating scene, one can see that there are a lot of talented young skaters, but skaters that one generaly has trouble imagining as tomorrow's heavy-weights. A lot of these kids have loads of talent, but because they spent most of their competitive career skating under the current system, they have good footwork, good spins, intricate choreographies, but they don't take risks, they don't do programs with lots of "oomph". The old generation may not have a some of the qualities that these new skaters have, but they know how to work the crowd, they take risks, they make competions thrilling. That generation was inspired by people like Yagudin a skater who was thrilling technicaly and artisticly. His choreographies weren't the most intricate that we've eve seen (the current system encourages intricate choreography). The current generation is inspired more by people like Buttle, who did, certainly have intricate choreographies, but these weren't necessarily accessible to all. His programs, as artisctly sublime as one may find them, don't reach out to all and aren't what will attract non-skating fans to figure skating. Jeff's style worked because he was the only one to skate so, they wouldn't have worked if there were a hundred different Jeffs skating.
I think also judges are starting to realise that the kind of skating the current system encourages is partly responsible for dropping popularity.
These new skaters all skate alike, there are no strong personnalities, original styles, out there, which is what makes the mens' event what it is.
Patrick, I think is an amazing skater, but because he is the leader of this new generation, it's via his grades that judges are sending out the signal.

I also think that Patrick is also victim of how judges overgraded him all throughout this season. Yes, he is amazing, but sometimes during this season gave him way to high grades, especially for his 4CC SP. I was great, no doubt, but 88.90 is much too high for someone who doesn't have a quad. Because of that, judges have raised Patrick's and everyone else's expectations too high concerning his grades, but also they are now giving him grades that are a little low as if to repair their previous mistake.

 

[herios]

I know! Part of me is baffled by the scoring of Verner and then the other part of me thinks it's because his performance in the Europeans LP swayed the judges away from him momentum-wise. They feel they can't depend on him, and his scores are taking a hit as a result, and that's a real shame. He should be rewarded for skating well at this SP, not based on failed momentum from past performances.

You are right. he wuzrobbed and he usually isn't. Very strange judging. A lot of biases, Joubert got a gift, Lysacek the home court advantage, Chan got penalized for his bigmouth, Verner for his inconsistency, Kozuka like always for being too shy.

 

[bekalc]

Don't you think the system tries to get there now? Jumps are more heavily weighted than any other element or category in a program. Would making the quad worth more really help the balance between hard choreography and hard jumps? I personally don't think they would - if the quad is worth more than skaters like Joubert would definitely focus on the quad and have even less choreography then they would otherwise try.

But my main issue is that jump content isn't factored into things enough. And it's not fair. What I mean by that is that there are three points in the PCS mark that address choregraphy and transitions. And you get higher GOE on jumps for transitions.

However what is not factored into things enough is actual jump content. Yes you get higher base value for doing harder elements, but that is counteracted by GOE....

The thing is though that it's a real problem with this system because we are not saying skaters rewarded for well balanced programs jump wise.

Do you really think it's fair that Chan's Four Continents long is the highest long in the season. IS it really right that it's higher than Abbott's GPF long program. Abbot had two triple axels in his long, Chan had one triple axel.

And Abbott has difficult transitions and choregraphy... Under 6.0 the fact that Abbott landed 2 clean triple axels and all those jumps would have certainly given him the edge over Chan. And that's not unfair.

It's not right that the system doesn't reward jump content, because it needs to be factored into things. Things like someone la nding 2 triple axels versus one, should be factored into things, if this is going to be considered a sport.

 

[Medusa]

:yes::agree:

I get your points - but I don't think you add the different mistakes up. At least I don't think so. I try to find an example, but I don't remember that those mistakes add up per jump. E.g. if you got an edge call on a jump and also double-foot - it would mean -2 + -2/-1 -- but I don't think they deduct the maximum of -3 then. Because that't the deduction for a fall. Or am I wrong here?

Isn't this like in the justice system: you murdered someone, you robbed an old lady, you didn't pay your taxes. You can only be tried for the worst offense then, the murder. In Brian's case the murder is the step-out of the second jump - a required -2. If you would add up all those mistakes he made, it would be a -5.

I am not sure though.

 

[BBI*CEO]

It is a very interesting theory, and one I think is completely valid. I would add some others (linked ):

When one looks at the current skating scene, one can see that there are a lot of talented young skaters, but skaters that one generaly has trouble imagining as tomorrow's heavy-weights. A lot of these kids have loads of talent, but because they spent most of their competitive career skating under the current system, they have good footwork, good spins, intricate choreographies, but they don't take risks, they don't do programs with lots of "oomph". The old generation may not have a some of the qualities that these new skaters have, but they know how to work the crowd, they take risks, they make competions thrilling. That generation was inspired by people like Yagudin a skater who was thrilling technicaly and artisticly.
___________
NatachaHatawa - very good insight as to the theory and I have to say that as an ice dancer, I'm agog with delight (and heavily impressed) at the amount of intricate footwork and interesting transitions that have moved from ice dance into the singles and pairs. But you're right, it's all so jammed in there that on the surface, everyone's skating IS starting to look the same. It's not until you really take a microscope observation to their footwork sequences that you get a real feel for who can do what better etc....but at full speed ahead, a viewer might only catch the impression and not get to savour the details.

That's where the jump-risking would have to be a definer.

I guess that's what's missing for me in the new skating system - the forced jam packing reduces the delight in the exquisite individual footwork elements unless you have a brain that can process at the speed of light what you're seeing in real time.

And I still feel even though Chan may have been overmarked previously, the PCS subjectivity shows me that there's a window in the new judging system where subjectivity can still be applied to a skaters' benefit should the judges deem so without explicable reason.

 

[Buttercup]

Brian and Evan are more or less the last of a generation, a generation which is the last to have known the old judging system and a generation that is inspired by Yagudin, Goebel, Stojko, Abt and so on. When one looks at the current skating scene, one can see that there are a lot of talented young skaters, but skaters that one generaly has trouble imagining as tomorrow's heavy-weights. A lot of these kids have loads of talent, but because they spent most of their competitive career skating under the current system, they have good footwork, good spins, intricate choreographies, but they don't take risks, they don't do programs with lots of "oomph".

The old generation may not have a some of the qualities that these new skaters have, but they know how to work the crowd, they take risks, they make competions thrilling. That generation was inspired by people like Yagudin a skater who was thrilling technicaly and artisticly. His choreographies weren't the most intricate that we've ever seen (the current system encourages intricate choreography).

The current generation is inspired more by people like Buttle, who did, certainly have intricate choreographies, but these weren't necessarily accessible to all. His programs, as artisctly sublime as one may find them, don't reach out to all and aren't what will attract non-skating fans to figure skating. Jeff's style worked because he was the only one to skate so, they wouldn't have worked if there were a hundred different Jeffs skating.

Nathacha, I can't say what the judges' motives were, but I think your post is very much on target. Earlier this season, there was much discussion here on whether the system was pushing all the skaters into a specific performance style, and I hope that won't be the case. I think Jeffrey Buttle was a wonderful competitive skater and will have a great professional career, but I don't want a generation or more of nothing but Jeffreys, lovely as his skating can be.

I agree that some of the skaters are skating very well but not taking risks. A risk does not have to be a quad; for someone like Yannick Ponsero, there are jumps much riskier . But I feel some skaters are also not taking creative risks, and are showing us variations on the same thing again and again. I agree that a skater needs to develop a distinctive on-ice persona, but that does not mean that we should be subjected to repetition. I have seen a lot of triples out of footwork, lots of tangos and high kicks in the step sequences, and plenty of spread eagles into whatever element. I want more than that. I want different types of programs on the ice. Whether one likes Joubert's SP or not (and it's not my favorite program of his), at least it's not another tango, or any of the standby classical pieces. And it's pitched at the audience, not just at the judges. Showmanship shouldn't be frowned upon.

I would advise the men and the ladies (and some of the pairs) to take a very good look at what the ice dancers are doing; go to the free dance on Friday, and really pay attention. Ice dance has become very exciting because the last thing you see there is repetition; each team is unique. The variety of styles, the innovation that goes into creating some of the elements, and the risk-taking with the musical choices and the choreography should inspire everyone who loves the sport and the art of figure skating.

 

[*Sniper*]

The only thing I can say about the Men's....

Where is Stephane? Where is Jeffrey??!!
WHERE ARE THEY!!!! :banging:

 

[fairly4]

Patrick Chan, wasn't too bad overmarked during the season just mainly at 4cc's.
However i think at worlds . in the men they are trying their hardest to be fair. I think they are.
Also as far as sportmanship, Since Chan brought it up himself. he is very unsportmanlike as well as a few others.
personally, I don't like it on the field of play. The skaters all try their hardest, sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. the skaters shouldn't make fun, remarks otherwise because they all put in the effort for a goal of medals /and what not.

 

[DaveT]

I would advise the men and the ladies (and some of the pairs) to take a very good look at what the ice dancers are doing; go to the free dance on Friday, and really pay attention. Ice dance has become very exciting because the last thing you see there is repetition; each team is unique. The variety of styles, the innovation that goes into creating some of the elements, and the risk-taking with the musical choices and the choreography should inspire everyone who loves the sport and the art of figure skating.

Now that really made me think - there is far more thematic variety contained within ice dance - and I had honestly never even recognized it until you pointed it out - and I'm even thinking to myself right now, how much does Lori Nichol watch ice dance?

 

[enlight78]

After looking at the performances again. I recorded it. I agree with Brian and Evan scores. They were electric performance wise. I think chan more introverted appoach might have cost him. {One or two points}. Verner quad seem slightly underotated. Goe's may have been -. Overall the scores were only off about one to two points. That's about 2% of 80. I attribute that to human error.There is no big controversy here. Only a difference of opinions. 4CC really mess up my expectations. If you take away the three pts for inflation and then another three pts for home crowd advantage. You come up with 82.9.

 

[antmanb]

I get your points - but I don't think you add the different mistakes up. At least I don't think so. I try to find an example, but I don't remember that those mistakes add up per jump. E.g. if you got an edge call on a jump and also double-foot - it would mean -2 + -2/-1 -- but I don't think they deduct the maximum of -3 then. Because that't the deduction for a fall. Or am I wrong here?

No you don't add up the penalties - i was just listing all of the possible errors with the jump cobination. I can't find clarification on how you take the errors into account but i would logically think that if so many things go wrong with the jump you do end up at around -2 or -3 overall. We've certainly seen skaters step out of a flutz and get -3 on the GOE.

Interestingly the only error i listed which requires a -GOE is the step out of the second jump. Which means in theory that if, apart from that error, the jump was so good it would have ended up with + GOE it can counteract the -GOE but it must still come out with an overall -GOE. The reason i listed all of the errors is that there is no way that combo would have been on track for +GOE because of everything that went wrong with it.

Isn't this like in the justice system: you murdered someone, you robbed an old lady, you didn't pay your taxes. You can only be tried for the worst offense then, the murder. In Brian's case the murder is the step-out of the second jump - a required -2. If you would add up all those mistakes he made, it would be a -5.

This is how your criminal justice system works???

As far as i'm aware in the UK you can be tried for each and every criminal offence you committ. When it comes to sentencing you can have other crimes "taken into consideration" which means at sentencing for one crime, you confess to others - you are convicted of them, and the judge gives you a sentence which takes those crimes into account and gives a certain discount for confessing to them all.

Ant

 

[museksk8r]

A lot of these kids have loads of talent, but because they spent most of their competitive career skating under the current system, they have good footwork, good spins, intricate choreographies, but they don't take risks, they don't do programs with lots of "oomph". The old generation may not have a some of the qualities that these new skaters have, but they know how to work the crowd, they take risks, they make competitions thrilling.

I know this is your opinion, but I totally disagree. This sport breeds so many different opinions and perspectives among fans and judges alike. Evan doesn't "work" me at all, well, maybe he works me into having a headache. I find his skating completely ridiculous and obnoxious most of the time. His skating doesn't "thrill" me; it annoys me. I haven't been moved by a performance from him in competition since his LP at the 2006 Olympics, and that was the first and last time for me personally, aside from his Ave Maria exhibition piece. I have really admired his ability as a strong competitor, but as a skater, I usually see his programs as messes, like a poor man's impression of Plushenko. I have never been moved by a Brian Joubert program, competition or exhibition. I have no emotional connection with him whatsoever, but like Lysacek, he is such a strong competitor and I think that is very admirable. I understand that they are and should be rewarded for taking risks in the jump content, but that doesn't mean they work or move me. With that being said, I do root for them to do well because I know they work hard to realize their dreams and their successes mean opportunities for other skaters whom I really enjoy, like Jeremy Abbott and Yannick Ponsero. Go guys! I hope all of you do great tonight!!

Also, I do think good footwork, good spins, and intricate choreographies add risk and "oomph" to programs just as much as good jumps do, and perhaps more so for me personally.

 

[enlight78]

also, i do think good footwork, good spins, and intricate choreographies add risk and "oomph" to programs just as much as good jumps do, and perhaps more so for me personally.

ita

 

[Mathman]

Interestingly the only error i listed which requires a -GOE is the step out of the second jump. Which means in theory that if, apart from that error, the jump was so good it would have ended up with + GOE it can counteract the -GOE but it must still come out with an overall -GOE. The reason i listed all of the errors is that there is no way that combo would have been on track for +GOE because of everything that went wrong with it.

It seems to be different for quads. We hardly ever see a quad with 0 GOE. I think the judges are already pre-disposed to give positive GOEs to a quad just because IT'S A QUAD!

So if a judge took off -2 GOE for the errors and added back +1 GOE for the sheer quadliness of the quad, I can see where they come up with the scores that are reported.

(Aside: In the U.S. if a person is found guilty of multiple crimes the judge usually has the option of giving consecutive sentences or concurrent ones -- two crimes for the price of one.)

But my main issue is that jump content isn't factored into things enough.

Base values for jumps typically count for about 75% to 80% of the TES.

 

[sillylionlove]

The only thing I can say about the Men's....

Where is Stephane? Where is Jeffrey??!!
WHERE ARE THEY!!!! :banging:

Where is Daisuke with his hip hop swan lake when you need him?!?!?!?!?!

 

[Mathman]

Just a theory - could it be that by rewarding Joubert the judges wanted to send a message to the skaters that it is better to risk the quad and stop playing it safe with clean 3A programs?

I have never understood the rationale for theories of this sort. What would the motivation be for the judges, of all people, to "send someone a message?" Why would the judges care whether someone did a quad or a triple Axel?

All they have to do is mark their score sheets according to the rules.

 

[ks777]

Ok, I watched Joubert's SP again. His quad toe was definitely rotated but with a hand down. His 3toe was definitely underrotated so I am sure it got downgraded.

I just love the way Kozuka uses his blades. He is becoming my favorite skater, just so beautiful to watch the way his blades move.

 

[Mathman]

..I am sure it got downgraded.

I am pretty sure it didn't. He got 12.6 for the combo.

 

[i love to skate]

I am pretty sure it didn't. He got 12.6 for the combo.

They said on CBC that he got credit for the triple. The commentators seemed confused by it too.