Bribery accusations and constant bashing of other coaches' skaters doesn't sound like "hey" to me.
Plushenko: "What is happening is absurd."
- Thread starter LoveSkater
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2014
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2014
Final post on this because all I hear is criticism and nasty comments about Plushenko.
Eteri hiding her skaters weakness with clever choreo is smart, if Plushy did it he'd be a lying scumbag cheater.
Skater leaves Eteri's group they're a stupid, spoiled, self-sabotagng idiot, skater leaves Plushy's Academy they've seen the light and praise God they got away from that fake coach, who's a disgrace to the sport.
Plushy complains about Anna and Daria not receiving edge calls - what a piece of crap he is, he wouldn't know good skating anyway the arm waving freak.
I've said it before but here's an itemized list of the horrible things Plushy had been accused of:
Bribery (no evidence)
Being a member of the Russian Mafia (Guess it's fine to accuse Plushy of horrible crimes with not a damn bit of evidence)
Ruining Sasha's career
Ruining Aliona's career
Being an evil mastermind who's planning to turn skating into his own personal sideshow while at the same time being such a complete idiot he couldn't find his way out of bed without a map
And if course Eteri's personal favourite: Fake coach
And not once, not once did any of you so-called "We don't hate Plushy, no of course not!" posters called this out.
I've never heard such mean, horrible, ugly things said about another skater ever in my life. How would you feel if people said these terrible things about you. I'll tell you how it makes me feel, angry and upset!
But that's all I have to say about that, I'm not going to bother anymore. Say whatever nasty things you want.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
To me, that's exactly what Plushenko is saying. "Hey, y'all, we was robbed. They're all a pack of crooks. Grrr."
The proper response is, "Oh that Plushenko. There he goes again!"
Bringing this back to the topic at hand, absurd judging, this article was published today
Судья Сергей Чемоданов: «Люди не знают, за что ставятся оценки. Есть таблица, за что ставят надбавки и снижения – большинство обывателей ее не читали»
Тренер и секретарь Коллегии судей Федерации фигурного катания России ( ФФКР ) Сергей Чемоданов рассказал об особенностях судейской работы в фигурном катании.m.sports.ru
I took much interest in this comment by the judge:
So basically what this guy is saying is that if you can't do the edge properly, don't bother working on it, just stick the jump as far away as you can from the judges and you'll get off scott-free!
Sure hope Team Angel reads this and strategically positions Sasha's flips from now on. Apparently Eteri and her team did this with Zhenya's Lutzes...(no points for guessing how much abuse Plushy would get hurled his way if he admitted to practically cheating in this manner).
Not to mention the first part of the judge's comment "this picture is not very interesting to me" The guy is given clear evidence of a "!" call and it doesn't interest him? Elements being awarded correctly doesn't interest him?
Maybe you're all right Plushy should have kept his mouth shut and let these guys incriminate themselves.
Except...I have a strong suspicion that this interview wouldn't have happened without his comments.
So who's the bad guy now?
My understanding of the technical panel/review is that they have a camera that they review, and that is alone what they review off of, they can't do this "couch judging" of getting different angles that fans can access to view to micro-view a skater's jump. That's the source of the whole troublesome jumps are placed elsewhere on the ice; I believe Orser referenced with Medvedeva that they weren't going to "hide" her lutz - guess what started getting called when they did that. Plus, I could understand a level of skepticism with some things posted on social comparing jumps - how do you know that the jump they showed was a skater's lutz or their flip, if pandemic has proven anything it's that media personalities can twist up facts to support the position they favor.
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2018
People with Plushenko in their avatar
Now seriously, Anna's Lutz edge improved a lot and it is obvious she worked very hard on it since that was the loudest criticism against her and in China the calls cost her a lot of poins. But even though one can admit it was her problem, claimimg she has wrong edge now is simply closing eyes before reality and inability to accept Anna's progress in that. As for the 4F at nationals, IMO it is slightly inside and should be judged as correct, at least by the benefit of doubt rule. But I would accept !. Still the objections towards her flip edge lack much objectivity when at the same time the same people are totally unwilling to accept that Sasha's edge on her F has truly worsened,
I accept that Daria should have received ! for particular jumps, but once again I want to remind that the difference between just not receiving ! when you should have is significantly smaller than receiving just ! while you should have received e.
If I should relatively compare particular aspects of Anna's and Sasha's jumps (quads) as I've seen them at nationals, I would do it this (my) way:
| Anna | Sasha | |
| entering (transitions and moves before) | 1 | 2 |
| take-off | 2 | 1 |
| edges | 1-2 | 1-2 |
| height | 2 | 1 |
| air position | 1 | 2 |
| landing (fluency, effortless ballance) | 1 | 2 |
| completing the rotation | 1 | 2 |
| exit | 1 | 2 |
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2018
This is called "reputation".
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2020
And this is exactly what I find incorrect in the current system. There should be bigger gaps in BV between elements. The current addition of features is too mechanical. Some of the bullets are very easy to get, others are difficult, but the result in GOE is the same. The result of this system is (1) similarity of content, very rarely does a skater perform something unique, what for? (2) subjectivity of assessment, as the requirements for quality are described vaguely, "good" height or "difficult" entrance means nothing.
"Clean" in the past meant without falls. "Clean" now means also without obvious mistakes (step out, second foot, missed rotation etc.) So maybe this type of clean should be valued more? I find it strange and unfair that between two hypothetical skates with the same BV, the one with a fall, step out and a foot touching the ice during exit could win over the one with edge calls, less intricate entrances and less flow. And that is perfectly possible with the current GOE. (PCS not taken into consideration, it can change the result again).
The comparison above has nothing to do with Anna and Sasha, it is compiled from other cases.
As for Anna and Sasha,
I understand that the numbers mean first and second? I could agree only if you compare Anna's Flip with Sasha's second Lutz, but not if you take Anna's Lutz and Sasha's combo Lutz.
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2018
I'm not sure and too lazy to check, but I think some errors (like fall) put a limit on how big GOE can be.
So if you hit all possible bullets but have a fall - you cannot have more than -3. And top limit for the wrong edge is 0 (or +1?).
If my memory does not fail me then you cannot overcome any error by hitting other bullet points, so in your example it is possible only if 1st jump (with a fall and perfectly executed other things like height, flow, etc) have -3 and 2nd jump (with edge calls, less intricate entrances and less flow) have for some reason -4 (ALL is bad but no fall). For me this situation looks ok.
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2018
It's rather individual. Some have high jumps but difficulties with edges, some a vice versa etc. I don't have a problem with jumps BV (though I think Rittberger is undervalued), but I would probably agree with bigger difference between spins/stysq levels BV (resp. lifts, twists in pairs).
I know you mention "the same BV", but IMO the problem is many people lay stress on "clean skate" without considering the difficulty and overal execution. It's different to have clean skate with doubles and some triple here and there and telegraphed jumps and to have clean skate with quads, very complex choreo, difficult transitions and all. I remember an interview with a member of US skating union after the GPF/JGPF 2017 (where Sasha, Aliona and Nastya then have completely stolen the show in juniors and Alina in seniors) how he literally told he was horrified when he saw russian and japanese girls literally flying over the ice in comparison with junior girls in the US and then he was talking that US system values "clean skates" above difficulty with juniors too much so esp. the girls aren't forced to do difficult elements and then the big gap in capabilities is created.
And remember that since the times of mr. Axel Paulsen there is a principle that "A fall is not an obstacle to victory".
You've got it well. Though that's why I've written "I would do it this (my) way"
More seriously, I took that as the overal quality of the jumps of both skaters. As I said, Anna's edge on her Lz improved greatly and her landing and exit were better than Sasha's even when considered Sasha's combo jump.
I think ISU need to stop considering figure skating as a "live sport" only. There was a survey conducted on the figure skating subreddit which got about 500 responses and it showed that a large proportion of skating fans (~50%) have never been to a skating competition or even a skating show and less than a third had been to an ISU competition.
See the post here: https://www.another site.com/r/Figu...rt_3/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share
Of course, the numbers should be taken with a handful of salt since there's many caveats eg. It's on an English speaking forum, another site may gave a skewed demographic etc but the internet is the future and ISU need to keep it in mind in order to develop the sport's popularity. Remember the internet has allowed the sport to gain fans in countries that have few or no competitions.
It wouldn't make sense to a new fan who is just learning the technicals of scoring that the judges don't analyse the tech thoroughly even when they have the technology to do so.
See the post here: https://www.another site.com/r/Figu...rt_3/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share
Of course, the numbers should be taken with a handful of salt since there's many caveats eg. It's on an English speaking forum, another site may gave a skewed demographic etc but the internet is the future and ISU need to keep it in mind in order to develop the sport's popularity. Remember the internet has allowed the sport to gain fans in countries that have few or no competitions.
It wouldn't make sense to a new fan who is just learning the technicals of scoring that the judges don't analyse the tech thoroughly even when they have the technology to do so.
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2018
One injustice does not justify another injustice. This way of thinking is contrary to the very foundation of a just judgment and always leads to the discontent of the condemned. Regarding the article about refereeing: I read the opinion of a person who has experience in judging the FC, that from the referee's place at the side the wrong edges and under-twisted jumps are always clearly visible. At any point of ice. In order not to notice this, you must either not look at the ice, or try not to see. Indeed, if you look at the protocols of small competitions, they are filled with "!" and "e". But when the level of competition rises, politics comes in and everything changes. I wonder if there are practicing judges here, what will they say to this?
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2018
He will not compare it). Because that would refute his claim. A typical practice of ignoring "inconvenient" facts. Nothing new.
That was not my point. My point was that judges were kind toward EVERYONE that day. Everyone (including Sasha and Anna) benefited from lenient judging.
Plushenko cannot use Anna as an example of unfair judging, while ignoring how Sasha's mistakes were overlooked that day as well. Plushenko and Sasha were not victims of bad judging there.
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2018
100% of respondees of the survey on www.survery.org are using internet?
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2020
I do remember, and I think it is OK in some cases. With very different BV. I would also like to see differently graded bullets in GOE which IMHO should reflect difficulty more than it happens now, taking into consideration not only how many of them were well executed but also how unique and how difficult they are. Something new should be rewarded. I prefer the scoring system in gymnastics. It is not totally objective, but much more so.And remember that since the times of mr. Axel Paulsen there is a principle that "A fall is not an obstacle to victory".
As for Anna and Sasha, I see a significant difference in the performance and interpretation, but in other skills they both have their strong and less strong sides. Both have improvements BTW. Anna is a clear winner, no doubt, maybe not with such a gap, but anyway. I don't think there was any injustice in the free, but I did see some in the short. Both girls are my favourites, I appreciate different qualities in them, and can be happy for both. I don't understand supporting coaches as a personal choice, but everyone is entitled to their choices.
I meant several elements in a programme, not one jump compared. One jump with a fall, one with a step out, one with a two-footed landing. The rest of the jumps with very high GOE. And another programme, one jump with an edge call, one UR but not downgraded, all the others have GOE in the region of +0,5. The general impression of the first one which could win is compromised for me.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
The Code of Points judging system pretty much guarantees that we rarely if ever see anything new and unique in a skating program -- a skater would never waste a jumping pass on a double Walley or a one-foot Axel.
The other point, though -- taking difficulty into account in GOEs -- this is not so clear, to me. Difficulty is already rewarded in base value. Besides that, it is rewarded a second time with the proviso that GOE is not a fixed number of points but rather a percentage of base value. That's already double-dipping into the points pool.
If on top ot that we also agreed to give out more +4s and +5s for a hard element done well, but only a +2 for an easier element done equally well, now we are triple-dipping.
Of course a skater should get more points for a hard element. But should they get points on top of points on top of points?
You don't say. Even 5 falls at Rostelecom Cup 2020 didn't stop Trusova from beating Nugumanova who had zero falls and much better artistry. And I don't remember Plushenko complaining about that.
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2019
Ok, so I as I said in my post yesterday, during Europeans 2020 we had the seats directly behind the technical panel (you can even see me in the official ISU stream grinning stupidly at my boyfriend while we are on camera for the introduction of the TP). To clarify, we sat right behind Shin Amano, who was the Technical Specialist for the ladies' event, and had a direct and clear view of his screen. What you see there in the beginning of each skate is an empty table. As the program progresses the elements are put into this table one by one. If an element is marked for review, it gets highlighted in bright red right after input. Once the skater is done, the technical panel starts to go through the elements marked for review. For each element they get a close-up view of the skater on their screens (not the same as shown in the TV coverage). Sometimes they just watched this video once and then called or didn't call the element (uncalled elements briefly turned green, then grey). For unclear cases they had the possibility to play the video frame-by-frame and even backwards (it actually did not look so different from some of @NadezhdaNadya 's infamous edge videos). I cannot recall 100% if they had the possibility to access videos from different angles, but I think not. However, I was surprised how clearly you could make out the edges and also the landing points on the videos for the TP. Even my boyfriend, who does not know the first thing about figure skating, was able to identify if a jump was not fully rotated from these vids. That's also why in 99% of the cases the TP were super fast with their reviews. They all checked the vid, sometimes in slow-mo, and then Amano made his assessment, looked to the ladies at his side (the technical controller and the assistant technical specialist) for confirmation, they nodded, and that was it.
Overall, I must say that at least from this event, I got a very positive impression of all the members of the TP (this goes also for the TPs of the ice dancing and the pairs' event). They all acted in a competent and impartial manner (e.g. it was not like they reviewed the elements of skaters in the first group with more scrutiny than for skaters in the final flight). Also, when the skating was over and they picked up their stuff and turned to leave, they always turned around and nodded goodbye to the audience.
PS: @NadezhdaNadya if you see this: you should definitely apply to the ISU as a Data Replay Operator!
Interesting. I see your point. The danger of the +5/-5 GOE system does indeed mean points on top of points, and the whole system is not without flaws.
But I firmly support this system. It effectively promotes clean skates. And it effectively eliminated skaters to put in quads in their programs, quads they knew they would never land. But they got the points anyway. (remember how Men's skating was before?) The reality today is that if you fall on a quad you lose dearly. And it's not worth it if your quad is not stable.
Still there is some fine tuning to do with this system. But I don't really have any ideas how...
- Status
Similar threads
