- Joined
- Jul 11, 2003
Someone mentioned that in their argument for plus GoEs which I disagree with it definitely will look very stylized for the PCS scores, though.
Joe
Problems with CoP and how to fix them
- Thread starter GoldMedalist
- Start date
Joe
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2005
I think they should be consider a three jumbp combination not a sequence. I also believe their should be a seperate standard for Three jump combinatiotion point values.The order of the jumps should greatly affect the difficulty so there should be an agreement in the values
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2003
For all of the rhetoric, under 6.0 the technical score was supposed to be accumulated as well, a combination of quality, quantity, and technical difficulty(minus specific deductions in the SP), but the "grid" was in the judges' heads. The differences between the two systems are human nature and aptitude, which is the ability to make those calculations over the course of the program and the tendencies to give credit according to one's value system -- i.e., jumps vs. spins -- and to remember big bang elements and the end of the program more than the beginning.
PCS in CoP are structured to be holistic, as the entire program is supposed to be taken into consideration in determining the score: how much of the choreography is related to the music (not just the final blinding scratch spin), how much of the program was done using one-footed vs. two-footed skating, was the posture maintained throughout the program, etc.
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2005
I think the PCS should be reduced to increments of 1 EX) 10,9,8,7,6,5,4,3,2,1.
The differentent parts of the PCS should be thought of and graded in levels like the spins, footwork, and spirals. (Forrough incomplete example) if a skater shows during the program that he or she as excellent controll of all edges. Show exellent controll of edges in spins and all jumps double and triples. If the skater generats speed well with little pumping. I would say that skater has a level seven or eight skating skill.
I think if the reqiurements for PCS were written in the same way as spins and pair lifts we would see more consistant scoring.
I would say buttle accoplishes choereoghraphy of level 8 most of the time.
Joubert usually have skating skills reflecting a level 8
The differentent parts of the PCS should be thought of and graded in levels like the spins, footwork, and spirals. (Forrough incomplete example) if a skater shows during the program that he or she as excellent controll of all edges. Show exellent controll of edges in spins and all jumps double and triples. If the skater generats speed well with little pumping. I would say that skater has a level seven or eight skating skill.
I think if the reqiurements for PCS were written in the same way as spins and pair lifts we would see more consistant scoring.
I would say buttle accoplishes choereoghraphy of level 8 most of the time.
Joubert usually have skating skills reflecting a level 8
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2003
More skaters have flutzes than lips, and I would argue that a number of the successful lutzes should have been downgraded.
I can't find much of a pattern, though. My two guesses going in were:
1. Triple loops were most successful, because the skaters who can't do them or rely upon them leave the jump out of their program.
In actuality, the skaters who did leave them out were: Kim, Nakano, Meier, Marchei, Hughes, Sebestyen, Martinova, Katz, and Leung. I'm not sure if Gimazetdinova left it out, or if she doubled what was going to be a 3Lo attempt. Still, 9 of 24, over one-third did not attempt a 3Lo.
Of the women in the final, the only skaters not to attempt 3Lz and 3F were Marchei, Sokolova, and Gimazetdinova, and possible Katz, whom I'm not sure had one, or doubled the attempt.
The skaters attempting both but not landing at least one were Glebova, who doubled the flip and had a downgraded 3Lz, and Liu, whos 3Lz and 3F were downgraded.
The only skaters not to land at least one of each are:
Poykio and Meier, who planned 3Fs and doubled them, but had 2-Lz's each
Martinova, who planned a 3F and singled it, but had 2-Lz's
Kostner, who planned the 3Lz and doubled it, but had 2-3F's, failing on both
Liu, whose 3F was downgraded.
All but two in the final landed at least one of the hardest jumps.
2. Somehow, the lutz would be more successful as one of the earliest jumps, mostly because it is the most popular combination, while the flip would be solo and wonkier, coming deeper in the program. This turned out not to be true at all
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
There is a new ISU "clarification" of the 2007 rules changes out.
http://isu.sportcentric.net/db//files/serve.php?id=541
Here is what it says (in part) about sequences.
This tightening of the rules is expected to have especial impact on side-by-side pairs jumps.
http://isu.sportcentric.net/db//files/serve.php?id=541
Here is what it says (in part) about sequences.
So in other words, if you do triple Axel, cross-roll, triple flip, you get 6.0 points, same as a triple Lutz (7.5 x .8 = 6.0 for the Axel, 0 for the flip.)
This tightening of the rules is expected to have especial impact on side-by-side pairs jumps.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
Some other clarifications.
The Bottom of the Bottom rule: “Definition of Sit Spin states that buttocks must not be higher than knee of the skating leg. This should be understood as ‘bottom of the buttocks’ and ‘top of the knee’.”
The Drunken Sailor Spin rule: “Any Spin that has no basic position with at least 2 revolutions will receive no Level and no value.”
The Do the Math rule: “The negative GOE values of Double Axel (2A) are changed from –0.7, -1.4. –2.1 to –0.8, -1.6, -2.5 correspondingly, so that the value of a Double Axel with a negative GOE does not exceed the value of the Triple Toeloop with the same negative GOE.”
The Bottom of the Bottom rule: “Definition of Sit Spin states that buttocks must not be higher than knee of the skating leg. This should be understood as ‘bottom of the buttocks’ and ‘top of the knee’.”
The Drunken Sailor Spin rule: “Any Spin that has no basic position with at least 2 revolutions will receive no Level and no value.”
The Do the Math rule: “The negative GOE values of Double Axel (2A) are changed from –0.7, -1.4. –2.1 to –0.8, -1.6, -2.5 correspondingly, so that the value of a Double Axel with a negative GOE does not exceed the value of the Triple Toeloop with the same negative GOE.”
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2007
Some other clarifications.
The Bottom of the Bottom rule: “Definition of Sit Spin states that buttocks must not be higher than knee of the skating leg. This should be understood as ‘bottom of the buttocks’ and ‘top of the knee’.”
The Drunken Sailor Spin rule: “Any Spin that has no basic position with at least 2 revolutions will receive no Level and no value.”
The Do the Math rule: “The negative GOE values of Double Axel (2A) are changed from –0.7, -1.4. –2.1 to –0.8, -1.6, -2.5 correspondingly, so that the value of a Double Axel with a negative GOE does not exceed the value of the Triple Toeloop with the same negative GOE.”
LOL, I love your names.
The last one is funny, though, because if you DO "do the the math", getting a -3 GOE on a Double Axel is still worth .1 more than getting a -3 GOE on a Triple Toe.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
No, no, check it out. The new increments for negative GOEs for the 2A are -.8, -.8 and -.9!The last one is funny, though, because if you DO "do the the math", getting a -3 GOE on a Double Axel is still worth .1 more than getting a -3 GOE on a Triple Toe.
You have to get up pretty early to get the jump on our Speedy!
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2007
Oh, lol, I wasn't paying attention to the last part.
In the end these changes are inferior to the ones I've carefully thought of anyway.
In the end these changes are inferior to the ones I've carefully thought of anyway.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
True. To follow your principle for negative GOEs, if they want to keep 3T = 4.0 and 2A = 3.5, then the increments for 2A should be .875.In the end these changes are inferior to the ones I've carefully thought of anyway.
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2007
How exactly does the USFSA distribute these CoP changes to our coaches? Is it the the coach's responsibility to surf the internet and find the changes? Are they e-mailed? Are they snail mailed? Is it dumb luck or are some skaters just out of luck if their coach is not in the loop? Do certain coaches get this information before other coaches? Meaning, time distribution has an effect on how long a skater can work on a level change if specific coaches have privy to this information prior to other coaches. Are not technical specialists coaches also? What if the coach cannot read English, but only speak it? What if the coach does not know exactly how to interpret the change? Means of distribution would seem to give certain skaters an edge over others......
I've seen level 1 sprials that are much more difficult to perform and more attractive than say a level 4 where the free leg is just held out to the side barely above the hip... like there is a fire hydrant on the ice, and the unattractive spiral scores higher! It is of no value to the skater to do a difficult level 1 spiral, such as a forward spiral with the free leg at the side of the head with change of edge, and get a +GOE when the skater can do the "fire hydrant" spiral with a completely free leg held out to the side and get a level 4! Where is the beauty in the CoP? Who really has to skate well? Where is the grace and the elegance?
Who needs skaters - just give us (2) triple - triples, one fire hydrant spiral, inside edge spins that look out of control with 8 gumby positions, and one fabulous mathematics professor and voila! This point system is really getting out of control! There are many, many level 1 and level 2 elements in spins and spirals that are truly more difficult than the level 4 when performed well with grace, beauty and elegance that are just being tossed! So, so sad...............
IJS updates (both ISU's and USFS' clarifications) are published promptly on the USFS site -- specifically here: http://www.usfigureskating.org/New_Judging.asp?id=280
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2006
deffinetly!! I love combos with a half loop.... they are very difficult and look great when done well. Tara had a beautiful toe loop-hlaf loop-salchow, that was so fast, you had to watch closely to even catch the half loop! I think that CoP should reward them not only as a combo, but as a more difficult combo than a regular toe-toe, for lutz-loop. Any freeskate 2 kid can tack on a toe loop after a jump. Very few elite skaters can do a jump half loop jump with ease.
yeah, like the beautiful classic layback that Sasha cohen had, and Anglea!!!! That position is NOT easy to get... not if the leg is turned out beautifully and the back with all the way back and arched. But Cop only rewards a layback if you have 4 diffrent positions in there, one of which is a belliman, wheather you have a good belliman or not!
Last edited:
As of this year there are now other ways to achieve level 4 in the layback without including a Biellmann and without changing position more than once or twice.
Also, simpler spins done especially well are rewarded in the grade of execution as opposed to the levels. A beautiful position by itself will probably get you +1 in the GOE. A fast, especially well-centered beautiful position held for twice the minimum revolutions or more would more likely earn +2 or potentially +3.
Similar threads
