Dumb question what is the difference between a wally and a toe loop or are they the same. Obviously the wally must be seen as the same as something or there would be another triple option and someone would have used it to get around the Zayak rule and get more jumps in.
It's important to distinguish between "walley" and "toe walley" for the same reason that there's a big difference between "loop" and "toe loop."
Loop: edge jump from back outside takeoff
Toe loop: back outside takeoff with toe assist
Walley: edge jump from back inside takeoff (see Sam-Skwantch's link) -- only ever done as single jumps, not in scale of values so counts as a transition in IJS
Toe walley: back inside takeoff, with toe assist
LiamForeman has addressed what the difference is between toe loop and TOE walley. It's a subtle difference since the inside edge was usually shallow when it was even present in toe walleys, so the ISU decided in 1982 that toe loop and toe walley would count as the same jump for purposes of counting repeated triples.
Another dumb question. Is it fair to say with IJS/COP we won't probably see creative stuff like a horizontal axel (Look up I think his name is Igor Bobrin) because it doesn't render many points.
If it were a true axel variation with forward outside takeoff, one-foot back outside landing, and 1.5 revolutions in the air, it would count as a single axel, earn base value for a single axel plus positive GOE assuming it was executed well, and fill a jump box. So yes, it would not be worth doing for a skater who could otherwise fill that slot with a double axel or triple jump. Might be for a guy without a quad who could fit all his triples into 7 jump passes and have an extra one left to play around with.
If it takes off from a forward inside edge ("inside axel") and/or lands forward not backward, especially on two feet, all the case for the Bobrin move you're referring to, then it will be counted as a transition move. No base value points, but also doesn't block a jump slot so the skater can also do the full complement of jump content and this would be extra and be considered in the Transitions and Choreography components.
If they did it in the choreographic sequence, it would also contribute to the GOE for that element.
Would a delayed axel or double jump get extra points or just goe's?
Just GOEs. Therefore only worth doing if the skater has already filled all the slots with high-value jumps that they can.
As mentioned in an earlier post, if the skater has already filled all their jump slots (8 for men, 7 for women) and does an extra jump at the end of the program, it gets no points but also no penalty. So something interesting done well could be valuable for its contribution to the program components.
But what would the penalty be? Would they take away points? I'd take a zero point scratch spin to end a program after all the boxes have checked. I'd call it choreography. And Mathman, I do see your point, that it kind of is thumbing your nose at the system. But if the rules say the first three spins are the ones graded, what's the big deal ending with a great spin as choreo?
Sorry, typo, I meant there would be NO penalty.
I don't know that judges would consider an extra element to be the skater "thumbing his/her nose" at them or the system. Of course different judges might have different feelings about skaters playing with the rules, but I suspect that most would appreciate a skater who does something extra that's well done, creative, or otherwise interesting, as long as it doesn't interfere with the standard elements. What they might get annoyed at would be poor planning that causes the skater to lose credit for a valuable otherwise legal element. And they will generally be annoyed by poor execution in any case.
If it's called as an element they'll give a GOE according to its quality. And if it's the 4th spin or 9th/8th jump pass in a program the element will be asterisked and receive no points including GOE points anyway.
So the only place where judges' opinions would come in would be how it would affect their program components. And there it would pretty much rely on how effective the extra move is as performed at that point in the program.
Tech panels' personal opinions wouldn't come into it one way or another. They'll just call what they see and asterisk out the 9th/8th jump element or 4th spin, regardless of whether they're privately insulted or delighted that the skater chose to throw it in.
What they might all find frustrating is if a skater puts an "extra" low-value move, including one that could be considered a mistake, earlier in the program so that it fills an element slot with little or no actual value and then the skater's final high-value spin or jump would end up getting no credit. But the penalty for that is the loss of credit for the later element(s) -- I can't imagine judges taking out their frustration with additional PCS penalty if the extra element was well done and choreographically effective. Judges who miss the freedom of pre-IJS free programs might even overcompensate with higher PCS.
A blast from the past! The Chicklets. 
Do you know what's she's been up to lately?
