Relative difficulty of types of jumps: triples versus quads

[Mathman]

The Internet is our creation. It is exactly the way we are making it to be.

T]he Internet is still an informative greyzone in which truth and lies are [treated equally].

That is the scary part. If the infant/fetal Internet ever achieves self-consciousness, it will be insane, unable to distinguish truth from lies or even to understand that there is a distinction.

Even setting aside science-fictiony projections and Chicken-Little handwringing about Armageddon, as AI assumes an ever larger role it is a problem if the robots that we increasingly rely on have no means of deciding whether a statement is true or false.

 

[Skating91]

This discussion is quite timely after watching the Harbin women's short program. This is from Kaori's short program today. In my mind the officials had a bad day out. I imagine there will be some explaining to do tonight (or maybe not ). Kim who skated her heart out, perfect jumps no errors, should be leading if event was adjudicated without bias.

As I have tried to explain, cheated triples are the big issue in this sport, not the cheated quads.

Just for the record the other two judges gave this combo +3!!

It's just about fairness. This is easy stuff to identify in real time, so how do experienced officials completely miss this stuff?

 

[Baron Vladimir]

This is quite true. The ISU allows anything short of 180 degrees of pre-rotation on the take-off (at least on toe-loops and Salchows) without penalty and anything short of 90 degrees of under-rotation on the landing without penalty = 2.25 revolutions in the air for a valid triple jump. All coaches and skaters understand this and, as far as I can tell, have no beef with it. The rules are fair provided that everyone understands what the rules are and that everyone is held to the same standard (or lack of it).

I always got the feeling that the ISU is not too terribly interested in obtaining accurate measurements of rotation because if the public knew that a triple jump is not really three revolutions, that would make for bad publicity.

Still, its worth mentioning the example happened at 2019 Worlds - Satoko Myahara's triple loop was judged with 6.3 points overall, while Kaori Sakamoto's triple loop got 7.7 points, mainly as a result of that same jump being more rotated in the air in the later case (both jumps in the protocol are called the same - 3Lo, but difference in points still exists).

 

[Mathman]

... how do experienced officials completely miss this stuff?

How indeed. They do not have an obsessive agenda againstJapanese, American and Western European skaters.

 

[Mathman]

Still, its worth mentioning the example happened at 2019 Worlds - Satoko Myahara's triple loop was judged with 6.3 points overall, while Kaori Sakamoto's triple loop got 7.7 points, mainly as a result of that same jump being more rotated in the air in the later case (both jumps in the protocol are called the same - 3Lo, but difference in points still exists).

And that's how it should be. Sakamoto's jump was executed with better quality. It got +5 across the board in GOE, Miyahara's got 2s and 3s with a couple of 0s. They both got full base value for doing a triple loop, no deductions in base value for skimping on the rotations. Everything perfectly fair and aboveboard.

And what a competition that was! In the LP Rika Kihira did a 3A+3T (and attempted an additional solo 3A, fell). Elizabet Tursynbaeva did a 4S. But they couldn't catch Alina Zagitova with her 3Lz+3T, 3Lz+3Lo, and 3F+2T+2Lo combos. Interesting that Kihira, even with a fall and -5 GOE on the solo triple Axel, still got 4.34 for the attempt and beat Zagoitova in TES.

 

[Skating91]

Hoe indeed. They do not have the same agenda as you when it comes tp Japanese, American and Western European skaters.

Strawman argument. Please stick to the discussion and the facts. Are you fine with judges missing wrong edges, q's and underrotations? Does someone like Kim not deserve to play on a level playing field with the same rules that are applied to her are applied to others?

 

[Mathematician]

Hoe indeed. They do not have the same agenda as you when it comes tp Japanese, American and Western European skaters.

I've also been surprised by Skating91's severe agenda when it comes to Sakamoto specifically and his differential treatment of Western versus Eastern skaters that you rightly discerned and mention :

Skating91 Said:

I just hope it is resolved by worlds so Kaori can three-peat with no asterisk and take her place as the modern era GOAT.

Three world titles in a row means complete dominance of her era. No-one else has achieved three in a row in decades... #GOATamoto.

I really don't see how Sakamoto is more accomplished than Yuna or Zagitova but he seemed really convinced. He even said "with no asterisk" as if the highest scoring ladies aren't barred from competition. Thats very bias and agenda driven for Sakamoto and against eastern skaters like you imply. Why does he just ignore the eastern skaters like that? Not just one certain country but the Korean greatest too. So its not about nationality but general agenda with the Westerners like you mention. He gives Westerners a lot of leniency and preferential treatment while ignoring Easterners. It seems like by suggesting Kaori is the "GOAT" hes trying to mitigate the current skill of eastern skaters like Kamila, Adeliia, or Akateva but also the legacy of eastern skaters like Yuna in one swipe; I personally dont think Sakamoto can claim an equal run to Yuna (Eastern skater) who was competing against the true best of her era while Sakamoto is not (Eastern skaters). But it seems he wants to give preferential treatment to the current western dominated competition while ignoring the eastern old greats current savants, from all Eastern countries (not just one, so the agenda is about Western skaters in general like you say). Weird agenda. Very bias like you mention. You bring up a good point.

 

[AxelLover]

if the public knew that a triple jump is not really three revolutions, that would make for bad publicity.

Exactly! When I discovered this myself many years ago (watching slow-mo shots of quads and seeing there are just about 3.25 revs in the air for most skaters) I even got angry. It just felt sooo lame.

 

[Mathman]

Exactly! When I discovered this myself many years ago (watching slow-mo shots of quads and seeing there are just about 3.25 revs in the air for most skaters) I even got angry. It just felt sooo lame.

I can't tell for sure, but is this Salchow pre-rotated by about 150 degrees?

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

www.youtube.com

 

[AxelLover]

This discussion is quite timely after watching the Harbin women's short program. This is from Kaori's short program today. In my mind the officials had a bad day out. I imagine there will be some explaining to do tonight (or maybe not ). Kim who skated her heart out, perfect jumps no errors, should be leading if event was adjudicated without bias.

As I have tried to explain, cheated triples are the big issue in this sport, not the cheated quads.

Just for the record the other two judges gave this combo +3!!

It's just about fairness. This is easy stuff to identify in real time, so how do experienced officials completely miss this stuff?

I'm also mad at the judges every time they ignore Kaori's (or anyone elses) wrong 3Lz edge. I haven't seen the video but from these pics it looks to me that the 3Lz landing is acceptable in terms of rotation, it's not on the quarter as you suggest, imo. The technique that you call "illegal full blade assistance" is used by majority of skaters these days and it never gets punished because it was actually never explicitly stated to be wrong. There's no point in criticizing the tech panel for not punishing Kaori specificaly for this. The 3F, however, does seem to be on the quarter, I agree. The +3T seems severly underrotated. Unless the pics you posted are somehow manipulative I agree overall that the tech panel was either biased or blind. But again, I haven't seen the video.

EDIT: I just watched the video and I'm sure the 3F+3T should have been marked as 3Fq+3T<. Not good.

 

[AxelLover]

I can't tell for sure, but is this Salchow pre-rotated by about 150 degrees?

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

www.youtube.com

Hard to say, the video quality and framerate are bad. It does seem like more than 150 to me though.

 

[Mathematician]

there are just about 3.25 revs in the air for most skaters

Deleted my original response:

Axel and I spoke on Discord, he is speaking about judging take-off from the toe-pick, not the actual take-off edge. He counts air-born rotations from that point for which .75 allowance is justified.

He made it clear he is not defending Glenn's loop or Kaori's combo. Those indeed should be penalized. .75 missing rotation is not justified if judging from the take-off edge itself.

 

[4everchan]

I always find it interesting (not) when fans think they know better than judges, who are former skaters and have extensive training on how to judge figure skating. YMMV

I don't know why this thread is picking on skaters, whoever they may be instead of discussing the topic at stake. Some threads have been cleaned up for much less off-topic banter.

 

[AxelLover]

I always find it interesting (not) when fans think they know better than judges, who are former skaters and have extensive training on how to judge figure skating. YMMV

The tech panel are just people though and if they don't see a reason to review a jump then they don't review it (URs are not always easy to spot real time). Therefore they don't see the slow-mo that we do and that's why skaters get away with URs.

 

[gkelly]

All single jumps will be somewhat less than 360 degrees rotation in the air, except Lutz with counterrotated entry and of course axel--replace 360 with 540 in that case. It's part of the mechanics of the jump. How much less depends largely on the type of jump.

The entry edge curves, and the curve needs to deepen while the blade is still in contact with the ice to generate the rotation. That is normal technique, not cheating. It will happen somewhat more with multirevolution jumps because they need to generate more rotation.

At a certain point there could be excessive prerotation that should be penalized. To date the ISU has not defined that point except for "toe axels." It's considered a quality issue that can be reflected in GOE.

"Illegal" is not an appropriate term to use for quality issues, even those that are severely punished in base value as well as GOe like downgrades.
The rulebook uses the term "illegal" to refer to elements that are completely forbidden in competition and receive deductions if present. Like backflips until recently.

Even when skaters include elements in short programs that are not allowed in that disciplines short program at that level and therfore receive no base value, the official term is "not according to requirements."

Incidentally, the ballet jump called 540 (which skaters sometimes emulate in step sequences or choreo sequences) is not in fact 540 degrees in the air measured from the takeoff to the landing foot -- even the body rotation in the air is less than 540. Looks like it's usually a little more than 360 in the air, plus there is additional rotation of the body before and after.

Even in skateboarding, where the board has a front and back that can be used as reference points, the board does not make a full 540 degrees of rotation in the air:

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

www.youtube.com

And similarly with higher orders of rotation:

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

www.youtube.com

I know nothing about the technique, but I imagine the principle is similar: the very beginning and often the very end of the rotation has to occur while the board is in the process of leaving/returning to the ground.

 

[eppen]

Part of the story and also info on data collection you can check here: https://fascinatioglaciei.com/

The idea of the post was to look at jump type selection in general and then age and jump type selection. Quality was a little bit too difficult to put into it comprehensively for all 106, so I left it out.

I have been collecting data on quads and also women's 3A for a little while now and maybe some day will resolve the question of how to get the data out there. Even though such databases as Rink Results and Skating Scores are very useful, they contain mainly results from major national and international competitions. I recently looked at the Russian domestic scene (which is where women do quads) and as much as over 50% of the jumps were from smaller domestic competitions. And you gotta work pretty hard to get those results. Since I began with men and videos are more often than not hard/plain impossible to find, that kind of analysis I don't find too interesting since it would usually cover only the elite skaters.

The aim is to get the big picture, not just the cherries on top of the cake. So I have also collected data on rumours of training or statements by the skaters themselves saying they're working on quads/3As. I have a list of jumps and list of skaters plus all kinds of additional data I have been able to find and remembered to record. The whole quadster list, women and men, is now 771 skaters strong from Alexander Fadeev to Nikita Sheiko who attempted a quad for the first time yesterday (as far as I know). The jump list has 19 618 quads from March 1983 until today.

There are 186 names on my women's list - this includes also thos who have just trained (thanks a lot for Frolova btw! She got to be nr 186). That's 24% of everyone. This list could be a lot longer ofc but not everyone has come out of their quad closet. Interestingly enough, there are more women in the "only trained" list than men - 80 vs. 40 (especially if you think that there are 544 men who have gotten to competition stage with their quads). This is ofc easy to explain since there has been a lot of talk about and interest towards women's quads in recent times, so there is far more data which tends to be also easier to find.

106 of the 186 women have so far gotten into attempting a quad in competition at least once. That is 57% of all I have and in reality the percentage should probably be smaller. The number of jumps is 1386 since January 1990 when Surya Bonaly tried the first ones to the three that Alina Orekhovskaya and Elvina Tuguzbaeva attempted today at one of the very many Russian junior championships (results here: https://tablo.ffk52.ru/2425/pfo_ufo022025/)

46 of those 106 have gotten at least one fully rotated quad in competition. That is about 25% of all and 43% of the ones who have tried in competition. 650 jumps, 47% of all.

42 women have been gotten at least one fully rotated quad with GOE 0 or above. 444 jumps, 32% of all. 11 of them have only gotten 1 good quad, 16 have 2-10 good jumps, 10 have 10-20 good ones. The top 5: Zhilina 22, Akatyeva 23, Kostyleva 36, Bazylyuk 41, and Trusova 54.

Those 42 women are the cherries and they are less than quarter of all known and less than half of those who have attempted a quad in competition. Just looking at their results does not IMO give a very good idea what is really going on.

Thinking of for example 4Lo. You mentioned Adeliya who is the only to get it landed with quality. But if you add to that tidbit that 6 women have tried and only one has succeeded, you have a clearer perspective of her achievement. I can also add that there are 22 attempts by those 6 women and 5 of them have been fully rotated (all by Petrosyan) and 3 of these have a positive GOE. If you only look at those 3 perfect jumps or the 5 fully rotated ones or even only the 12 attempts by Petrosyan, you focus on detail, but miss what else is going on. Oh, and at least 20 women have trained or are training 4Los - 14 of them are active in competitions.


I liked the idea that they might change jump types with age, but so far the data is not very conclusive since so many of them are still so very young. Let's get back to that in about 5 years time when we have a better idea what happened to say Bazylyuk (who came out guns blazing with 4T and 4S and has done both steadily ever since) and Kostyleva (who did just about only 4S until this season when 4T started to work for her also). I am also curious to see whether they will become part of the very select group of women who actually manage to jump good quads when they grow up...

E

And for you, the 22 4Los as an example of what my data looks like - a humbe spreadsheet it is...

Year

Date

Event

I/N?

Sr/Jr

Cat

Family Name

First Name

M/W

Country

Segment

SP+FS

Jump

BV

GOE

SoP

2020

9.12.-12.12.

RUS Чемпионат города Москвы Jr

N

Jr

3

Samodelkina

Sofia

W

RUS

FS

0+2

4Lo<<

4,90

-2,45

2,45

2021

2.10.-3.10.

RUS Турнир на призы сети магазинов Фигурист Nov

N

Nov

3

Prineva

Alena

W

RUS

FS

0+1

4Lo<<

4,90

-2,29

2,61

2021

17.11.-21.11.

RUS Cup Кубка России 5 Этап

N

Sr

2

Petrosyan

Adeliya

W

RUS

FS

0+2

4Loq+2T

11,80

-1,05

10,75

2021

17.11.-21.11.

RUS Cup Кубка России 5 Этап

N

Sr

2

Petrosyan

Adeliya

W

RUS

FS

4Loq

10,50

-5,25

5,25

2021

17.11.-21.11.

RUS Cup Кубка России 5 Этап

N

Sr

2

Petrosyan

Adeliya

W

RUS

FS

0+2

4Loq+2T

11,80

-1,05

10,75

2021

17.11.-21.11.

RUS Cup Кубка России 5 Этап

N

Sr

2

Petrosyan

Adeliya

W

RUS

FS

4Loq

10,50

-5,25

5,25

2021

23.12.-26.12.

RUS Nats

N

Sr

1

Petrosyan

Adeliya

W

RUS

FS

0+2

4Lo+2T

11,80

1,95

13,75

2021

23.12.-26.12.

RUS Nats

N

Sr

1

Petrosyan

Adeliya

W

RUS

FS

4Lo

10,50

2,85

13,35

2022

18.1.-22.1.

RUS Nats Jr

N

Jr

1

Petrosyan

Adeliya

W

RUS

FS

0+2

4Lo

10,50

-2,85

7,65

2022

18.1.-22.1.

RUS Nats Jr

N

Jr

1

Petrosyan

Adeliya

W

RUS

FS

4Lo<<+REP

3,43

-2,45

0,98

2022

23.2.-27.2.

RUS Cup Кубка России Финал Jr

N

Jr

2

Petrosyan

Adeliya

W

RUS

FS

0+2

4Lo+2T

11,80

0,21

12,01

2022

23.2.-27.2.

RUS Cup Кубка России Финал Jr

N

Jr

2

Petrosyan

Adeliya

W

RUS

FS

4Lo<

8,40

-4,20

4,20

2022

1.3.-5.3.

RUS Nats Nov

N

Nov

1

Morozova

Viktoria

W

RUS

E

4Lo<*

0,00

0,00

0,00

2022

5.9.-8.9.

RUS Открытое первенство Москвы Jr

N

Jr

3

Rubtsova

Lyubov

W

RUS

FS

0+1

4Lo<<

4,90

-2,45

2,45

2022

7.10.-9.10.

RUS Областные соревнования Изумрудный лёд Jr

N

Jr

3

Rubtsova

Lyubov

W

RUS

FS

0+1

4Lo<<

4,90

-2,45

2,45

2022

28.10.-30.10.

RUS Cup Гран При России Бархатный сезон 2 Этап

N

Sr

2

Petrosyan

Adeliya

W

RUS

FS

4Lo

10,50

-5,25

5,25

2022

21.12.-25.12.

RUS Nats

N

Sr

1

Petrosyan

Adeliya

W

RUS

FS

0+3

4Lo<<

4,90

-2,45

2,45

2023

24.8.-28.8.

BLR Belarus Open Cup 1

N

Sr

2

Safonova

Viktoriia

W

BLR

FS

0+1

4Lo<<

4,90

-2,45

2,45

2023

24.11.-26.11.

BLR Открытого Кубка РБ 3 Этап

N

Sr

2

Safonova

Viktoriia

W

BLR

FS

0+1

4Lo<

8,40

-4,20

4,20

2023

6.12.-10.12.

Friendship Cup

I

Sr

M

Safonova

Viktoriia

W

BLR

FS

0+1

4Lo<<

4,90

-2,45

2,45

2024

5.9.-8.9.

BLR Открытого Кубка РБ 1 Этап

N

Sr

2

Safonova

Viktoria

W

BLR

FS

0+1

4Lo<<

4,90

-2,45

2,45

2024

10.10.-13.10.

BLR Belarus Open Cup

N

Sr

3

Safonova

Viktoria

W

BLR

FS

0+1

4Lo<

8,40

-4,20

4,20

the whole post

 

[Mathman]

quarters (judging by first contact, not full blade like most of the people in this thread decided is fair...

I think that'a misconstruing of what "most people on the thread decided is fair."

In the first place, the ISU is not bound by the opinions of most people on this thread. But setting that aside, the "landing" has to be defined by the first time the skater touches the ice. If she lands forward on the blade and then and then swivels around really fast before the "gfull blade" is pressing on the icedown on the ice, the point of landing is the first moment of contact. (As could easily be determined by pressure sensors ) Mirai Nagasu is an example of a skater who actively "reached down" with her landing leg, resulting in extra under-rotation calls. On the other hand, no skater actually lands on the toepick rather than the runner, isn't that right?.

Does she deserve a q? What is the angle of the blade at first touch down? This is well defined even if the "full blade" is not yet on the ice. and supporting her full weight.

(All this is propbab;y wrong, though. To me, an Ina Baur always looks like the skater is gliding on edges turned perpendicular to the direction of motion (q), but that can't possibly be true! Just the magic of figure skating. )

 

[Mathman]

All single jumps will be somewhat less than 360 degrees rotation in the air, except Lutz with counterrotated entry and of course axel--replace 360 with 540 in that case. It's part of the mechanics of the jump. How much less depends largely on the type of jump.

That has to be the bottom line. It is simply the art and the mechanics of the discipline.

 

[gkelly]

At a certain point there could be excessive prerotation that should be penalized. To date the ISU has not defined that point except for "toe axels."

Actually, I take that back. The ISU has said "A clear forward (backward for Axel type jump) take-off will be considered as a downgraded jump. The toe loop is the most commonly cheated on take-off jump."

For a salchow or loop jump, a clear forward takeoff would mean the blade turning around on the ice (three turn or skid) until it is traveling forward on the FO or FI edge, respectively. For an axel, it would mean the blade turning or skidding on the ice until it is on the BI edge.

If it's really blatant, the tech panel might call a double/triple/quad salchow with that kind of turn on the ice as a single/double/triple axel, or call a single/double/triple axel with that kind of turn as a salchow.

I saw that happen once in an adult competition. It's more likely to happen at lower levels, where the doubles are not quite mastered. I've made that kind of error myself on axel and double sal attempts, but those jumps were never good enough for me to attempt in competition.

There have been a 3As with such blatant skids on their takeoffs that a strict tech panel might ding them for excessive prerotation by calling a downgrade
But the examples I'm thinking of were before IJS took any official notice of prerotations, let alone as much as some fans would like to see.

An even stricter tech panel might even call a 3S instead. But that's less likely because a skater going into a 3A that way would be covering a lot of ice on the FO edge and would still only be on the BI for no more than a blade length while leaving the ice.

In the first place, the ISU is not bound by the opinions of most people on this thread. But setting that aside, the "landing" has to be defined by the first time the skater touches the ice. If she lands forward on the blade and then and then swivels around really fast before the "gfull blade" is pressing on the icedown on the ice, the point of landing is the first moment of contact.

I think the reference to "full blade" technique is referring to the picking foot on flips and lutzes rather than to the landing foot. (Well, it's the same foot on those jumps, but before rather than after the in-air portion of the jump.) I.e., the angle of the blade is closer to parallel than perpendicular to the ice, so it looks as though the skater has weight on the full blade not just the toepick when they pick to takeoff.

(As could easily be determined by pressure sensors ) Mirai Nagasu is an example of a skater who actively "reached down" with her landing leg, resulting in extra under-rotation calls. On the other hand, no skater actually lands on the toepick rather than the runner, isn't that right?.

A good jump landing will touch the toepick to the ice before the middle of the blade, but not linger or continue rotating there.

Try jumping on the floor. It's much easier and safer to land on the back of your toes, rolling immediately onto the ball and then full sole, rather than landing on the full sole of the foot right away.

(And make sure you bend you knees on the landing when you give it a try!)

I remember once witnessing a coach correcting a skater who was landing her just-learned axel on the middle of the blade rather than rolling down from the toepick.

It's much clunkier to land on the middle of the blade and more likely to produce injury.

 

[Mathman]

A good jump landing will touch the toepick to the ice before the middle of the blade, but not linger or continue rotating there.

That's what I thought! But I wasn't sure of my terminology so I Googled "In landing a figure skating jump, what part of the blade hits the ice first?"

The Google "AI overview" said "When landing a figure skating jump, the middle part of the blade, known as the "runner," hits the ice first; this is the flat surface of the blade that runs along the ice, allowing the skater to glide smoothly upon landing."

So I figured I better go with AI, otherwise I will look like an ill-informed ninny.

Gosh, if you can't trust Google AI, who can you trust?

Still, if you "linger" for a hundredth of a second, that's about 31 degrees of extra rotation. No wonder this is so hard.to judge.

Edit: AND ANOTHER THING: Whenever I type "toepick" auto-correct changes it to "topic."