Sasha injured

[R.D.]

believe or not CoC was in her plan, heard she may have other reasons needs to be in china.

Assuming the rumour above is true, think she'll go to China anyway, if it was in her schedule? She might be able to do whatever else she wanted to but not go to the competition. (As to whether that makes sense or not leaves something to be desired, but whatever.)

 

[Mathman]

Sure that makes sense. Maybe she is scheduled to open a new Disney World in Peking, or a branch of the East-West Bank! That's something she could do easily enough, bum hip or no. :agree:

 

[kyla2]

Hockeyfan228

Let's think about this. Those "lot's of ways" to get more points aren't going to cut it if you have maxed out on how fast you can spin, how flexible you are etc. as in the case of at least 3 skaters that I can think of (no names mentioned). Yes, they can try different combinations but they will never be as competitive in spinning as Irina and Sasha (maybe Alissa now, but she can't jump). That leaves you with the jumps and upping the combinations- the only way most of these skaters can compete technically. So they will practice them ad infinitum and try to put them in their programs, some successfully and some unsuccessfully. All the while they will be hammering their bodies and to what end? The saddest thing about all this is that a clean program has been relegated to the "not necessary" category. It means that a program filled with tricks (not even done cleanly) can beat a beautifully delivered solid and complete performance. Give me a clean, beautifully choreographed program with 6 or 7 triples, one in combination and I would be happy.
Just saw that USA Today had a big article on all the injuries among skayers. I rest my case. It specifically points to the new CoP requirements and jumps.

 

[hockeyfan228]

Let's think about this. Those "lot's of ways" to get more points aren't going to cut it if you have maxed out on how fast you can spin, how flexible you are etc. as in the case of at least 3 skaters that I can think of (no names mentioned). Yes, they can try different combinations but they will never be as competitive in spinning as Irina and Sasha (maybe Alissa now, but she can't jump). That leaves you with the jumps and upping the combinations- the only way most of these skaters can compete technically. So they will practice them ad infinitum and try to put them in their programs, some successfully and some unsuccessfully. All the while they will be hammering their bodies and to what end? The saddest thing about all this is that a clean program has been relegated to the "not necessary" category. It means that a program filled with tricks (not even done cleanly) can beat a beautifully delivered solid and complete performance. Give me a clean, beautifully choreographed program with 6 or 7 triples, one in combination and I would be happy.
Just saw that USA Today had a big article on all the injuries among skayers. I rest my case. It specifically points to the new CoP requirements and jumps.

Actually, a clean program will garner higher GOE's than a flawed one, if the programs are judged by the book, and that can make up part of the difference in technical difficulty.

Just because a skater can't spin faster or throw in a Biellmann doesn't mean that there aren't lots of points to be had by adding positions. For example, the improvement in Joubert's and Lindemann's spins, and, to an extent Li's, has been night and day under CoP.

A Ladies skater cannot perform a 7-triple program without a 3/3 or a 3A. A six-triple program without a 3A is the maximum CoP 7-jump element program, because an axel is required.

Jeff Buttle won a World silver medal with a 3/3 and a 3/2. Weir didn't have more than one combo in Otonol.

The USA Today article is hardly a scientific or representative sample. The article did not compare injury statistics in the pre- and post-CoP era. It quoted one coach, Priscilla Hill. While she said there can no longer be downtime in a program, I found it interesting the Lambiel recently said in an interview that he worked with Iliak Kulik this summer, and one of the things that Kulik taught him was how to relax through various parts of his program.

Weir himself was injured intermittently for a couple of years in the 6.0 era; his foot injury was sustained when he picked incorrectly during a 3T in the gala exhibition, not because he was training so hard to do combinations and a quad. He himself said that it was the GP schedule that took its toll, because he couldn't train properly, having spent so much time travelling and adjusting for his GP events. Plushenko has been injured for years, but he was pounding his body with quads and quad combos before SLC and while CoP was barely a twinkle in Cinquanta's eye, and Yagudin became permanently injured under 6.0. Plushenko launched 4/3/2 under 6.0, not CoP. Michelle Kwan pounded her body for years performing 3/3's and practicing others, all in the 6.0 system. Timothy Goebel won a bronze medal in SLC based on his quads, all in the 6.0 era. Cohen has had serious back problems since she burst on the National scene, under 6.0. Honda injured his ankle repeatedly under 6.0 -- performing quads -- and was out trying to recover, but couldn't last year. It is more likely that the cumulative pressure -- mostly sustained during the 6.0 era -- is responsible for their injuries than CoP.

On the other hand, Slutskaya and Arakawa have been attempting and performing 3/3's -- more than one per program -- for a number of years, starting in the 6.0 era. Slutskaya has been injured rarely. Arakawa was injured last year because she was breaking in new boots. Kostner started with a high jump ante under 6.0 which led to her back injury. Ando has been healthy, so far.

 

[thisthingcalledlove]

[QOUTE]Originally Posted by thisthingcalledlove
Actually, I blame Sandra Bezic, Marie Reigne Le Gougne, Speedy, and Scott Hamilton for this new system. If the cheaters hadn't cheated, and if the media hadn't whined, maybe the proposal of the Australian federation, which was to improve 6.0 and make judges accountable would be the system currently in place, instead of this one, which I don't think solved the hanky panky problem one bit.
[/QOUTE]
What improved system that Australian Federation proposed? Can you sumarise?

Basically, mzheng, it was going to be some sort of a meeting in the middle between the old 6.0 and the new system. It was going to keep the old way of scoring, with some way to quantify elements. Judges were going to have their names known (none of this hidden judges), and it wouldn't be random (at least that's what I remember from the NISA proposal). It would keep the judges accountable, and make it easier to quantify programs. I think that would've been better.

 

[antmanb]

The assumption is that a 3/2/2 is harder than a 3/3, but has that been proven? The height, for one thing, to perform a 3T or 3Lo as a second jump, without destroying one's hip like Lipinski did, is greater than the height needed for a double. Wouldn't the force of landing a triple be greater than the force of landing a double?

The first spate of 3/3's occured in the 6.0 system, just after figures were eliminated. The most common theory for this is that skaters had more time to practice jumps, since they didn't have to spend the time mastering figures. There has been constant whining that the technical aspect of skating has gone down since Kwan "dumbed down" the sport with her well-rewarded presentation skills. But that never stopped Surya Bonaly, Irina Slutskaya, Joanie Rochette, Shizuka Arakawa, Miki Ando, and Carolina Kostner from attempting and landing 3/3's under 6.0, before CoP was implemented. The main difference between the two systems is that 3/3's under CoP must at least be rotated 2.75x to gain credit. But it also makes more sense for skaters to do a 3/2/2, if there's a chance a 3/3 will be downgraded.

I don't think that height is an issue on jumps - skaters usually jump the same height whether they're doing singles, doubles or triples, what they change is the speed of rotation and/or leave a bigger delay at the start of the jump. Look at Irina when she does her double jumps while they're calling the marks of the previous skater.

The main difference is the torque on the body - hip, knee, ankle. In a triple jump you're pulling in quickly and strongly to get the three roatations - the force required to check that rotation is greater and mroe difficult. If you are not quite getting a triple right say by underotating it even slightly then you are not ready checked out on a bend skating knee with good flow across the ice which reduces the force of the landing and the check. If you are doing two very nicely comfortably done doubles after as triple the chances are you are more likley to spare your joints because you can easliy rotate that double and check it out.

Ant

 

[antmanb]

That's exactly my point. They keep adding to the jump combinations expected. Under 6.0 you would have had 1 triple-triple, now they want 1 or 2, PLUS a triple-double-double. Tara is a prime example of a skater who sustained repeated impact to a joint. She practiced those triple loops-triple loops until she dropped and RUINED her hip in the process. This jump baloney is never ending and it is going to ruin these skaters joints. No if, ands or buts. The human body is simply not designed to sustain this kind of impact again and again for years. Sarah did triple-triples for a relatively short period of time and then left skating. You can't compare her experience to the average skater.

As for Michelle and Sasha, I really hope they find at least one CoP competition to compete in, or their chances of winning OGM or gold at Worlds are significantly less, both from the experience perspective and the judging bias we have come to "know and love."

I totally agree with the impact triple jumps and quads and combinations have on a skaters body. What i absolutely don't understand is the blaming of CoP for it - i don't think the CoP has anything to do with the injuries and everything to do with skaters upping the ante in the sport just because they think they need the next big jump.

Pluschenko did the most difficult combinations in the worlds under 6.0 and that certainly wasn't CoP. He was trying the 4t/3T/3Lp for ages and all leading up to SLC. He also was (in the same program) doing the unfeasibly difficult 3A/half loop/3F which isn't worth doing now under CoP because a sequnce effectively gets a deduction. So that's a three jump combination with 4/3/3 and 3A/3F and both a solo 4T and solo 3A...i don't see his jump content getting any more dificult under CoP than under 6.0 and as long as he's doing this other skaters will try and follow suit...that's what sport does regardless of the judging system in place.

Ant

 

[BronzeisGolden]

Actually, I see what Kyla is trying to say. COP, IMO, doesn't really push skaters to attempt more difficult jump combinations more than it encourages them to attain complex, varied spinning/spiral positions. I could see how this would increase the likelihood of injury. That doesn't mean that it automatically makes COP more dangerous for skaters, but it certainly doesn't help. Contorting your body into ever tighter pretzel-like shapes is risky, and COP rewards these difficult variations in position far more than 6.0 did. Thus, you see more and more skaters pushing and testing their body's limits (in terms of flexibility, endurance, etc.). I don't think it is fair to say that COP causes more injuries than the 6.0 system yet, though. Lets give it a few more years and then look at the situation again.

 

[mzheng]

thisthingcalledlove, thanks.

 

[soogar]

Actually, I see what Kyla is trying to say. COP, IMO, doesn't really push skaters to attempt more difficult jump combinations more than it encourages them to attain complex, varied spinning/spiral positions. I could see how this would increase the likelihood of injury. That doesn't mean that it automatically makes COP more dangerous for skaters, but it certainly doesn't help. Contorting your body into ever tighter pretzel-like shapes is risky, and COP rewards these difficult variations in position far more than 6.0 did. Thus, you see more and more skaters pushing and testing their body's limits (in terms of flexibility, endurance, etc.). I don't think it is fair to say that COP causes more injuries than the 6.0 system yet, though. Lets give it a few more years and then look at the situation again.

Well if you look at how the ISU gives levels to spins, a skater does not need to contort his/her body to get a higher level spin. That skater can achieve higher levels through position changes via the body (camel to sit) or edge. Skaters tend to be big copycats anyway. The reason why everyone is throwing the Biellman is because the World Champion does a lot of them and won. It's the same reason why all these ice dance ladies dye their hair platinum (Pasha wannabes) and wear retarded looking headbands (a la Navka). When Michelle brought back the Charlotte and other moves, other skaters copied her (and still do).

Notice the guys aren't all contorting themselves into Biellmans (some are, but not all) and they are able to get high levels on their spins.

 

[mzheng]

Actually, a clean program will garner higher GOE's than a flawed one, if the programs are judged by the book, and that can make up part of the difference in technical difficulty.
.

If only judges applying rule correctly. And ISU specify more clearly and fairly. The way judges going every other girls is trying bieman. Looks like they and their coach don't see any other way to rack up points in spins.

I posted following questions in another board, got negative answers on both. (Looks to me it is suspeciouse that ISU has to explicitly put in CoP spec that Bielman position (no other difficult position is mentioned) is considered a difficult position veriasion in spin and spiral and as one of the critirias to get higher level. Which we know couple of Rusian skaters have been doing it for years) I'd like to know if someone here know more about it.

So far is there any spin called level 4 without bielman in it?
Is there any other difficult position in spin considered as a difficult veriasion besides bielman?

 

[hockeyfan228]

I posted following questions in another board, got negative answers on both. (Looks to me it is suspeciouse that ISU has to explicitly put in CoP spec that Bielman position (no other difficult position is mentioned) is considered a difficult position veriasion in spin and spiral and as one of the critirias to get higher level. Which we know couple of Rusian skaters have been doing it for years) I'd like to know if someone here know more about it.

The rule about the Biellman is actually more restrictive than any other position. For a layback, the skater must complete eight revolutions in a back or sideways layout position or the Biellmann position does not count towards difficulty. Since this is a specific rule, they had to define a Biellmann so that the skaters knew that a one-handed foot grabbed over the head in an open position was just as much of a Biellmann as the one Biellmann made famous.

In addition, "The concluding upright position at the end of [any] spin (final wind-up) is not considered to be another position if does not exceed 3 revolutions and the revolutions executed in it are not to be counted in the required number of revolutions." By applying this rule, it's possible that a combo spin be downgraded to a L1, if all counted positions doesn't have two or more revolutions per position.

This is all in ISU Communication 1319. (I can't figure out how to capture the filename for .pdf files on the Mac; it's not displayed in the browser window like other web pages.) But you can select the file from this page:

http://www.isu.org/vsite/vnavsite/page/directory/0,10853,4844-130127-131435-nav-list,00.html

So far is there any spin called level 4 without bielman in it?
Is there any other difficult position in spin considered as a difficult veriasion besides bielman?

Yes, and yes. These are defined in the big (100+ page) ISU communication on singles and pairs, but I can't find the link from the ISU Communications page. Someone from FSU found the direct link. If I can find it, I'll post it here.

 

[mzheng]

Yes, and yes. These are defined in the big (100+ page) ISU communication on singles and pairs, but I can't find the link from the ISU Communications page. Someone from FSU found the direct link. If I can find it, I'll post it here.

I guess what I'm asking is so far is there any one in real competetion had been actually called level 4 spin without doing bielman?

 

[kyla2]

Thanks For Your Responses

I do appreciate everyone's thoughtful and courteous responses! What a pleasure posting on this board can be. I agree with some of everyone's points. I am still worried that the sport of figure skating is escalating into a disaster for the human body. We shall see down the road.

 

[R.D.]

For more

Check out this article on USA Today:

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/olympics/2005-10-18-figures-focus_x.htm

Quite interesting.

 

[gkelly]

I guess what I'm asking is so far is there any one in real competetion had been actually called level 4 spin without doing bielman?

Checking the men, since it's less likely that they'd be doing Biellmanns.

At Nebelhorn (long program), Noriyuki Kanzaki, Nicholas Young, Filip Stiller, and Hugh Yik were all credited with level 4 combination spins, and Stiller also had a level 4 change-foot upright spin.

At Karl Schaefer (long program), John Hamer had both level 4 combo spin and level 4 sit-change sit (which obviously did not include a Biellmann position).

At Japan Open, Jeffrey Buttle got level 4 for a combo spin without change of foot, a flying sit, and a plain sitspin (his final combo spin was only level 2 though).

You can check the protocols for the short programs and the JGP events so far if you like, and for the ladies.

Obviously it is possible to do level 4 sitspins without Biellmanns. Someone who has actually seen all the guys' combo spins would have to let us know whether they included Biellmanns or not.

Or were you only asking about solo laybacks as the ladies do in the short program?

BTW, Communication No. 1319 gives the following definitions/examples of difficult positions:

Simple Variation: A simple variation of position is a movement of a body part, leg, arm, hand or head, which enhances but does not change the basic position of the main body core. A simple variation DOES NOT increase the Level.
Difficult Variation: A difficult variation is a movement of a body part, leg, arm, hand or head, which requires more physical strength or flexibility and that, has an affect on the balance of the main body core. Only these variations can increase the Level.
As examples only:
• sit spin (broken leg) – changing the weight distribution by bending the leg to the side or behind the main body core.
• camel spin with the upper body turned upwards app 180% (upside down position)
• camel spin – body arched where head and free foot are almost touching (doughnut spin)
• upright spin – where from the hips to the skating foot it is straight and the upper body is bent down towards to ice.
• Bielmann spin is considered a difficult variation of an upright spin – going from a camel spin to a Bielmann spin is considered as change of position. Going from an upright spin into a Bielmann spin is NOT a change of position likewise going from a layback spin to a Bielmann spin is NOT a change of position.
• For camel, sit and layback positions once the position has been established a clear increasing of the speed will be considered a difficult variation. (Rational: It is necessary to draw body parts (adjust position) toward the main body core in order to increase speed. This is more physically difficult and changes the balance point on the spinning blade).

And for spiral sequences:

Definition of Spiral Variations
Simple Variation (of position): A spiral position with limited leg and or arm movement, e.g. bending of free leg, bending of skating leg, changes in arm positions, turning of head (all of these not affecting main body core position and independent from skating edge or direction). A simple variation DOES NOT increase the Level.
Difficult Variation (of position): These are variations that affect the main body core position and balance, e.g. twisting the upper body, bending or pulling the upper body towards the skating leg, obtaining the Bielmann position. Only these variations can increase the Level.

Three different examples given; Biellmann is only one of them.

3) Unsupported change of edge in a spiral -3 seconds hold after the change
4) Unsupported change of position or direction maintaining the spiral position
5) Unsupported position with the leg sideways or forward
6) Free leg in a total split position -sideways or forward, one arm hold possible

Are listed as features for higher level spiral sequences. Some of them I would also consider "difficult variations," but they are mentioned separate from the difficult variation feature (which is feature no. 2).

 

[Pau-goodle76]

Very sad to hear of all the recent injuries. I want to wish Sasha a full and speedy recovery.

 

[gkelly]

But all these questions lead me to ask this. What IS figure skating all about? Is it the artistry part of it? The jumps? The athleticism? What is it? I hear a lot of hardcore skating fans talking about the artistic element of it, and others talking about the technical aspect. So what is the ideal skater like in this case?

Well, figure skating is multifaceted, and different skaters and different fans have different favorite aspects.

But if there's one thing I'd have to say is essential to figure skating as such, it would be flow across the ice on curving edges.

 

[mzheng]

Thanks. gkelly.
I'm not talking about bielman in layback, I knew the rule being streight in new CoP spec.

 

[bdreampixie]

I guess what I'm asking is so far is there any one in real competetion had been actually called level 4 spin without doing bielman?

Yes, Sasha's 1st combo spin in her R&J program was level 4 and there was no Bielmann in it.

The one spin she did do a Bielmann in did not receive L4. It received L3.

It seems to me that many are mistakenly believing that if a skater does a Bielmann it's an automatic L4. Not so. There are many ways to get L4 spins without ever doing a Bielmann, just have to be smart about it.