Sonia Bianchetti's thoughts on U.S. Nationals

[museksk8r]

YAY, Medusa made a TARDIS reference! I can tell you watch Doctor Who perhaps . . . I LOVE the spin-off Torchwood!! I always have to watch it on BBC America! I love sci-fi.

I agree with your post, Medusa! I think the reason no one other than Scott Hamilton questioned Alexei Yagudin's win in 2002 was because it was judged under 6.0 and under 6.0, there was no such belief in skating that one has to max out their combos in order to win. 6.0 wasn't about accumulating points, getting higher levels on non-jump elements, or putting x amount of jumps after the 2 minute mark to make sure a skater gets as many bonuses as they can. It was not as technically demanding a system as Code of Points is in terms of the spins and footwork sequences. Skaters with bad technique under the 6.0 system and the early stages of Code of Points prior to this season slid under the radar with their flutzes, lips, and underrotations. Besides, Yagudin had such a grand lead and performance in the SP, he was not having to play catch up or having to prove himself after a disappointing SP like Plushenko and let's face reality, neither Evgeny or Tim had Alexei's sense of artistry back in 2002. Evgeny and Tim were technicians, but Alexei was a more complete skater, combining the technical and the artistic into a memorable, theatric Man in the Iron Mask performance, IMO, and the judges obviously seemed to think so as well. I find Alexei Yagudin's 6.0 winning Olympic programs from 2002 FAR MORE memorable and entertaining than Evgeny Plushenko's COP winning Olympic programs from 2006. 6.0 allowed a skater to breathe and bring musical interpretation and character into their programs in order to tell a theatrical story. We seldom see that in COP programs nowadays. Stephane Lambiel is the primary example of a skater who is still able to pull this off under the current judging system.

 

[sillylionlove]

Well we could solve this problem by putting Carolina Kostner, Evan Lysacek and Apollo Anton Ohno on the ice and see who can skate the fastest....well maybe we should throw a long track speed skater in the mix too just for fun...is Bonnie Blair available?

 

[Mathman]

..is Bonnie Blair available?

Remember those advertisements for a financial services company, featuring Bonnie Blair and Kristi Yamaguchi? -- "What do you want, speed or figures? Get both with..."

 

[Mathman]

Why are you sure that if placements were given, Weir would have been placed ahead of Lysacek, and the quality of Weir's skating would have trumped Lysacek's?

I think the difference is that the CoP directs the skaters to do certain things which detract from the quality of the performance. Like the required multiple Biellmann positions a few years ago, the required fire hydrant spiral of last year, all those goof-ball looking spins as the coaches and choreographers struggle to figure out a way to make their skater hop from one edge to another more times than someone else can.

The CoP essentially requires that every skater (lady) do 2 Lutzes and 2 flips, for those skaters who are seriously trying to win something. Isn't it possible that a a pretty loop jump is more in character with a particular program than the required 3flutz, 3flutz+2T, 3F, 3F+2T?

Certainly we see bad performances under any judging system and sometimes a bad forformance wins over a good one (that's the nature of a judged sport).

But let the skaters be bad on their own. IMHO the point system should not require them to cram in elements that they can't really do and that add nothing of value to the performance.

 

[museksk8r]

Sorry, my bad, double post!

 

[ManyCairns]

I think the difference is that the CoP directs the skaters to do certain things which detract from the quality of the performance. Like the required multiple Biellmann positions a few years ago, the required fire hydrant spiral of last year, all those goof-ball looking spins as the coaches and choreographers struggle to figure out a way to make their skater hop from one edge to another more times than someone else can.

The CoP essentially requires that every skater (lady) do 2 Lutzes and 2 flips, for those skaters who are seriously trying to win something. Isn't it possible that a a pretty loop jump is more in character with a particular program than the required 3flutz, 3flutz+2T, 3F, 3F+2T?

Certainly we see bad performances under any judging system and sometimes a bad forformance wins over a good one (that's the nature of a judged sport).

But let the skaters be bad on their own. IMHO the point system should not require them to cram in elements that they can't really do and that add nothing of value to the performance.

I promise, I almost never quote an entire post -- but this one deserves it. Well said, MM!

BTW, love your avatar! ll maybe an Airedale? Some kind of terrier on skates, anyway.

 

[Kwanford Wife]

But let the skaters be bad on their own. IMHO the point system should not require them to cram in elements that they can't really do and that add nothing of value to the performance.

Excellent point! And its always been my major issue with a skater like Buttle... I never could learn to appreciate his often discussed artistic qualities because of that darn quad that he continued to throw - knowing he couldn't land it cleanly... regardless of the rotation - that fall would always bug me... Any judging system designed to identify a competitive winner should not have room for falls and messy skating...

It reminds me of Kwan's statement during Caroline's nationals fluff piece: you need to have high technical things but you can't have messy dirty places. you need to be a warrior" LOVE THAT and for me, that's the attitude elite skaters need to have...

 

[gkelly]

I think the difference is that the CoP directs the skaters to do certain things which detract from the quality of the performance. Like the required multiple Biellmann positions a few years ago, the required fire hydrant spiral of last year, all those goof-ball looking spins as the coaches and choreographers struggle to figure out a way to make their skater hop from one edge to another more times than someone else can.

Not one of those things is required or "directed" COP. For a while the way the rules for layback spin levels were worded it seemed that it was necessary to include a Biellmann position to achieve level 4 in a layback spin, although now there are explicitly plenty of other ways, in theory, to get a level 4 layback. It's just that some of them are more difficult.

For all other spins and spiral sequences it is perfectly possible to achieve level 4 without doing any particular difficult variation.

It just seems that for skaters who happen to have that kind of flexibility, it's easier to raise their scores by using the same variation as many times as allowed to get higher levels rather than developing additional skills for more variety of features, or just aim for a lower level with better GOE.

And the skills that are comparatively easier to get credit for or to do at all get used by a lot more skaters than those that are harder but would contribute the same to the levels.

And of course there's no requirement to achieve level 4 -- that just helps with base marks, and for many of the elements, unfortunately IMO, it also raises the value of the positive GOEs.

In other words, it would be accurate to say that the level definitions, the point values of raising the level of the element vs. raising its quality, and the rules that limit how many times the same feature can count (or lack thereof) in any given season (because some of these details have changed every year so far), combined with the fact that some features are easier than others, have encouraged overuse of those features. It's not true that the rules direct skaters to do these things.

The only thing they're really directed to do in long programs is some kind of axel-like jump, a combo spin, a flying spin, and a spin in one position.
Everything else is allowed up to a maximum but not required. In practice, of course, skaters have every incentive to include all the elements allowed up to the maximum and to aim to include the highest-point-value elements they're capable of. But incentive is not the same as direction.

The CoP essentially requires that every skater (lady) do 2 Lutzes and 2 flips, for those skaters who are seriously trying to win something. Isn't it possible that a a pretty loop jump is more in character with a particular program than the required 3flutz, 3flutz+2T, 3F, 3F+2T?

Considering that as of this year a 3flutz requires negative GOE so the maximum value would be 6.0 base value minus 1.0 GOE = 5.0 and a pretty 3loop would be worth 5.0 base value plus positive GOE, for a skater whose 3loop is usually good quality and whose 3lutz is consistently dinged with a wrong edge call, the repeating the loop instead of the lutz would in fact be a better strategy for that skater. As Mao Asada has demonstrated all season.

There are other situations in which a particular skater's strengths might dictate a different jump schedule -- which jumps she's likely to get downgraded or get wrong edge calls for vs. those that usually get positive GOE; whether she can do any triple-triple combinations and if so which; whether she can rotate and sometimes land a triple axel or quad.

There may be a theoretical ideal jump layout for the typical senior lady jump skill set, but in fact many skaters' skill sets do vary slightly or significantly from that theoretical norm, and those skaters are wiser to tailor their jump layouts to their own abilities rather than to the theoretical ideal.

And how often do the top senior men choose to repeat triple toe, which the lowest-value jump they do that's subject to the Zayak rule, with one quad and two triple axels or vice versa, rather than repeating both a quad and the triple axel for a higher base mark?

But let the skaters be bad on their own. IMHO the point system should not require them to cram in elements that they can't really do and that add nothing of value to the performance.

Which is why I keep arguing for more flexibility in the elements allowed to earn points under the long program well-balanced program maximums and for more reward for quality vs. difficulty in the values of the GOEs vs. levels.

 

[netnuts]

.don't want to pick on Miki or Zhang/Zhang, but sometimes I really wonder what the judges see in them to give them such high PCS. ....

I think Z/Z deserve higher PCS than P/T, especially in short program. Z/Z are faster and they have excellent transitions(just slightly below S/S's level in terms of transition especially in SP). You should notice they are using very difficult entrances into all major elements such as 3twist, throw 3, even sbs jumps. They are also more innovative in their lifts.

P/T are lyrical but I think they're a bit outdated, they do not have those 'transitions' into difficult elements such as jumps and throws.

 

[indicatoto101]

whole post

Lysacek should have received bigger deductions on GOE that what the judges implemented. -.29 for the 3A-2t & 3F-3T is absolute crap. He should've been deducted at least 1 GOE for each element.

 

[feraina]

I think Z/Z deserve higher PCS than P/T, especially in short program. Z/Z are faster and they have excellent transitions(just slightly below S/S's level in terms of transition especially in SP). You should notice they are using very difficult entrances into all major elements such as 3twist, throw 3, even sbs jumps. They are also more innovative in their lifts.

More difficult entries are already accounted for by higher GOE's for the individual elements. It shouldn't be rewarded again in the PCS, at least not outside skating skill and transition.

Even if Z/Z do deserve higher PCS under CoP, that's not the point.

The beautiful programs Michelle Kwan used to skate wouldn't get rewarded under CoP now, because she wasn't especially fast, nor had especially hard transitions/entries into elements.

ETA: P/T had higher PCS than Z/Z in the 4CC LP, by about 3.5 points. That's a sizable difference! I hope the judges are finally recognizing P/T's lyrical style of skating.

 

[hockeyfan228]

I think the difference is that the CoP directs the skaters to do certain things which detract from the quality of the performance. Like the required multiple Biellmann positions a few years ago, the required fire hydrant spiral of last year, all those goof-ball looking spins as the coaches and choreographers struggle to figure out a way to make their skater hop from one edge to another more times than someone else can.

Under 6.0, there was incentive to do perfunctory "sit" change "sit" spins, three mediocre spiral positions held 2 or less seconds each, and footwork that was less than level 1, because all but exceptional versions -- even Stephane Lambiel had two perfunctory spins in his Dortmund LP, but no one remembers anything but the last two -- they didn't seem to get much credit, and why expend energy for no credit? Under 6.0, there was incentive to throw in harder jumps, even if they were flawed, particularly badly underrotated, because judges have allegedly admitted that they sometimes gave credit for effort.

Even if attempts are uglier now, and GOE is not applied correctly, i.e., giving earned scores outside the -1 to +1 corridor, especially for lower level elements, if you look at skating as a sport, which you've often argued, wouldn't you want to compare how different skaters take on the most difficult elements, however ugly, instead of breezing by with perfunctory attempts at a skill like spins, which comprise 20-25% of a skater's elements? Isn't it pushing th envelope to attempt 2 Lutzes and to show the world whether you can do the jump properly, instead of a pretty loop?

 

[Bennett]

It's not that I don't think speed is important. Athletic grace is grace too, and speed is a major component of that. But I just wouldn't want speed to become the single dominating component of what is judged to be "beautiful skating." Everything needs to be balanced in a beautiful program. I don't want to pick on Miki or Zhang/Zhang, but sometimes I really wonder what the judges see in them to give them such high PCS. It seems like having speed without any other positive attributes is sufficient to get top-level PCS, but have everything else but phenomenal speed and you're doomed to a mediocre PCS.

Maybe the rest of you really think speed is the only thing that should matter, I'm just expressing my own personal opinion...

ITA. Speed is very important, but not the single most important factor. I also don't like that TES sometimes has too much impact on PCS.

I don't understand why Yukina Ota with decent speed (especially before the injuries, she had great speed; she is now regaining it) getting lower PCS than other ladies.

 

[Mathman]

...if you look at skating as a sport, which you've often argued...

Are you asking me specifically? We have plenty of sports already that are based on who can leap the highest, paddle a kayak the fastest and throw a discus the farthest. I think figure skating makes a big mistake when it tries to respond to the "oh, but skating is not a real sport" crowd by saying, "yes we are, yes we are, yes we are."

Figure skating has it's unique niche. I would be the last person to say we should abandon it by trying to be more like soccer or archery.

Wouldn't you want to compare how different skaters take on the most difficult elements, however ugly, instead of breezing by with perfunctory attempts at a skill like spins, which comprise 20-25% of a skater's elements? Isn't it pushing the envelope to attempt 2 Lutzes and to show the world whether you can do the jump properly, instead of a pretty loop?

I am undecided about that.

I like figure skating as a spectator sport because it is very exciting as a competiton -- the thrill of victory, agony of defeat thing -- and also because an aesthetically satisfying program strikes an emotional chord with me.

So I think on balance, I would say, no -- one wonky flutz per program is enough, you don't have to push any envelopes for me, thank you.

BTW, I loved Lambiel's "perfunctory attempts at spins" in his Dortmund programs (he was robbed of the bronze, LOL -- but I was glad Lindemann skated great before his home crowd, too). They were 100 times better than the CoP-inspired same-as-everyone else stuff he is doing now, IMHO.

 

[Mathman]

BTW, love your avatar! ll maybe an Airedale? Some kind of terrier on skates, anyway.

It was supposed to be our wire-hair fox terrier. My wife made it for me.

Yes, he's a big one. His father was a champion, but our pup grew too tall for the standard of the breed, so we couldn't show him.

 

[waxel]

Okay. Most of us agree there are some glaring things that need to be fixed with IJS. What I'd like to know is WILL the ISU ever address some of these issues? As out of touch as Speedy is, he HAS to be aware of all the grumbling in the skating world. Does he simply not care? Or might the system be significantly improved in the future?

Sure we saw somewhat fewer Beillmann positions this year --- is a small tweak or two a season the most we can hope for?

 

[nubka]

I think that figure skating still is something more than just another sport. Every season there are plenty of beautiful, artistic performances e.g. from top skaters. LOL, fortunately they all don´t have the same artistic style, but they are artistic as there is not just one kind of art, in my opinion.

ITA!!! Well said...

 

[hockeyfan228]

BTW, I loved Lambiel's "perfunctory attempts at spins" in his Dortmund programs (he was robbed of the bronze, LOL -- but I was glad Lindemann skated great before his home crowd, too). They were 100 times better than the CoP-inspired same-as-everyone else stuff he is doing now, IMHO.

Go back to the videotape and watch his first two spins, including the camel spin with the sloppy hanging free leg. If you can watch the SP again, and the SP's of the group of men below him in the SP. In my opinion, he should not have been in a position to win bronze, because he was so gifted in the SP, and shouldn't have been skating in the last group.

 

[Mathman]

Go back to the videotape and watch his first two spins, including the camel spin with the sloppy hanging free leg. If you can watch the SP again, and the SP's of the group of men below him in the SP. In my opinion, he should not have been in a position to win bronze, because he was so gifted in the SP, and shouldn't have been skating in the last group.

I just watched it again.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zRQVeaD2iu8

I thought the first spin was fine. I agree that the second was "perfunctory." The third one was great, very fast and well-centered, and the final headless spin a perfect punctuation mark for the program. Two quads and a fine triple Axel, though not every jump was textbook perfect. The weakest part was the footwork.

That performance had me leaping out of my chair (Lindemann's, too. Arakawa's, too. What a competition! I would have scored it, Arakawa gold, Lambiel silver, Lindemann bronze, Michelle "lifetime achievement award". )

"In the moment," as opposed to analyzing it later on You Tube, that was and continues to be Stephane's finest performance. I thought, here is the next World Champion (as soon as Plushenko retires). The youthful heart-on-his-sleeve emotion is what put the performance over the top, to me.

As for the bronze medal, I don't have an opinion about whether Stephane should have been in fourth going in, but between Lambiel and Lindemann, Lindemann gave the performance of his life, allowing the technical excellence to sweep everything before it. I wasn't really disappointed that the judges gave him the home town break.

Lambiel's performance was one of those "whole is greater than the sum of its parts" experiences. I think the last time I felt that way was Slutskaya's 2005 Worlds LP. (BTW, in terms of CoP judging, I thought the judges felt the same way that I did. Component by component, Irina was overmarked, but the performance was so amazing the judges just automatically gave her the highest possible scores in everything.)

 

[Medusa]

Mathman, have you been at Dortmund during the Worlds 2004? It sounds like it... It is actually the first skating competition I ever visited and of course I cheered for Lindemann. And stared at Joubert (I was a teenager back then...). And discovered a fondness for a certain American I had never heard of till that day.

But back to the topic. Wasn't Lambiel's program with the new judging system that his spins were way too simple and only got minor levels? His spins were so fast in Dortmund and they are still great but not as fast and he seems to have problems with the centering (?) from time to time.

Under 6.0, there was incentive to throw in harder jumps, even if they were flawed, particularly badly underrotated, because judges have allegedly admitted that they sometimes gave credit for effort.

Well, the current judging system rewards you for a fully rotated Quad you fell on. It practically says - fall on the Quad-Toe is as good as doing an ok Triple-Loop. Fall on the Quad-Salchow is as good as doing an ok Triple-Flip etc. Both systems support going for elements you only do poorly.