- Joined
- Dec 16, 2006
Also, a 3T/3T goes in the same direction. Your body weight does not need to shift, making rotation easier. 3Z/2T/2L, or even 3Z/2T requires a weight transfer.
The current 3Lz problem in Senior Ladies
- Thread starter FSGMT
- Start date
Also, a 3T/3T goes in the same direction. Your body weight does not need to shift, making rotation easier. 3Z/2T/2L, or even 3Z/2T requires a weight transfer.
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2009
No she lips. She's gotten edge calls on her 3f for a few seasons now. She has quite a nice lutz.
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2010
I enjoy learning so much on this thread as well as others on GS, especially thanks Gkelly and Wallylutz for explanation/history and the possible direction of where 3 lutz problem may go for the ladies.
You know what? Looking at this list, the answer is probably self explanatory. Considering the above, it would seems to be most federation's interest to devalue the lutz (through inflate the value of other jumps as well as depreciate the scale of GOEs and UR rules in general which negate the higher jump rewards with proper bonuses, which cannot be offset by with easier elements done with good GOEs and high PCS through consistency. i.e 3 Lutz ). By playing down its importance, all these federations have gained better competitive advantages overall for their ladies than before.
If such is the case. This perhaps expose another weakness of the COP judging system. It is no longer about whether something is more challenging, well rounded or worthy to have in your program in terms of pure skating skills; but whether it has enough supporters from various federations to sustain its scale of importance. To put it bluntly. It seems now there's no point to bribe individual judges (guerilla warfare), it might be easier and more effective just bribe the value scale decision makers (flanking warfare) + technical judge!!
Kidding aside of course (ahem... cough..cough!) I wonder if ISU is taking the necessary measures to protect the integrity of the sport through not bending to any political/federation pressure push for certain value changes. A hypothetical situation could be one federation generally favour a particular high scored elements and told all their skaters to train specifically on that element only (for example, Russia for the certain type of quads), and pressures ISU to raise the value of it. This might have met with protest from other federations since their own skater hasn't even began practice that specific quad (e.g Canada), so they hold off this proposal until one or two year later. However if the protest only comes from minor federations (e.g Spain) that doesn't have much power, then changes could have gone through regardless as early as the next season.
I wonder how transparent are these processes to determine these changes. Do they have an open round table panel to sought a consensus for rule change? Or do they decide everything internally behind close door without consult with any federations. If so, who decide and by what mathematical/scientific methods are these scales being changed and justified by how much? How do the TPTB vet what should be changed from one year to the next?
Otherwise the COP algorithm could really makes the sport vulnerable, since by placing a numeric value as a base mark and revise it at will without a strict vetting process or overall algorithm assessment means ISU can favour certain trends, layouts and determine future winners (Or maybe that was the subversive intention?). We already seen how major changes to the COP maths since the Olympics have made major differences in how men and ladies progress to to win competitions. Men generally wins by taking chances with quads because the point rewards is there (garner new points), women generally wins by tactics of consistency and momentum building on their PCS (more about not loosing out points by taking risks and difficulty).
You know what? Looking at this list, the answer is probably self explanatory. Considering the above, it would seems to be most federation's interest to devalue the lutz (through inflate the value of other jumps as well as depreciate the scale of GOEs and UR rules in general which negate the higher jump rewards with proper bonuses, which cannot be offset by with easier elements done with good GOEs and high PCS through consistency. i.e 3 Lutz ). By playing down its importance, all these federations have gained better competitive advantages overall for their ladies than before.
If such is the case. This perhaps expose another weakness of the COP judging system. It is no longer about whether something is more challenging, well rounded or worthy to have in your program in terms of pure skating skills; but whether it has enough supporters from various federations to sustain its scale of importance. To put it bluntly. It seems now there's no point to bribe individual judges (guerilla warfare), it might be easier and more effective just bribe the value scale decision makers (flanking warfare) + technical judge!!
Kidding aside of course (ahem... cough..cough!) I wonder if ISU is taking the necessary measures to protect the integrity of the sport through not bending to any political/federation pressure push for certain value changes. A hypothetical situation could be one federation generally favour a particular high scored elements and told all their skaters to train specifically on that element only (for example, Russia for the certain type of quads), and pressures ISU to raise the value of it. This might have met with protest from other federations since their own skater hasn't even began practice that specific quad (e.g Canada), so they hold off this proposal until one or two year later. However if the protest only comes from minor federations (e.g Spain) that doesn't have much power, then changes could have gone through regardless as early as the next season.
I wonder how transparent are these processes to determine these changes. Do they have an open round table panel to sought a consensus for rule change? Or do they decide everything internally behind close door without consult with any federations. If so, who decide and by what mathematical/scientific methods are these scales being changed and justified by how much? How do the TPTB vet what should be changed from one year to the next?
Otherwise the COP algorithm could really makes the sport vulnerable, since by placing a numeric value as a base mark and revise it at will without a strict vetting process or overall algorithm assessment means ISU can favour certain trends, layouts and determine future winners (Or maybe that was the subversive intention?). We already seen how major changes to the COP maths since the Olympics have made major differences in how men and ladies progress to to win competitions. Men generally wins by taking chances with quads because the point rewards is there (garner new points), women generally wins by tactics of consistency and momentum building on their PCS (more about not loosing out points by taking risks and difficulty).
Last edited:
I'm glad to see someone who agrees with me...^
Figure skating lost its integrity a long time ago I must say it no longer is a "fair" sport due to certain feds.
I'm not going to name a certain country, but ISU changed their jump values and from seeing facts given from gs and competitions I watched, I feel like ISU greatly favored a certain "country" where skaters are capable of loop but not lutz. (Hence why 3Lo's point was raised but not lutz)
It's just a theory so it may or may not be true, but it's kind of funny how these pieces go together.
I just feel like ISU is trying to limit certain skaters to perform in their best abilities.
Figure skating lost its integrity a long time ago I must say it no longer is a "fair" sport due to certain feds.
I'm not going to name a certain country, but ISU changed their jump values and from seeing facts given from gs and competitions I watched, I feel like ISU greatly favored a certain "country" where skaters are capable of loop but not lutz. (Hence why 3Lo's point was raised but not lutz)
It's just a theory so it may or may not be true, but it's kind of funny how these pieces go together.
I just feel like ISU is trying to limit certain skaters to perform in their best abilities.
I'm pretty sure Elena Glebova lips. She been competing with a lutz for awhile.
Kexin Zhang lips too.
Gedevanishivili lips
I think Silete and Meite both have the correct edges on their jumps though shallow.
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2011
This is a very interesting topic, in fact, it led to one of the biggest arguments a friend and I ever had. It involved my favorite skater, Maria Butyrskaya and her fav, Sarah Hughes. We were watching the Ladies SP at the 2000 World Championships.
I was trying to enjoy Maria's beautiful short program. A program that I still consider, one of the best ever. However, it became increasingly difficult, due to the ridiculous commentary from Dick Button regarding her program.
" Her spiral is really not as good as Sarah's "
My friend immediately agreed with Mr Button. " I think he's right. " she said.
I said, " Of course you do, and you're both idiots " It went down hill from there.
Here's my problem with Mr Button's statement. As a professional dancer ( I promise I won't mention that again ) I can assure you, Maria's 3rd spiral, in the Double Attitude position, is far more difficult to do correctly than, Sarah's Arabesque-Penche' spiral.
Maria's position, when executed correctly, requires that both hips remain square, down, and in line with the shoulders.
If you watch Sarah, she was certainly flexible. However, her " Non standing hip " was often, open, and raised in the direction of the extended leg. Bad technique that due to her flexibility, was often overlooked.
Now, The lutz.......I know Mr Button was also a dancer. A well educated one at that. Which is why it will always bother me that, he never complimented Maria's True Lutz. I never heard
" Sarah's lutz , is really not as good as Maria's "
When, that was actually the case. She didn't always land them but, she rarely, if ever, " Flutzed. " Is that the right word ?
If someone knows, is Maria still involved in skating ? I think she would be a great tech judge. I also think, due to her experience with her own federation. She would call it like she see's it. I think she'd have no problem placing a 3 triple free skate ( Even from the fed favorite ) In fifth.......Where it belongs !!
I miss Maria. She had such guts. BTW, How old is Alissa ? Don't give up yet, girl. It's not over, till you say it is.
I was trying to enjoy Maria's beautiful short program. A program that I still consider, one of the best ever. However, it became increasingly difficult, due to the ridiculous commentary from Dick Button regarding her program.
" Her spiral is really not as good as Sarah's "
My friend immediately agreed with Mr Button. " I think he's right. " she said.
I said, " Of course you do, and you're both idiots " It went down hill from there.
Here's my problem with Mr Button's statement. As a professional dancer ( I promise I won't mention that again ) I can assure you, Maria's 3rd spiral, in the Double Attitude position, is far more difficult to do correctly than, Sarah's Arabesque-Penche' spiral.
Maria's position, when executed correctly, requires that both hips remain square, down, and in line with the shoulders.
If you watch Sarah, she was certainly flexible. However, her " Non standing hip " was often, open, and raised in the direction of the extended leg. Bad technique that due to her flexibility, was often overlooked.
Now, The lutz.......I know Mr Button was also a dancer. A well educated one at that. Which is why it will always bother me that, he never complimented Maria's True Lutz. I never heard
" Sarah's lutz , is really not as good as Maria's "
When, that was actually the case. She didn't always land them but, she rarely, if ever, " Flutzed. " Is that the right word ?
If someone knows, is Maria still involved in skating ? I think she would be a great tech judge. I also think, due to her experience with her own federation. She would call it like she see's it. I think she'd have no problem placing a 3 triple free skate ( Even from the fed favorite ) In fifth.......Where it belongs !!
I miss Maria. She had such guts. BTW, How old is Alissa ? Don't give up yet, girl. It's not over, till you say it is.
But this isn't really about skating technique. A more important point when it comes to spirals, which both you and Button are ignoring (well, he probably knows but chooses not to discuss here), is the quality of the edges.
Also, the balance is different on blades than on the floor, and the angle of the skating foot to the hip is different because the skating leg can't be turned out, so the angle of the free hip will also be different. Therefore positions that might be easier on the floor might be harder on the ice, or vice versa.
Yes. You're right here, Maria definitely had much better lutz technique than Sarah. And that is definitely about skating technique.
(I just disagree with the premise of this thread that it's the most important or decisive technical point in ladies' skating.)
Last I heard, several years ago, she was coaching children. I don't know if she's got any at junior/senior level yet, or if she wants to coach at that level. Maybe some of our Russian posters know more.
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2006
From SGPF protocols for the Senior ladies SP....not one 3Lutz in the SP.
http://www.isuresults.com/results/gpf1213/gpf1213_Ladies_SP_Scores.pdf
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2010
This always annoyed me about the American commentators. Very few of the hyperextended spirals are done on deep edges, yet earned raves from Dick. OTOH, Irina was one of the few who could accelerate through her COE spiral, yet it was slammed because her free leg was not as high as some others. As a spectator I enjoy Sasha's spirals over Irina's but I feel like the commentators, with their base of knowledge, have some duty to explain why Irina's are in some ways superior.
From SGPF protocols for the Senior ladies SP....not one 3Lutz in the SP.
http://www.isuresults.com/results/gpf1213/gpf1213_Ladies_SP_Scores.pdf
When the system allowed kostner to win- and it was a big win- with no attempt at a lutz it said to all "stop doing them" like men stopped doing quads. COP has the huge tendency to move toward the elimination of some elements from disciplines.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
From SGPF protocols for the Senior ladies SP....not one 3Lutz in the SP.
The loop has really made a comeback. A couple of years ago triple loops in the SP were few and far between. Melon above points out that the value of the triple loop was raised, but only by one tenth of a point (from 5.0 to 5.1). At the same time the flip was lowered in value from 5.5 to 5.3, but that doesn't seem to have resulted in a decrease in triple flip attempts.
So Kim won big without a 3loop (of course with hard 3/3s) I don't think there should be a limitus test in terms of you must land this jump. However what I do think should happen is that the base value for the 3lutz should go up and more bonus for having all of the jumps too. As well as a bonus for difficult combos. But yes a big punishment though for flutzing. Downgrade flutzs to the value of a flip....
Kostner's win? I have no issues with the other girls weren't doing real 3 lutzs. But lets give a bonus for having all of the triples and doing them well.. IMO. That is the way to solve this problem, I think.
Last edited:
Similar threads
