The "wrong edge" call in JGP events

[Mathman]

The technical panels are apparently implementing the "wrong edge" call for Lutzes and flips now. In the ladies' LP at the Vienna Junior Grand Prix competition three skaters had Lutz's marked "e" in the protocols, and two had the wrong edge designation for flips.

Here are the judges' protocols. (Pdf file; scroll down to Ayana Nakamura, Kathryn Kang, Mutsumi Takayama, Sarah Hecker and Margarita Tertichnaia)

http://www.isufs.org/results/jgpaut2007/jgpaut07_JuniorLadies_FS_Scores.pdf

However, it looks like not all the judges followed the rules. According to the 2007 revisions

http://www.isu.org/vsite/vfile/page/fileurl/0,11040,4844-183415-200633-121139-0-file,00.pdf

(page 8), once the tecnical panel calls wrong edge, the judges must take off -1 to -3 GOE and give a negative GOE overall for the element. There were quite a few 0 GOEs and some +1s.

 

[GoldMedalist]

Judges are bad. What else can be said.

I do disagree with the "jump MUST received a negative GOE" rule, though. Midori Ito flutzed a bit but what would you rather see - one of her huge Lutzes or some tiny one that has a very slight outside edge and therefore is "proper".

 

[bekalc]

Judges are bad. What else can be said.

I do disagree with the "jump MUST received a negative GOE" rule, though. Midori Ito flutzed a bit but what would you rather see - one of her huge Lutzes or some tiny one that has a very slight outside edge and therefore is "proper".

The point is that a flutz is a flip not a lutz...And Midori can get credit for her beautiful triple flips, with their inside edge.

What makes triple lutzes hard is the outside edge, and so with flutzing you have people getting credit for a jump they cannot do. Don't you think Kristi being able to do a lutz correctly deserved a reward for it. Perhaps it was have evened out the triple axel difference.

Flutzing is cheating no if ands buts about it. If people can't do the lutz correctly they shouldn't do it at all. Its' not fair to the skaters who do the jumps correctly.

What makes the situation worse now is you have skaters leaving out other jumps/can't do the other jumps. Right now we have Mao who is supposedly this year going to do 3 triple flips, 2 triple axels, and a triple loop. If you told Mao no flutzing she would only be able to do 5 jumps because she can't do the others. It's not right that Mao and other skaters get away with repeating the same jump 3/4 times.

 

[demarinis5]

Best comments I have head on the flutz/flip/lutz issue. Simple and direct.

 

[SeaniBu]

...???? No deduction for the flutz, but in not flutzing you can be awarded up to .3 or something?????....

At first thought I think it sounds rather fair.

I don't think it is so necessary to only do it if it is perfect. That acutely sounds rather pretentious to me. If they can do it "clean" they will get more points. It is thought to only do it perfect or not at all would seem like a hockey game not allowing ANY penalties. Or a Dive being totally discounted for an "improper splash."
....that doesn't even make sense really. The fact there is a deduction "ruling" is to say there will be mistakes, and the ones who make the least mistakes.....

Anyway I would rather see a flutzed Lutz than no Lutz at all.

The judges are not even in control of the last scenario MM gave, but is that really a bad thing.??? I don't think a "give a negative GOE overall for the element" sounds at all fair - why "overall" does it have to be? A mandatory deduction would mean the judges should not factor in tech spec, calls.
IOW are the judges supposed to mark based on "if" it is a clean, and then let the Tech and Ref calls dictate any deductions?????


Oh geez, I hope I am not incoherently babbling again...........LOL

 

[ks777]

wow, I have never heard of Midori slightly flutzing. I watched her videos and can't find anywhere.. To me, she is slightly lipping than flutzing. I always thought Kristi Yamaguchi is the one who slightly flutzed.

Here is Midori's video that can see her taking off on the deep back outside edge.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=_5NPk3C5HY8&mode=related&search=

 

[goldenpleasures]

Midori Ito flutzed a bit but what would you rather see - one of her huge Lutzes or some tiny one that has a very slight outside edge and therefore is "proper".

Midori Ito didn't flutz at all - wherever did you get that idea??? Just take a look at the video posted above. The outside edge could hardly be more obvious.

 

[Mathman]

At first thought I think it sounds rather fair.

I don't think it is so necessary to only do it if it is perfect. That acutely sounds rather pretentious to me. If they can do it "clean" they will get more points.

As far as I can tell, this is the compromise that the ISU came up with. One opinion is what Bekalc (and many, many others) is arguing for: "a Flutz is a flip, end of discussion."

The opposite view is, "nobody's perfect, don't have a cow over a sloppy edge, it's no worse than other mistakes."

The ISU rule is in between (it's OK to have a calf, LOL).

 

[Mathman]

Actually, critics of the present "wrong edge" rule say that it is even worse than before. The reason is, before this year the decision of how much to deduct for a flutz or a lip was left to the discretion of each judge. So in a questionable or mild case, or if it was hard to see from the judges' perspective, some of the judges might take off a substantial GOE and others wouldn't.

But now, the technical panel will call "wrong edge" only in cases that are completely obvious (to the caller and his team), and all three must agree, with no video replay allowed. So there will be lots of flutzes that will not be called.

In this case the judges could still take something off if they wanted to, but they probably wouldn't. There would be pressure to say, "well, the tech specialist didn't call it, so I guess it must be OK. Sure looked like a flutz to me, but oh, well."

 

[bekalc]

I just think a flutzed lutz is unfair to the other skaters. For example, Yu-na Kim has issues with her triple loop, but well there's no jump that she can mask the loop with someone else, so she has to deal with getting zakayaed out. Whereas other skaters like Mao get a slap on the wrist for masking a flutz as a lutzs. I think the fairest solution is to call a lutz a lutz and flip a flip. If skaters can do a lutz with the outside edge then they should get rewarded with that jump, if they can't they shouldn't. I think it's the fairest solution for all.

 

[Mathman]

I think there is a difference between, on the one hand, a skater who cannot do a Lutz, has no interest in ever learning a Lutz, makes no effort to try to do a Lutz, and tries to cheat the system by doing 4 flips...

And on the other hand, a skater who works hard on this difficult element, can do it pretty well much of the time, but once in a while slips up a little and rolls onto a shallow inside edge at the last moment.

I think it's a pretty severe penalty for the second skater if we say, sorry, 0 credit for that element.

While a skater who somehow manages to hold the edge, but underrotates to a double and falls splat on the landing, crashing into the boards -- that skater takes her deductions, but at least ends up with something.

Under the current rules, you get 3 to 5 points for an otherwise excellent jump, fully rotated, proper Lutz-y counterrotation of the upper body, an entry coming in on the "opposite" outside edge curve, good height, nice flow out on the landing.

That's not such an awful compromise, to me.

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

A LUTZ from a back outside edge is a LUTZ.

If there is no back outside edge at the time of take off, it is no longer a lutz. duh. It's not a question of what a skater does in practice. It's what a skater does in front of the judges. duh. Bekalc is correct in calling it a flip because that's what it becomes by definition. But since this is not a man's sport, we can forget the Zayak rule and just give them a tap on the wrist with a -1 in the GOE.

By the way, what is the rationale to award (and it is an award) -1 through -3? More pussyfooting for an incorrect jump score? Why can't the mishap be standardized? Anyone who can not comply with the definition of a lutz should automatically receive a -3 GOE

The argument that there was an attempt is soooo weak. Can you imagine an attempt at pushing a basketball into the basket for two points but misses and then is awarded one point for the attempt? How sweet!

We'll see how this plays out with the culturally-minded judges.

Joe

 

[Mathman]

I think it's more like the manly sport of horseshoes.

You try to get a ringer (three points), but if you miss and only get a leaner, that's still 1 point in professional horseshoes and 2 points in the amateur game.

 

[Mathman]

But seriously... ...IMHO we have to think this through, not just thump the Bible.

Suppose we say, inside edge = flip, period.

Here are three short programs.

Rachael: 3Lz+2T, 3Lo, 2A.

She has a terrible flutz, so she gets scored for 3F+2T (6.8 points), 3Lo (5 points), 2A (3.5 points).

Total: 15.3

Caroline: 3Lz+2T, 3F, 2A.

She also flutzes her Lutz, so she gets scored as 3F+2T (6.8 points), 3F (0 points), 2A (3.5 points).

Total: 10.3

Rachael and Caroline made the exact same mistake, an improper take-off egde on her Lutz attempt. But that same mistake cost Caroline 5.5 points, and only cost Rachael 0.5 points.

Is this really how we would like the scoring to go?

Personally, I think the penalty for Rachael's flutz should be greater than half a point.

Mirai: 3F+2T, 3Lo, 2A.

She does everything perfectly, so she gets 6.8 + 5.0 + 3.5 = 15.3.

Mirai scored exactly the same as Rachael, even though Rachael made a bad mistake and Mirai skated without error. Rachael made out like a bandit. She made a huge mistake but was not penalized for it, because -- well, there is no such jump as a flutz, so her jump was scored as a flip and she got full credit for it.

 

[bekalc]

Mathman, but your scoring system isn't accurate. For example, a lot of the skaters who have terrible flutzs, know they flutz; thus, they will probably not choose to do a triple lutz and a triple flip in their short program, if they know that they could be severely penalized for it.

I contest that if you were to actually start calling triple flutzs what they are, that
1. We would probably see a lot less lutz attempts.

2. We would also in the long run see more real lutzes. I suspect that a lot of skaters start flutzing because its easier and they want the quick points. Then, they develop a bad habit for competition..

My main issue is I think the flutzing has gotten way out of hand. At least in Tara/Sasha/Sarah's case, the girls could do the other triple jumps. Now, we have skaters arriving who not only flutz, but also cannot seem to do let's say a salchow, or in Mao's case have issues with the salchow and the triple toe. So you have girls who are only doing 3 triple jumps, and these girls are gonig straight to the top of the sport!

It's not just, Mao it's also Caroline Zhang apparently now. Who left out the salchow in her latest performance. I'm sorry but this sincerely bugs me.
It's not right.. What's the point of even having a triple lutz? And it also means that the triple flip is basically the money jump.

I'm sorry, I don't think it's a fair compromise. People who don't know the triple loop, they don't get to do a salchow and call it a loop.

 

[Mathman]

Excellent points.

I have to admit, I go back and forth on this. I do think that the key now is to enforce with vigor the rule that is currently in place.

For instance, if a skater knows she has a bad flutz (in the -3 GOE range), she would not be able to cheat the system by doing two "Lutzes" and two flips (i.e., four flips).

She would get only 3 points for each of her Lutzes. She would be far better off to do two loops and two flips instead.

 

[Mathman]

PS. Also, a no-flutz rule wouldn't hurt a three-jump skater with a triple Axel. She could do 3A, 3A+2T, 3F, 3F+2Lo, 3Lo, 2A+2Lo+2Lo, 2A = 44.8 points, before second half bonuses and GOEs.

So if the goal is to force skaters to do all the jumps, we would need a different strategy than to judge Lutzes more strictly.

 

[SeaniBu]

If there is no back outside edge at the time of take off, it is no longer a Lutz. duh. It's not a question of what a skater does in practice. It's what a skater does in front of the judges. duh. Bekalc is correct in calling it a flip because that's what it becomes by definition.

....that doesn't even make sense really. The fact there is a deduction "ruling" is to say there will be mistakes, and the ones who make the least mistakes.....

So is it safe to say that giving it a Flip designation is to give it less points.......
SO that is a very sensible "point deduction," for it is not a Lutz anyhow.
:agree:

2. We would also in the long run see more real lutzes. I suspect that a lot of skaters start flutzing because its easier and they want the quick points. Then, they develop a bad habit for competition.

excellent points!!!! in the whole post, but this is most definably reason alone to agree.
:agree:

 

[Mathman]

So is it safe to say that giving it a Flip designation is to give it less points.......

SO that is a very sensible "point deduction," for it is not a Lutz anyhow.
:agree:

But there is only a half point difference between a Lutz and a flip. So if you call a failed Lutz attempt a flip, the penalty is only 0.5 points. I don't think this would satisfy the fans who are looking for a major penalty for flutzing.

Under the current rules the the penalty is -1 to -3 points.

If they went with the "call it a flip" rule, a skater could flutz as much as she wanted. If she got away with it, she gets 6.0 points. If she got caught, she gets 5.5.

The only thing she would have to be careful of is if she planned 2 Lutzes and 2 flips. That would go out the window if a skater had to worry about having her Lutz called a flip.

On the other hand, getting rid of the universal 2 Lutz, 2 flip programs would be a good thing in any case. It's boring when every skater does exactly the same thing, which is what the NJS practically forces upon choreographers.

 

[SeaniBu]

So if you call a failed Lutz attempt a flip, the penalty is only 0.5 points. I don't think this would satisfy the fans who are looking for a major penalty for flutzing.

Why is it having to be so "major?"