What determines the difficulty of a jump combination?

[Sam-Skwantch]

Is there a video somewhere? I'd love to see that!

Moris KVITELASHVILI from Eteri's group did a 2a-4t a while back. It's a bit sketchy but at least it shows it's doable. I always tell myself that Julia is taking notes and that's why she is right there.

https://youtu.be/B958exLmbWA

 

[Interspectator]

But why can't we say the same about the ladies. Is Liza Tuktamysheva "not pushing herself" because she did 3A, 3Lz, and 3T+3T (in the second half) in the short program?

I think that is still an extremely ambitious jump layout. I don't feel that she's holding back in the jumps. Rather, she has reached her limit as to what jumps she hopes to land consistently at this time.

If combos like a 3Lz-3T or a 4T-3T were given a bonus, how much bonus should they get? What is a fair boost?
And would it negate the lead in the TES department that Elizaveta and Yuzu now enjoy with their high-scoring solo jumps and slightly 'easier' combos?

For example, should Patrick's program with 4T-3T 4T 3A 3Lz-3T trump Yuzu's 4S, 4T, 3A-3T, 3A-lo-3S?
What do you think?

 

[matmuh]

But why can't we say the same about the ladies. Is Liza Tuktamysheva "not pushing herself" because she did 3A, 3Lz, and 3T+3T (in the second half) in the short program?

i never said " she doesnt push herself". she does 3A for gods sake, and plans total of 3 of them as far as i know

i think every skater does what they possibly can and push themselves, why wouldnt they when its getting more competetive everyday? its just that some are just more capable than others, but its easy for us to judge since we dont see what they are going through

 

[Lys]

I think that is still an extremely ambitious jump layout. I don't feel that she's holding back in the jumps. Rather, she has reached her limit as to what jumps she hopes to land consistently at this time.

If combos like a 3Lz-3T or a 4T-3T were given a bonus, how much bonus should they get? What is a fair boost?
And would it negate the lead in the TES department that Elizaveta and Yuzu now enjoy with their high-scoring solo jumps and slightly 'easier' combos?

For example, should Patrick's program with 4T-3T 4T 3A 3Lz-3T trump Yuzu's 4S, 4T, 3A-3T, 3A-lo-3S?
What do you think?

Two different quads + two axel combos are more challenging than the same kind of quad (one solo, one in combo) and no axel combination, to me.

But what's actually easier... that depends solely on a skater's skill... I mean, I'm pretty sure that for Yuzuru a 3f+lo+3s would be more difficult than a 3a+lo+3s or any other 3a combos...

 

[OS]

i never said " she doesnt push herself". she does 3A for gods sake, and plans total of 3 of them as far as i know

i think every skater does what they possibly can and push themselves, why wouldnt they when its getting more competetive everyday? its just that some are just more capable than others, but its easy for us to judge since we dont see what they are going through

I would be super impressed if Liza manage to bring out 3A as early as her 1st competition of the season rather than towards the end. I reckon she is likely to do what she did last season, coasting on 3t3t consistency, it is likely to be a more defensive strategy than last year, and playing more on COP smarts until say if she faces someone poses a threat, someone like Adelina (if she comes back), or Mao or when Mao chose to bring out the 3A earlier. Is Liza going to Japan Open?

 

[Mathman]

I would be super impressed if Liza manage to bring out 3A as early as her 1st competition of the season rather than towards the end. I reckon she is likely to do what she did last season, coasting on 3t3t consistency, it is likely to be a more defensive strategy than last year, and playing more on COP smarts until say if she faces someone poses a threat, someone like Adelina (if she comes back), or Mao or when Mao chose to bring out the 3A earlier. Is Liza going to Japan Open?

That is not such an outrageous approach, though. Many athletes facing a long season adopt the strategy of coasting in the early going, then adding more advanced stuff to the playbook as the season progresses and the competition gets tougher.

 

[OS]

That is not such an outrageous approach, though. Many athletes facing a long season adopt the strategy of coasting in the early going, then adding more advanced stuff to the playbook as the season progresses and the competition gets tougher.

There's nothing wrong with the approach. However the points rewarding system is outrageous because it doesn't allow proper competition, there's little risk with this strategy, when there should be.

Put it this way, if either Yuna/Mao/Carolina has been coasting on 3t3t for majority of the season without a difficult combo in place and relies on PCS momentum and still dominate the field and rivals, there'd be massive injustice cries already, and there should be.

 

[Mathman]

I think there are two separate conversations going on here.

First, should we give extra points for jumps done in combination, as opposed to jumps done singly. And second, is the 4.3 base value for a 3T too high in comparison with harder jumps.

Here is a comparison that straddles both questions. Which deserves the greater reward, a 3T+3T combination (8.6 points) or a triple Flip and a separate double Axel (also 8.6 points in all)?

Would it be an improvement in the CoP if the base value for the 3T were lowered to 4.0, but then a bonus of 7.5% applied to the combo?

 

[OS]

I would like to see if there are any real data on the % rate of success and failure of various triple triple attempts over last 4 years and have these data some how feed into decisions to quantify how much the scale of value should be worth. As it is, it seems totally arbitrary on some decision maker's whim that doesn't make sense.

For example if over 90% of 3t3t had been successfully done over last 4 years including after half way point, then why should it get 10% bonus at all? IF the whole purpose of rewarding bonus is about risks. That and the GOEs should really be evaluated, proportionate reward is the way to go. I'd also argue there's not enough differentials between hardest to the easiest jump elements, since for the moment difficulty hardly affect the results when you account for GOEs.

 

[moriel]

I would like to see if there are any real data on the % rate of success and failure of various triple triple attempts over last 4 years and have these data some how feed into decisions to quantify how much the scale of value should be worth. As it is, it seems totally arbitrary on some decision maker's whim that doesn't make sense.

For example if over 90% of 3t3t had been successfully done over last 4 years including after half way point, then why should it get 10% bonus at all? IF the whole purpose of rewarding bonus is about risks. That and the GOEs should really be evaluated, proportionate reward is the way to go. I'd also argue there's not enough differentials between hardest to the easiest jump elements, since for the moment difficulty hardly affect the results when you account for GOEs.

hmmmm maybe could be done... we could actually do the study =D
How should we collect the data? imho just the big ISU competitions like gp final, europeans, 4cc, worlds for all years?
imho, we should keep it general though: for example, if studying the 10% bonus, either see if its worth it for all jumps or not worth it for all jumps together.

 

[Mathman]

I think it would be hard to draw conclusions just from the success rate on attempts. Most skaters don't try the hardest elements in the first place, because they are beyond the skater's skill.

 

[moriel]

I think it would be hard to draw conclusions just from the success rate on attempts. Most skaters don't try the hardest elements in the first place, because they are beyond the skater's skill.

A few other factors could affect it too, for example the actual jump sequence (for example, jumping a triple after doing 3 quads/quad attempts with falls is not the same thing as jumping a triple after 3 triples).

For the elements, id stick to just triples, as they are pretty much a common element for top skaters. And see how it goes.

 

[leafygreens]

I'd like to see the bonus be applied at the 75% point of the program - after 75% of the program time has elapsed, there is a bonus with a multiplier that makes it worth it to do a 3-3 at the end. I also think that goe should have a multiplier if the element is performed after the 3/4 mark. If it's good GOE is amplified...if it's poorly done, then the penalty is more severe than it usually would be. I feel like it's more exciting and incentivizes putting a really good jumping pass at the end. If you can't do it well with that kind of bonus structure, then do what you can do really well and max out your potential.

Having jumping passes all at once (read: the second the current second half bonus kicks in) just makes the program look sloppy and carelessly constructed.

Do the best of what you can do, not some sloppy gaming the system program.

That seems like an interesting way to keep skaters from putting all their jumps in the 2nd half. There wouldn't be time to put all their jumps in the last quarter! But I don't know if all of this tinkering is really necessary. It bugs me how ISU changes things year after year. I'm just predicting what I think the ISU will try next. I wouldn't put it past them to come up with something like a 75% rule.

 

[AsadaFanBoy]

That seems like an interesting way to keep skaters from putting all their jumps in the 2nd half. There wouldn't be time to put all their jumps in the last quarter! But I don't know if all of this tinkering is really necessary. It bugs me how ISU changes things year after year. I'm just predicting what I think the ISU will try next. I wouldn't put it past them to come up with something like a 75% rule.

That was exactly my thinking. If it's at the 75% point, it'd be really difficult to put two jumping passes into that. I'd like a highlight to really be a highlight, not a barrage of points grabbing.

You have a very good point though, all of that tinkering isn't necessary and the ISU changes it up too often, seemingly without considering the impact on programs/program construction.

 

[OS]

hmmmm maybe could be done... we could actually do the study =D
How should we collect the data? imho just the big ISU competitions like gp final, europeans, 4cc, worlds for all years?
imho, we should keep it general though: for example, if studying the 10% bonus, either see if its worth it for all jumps or not worth it for all jumps together.

That would be a massive under taking project, but not impossible. Yes I agree with MM that it would be hard to draw conclusions based on success rate on attempts alone. However just by just comparing the amount of time people include it on their elements on a relative terms, they provide useful indicators on rarity and difficulty of the jumps, therefore proves useful indicators on weighing risk and rewards.

I like the 75% rule more than 50% rule, but it still doesn't resolve the the fact such rule can be abused unless you also consider which elements are worthy of the risks and should be rewarded more. How far should one go? Carolina's last 3S at Bolero Version 1 was a great pay off which the entire music choreography has been building up to, it ends up being the greatest risk jumps in that the whole program wouldn't work without it (it is like a blow up a bolloon, she land, it flies, she miss it, the momentum blew/bursts). Should we reward the last major jump element more then since it is obviously the end of a marathon, requires stamina and has the greatest risk? It may get rid of these typical spins at the end proceed by step sequences!

I actually think the musicality of jumps makes it harder than the order they are in, take off, landing to the exact beat.

 

[gkelly]

I actually think the musicality of jumps makes it harder than the order they are in, take off, landing to the exact beat.

And if it works, that can be rewarded in GOE and in the Choreography component and maybe Interpretation as well.

I hate to see the scores try to micromanage too much when skaters should place their elements temporally in the belief that certain layouts are intrinsically better than others.

The only reason for an automatic bonus for doing jumps later in the program is because it's physically harder to do them when fatigued.

Rewards for balancing the distribution of elements aesthetically should not be automatic. But they should be available to judges (in the Choreography score especially) if a skater does choose to and succeed at doing something intentionally aesthetic with the layout, rather than simply timing the elements for maximum likelihood of landing successfully.

 

[Mathman]

But I don't know if all of this tinkering is really necessary.

It is necessary to the ISU. The ISU has a Technical Committee and various other officials whose job it is to tinker. If they didn't tinker, they would have nothing to do and their importance in the organizational hierarchy would decline.

Carolina's last 3S at Bolero Version 1 was a great pay off which the entire music choreography has been building up to, it ends up being the greatest risk jumps in that the whole program wouldn't work without it (it is like a blow up a bolloon, she land, it flies, she miss it, the momentum blew/bursts). Should we reward the last major jump element more then since it is obviously the end of a marathon, requires stamina and has the greatest risk?…

The reward could come in the PCSs without needing to adjust base values. I don't think base values are the place to reward hitting the jump right to the beat, incorporating the jump into the choreography, blowing up the balloon to a grand climax, etc. JMO.

It may get rid of these typical spins at the end proceed by step sequences!

The problem with those lame final spins is that they incorporate a lot of off-putting changes of position, which causes the program to end with a whimper rather than a bang. A simple upright scratch spin -- just throw caution to winds and spin for all you're worth, forget the points you might be leaving on the table -- that's a very exciting and satisfying finish.

Edited to add: What gkelly said.

 

[leafygreens]

It is necessary to the ISU. The ISU has a Technical Committee and various other officials whose job it is to tinker. If they didn't tinker, they would have nothing to do and their importance in the organizational hierarchy would decline.

They have to justify their existence by making changes that might not be necessary.

 

[russianbratz]

Wow. Borderline sexist. Yeah, that's me! My point is that the top two man are not pushing themselves as hard as the certainly could because of CoP. Or do you think that Hanyu and Fernandez are not capable of doing 4T-3T or 4S-3T?

I think its pretty disingenuous to say that because men don't do a quad in combination, that skating programs are overall so much easier than they used to be. Do you think Hanyu or Javi could consistently pull off clean long programs with 4T+3T combinations? Because they rarely pull that off with existing content. The corollary to the men's quad is still the women's triple triple. Just because Tuk puts a 3T+3T in the second half of her short, after a 3A in the beginning, does not mean we should "be satisfied" with easy triple-triple combinations across the board for women. Making this comparison in isolation and couching it in gender differences is patronizing to female athletes. Again, if anything I would like to see women who compete with difficult triple-triples to have some chance against Tuk's current layout.

 

[solani]

I think its pretty disingenuous to say that because men don't do a quad in combination, that skating programs are overall so much easier than they used to be. Do you think Hanyu or Javi could consistently pull off clean long programs with 4T+3T combinations? Because they rarely pull that off with existing content. The corollary to the men's quad is still the women's triple triple. Just because Tuk puts a 3T+3T in the second half of her short, after a 3A in the beginning, does not mean we should "be satisfied" with easy triple-triple combinations across the board for women. Making this comparison in isolation and couching it in gender differences is patronizing to female athletes. Again, if anything I would like to see women who compete with difficult triple-triples to have some chance against Tuk's current layout.

You confuse me. Sexist and now disingenuous? What have I done to deserve such severe judging from you?
I have never said that the skating programs are less difficult nowadays, in fact I do think that there are too many jumping passes. Fernandez and Hanyu try to max out their TES and they can do it better without doing the most difficult combinations. They want to win, so that's not their fault or their trainer's fault, it's a good strategy to win competitions fair and square and I don't have to like it. But I would love to see those combinations from them.
For me the equivalent to triple-triple for women is quad-triple for men and I won't change my mind about that, and I don't think that I presume too far.
Anyway, a 3T-3T is a propper triple-triple and exciting to watch when it's well done. I enjoyed Julia's 3T-3T last season very much. I want to see high quality elements. I will always prefer a high and sure 3T-3T over a mediocre 3Lz-3T!