What will You Be Looking for from Your Favorite Skaters?

[antmanb]

It's in the body which has already turned in the direction of the jump, then comes some sort of a make believe toe off and jump. To get a better view watch some novice or juvenile skaters turn their bodies half way, then pick the ice and do a waltz jump-like or axel-like. It's also used in combo jumps when the toe loop is the last jump of the combo.In fact it happens quite often in combo jumps. The judges do not seem to care about it, and the Tech Caller is too busy with URs that he doesn't care about it either.

I disagree i think the callers definitely do down-grade jumps that take off like you describe. Off the top of my head both Mao and Mai Asada had triple and double toes down graded due to the pre-rotated toe. As did Meisner with the second have of her 3/3 combos.

The toe-loop has pick in backwards, the twist on it once it's in the ice seems to be ok, but if you "pick" in using the bottom toe pick with the skate facing forwards you'll get down graded.

Ant

 

[mskater93]

The toe-loop has pick in backwards, the twist on it once it's in the ice seems to be ok, but if you "pick" in using the bottom toe pick with the skate facing forwards you'll get down graded.

Ant

Exactly - check mark is OK, spin mark and turn forward = UR

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

Exactly - check mark is OK, spin mark and turn forward = UR

Ant seemed to be talking about the toe-offs. Can a wrong edge toe-off, if he is correct, be considered a UR which is judged on the landing?

 

[antmanb]

Ant seemed to be talking about the toe-offs. Can a wrong edge toe-off, if he is correct, be considered a UR which is judged on the landing?

Under-rotations are not just called on the landing, i seem to recall toe-loops taking off forwards being mentioned specifically in the rules somewhere. I can't find it at the moment but i'm sure i've read it. If you look for protocols for Meisnner in the 06/07 season yuo'll see her downgraded 3T. Also for Mai Asada she even had her 2T down graded.

Ant

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

Under-rotations are not just called on the landing, i seem to recall toe-loops taking off forwards being mentioned specifically in the rules somewhere. I can't find it at the moment but i'm sure i've read it. If you look for protocols for Meisnner in the 06/07 season yuo'll see her downgraded 3T. Also for Mai Asada she even had her 2T down graded.
Ant

Toe Loops and Axels are the only two jumps that one can "secretly" as Laak puts it, pre rotate a jump. The others are quite obvious and can be seen easily on the ice. The "secret" jumps are body and free leg movements and not the prerotations one sees on the ice. This was first discussed AFAIK, about Ashley Wagner in Quebec GP, and then about Evan Lysacek's axel technique. At the time, the Caller did not say anything about this. (Maybe he should have) but the judges did on their own give out -GoEs. There was no mention in the protocols of URs. (Maybe there should have been).

Ant - from what you say, can you clearly see a notation in the protocols that Mao got downgraded for a pre underrotation and not for a landing underrotaton. That would make it interesting to watch for this notation in the future. If it is not clear, then fans and protocol readers would just say it was a landing underotation, and hence, Laak would be so much more correct to call them "secret" if the Caller misses it.

 

[antmanb]

Toe Loops and Axels are the only two jumps that one can "secretly" as Laak puts it, pre rotate a jump.

If that is what Laak says then he is simply wrong, toe axels and axels that take off backwards are downgraded as i've mentioned previously.

The others are quite obvious and can be seen easily on the ice. The "secret" jumps are body and free leg movements and not the prerotations one sees on the ice.

Again if this is what laak says then I would have to disagree. It is questionable how "free" the leg is in a toe-loop since both will be ont he ice for a split second at take off and if he is advocating picking the free leg in, in any way other than straight back getting the top toe pick of the boot into the ice then this leaves the jump susceptible to down grade by virtue of it becoming a toe axel.

This was first discussed AFAIK, about Ashley Wagner in Quebec GP, and then about Evan Lysacek's axel technique. At the time, the Caller did not say anything about this. (Maybe he should have) but the judges did on their own give out -GoEs. There was no mention in the protocols of URs. (Maybe there should have been).

I can't recall off the op of my head how these skaters did in this GP but i'm fairly certain Evan's had his triple axel downgraded at least once on the basis of the take off.

Ant - from what you say, can you clearly see a notation in the protocols that Mao got downgraded for a pre underrotation and not for a landing underrotaton. That would make it interesting to watch for this notation in the future. If it is not clear, then fans and protocol readers would just say it was a landing underotation, and hence, Laak would be so much more correct to call them "secret" if the Caller misses it.

No the only notation there is in the protocls is the "<" which denotes that that jump has been downgraded. The reason i particularly mentioned Mai Asada was because i remember watching her toe-loops very carefully and noting that she absolutely did land all the way round and backwards on her toe-loops (doubles as the back half of combinations) in one particular competition and noted that she had taken off by turning the picking foot out to forwards and springing up only off the bottom toe pick and edge of the "picking" foot. When i then looked at the protocols the toe-loops had been downgraded which says to me - the callers are definitely looking out for that particular error on the toe-loop.

Received wisdom from coaches in the UK at a camp i recently attended was that Toe-Axels (or toe-waltz jumps in our case!) would be downgraded, as would salchows and loops that let the edge come round more than a quarter of a turn - but that is specifically the edge when you look at the tracing on the ice and not the toe-pick graze/flag/check. I did a salchow that i thought was suspect and the coach noted that the edge came round less than a quarter turn which was fine, despite the check mark at the end of the jump showing that the toe pick left the ice nearly another 90 degree round from the edge i'd traced on the entrance. I was told that was ok.

Ant

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

No the only notation there is in the protocls is the "<" which denotes that that jump has been downgraded. The reason i particularly mentioned Mai Asada was because i remember watching her toe-loops very carefully and noting that she absolutely did land all the way round and backwards on her toe-loops (doubles as the back half of combinations) in one particular competition and noted that she had taken off by turning the picking foot out to forwards and springing up only off the bottom toe pick and edge of the "picking" foot. When i then looked at the protocols the toe-loops had been downgraded which says to me - the callers are definitely looking out for that particular error on the toe-loop.

Received wisdom from coaches in the UK at a camp i recently attended was that Toe-Axels (or toe-waltz jumps in our case!) would be downgraded,
Ant

With the only one notation for a downgrade in the protocols, when one is looking in the protocols and not having seen the event will not know whether it was a Toe axels or a illegitimate landing. similarly with a forward pick Toe Loop. No?

I would highly recommend a symbol for prerotations.

 

[antmanb]

With the only one notation for a downgrade in the protocols, when one is looking in the protocols and not having seen the event will not know whether it was a Toe axels or a illegitimate landing. similarly with a forward pick Toe Loop. No?

That's absolutely right - there's no way to tell without having seen the competition.

I would highly recommend a symbol for prerotations.

For me, i think that might just be adding to the micro management of the system. We don't have a different symbols for other errors jumps e.g. we don't know whether a jump received -1 or -2 GOE because there was a hand down, step out, turn out etc. At some point i think you have to watch the competition, there's only so much the protocls can actually tell you.

Ant

 

[mskater93]

I would highly recommend a symbol for prerotations.

That would make program reviews even longer than they currently are while the tech panel fumbled with !, e, <, and some other symbol along with reviewing spin and step sequence features.

There are people who are notorious "toe axel-ers" who you just know when they get a < on the back half of a combo is for that. Mao has corrected hers, but Mai is one for sure.

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

That would make program reviews even longer than they currently are while the tech panel fumbled with !, e, <, and some other symbol along with reviewing spin and step sequence features.

There are people who are notorious "toe axel-ers" who you just know when they get a < on the back half of a combo is for that. Mao has corrected hers, but Mai is one for sure.

Indeed, it might make the program reviews longer, but what is the rush to judgment. Many skaters who have been marked down for prerotation underrotations will not learn from it and believe it is for the Landing.

I'm one of the few armchair judges who consider the Takeoff of a Jump more important than that of air rotations and landings. After all, all jumps have the same directional air turns and landings. Of course, the majority of fans see the air rotations as the most important part of the jump, and I differ from that group. That to me, is circusy and barrel jumping-like.

I had thought prerotations were in the domain of the judges GoEs. But according to Ant, the URs are given to prerotations and landings, and as fans, we will not be able to differentiate which in the protocols. A fan must see the program and see for himself if it was a prerotation. Unfortunately, two fans may not see the same thing. I don't know why that would take so much more time when a simple addition to the symbol, p or l could be added to the symbol and have fans know the skater is prerotating and getting URs for it. Good for the skater to know, too.

btw, MSSkater - Thank you for bringing this topic up and we didn't drift away from it.

 

[i love to skate]

Adding a symbol that differentiates between take off or landing pre-rotation is just going to add to the confusion. There is already so much debate and controversy on the topic. I don't think this will help at all.

 

[antmanb]

Indeed, it might make the program reviews longer, but what is the rush to judgment. Many skaters who have been marked down for prerotation underrotations will not learn from it and believe it is for the Landing.

I canot believe there is a single skater or coach who competes (or trains in the case of the coach) at the international level who would know what their/their skaters flaws are and wouldn't know that under-rotation was given because of the take off and not the landing. Were you thinking of anyone specific Joe?

Ant

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

Adding a symbol that differentiates between take off or landing pre-rotation is just going to add to the confusion. There is already so much debate and controversy on the topic. I don't think this will help at all.

How would you and the skater tell this difference that the jump had a prerotation UR or a Landing UR. I think that's the confusion.

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

I canot believe there is a single skater or coach who competes (or trains in the case of the coach) at the international level who would know what their/their skaters flaws are and wouldn't know that under-rotation was given because of the take off and not the landing. Were you thinking of anyone specific Joe?Ant

I was not talking about training, just competition.
I think the skater or coach may want to argue where the skater UR'd, since the skater landed perfectly and was not aware of anything incorrect. Also fans who did not see the skate but want to check the protocols would want to know.

 

[antmanb]

I was not talking about training, just competition.
I think the skater or coach may want to argue where the skater UR'd, since the skater landed perfectly and was not aware of anything incorrect. Also fans who did not see the skate but want to check the protocols would want to know.

I wasn't talking about training either. As a skater you can definitely feel the difference between a toe-loop and toe-axel (or toe-waltz jump). If, as a skater or coach, you notice that a jump has been downgraded you would re-watch the tape and see where you made the error. A coach or skater would look at all phases of the jump to see where the error came.

The protocols are there simply as a summary of the judges marks, not as a substitute for watching the competition. Like i said in a previous post you do not get any notations to say if a skater put a hand down, turned out of a jump. You are not even told what a deduction is for (it could be a fall, you could verify if any elements have a clean sweep of -3s, but it wouldn't tell you if a skater fell and it wasn't on an element), it could be for a fall, time violation, costume violation, music violation. I don't think it would be practical to have a different symbol for pre-rotation on the take off and under-rotation on the landing.

Ant

 

[i love to skate]

How would you and the skater tell this difference that the jump had a prerotation UR or a Landing UR. I think that's the confusion.

The coach will know....it is their job to fix and tinker with technique. The skater can also tell what went wrong with a jump.

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

Rather than drag this out any further. Let us be happy that we agreed on that prerrotations exists for Toe Loops and Axels, as Laak has said, they can be secretive if not caught by the Caller. I'm ok with this as I do not think of any official in any sport as being infalible.

As to listing a symbol to differentiate the difference between a prerotation and a landing rotation because : coaches know; it's confusing; and longer reviews of programs, and one must have seen the error in competition since it will not be seen in the protocols. I will go along with the small consensus that differentiating is unnecessary.

 

[mskater93]

The coach will know....it is their job to fix and tinker with technique. The skater can also tell what went wrong with a jump.

If the coach doesn't know (or chooses to ignore it), it's time for a new tech coach

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

If the coach doesn't know (or chooses to ignore it), it's time for a new tech coach

I did mention infallibility, What's sad at least for me, is we will not know for sure if the UR was due to a prerotation or a landing without witnessing the skate and see what the Caller sees on his monitor. Oh well, that's it. There isn't anymore.

 

[mskater93]

IMO, it is the coach's responsibility to do the following:
1) schedule a critique with a technical controller and/or specialist once the program is set to receive feedback on levels and iffy elements (I think for the enveloped skaters in the US, this is part of "summer monitoring")
2) review protocols after competition. Ask for feedback/critique if available from tech panel
3) review video from competition with protocol available. Make notes of what he/she observes as root cause of low levels and/or under rotations and concentrate on that.