Will Mao Asada Make It to the 2018 Games?

[ioanna]

Hmm, I wonder if these rules were put forth to target a skater like Satoko, most of these rules will hurt her the most.

In the end she still gets what everyone thinks she deserves. Just switch her PCS and TES around and she would be getting the same score. Moreover, most skaters get +1.40 GOE for their 3-3 if they execute them cleanly, she gets +0.70. Basically it's +1 all over the board and a skater only needs to fulfill 2 of the 8 bullet points proposed by the ISU to be able to receive +1. In Satoko's case, "effortless throughout", "good flow from entry to exit" or "element matched to the musical structure" can meet the requirements. It's the spins, the choreo sequence and the step sequences that give her the biggest GOE points, and deservedly so.

4. More credit for more powerful, big jumps versus little jumps

+1.40 GOE vs +0.70 GOE, that means Satoko can execute her combination as clean as she possibly can but she will always get half the GOE points a skater like Gracie Gold or Anna Pogorilaya would get for that same combination. How much more credit would be enough?

 

[miki88]

Then in what way can the system be balance to benefit all skaters? If I recall, changes post 2010 have benefited Mao the most rather than magnifying her weaknesses. 70% reduction on UR and allowing 3A in the SP ensured Mao would be a top finisher if she doesn't fall. You cannot blame the system for punishing falsely executed jumps/landings. Why is it that a jump should be rewarded a "high" amount when it is clearly done wrongly? Just because a program is pleasing to your eyes doesn't mean you ignore all the problems in the technical part of the program. Surely the general audience who doesn't know figure skating in depth will have hard time understanding such low scores for beautifully performed program, but sacrificing the legitimacy of the sport for audience gathering is equally wrong. It is also not fair for other skaters who've rotated all the jumps with correct edges. CoP has problems of itself such as not having an incentive for going say, 2 3-3 or 3Lo combos, but 6.0 has even more problems in that it fails to punish wrong jumps which I think should be addressed more since we're at a point where 7 triple program is the "norm." Plus, going for a hard jump is a risk itself. 3A is difficult, but if you want to be rewarded in CoP, you better jump that with no UR or fall because it's a point game, not who does the most difficult jumps.

You have clearly misconstrued my post. When I say I feel the system isn't balanced, I did not mean it should reward jumps with issues. Nor did I say Mao doesn't have jump issues. I am saying the focus is mostly on jump quality and consistency whereas everything else is secondary. To put matters worse, sometimes high GOE is awarded on jumps when they are merely good (Sotnikova's jumps, Evgenia's jumps). And PCS goes up when skaters land good jumps on a consistent basis despite the fact that their skating skills haven't really changed. The thing about COP is that it should be better than 6.0; that's why it existed in the first place. COP breaks down skating into elements yet the scores still comes down to jumps, consistency, and reputation. If the system were actually used correctly, it would be a more balanced system.

 

[Mathman]

The thing is that some person (or federation) has to push for a rule change; they don't happen randomly. Who would push for a rule change that helps exactly one skater? Would this change have happened when it did if no women were doing the 3A?

To me, there is a difference between the situation where one skater is a catalyst for change and the situation where a rule is instituted specifically to benefit that one skater.

When figures were abolished, Janet Lynn was put forward as the example of the type of skating that the ISU ought to encourage. This is not the same as saying that figures were abolished so that Janet Lynn would have an advantage over other skaters. And in fact, the change was spearheaded at the ISU by a coalition of small federations together with officials with an eye on television revenue, led by Sonia Bianchetti. The UnitedStates Figure Skating Association opposed the change (and Lynn never benefitted).

 

[MiRé]

You have clearly misconstrued my post. When I say I feel the system isn't balanced, I did not mean it should reward jumps with issues. Nor did I say Mao doesn't have jump issues. I am saying the focus is mostly on jump quality and consistency whereas everything else is secondary. To put matters worse, sometimes high GOE is awarded on jumps when they are merely good (Sotnikova's jumps, Evgenia's jumps). And PCS goes up when skaters land good jumps on a consistent basis despite the fact that their skating skills haven't really changed. The thing about COP is that it should be better than 6.0; that's why it existed in the first place. COP breaks down skating into elements yet the scores still comes down to jumps, consistency, and reputation. If the system were actually used correctly, it would be a more balanced system.

In that case, I agree with you that the current system is not used correctly. But that does not mean the current system is broken by itself. In fact, I think it does a great job in rewarding quality jumps and punishing mistakes, and it's perhaps the fairest way to judge the technical part of the program. I think it's only broken because of the politics that goes behind the sport and judges who are clearly not following the bullet points when giving out GOEs (I'm not sure if you agree with this considering you didn't mention about politics).
IMO, Until politics no longer play in FS, CoP would remain unbalanced.

 

[OS]

In the end she still gets what everyone thinks she deserves. Just switch her PCS and TES around and she would be getting the same score. Moreover, most skaters get +1.40 GOE for their 3-3 if they execute them cleanly, she gets +0.70. Basically it's +1 all over the board and a skater only needs to fulfill 2 of the 8 bullet points proposed by the ISU to be able to receive +1. In Satoko's case, "effortless throughout", "good flow from entry to exit" or "element matched to the musical structure" can meet the requirements. It's the spins, the choreo sequence and the step sequences that give her the biggest GOE points, and deservedly so.


+1.40 GOE vs +0.70 GOE, that means Satoko can execute her combination as clean as she possibly can but she will always get half the GOE points a skater like Gracie Gold or Anna Pogorilaya would get for that same combination. How much more credit would be enough?

With all due respect. If you really look into it, the scoring criteria are faulty and made little sense in the first place. So much so it looks like a rush job by an accountants rather than someone is familiar and have a passion for what makes this a unique sport. It fails to acknowledge all these bullets points should not be equal in difficulty in the first place, no different than all jumps are not equal in a proper Olympic standard 'sport'. How do you measure Mao's 3A at a young age to today for example. And that there should be a few more bullet points not added when it should.

Current standard equalise everything

• Unexpected / creative / difficult entry
• Clear recognizable steps/free skating movements immediately preceding element
• Varied position in the air / delay in rotation
• Great height and/or distance
• Superior extension on landing / creative exit
• Superior flow in and out (and in-between in jump combinations / sequences)

One just need to look at the above and quickly realise the set up clearly advantage the young and petite, made it about quantity by conquering gravity by nature's advantage (petite, skinny, pre pube, less work), instead of how it should be: Conquering gravity DESPITE of nature, and make it all about atheleticism, technique, maturity, quality, finesse.

Bear in mind to truely measure qualitative of TECHNICAL SCORING (not artisticis) in a JUMP (what is a jump in a jump?)in a sporting competition, i believe the following concept is better

• Great height and/or distance +6 / -6
• Varied position in the air / delay in rotation +5 /-5
• Superior flow in and out (and in-between in jump combinations / sequences) +4 / -4
• Unexpected / creative / difficult entry +3 /-3
• Clear recognizable steps / free skating movements immediately preceding element +2 / -2
• Superior extension on landing / creative exit +1 / -1

Factored according to jumps. ie/ the GOE of a 3T3T should NOT be the same as 3Lz3T or 3A2T etc.
It is the principle of the rewarding system I am concerned about.

In an ideal setting, each judges should be assigned to only focus to look for their assigned bullet points and mark them + or -, then the system tally them up to create a score that is more reflective of the various quality to an element, rather than some random + 1,2,3 per element based on some gut reaction with little time to actually process what they are looking for. It is a more transparent way of measure the sport and discourage biases (and cheats).

On top of these I'd also add the following bullet points

• Jump / Landing integrate with the music and choreography on time as a highlight
• Set up / air positions are not excessively done or predictable
• Jump is not at a vantage point that is designed hide to hide the flaws of the skater
• Personal breakthroughs

(This is a tough one, may be just for elite competitions) - Skaters should be encouraged for putting up new jumps / jump combo or take risks that is outside of their comfort zone, or for ace something they have consistenly problem with, UR, under performed for, something like Adam's 4lz if by miracle does manifest, it deserve some extra points for the fact he failed so many times, but still keep going for it. Similar with Jin's 4lz just because no one do them, like Mao's 3A. Or even Ashley's 3/3 difficult combos. May be the computer can generate this by check past record, as well as across the field on the rarily of successful combos (yes this add bonus to successful 3loop3loops.)

 

[ioanna]

post

With all due respect, the scoring criteria is what the ISU says it is and the one currently used in the judging of figure skating. It's not perfect, sometimes they recognize their faults (i.e. the new change in the zayak rule), but everyone has their own ideas about how it should be and the truth is that most of us here are not technical specialists.

Great height and/or distance +6 / -6

How high is high enough to get +6? How long should the distance be to get +6? They don't all jump to the same height/distance so how do you "truly" measure the quality of the jump? The criteria would still remain subjective and prone to manipulating.

So you give scores to GOE bullets and then what? Apply the same procedure the technical panel does for equalized bullet points.

1) Skater A has great height or distance (+6), superior flow in and out (+4), clear recognizable steps (+3) and superior extension on landing (+1)
2) Skater B doesn't have great height/distance (-6), does have superior flow in and out (+4), does have clear recognizable steps (let's say +1) and superior extension on landing (+1)

I've no idea how these points would be factorized but by the looks of it, skater B would still get half the GOE points skater A would get.

One just need to look at the above and quickly realise the set up clearly advantage the young and petite, made it about quantity by conquering gravity by nature's advantage (petite, skinny, pre pube, less work), instead of how it should be: Conquering gravity DESPITE of nature, and make it all about atheleticism, technique, maturity, quality, finesse.

I believe the judging was set up (or at least they tried) to advantage all kinds of skaters and that ideal setting cannot exist, you can't assign 8 separate judges to look for 8 bullet points, also having more other judges in the technical panel to look for underrotations, edge calls and so on. There is a simpler way to achieve that much desired transparency and that is to abolish anonymous judging. That would bring at least some transparency but they don't want that so why would they turn the judging into something even more complicated than it already is.

Skaters should be encouraged for putting up new jumps / jump combo or take risks that is outside of their comfort zone, or for ace something they have consistenly problem with, UR, under performed for, something like Adam's 4lz if by miracle does manifest, it deserve some extra points for the fact he failed so many times, but still keep going for it. Similar with Jin's 4lz just because no one do them, like Mao's 3A. Or even Ashley's 3/3 difficult combos.

Again this is just skating in Wonderland. I disagree with giving extra points to a skater for nailing a jump he or she has been attempting for years. If the jump is executed correctly, he or she should get about the same score another skater has been getting for nailing that same jump competition after competition, otherwise it's plain favoritism and unfair judging. I also disagree with "let's give Boyang more bonus for jumping the 4Lz because he's the only one doing it" or "let's give Ashley's difficult 3/3 combinations bonus points because nobody else is executing them" - this is even more confusing, what exactly is Ashley executing that is more difficult than everyone else's 3-3?

On one hand the GOE scoring is not fair because they're not giving skaters who can execute high jumps enough credit. On the other hand skaters who attempt a jump nobody else is attempting should get bonus points. By this logic if Boyang lands a 4Lz but then steps out of it the -GOE would be canceled by the "only one doing it" bonus and he would still get credit for a poorly executed jump and basically more points than a perfectly executed 4T or 4S by Hanyu - because everyone can do Hanyu's quads.

Anyway this is getting way off topic but I believe small jumpers (Satoko) getting half the GOE points big jumpers (Pogorilaya, or Mao herself on a good day) is enough. Everyone skated clean or almost clean at Worlds and everyone saw what happened. Satoko finished 5th, nowhere near the podium and much less near the 1st position everyone was fearing. Had Satoko received Evgenia, Ashley or Anna's jump GOEs, she would have been on the podium because she had one UR in the SP and a clean FS.

 

[topaz emerald]

Let me remind you again. Korea has absolutely no politicking power in figure skating, and to be frank, Yuna herself brought her the fame, not KSU(Korean skating union) in any shape or form. I don't know if you read the news, but in the recent Korean figure skating competition, LPG gas tank from one of their zamboni fell out which ended up canceling the entire competition. KSU didn't even bother to find other rinks because there is no dedicated figure skating ice rinks in Korea. You see how pathetic KSU is now? You honestly think they can "politic" figure skating judges to give Yuna WR's and such?




Oh please, Mao is known for her UR and edge calls on her Lutz. Be thankful her 3A-2T in Olympics LP wasn't called UR because that was clearly UR but she got a pass. Technical judges are there for a reason, and once you start UR, they WILL look at your jumps in more detail (e.g. Mirai).

**sorry for going off tangent, but please do not try to spread lies no matter how much you dislike Yuna. Especially if you don't know/don't care about her past and what she went through to achieve what she is now.

On topic: Mao shouldn't retire because she has the potential. My opinion is that she ditch 3A and bring in 2 3-3's, but if really wants to keep her 3A, she really needs to fix the UR on her 3f-3lo combo or simply change it to 3T as she did in 2008(i believe?).

Well, I disagree with everything you just said, no offense.

 

[MiRé]

Well, I disagree with everything you just said, no offense.

Looks like I'm talking to another brick wall .

 

[topaz emerald]

With all due respect. If you really look into it, the scoring criteria are faulty and made little sense in the first place. So much so it looks like a rush job by an accountants rather than someone is familiar and have a passion for what makes this a unique sport. It fails to acknowledge all these bullets points should not be equal in difficulty in the first place, no different than all jumps are not equal in a proper Olympic standard 'sport'. How do you measure Mao's 3A at a young age to today for example. And that there should be a few more bullet points not added when it should.

Current standard equalise everything

• Unexpected / creative / difficult entry
• Clear recognizable steps/free skating movements immediately preceding element
• Varied position in the air / delay in rotation
• Great height and/or distance
• Superior extension on landing / creative exit
• Superior flow in and out (and in-between in jump combinations / sequences)

One just need to look at the above and quickly realise the set up clearly advantage the young and petite, made it about quantity by conquering gravity by nature's advantage (petite, skinny, pre pube, less work), instead of how it should be: Conquering gravity DESPITE of nature, and make it all about atheleticism, technique, maturity, quality, finesse.

Bear in mind to truely measure qualitative of TECHNICAL SCORING (not artisticis) in a JUMP (what is a jump in a jump?)in a sporting competition, i believe the following concept is better

• Great height and/or distance +6 / -6
• Varied position in the air / delay in rotation +5 /-5
• Superior flow in and out (and in-between in jump combinations / sequences) +4 / -4
• Unexpected / creative / difficult entry +3 /-3
• Clear recognizable steps / free skating movements immediately preceding element +2 / -2
• Superior extension on landing / creative exit +1 / -1

Factored according to jumps. ie/ the GOE of a 3T3T should NOT be the same as 3Lz3T or 3A2T etc.
It is the principle of the rewarding system I am concerned about.

In an ideal setting, each judges should be assigned to only focus to look for their assigned bullet points and mark them + or -, then the system tally them up to create a score that is more reflective of the various quality to an element, rather than some random + 1,2,3 per element based on some gut reaction with little time to actually process what they are looking for. It is a more transparent way of measure the sport and discourage biases (and cheats).

On top of these I'd also add the following bullet points

• Jump / Landing integrate with the music and choreography on time as a highlight
• Set up / air positions are not excessively done or predictable
• Jump is not at a vantage point that is designed hide to hide the flaws of the skater
• Personal breakthroughs

(This is a tough one, may be just for elite competitions) - Skaters should be encouraged for putting up new jumps / jump combo or take risks that is outside of their comfort zone, or for ace something they have consistenly problem with, UR, under performed for, something like Adam's 4lz if by miracle does manifest, it deserve some extra points for the fact he failed so many times, but still keep going for it. Similar with Jin's 4lz just because no one do them, like Mao's 3A. Or even Ashley's 3/3 difficult combos. May be the computer can generate this by check past record, as well as across the field on the rarily of successful combos (yes this add bonus to successful 3loop3loops.)

I skimmed through what you read, but I do agree with you that the scoring system is faulty. I actually thought that anonymous judging was taken out of this new scoring system, but to hear that it exists now is not surprising. This sport is very political, in my opinion, and it will always be that way. I think the scoring system has benefited unknown skaters to move up in the ranks, but I also feel the judges/sport like to keep a few group of skaters at the top no matter if they fail in their programs, so they are still upholding the status quo, because again, I think it all comes down to politics

 

[topaz emerald]

Looks like I'm talking to another brick wall .

I will always believe this sport is political. And of course, you can disagree. Just don't take this so seriously.

 

[topaz emerald]

Yeah, never. Cause she's grandma age now. Okay.



Because it's super hard!

It's also the kind of combo that totally favors very small bodies. So when Mao was young it was consistently rotated. Then it started getting harder for her, although I believe several of the underrotation calls she's received on it over the years have been wrong. Her executions of it in the Short Program at 2008 Worlds and then 2014 Olympics and Worlds (although here it was the first jump that was called) being the most striking, off the top of my head.

See....I don't think it was getting harder for her, she was still petite and thin and fit. The problem was, she started getting called for it being under-rotated EVERY single time...and you mentioned her sp program at worlds, I can't really remember the program, but wasn't that her claire de lune program? I remember she did the 3flip3loop and it looked fully rotated, yet it was AGAIN called for under-rotation. And from that point on, it was like she kept getting under-rotation calls for the combo jump again and again. I really believe edge calls on her lutz and under-rotation calls on her triple triples threw her confidence off. Because as a skater, you think you are rotating your jumps but not getting credit for it, so where else to go from there but downhill, right? God, this girl was so talented, but everything was just not in her favor in her prime. But for me, she's still a skater I will remember for a long time....there is no other skater like Mao.

 

[MiRé]

I will always believe this sport is political. And of course, you can disagree. Just don't take this so seriously.

No one's gonna take you seriously if you think South Korea has politicking power over Japan. That is the most absurd statement I read on this forum. I advise you to research what KSU's done to Yuna (or Korean figure skaters in general) because I guarantee you'll take your statements back. And if you don't, you'll just sound like a fool.

 

[topaz emerald]

No one's gonna take you seriously if you think South Korea has politicking power over Japan. That is the most absurd statement I read on this forum. I advise you to research what KSU's done to Yuna (or Korean figure skaters in general) because I guarantee you'll take your statements back. And if you don't, you'll just sound like a fool.

Again, I disagree with you. And you need to calm down. I don't think Yuna Kim cares what you say and I don't think Mao cares either.

 

[MiRé]

Again, I disagree with you. And you need to calm down. I don't think Yuna Kim cares what you say and I don't think Mao cares either.

You know, I wish people like you would stop spreading lies. Did you even bother to look up what I told you? You're blinded by your favorite that you refuse to look at things that are true.

Looks like there's an addition to my ignore list

 

[topaz emerald]

Sure, everyone has personal challenges but the reason I brought that up is due to the timing of those challenges. If you saw Raf's interview, Mao found out about her mother's condition around 2008, it forced her to leave her coach at that time and return to Japan and this started a period where I suspect she was coaching herself. TAT was her official coach but it was on a part-time basis and TAT did not leave Russia. So yeah, I think this incident had profound effects on her skating and career. A lot of those things you mentioned happened earlier in the skater's career when a skater hasn't become famous yet. While they are preparing for the Olympics, their coaching relationships remained secure and they had good support. Usually, when a coaching situation and/or skater's training is disrupted before the Olympics, it has a negative effect (Michelle-Caroll breakup, Chan's breakup with his coach).

I believe all skaters have their own weaknesses and strengths, however, sometimes the system do not balance things out equally. For example, both Ito and Lynn could be said to be far superior to their rivals in some aspects yet could not overcome their weaknesses in figures. There are certain qualities of Mao's skating that are superior (carriage, extension, spin and spiral positions, steps) yet she is competing a system that magnifies her weaknesses in comparison to others.

You hit the nail on the head. When she was competing in juniors, the system did not call for edge calls. As soon as she enters seniors, all of sudden, they decide to change the rules, this benefited Yuna a great deal because her go to jump was the 3lutz3toe. And because the judges kept penalizing Mao for the 3flip3toe, she had to rely too heavily on the 3axel, which, even when she landed it, was not fully rewarded, in my opinion. The scoring system laid out by ISU never favored her. And she was unfortunate to never have the right coach. As a skating fan of hers, it's frustrating to see this all happening to her, but at the same time, it was a joy to watch her skate.

 

[Franklin99]

[/B]

You hit the nail on the head. When she was competing in juniors, the system did not call for edge calls. As soon as she enters seniors, all of sudden, they decide to change the rules, this benefited Yuna a great deal because her go to jump was the 3lutz3toe. And because the judges kept penalizing Mao for the 3flip3toe, she had to rely too heavily on the 3axel, which, even when she landed it, was not fully rewarded, in my opinion. The scoring system laid out by ISU never favored her. And she was unfortunate to never have the right coach. As a skating fan of hers, it's frustrating to see this all happening to her, but at the same time, it was a joy to watch her skate.

Correction: Prior to the 2009-10 season, Yuna's go to jump was 3F-3T, not 3Lz-3T.

 

[topaz emerald]

Correction: Prior to the 2009-10 season, Yuna's go to jump was 3F-3T, not 3Lz-3T.

Yes, you are right. I think she changed it because she got called once or twice on an edge call on her flip. That's probably why she changed it. But, her go to jump was still the lutz jump. Correct me again if I'm wrong, but I remember she would do a single lutz, then a lutz-2toe combo in her lps. She also got rewarded highly for her GOEs.

 

[Franklin99]

Yes, you are right. I think she changed it because she got called once or twice on an edge call on her flip. That's probably why she changed it. But, her go to jump was still the lutz jump. Correct me again if I'm wrong, but I remember she would do a single lutz, then a lutz-2toe combo in her lps. She also got rewarded highly for her GOEs.

I'm not familiar with Yuna's LP jump content outside of her 3-3 to confirm/deny the bolded part. But yes, due to her speed/flow, her jumps were rewarded with high GOE.

As for Mao, I truly hope that she succeeds in overcoming any obstacles in regards to her edges/UR issues and put out some performances for the ages prior to her retirement. And I honestly don't care if she wins or not, just as long as she's happy with her performances.

 

[kiara_bleu]

Yes, you are right. I think she changed it because she got called once or twice on an edge call on her flip. That's probably why she changed it. But, her go to jump was still the lutz jump. Correct me again if I'm wrong, but I remember she would do a single lutz, then a lutz-2toe combo in her lps. She also got rewarded highly for her GOEs.

So the Korean Federation didn't really do a good job writing those ISU rules since they failed to see that Yuna tended to go on the wrong edge on her flip as well, right? Man, come to think of it their bribery could have actually done the opposite of helping Yuna if she wasn't able to master that 3Lz-3T or allowed the edge calls to shake her confidence. Doing a great 3Lz is one thing but to actually change your 3-3 combo in the Olympic season with all the pressure on you as reigning World Champion could have been a disaster.

 

[iamchrislao]

I'm not so sure about this. I see more doing the 3z-3t than whatever triple with 3loop as backend combo. heck even guys stay away from this combo!

Depends on which combo youre doing. 3lz-3t is still more difficult than doing 3t-3lo or 3s-3lo. Giving additional points need to factor in the first jump in the combination as well. If Not, we're essentially giving even more incentives to do 3t-3t