Would Lipinski have won Nagano under CoP?
- Thread starter Fossi
- Start date
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2003
That is irrelevant. A jump sequence
"may consiste of any number of jumps of any number of revolutions linked by steps (not more than 2 and not crossovers), hops, mazurkas, and non-listed jumps immediately following each other, while maintaining the jump rhythm."
Under jump combinations: "If the two jumps are connected with a non-listed jump (e.g. half-loop), the element is called as a jump sequence."
What Lipinski performed was a jump sequence, subject to the .8 factor. Ironically, had she failed to keep the jump rhythm or had done a crossover or more than two steps in the middle of the sequence, it would have been called as two separate jumps, for full credit, although the GOE might have cancelled out the gain.
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2004
Agreement doesn't change the rules - the rules do not say that a flutz will become a flip for Zayak or any other purposes. Gio was merely stating the opinion of a renowned coach much the same as you are merely expressing your opinion on flutzes too.
I don't need to show a clean sweep of judges all giving a -1 to make the point of what the rule actually is i can just point o you the rules on GOE (Why don't you show me a protocol showing all 0 or above for a flutz with no other errors?
). Whether the rules are applied correctly by all judges is a big beef i have, expecially with annonymous judging. But the what the rules are are very clear for all to see.Ant
Last edited:
Tara's jump aside....
I have not familiarized myself with COP changes for 2006-2007 but using the one at the 2006 Olympics a judge took the negative goe off of the score s/he would have given the jump called a lutz or a flip. Once the jump is called a flip or lutz the judge looked at something like the entrance steps, body position and ease of how the jump went into the air*; then s/he would look at what the jump looked like in the air; and then the ease and flow of the jump landing*. Then the judge would give the skater a score and then deduct wrong edge -1,-2, or -3 from how s/he judged the jump not from the base mark.
*Not saying that is the criteria or only criteria.
I have not familiarized myself with COP changes for 2006-2007 but using the one at the 2006 Olympics a judge took the negative goe off of the score s/he would have given the jump called a lutz or a flip. Once the jump is called a flip or lutz the judge looked at something like the entrance steps, body position and ease of how the jump went into the air*; then s/he would look at what the jump looked like in the air; and then the ease and flow of the jump landing*. Then the judge would give the skater a score and then deduct wrong edge -1,-2, or -3 from how s/he judged the jump not from the base mark.
*Not saying that is the criteria or only criteria.
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2006
If I remember correctly, Jeff Buttle did a 2Axle + 2Axle sequence at 2005 Worlds that was counted as separate jumps because he did not have an 8th jumping pass.
I Why don't you show me a protocol showing all 0 or above for a flutz with no other errors?
Umm...last year at Worlds in the qualifying round Sasha's 3Flutz/2Toe received no negative GOE marks.
~Z
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2006
Irina tried and never was able to do a 3/3/3. At least not in practices at competitions.
~Z
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2003
He did 2A, hop, 2 cross-overs and more before the second 2A. No crossovers are allowed in a jump sequence.
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2006
Ugh, whatever.
The entire point of a Triple/Triple sequence getting deducted in the first place is because it's easier than a combination and there needs to be something to make a 7 Triple program with a Triple/Triple combo worth more than a 7 Triple program with a Triple/Triple sequence. Tara did 2 Triple/Triple's, thereby giving her an entire extra jump slot to work with. Her Triple/Triple "sequence" (whatever, it's a combination.....a 3Toe, STEP, 3Sal would be a sequence) was not there to simply squeeze 7 Triples into 7 jump slots because she was incapable of doing it in combination form and, as such, it shouldn't be deducted.
The new judging system is still a work in progress. People who follow it without question are sheep and will soon be getting their wool cut off when updates are made to it (updates already HAVE been made, in fact, thereby showing that the rules are obviously not infallible).
~Z
The entire point of a Triple/Triple sequence getting deducted in the first place is because it's easier than a combination and there needs to be something to make a 7 Triple program with a Triple/Triple combo worth more than a 7 Triple program with a Triple/Triple sequence. Tara did 2 Triple/Triple's, thereby giving her an entire extra jump slot to work with. Her Triple/Triple "sequence" (whatever, it's a combination.....a 3Toe, STEP, 3Sal would be a sequence) was not there to simply squeeze 7 Triples into 7 jump slots because she was incapable of doing it in combination form and, as such, it shouldn't be deducted.
The new judging system is still a work in progress. People who follow it without question are sheep and will soon be getting their wool cut off when updates are made to it (updates already HAVE been made, in fact, thereby showing that the rules are obviously not infallible).
~Z
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2004
A triple axel from Tara? Come off it - i'd believe a quad salchow or a quad loop before i believed a triple axel. Her technique on the axel was iffy and roller skate-y at best. There's no chance at all that she could have gotten a triple out of that jump technique.
Ant
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2004
Well you asked for a solo triple flutz without error besides the flutz. For a combination both jumps are counting towards the GOE therefore a good double toe will negate the deduction for a flutz....keep trying...
Ant
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2004
They are not infallible and no-one questions the COP more than me, but you seem to make claims arguing the toss about combinations and sequences as if YOUR rules apply. They don't the COP apply. Talk about the need for them to change or talk about how you disagree with it but don't say that X skater did a combination when under the rules they did a sequence.
Ant
I think Tara will be remembered as the youngest Olympic champion in figure skating, and as one on the list of US lady skaters that won the title. About winning over Kwan, the Olympics was not the first or even second time that she won over Kwan. As athletes their internationat merits before Nagano were equal, both had won the Worlds once.
Personally, I definetely would have prefered and really wished Kwan to win in Nagano, but that did not happen because of Kwan´s freeskate.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2003
I'd rather not rehash the competitions. Given the subject, and the ensuing discussions from all boards and sources, there is no point in continuing them.
btw, I agree with the results.
Winning an Olympic at 15 - just short of 16 was possible then. It is no longer, and age restrictions have come into play in many ways. I think we should remember Tara for the change in rules.
That said, my point was that Olympic gold medalists come and go.
There was an incredible amount of support for Tara to win from the American fans. The boards were full of Tara to win and she did. However her reign was somewhat marred by the contining support of the Kwan fans. Seven years later, Kwan won a popularity contest despite her being somewhat crippled at the time. What is it about Kwan that her fans wont let go? Tara's fans moved over to Irina and then on to Sasha.
I think the gold Oly is a dream of all skaters. It in itself does not prove the best skater except for one performance. Gold Oly winners have 4 years to reign, and one can watch how they slip into poor competititve skating during that period except perhaps for Witt.
Yes, Tara will be remembered for the age restrictions by the ISU and for winning an Olympics. But for me, I have seen better skaters who have not won an Olympics.
Joe
btw, I agree with the results.
Winning an Olympic at 15 - just short of 16 was possible then. It is no longer, and age restrictions have come into play in many ways. I think we should remember Tara for the change in rules.
That said, my point was that Olympic gold medalists come and go.
There was an incredible amount of support for Tara to win from the American fans. The boards were full of Tara to win and she did. However her reign was somewhat marred by the contining support of the Kwan fans. Seven years later, Kwan won a popularity contest despite her being somewhat crippled at the time. What is it about Kwan that her fans wont let go? Tara's fans moved over to Irina and then on to Sasha.
I think the gold Oly is a dream of all skaters. It in itself does not prove the best skater except for one performance. Gold Oly winners have 4 years to reign, and one can watch how they slip into poor competititve skating during that period except perhaps for Witt.
Yes, Tara will be remembered for the age restrictions by the ISU and for winning an Olympics. But for me, I have seen better skaters who have not won an Olympics.
Joe
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2004
I just don't think that was the case, i don't think Kwan lost the gold medal i think Lipinski won it. Kwan did a very strong good LP. Most north aericans who saw US nationals seem to talk about the Olympic LP as if it was tentative and as if she held back. The rest of the world that was not privy to the US nationals felt it was a truly amazing performance and worthy of Olympic gold. After Kwan skated i thought she'd won it, BBc commentators thought she'd won it (just as kulik had gone out first in his group and won it). Then Lipinski went out and blew the roof off. No damning or poor skate for Kwan and nothing to take away from Tara's impressive free skate either.
Ant
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2006
Okay then, if you want to be dumb about this...KWAN did a 3Loop, step, 2Toe sequence (hey, look, an ACTUAL sequence) in her long program. Both of those jumps get the .8 deduction.
Lipinski wins, still.
~Z
Similar threads
