fireovertheice

Waiting for GPF, and also for the complete translation (usually and generously done by @Lys), here other tidbits for thoughts from Ambesi&Dolfini pocast https://www.spreaker.com/user/talk-sport/puntata-9: To note: the following is not a literal translation but my summary of some points of the podcast (you can find the indication of the exact timing to check), also if I tried to stick to the original words and concepts expressed in Italian for the more interesting and "sensible" parts. 1) Dolfini said (73.25 mins) that the program of Nathan Chen (meaning mostly the FS) is in the moment of the greatest technique expansion ("massima espansione tecnica") and thus the program is emptier by definition ("più vuoto per definizione") in comparison to those of the ladies - or other men - with similiar PCS scores, i.e. around 87/88 pts. Plus Ambesi and Dolfini both recall the fact the Nathan FS seems to be still having an open layout, with major liberty to change the transitions and the pattern in the set ups for the different jumps, so it's obvious that the program is poorer/ simplier in terms of TR. In doing so the strategy for this program of Nathan Chen seems to renounce deliberately to follow the rules to obtain major/maximum scores in PCS, in favor of a stellar score in TES. So they criticize North American analysts (Wong) complaining that 87 PCS for Chen's FS was a low score. For Ambesi and Dolfini clearly 87 for that program and performance was way too high. 2) They speak about the eccessive levelling in the high scores for the top men because of the correlation between TES and PCS scores (from. 75.16): following Dolfini the latter (relation TES/PCS scores) is always been so in FS, also if under COP it should be not. Now, if certain athletes land difficult quads and have high TES , they tend to get automatically high scores in all the PCS. For Dolfini this leads to the debate they had also in other occasions about the necessity of change in the coefficient between TES and PCS, with the raise of the latter. Ambesi stress that in the meantime the price for that is paid by the whole package athletes, as Hanyu, Fernandez, Chan as well as by other very good skaters in all the PCS that are not landing quads, such as Brown and Rippon. Brown is also faster than Chen, following Ambesi. Thus for Ambesi the problem seems to insist also the judges evaluation and in the application of the current rules. So, Dolfini concludes that the best would be to have both: change the coefficient and correct the evaluation of PCS, also if the latter is not so easy in the short time available to the judges. 3) Lastly, they again stress out the necessity of a major differentiation among the scores of the five PCS, that could reflect better the characteristics of the single skaters but also their actual performance (minute 80.50 on). In the way its used now the new scoring system loss its meaning. In consideration of all these factors and in how the system works/is applied now (also with the excessive BV given to the 4Lz in comparison to other difficult quads), Chen with his strategy, just IF he lands all his planned jumps without falling in the FS (6quads with 2 Lz, one in combo and another in the 2nd half, and Flip), also with a far more than perfect skate (with PCS in the range of 88-90), is the favorite to win, beating also the best Hanyu and on the contrary to what Plushenko said. P.S. I like the fact that Ambesi then said that if Nathan lands all those jumps planned without falling, one has to bow to him and he should pass as the greatest jumper in the history of FS (I think that is clear who is the GOAT figure skater in his mind...)

Frankly I say so, not only for the issues Patrick showed in the first part of this season (but also in the second part of the last one, in a certain degree), but because this season it will be the FS to make the difference and mostly for the TES. It's because of this that Yuzuru introduced the 4Lz and backloaded a little bit both his programs. The SP will be important to stay in the first positions and not losing to much/gaining something, and for order of skating the FS. But with the actual jumps layout of Chan (i.e. without a 4S in the FS), I doubt that he really could win. For Javi is different because he have something more to play in TES with in case of bad skates of the others in the FS, as in part we have seen at IdF. And also if for the SP he is capable to go around 100 or little more with a single quad, he never had the cushion that Yuzu or Javi could have with a clean skate and two quads. And I think that a clean skate in the SP is more reachable for everyone of the top men with min difference: in fact for now almost all have topped the 100s (Uno - a couple of times - Fernandez, Chen and Yuzu). More: last season Chan had a clean SP only at GPF scoring 99.76, and at WC, where he gained a 102.13 score; and this at WC is the same layout he presented at the only competition of this season. In Helsinki he had already good GOEs: 2.43 for the combo, 2.00 for the 3Lz and 2.00 for the 3A (that rarely he lands clean...). And he earned excellent PCS, for a total of 48.02. Also being generous and giving him all +3 on jumps, and a couple of points more on spins and one point (I think the max) in PCS, he can be scored max around 107/108. Without a second quad he will not score much more than that. At the last WC in the FS he scored 193 and something because he had the 4S, but still was not enough because the others were clean or just cleanish and the cushion from the SP not so high. So, if he want be really competitive: 1) he have to introduce a second quad in the FS and better a second quad in the SP; 2) then he has to be foot perfect in both segments of the competition ; 3) he has to hope that Yuzuru, Javier, Shoma and Nathan had not good skates at least in one of the segments, better the FS. For these reasons at the moment his win seems not so easy and probable, also if I agree with you that is not impossible at all. As I said, it depends on what he will shows at Nats, in terms of layouts/TES as well as of psycological and phisical form.

At the moment - unless major meltdowns in the next competitions or injuries (i hope not) - the major threats for Yuzuru's gold at OGM are Nathan and Shoma. I think that Javier and Mikhail could be a threat for the other podium positions and I think that honestly this is also their realistic goal, unless disastrous skate from the others (for Javier Brian said: a medal of any color...). For Boyang we will see better in this weekend. I doubt also very much that Chan will be a podium contender...it depends on what he will be able to produce from Nationals on.

Yes, she did a wonderful job indeed ! Pratically she was playing the second American among the judges: not only she gave higher mark than Yuzuru to Chen in TR, but also in PE ; her scores and those of the USA judge are the only all in green, i.e. above the medium score obtained by Chen. More: she gave sometimes better GOE to Chen than the USA judge (4F, 4T+combo, 3A, 3A+combo), while in scoring Yuzu she was more or less in the average with the exception of the 4T+3T: http://skatingscores.com/2018/gprus/men/long/ About her scores at CoR 2017 see also this ironic - and informative - blog entry: https://fuckyeahdearlybeloved.tumblr.com/post/166667788816/one-of-the-judges-j3-gave-nathan-025-more-in Maybe this was the result of an hypercorrectness, a sort of way to show that she wasn't biased towards Nathan or other "rivals" of Yuzu, but in doing so at the end she damaged Yuzuru, because actually she made count the scores of the USA judge (in the case of Chen) and of the Russian and Uzbekistan judge (in the cases of Kolyada, Ge and Kvitelashvili). And if you look at her scores in FS, all her marks are above average (again in green) for each component and for each skater up to the sixth classified skater, with the only exception in CO for Yuzuru. @yuzuangel, thank you for your amazing and interesting work: I am using that site too and looking at your charts some phenomena are more evident (sadly ...). It is also true that sometimes is very difficult to find informations about the judges background. Mostly you can find only the other competitions they were attending.

These two videos are always useful to explain in the essence the "footwork" in the transitions: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhGY4aI7yzM&pbjreload= and the old "intricacy" (now the continuity etc...: this is an aspect of which Yuna Kim and Yuzuru are the best example): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnXGtSK9hCw that can be considered as opposit to a long preparation to and the telegraphing jumps/elements. In the videos is nice to see also part of the performances of Chan, Kim, Asada, Buttle and an explosive Orser (videos are from a DVD released ante 2012). Interesting also the examples (not responding to actual standard and scoring, I would say): average/above av. TR (ex. Jonny Weir): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j6grQEfEEZ8 good TR (ex. Jeffry Buttle): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YdSXZr0dsl8&t very good TR (ex. Patrick Chan): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYEVxjfy_IA

@Xen as far as i know crossovers are considered transitions in the literal meaning of the term in FS, and they are considered under the category of "footwork > steps"; these are considered the among easy TRs, while the "footwork > turns" are the more difficult ones. Then there are also the "skating movements" such as SE, IB, lunge, arabesque, HB etc... and the "non-listed elements" such as FL, SJ, walleys and so forth, plus the "body movements" I think that this document here is very useful in this sense: http://www.skatinginbc.com/sites/default/files/technical-updates/transition_summary.pdf We have to pay attention to old criterion of "intricacy" that is now changed in "continuity of movements from one element to another", I suspect because the prior definition was misleading. In fact, also before for intricacy was intended the presence of "series of different transitional tools linking into each other and immediately into and out of listed technical elements". So, if you look at the rulebook that you have linked, I think that also now for "intricate footwork" written in the general description, is intended the "continuity of movements from one element to another" listed after, combined with "variety" and "difficulty". However to me it's true all this you wrote (but maybe not for some judges...?): To me it depends really if the number of crossovers is in the average to consent variety and/or difficulty of TR or not: if among the top skaters the average of crossovers/crossunders is around 30-34, those skaters who use more than 40-42 crossovers (plus 20-30%) or more than 50-52 (plus 45-50%) than the others, are using less difficult TR in the first case, and surely also less varied TR in the second. In conclusion: also if we want to take in account crossovers for high scores in TR for the aspects of "continuity of movements" and "quality" (but only IF they are QUALITY crossovers" ), a big or a huge number of crossovers should counted in negative way for the scores in TR regarding the aspects of "variety" and "difficulty". In this sense to count them, such as to count and to verify the difficulty of the other transitions too, should be done and to have an impact scoring TR. For this I began also to count at least the "skating movements" and the time of their hold, for example. An I agree also with this part: Maybe the most part of the judges is still working having in mind the 6.0 system, but athlets, technicians and fans are not. I think that we have the tools now and the way to let them know that we are all understanding, observing and following closely what they are doing, also if someone want to convince us that because is a "judged system" there is no way to find more objective way to score some parts of it. Sorry for the final rant

Yes you are absolutely right: I was thinking now (and I have already done for some skaters) what you have just suggested

Hi For whom it may concern, I updated the table about numbers of (quality) crossovers, one-footskating etc. with this data: - values and numbers for Javier Fernandez FS on the basis of his performance at IdF (program packed with transitions, with number of crossovers and turns on one foot similar to Yuzu's ones, but with the major part of one-foot skating time concentrated in the STSq and ChSq; among the two-feet TR non listed there: 1 SE, 1 IB hold 1.5 sec, 2 lunges) - jumps layout at the competition taken in consideration (indicated with* the jumps surely intended/tempted) - PCS scores at the competition taken in consideration https://planethanyu.com/topic/44-general-skating-chat/?do=findComment&comment=115065 I am interested in your considerations or observations... thanks in advance.

I have to say - and my bad if I made not clear enough - that Ambesi and Dofini are speaking their opinions about all this (but I wrote clearly: "following him", meaning Ambesi...and so forth), not pretending to know for sure what Yuzuru is thinking. The only thing that they seemed to know was about the presence of 4Lz in the programs of this year and in what he was training. But frankly, looking at the second part of last season, for the experts or in general for persons who follow constantly the discipline and Yuzu, It wasn't difficult to say that. They don't said that Yuzuru was agonizing about that, but just what you have said. Because "He acknowledges it and searches for ways to conquer it", in the current situation he has to do two things; raising TES but at the same time trying to be clean as much as possibile. From here the new 4Lz, a little backloading in the second half of the programs and the revisitation of the old programs. He is not leaving back anything that could be possible let him down after. Ambesi is saying that Yuzuru would add the 4Lz before Nathan and Shoma landed them (just right after Boyang did it). But I think that is probably true that if the 4Lo, GOE and PCS would be enough for a sure win, he would have not risked to train a new jump in the short season of OGM, IMO.

Sorry, @yatagarasu is absolutely right: Ambesi said 4T-3T (my bad in doing the transcription I left behind the Toe- and is quite different). You can hear it clearly at 5.40-5.41

About what Yuzuru could be thinking about 4Lz and the fact that training it can be dangerous for his health or not, and also about what he was training in practice at NHK, I listened again the last podcast of Ambesi and Dolfini (the 7th, minutes around 5.00-6.50): https://www.spreaker.com/user/talk-sport/puntata-7 Following Ambesi, as we know, the day before practice Yuzuru had high fever (around 39°); at the only practice he attended, Yuzuru realised soon that's something was off: after warming up Yuzu tried the combination 4T-3T, landed, but he began to shake his head (in negative way), probably because he felt that the effects of the flu were still there; then he tried another jump, that he opened, after which he tried to jump the 4Lz. This jump, in his intentions, should be the opening jump of the short program, because the layout has been trained with the Lutz for first jump. That day this jump had not enough height/parabola, but he didn't open as usual, in order to complete the rotation instead. He did it, without having enough space to land properly and leading to the injury. When Ambesi asked to Dolfini, what are the effects of the flu and high fever on skating and more on jumps (6.52-6.57), Dolfini answered that in this condition skaters lack the energy and coordination to do such difficult jumps (the quadruples), the lack of right balance and also problems in the legs, that can result heavier than usual (around 7.00-10.00 minutes of the podcast). We are seeing maybe the effects of the flu also on Shoma after more than a week from his recovery: http://shoma-uno.tumblr.com/post/167602841157/shoma-after-the-short-program-november-17th. The conclusion of Ambesi and Dolfini after all this saying, is that the problem was the condition after the flu for jumping quadruples, and not the 4Lz in particular. However, the fact that the injury arrived after a bad landing of the 4Lz, could have some psychological back effects. I cannot imagine the condition of Yuzu that day and I am a little bit angry at him and at his strong will to compete at NHK under those conditions, also If, from some points of view, I can understand him. Then (around 15.00-17.00 minutes of the podcast) Ambesi said that following him, and knowing Yuzuru, is not thinkable that he would skate at the OGM without 4Lz. He said also that Yuzu trained and added the 4Lz in his layout because last season he probably felt that he was not scored well/properly in comparison to others (litterally: "non si è sentito verosimilmemte premiato fino in fondo in termini di valutazioni ottenute") and to be "sure" to win he realised he needed the 4th quadruple. It will be very difficult now to turn back from this acknowledgement, also because this situation (the jumps layout and the GOE/PCS scores of some others, mostly Shoma and Nathan) it has been confirmed by the first competitions of this season. Then he and Dolfini speak about the correct scoring of PCS and the problem of their levelling among the top skaters: this is one of the factor pushing Yuzu and others for a more difficult layout. * I edited the part about the combination trained, that as Yatagarasu stated was 4T-3T, and I stressed the parts where I wrote that Ambesi and Dolfini are expressing their opinions on the basis of what they know. It was clear to me that they were not speaking for Yuzuru, and I am sorry if my part of translation, part resume gave you other ideas. I hope that soon you will find the complete translation of the podcast so that you can check better.

@kaerb frankly all this is just speculation among us without knowing actually what is his condition, how is going the healing process and how resuming training will procede in the next weeks. We all hope that he will be able to compete at Nationals (knock on wood !), but if, in the unfortunate case, he will not be able, OGM would be just the third competition this season (fourth if we consider the Team event for the short) and a YOLO for any variation of the layout.

I don't think at Nationals ...but later i.e. at OGM... who knows. It depends also what his main competitors wil be doing in the next month (because Yuzuru love to compete with himself, but he is fired up by the competition with the others )

Yes, I confirm that Max stated clearly that Yuzu was doing so in practice. Anyway it will be 4Lz if health will consent, or the "old" 4Lo; I don't think the 4S, like ad ACI. I think that Yuzu made a good choice in training the Loop and now the Lutz and I am sure that he and his team will do the best in the current and future situation. In fact, he has to maximize points also in the SP because the others (escpecially Patrick and Shoma, and for SP also Chan) are too close in GOE and PCS. I made this chart with the SP PCS from the beginnig of the last season until now: http://i64.tinypic.com/21dn1pi.jpg (there isn't a way to show an image directly into the post? I didn't find it...). You can see that while until 4CC/EU of last season Chan, Fernandez and Yuzuru were in the same range and distant from 2 to 4 points from the others, now Shoma is in the same their range too. Chen is rising but is still a little bit under, like Kolyada. Jin is improving but not enough (in term of scores, naturally).

You are welcome ! I have seen that you can find useful links and posts about PCS also in this thread of the Planet: https://planethanyu.com/topic/50-ice-skating-faq-and-introductions-for-new-fans/

As far as I know there isn't an unique good source for that, but maybe you could have more useful insights by other posters. Here some useful links (pay attention for each document at the date of release/update, because for some things documents after 2004 are still useful/ followed, while for others not): 2016: http://www.isu.org/inside-single-pair-skating-ice-dance/figure-skating-rules/regulations-rules-fs/file 2016: http://www.skatinginbc.com/sites/default/files/technical-updates/new_program_components_definitions_and_criteria_.pdf 2016: http://www.usfsa.org/content/ISU program-component-chart_sandp-and-id_08-16.pdf before 2016/2017: http://www.skatinginbc.com/sites/default/files/technical-updates/transition_summary.pdf 2004: http://www.usfsa.org/content/JS08A-Programcompexplan.pdf In this part of the site of the USFSA you can find ISU updates, among which there could be also some news about components as there were recently for GOEs: http://www.usfsa.org/story?id=84109 here some videos about about skating skills (videos uploaded in 2012): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bu1TFFHNZ7o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzcS_HlgLKQ&t https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=myHKTKu4j6U https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvSqpY2b_I8&t In the same channel if you look under all the videos uploaded there, there are other about SS, TR (but still with intricacy), and other components. Starting from these links and searching through the web and the FS forums and then asking to more expert fans or technicians in this platform too, I think you can have a proper idea of the current system.

I agree absolutely on body carriage which is reflected in PE and in IN. Do you think this have an influence on TR for her? Then: at NHK she wasn't clean at all, but she had the highest PCS scores among the ladies (75.71, 9.40/9.50 av.).

So, just for "fun" I checked how many crossovers - vs. difficult transitions have some of the top ladies in their FS this sesason and compared to their scores. Here you are the data for your considerations. To note that also for me the problem in the scores of Carolina are not so much in SS, where she is very good (good mix of some crossovers and still a nice quantity/quality of one-foot skating), but in TR (but she has less crossovers than I thought) and also sometimes in GOE of jumps. See also the difference, with a slight worse performance, in her score between CoR and NHK. To me, in comparison the scores of Zagitova and Higuchi at CoC were not so bad (at that competion the scores of SS and more of TR of Mihara were the problem...). What do you think about it? E. Medvedeva C. Kostner A. Zagitova W. Higuchi COR jumps layout 2 triple+triple comb. 3 triples 1 2A 2A+double-double comb. 2 triple+double comb. 3 triples 1 2A 2A+one-triple comb. 2 triple+triple comb. 2 triples 1 double 1 2A 2A+double-double comb. COR-crossovers 16 18 26 COR-SS+ TR scores SS: 9.39 TR: 9.39 SS: 8.93 TR: 8.93 SS: 8.50 TR: 8.36 NHK jumps layout 2 triple+triple comb. 3 triples 1 2A 2A+double-double comb. 2 triple+double comb. 2 triples 1 double 1 2A 2A+one-triple comb. NHK-crossovers 14 20 NHK-S+TR scores SS: 9.36 TR: 9.39 SS: 9.39 TR: 9.39 CoC jumps layout 1 triple+triple comb. 1 triple+double-double comb. 3 triples 1 2A 2A+triple comb. 2 triple+triple comb. 3 triples 1 2A 2A+double-double comb. CoC-crossovers 15 26 CoC-SS+TR scores SS: 8.39 TR: 8.36 SS: 8.64 TR: 8.11

I don't want to give too much importance to what JW said about crossovers: to me his statement was just instrumental to discuss with you and others and to understand better some of the aspects I am observing in the last times. More: this is a subject, in a broader discussion about PCS, of debate not only for men but also for ladies and the other disciplines, also because is not working well. It is because this doesn't work properly that all the top men have similar PCS scores, so that to be sure to win they are pushing so hard in TES, with all what is happening of good, but also of bad. Yesterday Ambesi and Dolfini in their podcast were discussing if this was also one of the causes for Yuzu to bring the 4Lz this year, also if half FS world is saying that he could win also without.

So, you can see is a complex system that give the possibilty to the judges to give more weight to the aspects the impress them more or that the like/evaluate more (the sense of purpose to me is one of the most subjective thing...): in one case is reputation, in an other TES, in another in upper body movements despite what the feet are doing...and so forth. Really, I do not know what is your experience in competition also in life, but this seems to me the best way to meddle with those scores beyond what you can already do with IN, CO and PE, and in the current situation there is no need of that.

Yes it seems so, sadly for me, also if for example in another thread about PCS/reputation you can find adfirmation such as this one: "What I have found is that TR is usually half a point lower than SS. I always figured that this was because it is easier for judges actually to count the transitions and evaluate their variety at least, if not quality -- so they are more confident in giving a lower score". So ? They count transitions and evaluate the variety or not...? In fact the observation that TR could be at least lower of SS is true, if you check. Or, if you look at the programs of the ladies, like for example those of Carolina Kostner and Wakaba Higuchi, that have both a quite number of crossovers "a lot of high quality crossovers (high number as they may be), with good body movement, and link those to certain moves before jumps and keep all elements linked, in a good flow, throughout the program", how can you explain the difference in SS and TR between them? At COR, i.e. with the same panel for SP Wakaba received 8.32 for SS and 8.14 for TR, while Carolina got 8.96 for SS and TR; for the FS Wakaba 8.56 in SS and 8.36 in TR, while Caro 8.93 in both... And anyway they didn't received a mark above 9 for these components, that was awarded only to Medvedeva, who actually has a lot of difficult transitions. If you compare this to what is happening to Uno, you can understand that a program like his in this season can not be in the 9s, at least for TR (and maybe also for SS), IMO.

Ah ok, thank you for the correction. Better, for sure as example ...anyway doesn't change nothing in the general subject and discussion generated after. In fact in general Patrick is well known for his high level SS, not always the same about TR also if he in these component he is at another level of some of the young quadsters .

Well @PapiandPooh421 if you read everything she wrote about the subject, it is really discomforting, at least to me. It seems that there is almost not way to fall under subjectivity (or bias) of judges for any of the components. It's no wonder that Italians gave a big effort in the construction of this system of scoring (I am Italian...).It seems to me like the most part of competition in our country (even for professorship at Uni): you have a three part examination, of which only one can be count or referred to countable or objective criteria, while the other two are more or less leave to subjectivity. This is made on purpose to give room to the judges to do what they want, also if within certain limits. In FS now is quite like that: you can count how many, the type and of some extent some the levels of elements, but there are GOE and PCS that can be given as someone please. And if this someone score too much in different way from the other judges - also in a good sense - they recall him/her to be more adherent to the corridor of the scores of the others ... .

I write you down here the answer that @gkelly gave me on GS forums (one of the few persons there and not here, that I find a reliable and interesting source): I asked also about the statement of Wong and she (I think is a she) said: My oher question: "And just moving the head during crossovers is really to be counted as turns or in general difficult steps on one foot?" If you wanna read the details of the entire conversation between us you can find it in the "Structure of Zagitova's Free Skate" thread on GS.

This is the point: crossovers are steps used in between/ connecting elements so literally they are transitions indeed. However, I do think that speaking - for example - of the ten top men is difficult to find actual bad quality crossovers, also if some of them are slightly better than others, as @Xen also said, if I remeber well. And maybe Chen is just not the best. Also follow me that should be count more in the general SS than in TR, more if we think that other than quality (cleanennes and clarity), the criteria for the scores of TR comprehend also variety (and if crossovers are the transitions in majority were is that?) and difficulty (....). It is true that I realised only now that from this year they changed the other requirement for TR, i.e. intricacy with a more general - and bland to me - "continuity of movements". Last, and I have already spoken about this, IMO if in a program crossovers are too many in comparison to other transitions, that should be reflected in some negative way not only in TR scores, but also in SS scores (because at least in contradiction with > Multi directional skating (Includes all direction of skating: forward and backward, clockwise and counterclockwise including rotation in both directions) and Mastery of one foot skating (No over use of skating on two feet), if not with Cleanness and sureness of deep edges, steps, and turns (The skater should demonstrate clean and controlled curves, deep edges, and steps: easy to do if they are mainly crossovers...).