hoodie axel

What about 1998 or 2006 Olympics ladies, 2007 Worlds ladies, or 2013 or 2014 Worlds ladies?

Well, it shows clarity of technique with the long back glide, which needs control, after all. It takes it based off the interpretation, because the music didn't need a different entry. There's a simple yet grand beauty there which goes very well with the music. Cohen's is probably second for me though. She had the best ever position on her arabesque. (Kind of sad where US skating is after Kwan, Cohen, Savoie and others)

For me, Kwan definitely had the best spiral, because of the way she didn't even bobble while raising or dropping her leg, especially impressive considering her speed and depth of edge.

No I agree that only the same jump class should be compared. I think Kaori's best would get +4, because people like Miki Ando (for a much more recent example compared to Ito) had even larger loops, and also better air position. She does have a difficult entry out of the spiral into the three turns though.

Well, it's a problem from the ISU bullets. Think about it, there's average, there's good, then very good, and also excellent height. They're grouping the jumps all together, it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. How should we differentiate? They also group together height and distance, when they are separate qualities. Giving more space to the amplitude bullets makes sense on multiple levels, actually, to me. As I mentioned on another thread, jump amplitude can sometimes affect landing and outflow, and that would negate the amplitude aspect of the jump based off the very bullets the ISU has proposed. But it makes no sense: suppose you're a new senior big jumper, controlling your jump landings, and mastering them will take time to learn, and in the meantime you're not even getting credit for what you ARE doing and putting effort into? It's an in-built reputation-based system in a way. The ISU rules are hardly helping judging. Like not to be a judge-apologist, because they shouldn't be dumb enough to blindly follow dumb rules, but the rules themselves are stupid. As Lou mentions, we should also not be equating jumps with 5 bullets to jumps with 6 bullets. Instead, a 6 (or 7 or 8) bullet jump should be getting +5s, just that there should be different ways of getting six bullets (very good height + very good distance jump vs good height + distance + difficult entry, for instance). In the meantime, well, I would give Sakamoto "+5", and then deduct a Raw GOE (-1 or -2 depending on the jump) for "lack of height" or something like that. It doesn't make sense to me to compare two different jump classes, though? A good 2A is a good 2A, a bad quad is a bad quad. ETA: Maybe I misunderstood? I'm not comparing 2As and quads. 45 cm for a 2A IS good. It's still not exceptional height, though, since some of Ito's executions looked like they were more than half a metre off the ice, and came VERY late in the program, AND came off difficult entries. He shouldn't be losing a bullet point for changing his technique to prevent overrotation at all! That's a GOOD display of technique.

Yeah, I basically became a fan based off that worlds competition That's actually the best jump ever for me, not just best 4Lz. It's not only got some of the best qualities ever, it's got LOTS of qualities, AND it works with that part of the program. Very rare, especially nowadays.

Also great air position, and wonderful interpretive element

To me it sounds lovely.

Yep, they recolored his eyes blue.

It also just seems like it would be easier to produce, for that matter. There were several numbers I didn't believe during worlds. In general I'm taking all these statistics with big grains of salt, but this perform live was just entirely against thought.

These are close enough approximations. ETA: I'd rather Ice Scope gave us air times instead of what it does.

No that's fine. I just noticed that a bit back, and decided to post it here since I saw the web page pop up here

I highly doubt the stats in the Hanyu vs Chen quad Lutz comparison lol. Nathan has increased his jump height to nearly Kolyada-level on his quad lutz (if you watch that execution, it's not even close!), but had a gain in air time of only 0.02 seconds from when he had a 53 cm high 4Lz?! Also, 75 cm on a 0.7 s air time?! Or how Yuzuru's air time jumps from 0.761 s to 0.781 s ( which had lower height than nathan's 0.7 s jump... and while the height for yuzuru's seems about right, 0.781 s for that seems wrong as a result) in the same picture. And I don't believe the stats he put up for Boyang's 4Lz either, although the one he picked was a less-than-good execution (and the linked video is an entirely different one )

Apparently Boyang is going to do a master's degree!

Why though?

That's the Chairman's Waltz from Memoirs of a Geisha... New show program?

Lol

Discount?

Question: Who will bring the feather boa? Answer: No one. It's not 1974.

What if Medvedeva picks a Moulin Rouge SP?

Or take away credit for assumptions either. There's simply no proof that him (or anyone else) not cramming random turns into his programs means he is incapable of doing so, which seem to be the logic behind this and the counting of crossovers (= they MUST need to do all those to maintain speed! logic I've seen elsewhere). You can judge the ability based on what does exist. And there's plenty in any high level senior program, if you know what to look for. You also said this before, but I chose not to counter it: Are you sure it's "easier" to make things look perfect -- all the basic turns and steps, keeping supreme quality of speed, edge, and control through the program -- a la Yuna Kim, as opposed to doing a bunch of turns of OK to mediocre quality -- a la Alina Zagitova? Sorry, but I'm not the one making assumptions here.

I don't think I'd agree. Mihara got "soft" programs before him, too. I think he simply latches on to the lowest common denominator.

Do you see Hozier as Mihara's style? I don't believe Wilson choreographs with Yuna in his mind. He is simply an uncreative choreographer at this point.