General Skating Chat

[WinForPooh]

I love ^^^ that idea about just calling it a new jump. It is, in essence, a new jump. It takes the outside edge from the Lz, then puts aside what the outside edge in a Lz actually signifies - take off with counter-rotation - and builds PR on the toe pick into the jump.

 

So it's obviously not a Flip, it's not a Lutz, it's not a Toeloop. It's a different kind of toe jump. So give it a name, assign it a BV that reflects the fewer rotation off ice, like in a toeloop or sal, and let them jump it. Then add slo-mo review to takeoff of all toe jumps, including this one. This way, they can still have their 'quad'. And those who jump the actual 4Lz will get the points for a 4Lz.

 

And for lulz, they'll finally have a technical negative to say about Yuzu because he will NOT be able to jump this new jump.

 

All the talk about mitf makes me sad. It was always my impression that the StSq was supposed to represent a new evolution of figures, and ChSq the MITF. Now ChSq is just a dance break with no moves in the field.

[WinForPooh]

 

 

Hmmm, maybe Yuzu would be able to jump this new jump if he thought of it as more of a flip for which he doesn't have to focus on his edge than as a Lz?

[monchan]

16 hours ago, Henni147 said:

 

If they added "In our opinion multiple Russian and US skaters received highly inflated scores compared with skaters from other feds", well then I would clap.

 

 

EDIT: To the quad discussion: I have some hypotheses that need to be verified:

 

1. A 4Lz with 0° pre-rotation, deep outside edge and clean toe assist is harder to do than a quadruple Flutzberger (4Fzb).

2. A 4Lo is harder to do than a 4Fzb, but about same level of difficulty as a 0PR+DOE 4Lz.

3. A 4F with 0° pre-rotation, slight inside edge and clean toe assist is harder to do than a quadruple Floop (4Flo),
    but a bit easier than a 4Lo or 0PR+DOE 4Lz.

4. A 4S is harder to do than a 4T, but easier than a 0PR+SIE 4F.

5. A quad Axel is MUCH harder to do than any of the jumps mentioned above.

 

 

Double EDIT:

Here's a compilation of pretty much every skater, who landed a 4Lz or a jump labeled as 4Lz already:

(Yuzu's outward toe-picking and 0° PR is such a miracle... I have no clue how he does it, but it would be a gift to the skating world, if it returned to competition)

 

 

 

Triple EDIT:

This is a translation of a very interesting post on a Russian forum regarding the different 4Lz techniques:

 

This is interesting. Yeah i also agree with naming it a new jump. Cuz it neither a toe jump nor an edge jump, lets stop pretending its a lutz. The pre-rotated, half-blade take off needs a new BV. While the twisting ankle technique at take off needs a new rule for it too. Its totally not how Lz meant to work (it's supposed that u jump up relying solely on counter force at take off).

[sallycinnamon]

22 hours ago, Old Cat Lady said:

I don't see anyone outside of Russia voting for this either unless they make deals with Feds that have little to no chance in the ladies field.  On principle, with the way skating is today,  I don't really see a legitimate sporting reason to ban quads in the short unless they want to limit tech in general for all disciplines with the intent of rewarding quality in one phase while rewarding technical progression in the LP.  It doesn't make sense to have different standards for men vs. women and I would also equalize the PCS factorizing between genders. 

 

I personally would actually like to see them simplifying the SP and having required jumps like in juniors - this way, people can't hide their weaknesses their whole career and truly complete skaters can get more of a reward.

 

Though from a viewership perspective, banning the quads makes sense because the limited tech in the SP is the only thing that let's people continue to pretend that non-quadsters are competitive

 

I agree that without a deal it's not really possible that the majority of federations would vote for this change. But I can see hit happen if there was some sort of package deal, in which one of the rule changes would be favourable for Russians while the other could also benefit other federations as well (raising the age limit to 16? + allowing quads in both programs? - just an example). But without any deal, a change that would be favourable only for Russians - at least currently - is something I don't think would happen next season at the Congress.

 

I still think Lakernik & ISU will push the proposal of technical and artistic programs so if feds will vote for it next year, that could change everything anyway. Then it could possible that both triple Axel and quads would be allowed, maybe even in both programs - with some restrictions that were mentioned by Lakernik. Number of jumps, for example.

 

Any big changes would only be implemented after Beijing 2022, not in the middle of an Olympic cicle though.

[yuzupon]

Re: RusFed's move.

*look at the current global politic proper situation*

*look at what RusFed audaciously claims and proposes*

Yeah. Not predictable at all 

[Kadova]

On 11/4/2019 at 2:11 AM, shanshani said:

Yeah, it's obvious that consistency in scoring across different competitions does matter, because scores from different competitions are used for world records, qualifying for grand prix events, and tie breakers for qualifying for GPF. If making it on the top 24 SB list automatically qualifies you for a grand prix spot, being number 25 because you had a tough technical panel and number 24 didn't sucks. Obviously there's always going to be some luck involved and people aren't robots, but it's better to reduce the variation as much as possible.

 

In this case, the variation in tech panel strictness was particularly stark, because not only was Nate's arguable fall in the SP overlooked, so was Shoma's really obvious 3A UR/near downgrade, and I'm sure there were also other men's skaters whose tech errors were overlooked. But a few hours later, despite 2/3 of the panel literally being the same people, they were extremely strict on the ladies. Alina's Lutz was called e even though it would only have been called ! in most circumstances, and Alena got a < called even though at most her toepick had only just begun slightly brushing the ice at the quarter mark, which is only UR on the strictest possible interpretation of the rules (and who knows, maybe they decided they were overly strict and that's why they let her much more clearly UR 3A go in the free ). Most of the other ladies also got calls all over their protocols. The point is, the tech panel extended the ladies zero benefit of the doubt and essentially threw the book at them, whereas they let the men get away. Obviously the men and the ladies don't compete against each other, but still, what gives? Is it that hard to decide on a single standard of strictness, especially when 2/3 of the panel are the same people? Fine, Nathan's “fall” might be a grey zone, but so was Alina's lutz and Alena's UR and the tech panel called against the skaters there. (Also Shoma's 3A was not remotely a grey zone, tech panel was just asleep.) Either decide you're going to give skaters the benefit of the doubt or you aren't, don't go one way one time and the other another.

 

Tech panel inconsistency is confusing to viewers, unfair to skaters, and makes the sport seem less legitimate. The rules should be clarified and an equal standard of strictness applied across competitions. Moreover, the tech panel should be supported by improvements in technology, such as multiple camera angles. I'm sure some of the inconsistency comes from the fact that they only get one replay angle. I'm also pretty sure the way the tech panel works is that they first decide whether to flag an element for review in real time, then later only review the elements that were flagged. Meaning if they blink, or some other lapse of attention occurs and they don't flag, they don't review. Which seems like another source of inconsistency--they should just review every jump element, tbh. It might extend competition times a little, but I personally have never thought the time between the skate and the scores is excessive--I like it because it gives people time to react and talk about the skate. Maybe there's an issue with selling rights to broadcasting networks, but I hope we're moving away from that tbh.

Read on ISU website that, if unsure, the doubt must benefit the skater.

[Kadova]

On 11/5/2019 at 2:03 PM, Veveco said:

 

You bring some good points, and I would like to expend on my original post to explain my own point of view a bit more.

 

First, I absolutely agree that that athletes themselves (or anyone, really) should not be harped on on social media. If my comment hinted at that I apologize because that was really not my intention. That being said, I don't see why people wouldn't be allowed to disagree with her. She stated her opinion publicly, in response to a discussion pointing out at the inconsistency of the panels, so obviously people are going to react. She chose to get involved in the discussion and she essentially gave ammunition to the people complaining about the system in the first place. I wish some fans were more subtle in their answer, but unfortunately social media is rarely the best place for a nuanced debate (particularly Twitter).

 

Her being a skater (active or not) doesn't really change anything about the issue as far as I am concerned. I don't expect any individual skater to either support or attack the system. Some will speak out, some won't. She or anyone else doesn't owe us anything, it's 100% their choice. But since she gave her opinion, people are allowed to react.

 

I will say, however, that more so than her own personal opinion, what disturbs me in her reaction is the fact that the ISU has essentially created a culture in which unfairness is not only expected, but thought to be impossible to avoid by the athletes and judges alike. While she says it is "unfortunate", she makes it clear that for her "it is what it is". I blame the ISU for this, not her personally, because I don't think any individual person can be held responsible. Not even judges themselves, given the conditions they have to work with (vague rules, limited angles & replays, limited time for scoring, having to stay focus for about 2h in a row, etc.). There are so many reasons for this mess. Even the most willing judge would not be able to be fair all the time (and that is without even poking at the issue of nationalistic bias which is a different story altogether). In reality, the ISU could implement a number of measures to improve the situation. Simply clarifying the rules would go a long way (what is a "serious mistake"?? What is "good height"??). Not allowing judges to enter a GOE that is outside of the "guidelines" on the screen. There are also methods to scientifically study inconsistency in scoring (as brought up by some Twitter comments, actually), statistical models have been developed for this and used in other sports. For instance, it's not a secret that panels are often more lenient on the last group than the lower-ranked skaters. This could be systematically studied. And while grey areas will always exist, clearer rules and investing in new technologies to assist the judges are some obvious answers to limit them. Yes, it is all costly. But it is the responsibility of the ISU to tackle the issue.

 

I can give as one last example, a recent discussion I had with my neighbor at Skate Canada. The lady next to me was a judge for lower level competition, and she asked me how much I knew about jumps (as a relatively new fan of the sport). I told her I could recognize most of them but that flip and lutz were still hard for me at real speed. And she answered right away: "oh, but most judges don't see the difference". And I felt so bad, honestly. I'm nobody, my incompetence in the matter doesn't impact anyone whatsoever - but judges? Shouldn't they know better? Shouldn't the ISU provide better training? Even at the lower levels? It was quite disheartening to hear.

 

 

Exactly. I answered her tweet writing she closes the door to any improvement if this is how it is.

[Kadova]

On 11/6/2019 at 4:03 AM, WinForPooh said:

Annnyway, Raf is also talking about quints from Nathan now.

Buzz imho.

[memae]

On 11/12/2019 at 9:38 AM, rockstaryuzu said:

Well, when they had them, figures were never televised except in very short recaps as a way to explain why this or that skater was already in high standing even before the televised portion of the competition began. And they were discarded entirely and solely as a way to make the sport more appealing and television friendly, so bringing back either figures or anything else that smacks of them would be counter-productive, to my mind. I think the current format of competition is actually the most television-friendly version of the sport they can come up with, and that any changes are going to roll the sport backwards. 

 

 

Having separate 'artistic' and 'technical' programs only works if the content for the technical is set, like the way RD is set in ice dance. Requiring all the competitors to follow the exact same layout, in other words. That way you can honestly say that judges are comparing apples to apples. But who wants to watch that? Imagine two hours straight of 3A 4T 4S quad combo camel spin sit spin StSeq spread eagle spiral layback or A spin lather rinse repeat. 

 

I agree with your suspicion that it's all about medal-mongering and I think it's a cheap trick. 

 

I think the televising of events and the need for the revenue that comes with it will be what makes the separate artistic and technical program idea stop coming into fruition. The casual audience either wants to watch pretty skating or they want to see the big jumps (and the falls that come with them) - splitting the two across programs splits the audience. Where people might watch both the short and long during, say, the Olympics or Worlds broadcast, if one program is going to be empty of what appeals to them about skating, they're not going to watch it and will just watch the other one instead of sticking around for both. The reason professional sport exists is because of money, and that money comes from entertainment and gambling. The ISU's decisions are all going to be made with that in mind, not with the sport itself (although, of course, what's best for the sport is that it continues, so I guess by making choices dictated by money, they're indirectly making choices that benefit the sport itself). 

 

I would like to see PCS criteria and judging become more stringent and, as the tech abilities of the skaters (the elite ones in general) begins to plateau (I mean, until there's a quint, how much more can the tech be maxed out with the current rules? And then what? Do we add level 5 spins or something? Allow ridiculous 4-jump combos?), PCS should become worth more, because that will be what divides the skaters once everyone catches up to the current benchmarks set by the top few (and that will happen - it always does in sport). When everyone is doing a layout with the same difficult quads and combos, GOE and PCS are going to be all there is to set programs apart from one another. 

[shanshani]

 

 

will I let this go? no, I will not let this go

[WinForPooh]

8 hours ago, shanshani said:

 

 

will I let this go? no, I will not let this go

... The SP LzT combo looked better than the FS one, even, none of this makes sense, none.

 

TSL apparently called it the most beautiful combo ever or some such nonsense, too? I don't give them views so this is second-hand.

[shanshani]

49 minutes ago, WinForPooh said:

... The SP LzT combo looked better than the FS one, even, none of this makes sense, none.

 

TSL apparently called it the most beautiful combo ever or some such nonsense, too? I don't give them views so this is second-hand.

Yeah the judges somehow managed to overscore him on the FS combo even relative to his already grossly overscored SP combo

 

Yuzu leans sliiiightly forward on his 3A and it's enough to knock him down one GOE point despite his entry, meanwhile Samarin's axis is all over the place and he has no entry transitions but nonetheless his jump is the second highest scoring jumping pass by raw GOE. Also, his landing is clunky and landing posture unattractive, and he demonstrates far less control over his exit edge than Yuzu and Jason. On top of all that a strict panel would have called the entry edge a ! 

[WinForPooh]

7 minutes ago, shanshani said:

Yeah the judges somehow managed to overscore him on the FS combo even relative to his already grossly overscored SP combo

 

Yuzu leans sliiiightly forward on his 3A and it's enough to knock him down one GOE point despite his entry, meanwhile Samarin's axis is all over the place and he has no entry transitions but nonetheless his jump is the second highest scoring jumping pass by raw GOE. Also, his landing is clunky and landing posture unattractive, and he demonstrates far less control over his exit edge than Yuzu and Jason. On top of all that a strict panel would have called the entry edge a ! 

 

His landing posture has no resemblance to the low knee and close to upright torso that's supposed to be ideal lol

 

The only thing I can say is he got good height and probably good distance on the combo, and he did not UR on landing. That's it, those are all the positives.

[WinForPooh]

It is some extraordinary skill to wobble his axis in the air like that and somehow fix it enough to stay on his feet, though. I have NO idea how he does that. It's almost as extraordinary as how Grassl makes any of his jumps work at all. I don't know how but they do it.

[shanshani]

1 hour ago, WinForPooh said:

It is some extraordinary skill to wobble his axis in the air like that and somehow fix it enough to stay on his feet, though. I have NO idea how he does that. It's almost as extraordinary as how Grassl makes any of his jumps work at all. I don't know how but they do it.

Samarin is super tall so that probably makes it harder for him to control his axis. I notice a lot of skaters with a build like his have similar problems--jumps high, but often out of control.