Jump to content
sallycinnamon

[2018/19] 4CC (04.02-10.02) - Men SP & FS

Recommended Posts

Does someone remember when last time Shin Amano was main Technical Specialist?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Paskud said:

Does someone remember when last time Shin Amano was main Technical Specialist?

Based on skatingscores.com he's only been lead tech specialist once, at GP China in the ladies event. All the other times he was assistant tech specialist. (edit: wait skatingscores only goes back to 2016-2017, so idk about previous years. looks like he's been around for a while though, he's showing in stories about Yuna Kim v Mao Asada and has had a reputation for harsh calling since at least 2013-2014)

 

I remember he was on the panel at Worlds for ladies last year as assistant tech. I think there was some complaining about the later flights getting off easy in comparison to the earlier flights (not 100% sure though) in the SP (maybe about Alina in particular not being called?), but the FS protocols look pretty brutal. So the tech panel has a chance to redeem themselves tomorrow, I guess.

 

Edit: holy crap, the GP China ladies FS protocol is also brutal. I guess that justifies his TES Assassin title. In general, the FS seem more harshly scrutinized, but maybe it just looks that way since more jumps=higher likelihood of UR call.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, SparkleSalad said:

Ladies and men's SP, uncut. Requires VPN except for full group 2 video.

 

 

 

 

THANK YOU Sparkle:tumblr_inline_nhkezmYSxk1qid2nw::tumblr_inline_nhkezmYSxk1qid2nw::tumblr_inline_nhkezmYSxk1qid2nw::tumblr_inline_nhkezmYSxk1qid2nw::tumblr_inline_nhkezmYSxk1qid2nw::tumblr_inline_nhkezmYSxk1qid2nw::tumblr_inline_nhkezmYSxk1qid2nw::tumblr_inline_nhkezmYSxk1qid2nw::tumblr_inline_nhkezmYSxk1qid2nw::tumblr_inline_nhkezmYSxk1qid2nw::tumblr_inline_nhkezmYSxk1qid2nw::tumblr_inline_nhkezmYSxk1qid2nw::tumblr_inline_nhkezmYSxk1qid2nw::tumblr_inline_nhkezmYSxk1qid2nw::tumblr_inline_nhkezmYSxk1qid2nw::tumblr_inline_nhkezmYSxk1qid2nw::tumblr_inline_nhkezmYSxk1qid2nw::tumblr_inline_nhkezmYSxk1qid2nw::tumblr_inline_nhkezmYSxk1qid2nw::tumblr_inline_nhkezmYSxk1qid2nw::tumblr_inline_nhkezmYSxk1qid2nw::tumblr_inline_nhkezmYSxk1qid2nw::tumblr_inline_nhkezmYSxk1qid2nw::tumblr_inline_nhkezmYSxk1qid2nw::tumblr_inline_nhkezmYSxk1qid2nw::tumblr_inline_nhkezmYSxk1qid2nw:

praying that my only working downloader can make it...two out of 3 aren't impressed with my VPN and refused to accept the link LOL, crossing fingers for the third one (tho it's the slowest one but blessed it for working with VPN)

ETA: yassss got Ladies group 1 and 2 and now downloading group 3 and 4 and then I'll try the men too:tumblr_inline_ncmif5EcBB1rpglid:

 

3 hours ago, Henni147 said:

 

Sorry for joining/expanding the OT discussion :laughing: I've thought about this question for a a long time, too...

 

I remember the ISU webinars for the new +5/-5 system. They picked paramount examples for specific bullets, but where is this "baseline"? How is an absolute standard 0 GOE jump supposed to look like? BV only without any extras or errors...?

 

Another question that popped up today in multiple discussions:

How is underrotation (downgrade) exactly defined according to ISU?

1. 1/4 (1/2) rotation or more too short at the landing only or from take-off to landing altogether?

2. Where do I have to look: when the blade or the toe pick leaves/enters the ice?

(many skaters pre- or post-rotate their jumps on the toe picks)

 

When I look at other sports like ski jumping, they can measure basically everything:

Take-off angle, position on the take-off platform, take-off speed, flying/landing speed, wind speed at any point in any direction...

It should be possible to measure the exact rotation of a figure skating jump from take-off to landing in degrees, too, no?

Example 4Lz: ideal 4 x 360°=1440°   executed: 1416°   scoreboard shows the difference: -24°

(fully rotated in green, < in yellow, << in red or sth like that...)

 

Same with height, distance and rotation speed of the jumps. I really appreciated the jump simulations at Japanese Nationals. That was great and a step into a good direction :2thumbsup: (don't know how much the judges made use of that in their GOE scoring though).

I'd like to know the answer to those questions too:tumblr_inline_mqt4graWWO1qz4rgp:

I think the reason for the (extremely annoying, if you ask me) lack of any kind of detailed explanation in official ISU sources is that the qualitative part of the sport can't be "reduced to numbers and fixed on paper" (or so I am told). Heck we're still wondering what 'serious mistake' is and I'd think that would be easier than detailing something like the percentage of body weight or portion of blade on the ice to scream: "landed!!!!!"

And it baffles me when some people say for UR you only have to look at the landing...I mean, to decide where the heck 'backwards' is, at the very least you need to look at the trajectory of the jump, so you need to know where the heck it started, not only where it landed:confused:

 

booooooooring ranting/musings :embSwan:

Spoiler

 

The point that many people allergic to accurate FS scoring miss, tho, is that FS doesn't need necessarily an exact definition of everything, just some kind of common standard, an official and PUBLIC standard recognized by the governing body, that everyone in the sport need to follow (even if they disagree with that standard).

You can't decide if you to consider "landed" a jump when only 20% of body weight is on the ice, or 25% or 30%? or you just can't measure it?

Fine.

But show me an example (or better several examples, a sample big enough to give me a solid reference and from a variety of jumps) of what you, ISU, representing the sport the coaches the skaters and the judges, classify as "ending point of the rotation" so if there is a jump that, based on that official 'ending point' should have received a UR, you can call tech tech panel and tell them: were you sleeping on duty? Becuase I told you to count till there and you've counted it wrong.

or, you can't quantify in absolute terms what very good SS are? Ok. Then give me videos of what ISU thinks is 'excellent' and then give me more videos of what is 'unremarkable', and then what is 'bad', so everyone trying to make sense of the scores can compare and see.

I mean, just GIVE ME OFFICIAL ISU REFERENCE MATERIAL so I can compare scores from every comp at every level against that common reference.(*)

heck this way it would be easier for judges to judge, and easier for ISU to see when judges need to be banned from judging more training, and it would reduce the fan drama as a bonus. it would make scoring more reproducible and reproducibility is a big part of what FS needs to be still considered a sport. Similar things should lead to similar outcomes, that's a basic rule.

 

Instead way too many people like to hide behind judges' subjectivity.

Well, to them I'd say: you know what, if I wanted to measure the lenght of an object in inches and I used my own thumb, so tiny and cute, as reference sure as heck I wouldn't get the same number of inches of a guy with big hands and big thumbs measuring the same object with his own thumb. becuase, guess what, we're using different unit. So yeah, even that kind of measurement can be subjective. But mankind was smart enough to have solved that issue long ago, establishing common units for basically everything. So if the guy and me use the same unit we're gonna get a similar result (not the very same result 'cause hey there is experimental error in each and every measurement, but there are ways to minimize it, and starting with common unit is the first step)

 

Why can't FS be as smart?

FS could and should be the same. Yes the 'experimental error' will likely still be quite big, because of the nature of what you judge which sometimes it's difficult to quantify

But it wouldn't be as bad as it is now when I see the weirdest scores legitimized behind the shield of subjectivity-different comp-different panel-can't compare LOLOL(some people seem to take great pleasure in saying this, as if it were a good thing). And even when the weirdness is also within the same comp, in the way the same judges look like a entirely different people when giving marks to this or that skater, another shield conveniently pops up: starting order LOLOL

As if the sad state of things was a justification, instead of something that needs to be uprooted, erased, burned to the ground.

 

Well now I'm pretty much resigned to this but when I stop and think I am mad both at myself and at ISU because I shouldn't be resigned, NO ONE should be resigned, no one should take for a given that e.g. PCS are nationality-related and reputation-related and starting-order-related. I have the feeling of a general apathy and it's ISU's fault becuase yes, fans are powerless and getting upset at every score just isn't a healthy way to follow a sport, you just needs to laugh and shrug it off if you want to keep enjoying the sport

And I hate the ISU, yes, I hate it as an institution, for doing this to me, making it hard for me to follow a sport that I have loved at first sight thanks to the skaters.:squishedPooh:

I almost regret the day I wanted to understand skating more and learn about jumps, rules and so on.

Well I can't really regret it because it made me appreciate some qualities more, like the beauty of a pure toe pick and the aestethic pleasure of watching good knee bend and deep edges, even if the downside is me being WTF when I see scores

 

I believe that after Yuzu I'll step back a little and follow singles as I follow pairs and ID now: I have my faves, I support them but don't delve too much in the scoring, don't get too involved, be happy for the triumphs and sad when they don't make it but not going to read the protocols.

And using the predictability of certain scoring to get points for my pre-competition predictions:P (reputation scoring rarely fails you when predicting ID, and when it does it's because the unexpected mistake happened, not because judges for once stopped being predictable):rolleyes:

 

 

tho if I had to give a new fan an advice, it would be: just keep enjoying the performances and don't ever ever ever try to know why elements are scored the way they are.

Currently, in FS, knowledge isn't power, it's just frustration.:Poohgaveup:

 

 

(*)

well, I'd likely complain if ISU wrote in the rules "stiff knee means outstanding SS" "bent forward posture means beautifu lines" and I already disagree that "3.25 rotations are a quad" (that's just extremely counterintutitive, for anyone but some people in FS community I guess) but if those are written down in the rules, then whatever, all skaters and coaches can read those rules and try to adapt to them and judges can't get too creative.

And I would sigh but I'd still be able to understand why stiff knees get a 9 in SS. That's the standard in the rules, though a poor one. But then everyone with stiff knees would need to get 9. Ah ah. Unless they don't add the clause: "this rule only applies to skater xxxx and xxxx. Everyone else will be scored according to a different rule".

At least it would be more honest.:shrug:

 

 
aaaaand even more musings:4: but without ranting:biggrin:

Spoiler

 

I'll be happy the day (who knows how distant in the future) when they will accurately measure the degrees of rotation in the air and give BV based on just that, not on what the skater meant ----idk, 45° of rotation = 0.25 points---. if you meant to do a quad but only rotated 3.25 revolutions in the air, well sorry but gonna get BV for that, not for what you meant.

I'd be fine with having only a few "true triples" among ladies (I believe it would mostly be 2.5 revs or less).

I would be fine with having only a few "true quads", most of the current quads would likely be mostly 3.5 revs.

Maybe it wouldn't be that good for narrative about multiple quadssssss!!!!!!!! but it would be a fair system for everyone. For the majority of skaters it would only be a change in the baseline ----where once they got a BV of 20 they would be getting a 15... but ISU could still decide 45°=1 point BV and the baseline would skyrocket and they could have all the WRs they want....better, they could change the BV every 4 years and have brand new WRs every olys cycle regardless of technical advancement----. But compared to the current system, it would also finally be fair to the alwasy-forgotten minority of those who rotate more in the air. They would rightfully get higher BV.

 

Then, because jumps landed forward are extremely dangerous, if ISU wants to be sure that skaters keep training to land in the safest way, , they can add some kind of bonus for properly landing backwards.

It might also be just GOE, I can't see a jump landed forward looking effortless or having flow, but it could, idk, be a brand-new GOE bullet: "proper landing". Heck the system would actually be more simple than the current one, no need of all that complicated table of BV of different jumps of different revolutions, no need to list additional BV of UR and DG, no need of goe deductions for UR or DG, just use the "backward landing" bullet for +1 and "not backwards" for -1 or whatever.:dancingpooh::P

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, shanshani said:

Based on skatingscores.com he's only been lead tech specialist once, at GP China in the ladies event. All the other times he was assistant tech specialist.

 

I remember he was on the panel at Worlds for ladies last year as assistant tech. I think there was some complaining about the later flights getting off easy in comparison to the earlier flights (not 100% sure though) in the SP (maybe about Alina in particular not being called?), but the FS protocols look pretty brutal. So the tech panel has a chance to redeem themselves tomorrow, I guess.

 

Edit: holy crap, the GP China ladies FS protocol is also brutal. I guess that's what justifies his TES Assassin title. In general, the FS seem more harshly scrutinized, but maybe it just looks that way since more jumps=higher likelihood of UR call.

Before that, he's also tech specialist at WC15, WJC14 and GPF13. One of his most questionable call was Mao's 3A at GPF13. Actually this is the first time he's in tech panel for men's event. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Katt said:

Before that, he's also tech specialist at WC15, WJC14 and GPF13. One of his most questionable call was Mao's 3A at GPF13. Actually this is the first time he's in tech panel for men's event. 

yeah, I realized that skatingscores didn't go back that far. He was on the panel for men's in GP China 2016 though. Apparently he used to coach Patrick Chan so that may be why he wasn't on men's panels as much? (Though Pchiddy was at 2016 GP China).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, shanshani said:

yeah, I realized that skatingscores didn't go back that far. He was on the panel for men's in GP China 2016 though. Apparently he used to coach Patrick Chan so that may be why he wasn't on men's panels as much? (Though Pchiddy was at 2016 GP China).

Yeah, but again, he was there only an assistant. Find diffrence, the same competition:

Shin Amano as TS assistant

http://www.isuresults.com/results/season1617/gpchn2016/gpchn2016_Men_FS_Scores.pdf

Shin Amano as actual TS

http://www.isuresults.com/results/season1617/gpchn2016/gpchn2016_Ladies_FS_Scores.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, shanshani said:

yeah, I realized that skatingscores didn't go back that far. He was on the panel for men's in GP China 2016 though. Apparently he used to coach Patrick Chan so that may be why he wasn't on men's panels as much? (Though Pchiddy was at 2016 GP China).

Yes, I don't remember which events he's in tech panel before 2013, but he's known to be very strict towards Mao. I read that he also work at TCC and someone said that its one of reason why he hardly ever in men's event. 

 

Edit : He's tech specialist at SA 2013, so he's been a few men's events before. Sorry for wrong info in my previous post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Paskud said:

Yeah, but again, he was there only an assistant. Find diffrence, the same competition:

Shin Amano as TS assistant

http://www.isuresults.com/results/season1617/gpchn2016/gpchn2016_Men_FS_Scores.pdf

Shin Amano as actual TS

http://www.isuresults.com/results/season1617/gpchn2016/gpchn2016_Ladies_FS_Scores.pdf

I'm not sure that's a great comparison, because men could very well UR less than women. But either way he's only 1/3 of the tech panel. The other 2 could overrule him if they want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The story I have heard is that Shin Amano couldn't be in tech panel for men because he had coached Patrick at a point.... Maybe a specialist need to wait some time before he can be again in the panel in a comp with one of his former skaters....

 

And asfaik he has been lenient on Satton in the past...tho of course it's always a 3 people panel so who knows for sure...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to say I really hoped someone will break free skate WR here (and honestly I still do, there's a lot of men who can do better (of course Yuzuru first in this group) and I want to see some great performances), but if Vincent will do it, I'm suing ISU. And I never do it, but I can say now befeore he skates that he's not one of the guys who is able to fairly get such a score.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, rockstaryuzu said:

Johnny just says stuff. "Classic Chinese quad technique", my heinie. Exactly how long have Chinese men even been doing quads? Not long enough for there to be 'classic' technique, that's for sure...

I think it's been long enough. i just take issue with Weir saying it's a poor way to do quads with no finesse, when these are the kind of quads the "older" Chinese men were known for:

 

 

Definitely high. Definitely not landing with a thud, and without beauty or finesse. Especially when you consider that the American quad technique has been producing things like this:

 

 

(Yes, it's supposed to be shade. Using Zhou and Chen's W18 LP masterpiece is too easy)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LadyLou said:

 

booooooooring ranting/musings :embSwan:

  Reveal hidden contents

 

The point that many people allergic to accurate FS scoring miss, tho, is that FS doesn't need necessarily an exact definition of everything, just some kind of common standard, an official and PUBLIC standard recognized by the governing body, that everyone in the sport need to follow (even if they disagree with that standard).

You can't decide if you to consider "landed" a jump when only 20% of body weight is on the ice, or 25% or 30%? or you just can't measure it?

Fine.

But show me an example (or better several examples, a sample big enough to give me a solid reference and from a variety of jumps) of what you, ISU, representing the sport the coaches the skaters and the judges, classify as "ending point of the rotation" so if there is a jump that, based on that official 'ending point' should have received a UR, you can call tech tech panel and tell them: were you sleeping on duty? Becuase I told you to count till there and you've counted it wrong.

or, you can't quantify in absolute terms what very good SS are? Ok. Then give me videos of what ISU thinks is 'excellent' and then give me more videos of what is 'unremarkable', and then what is 'bad', so everyone trying to make sense of the scores can compare and see.

I mean, just GIVE ME OFFICIAL ISU REFERENCE MATERIAL so I can compare scores from every comp at every level against that common reference.(*)

heck this way it would be easier for judges to judge, and easier for ISU to see when judges need to be banned from judging more training, and it would reduce the fan drama as a bonus. it would make scoring more reproducible and reproducibility is a big part of what FS needs to be still considered a sport. Similar things should lead to similar outcomes, that's a basic rule.

 

Instead way too many people like to hide behind judges' subjectivity.

Well, to them I'd say: you know what, if I wanted to measure the lenght of an object in inches and I used my own thumb, so tiny and cute, as reference sure as heck I wouldn't get the same number of inches of a guy with big hands and big thumbs measuring the same object with his own thumb. becuase, guess what, we're using different unit. So yeah, even that kind of measurement can be subjective. But mankind was smart enough to have solved that issue long ago, establishing common units for basically everything. So if the guy and me use the same unit we're gonna get a similar result (not the very same result 'cause hey there is experimental error in each and every measurement, but there are ways to minimize it, and starting with common unit is the first step)

 

Why can't FS be as smart?

FS could and should be the same. Yes the 'experimental error' will likely still be quite big, because of the nature of what you judge which sometimes it's difficult to quantify

But it wouldn't be as bad as it is now when I see the weirdest scores legitimized behind the shield of subjectivity-different comp-different panel-can't compare LOLOL(some people seem to take great pleasure in saying this, as if it were a good thing). And even when the weirdness is also within the same comp, in the way the same judges look like a entirely different people when giving marks to this or that skater, another shield conveniently pops up: starting order LOLOL

As if the sad state of things was a justification, instead of something that needs to be uprooted, erased, burned to the ground.

 

Well now I'm pretty much resigned to this but when I stop and think I am mad both at myself and at ISU because I shouldn't be resigned, NO ONE should be resigned, no one should take for a given that e.g. PCS are nationality-related and reputation-related and starting-order-related. I have the feeling of a general apathy and it's ISU's fault becuase yes, fans are powerless and getting upset at every score just isn't a healthy way to follow a sport, you just needs to laugh and shrug it off if you want to keep enjoying the sport

And I hate the ISU, yes, I hate it as an institution, for doing this to me, making it hard for me to follow a sport that I have loved at first sight thanks to the skaters.:squishedPooh:

I almost regret the day I wanted to understand skating more and learn about jumps, rules and so on.

Well I can't really regret it because it made me appreciate some qualities more, like the beauty of a pure toe pick and the aestethic pleasure of watching good knee bend and deep edges, even if the downside is me being WTF when I see scores

 

I believe that after Yuzu I'll step back a little and follow singles as I follow pairs and ID now: I have my faves, I support them but don't delve too much in the scoring, don't get too involved, be happy for the triumphs and sad when they don't make it but not going to read the protocols.

And using the predictability of certain scoring to get points for my pre-competition predictions:P (reputation scoring rarely fails you when predicting ID, and when it does it's because the unexpected mistake happened, not because judges for once stopped being predictable):rolleyes:

 

 

tho if I had to give a new fan an advice, it would be: just keep enjoying the performances and don't ever ever ever try to know why elements are scored the way they are.

Currently, in FS, knowledge isn't power, it's just frustration.:Poohgaveup:

 

 

(*)

well, I'd likely complain if ISU wrote in the rules "stiff knee means outstanding SS" "bent forward posture means beautifu lines" and I already disagree that "3.25 rotations are a quad" (that's just extremely counterintutitive, for anyone but some people in FS community I guess) but if those are written down in the rules, then whatever, all skaters and coaches can read those rules and try to adapt to them and judges can't get too creative.

And I would sigh but I'd still be able to understand why stiff knees get a 9 in SS. That's the standard in the rules, though a poor one. But then everyone with stiff knees would need to get 9. Ah ah. Unless they don't add the clause: "this rule only applies to skater xxxx and xxxx. Everyone else will be scored according to a different rule".

At least it would be more honest.:shrug:

 

 
aaaaand even more musings:4: but without ranting:biggrin:

  Reveal hidden contents

 

I'll be happy the day (who knows how distant in the future) when they will accurately measure the degrees of rotation in the air and give BV based on just that, not on what the skater meant ----idk, 45° of rotation = 0.25 points---. if you meant to do a quad but only rotated 3.25 revolutions in the air, well sorry but gonna get BV for that, not for what you meant.

I'd be fine with having only a few "true triples" among ladies (I believe it would mostly be 2.5 revs or less).

I would be fine with having only a few "true quads", most of the current quads would likely be mostly 3.5 revs.

Maybe it wouldn't be that good for narrative about multiple quadssssss!!!!!!!! but it would be a fair system for everyone. For the majority of skaters it would only be a change in the baseline ----where once they got a BV of 20 they would be getting a 15... but ISU could still decide 45°=1 point BV and the baseline would skyrocket and they could have all the WRs they want....better, they could change the BV every 4 years and have brand new WRs every olys cycle regardless of technical advancement----. But compared to the current system, it would also finally be fair to the alwasy-forgotten minority of those who rotate more in the air. They would rightfully get higher BV.

 

Then, because jumps landed forward are extremely dangerous, if ISU wants to be sure that skaters keep training to land in the safest way, , they can add some kind of bonus for properly landing backwards.

It might also be just GOE, I can't see a jump landed forward looking effortless or having flow, but it could, idk, be a brand-new GOE bullet: "proper landing". Heck the system would actually be more simple than the current one, no need of all that complicated table of BV of different jumps of different revolutions, no need to list additional BV of UR and DG, no need of goe deductions for UR or DG, just use the "backward landing" bullet for +1 and "not backwards" for -1 or whatever.:dancingpooh::P

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry for off-topic, but I needed to answer you LadyLou

Spoiler

So, thanks to fs I realised that rhythmic gymnatics (another sport I follow since ... since a very long time, clearly longer than fs), was not that subjective !

 

Just, if you're interrested I'll explain very shortly why (so sorry if you absolutely don't care !):tumblr_inline_mzx8s4JRlX1r8msi5:

 

Rhythmic gymnastics have that sort of PCS score too ... but in the code there are very detailed type of penalties for each categories. Those peanlities appeared with more details about 6 years ago, because the ''pcs score'' was starting to be completely wrong (ie very linked to the reputation and country), so a big reform started

But this reform isn't over yet, at least for me because the judges can do whatever they want with those penalites (at least with the more subjective one, like about the charater of the programme or the hamony between music and movement). Plus, rhythmic gymnastics still don't have protocols like in fs (so shadow judging, with very few details about the judgement ... like if you were only getting TES score, PCS score with score for each segment (SS score, IN score etc ...) and that's it. No details GOE, no details per judge. Imagine fs with that ! You can't really analyse anything ... :headdesk:

 

But love the way your putting words together, always so funny and colorful when I'm reading your comment (even if I don't comment or don't use the ''heart bottom'' because I'm not log in)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

fandom/UR complaining

Spoiler

Why does Vincent have such a fervent defense force for his URs, whereas Jun fans largely seem to acknowledge that Jun underrotated his 4S? Is it a USA stan thing? Honestly, it's really annoying. This isn't a subjective thing like artistry, or something that it takes a while to learn how to evaluate like skating skills. All you have to be able to do is look at angles. Slow it down--youtube has a 0.25x speed option. To be honest, I'm not even sure Vincent got even 3.25 rotations in the air on the 4S. He doesn't leave the ice until he's forwards, and lands only a little bit more than forwards. Even if you use a more generous definition of takeoff and landing, it's not rotated. Sure there are borderline cases sometimes (if you squint maaaaybe you could say his 4Lz was borderline), but this isn't borderline.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, shanshani said:

fandom/UR complaining

  Hide contents

Why does Vincent have such a fervent defense force for his URs, whereas Jun fans largely seem to acknowledge that Jun underrotated his 4S? Is it a USA stan thing? .

Maybe because out of something like 100 people, 95 are raging non-stop on twitter about Zhou's uncalled URs, while 5 are saying things like "maybe Junliet Ured his quad but i'm so happy he scored high".

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, shanshani said:

fandom/UR complaining

  Reveal hidden contents

Why does Vincent have such a fervent defense force for his URs, whereas Jun fans largely seem to acknowledge that Jun underrotated his 4S? Is it a USA stan thing? Honestly, it's really annoying. This isn't a subjective thing like artistry, or something that it takes a while to learn how to evaluate like skating skills. All you have to be able to do is look at angles. Slow it down--youtube has a 0.25x speed option. To be honest, I'm not even sure Vincent got even 3.25 rotations in the air on the 4S. He doesn't leave the ice until he's forwards, and lands only a little bit more than forwards. Even if you use a more generous definition of takeoff and landing, it's not rotated. Sure there are borderline cases sometimes (if you squint maaaaybe you could say his 4Lz was borderline), but this isn't borderline.

 

It's gonna frustrate you further if you want to try to understand this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×