Protocols for US Nats are up

[NoVa Sk8r]

Yay, they're here (the PDF documents combine the SP and LP).
http://stlouis2006.usfigureskating.org/News/EventNews/0117JudgesScores.aspx

OK, how on earth do can some judges award Sasha a +2 for her triple FLUTZ/double toe?
Sorry, had to throw that out there.

Kimmie got credit for doing 2 triple-triples; she has a negative GOE on the opening 3flip/3toe, but I can't recall if she had a wonky landing.

And Amber Corwin got full credit for her 3toe-3toe in the short and long programs! 8-)

Looks like the judges appreciated Stephanie Rosenthal's "Rockit" SP; look at how high her interp scores are in relation to the other PCS marks!

and yay to seeing "3ATh" for Inoue & Baldwin's LP! 8-)

[Schmeck]

Hooray! I really thought USFSA was going to drop the ball on this one, so I'm pleasantly surprised.

Now, I hopw my printer is up to the demand - I want this stuff to review tomorrow morning while the students are taking finals.

[loveskating]

Yay, they're here (the PDF documents combine the SP and LP).
http://stlouis2006.usfigureskating.org/News/EventNews/0117JudgesScores.aspx

OK, how on earth do can some judges award Sasha a +2 for her triple FLUTZ/double toe? Sorry, had to throw that out there.


Maybe because the takeoff edge is not the only thing about a jump that is judged? DUH!

(1) speed into,
(2) proper takeoff edge
(3) proper backspin position in the air, including body being straight at the apex of the jump
(4) size up of jump
(5) size of jump over the ice
(6) proper landing edge
(7) solid, smooth runout

and jumps in combination require that the second or third jump be similar in size (and in pairs, the jumps need to be in unison as well).

Sasha's speed into and out of jumps is exemplary and her air position is right up there with skaters like Irina and Plushenko on the jumps. Her jumps are not huge, but they are every bit as big as Kwan's.

This is all right there in the COP rules on the ISU web site.

[NoVa Sk8r]

Um, excuse me, but according to ISU, "If an element has one of the described errors (see charts), the GOE cannot be higher than Base Value (“0”)"

(Reading IS fundamental.)

And calling that jump a flutz is being way too kind. She *never* achieves an outside edge to switch over to an inside edge.

And next year, the ISU will be cracking down on this.

[loveskating]

Um, excuse me, but according to ISU, "If an element has one of the described errors (see charts), the GOE cannot be higher than Base Value (“0”)"

(Reading IS fundamental.)

And calling that jump a flutz is being way too kind. She *never* achieves an outside edge to switch over to an inside edge.

And next year, the ISU will be cracking down on this.

Good, then Kwan's outrageous flutz will finally get marked down! 6.0 INDEED! She has NEVER achieved an outside edge, the best she can get is the flat, EVER! So why don't you bash her?

However, that rule would be nonsensical -- so I doubt it means what you say it means -- to make one part of a jump so defining is absurd -- that would mean, for instance, that if Irina flutzed, her superior height and ice coverage and air position would mean nothing.

If this is the case, then the ISU should change it immediately.

And I DID read it -- but maybe I missed the little catch 22s that some are so fond of inserting into the rules!

[NoVa Sk8r]

Good, then Kwan's outrageous flutz will finally get marked down! 6.0 INDEED! She has NEVER achieved an outside edge, the best she can get is the flat, EVER! So why don't you bash her?

However, that rule would be nonsensical -- so I doubt it means what you say it means -- to make one part of a jump so defining is absurd -- that would mean, for instance, that if Irina flutzed, her superior height and ice coverage and air position would mean nothing.

If this is the case, then the ISU should change it immediately.

And I DID read it -- but maybe I missed the little catch 22s that some are so fond of inserting into the rules!The discussion was about US Nats, an event that Kwan was not at.

I am just reporting what the ISU document states (Communication No. 1284).
So enough with the bloviating already.

[likes2skate]

Good, then Kwan's outrageous flutz will finally get marked down! 6.0 INDEED! She has NEVER achieved an outside edge, the best she can get is the flat, EVER! So why don't you bash her?

However, that rule would be nonsensical -- so I doubt it means what you say it means -- to make one part of a jump so defining is absurd -- that would mean, for instance, that if Irina flutzed, her superior height and ice coverage and air position would mean nothing.

If this is the case, then the ISU should change it immediately.

And I DID read it -- but maybe I missed the little catch 22s that some are so fond of inserting into the rules!


Why is saying Sasha flutzes a bash? GEEZ you Cohenaholics cannot take any constrictive criticism of Sasha can you? :D

Oh and Kwan wasn't at Nationals...I bet that is why the poster did not discuss her scores for flutzing...

[crayonskater]

Cohen's flutz was pretty marked in the LP, as I recall; the camera angle was behind her in that corner and it was a pretty clear inside edge.

Of course, Kwan wasn't there, so I didn't see if she flutzed or not. Flutzing is fairly common, but my impression is that Cohen's flutzes are a bit more pronounced. She usually wobbles edges pretty severely.

One hopes that the international judges will be to the same standard as the U.S. (or the U.S. rises to the occasion), if only to give the skaters a fair sense of how their elements mark. (i.e., if the Olympic panel downgrades, that could cost the gold, right there, ya know?)

Maybe because the takeoff edge is not the only thing about a jump that is judged? DUH!

Well, but the takeoff edge is pretty important, at least in distinguishing the jumps, ya know? You get downgraded if you fall, too, even if you had great air position.

I'm not certain as to the interpretation of the rules - NovaSk8er's seems plausible- but it is possible to consider a change in entry edge a large enough error to override great air position and landing. I suspect the +2 is due to the combo, however, but I'm not sure how combos are scored, exactly. (So it could be 0 on the lutz, +1, +1 on the sequence)

[loveskating]

Why is saying Sasha flutzes a bash? GEEZ you Cohenaholics cannot take any constrictive criticism of Sasha can you? :D

Oh and Kwan wasn't at Nationals...I bet that is why the poster did not discuss her scores for flutzing...

No one is saying Sasha does not flutz -- I do not deny that she flutzes, and I never have.

Also, the entry defines the jump, not just the takeoff edge. Iv'e seen people save a 2 axel going right off the flat, not the forward outside edge!

Glad you admitted that Kwan flutzes -- I've been bashed to smithereens for noting that she flutzed, although I could not reference the marks specifically as this poster did because there was no COP then. I can assume, however, that the judges ignored her obvious flutz when they gave her all those 6.0s???

I recall very few people lamenting this fact. Hmmm?

[likes2skate]

No one is saying Sasha does not flutz -- I do not deny that she flutzes, and I never have.

Also, the entry defines the jump, not just the takeoff edge. Iv'e seen people save a 2 axel going right off the flat, not the forward outside edge!

Glad you admitted that Kwan flutzes -- I've been bashed to smithereens for noting that she flutzed, although I could not reference the marks specifically as this poster did because there was no COP then. I can assume, however, that the judges ignored her obvious flutz when they gave her all those 6.0s???

I recall very few people lamenting this fact. Hmmm?

I am assuming with the 6.0 system, there was not much taken off for a flutz? But if there was, wouldn't it be taken off on the tech mark? I do not think MK ever got a 6.0 for tech, right? Although, her tech marks always seemed a little high for me...

Also, the fact that the last 2 olympic champs had major flutzes would lead me to believe that this was not a big deal under the 6.0 system.

And finally, Sasha also received 4 6.0's for her 04 worlds sp with a flutz, which again would lead me to believe that the judjes to not mark down for it on the artistic mark. But her tech marks were 5.8 and 5.9's right?

Oh and one more thing, I LOVE Kwan, but I am real about her, and she does flutz too, but maybe not as bad as Sarah H or Tara L.

[crayonskater]

I don't know, but I think it's mostly just edge & picking; you can tell the difference in jumps by the set-up (and the axel requires a backward prep, I think), but there's lots of ways to get to the edge you're supposed to be on. Usually the setup and the takeoff go together. It's just that with the flip and the lutz if you switch the edge, which is easy enough to do, you get the other jump.

Maybe flutzes should just be rated as flips with a non-traditional entry.

Regardless, it's a little disingenuous to get upset when discussing this year's Nationals and the scoring because under a different system, in the past, not at this years Nationals, another skater may or may not have made the same mistake, and the judges may or may not have been over-generous with their marks. It doesn't have a lot of bearing on the score at this year's Nationals.

Should every remark about poor Cohen be prefaced with a remark about how Kwan did the same thing? Could get old, but it could lead to an entertaining comedy style.

'Cohen stepped out of her triple loop at this year's Nationals. Meissner fell on a double axel. But Kwan fell on a triple flip at the Olympics!'

'Cohen did a great short program at last year's Worlds. But Michelle did a great one in 1998!'

'Bananas are $.49/lb. But tomatoes are $1.25/lb! QUIT BASHING BANANAS.'

I realize this is the internet and all, but yeesh.

[loveskating]

Well, I didn't just single out Kwan, I also mentioned Irina, and now I'll mention Sarah Hughes and Tara Lipinski, all champs, just like Sasha, who flutz.

Sasha's technique on the lutz also includes the fact she does not telegraph it, like Irina.

Also, it wasn't like Sasha got a level 4 or 3 for her lutz, so how do you know it was not marked? I feel that it was, it usually is.

IMHO flutz or not, that lutz/2 tl/2 loop was otherwise PERFECTION in her LP.

BTW According to my reading of COP, combo jumps are marked as combo jumps, not as two separte jumps -- however, sort of like when you double a jump, you get credit for a 2 jump, and likewise if the combo goes wrong -- you turn or make it a sequence etc. -- then it is marked as that or as two separate jumps.

[NoVa Sk8r]

You must have been watching a vastly different Sasha over the past few years, she distinctly rocks between edges hitting both. No doubt she isn't the soundest when it comes to take off edges on the flip and lutz, but you are making things up to say she NEVER gets to the outside edge during her lutz.

I'm not entirely sure about the wording you refer to about one of the mistakes means a positive GOE is impossible. Irina would be in trouble since she tends to have poor runout on her jumps (many times I see her standing still at the end of a jump).Sorry, but as someone who skates and competes, I can say that Sasha has a serious flaw in her lutz jump, and I hope she fixes it. She's clearly talented with strong edges, so with some work, she can fix it (though breaking bad habits on triples can be difficult). Ms. Cohen rocks between edges on her flip jump.

The rest of her skating, however, is gorgeous.

As for CoP, "telegraphing" is also a no-no, and IMNSHO, Irina should get dinged for that.
Again, I was just referring to what the rules "state," not how they are "enforced."

Also, the entry defines the jump, not just the takeoff edge.Um, no. The takeoff edge is EXACTLY what defines the jump. (To wit: You can do a toe loop from the traditional flip entrance; that is, do a LFO 3-turn, and instead of picking in the right foot, put down the right foot and pick in with the left toe pick.)

Also, it wasn't like Sasha got a level 4 or 3 for her lutz.Jumps are not marked by level.

[LoopLoop]

My coach has worked with Cohen intermittently, he's a supporter of hers (he occasionally gives me jump drills that she's used), and he says flatly that her "lutz" is purely and simply a flip, and that even she knows it. The jumps in her programs that are supposed to be flips are closer to being lutzes than the "lutzes" are; on the flip, after she does the three-turn she rocks back and forth from the inside to the outside back to the inside before picking. On the lutz, she does a mohawk, then a crossover usually right onto the inside edge (the same thing that Tim Goebel and Takeshi Honda do); occasionally she crosses over onto a flat which then switches to an inside edge.

And according to this coach, the only top women in the world who actually have real distinction between their lutzes and flips are Kostner, Rochette, and Hughes.

Slutskaya and Kwan take off for both jumps from the flat; Sokolova, Volchkova, Meissner and Arakawa do their flips as "lips"; Suguri and Asada do classic flutzes.

[Debbie S]

And according to this coach, the only top women in the world who actually have real distinction between their lutzes and flips are Kostner, Rochette, and Hughes.

Slutskaya and Kwan take off for both jumps from the flat; Sokolova, Volchkova, Meissner and Arakawa do their flips as "lips"; Suguri and Asada do classic flutzes.Interesting. (I assume your coach means Emily Hughes?)

[Schmeck]

Which Hughes?

Just wanted to second the point that jumps do not get assigned levels...

Questions:

How many judges' scores counted, 7 of 9? Did they drop highest and lowest, or was it random? For the GOE, was there a factor of .8 in the SP?

I sat at work and crunched the SP numbers for a few skaters and I couldn't get the scores to work out. If one formula worked for a few of the scores, it didn't work for all of them!

And why is #8 missing from Cohen's FP? It lists 14 elements, except they don't have a #8...

[loveskating]

Jumps are not marked by level.

they are marked by -1, -2, -3, or 0 and +1, +2 or +3, from a base level of worth, are they not?

[LoopLoop]

Yep, Emily Hughes. Sorry for not clarifying that to begin with. :oops:

[loveskating]

Ask him about Maria Butereskaya. I bet she had a real lutz.

[LoopLoop]

He has mentioned her, I believe, as one who lips her flip. But really we've talked about current competitors.

[NoVa Sk8r]

How many judges' scores counted, 7 of 9? Did they drop highest and lowest, or was it random? For the GOE, was there a factor of .8 in the SP?

I sat at work and crunched the SP numbers for a few skaters and I couldn't get the scores to work out. If one formula worked for a few of the scores, it didn't work for all of them!I think they work. Let's look at Sasha's SP:
Element/ Base / GOE / J1 ................ J9 / Score
3Lz+2T/ 7.3 / 0.43 / 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 1 / 7.73

So the high (2) and low (0) are thrown out, leaving 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1 for a total of 3 points. There are seven juges, so 3/7 = 0.43, which is what the GOE is.

For the PCS mark, she had 7.68, 7.25, 7.64, 7.64, and 7.75. Each of these is multiplied by the 0.8 factor. Add up these numbers, and you get 30.36.

The judges markings are slightly differnet in ISU events: There are 12 judges, 9 are randomly selected to have their marks count, and then the high and low are thrown away, leaving 7 marks (like at US Nats) that get averaged.

[NoVa Sk8r]

they are marked by -1, -2, -3, or 0 and +1, +2 or +3, from a base level of worth, are they not?Yes, they are assigned a grade, not a level.

Oh what fun CoP is.

[Schmeck]

That's what I did, but then halfway down Cohen's SP, the numbers didn't gel - they were very low.

[loveskating]

Yes, they are assigned a grade, not a level.

Oh what fun CoP is.

Semantics.

At least now everyone has a chance to learn the rules -- they are not so esoteric.

[NoVa Sk8r]

That's what I did, but then halfway down Cohen's SP, the numbers didn't gel - they were very low.Ah, now I know what happened.

The GOE score does not absolutely equate over to a number score. Just because an element has a, say, +1 GOE, does not mean that one full point is added to the base value. It depends on what element is performed. The ISU charts lists ---, --, -, 0, +, ++, and +++ to avoid confusing the -3 to +3 GOE.


To see what points are added or subtracted (depending on how the element is performed) take a look at this ISU document, starting on page 4:
http://www.isu.org/vsite/vfile/page/fileurl/0,11040,4844-143302-160518-34133-0-file,00.pdf

This document lists the updated level 4 items, starting at the bottom of page 8.
http://www.isu.org/vsite/vfile/page/fileurl/0,11040,4844-166267-183485-89562-0-file,00.pdf

For all the triple and quad jumps, the actual GOE awarded *does* refer to the actual grade added. Thus, a triple axel with a +1 GOE is worth 7.5 (base) + 1 (the "+1" GOE mark) for 8.5 points.

As another example, a level 2 step sequence with a -1 GOE is worth 2.3 (base) - 0.3 (the "-1" GOE mark) for a total value of 2.0 points.

In Sasha's case, her straight line step sequence was called a level 3 (SlSt3), and it had GOEs of 1, 1, 3, 1, 0, 2, 1, 1, 2. After the high and low are discarded, it's just 1,1,1,2,1,1,2.
HOWEVER, in this instance, the GOE does NOT correlate directly to the points added tothe base mark.
According to the charts, for a level 3 element, the GOEs convert this way:
GOE +3 = 1.5 points
GOE +2 = 1.0
GOE +1 = 0.5
GOE (-1) = -0.7
GOE (-2) = -1.4
GOE (-3) = -2.1

So, her awarded GOE marks of 1, 1, 1, 2, 1, 1, and 2 corresponds to 0.5, 0.5, 0.5, 1.0., 0.5, 0.5, and 1.0, which equals 4.5.
Averaged out over the 7 counted judges, and the points for the GOE is 0.64.

Hope this makes sense. 8-)

[Schmeck]

Nova Skater, thanks for taking the time to type that all out! Now I understand the scores (not that the difference in scoring spins and step sequences differently form jumps makes sense, but we're dealing with the ISU here, LOL!) and won't be trying convoluted archaic formulas tomorrow! :lol:

[NoVa Sk8r]

Nova Skater, thanks for taking the time to type that all out! Now I understand the scores (not that the difference in scoring spins and step sequences differently form jumps makes sense, but we're dealing with the ISU here, LOL!) and won't be trying convoluted archaic formulas tomorrow! :lol:Well, I need *something* to do at work. :P