THE LUTZ - please explain

[AxelAnnie22]

Here is what I don't understand. If the lutz is a jump that takes off from an outside edge, why is credit given (or the mandatory deduction not taken) for a lutz that takes off from either the flat or the inside edge?

And, if a flip takes off from the inside edge, why isn't a lutz that takes off from the inside edge (which is a flip) counted in the "you can't repeat a jump" count?

These are mysteries to me. HELP!

[allegria]

I can answer the second part of your question- judges have been instructed to count a jump as the jump that it is *intended* to be. Therefore, a flutz is not considered to be a flip- it is considered a flawed lutz attempt. So rather than taking a deduction for the repeated jump, either the judge takes a deduction for an improper takeoff or lowers the base mark because of poor technique.

Does someone else want to tackle the first question?

[AxelAnnie22]

Thanks for your answer. So, a skater could come out and do 6 triple toe loops, and intend that they be a lutz, loop, flip, sal, etc., ? I am sure not, but one could LOL!

[Rachel]

I imagine it would be pretty hard for a skater to convince a judge that an edge jump was intended to have a toepick takeoff. OTOH, a skater who glides back on an outside edge and switches over to the flat or an inside edge as the skater's free leg goes back and up is clearly intending to do a lutz.

There are deductions for the degree of the flutz, ranging from .1 for slight flutz to .3 for an egregious flutz, but I imagine that the flutz is only an issue when the competition comes down to such a small issue. It's one small piece of one jump, not the end-all and be-all of the program or even of the jump itself. I think the flutz only becomes an issue when the competition is very close, which is as I at least think it should be. Flutzing makes a lutz easier to do; it's the outside edge entry that makes the jump the most difficult triple after the axel. So a flutz might be worth slightly less than a true lutz, but if the rest of the jump is of good quality, then I don't think the judges much care if it was a little flutzed. A big flutz, yes, I think it matters a bit, but switching over to the flat or to a very slight inside edge at takeoff is no big deal in the overall scheme of things.

[loveskating]

Hi AxelAnnie:

Its a mystery to me too, why taking off from the flat is given full credit on the lutz...or no deduction. But is that even the case? I'm not sure, but it is claimed to be so.

If this, differentiation, among others, is designed to distinguish as to quality between skaters who land the same jumps, then it would seem that taking off from the flat is not as good as taking off from the left outside edge on the lutz.

But I also agree that this is only important when a competition is very close...

[RobinA]

I would think it's partially pratical considerations that allow judges to give full credit for a lutz off a flat blade. It's one thing to see a flat take-off on TV, quite another for a judge half a rink away to be able to make a call as to whether the lutz is off a shallow outside edge or a flat. Rather than maybe make the wrong call, I'd guess a judge would want to err on the side of caution. This would especially be true in the LP, where there's no replay. And how helpful are the replays allowed in the SP? I kinda doubt the views the judges can review are as clearcut as what we can see on TV from a strategically placed camera.

[AxelAnnie22]

Originally posted by Rachel
I imagine it would be pretty hard for a skater to convince a judge that an edge jump was intended to have a toepick takeoff.

True, but it is fun to think about, and with some of those Flutzes, it isn't such a stretch LOL!

There are deductions for the degree of the flutz, ranging from .1 for slight flutz to .3 for an egregious flutz, but I imagine that the flutz is only an issue when the competition comes down to such a small issue. It's one small piece of one jump, not the end-all and be-all of the program or even of the jump itself. I think the flutz only becomes an issue when the competition is very close, which is as I at least think it should be. [/QUOTE]

I would imagine all that you say is correct. However, how does the judge know a competition will or will not come down to that lutz take off, if it is as you say. Seems to me that if the mandatory deduction - in the SP, let's say - is NOT taken, with each incorrect take off why have the rule? Why have the distinction? Unless you are saying that the judges have already decided on the placements, and are then just looking to justify their order. (I am only just joking - barely)

Take the US Ladies SP at Nationals as an example. I don't think anyone could have predicted that so many skaters would skate such gorgeous, wonderful programs. I don't remember the skate order. But with a competition like this, not making the deduction is tentamont to giving a free pass. Doesn't seem right.

I am not saying that it is the end all of the competition. Nor am I saying it is the most important thing. But, it is my understanding that "mandatory" means you have to, so why don't the judges take the deduction. I know it is sometimes hard to see - but they are judges, and that is their job and their training. It is not that hard for their trained eye.

When you have Peggy talking about the flutz that so and so did, and you have the instant replay, and you have no deduction.....well, it doesn't help skating's reputation, nor does it help it's perception as sport.

[Marco]

Well a jump isn't just about the take off edge. Granted it is important, there are also important aspects that should be considered like speed in and out of jump, height and air position, spring, distance, landing edge and sureness, completeness of rotations and posture. IMO, Nicole Bobek's 3 flutz (when she hits it nicely like in 1995 Worlds) is worth much more than a correct 3lutz from say Elina Kettunen or Nancy Kerrigan. So sometimes judges might have taken a deduction (or might only have given partial credit) on a flutz but it was just that the jump itself was good enough aside from the wrong edge takeoff that it seems like the judges ignored the flutzing.

I think Sarah was hit pretty hard by the judges for that flutz, but ofcourse she also tended to underrotate it as well as having an awkward toepick.

Axelannie, I think the keyword here is "attempt". If a flutzer clearly intended to attempt a 3lutz2toe and a 3flip in the short, then she would not receive a deduction for repeating the same jump but would instead suffer a deduction for taking off the 3lutz off the wrong edge. I guess this is one of the reasons why judges should watch practice so they know skaters' various jump approaches and techniques, and thus what they had intended to do.

[Barnet]

AxelAnnie wrote:

[And, if a flip takes off from the inside edge, why isn't a lutz that takes off from the inside edge (which is a flip) counted in the "you can't repeat a jump" count?]

Hello everyone, former FSWer posting here for the first time.

AxelAnnie, changing the Lutz edge from an outside to an inside edge take off makes it a salchow not a flip as the salchow is taken off from the edge; the flip is taken off by digging in the toe pick. This is significant as the degree of difficulty between a Lutz and a Salchow is greater than between a Lutz and a Flip. The Lutz is considered the second most difficult jump in skating but the salchow is the second easiest, so it's important to be aware just how much the degree of difficulty changes merely with the change of edge from outside to inside.

Rachel wrote:

[Flutzing makes a lutz easier to do; it's the outside edge entry that makes the jump the most difficult triple after the axel. So a flutz might be worth slightly less than a true lutz, but if the rest of the jump is of good quality, then I don't think the judges much care if it was a little flutzed. A big flutz, yes, I think it matters a bit, but switching over to the flat or to a very slight inside edge at takeoff is no big deal in the overall scheme of things.]


There is no such thing in skating as a slight inside edge. There are only two "edges" in skating - the inside and the outside, so if a jump is taken off an edge, it's an either/or situation. It's either taken off an outside or an inside. Since the degree of difficulty of the Lutz is determined simply by which edge it takes off from, then swtiching from an outside edge to an inside edge doesn't just make doing it slightly easier, it turns the second most diffcult jump in skating to the equivalent of the second easiest jump in skating.

As there is no technical or difficulty differential between an "attempted" Lutz done from an inside edge and an attempted Salchow (it's exactly the same jump), a judge should give a Triple "Inside Edge" Lutz the same weight as a Triple Salchow. But they don't do that. Under the current ISU rules, anyone attempting any kind of Lutz automatically gets a higher base mark because the jump is classfied as Lutz even if the difficulty level ends up being the same as a Salchow and so the Flutz deduction comes off a higher original base mark, which is unfair.

However, I am referring specifically to Lutz's done off inside edges. Of course, there are also Lutz's done on flats ie not off an edge, and for me, this is the proper definition of a Flutz - it's still the Lutz but done on a flat take off, which makes the attempt slightly easier, but does not transform it into another jump altogether, as no jumps exist that are taken off from flats.

So I guess what I am trying to say is that the ISU should reclassify a Lutz taken off the flat as a Flutz with only a minor deduction but regard switching to the inside as a landed salchow rather than an attempted Lutz, and yes, anyone who does this should have to suffer the "repeat jump" rule because there really is no difference between the two jumps.

But hey, I am only going by what I was taught!

Incidentally, I was also told that the proper Lutz take off was off a long or held back outside edge, (so the tracing on the ice of the jump should show an S shape), but hardly any women do that nowadays, though most of the men still do so.

[Ellyn]

I would imagine all that you say is correct. However, how does the judge know a competition will or will not come down to that lutz take off, if it is as you say. Seems to me that if the mandatory deduction - in the SP, let's say - is NOT taken, with each incorrect take off why have the rule? Why have the distinction?

It is mandatory to take a deduction in the short program if the judge saw an incorrect takeoff, with or without instant replay available. The amount of the deduction varies from 0.1 to 0.3 depending on the severity of the error.

Take the US Ladies SP at Nationals as an example. I don't think anyone could have predicted that so many skaters would skate such gorgeous, wonderful programs. I don't remember the skate order. But with a competition like this, not making the deduction is tentamont to giving a free pass. Doesn't seem right.

Did any of the US ladies at Nationals with visible errors on their lutz takeoffs receive a required elements mark equal to or higher than the presentation mark from the same judge? If the first mark was lower, as it usually is, you can assume that one or more deductions were taken.

Of course it's possible that the judge also had problems with the skaters presentation and would have given a lower mark for presentation than for required elements if not for the deduction -- with skaters who are agreed to be particularly strong in presentation, that isn't likely though.

But unless you see skaters with blatant flutzes receiving 5.9s and 6.0s for required elements, you can't say that no deduction was taken.

In the long program, there are no mandatory deductions for flawed elements. The skater just doesn't get full credit (or if the flaw is serious enough, any credit at all) for the element. But s/he may get enough credit for all the other elements to make up for a given flaw.

[Ellyn]

Originally posted by Barnet
[B]
AxelAnnie, changing the Lutz edge from an outside to an inside edge take off makes it a salchow not a flip as the salchow is taken off from the edge; the flip is taken off by digging in the toe pick.

The lutz is takes off from the outside edge and the toe pick. The flip takes off from the inside edge and the toepick. The salchow takes off from the inside edge without the toepick.

If the skater starts on an outside edge, changes to inside with or without a toepick assist, takes the toepick out of the ice if it was in there, and *then* takes off from the edge alone, that would be a salchow.

If the skater starts on a back inside edge intending to do a flip, sticks the toe in the ice, takes it out, and jumps from the BI edge alone, that would be a salchow.

I have a bad habit of doing this myself -- my (single) flip and especially lutz are often seriously flawed in this way. Of course, it's still a lot more difficult than just doing a normal salchow.

Yulia Soldatova used to do (maybe still does) a back outside spiral, change edge into triple salchow. I've seen at least one juvenile or intermediate skater do a back outside lutz approach to a change of edge into double salchow. No toe assist, just using an edge change instead of the more common three turn or mohawk approach to set up the salchow. That is MUCH harder than the normal approaches, probably comparable in difficulty to just doing a correct lutz of the same number of revolutions. We could jokingly refer to this type of salchow entry as a "toeless flutz". Considering how difficult the single toeless lutz is and the lack of any examples of doubles or triples, I wouldn't think that even "flutzing" it into a salchow would lose much difficulty.

However, if a skater is on a back inside edge, sticks the pick in the ice, and takes off from the edge *and* the pick, especially with the pick leaving the ice after the edge, that is a flip, NOT a salchow.

If it was always intended to be a flip, it was done correctly.

If the skater started on an outside edge (intending a lutz) and then changed to an inside edge and then took off from the inside edge and the pick at the same time or the pick leaving the ice last, it was essentially a correct flip from a more difficult entry and deserves at least as much credit as a normal flip, or slightly less than a correct lutz.

In a situation where it is obvious (form the existence of other, more normally approached flips in the same program),


Many skaters change edge a little or a lot on the lutz takeoff. Many skaters prerotate ('toe axel') their double or triple toes especially at the ends of combinations. Many skaters skid off their axel and sometimes loop takeoffs. Some skaters prerotate double or triple salchows so much that they turn forward on the ice and end up doing single or double axels. Some skaters turn backward on their axel takeoffs before leaving the ice and end up doing salchows. Some skaters, at least sometimes, "pick" for a lutz or flip too low on the blade and end up taking off from the blade and not the pick of the "picking" foot (and usually suffer from lack of height in the jump). Some skaters trail their free foot on the ice on the takeoffs for salchows and loops. Some skaters leave the outside or inside edge on the ice after they're finished picking for a lutz or flip so that the pick leaves the ice before the other foot.

These are all flaws in jump takeoffs. They all make the jump worht slightly or significantly less than if it were performed correctly. Similarly with flaws in jump landings. But just because a skater does one or more jumps in a program less than perfectly doesn't mean that the program as a whole did not deserve high marks or first place. Perfection is a lot rarer than a few little flaws here or there, even at the highest levels.

However, I am referring specifically to Lutz's done off inside edges.

It is quite rare for skaters to turn lutzes into salchows (taking off the inside edge only with the pick already off the ice by the time they jump). I do it, so I know it can be done, but this is not what people are usually referring to when they talk about "flutzing" or "turning a lutz into a flip." They're talking about doing a toe jump off an inside edge. That's a flip. If you're trying to call a toe jump a salchow you're 1) wrong, and 2) confusing the issue.

But hey, I am only going by what I was taught!

Where were you taught this?

BTW, when my coaches and I joke about me turning my jumps into salchows, we know that they're really flawed lutzes (or flips or axels, I can do it on all of them) and don't confuse the corrections I need to make on the technique for those jumps with the technique I need for my correct, intentional salchows or double sal attempts.

[AxelAnnie22]

Originally posted by Ellyn
It is mandatory to take a deduction in the short program if the judge saw an incorrect takeoff, with or without instant replay available. The amount of the deduction varies from 0.1 to 0.3 depending on the severity of the error.

Did any of the US ladies at Nationals with visible errors on their lutz takeoffs receive a required elements mark equal to or higher than the presentation mark from the same judge?

But unless you see skaters with blatant flutzes receiving 5.9s and 6.0s for required elements, you can't say that no deduction was taken.

Thanks for the wonderful information. I am going to go back and look at the SP from US Nats and try to figure out the deductions for those flutzes. I wish they told you the start value before the skater started. Is there anyplace to look it up

BTW - I am not out to "prove" anything. I just don't have much of a life, and I think is it interesting.

[loveskating]

Well, where this comes up for me is when I see that the tech marks don't add up...that they should be lower if the mistakes were taken into account...and relative to other skaters, of course. I mean, for instance, when someone very clearly flutzes badly and also underrotates their flip, but gets a 5.7 on the tech mark in the SP...I just go, "whaaaaa?".

I agree, though, that the other factors, height, ice coverage etc. could be worth more than a perfectly correct lutz where those factors are less or much less.

[AxelAnnie22]

Originally posted by loveskating
Well, where this comes up for me is when I see that the tech marks don't add up...that they should be lower if the mistakes were taken into account...and relative to other skaters, of course. I mean, for instance, when someone very clearly flutzes badly and also underrotates their flip, but gets a 5.7 on the tech mark in the SP...I just go, "whaaaaa?".

I agree, though, that the other factors, height, ice coverage etc. could be worth more than a perfectly correct lutz where those factors are less or much less.

I am not quite so pleasant with my comments! LOL!! It would probably be a good idea if the commentators did not mention "mandatory deductions" and if the ISU didn't have them. If they are not going to use them, why allude to them?

Then, the lutz could just get a mark which incorporates all the factors as well as impression, because it sounds as though that's is what the mark is, anyway. I am not complaining. I just think it is a good idea to, if you say what the rules are, that you follow them. If there is a MANDATORY deduction for a lutz that does not take off from the outside edge, then no flutz should ever receive full credit. That seems pretty simple to me. That would include the lp too. If the start value includes a lutz, and they take off from other than the outside edge (which is what gives the jump the difficulty), it should ALWAYS be given less than full credit, seems to me.

[rack]

I don't have anything intelligent to add to this conversation (except to say how much I'm enjoying and learning from it).

The real reason I'm posting is to wish everyone a happy new year!:P

[Ellyn]

If the start value includes a lutz, and they take off from other than the outside edge (which is what gives the jump the difficulty), it should ALWAYS be given less than full credit, seems to me.

In skating programs, as traditionally judged (this may change in two years if Ottavio Cinquanta gets his way), individual elements are not given specific scores and there's no such thing as a "start value."

The judge assigns a technical mark to the program as a whole, on the basis of the difficulty *and* the quality of all the elements and all the in-between skating, in relation to a general assessment of the overall level of this competition a general sense that 6.0 = the best that the best skaters in the world at this time are capable of, 4.5 = minimum senior quality, and 3.0 = minimum juvenile quality. The actual numbers are just guideposts and the real task of the judges is to rank the skaters according to whose performance was better than whose, overall, in each judge's judgment.

In the long program, it's just a matter of adding up credit for everything that a skater deserves credit for, including "partial credit" for partially successful elements, to decide whether she skated better or worse than each of the precedign skaters, and assigning marks to reflect that placement.

In the short program, each judge comes up with a "base mark" according to the same kind of process, of what the program would be worth if skated with no deductible errors, and then subtracts the necessary amount for any such errors. The concept of base marks and deductions applies to short programs only. It is possible to say "if only she'd done that lutz correctly, that would have been a 5.9 program technically, but with that moderately bad flutz, I can only give 5.7 for required elements."

Of all the top U.S. ladies, Sarah Hughes has the weakest 3lutz, but she also has the hardest combination (lutz-loop instead of lutz-toe) and the strongest 2axel, so it averages out and she can still earn top RE marks even with the flutz deduction.

There are advantages and disadvantages to this approach. But expecting it to work like some other approach that you have in mind but that isn't what the judges are really doing is not going to help.

One of the advantages is flexibility and ability to reflect whatever the skaters happen to do well or not so well rather than holding them to a hard-and-fast point system that captures some aspects of the skating well and completely ignores others.

One of the disadvantages is that the numbers themselves give us no indication of why the judge marked a skater in a given way. Without actually asking the judge, we can only do our best to interpret what the judge was rewarding or penalizing. However, if a senior lady skates a short program with generally high quality on most or all elements and in-between skating, except for a deductivle change of edge on the lutz takeoff, a required elements mark of 5.7 does not mean that no deduction was taken. If the presentation mark from the same judge is 5.8 or 5.9, that's a pretty good indication that a deduction *was* taken. And if the other skaters in the event also changed edge on their lutzes and/or made other subtle or not-so-subtled errors, there's no reason why the skater should not win the short program despite the visibly flawed lutz.

I just don't see how you can conclude from that situation that the judges were not following the rules.

If you want to come up with a completely different method of scoring that gives specific marks for specific elements, I'm sure Mr. Cinquanta would be eager for your input.

[AxelAnnie22]

Originally posted by rack

The real reason I'm posting is to wish everyone a happy new year!:P Much appreciated. And, L'Shannah Tovah to you!

[Barnet]

Ellyn wrote:

[The lutz is takes off from the outside edge and the toe pick. The flip takes off from the inside edge and the toepick. The salchow takes off from the inside edge without the toepick.]

Hi Ellyn. I do so love these technical discussions!

Yes the Lutz is taken off from the back outside edge but with a toe pick assist with the free foot. The take off itself is from the edge only. The flip is done by digging the toe pick of the take off leg. And you are right, the flip is exactly the same as the salchow only the take off is from the toe pick of the inside edge and in the salchow the take off is from the inside edge itself. It is no coincidence that the other name for the flip is the toe-salchow. But you are also right, there is no toe-pick assist in a salchow, so yes, an inside edge Lutz is not a salchow, but its not a flip either since the flip has a toe-pick take-off. Therefore, I would revise my view to say that the inside edge Lutz is very similar to a salchow, but that it is more similar to a salchow than to a flip.

However, the biggest reason I have for an inside edge Lutz to not be considered a Lutz is because of this. The Lutz, if done properly, is a counter rotation jump ie you take off in one direction, but you rotate in the opposite direction. So if you are a right footed skater, you are on an LBO (left back outside edge) and travelling clockwise as you take off the outside edge and then you rotate counter clockwise before landing on an RBO. But if you switch edges at the last minute, you don't do that. By being on an LBI on take off, you are taking off counter clockwise, rotating counter clockwise and landing counter clockwise. It's all done in the same direction. This is much easier than counter-rotating. So it's just like a salchow albeit with a toe pick assist (not the Flip, which is a toe pick take off). Now, if the Lutz is taken off the flat of the left foot, then rotated counter clockwise and landed on an RBO, there is a little counter rotation, so that makes it closer to a Lutz. Here, I would be happy to see only a minor deduction. But for me, an "inside edge" Lutz cannot ever be a Lutz since there is no counter rotation.

And finally, in my defence, I have Robin Cousins, the 1980 Olympic champion, to back up my viewpoint. When explaining the flutz on British TV, he has stated (and I have it on tape) that switching the Lutz from an outside edge take off to an inside edge take off makes it a salchow or makes it like a salchow, I can't remember the exact words, but he definitely said salchow not flip.

Yikes, skating is one complicated sport! Guess we need them scandals for some light relief!!!

[habanero]

Originally posted by AxelAnnie22
Here is what I don't understand. If the lutz is a jump that takes off from an outside edge, why is credit given (or the mandatory deduction not taken) for a lutz that takes off from either the flat or the inside edge?


Lot of good answers in here. A Lutz can get credit as a Lutz instead of a Flip if a) the edge is correct or b) if the edge is incorrect but the time on the wrong edge is very short. The reason that (b) is allowed without penalty (unless it has been changed in the last year) is that the Lutz is a counter-rotation jump and it is the counter-rotation that adds the difficulty, not the edge itself. If the skater is on the wrong edge for a minimal time, the counter-rotation is still active. And the jump is still difficult.

If the "Flutz" scenario is in play (wrong edge and long enough time), the Judge may give credit for a Flip if a Flip hasn't been done already. This can lead to difficulty if an honest Flip is attempted later in the program. One of them then must be deducted (either as a repeated jump or as wrong edge).

[Marco]

Barnet, are you sure Robin Cousins didn't mean "toe-salchow"? I know a lot of people used to call the flip a "toe-salchow".

[Anita18]

Originally posted by Barnet
Yes the Lutz is taken off from the back outside edge but with a toe pick assist with the free foot. The take off itself is from the edge only. The flip is done by digging the toe pick of the take off leg.
I'd really like to see a lutz with minimal assist with the toepick. :) The toe pick is used to stop the horizontal momentum (the BO edge) enough to get the skater up in the air. Dick Button was correct in his analogy of a pole vault. It's the same with a flip, although I find with my own skating that it's more of a weight transfer with the flip rather than a pole vault.

The only way to get height from an edge jump would be to "snap" into a very deep edge and convert that sudden horizontal motion to vertical height. No one, not even Maria B or Todd E, gets a deep enough BO edge on the lutz to snap it up. You need that toepick for the lutz and flip. Love that pick, LOL.

Originally posted by Barnet
And you are right, the flip is exactly the same as the salchow only the take off is from the toe pick of the inside edge and in the salchow the take off is from the inside edge itself. It is no coincidence that the other name for the flip is the toe-salchow.
And a very egregious name for the flip too. The salchow and flip are not "exactly" the same. The feelings of the takeoffs are completely different. Sweeping across for the salchow is dramatically different from pulling back and picking in for the flip. I have a nasty habit of entering my flips like salchows, and lemme tell you, I do not land those...

Originally posted by Barnet
But you are also right, there is no toe-pick assist in a salchow, so yes, an inside edge Lutz is not a salchow, but its not a flip either since the flip has a toe-pick take-off. Therefore, I would revise my view to say that the inside edge Lutz is very similar to a salchow, but that it is more similar to a salchow than to a flip.
A salchow needs that deep edge snap to take off. A lutz does not, nor does it require anything close to a snapping edge in order to take off. They are nothing alike.

Originally posted by Barnet
And finally, in my defence, I have Robin Cousins, the 1980 Olympic champion, to back up my viewpoint. When explaining the flutz on British TV, he has stated (and I have it on tape) that switching the Lutz from an outside edge take off to an inside edge take off makes it a salchow or makes it like a salchow, I can't remember the exact words, but he definitely said salchow not flip.
Yah, and I trust Dick Button when he once claimed Michelle Kwan's 2axel was a 2flip. :roll: I respect skaters like Button and Cousins, but sometimes they can make mistakes while commentating.....did Cousins make that analogy just once, or multiple times?

Originally posted by Barnet
Yikes, skating is one complicated sport! Guess we need them scandals for some light relief!!!
It is quite a complicated sport, but I find that I've come to understandings with it more easily now because I skate myself. These observations are from hours of watching other skaters as well as personal experience. (Yes, I have landed the lutz and no way do I just take off from the edge. No one I have seen does that.)

Anita

[Rachel]

it is the counter-rotation that adds the difficulty, not the edge itself. If the skater is on the wrong edge for a minimal time, the counter-rotation is still active.

That's what I should have said but didn't.

In a lutz, the skater enters the jump on one curve, but has to rotate in the opposite direction in the air. In the flip, the skater's rotation in the air continues in the direction of the entry curve, making it an easier jump.

That's why Sarah Hughes' flutz is so bad--because she goes way over on that inside edge when she reaches back, which turns her entry curve completely in the jump's direction before she picks in. Next time you watch her do a lutz, watch her shoulders and you'll see the way her entire body shifts direction before she picks, not just her blade. She gets little or no counterrotation because she is already fully rotating in the direction of the jump before she picks in. Most of the US ladies have at least a slight shift of edge when they reach back to pick in, but the best ones still get full or nearly full counterrotation with their bodies, which means that the jump is still doing what makes a lutz difficult to do, and makes it worth more than a flip, even if it's not a textbook-perfect lutz.

But it's still just one part of just one jump, and it just doesn't mean all that much in the overall program scheme of things.

Toe salchows??? Shades of Christopher Bowman and his triple toe walleys :lol:

[Ellyn]

Hi Ellyn. I do so love these technical discussions!

Hi. :-)
BTW, are you speaking from personal experience as a skater (do you single, double, or triple lutzes?), or just from trying to piece together what you've been told in various contexts?

Yes the Lutz is taken off from the back outside edge but with a toe pick assist with the free foot. The take off itself is from the edge only. The flip is done by digging the toe pick of the take off leg.

This is where I have to disagree strongly. See Anita18's post above.

The picking action on the lutz and the flip should be the same.

There is one primary difference between the lutz and the flip: the edge and consequently the direction of travel and rotation before and, ideally, right up until the instant of takeoff.

There is one primary difference between the flip and the salchow: the use of the toepick or not. (The other differences that Anita mentions are consequences of what works technically to achieve the best results on these jumps, but the definitions of the jumps as such are salchow = takeoff from back inside edge alone; flip = takeoff from back inside edge and toepick of opposite foot.)

Therefore there are TWO primary differences between the lutz and the salchow -- the direction of travel/rotation up until the takeoff, and the use or nonuse of the toepick for jumping. It is possible to commit two errors in performing a lutz that would turn it into essentially a salchow -- change the rotation before the takeoff, and also fail to commit weight to jump from toepick.

As I said, I often do this myself on my single lutz, which is why even if I were still a teenager and had already mastered all the other doubles I would probably never get a double lutz. Because this combination of errors seriously diminishes the power of the jump.

It would be very surprising for a skater to make both these errors and still get enough power to rotate three times for a triple (although Hughes does come close to doing so). But even if one did, it's a very inefficient way to do a salchow and should certainly be worth more than a simple salchow from a normal salchow approach.

Most of the skaters who we accuse of "flutzing" make only the first error -- they change the direction of rotation before they takeoff, but they do vault from the toepick with the correct action for both the flip or the lutz. Therefore they are changing the jump into a flip, NOT a salchow.

Changing the rotation, i.e., doing a flip instead of a lutz, does make the jump slightly easier, although it is not the most efficient way to do a good flip and thus the skater is not making things easier on herself compared to just doing a flip from a more normal flip approach. A flutz is still harder than a simple flip.

There are also degrees of seriousness in this error, depending how long before the takeoff the skater leaves the outside edge, how far she gets onto the incorrect inside edge, and as habanero says, how much she retains or loses of the counterrotation in the rest of the body. Hence the range of deduction between 0.1 and 0.3 in the short program.

In the long program, there are so many other elements and so many other aspects of the skating to be taken into account that the difference between a true lutz and a flutz will probably amount to less than 0.1.

[AxelAnnie22]

Thank you so much to all of you who have taken the time to post here. I have learned so much, and there is so much information to sift through, and actually visualize. I now have a much better understanding about the lutz itself, the deduction process, and what goes into it all.

[melanieuk]

Originally posted by Barnet
Hello everyone, former FSWer posting here for the first time.

AxelAnnie, changing the Lutz edge from an outside to an inside edge take off makes it a salchow not a flip as the salchow is taken off from the edge; the flip is taken off by digging in the toe pick. ]

Hi Barnet :)
Where do you skate if you dont mind me asking?

I was wondering about the above statement.
I thought a lutz, taking off from an inside edge, with a pick from the other foot, was technically a flip (or toe salchow) and not a salchow. The salchow is taken off from one foot only (from an inside edge obviously) but with no pick.

[habanero]

Originally posted by Ellyn
Therefore there are TWO primary differences between the lutz and the salchow -- the direction of travel/rotation up until the takeoff, and the use or nonuse of the toepick for jumping. It is possible to commit two errors in performing a lutz that would turn it into essentially a salchow -- change the rotation before the takeoff, and also fail to commit weight to jump from toepick.


Yes. There are some pretty interesting variations on the Flip and Lutz that most people don't catch (even the commentators) -- turning it into a loop jump. What happens is that enough weight change occurs to the toe-picking foot that the blade rotates down to the edge and the takeoff is actually a loop jump instead! The edge is usually momentary since the takeoff has started. In obvious cases (provided you can see them at all), the toe-pick now edge will trace a mark for a about a foot, sometimes more. A good flip or Lutz has an very rapid "pop" up.

I've also seen skaters fake a toepicking and actually do a 3S instead of a 3F or 3Z. You have to really pay attention on these jumps. The action happens very quickly, especially in the fake toepicking and 3L variation of 3F and 3Z....

[TashaKat]

Originally posted by Marco
Barnet, are you sure Robin Cousins didn't mean "toe-salchow"? I know a lot of people used to call the flip a "toe-salchow".

Yeah, that's what I was thinking ...... I know that some of the UK coaches still call the Flip a Toe-Salchow!

[JDC1]

I can't do a salchow!! I can almost do a flip (land on two feet) finally landed a loop and ofcourse can do a toe loop and waltz jump but not the dastardly salchow!! :-)

I won't get into the technical fray because Ellen said all that I would have said but I beg to differ with the person who said a bigger jump that covers more distance but is flawed in the take off should have more value than a correct jump - NO NO NO. The take off IS the jump (that and the direction of rotation). If you Flutz you are NOT doing a lutz no matter HOW BIG it is and if you lip you are NOT doing a flip no matter how big and beautiful it may be. The take offs must be correct or there is no jump, air position is identical (back spin position) so it doesn't matter once you are in the air but how you get up there!! Anyway, just my pet peeve as one practices 4 times a week to get all these jumps right, I can rotate in the air no problem baby, but snapping off a deep edge is tough for me. :-)

[loveskating]

Ok, I just want to be clear on the rules...

Someone here said that according to the rules, that if a lutz was intended, then the jump was marked as a lutz...not well done presumably if it is flutzed in the LP (and in the SP, a mandatory deduction)

According to what you are saying, if the takeoff is flutzed, then the jump should not be counted as ...well, are you saying not counted at all, or are you saying it should be counted as a badly done flip?

That doesn't seem to stack up with the marks I've seen...if that were true, then Sarah (and Jenny) would NEVER be in the top 5 even...could you clarify what you are saying?

Frankly, IMHO, the ONLY U.S. lady at the elite level I've seen to a 3 lutz correctly is A.P. McDonaugh...so ALL of them would not be in the top 5 most of the time if the intended lutz were not counted as a badly done lutz.

[serpentine]

to my knowledge:

if a skater intends a lutz, no matter what the jump ends up being (lutzed, flutzed, fall on takeoff, etc) it is noted as a lutz. as mentioned previously, in the short program appropriate deductions are taken with respect to cleanness of take off edge, if entry steps are sufficient, etc.
in the long program, it is noted how technically correct the lutz is performed and this is taken into consideration along with all the other technical elements as part of the technical merit mark. a lutz will not necessarily make or break a skater as no two skaters are exactly equal in all other aspects of their skating skills, and it is up to each individual judge as to how much emphasis to place on a singly poorly executed take off for one element compared to an otherwise competently skated program.

so, my short answer to loveskating's question is that the badly flutzed jump is still annotated as a lutz but does not receive credit, or less credit (if otherwise performed correctly and well) in comparison to a correctly and well-executed lutz by another skater. This is sometimes referred to as whether or not the skater made a 'reasonable attempt'.

hope this helps!

[JDC1]

You probably wouldn't like me if I was a judge. :-) I would wonk Sarah Hughes and Jenny Kirk BIG TIME on their lutz's .3 for each skater. And atleast as of 2 years ago (her first year as a senior) I would have wonked Jenny Kirk for repeating the jump. :-) Atleast 2 years ago I would have wonked Sarah for her waaaaay cheated flip but she really did work on that one and it's improved. I would wonk Sasha and Michelle normally .2 on their lutz's and often I'd wonk Irina .2-.1. :-) I am not a judge or a coach just a skater (hoping to coach someday) and I know how hard it its just to learn these jumps as singles. My coaches don't stand for flutzing it's a big deal and we've worked alot on the approach to the lutz and the pick in without even jumping so we don't flutz. I don't know the rule books or what the USFSA teaches judges but I find, atleast on the technical score, that I often would give skaters lower scores. Furthermore, I would give much more credit for spins than before I learned to skate, spinning is so HARD!! I used think Dick Button was just spouting hot air with all his talk about how Lucinda Ruh wasn't marked high enough for her spins but now I totally agree with him.

[loveskating]

Hi Spinner,

Thanks for the clarification...

And JDC1,

Actually, I don't disagree...I would give similar marks as you to the skaters you mentioned as to the lutz/flutz, providing, of course, that there were other skaters in the specific competition who did not flutz (which is not always the case). Skating is so relative!

Its just that there are several differentiating factors...speed into and out of, ice coverge, height, correct takeoff and landing edges, clean runout, and proper backspin position in the air are ALL supposed to be considered...and now we have the required footwork into jumps, so that complicates things even more (but it is so very exciting and beautiful).

[singerskates]

Originally posted by AxelAnnie22
Thanks for your answer. So, a skater could come out and do 6 triple toe loops, and intend that they be a lutz, loop, flip, sal, etc., ? I am sure not, but one could LOL!

NO, It's only on the lutz and flip that it's pretty darn close on take off. Lutz takes off from left outside edge (CCW skater) with right toe pick digging in crossed behind the left foot. Flip has the skater picking in directly behind left foot with right toe pick while on a left back inside edge.

The toe loop and loop look very different on take off. The loop takes off on a right outside edge with the left foot crossed infront of the right foot. Where the toe loop takes off with the left toe picking in behind to the right of the right foot which is on a back right outside edge (preovided the skater is a CCW skater, ie. Elvis Stojko. Very different.

Salchow can be done two ways, from a left forward outside three turn going onto a left back inside edge with the right foot crossed infront on take off or from a right forward open inside Mohawk but the right foot still crosses in front of the left foot on take off.

A Waltz jump/axel jump takes off from a forward left outside edge (CCW). It's the only jump to take of from a forward position.

So this makes it easy to spot which jumps are which. Flips and lutzes can be very close if you miss the instant the skater actually takes off. That's why some times a judge will give credit for a lutz when in fact it was a flip instead.

[blue111moon]

Don't forget all the Clockwise skaters who take off the opposite foot from the above. The jumps are still the same because the edges don't change, but the direction and rotation do.

I don't know many judges - especially high-level judges - who would mistake a lutz for a flip. A lutz is probably only worth a tenth or two (done perfectly) more than an equally perfect flip, so if a judge dedects a tenth or two for a change of edge on the lutz entry, the jumps may end up marked the same. But that doesn't mean the judge thought the jump WAS a flip or even was intended to be a flip. You don't get to be a judge (at least in the US - I don't know how other countries train their judges) without being able to tell the difference.