the phantom combo scoring rule

[Artemis]

I started this in relation to the worlds mens results, but thought I'd open a new thread for a more general discussion.

It started when I was reading the judging protocols for the men's LP, and saw that Patrick Chan and Stephen Carriere each scored a zero and "invalid element" for 3sal-2toe combos they did later in the competition.

Turns out it's a case of "phantom combo rule." Both Chan and Carriere had fallen on earlier planned combos, and then tried to make up for it by adding 2-toes to their 3-sals later. But because the rule, the earlier missed combo still counted as a combo, so the later combo was one too many, so the whole thing counts as zero. No credit even for the 3-sal, which was always planned.

This is one of the wackier scoring rules, IMO, and unfair. I thought this new system was supposed to award trying difficult stuff, and this seems to be contrary to that. It makes sense that if you pop the second jump in a combo or something like that it still counts as a combo ... but if you never even attempt the second jump because of a fall? And what if you just change your mind, decide to move a combo to later in the program. Are the judges going to say that you "missed" it earlier but it still counts as an attempt?

I have no problem with a rule limiting the number of combos (tho' I think 3 is a pretty low limit). But the specifics of this particular rule seem both unfair and pointless to me.

[singerskates]

To help skating fans understand, skaters who compete in competitive stream (be it Nationals, Worlds, Olympics or a qualifying event), US Adult Championship level events and all Skate Canada Adult Championship events are required to fill out a planned program sheet for their skating programs. This is for all ladies, mens, pairs and dance diciplines and does not include interpretive events. Skaters are required to list every element they have planned in their programs. This way the caller and judges know what each skater has planned.

If a skater just simply leaves out the back end of a 2 jump combination and adds the second jump to another jump. That's not a problem. But if a skater looses track on how many jump windows they have done and then does another combination jump or another jump, that jump or jump window does not count. Also if a skater at senior or junior level tacks on a single jump on the end of a jump they use up a combination jump window. These skaters are only allowed three combination jump windows. The 5 other jump windows must be jumps that are done by themselves; not a combination or in a jump sequence. In total these skaters have only 8 jump windows. Also, they can only repeat a jump once either in a jump combination or in a jump sequence. A jump sequence is a series of jumps put together by not jumping off of the landing foot of the first jump.

[Artemis]

If a skater just simply leaves out the back end of a 2 jump combination and adds the second jump to another jump. That's not a problem.

But that is essentially what Chan and Carriere both did, and it most definitely was a problem as far as scoring went. Sure, they left off the combo because they feel on the first jump ... but the result is the same. However the scoring system calls the fall a combo, even though the fall was on the 1st jump and the 2nd jump was never even attempted, and the added combo later in the program counts zero.

[Ellyn]

But that is essentially what Chan and Carriere both did, and it most definitely was a problem as far as scoring went. Sure, they left off the combo because they feel on the first jump ... but the result is the same. However the scoring system calls the fall a combo, even though the fall was on the 1st jump and the 2nd jump was never even attempted, and the added combo later in the program counts zero.

In both cases -- 3Lz for Carriere and 3A for Chan -- the jump with a fall that was scored as a sequence was the second time they attempted those jumps, and the first time they performed the lutz and axel, respectively, as solo jumps.

Therefore they were required to perform the jumps as combinations or sequences the second time for those jumps to count at all. Unless the skaters and their coaches were totally off the mark, those jumps must have been planned as combinations.

There were also two other combinations planned in the program, which is why the two completed combos plus the uncompleted combo that was called as a sequence filled the limit for combo/sequence slots.

Even if a fourth combo/sequence would count (assuming an earlier required one was not completed), adding a double toe to a later jump would not be much of a strategy for making up for that lost combo -- it would only add 1.3 points anyway. So there's really no good reason under the current system for thinking that it would be advisable to make up for the missed combination as a plan B. Understanding the current rules about how the "phantom sequences" or scored would make it clear that it's very inadvisable.

The requirement that repeated triples must be in combination at least one of the times they're performed had been around since the mid-1980s. The limit of three combinations or sequences had been around since the mid-90s. Judges were supposed to take deductions for violations of those rules, but it wasn't always obvious in the scoring that they had done so. Now it's very clear how those situations are to be handled, so skaters and coaches can plan accordingly.

[Artemis]

In both cases -- 3Lz for Carriere and 3A for Chan -- the jump with a fall that was scored as a sequence was the second time they attempted those jumps, and the first time they performed the lutz and axel, respectively, as solo jumps. Therefore they were required to perform the jumps as combinations or sequences the second time for those jumps to count at all.

Ah yes, of course. That does make sense. I wasn't thinking of it from that angle. Thanks.

[doubletoe]

In both cases -- 3Lz for Carriere and 3A for Chan -- the jump with a fall that was scored as a sequence was the second time they attempted those jumps, and the first time they performed the lutz and axel, respectively, as solo jumps.

Therefore they were required to perform the jumps as combinations or sequences the second time for those jumps to count at all. Unless the skaters and their coaches were totally off the mark, those jumps must have been planned as combinations.

There were also two other combinations planned in the program, which is why the two completed combos plus the uncompleted combo that was called as a sequence filled the limit for combo/sequence slots.

Even if a fourth combo/sequence would count (assuming an earlier required one was not completed), adding a double toe to a later jump would not be much of a strategy for making up for that lost combo -- it would only add 1.3 points anyway. So there's really no good reason under the current system for thinking that it would be advisable to make up for the missed combination as a plan B. Understanding the current rules about how the "phantom sequences" or scored would make it clear that it's very inadvisable.

The requirement that repeated triples must be in combination at least one of the times they're performed had been around since the mid-1980s. The limit of three combinations or sequences had been around since the mid-90s. Judges were supposed to take deductions for violations of those rules, but it wasn't always obvious in the scoring that they had done so. Now it's very clear how those situations are to be handled, so skaters and coaches can plan accordingly.

Exactly. Skaters and their coaches need to remember that if they do a jump twice and don't manage to do either one as a combination, they've still used up a combination jump box so they just need to let that combination go. Daisuke Takahashi made the same mistake this season and it cost him the World bronze medal. He had two quad toes and two triple axels and he didn't manage to do the second jump on either of the quad toes or triple axels, so the second 4T and the second 3A both counted as sequences. Then he did his 3F-3T combo, which would count as his third combination/sequence. Unfortunately, he then made the mistake of adding a 2T to his triple lutz, giving him a 4th combo that got zero points because it was an illegal element. You simply cannot be spontaneous in this sport, unless you are exercising a Plan B that you've thought out ahead of time and you know won't be breaking the balanced program rules.

[Artemis]

But what doesn't make sense to me about this rule is why they get a mark at all for the repeated jump that ends up not being a combo. If you're planning a 3A-3toe combo after you've already done a solo 3A, then you fall on the 3A and are unable to make it into a combo ... then that should be the jump that's called an "invalid element" and counted as zero. It is after all a jump that's repeated without being in combination. Aside from making more sense within the rules, this would also allow the skater to add a combo later on. Not another 3A, that wouldn't work, but turning an existing planned solo jump into a combo. Just like Carriere and Chan and Takahashi did.

It's always a gamble when skaters start changing their programs on the fly, but mostly because it often looks as though they're thinking instead of being in the performance. But the rules shouldn't make it an impossibility. This is, after all, a sport.

[Ellyn]

If you're planning a 3A-3toe combo after you've already done a solo 3A, then you fall on the 3A and are unable to make it into a combo ... then that should be the jump that's called an "invalid element" and counted as zero. It is after all a jump that's repeated without being in combination. Aside from making more sense within the rules, this would also allow the skater to add a combo later on.

But the value of a rotated triple axel with a fall even with the sequence multipler is still more than the value of a double toe.

As is the value of any triple jump without a fall, even with sequence multiplier and a possible negative GOE. In those cases, it would definitely be to the skater's advantage to get some credit for the repeated jump. In addition full credit for all later jumps by not adding extraneous double toes.

So there's no great advantage to adding a double toe to a later jump just for the sake of another combination if it meant giving up credit for the earlier failed jump, assuming that the later jump with the added combo would count the same either way.

Where it would be more valuable to be able to make up the combination later and lose all credit for the earlier failure would be if the skater had been planning a three-jump combination and/or a triple as the second jump of the combo. In that case the only way to fit a lost triple toe, for example, would be to try it in a later combination. But it's also risky for the skater to attempt an unplanned triple-triple combo late in the program.

But the rules shouldn't make it an impossibility. This is, after all, a sport.

Sports need to have rules to be fair for the participants.
To a large extent, what the rules should be in this case come down to rules that level the playing field as much as possible vs. those that give skaters as much freedom as possible in their "free" programs (there was never much in short programs).

There are several possible scenarios involving repeated jumps without the required combos. Whatever rule is adopted for handling them needs to cover all the scenarios, and whatever rule is chosen will benefit the skaters more in some scenarios than in others. You can't have two completely different rules that can only be applied in retrospect after the program is over and someone has to make a conscious decision about which would better help this particular skater.