PDA

View Full Version : Patrick Chan deserves his scores



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

olympic
11-22-2010, 03:55 PM
Maybe the ISU needs to consider harsher penalties for jumps. How about the jump does not count at all if the skater's a$$ touches the ice?

On the flip side, keep the slightly more relaxed ur penalties in place [70% scoring]

Seerek
11-22-2010, 04:50 PM
Chan is a gifted skater, no doubt about it. But itīs sad he canīt deliver a clean program or at least an almost clean program. He isnīt able to manage his falls very well either, sometimes after a fall you can see on his face how disappointed he is and that kills his performance. I think his programs are too busy, he is struggeling with the transitions, he looks tired. Lori Nichol should change his programs a little bit.

Makes you wonder how Patrick's LP run-throughs are like in practice and what his success rates are - if he's only hitting 5-6 passes out of 8 even in practice, may be best to change things up.

Interesting that even as a Junior, Patrick was never really known as a clean performance competitor either (SP + FS combined)...

I just don't think he's good at "saving elements" (compared to other competitors) when his technique goes even the least bit awry (in takeoff and in the air).

Allen
11-22-2010, 04:52 PM
Maybe the ISU needs to consider harsher penalties for jumps. How about the jump does not count at all if the skater's a$$ touches the ice?

On the flip side, keep the slightly more relaxed ur penalties in place [70% scoring]

I don't think getting a zero for your ass touching the ice is a good idea. Last year with the stiff penalty for quads, not many men attempted them. If you fall and get a zero, lower level skaters will not even want to attempt triples.

olympic
11-22-2010, 05:02 PM
I don't think getting a zero for your ass touching the ice is a good idea. Last year with the stiff penalty for quads, not many men attempted them. If you fall and get a zero, lower level skaters will not even want to attempt triples.

Yeah. You could be right. I thought that the lesser penalties for ur's might be a counterbalance to that. And the jumps would also still count for hands-down / step-outs, etc.

I just imagine that more casual fans of the sport might get turned off by someone falling and winning because they don't understand it

mia joy
11-22-2010, 05:12 PM
I think the case is that if you fall a couple of times in your program, it should also show in your PCS. Period.

Allen
11-22-2010, 05:28 PM
I think the case is that if you fall a couple of times in your program, it should also show in your PCS. Period.

I think it should, but I think it should also depend on how the falls effect the skating quality.

euterpe
11-22-2010, 05:29 PM
Many of the top skaters get very high SS scores and the rest of the components scores are based on that. That is just wrong. A very high SS score (7.75 and up) indicates a skaters with very strong skating skills. A skater with such a high degree of skills should not be falling multiple times in the same program.

Perhaps the penalty for falling should be based on a skater's basic skills, so that the higher the skill level, the higher the penalty, including reductions in PE and IN component scores.

That way lower level skaters would still try to increase their difficulty without suffering the same penalties as the high-ranked skaters.

olympic
11-22-2010, 05:36 PM
Euterpe ^,

Mandatory PCS deductions along the lines of the -1 on the TES side?

Skate Talker
11-22-2010, 05:45 PM
Okay more imho - I don't think Chan should change any of his difficult jump entrances or any of his difficult jump "attempts". This is the time of the year and the time of the Olympic cycle to be going for it without worrying about being perfect out of the gate. This is not an ice show for the amusement of the audience. Too bad, so sad if they prefer to see a clean skate, but in the end it isn't about us. I am not saying that Patrick is unaware or indifferent to the audience reaction, but he has his eye on continuing to challenge himself and try to improve. If he doesn't push himself now when the risk is much lower then it will never happen. Kudos to him for going out there and trying it. Heaven forbid he should become one of those skaters who after some success begin to stagnate. Imho this is the correct approach for Patrick at this stage of his development.

In contrast I have to say that going the opposite route - reducing risks he used to take and going for a clean performance foremost - is exactly the correct strategy for Verner at this point in his career. After last year and his apparent complete loss of confidence in himself it is a great idea to rebuild slowly with some solid skating in his back pocket. After listening to Tomas' interview on CBC last weekend, it would also seem that the audience feedback is possibly even more important to him than the judges scores, so even for that reason he needs to go out and entertain them and skate pretty clean so he can get the uber love from them that appears to be his biggest motivator.

Different strokes.... For some the winning is the only thing, for some it's the personal challenge of constantly pushing themselves, for others it's what they can give to others.

euterpe
11-22-2010, 06:18 PM
Euterpe ^,

Mandatory PCS deductions along the lines of the -1 on the TES side?

I think there should be a greater deduction on the technical side, perhaps an additional penalty for more than one fall.

Right now, the judges have to keep all the PCS scores for the same skater within a certain range, or they get written up. I think that should be changed to allow variation in the PCS scores for specific reasons, such as falls in a segment, and make some of those variations mandatory.

I also believe if a skater fell 3 times in a SP, the penalties would be greater than for the same number of falls in the FS because there are fewer elements in the SP and the impact of the falls is greater.

So here's what I'd suggest:

For SS scores under 7.50, keep things as they are.

For SS scores 7.51 and higher:

Technical penalties: -3 on GOE for each fall and -1.00 penalty per fall
additional -1.00 penalty for more than one fall; -2.00 for more than two falls

Component penalties for more than two falls:

Mandatory ceiling on the PE and IN: 7:00 in the SP and 7.25 in the FS

modern_muslimah
11-22-2010, 06:38 PM
Couple of issues with this:

How do you know he is an arragont twit? Seriously. "Seems like" is good enough for a comment like this?

Overscoring/reputation? Show me the evidence where he is not getting marked down for jumps he falls on. The GP are setup so that the higher ranked teams don't compete against each other until the GPF. C
han is not a world champion, 4CC champion, or GPF champion. Failing to see real evidence in each competition he has entered where exactly he is overscored. If there are complaints, it should be about the system, not personally about Chan. Attacking skaters personally is never in-line.

How does seeing Chan skate a couple of years ago make any sense to how he skates today? A couple of years is a long time. He's still a pretty young guy.
A couple of years ago he was a kid? Can't see how he skated a couple of years ago has any bearing on how he skates today.

I just wanted to note that Chan is a former 4CC champion. He won the title in 2009. :)

PDilemma
11-22-2010, 06:46 PM
Right now, the judges have to keep all the PCS scores for the same skater within a certain range, or they get written up. I think that should be changed to allow variation in the PCS scores for specific reasons, such as falls in a segment, and make some of those variations mandatory.

I also believe if a skater fell 3 times in a SP, the penalties would be greater than for the same number of falls in the FS because there are fewer elements in the SP and the impact of the falls is greater.



The PCS scores should have variation because it should depend on the performance. A skater may have a very well choreographed program but fall three times. He would deserve a high score for Choreography and a lower score for Performance/Execution. A skater might perform a program with technical precision and not miss an element and have zero interpretation skills that should result in a high Performance/Execution score and a low Interpretation score. (I think we can all name names in both examples). The idea that the PCS judging very different elements should all be within range of each other is absurd and doesn't really allow judges to judge more than one part of PCS.

And if the SP is still a technical program, then maybe deductions for missed elements should be higher then than they are in the FS.

Vash01
11-22-2010, 07:00 PM
this problem is nothing new. different skaters through the times has won or had good results, also with the old 6.0. I remember at worlds 1999, Elena & Anton were fighting with Shen & Zhao for gold. IIRC the chinese skated clean, and Lena fell or stepped out of her double axel. Still, B&S won, because of the overall quality of their elements, the basic skating and the presentation. S&Z were getting there, but still a little rough around the edges at that time.

I had quite a few discussions with other people in the audience that night, who couldn't understand why B&S won. She fell??? The others did not! they could not get it.

I think Lena & Anton are a good example of skaters who had so many qualities to them, it made up for errors vs.others who skated clean, and for the untrained eye, better. (Olys 1998, 2002 as example. In olys 98 Anton fell in the short p, and they still placed in the top 3 above clean pairs)

Now, Chan is such a skater,and also Lepistö. Love her to death, her basic and in-betweens are divine!!


At the time B&S won with a fall (worlds 1999), they were head and shoulders above everyone else artistically. They landed everything else, and had difficult choreography to go with their technical elements. S&Z had only jumps and huge smiles/excitement in their skating. Artistry was practically nonexistent. B&S did receive low tech scores (5.7's mostly), but they won on superior artistic marks (mostly 5.9s). Their win was clearly justified because they had just one mistake.

Compare that with Chan getting high marks in the SP with 3 falls (that's within 2:40 minutes) and one in the LP at SC. He was clearly held up in the SP to allow him to win with a nearly clean LP. B&S were penalized when they had multiple falls (GPF 1999); Chan is not penalized even for 3 falls in a program. His LP scores at COR should have been lower for the overall impression.

Dragonlady
11-22-2010, 07:34 PM
I do not know Chan personally so I cannot say for sure that he is, but from his comments in the media he seems to have a big head. I am talking about all the comments he made last year about his fellow skaters and the quad. And his attitude makes his over scoring that much more annoying to me.

I've watched Patrick grow up on the ice and he is not big headed or arrogant as some have suggested. You have to have a certain amount of healthy ego to perform in front of thousands of people but Patrick has always displayed a good deal of common sense and self-awareness.

Kurt Browning made an interesting comment on the weekend. He said there were two ways to win: You could earn it or it could be given to you. The first way is the best.

People seem to be criticizing Patrick for not rejecting the judges' "gifts" or saying he shouldn't have won. What they forget is that skaters are told not to comment on the marking. It's beyond their control and they are not to criticize the judges who will, after all, be marking them again.

The one and only competition where Jeff Buttle made comments about the judging was 4CC in Hamilton which he won with a subpar performance. It was Jeff's last competition of the year as he had been left off the Worlds team, so he was able to say what he felt with impunity. Something Patrick would not be in a position to do in a GP event with the GPF, 4CC and Worlds to come.

Unlike other skaters who shall remain nameless, Patrick Chan has never said "I should have won" when he didn't. He's never said "I'm better than [you fill in the blank]" unlike other skaters who shall remain nameless. Patrick has never said he's the greatest skater but somehow he's seen as arrogant, big headed and a twit because he answers questions honestly, without rancour and doesn't filter his comments.

mmot
11-22-2010, 07:39 PM
Okay more imho - I don't think Chan should change any of his difficult jump entrances or any of his difficult jump "attempts". This is the time of the year and the time of the Olympic cycle to be going for it without worrying about being perfect out of the gate. This is not an ice show for the amusement of the audience. Too bad, so sad if they prefer to see a clean skate, but in the end it isn't about us. I am not saying that Patrick is unaware or indifferent to the audience reaction, but he has his eye on continuing to challenge himself and try to improve. If he doesn't push himself now when the risk is much lower then it will never happen. Kudos to him for going out there and trying it. Heaven forbid he should become one of those skaters who after some success begin to stagnate. Imho this is the correct approach for Patrick at this stage of his development.

In contrast I have to say that going the opposite route - reducing risks he used to take and going for a clean performance foremost - is exactly the correct strategy for Verner at this point in his career. After last year and his apparent complete loss of confidence in himself it is a great idea to rebuild slowly with some solid skating in his back pocket. After listening to Tomas' interview on CBC last weekend, it would also seem that the audience feedback is possibly even more important to him than the judges scores, so even for that reason he needs to go out and entertain them and skate pretty clean so he can get the uber love from them that appears to be his biggest motivator.

Different strokes.... For some the winning is the only thing, for some it's the personal challenge of constantly pushing themselves, for others it's what they can give to others.

Good point. We should not forget that we are only going through the GPS. Skaters take a whole season to improve and perfect the season's programmes and aim to peak at the end of the season - namely at the Worlds.

For most top-rank skaters, who're bound to be qualified for the Worlds, Grand Prix events are basically test beds for the season's programmes and newly included elements, choreographies, footwork sequences, and spins, etc. To get feedback from judges, checking whether they need to fine-tune something to get the highest levels, to see whether they can do in a competition what they can do in practice, and so forth. It is wrong for them to play safe at this stage, if they're aiming for the big title later on in the season. To be blatant, perhaps for some top-rank skaters, a win or two in Grand Prix events may not be a big deal at all - they won't probably admit it publicly out of politeness though. ;)

It is one thing to land jumps in practice, or even during run-through; to be able to nail them in competitions is another. Like many other sports, it all comes down to nerves and confidence at the end. One can only train these aspects by going through as many competitions and as many failures and successes as possible. Chan's doing exactly that, like Takahashi did with his quad last season. (No matter how many falls, and despite some telling him omitting the quad may improve his scores and placement, he never opted out - because he knew otherwise he would never get his quad back.)

As for Verner, his purpose seems to be building up confidence and self-belief more than anything. He's got the quad - one of the most beautiful ones I have ever seen, that is. For him, through Grand Prix series, to gain confidence that he can actually skate clean under pressure is more important than including jumps which he perhaps knows he can land fairly consistently. Each skater has different homework to be completed during GPS depending on the problems they have, before going to the big events, such as the Nationals, Europeans and the Worlds.