PDA

View Full Version : Gifts to Chan keep American men out of GPF



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14

AliasJohnDoe
12-09-2010, 05:13 PM
According to the rules, falls are taken care of in the "deduction column". I'm just going to throw this out there for discussion:

The solution to deal with falls is in the "deduction column". That's where costume malfunctions, over the limit time, extended lifts and falls are taken care of and penalized. Either raise the deduction for a fall to -2, or increase the fall deduction incrimentally per fall. That is where falls have been penalized since CoP started. Not the TES or PCS. Falls are deducted from the TSS as penalty/point deductions.

Deductions are subtracted from the TSS score. The TES and PCS combined score. The "deduction column" has always been there since the beginning of CoP. And the deduction column is there for a reason.

If it's raised to -2 per fall:
1 fall -2
2 falls -4
3 falls -6
4 falls -8
5 falls -10

If it's incrimental:
1 fall would be a -1 deduction incurring a -1 penalty for the 1st fall.
2 falls would be a -3 deduction(-1 for 1st fall, -2 for 2nd fall).
3 falls would be a -6 deduction (-1 for 1st fall, -2 for 2nd fall, -3 for 3rd fall).
4 falls would be a -10 deduction (-1 for 1st fall, -2 for 2nd fall, -3 for 3rd fall, -4 for 4th fall).
5 falls would be a -15 deduction (-1 for 1st, -2 for 2nd, -3 for 3rd, -4 for 4th and -5 for 5th fall).

I personally prefer incrimentally.

Hopefully, this can change the arguement regarding falls. "Tweaking" of the penalties in the deduction column. where falls are penalized in the first place.....according to the rules.

overedge
12-09-2010, 07:40 PM
He is overscored in jump GOE (a huge amount even on days his jumps are shaky), spin GOE, and overscored alot for interpretation and performance. One would think he had the jumps of Oda, the spins of Lambiel, and the performing ability and musicality of Takahashi and Lambiel, neither which is true even on a good day. And when he falls, which is the main topic here, he then becomes overscored in skating skills and transitions both which become badly married, in adidtion to even more overscored in interpretation and performance than he already is.

On top of that the whole system is wrong in many ways and there should be bigger deductions for multiple falls in the first place, which would hurt "skate on my ass" Chan more than anyone else.

This doesn't answer Rock2's question, which was asking you for SPECIFIC examples. With numbers. Saying yet again that "he is overscored a lot" is not an answer.

museksk8r
12-09-2010, 08:06 PM
Seems to me that most on this board had no issue with Lambiel scoring well when he cleaned the ice with his butt. Or had sub-par jumpinquality, which was common.

Lambiel paid when he fell. Remember 2007 Cup of China when he finished below both Weir and Lysacek in the SP and LP with multiple falls due to his being ill. Stephane fell once in the SP and three times in the LP, 4 times in all just like Patrick Chan. The judges didn't allow him to win even though, generally speaking, he is an overall better skater than Johnny and Evan. They penalized him for the mistakes he made and he was placed 3rd overall. Even at the same season's GPF in the SP, the judges placed Lambiel with a 4toe+3toe, 3Axel, and 3Lutz below Takahashi, who only did a 3+3 combination. Even though his win after the GPF LP was controversial to some (he didn't receive a deduction for any falls even though he had some touchdowns/messy landings), I don't believe Stephane has received the same amount of love from the judges that Patrick has. People tend to forget that Lambiel was placed 3rd in the SP and 4th in the LP at the 2006 Olympics. It was due to Buttle's and Lysacek's major blunders in the SP and Weir's major blunders in the LP that allowed Stephane to capture the Olympic silver. It wasn't gifted to him and as a whole, Stephane skated very well in Torino; his only major mistake being a fall on a 3Lutz in the LP along with the step-out on his 2nd 4toe and the omission of a 3Axel in both programs. He was the reigning World champ and 4th in the LP would have meant no medal, so I don't see at all how anyone can compare him to Patrick Chan in terms of overscoring.

Dragonlady
12-09-2010, 08:40 PM
He was the reigning World champ and 4th in the LP would have meant no medal, so I don't see at all how anyone can compare him to Patrick Chan in terms of overscoring.

Reading your entire paragraph and the list of Stephane's missteps which resulted in medals, it appears that he got exactly the same kinds of breaks that people currently want to see Patrick pilloried for.

Patrick didn't win either when he fell 3 times in the LP, but he did get a medal. And his SP falls at Skate Canada saw him placed 4th in the SP with a score that wouldn't make the top 10 list from this season's GP.

I think a lot of the vitroil directed Patrick's way has a whole lot more to do with people deciding for themselves that Patrick is an arrogant asshole who doesn't deserve to be getting gifts and less to do with their aversion to this particular situation if it involved a skater they do like.

I also find it interesting that the self same people who once claimed that the quad needed to be encouraged because Men's skating is going backwards are now complaining of the scoring changes which encourage quads, because they are resulting in a guy they never thought would have a quad, winning medals with messy performances.

deedeelocks
12-09-2010, 08:54 PM
Patrick didn't win either when he fell 3 times in the LP, but he did get a medal.
He would have though, had he not jumped the 3T after his last 2A...

museksk8r
12-09-2010, 08:59 PM
^ Nah, I'm pretty sure if Chan had been awarded the bronze medal at Skate Canada (as Lambiel was placed 3rd at the 2007 Cup of China) as opposed to the gold medal, people would not be in an understandable uproar. The judges never sent a message to Stephane that he could fall 4 times and be placed over someone who was relatively clean/clean. With Chan, on the other hand, other than a rule technicality, he would have beaten a pretty clean Verner in Russia with 4 falls and Patrick did beat a clean Rippon with 4 falls in Canada (and I certainly do understand that Adam's skating skills are not at the level of Nobu's and Patrick's, but I don't believe Chan's skating skills should give him a 4-fall advantage over Rippon either). This is a message that never should have been sent, not for figure skating to be considered a credible sport. I'm not blaming Patrick for where the judges place him; it's clearly a problem with the scoring system and it's damaging any credibility anyone may think figure skating has left, which is already in very short supply. I'm certain Chan's detractors would feel the same way about the situation even if they felt he was a perfect gentleman. His perceived character isn't the issue here; it's the flaws in the scoring system that has turned so many into anger balls.

withrespect
12-09-2010, 09:27 PM
:watch:

professordeb
12-09-2010, 10:06 PM
^ Nah, I'm pretty sure if Chan had been awarded the bronze medal at Skate Canada (as Lambiel was placed 3rd at the 2007 Cup of China) as opposed to the gold medal, people would not be in an understandable uproar. The judges never sent a message to Stephane that he could fall 4 times and be placed over someone who was relatively clean/clean. With Chan, on the other hand, other than a rule technicality, he would have beaten a pretty clean Verner in Russia with 4 falls and Patrick did beat a clean Rippon with 4 falls in Canada (and I certainly do understand that Adam's skating skills are not at the level of Nobu's and Patrick's, but I don't believe Chan's skating skills should give him a 4-fall advantage over Rippon either). This is a message that never should have been sent, not for figure skating to be considered a credible sport. I'm not blaming Patrick for where the judges place him; it's clearly a problem with the scoring system and it's damaging any credibility anyone may think figure skating has left, which is already in very short supply. I'm certain Chan's detractors would feel the same way about the situation even if they felt he was a perfect gentleman. His perceived character isn't the issue here; it's the flaws in the scoring system that has turned so many into anger balls.

It may very well be that the flaws in the scoring systems are what has people turning into anger balls but for the most part Chan's name is attached to that anger. Seldom have I seen posts where someone, who isn't a Chan lover, actually blame the system. In their estimation it is Chan's fault for the marks he is given, it is his fault that others don't get on the podium, it is his fault that others are marked lower than him, it is his fault that the judges apply the rules to him like they do to everyone else, it is his fault that others don't get to fall as often as he does, it is his fault that they tweaked the scoring for the quad (and other jumps) to that it would benefit only him (although I recall a certain young man from France who thought the quad wasn't getting enough marks for it and once he starts landing it he should benefit too but let's not get sidetracked).

It seem to me that according to some of our posters everything wrong with the scoring and the standings is ALL CHAN'S FAULT. Yep, I got the message loud and clear. :lol:

doubleflutz
12-09-2010, 11:19 PM
It seems like you are overestimating your own knowledge of the rules and starting to make up definitions based on your own opinion...

Nah. You're just nitpicking to an insane degree. There are three kinds of pre-jump transitions: moves that don't connect directly into the take-off and shouldn't count for +GOE (category A), moves that don't connect directly into the take-off and do deserve +GOE (Mirai's ina bauer-into-2A, category B), moves that do connect directly into the take-off and deserve +GOE (Yuna's ina-bauer-into-2A, category C).

I probably should have specified that Patrick Chan does sometimes do category B as well as category C, in which case his jump +GOE is kosher, but sometimes he only does category A, but gets credit for it like it was a B or a C. Likewise, sometimes Chan will do a category B or C, get credit for them (as he deserves), but still score higher on GOE than another skater who also does a category B and who in my opinion, deserves more positive quality bullet points on his jumps than Chan, because he jumps higher, gets more ice coverage, has a better landing, has more speed, etc etc.

But all of that can be inferred pretty well from everything I've posted from the beginning of this thread, if you know the rules and aren't desperate to nitpick anything anyone says to death in defense of Patrick Chan. You're just playing cheap games of "gotcha", instead of actually addressing my arguments.

Sometimes Patrick is overscored because he gets credit for things he doesn't do, according to the rules. Sometimes he is overscored because he gets the credit he deserves, but other skaters don't get the credit they deserve. You can split hairs about the particulars, but either way, in my opinion, he is overscored. I've explained why I think that, down to a minute degree of detail.

I haven't seen any of his defenders actually address any of the issues I brought up, other than Dragonlady (oy), and the people who just stamp their feet and keep repeating "HE TOTALLY DOES HAVE AMAZING ICE COVERAGE AND HEIGHT ALL THE TIME ON EVERY JUMP YOU ARE WRONG WRONG WRONG".

It's kind of telling that a lot of the people arguing against how he's being scored have also acknowledged that, hey, he's a really great skater with a lot of amazing qualities, who is capable of doing amazing things. His defenders seem to be living in this weird reality where he has no flaws and always skates to the full extent of his potential every time out, and also where the judging in skating is always perfect and fair and skaters never get held up, or get marked higher in certain areas than they really deserve.


It seem to me that according to some of our posters everything wrong with the scoring and the standings is ALL CHAN'S FAULT. Yep, I got the message loud and clear.

Of course it's not his fault. I blame the judges, for the constant inflation he's always received on certain aspects of his PCS and GOE, and the new rules, for underpenalizing falls on the 3A and 4T. I certainly do object to his comments about all of it. It doesn't make him worthy of blame, but it does open him up to criticism for bad sportsmanship. The ISU is responsible for his scores. Patrick Chan is responsible for what comes out of his own mouth.

heo-wikki
12-10-2010, 12:09 AM
Of course it's not his fault. I blame the judges, for the constant inflation he's always received on certain aspects of his PCS and GOE, and the new rules, for underpenalizing falls on the 3A and 4T. I certainly do object to his comments about all of it. It doesn't make him worthy of blame, but it does open him up to criticism for bad sportsmanship. The ISU is responsible for his scores. Patrick Chan is responsible for what comes out of his own mouth.

AMEN. Well, said. I wonder if Patrick where a bit more humble, if some of the ire wouldn't be so great. Gotta love ubers and anti-ubers.

Ziggy
12-10-2010, 12:30 AM
http://savefigureskating.blogspot.com/

Dear Monica,

You're talking out of your ass. Please stop whining.

Love,
Ziggy


If it's raised to -2 per fall:

Then skaters will take less risks and the "nobody is doing quads, this sucks" discussions are going to return. :wall:

You do realise that it's because of that whining that negative GOE has been lowered and quad values increased a number of times?

Well you are seeing the results of that in action now.

Rock2
12-10-2010, 12:36 AM
^ Nah, I'm pretty sure if Chan had been awarded the bronze medal at Skate Canada (as Lambiel was placed 3rd at the 2007 Cup of China) as opposed to the gold medal, people would not be in an understandable uproar.

The best way to ensure this happens is to score nothing but jumps and falls. Forget PCS, forget spins and footwork, forget the rest. Just jumps and falls. Then you will always be able assert the completely irrational argument that winning and medals should ONLY be determined by falls, nothing else. This is what you're trying to do.

If you're going to come back to me and try to suggest that you DO think everything else should count for something then please please please stop posting the very narrow perspective of trying to reconcile medals and falls, whether it be for Chan or Lambiel or whomever. Discuss every single mark on every single element if you want to talk about why someone should or should not win. If you continue to be so selective on which factors should determine placements, you will be eternally frustrated and will continue to cry foul for lack of ability explain what is actually pretty rational scoring under the current system .

Rock2
12-10-2010, 12:40 AM
Then skaters will take less risks and the "nobody is doing quads, this sucks" discussions are going to return. :wall:

You do realise that it's because of that whining that negative GOE has been lowered and quad values increased a number of times?

Well you are seeing the results of that in action now.

I actually don't mind -2 for each fall. Not in favor of incremental deductions for more and more falls; will lead to horrible skates with skaters bailing out of all of their jumps once they fall once or twice. Also there's really no reason to punish them incrementally. Just make the punishment fit the crime. They don't get bonus marks for completing X jumps in a row so why have the opposite?

Ziggy
12-10-2010, 12:44 AM
I'd just go back to -1, -2 and -3 points for -1, -2 and -3 GOE. And reduce the quads value and GOE very slightly.

As in, redo most of the changes that were done because of people whining about lack of quads.

Now those changes are in effect, they resulted in fully rotated jumps (especially quads) being worth more, even with a fall. And hey, now people have something new to whine about. OH JOY!

My problem with -2 for falls is that it penalises somebody who falls on a quad the same as somebody who falls on a single jump or somebody who just trips on their crossovers.

Rock2
12-10-2010, 12:52 AM
...so, let's say someone (like, a real life troll) participating in a competition did a few perfect crossovers, steps and turns across the rink for about 20 seconds...then sat down, and spent the rest of the time literally on their butt. No jumps, no spins, no attempt to interpret the music, no choreo, nada. Is it still appropriate to give them a 10.0 in Skating Skills?

Well, my answer is no.

Having a list of criteria is one thing, but using them properly to judge a complete performance isn't clearly set out in the rules. That's why I liked and in many ways, still idealize the "dark ages of judging" in figure skating a.k.a. 6.0. Because back then I didn't have to look up protocols and see blatant lies on paper.

The rule book actually accounts for this. If you spend a lot of time on your azz, it's hard to say what's affected: SS, CH, PE, etc. So what the rulebook does is provide for heavy deductions once you spend I think 10 continuous seconds disengaged from a program (forgot choreo, fall and can't get up, etc). I forget the exact amount, but it goes up substantially, the more time you are out of action. It's a deduction that lives in the same place as the -1 for falls live, not in any PCS.

Makes sense to me.

As for falling on the jump, yes you get the -1, but this is why skaters get up right away, to avoid further penalty. If you get up right away the duration of the 'fall/getup' is about the same as the duration of holding and presenting your landing and is thus seen strictly to be graded in the context of the element as it has not encroached on the rest of the program and thus PCS is in theory unaffected.

Having said that I would expect some sort of impact on your PCS if you're out of action for more time than the two-second fall/getup incidents over the course of doing any element, regardless of how many times that happens (yeah, up to 13x in an LP!)