PDA

View Full Version : Hersh article



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

agalisgv
11-03-2011, 05:09 AM
A -3 from the final score because of a non-element stumble???? Are you serious?? Stumble, no. Fall, yes. It was classified as a fall btw.

IceAlisa
11-03-2011, 05:10 AM
Stumble, no. Fall, yes. It was classified as a fall btw.

Thank goodness you are not involved in the creating of the scoring system. :scream:



Course Chan would still be winning (and justifiably so IMO), but by a margin I think is more reflective of some of his weaknesses. You may not be aware of this but Chan does not make it a habit of falling on non-elements. Therefore, one would be more correct classifying it as a fluke rather than a more systematic weakness.

MR-FAN
11-03-2011, 05:12 AM
Yeah, with a skater like Chan, you want to give him the PCS bc his skating is that good. But for non-element falls, there needs to be a better way of incoporating that than currently.

Yeah. I don't think 9.5 for SS is unwarranted for a skater like Chan with falls in the program, especially with something like his Aranjuez performance. But I'd give him a -3 for a random non-element fall. (And I do think the judges took into account his falls with their PCS scores. That kid deserves 10s for SS, transitions and choreography! I can't wait to see what PCS the judges give him if he skates this clean :swoon: )

IceAlisa
11-03-2011, 05:15 AM
Yeah. I don't think 9.5 for SS is unwarranted for a skater like Chan with falls in the program, especially with something like his Aranjuez performance. But I'd give him a -3 for a random non-element fall. (And I do think the judges took into account his falls with their PCS scores. That kid deserves 10s for SS, transitions and choreography! I can't wait to see what PCS the judges give him if he skates this clean :swoon: )

But the whole issue is that his SS scores are too high, according to Hersh anyway.

Chan received a total deduction of -2 for the falls on the jump elements which includes the quad. You want a skater to be docked more, a -3 off the total score for a non-element fall?

MR-FAN
11-03-2011, 05:16 AM
Chan does not make it a habit of falling on non-elements. Therefore, one would be more correct classifying it as a fluke rather than a more systematic weakness.

Yeah, he rarely (if ever ?) has non-elements falls besides his SC LP. most skaters rarely fall out of no-where. When they do though, -1 is a little low for programs that usually score in the 60 (SPs) to 180 (LPs) range.

MR-FAN
11-03-2011, 05:18 AM
But the whole issue is that his SS scores are too high, according to Hersh anyway.

I don't agree that they're too high, he has the best skating skills in the world and the marks reflect that. I would've goven him a 9.5 too :shuffle:

agalisgv
11-03-2011, 05:20 AM
Yeah. I don't think 9.5 for SS is unwarranted for a skater like Chan with falls in the program, especially with something like his Aranjuez performance. But I'd give him a -3 for a random non-element fall. (And I do think the judges took into account his falls with their PCS scores. That kid deserves 10s for SS, transitions and choreography! I can't wait to see what PCS the judges give him if he skates this clean :swoon: ) Hmm, fall aside, I thought he had other issues. I appreciate the speed with which he skates and how hard he has worked to improve that, but at times he wasn't fully in control bc of that speed, so that should be reflected in the PCS. To me the fall looked like it was a reflection of that (he was skating a little faster than he could fully control, so he slipped).

So while I would say he's ahead of the pack in PCS, I wouldn't score him at the 10 or even 9.5 level--yet anyway ;)

IceAlisa
11-03-2011, 05:24 AM
Yeah, he rarely (if ever ?) has non-elements falls besides his SC LP. most skaters rarely fall out of no-where. When they do though, -1 is a little low for programs that usually score in the 60 (SPs) to 180 (LPs) range.

Are you saying that the deduction should be more for men because they usually score more? Progressive docking it is! :lol:

I am at a loss to understand harsher punishment for a non-element fall. :confused:


Hmm, fall aside, I thought he had other issues. I appreciate the speed with which he skates and how hard he has worked to improve that, but at times he wasn't fully in control bc of that speed, so that should be reflected in the PCS. To me the fall looked like it was a reflection of that (he was skating a little faster than he could fully control, so he slipped).
So you do understand that for Chan this fall was a fluke, right? Other than the non-element fall, do you have any other examples of his "lack of control"? Someone with lack of control, as you allege, does not get consistent SS/PCS marks of that level.
After Chan skated, Daisuke picked up an object from the ice and brought it over to the boards. The most likely explanation for that fall is either an object (a sequin or something) or a rut in the ice.

agalisgv
11-03-2011, 05:25 AM
most skaters rarely fall out of no-where. When they do though, -1 is a little low for programs that usually score in the 60 (SPs) to 180 (LPs) range. Exactly. When you look at the total points scored in a program, -1 is really not a significant deduction compared to an element fall.

agalisgv
11-03-2011, 05:28 AM
A fall on a jump gets an automatic -3 GOE *in addition to* the -1. That results in a total loss of 3-4 points off the total score for a fall on a jump. That's 4x more penalty than a fall on a non-element.

MR-FAN
11-03-2011, 05:28 AM
Hmm, fall aside, I thought he had other issues. I appreciate the speed with which he skates and how hard he has worked to improve that, but at times he wasn't fully in control bc of that speed, so that should be reflected in the PCS. To me the fall looked like it was a reflection of that (he was skating a little faster than he could fully control, so he slipped).

So while I would say he's ahead of the pack in PCS, I wouldn't score him at the 10 or even 9.5 level--yet anyway ;)

Fair enough, if you thought the fall was because he couldn't control his speed, then maybe that should be reflected in the PCS. I didn't think it was, and I wouldn't have factored the fall in the PCS (not even execution. He got up and a second later went for the lutz without extra prep or even a cross over to get speed after the fall. now THAT'S commitment to choreography and musical phrasing!) And fall aside, he didn't seem to have any problems controlling his speed and edging. I think 9.5 is fair for someone who shouldn't be a stranger to 10s when he's on

MR-FAN
11-03-2011, 05:33 AM
Are you saying that the deduction should be more for men because they usually score more? Progressive docking it is! :lol:


men? I was talking in general... maybe I should've said 40-190 range. rules should apply across all disciplines. And not sure what progressive docking refers to.

agalisgv
11-03-2011, 05:33 AM
I thought he had issues controlling his speed elsewhere too (but obviously nothing like a fall). That's why I would be a tad more conservative in PCS with him at this point.

IceAlisa
11-03-2011, 05:38 AM
I thought he had issues controlling his speed elsewhere too (but obviously nothing like a fall). That's why I would be a tad more conservative in PCS with him at this point.

Where else?

MR-FAN
11-03-2011, 05:43 AM
I thought he had issues controlling his speed elsewhere too (but obviously nothing like a fall). That's why I would be a tad more conservative in PCS with him at this point.

Maybe. You're probably better at noticing this than me, since I'm usually too mesmerized by his skating :P but I wouldn't be surprised if I watched his program at worlds with some mileage and started seeing what you mean by more control of his speed. It has happened before when I thought he couldn't skate any better, and he proved me wrong :swoon: