Who will make GPF in DANCE?

[judgejudy27]

Péchalat & Bourzat still have to compete at TEB.

Sorry I forgot this was the year they were going back to 3 assignments for some skaters. The Shibutanis have incredibly easy assignments. They have a good shot to win both, but at worst they would be 2nd in both which would easily make it. It would take something catastrophic to not.

[mineko]

Ok, time to eat my own words...

I initially predicted:
1. D/W 30 points (1st at SA = 15 points; 1st at CoR = 15 points);
1. V/M 30 points (1st at SC = 15 points; 1st at TEB = 15 points);
3. the Shibs 28 points (1st at CoR = 15 points; 2nd at NHK = 13 points);
3. W/P 28 points (2nd at SC = 13 points; 1st at NHK = 15 points);
5. P/B 26 points (2nd at SA = 13 points; 2nd at TEB = 13 points);
6. Any of the 3 Russian teams.

My predictions for the first 5 teams still stand, but I now need to make two adjustments:

1. My 6th slot prediction among 3 Russians teams was based on the premise that R/T wins the bronze medal at SC thereby earning 13 points there. It didn't happen. They did not even maintain the 4th place coming out of SD comp; they lost ground and ended up at the 5th place, thereby earning only 7 points.

Unfortunately I was struck by just how slowly they skated compared to the top teams. They also had two point music deductions, which was disheartening, as their program was out there for a while. I really wish that they make a strong comeback. As for now, though, their prospect for making to the GPF is considerably dimmed, if not impossible.

Decrease in R/T's fortune means the increase in B/S's fortune as Doris described in the previous page. B/S has a considerably easier path to the GPF; they may battle out the last slot with C/P.

My second adjustment does not affect who would go to GPF; it has to do with the placement between W/P and the Shibs at NHK Trophy.

My initial prediction at NHK was:
1. W/P;
2. the Shibs.

I am no longer certain about the placement after watching W/P's performance at SD. The Shibs could win gold at NHK, though I still think it is a close call. The reason being that I have almost forgotten just how "accident prone" W/P were. I had to hold my breath a couple of times during W/P's FD performance.

True, W/P are a smoking hot couple, but their striking good looks do not save themselves from stepped out twizzle sequence, and/or wobbly lift (at least they shouldn't but one never knows). If not for an outright deduction, they would certainly be punished for reduced GOEs. On the other hand, the Shibs are known for racking up positive GOEs. (Side note: ISU judging panels used the Shibs' skating video as a model for earning bonus/positive GOE points. This young couple's skating skills are considered that good.)

And somebody better tell Kaitlyn to fix her "spaghetti strong" dress, which was kept coming down from one side of her shoulder during their FD. That was a "wardrobe malfunction waiting to happen." At their elite level of skating, no details should be unattended.

That's it for now, though I have a strong suspicion that I have to come back again & again to eat my words... oh, well...

[Pratfall]

Kaitlyn actually has a flesh coloured strap on that shoulder and the red 'strap' is extra and is sewn on to hang off the shoulder.

And don't forget they've opted for best 2 out of 3.

[mineko]

Kaitlyn actually has a flesh coloured strap on that shoulder and the red 'strap' is extra and is sewn on to hang off the shoulder.

And don't forget they've opted for best 2 out of 3.

The strap - it maybe, but don't you think it may still be hazardous for accidentally being ripped off or something?

As for skating three events, the GP rule dictates that you have to submit ahead of time the 2 out of 3 events that should be counted as official scores.

W/P attend SC, NHK, and TEB. If I hazard a guess, W/P asked ISU to account SC and NHK as their official scores. Why? Their practice mates and the closest rivals, P/B also signed up for two overlapping events:
SA, SC, & TEB.

It is the coaching teams' responsibility to strategize and map out the best possible path for their team to the GPF. So, if I were W/P & P/B's mutual coaches (Krylova & Camerlenge), I would make two official scoring events of each team as:

P/B = SA & TEB;
W/P =SC & NHK.

That way, each team get to maximize their own home court advantage. The fact that P/B withdrew from S/C (i know Fabian got afflicted with bronchitis, but still, they incurred monetary penality) also suggest that their remaining offcial score event is TEB.

[Sylvia]

From the ISU Grand Prix Announcement:

Only the best two placements, out of the 3 events, will count for the qualification to the Final.

[mineko]

Sylvia - thank you for correcting my misconception.

Still, if those high ranking skater are allowed to pick the best two out of three, don't you think that that would give these players unfair advantage?

For instance, I'm sure Paul/Islam would love to have an additional event to "re-do" their disastrous SD at SA.

[julieann]

Still, if those high ranking skater are allowed to pick the best two out of three, don't you think that that would give these players unfair advantage?

For instance, I'm sure Paul/Islam would love to have an additional event to "re-do" their disastrous SD at SA.

They need to be in the top 6 at worlds and they will get that chance next season.

Those skaters get that additional event because they are the upper echelon of skaters; not many took advantage of it.

[mineko]

They need to be in the top 6 at worlds and they will get that chance next season.

Those skaters get that additional event because they are the upper echelon of skaters; not many took advantage of it.

Yes, I understand these are the criteria for skating for three events and not many took advantage of it.

I understand that the ISU went for enticing the "upper echelon" skaters with the hope of drawing larger audiences.

Guess when monetary motive is stronger, it tramps the fairness, then.

[julieann]

Yes, I understand these are the criteria for skating for three events and not many took advantage of it.

I understand that the ISU went for enticing the "upper echelon" skaters with the hope of drawing larger audiences.

Guess when monetary motive is stronger, it tramps the fairness, then.

It's not all about money for some teams; it's about getting to do as many competitions as they can. Some of the teams depending on their schedule of competitions (and other things I'm sure) can't go to Nebelhorn, Ondrej Nepela Memorial, Finlandia or Cup of Nice etc......

So by the time some of the skaters meet up; some are competing for the first time and others have a few competitions under their belts already.

Why should the top 6 who chose three events be punished because some skaters need a do-over? I'm sure it wouldn't be a problem if Paul/Islam a medal.

[mineko]

^ Perhaps I might not have made it clear. When I wrote about money, I referred to the monetary motives of ISU/GP organizers. Like higher ranking players presumably could attract larger audiences, thereby fattening the ISU bottomline.

I am not sure what you mean by "Why should the top 6 who chose three events be punished because some skaters need a do-over? I'm sure it wouldn't be a problem if Paul/Islam a medal."

How would teams who choose to skate 3 events be punished?

When I mentioned that P/I wishing an additional event for a do-over, I was fully aware that they did not have that opportunity due to their lower world ranking.

But that is precisely my point: To me the fairness factor comes in if three events options are available to all GP invitees.

Another unfair factor is monetary concern. Top 6 teams, by virtue of being higher raking, mean that have more opportunities to earn prize money. It means less opportunities for lower ranking teams to earn prize money.

Likewise, P/B, by having an option to skate at three events, and by having to sign up to three events, they are still potentially eligible to qualify for GPF even after withdrawing from their second event (SC); they have TEB to skate. This option is not available to lesser seaded and/or non-seaded skaters who are invited to two events. For them, if for whatever reason, they withdraw from one event, they are no longer eligible to earn enough points to qualify for GPF.

Please understand that I am not begrudging that P/B could still skate one additional event. I am happy that they have one more fighting chance. I am, however, merely pointing out the option that they have but not others.

[mineko]

Another unfair advantage relates directly to monetary concern. The top 6 teams, by virtue of being the highest ranked teams, mean they have higher probability to earn prize money, and they have three opportunities to do so. This was one of the motives P/B stated as their reason for signing up for 3 events.

It means that lower ranked teams have less opportunites to medal and earn prize money.

P.S.: I apologize for being off-topic.

[Pratfall]

I agree that the GP set-up is inherently unfair ( especially to the skaters who don't get the chance to compete in the GP because of the reduced # of entries ).
W/P feel that the more they can compete, the more they improve ( and I wonder if they might also feel that it's to their advantage to be seen as much as possible ,since before last year they were basically held out of the international scene.) You can't blame them for going for it, and hoping it doesn't backfire.

I like the Shibs and C/L very much too,So I'm finding the GP really interesting.

[julieann]

When I wrote about money, I referred to the monetary motives of ISU/GP organizers. Like higher ranking players presumably could attract larger audiences, thereby fattening the ISU bottomline.

Who else is going to pay for it? Would you be more or less likely to buy a ticket if it were Kemp/King or Savchenko/Szolkowy?

I am not sure what you mean by "Why should the top 6 who chose three events be punished because some skaters need a do-over? I'm sure it wouldn't be a problem if Paul/Islam a medal."

How would teams who choose to skate 3 events be punished?

Because you want the top six to get two events like the other teams who don’t skate nearly as well so they have a chance. Or skaters who do have a chance and mess up get another one. Instead of the top 6 skaters who really deserve it.

When I mentioned that P/I wishing an additional event for a do-over, I was fully aware that they did not have that opportunity due to their lower world ranking.

So maybe they should give lower ranked skaters four events to see if they can get up to level of the top skaters?

But that is precisely my point: To me the fairness factor comes in if three events options are available to all GP invitees.

So who will pay for every skater at the senior level (who wants to) attend two competitions and who wants to see the 20th ranked skater at a Grand Prix even twice? Isn’t the Grand Prix supposed to the best of the best or close to it?

Another unfair factor is monetary concern. Top 6 teams, by virtue of being higher raking, mean that have more opportunities to earn prize money. It means less opportunities for lower ranking teams to earn prize money.

Then the lesser ranked skaters need to go to the other competitions I said and earn points and experience so they can be on the top 6 the next season.

Likewise, P/B, by having an option to skate at three events, and by having to sign up to three events, they are still potentially eligible to qualify for GPF even after withdrawing from their second event (SC); they have TEB to skate. This option is not available to lesser seaded and/or non-seaded skaters who are invited to two events. For them, if for whatever reason, they withdraw from one event, they are no longer eligible to earn enough points to qualify for GPF.

P/B will take (depending on ISU rules) a huge hit financially for withdrawing. Was it anymore fair that Kavaguti and Smirnov withdrew from Skate Canada last year and although they won the Cup of Russia, they couldn't go the GPF even though they would have most certainly medaled? Of course it’s not fair, but those are the rules and I didn’t hear anyone skaters/fans who got to go to the GPF in their place.

Please understand that I am not begrudging that P/B could still skate one additional event. I am happy that they have one more fighting chance. I am, however, merely pointing out the option that they have but not others.

They have the options others don’t have because they have been 4th in the world for two years straight. I would rather see a few skaters have one more competition (as they have in the past) then have to sit though another skater who barely got the minimum points to enter.

Maybe they should set it up so that all the ladies and pairs who are eligible go to Skate America and all the men and dancers who are eligible go to Skate Canada so everyone has a chance and so on; but who is footing the bill?

[mineko]

I believe that the dispute between you and I comes down to the umbiguity of the GPF format. Is it a competition or exhibition/show skating?

If it is a pure competition like nationals, giving multiple chance to skate to certain upper echelon skaters but not to others, like it is done at GPs, is out of question.

On the other hand, show skatings are money making enterprise aiming to entertain audience. To maximize the money making purpose, you want to highlight the most popular skaters as much as, and as often as possible.

I think we are having this discussion because the GP format is neither a pure competition nor the pure entertainment.

I critisize the "unfairness" of the GP format because I come from the pure comepetition perspective; you seem to take into account the pragmatic aspect of skating, e.g., need for the federations to raise fund so that they could keep holding events.

I don't think we settle what we have discussed as long as the GP format/structure attempt to be everything to everyone, that is, pretending to be a competition when its rules are not entirely consistent with a pure competition.

P.S.: By the way, I can't wait to see CoC, so we can go on predicting the GPF candidates!