Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 37
  1. #1
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    593
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0

    Sit Spin without Scratch spin on end

    Why would a coach NOT put a scratch spin on the end of a sit spin? Is there a reason behind this? (USFS)

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Age
    53
    Posts
    10,469
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    21424
    If the scratch spin is sustained for multiple revolutions at the end of the spin, then it would count as a combination spin with two positions (sit and scratch). Depending on the requirements of the program, you might need to be doing a spin in one position and not a combination spin for that element.

    Also, the coach may think it shows greater control to get out of the sitspin efficiently rather than reestablishing balance in the upright position before existing the spin.

  3. #3
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    11,015
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    My most recent test required a sit spin. The coach had me be very careful to raise up from it and immediately exit, so there was no question if I met the requirement. (You'd think sit-upright would demonstrate I could do a sit, but some judges might interpret it as a spin in isolation, and I didn't want a reskate to be taken up with an element that is fine...)

    For competition - what gkelly said. You have to do all your spins of a different nature. If you already did a change position spin, you wouldn't want the sit spin to count as one, and thus get 0 points (if IJS- but many 6.0 judges are used to looking at things in IJS light.)

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    2,227
    vCash
    5550
    Rep Power
    17487
    I did recently learn from a National level technical controller that an upright spin done at the end of a spin in one position is not counted as long as there are no difficult variations attempted, confirmed by the ISU Tech Panel Manual. I was not aware of this before and thought that more than 3 concluding upright revolutions would make it a combination spin. I believe only the underlined part is new with this version, so it appears my interpretation was out of date.

    "In spins in one position and flying spins the concluding upright position at the
    end of the spin is not considered to be another position independent of the
    number of revolutions, as long as the skater is executing only the final wind-up without any enhancements."

    http://www.usfigureskating.org/conte...%20Singles.pdf

    I do remember a few years ago that Carolina Kostner did just barely over 3 revolutions in an upright and lost credit for a spin with a very strict Tech Panel at Euros a few years ago, so perhaps they changed the rule after that.

  5. #5
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    11,015
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Very interesting. I really hope that doesn't trickle down to 6.0 (it pisses me off when IJS things do! Now most coaches won't let you do a scratch spin and a backspin in a program because they are "same nature" when they didn't used to be. Different foot used to mean different spin, now judges just see upright.) I pretty much have to do a sit-scratch as my second spin, because my first spin (backspin) is a single position upright. My change foot still pretty much sucks.

    I can't do a difficult upright variation, so if they stop counting my scratch spin I'm screwed.
    Last edited by Skittl1321; 08-16-2012 at 06:58 PM.

  6. #6
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    South of New York City
    Posts
    2,062
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    In the US, there are two different judging systems in use - 6.0 and IJS.

    RFOS is correct that the ISU/USFSA just changed this rule for IJS-level skaters. (Eff. 7/2012) They also revised the footwork sequences. However, the Tech Controller's guidelines are specifically for IJS-judged events where the skater declares their planned elements in advance.

    However, for a lower-level skater in the US, they have to comply with the 6.0 judging rules, so the well-balanced program guidelines apply, as gkelly explained. An upright spin of 3 or more revolutions would count towards a combination spin or count as a "spin of a different nature." Since some events (like Test Track) limit the actual number of allowed spins, tacking on a scratch spin eliminates the ability to do another spin elsewhere in the program.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    2,227
    vCash
    5550
    Rep Power
    17487
    Quote Originally Posted by FigureSpins View Post
    However, for a lower-level skater in the US, they have to comply with the 6.0 judging rules, so the well-balanced program guidelines apply, as gkelly explained. An upright spin of 3 or more revolutions would count towards a combination spin or count as a "spin of a different nature." Since some events (like Test Track) limit the actual number of allowed spins, tacking on a scratch spin eliminates the ability to do another spin elsewhere in the program.
    Thanks for your thoughts. Have you seen that in writing somewhere, or do you have the authority to have it put in writing? One of the most confusing things is knowing whether rule changes or clarifications at the higher levels also apply at the lower levels or not. Both judges and coaches I know have to try to find out about this every time something like this happens, and since judges usually don't have anything in writing the answer often is, it depends who the judges happen to be and what their interpretations are. I know some judges who consider a sit or camel with more than 3 revolutions in the concluding upright to be a combination spin and who deduct for it if a spin in one position was required, and others who don't. I don't know if any of them would also ask for a reskate if it happened on a test, but I agree with Skittl1321's coach's caution. Personally, I would comment on it on a test but wouldn't deduct or ask for a reskate as long as there were enough revolutions *in the required position* and the quality was acceptable for the level.

    I appreciate that "half loops are not considered a single jump at this level" is now explicitly stated in the requirements for No Test through Pre-Juvenile well-balanced free skating, so a big thanks to whoever made sure that was put in there!

  8. #8
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    South of New York City
    Posts
    2,062
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    I can't speak for the governing bodies. This was documented/explained during the PSA's IJS webinar earlier this week. The presenters referenced several Technical Notifications from the ISU/USFSA. If you check the USFSA Tech page, it should be outlined in one of those documents. I think it was for the highest-levels of skaters, but I was on a borrowed iPhone due to a last-minute home crisis, so I wasn't able to take any notes about exactly which documents/levels, sorry. They usually post the presentation and the audio for playback later; maybe the PSA will post a link soon.

    I'm cautious with programs as well. I think that push-out from the sit spin is a good exercise: since they can't step wide so they get a more powerful exit that helps the other spins.


    Interesting note about the half loop jumps on well-balanced since the Test Track Pre-Prel announcement for Regionals states that that jump will be counted as a half-rotation jump.
    Last edited by FigureSpins; 08-16-2012 at 08:08 PM.

  9. #9
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    25
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    77
    Quote Originally Posted by RFOS View Post
    I did recently learn from a National level technical controller that an upright spin done at the end of a spin in one position is not counted as long as there are no difficult variations attempted, confirmed by the ISU Tech Panel Manual. I was not aware of this before and thought that more than 3 concluding upright revolutions would make it a combination spin. I believe only the underlined part is new with this version, so it appears my interpretation was out of date.

    "In spins in one position and flying spins the concluding upright position at the
    end of the spin is not considered to be another position independent of the
    number of revolutions, as long as the skater is executing only the final wind-up without any enhancements."
    This rule is to prevent the skater from being penalised in situations, such as a short program, where a spin in only one position is a required element. Where a spin in only one position is not specifically required, a sit/upright will often be called as a combination spin. I saw this several times at the ISU Adult Competition in Oberstdorf.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    2,227
    vCash
    5550
    Rep Power
    17487
    Quote Originally Posted by frbskate63 View Post
    This rule is to prevent the skater from being penalised in situations, such as a short program, where a spin in only one position is a required element. Where a spin in only one position is not specifically required, a sit/upright will often be called as a combination spin. I saw this several times at the ISU Adult Competition in Oberstdorf.
    When I asked the technical controller about this question, I used an example from an Intermediate short program (where a skater did flying sit and then 6 revolutions in a basic upright, so I was surprised it wasn't called FCoSp, and where only one position is allowed in the solo spin) and she did say that she would call it FSSp in the short program. There was another example I saw at that competition where in a Junior free skate a skater did what clearly looked to be intended as a flying sit spin but where the skater did 4 revolutions on the exit. This was also called as a FSSp. I wonder if the planned program content form or what appears to be the intent of the skater is also used in this case to determine how to call the spin. From what FigureSpins said, it sounds like it might be referred to ("the Tech Controller's guidelines are specifically for IJS-judged events where the skater declares their planned elements in advance").

    In the free skate mentioned above, the flying spin (which could have been called as either FSSp or FCoSp) fulfilled the flying spin box (the spin in one position and combination spin were already met), so all 3 spins would have counted either way.

  11. #11

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Partying with Oda
    Posts
    4,226
    vCash
    1799
    Rep Power
    34903
    Quote Originally Posted by FigureSpins View Post
    Interesting note about the half loop jumps on well-balanced since the Test Track Pre-Prel announcement for Regionals states that that jump will be counted as a half-rotation jump.
    Except that it isn't a half-rotation jump.

    I've always hated that it's called a half-loop. Nothing "half" about it, it's a full single rotation. In roller skating it's called "Euler."

    So if someone did a 2-revolution "half-loop," would that be considered a single? Makes no sense.
    "I hit him with my shoes... if he had given me the medal like I told him to, I wouldn't have had to hit him!" -- 8-year-old Rhoda Penmark in "The Bad Seed"

  12. #12

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Age
    48
    Posts
    17,938
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    34819
    I got clarification on this one today at a Tech Panel seminar today, same as RFOS. As long as you don't increase the speed (which would give it a feature) or do some difficult variation position in the upright, you can do unlimited revolutions on the end of a spin without making it a combination spin.
    When you are up to your arse in alligators it is difficult to remember you were only meant to be draining the swamp.

  13. #13
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Kostner #1 Fan
    Posts
    455
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Yeah i believe you can now do an upright scratch spin (with no difficult variations) at the end of the spins, and they still wont call it a combination spin

  14. #14
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    South of New York City
    Posts
    2,062
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by skateboy View Post
    Except that it isn't a half-rotation jump.

    I've always hated that it's called a half-loop. Nothing "half" about it, it's a full single rotation. In roller skating it's called "Euler."
    Traditionally, a half-loop has been counted as a half-revolution. It's only in the last few years that the ISU and other governing bodies started to recognize it as a single revolution jump.

    The mechanics of the single half-loop are such that the actual rotation is not 360°. The takeoff is from a BO edge, but the skater naturally turns a notch as they take off, so you lose up to 45°. (The indicator is the "check mark" on the tracing.) On landing, the skater stays over the opposite side of the body from takeoff, so the transition takes away a bit of the rotation as well, mainly because it's a very open jump. The skater lands with the free leg behind, not in front.


    In a Loop, the same is true, but the skater stays over the landing side throughout the jump, so there is some additional rotation involved. That's why the Loop was considered a single and the Half-Loop was a half revolution jump.

    As I said, the designation been changed by the ISU for IJS events. That has cascaded down to the USFSA's IJS events, but not fully to the 6.0 events. In a way, that's good because it gives the lower-level skaters more options since they have fewer jumps in their skill set.


    For the record, jumps on quad roller skates are very different from those on figure skates, especially edge jumps. Jumping off the rocker of a blade provides little to no "grip" on the ice - the toepicks are engaged before and after every on-ice jump out of necessity.

  15. #15
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    South of New York City
    Posts
    2,062
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Aussie Willy View Post
    I got clarification on this one today at a Tech Panel seminar today, same as RFOS. As long as you don't increase the speed (which would give it a feature) or do some difficult variation position in the upright, you can do unlimited revolutions on the end of a spin without making it a combination spin.
    That's in Australia, right? Are all events judged under IJS, including the lower-level ones or are the rules different for those skaters?

    Here in the US, the tech panel is not involved for the low-level 6.0 events at all, so it doesn't matter if they'd let it slide for a Junior. At the Preliminary level events, the tech specialists have no say. It would be good if the PSA/USFSA were to clarify what the call would be for a non-IJS event.

  16. #16

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,312
    vCash
    289
    Rep Power
    41317
    Quote Originally Posted by FigureSpins View Post
    That's in Australia, right? Are all events judged under IJS, including the lower-level ones or are the rules different for those skaters?

    Here in the US, the tech panel is not involved for the low-level 6.0 events at all, so it doesn't matter if they'd let it slide for a Junior. At the Preliminary level events, the tech specialists have no say. It would be good if the PSA/USFSA were to clarify what the call would be for a non-IJS event.
    Australia is IJS Preliminary to Senior for technical, and IJS PCS for Artistic at all levels. Anything below Prelim (Aussie Skate) is 6.0. But as the loop doesn't make an appearance until Free Skate 4 (the last AS level) I can't imagine you'd see many half-loops in Aussie Skate.

  17. #17

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Age
    48
    Posts
    17,938
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    34819
    Quote Originally Posted by FigureSpins View Post
    That's in Australia, right? Are all events judged under IJS, including the lower-level ones or are the rules different for those skaters?

    Here in the US, the tech panel is not involved for the low-level 6.0 events at all, so it doesn't matter if they'd let it slide for a Junior. At the Preliminary level events, the tech specialists have no say. It would be good if the PSA/USFSA were to clarify what the call would be for a non-IJS event.
    Elements are not called for non-IJS events and there is no technical specialist. So it is a moot point.
    When you are up to your arse in alligators it is difficult to remember you were only meant to be draining the swamp.

  18. #18
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    11,015
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Aussie Willy View Post
    Elements are not called for non-IJS events and there is no technical specialist. So it is a moot point.
    But 6.0 still has required elements. So if you are required to do two spins of a different nature, and sit-upright is no longer different than a single position spin, you get a deduction for not doing the required elements.

  19. #19

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Age
    48
    Posts
    17,938
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    34819
    Quote Originally Posted by Skittl1321 View Post
    But 6.0 still has required elements. So if you are required to do two spins of a different nature, and sit-upright is no longer different than a single position spin, you get a deduction for not doing the required elements.
    Well if the skaters don't do the required elements or put something in that they shouldn't then they take that into account with their deductions in 6.0. But the elements are not called by anyone.
    When you are up to your arse in alligators it is difficult to remember you were only meant to be draining the swamp.

  20. #20

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    2,227
    vCash
    5550
    Rep Power
    17487
    Quote Originally Posted by Aussie Willy View Post
    Well if the skaters don't do the required elements or put something in that they shouldn't then they take that into account with their deductions in 6.0.
    And that's exactly what FigureSpins, Skittl1321, and I were wanting clarification of-- whether the sit spin to basic upright would be considered a combination spin or a spin in one position at non-IJS levels. There is no technical panel to determine that (and FigureSpins noted that in the post you were responding to, so no one is confused about that), but the judges have to determine what spin was performed and whether it meets the requirements, and whether to take a deduction (and coaches certainly should know too).

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •