Who moved my Lutz?

[umronnie]

Another of my fact-finding projects.

The CoP does seem to have a negative effect on ladies' jumps, as it did in the past on men's quads. I looked up the protocols for the world championships and OG since CoP came into use and focused on ladies' 3Lz and men's quad (4T/4S). I counted all attempts – including falls, downgrades and edge calls, as the object was to check the changes in strategy in view of CoP, not necessarily the success of said strategies.

Here are the results for men's quads:
WC 2005: SP 10, LP 13, Total 23
OG 2006: SP 6, LP 14, Total 20
WC 2006: SP 7, LP 13, Total 20
WC 2007: SP 3, LP 11, Total 14
WC 2008: SP 5, LP 12, Total 17
WC 2009: SP 4, LP 8, Total 12
OG 2010: SP 4, LP 11, Total 15
WC 2010: SP 5, LP 13, Total 18
WC 2011: SP 8, LP 15, Total 23
WC 2012: SP 11, LP 22, Total 33

You can see that men's quad attempts declined steadily from 2006 onward, hitting its lowest point in something like 12 years in 2009 WC and 2010 OG. After the changes made post-Vancouver quads became popular again quite rapidly. We had a burst of quads at Euros and US Nationals and I bet we'll see even more of them in London.

The quad list was just an illustration – CoP caused a problem, was changed when the problem was recognized, problem fixed. Now on to the really interesting stuff – ladies' 3Lz.

3Lz attempts in ladies' programs:

WC 2005: SP 20, LP 27, Total 47
OG 2006: SP 22, LP 25, Total 47
WC 2006: SP 20, LP 23, Total 43
WC 2007: SP 21, LP 29, Total 50
WC 2008: SP 22, LP 27, Total 49
WC 2009: SP 22, LP 23, Total 45
OG 2010: SP 16, LP 22, Total 38
WC 2010: SP 17, LP 18, Total 35
WC 2011: SP 11, LP 22, Total 33
WC 2012: SP 8, LP 18, Total 26 (!)

3Lz's are down to half what they used to be just 5 years ago. Clearly there is a problem. Does the ISU recognize it? How do we fix it?

[Ziggy]

There are more variables you have to take into account here.

When IJS was introduced, skaters had to devote a lot of time and energy to train non-jump elements and improve non-technical aspects of skating. So they had less time and energy to practice jumps and their programs usually became more complex, making all the elements harder, so they were doing easier jumps.

So less quads.

Same goes for Ladies. But there's even more to take into account here.

Before IJS was introduced, a lot of the Ladies were flutzing. They knew they could get away with it and coaches didn't care about it.

When IJS was introduced, flutzes became penalised so now we see less lutzes being performed.

Now it's something that coaches do care about (because they know they have to) so younger skaters coming up flutz much much less often. With time, we'll surely see more lutzes being performed.

[aftershocks]

^^ I wouldn't say they "knew they could get away with flutzing." It was just poor technique that wasn't being adequately addressed. Flutzing among the ladies seemed to become more prevalent after figures were eliminated, but it was not something that officials gave much attention to immediately. And neither did some coaches apparently.

[aliceanne]

I think underrotations for both men and women have become a big issue since instant replay was introduced. I would guess it has caused skaters to focus on quality vs. quantity. If your lower-scored jumps are underrotated you are better off saving your energy to get them all the way around instead of adding more difficult jumps that you won't get credit for.

[Sedge]

Another of my fact-finding projects.

The quad list was just an illustration – CoP caused a problem, was changed when the problem was recognized, problem fixed. Now on to the really interesting stuff – ladies' 3Lz.

3Lz attempts in ladies' programs:

WC 2005: SP 20, LP 27, Total 47
OG 2006: SP 22, LP 25, Total 47
WC 2006: SP 20, LP 23, Total 43
WC 2007: SP 21, LP 29, Total 50
WC 2008: SP 22, LP 27, Total 49
WC 2009: SP 22, LP 23, Total 45
OG 2010: SP 16, LP 22, Total 38
WC 2010: SP 17, LP 18, Total 35
WC 2011: SP 11, LP 22, Total 33
WC 2012: SP 8, LP 18, Total 26 (!)

3Lz's are down to half what they used to be just 5 years ago. Clearly there is a problem. Does the ISU recognize it? How do we fix it?

I believe you will find the SP reduction in 3Lu has to do with the increase in 3T/3T as a combination that sets the competitors apart from the field.
Until Kim and the Russian girls up the requirement in the SP to 3Lu/3T....I think 3T/3T will be the currency to reach the final flight

[briancoogaert]

It's not the same since Quads issue is under-rotation, but 3Lz issue is edge-call.
I'm not sure the 50 Lutzes from 2007 Worlds are all real Lutz, lol. We probably could do the same with Men and Lip. hehe
I prefer a Lutz-less program for Ladies if it's because of bad jumping technique, than a quad-less program for men, because they are afraid of under-rotation.

[os168]

I have expressed this before here and on other forums, it comes to COP maths and rule changes since the Olympics.

A matter of risk and reward, COP maths. unlike the 6.0, the COP is a beast all together that can have greater impact on how the skaters compete. It is such that if it decide to punish under rotation more this year, then I bet you all skaters will work on fully rotate their jumps and next year we will see a less under rotation overall.

If it start to reward difficulty, quality more, then we will see it in next year's program and performance. Therefore if it start to reward Lutz more like it does for the Quads for the men, then we wills start to see more of Lutz next year. A season worth of accumulated PCS through consistency and many competitions makes the points awarded for difficult elements almost obsolete. If it start to reward 'perfection' and 'artistry' more, then we will see a lot of more holistic programs next year, not a sum of some highlight parts designed for number crunching.

If COP decide to reward difficult triple triples and punishes lack of difficulties, it won't be only the youngsters doing them since the old guards can't afford not to do them anymore.

In ladies skating, imo clearly the balance is so out of wack where the young/newbies can't compete with the old even when they churn out 7 triples difficult combos and lutz and still no where close etc etc..

Is this still a 'sport' of 'risks and performance' of merely a formality for 'exhibition skating' among the anointed ones from rich federations I have wondered lately. The men's are doing great, but ladies, not always. The US nationals were so exciting because for towards the final 10, it got to be about sports, and all the skaters put out their best with real risks on the line, except Ashley, who arguably won by COP smarts, based on reputation/consistency/federation interests, thatn what really went on on the ice that day. The sport then became about too much thinking: strategy, calculation, rule smarts and not enough actual doing: what went on ice on the day. Stronger, Faster, Higher, Better, Harder.

[umronnie]

It's not the same since Quads issue is under-rotation, but 3Lz issue is edge-call.
I'm not sure the 50 Lutzes from 2007 Worlds are all real Lutz, lol. We probably could do the same with Men and Lip. hehe
I prefer a Lutz-less program for Ladies if it's because of bad jumping technique, than a quad-less program for men, because they are afraid of under-rotation.

I know that some (many?) of the 50 attempts in 2007 were not "true Lutzes". Some of them were flutzed, some were underrotated, some ended with a fall and some - all of the above. The thing is - the skaters of 2007 took the risk. The skaters of 2012 didn't. Obviously the issue is risk assessment. It's not as if ladies forgot how to Lutz (or flutz) in the past couple of years. And if it is risk assessment then surely the system can find a way to fix itsef, make the risk more manageable.

Here's what I don't understand, and why I listed the quad attempts as an illustartion. We all know that the original base value for the quad was too low. Yes, there is a risk factor in the jump, especially in the SP, which is why the steepest decline was in that part. The ISU finally recognized that, after Buttle won in 2008, but as it raised the BV it also increased the penalties. Result? Even fewer attempts in 2009 and 2010. After Lysacek's win in Oly10, they finally revised both BV and GoE factoring and the result is there for all to see. (Imagine if Plushy won in Vancouver - they probably wouldn't have changed the SoV table...).

Now, the BV of the Lutz hasn't changed since the beginning of CoP - and Lutz attmepts were unchaged from 2005 to 2008. GoE factoring did change, in the 2010 revision, so now the penalty for a flutz is lower (a -1 GoE is -0.7 in actuality, not -1.0 as it was before). Same with underrotating - with the 70% rule it is less risky to try for the harder jumps. Also, the new revision lowered the BV of the flip - thus increasing the advantge of incorporating a Lutz over a flip into a program. Despite all of these mathematical considerations, Lutz attempts are still declining.

I know that it makes more sense, mathematically, to do 3T+3T (8.2) than a 3Lz+2T (7.3) in the SP. But there is still another triple there - wouldn't it make more sense to do 3Lz (6.0) than a 3Lp (5.1)? Yet few skaters do.

[Aussie Willy]

I am not sure that the fact there is less ladies doing the lutz is actually a problem. That is matter of perception for those who would like to see more skaters doing it. I don't have a problem with it. Skaters have a choice. Those that do it successfully have the opportunity to earn higher points. Those that don't will miss out.

However that IJS now recognises all aspects of skating can earn something provides skaters an opportunity to really excell at those things they do well (spinning is one of them). Skaters may not feel so pressured to attempt a lutz because they can earn points in other things.

[Vagabond]

Now, the BV of the Lutz hasn't changed since the beginning of CoP - and Lutz attmepts were unchaged from 2005 to 2008. GoE factoring did change, in the 2010 revision, so now the penalty for a flutz is lower (a -1 GoE is -0.7 in actuality, not -1.0 as it was before). Same with underrotating - with the 70% rule it is less risky to try for the harder jumps. Also, the new revision lowered the BV of the flip - thus increasing the advantge of incorporating a Lutz over a flip into a program. Despite all of these mathematical considerations, Lutz attempts are still declining.

I know that it makes more sense, mathematically, to do 3T+3T (8.2) than a 3Lz+2T (7.3) in the SP. But there is still another triple there - wouldn't it make more sense to do 3Lz (6.0) than a 3Lp (5.1)? Yet few skaters do.

If I am not mistaken, these rules still apply: Scale of Values for Figure Skating Jumps, Scale of Values, and Determination of Grades of Execution.

When the edge on a lutz is clearly incorrect, a judge is supposed to take a deduction of at least -2 on the element, and the final GoE must be negative. When the edge is unclear, the judge is supposed to make a deduction of -1 or -2, but the final GoE need not be negative.

If a skater has a clearly incorrect edge on her triple lutz, the best she can hope for on the element is 5.3 points, and she will get no more than 4.6 unless she can somehow earn back that extra 0.7 points.

On the other hand, if she can do a clean triple loop, she will receive at least 5.1 points. The Scale of Values clearly favors doing a clean loop over an obvious flutz, so why would you do an obvious flutz if you could do a clean loop?

[Cherub721]

With all the about flutzing in the 2000s, I guess people thought that if the ISU penalized wrong edges, that skaters would just learn the correct takeoffs, but what do you know, it isn't that easy! So the result is many ladies will just omit the jump that gets the edge call.

IMO the real solution has nothing to do with the value of the lutz or flip or the deduction for the wrong edge or underrotation. The answer should be to factor the jumps in a combination by their relative value. The second jump gets factored higher than the second (because 3toe-3loop is more difficult than 3loop-3toe). It will become much more advantageous to do 3lutz-3toe or 3flip-3toe in the long program, and then we will start seeing them in the short as skaters become consistent.

[briancoogaert]

With all the about flutzing in the 2000s, I guess people thought that if the ISU penalized wrong edges, that skaters would just learn the correct takeoffs, but what do you know, it isn't that easy! So the result is many ladies will just omit the jump that gets the edge call.

IMO the real solution has nothing to do with the value of the lutz or flip or the deduction for the wrong edge or underrotation. The answer should be to factor the jumps in a combination by their relative value. The second jump gets factored higher than the second (because 3toe-3loop is more difficult than 3loop-3toe). It will become much more advantageous to do 3lutz-3toe or 3flip-3toe in the long program, and then we will start seeing them in the short as skaters become consistent.

I agree with your combo rule. I don't think it's logical to have same base value for a jump in combo or solo.
Anyway, I was one of those who didn't like Flutz in the 2000's. And I still don't like them. Really, Fumie Suguri or Alena Leonova were doing four 3Flip in their LP !

[mikemba]

I think that a major reason for the decrease in women's Lutzes has to do with the numerous flaws with the IJS. A woman can win without a Lutz because 1) the Lutz is not scored high enough compared to easier jumps (likewise the Axel is not scored high enough relative to the Lutz, but that's a different problem) and 2) PCS makes up too much ground, in my opinion, for women who are weak technically.

10 years ago I never thought I would see a World or US National Champion who won without a Lutz. Yet Carolina won the former last year and Ashley won the latter this year. Not to pick on Ashley, but her lack of a Lutz (she planned none in the short and only 1 in the long and fell on it) didn't hurt her for 2 reasons: her other jumps scored too high relative to some women who did 2 or 3 Lutzes, and her PCS scores overcompensated for her lack of difficulty.

Until the IJS changes to accurately reflect the difference in difficulty among the jumps, and to reward the most technically difficult programs, we will continue to see women win the gold with technical content that would not have won a bronze 10 years ago.

(Just a little aside to illustrate how ridiculously out of line jump values are: A few years ago, sectionals in my area were televised. When the winner did a triple Salchow, touble toeloop, double loop combo at the end of her program, the announcer explained that this was worth almost as much as a triple Axel done in the first half. But the Salchow combo in the 2nd half is no where near as difficult as a triple Axel done at any time. Not only was the woman who landed the Salchow combo unable to do a triple Axel, she also was unable to do a triple Lutz, Flip, or Loop! Thus an enormous difference in difficulty is grossly under-accounted-for in the scoring. The value of the Lutz is just one problem among many, and it is making me lose interest in women's skating.)

[TheIronLady]

Thanks for compiling this.

I'm not sure what arguments there are against Cherub721's combo remedy. Many analysts have called out this flaw. It seemed to go against commonsense not to reward skaters for attempting greater difficulty in the second (or third) jump. Your remedy seems a sound one, but there must be a practical argument against it. Perhaps they want to avoid competitions being decided by jump order. I am not sure, but there must be reasoning against factoring the second jump. What is the particular ISU reasoning?

[Coco]

I don't understand how giving a bonus to the 2nd jump in the combo would incentivize 3z-3 whatever combos. To me, it would incentivize the easiest combinations that could finish with a 3t or 3l.

Making GOE a multiple of base value would give an incentive to those who try higher level triples.

COP was definintely designed by people paranoid about some Bonaly in '91 type winning everything by pulling off 7 triples from a standstill.

[TheIronLady]

I doubt they would make GOE a mutiple of base value because the one trend I can see is the ISU wants to take as much influence away from the judging panel as possible. I may not be thinking correctly about the arithmetic, but it seems like that would move back in that direction.

ETA: I am not critiquing the idea.

[Aussie Willy]

The base value of the 3lutz is 6.0
The base value of the 3flip is 5.3
The base value of the 3loop is 5.1

I think the difference between those jumps is an okay incentive to try it. For those who think it should be higher than it is now what should it be?

[antmanb]

(Just a little aside to illustrate how ridiculously out of line jump values are: A few years ago, sectionals in my area were televised. When the winner did a triple Salchow, touble toeloop, double loop combo at the end of her program, the announcer explained that this was worth almost as much as a triple Axel done in the first half. But the Salchow combo in the 2nd half is no where near as difficult as a triple Axel done at any time. Not only was the woman who landed the Salchow combo unable to do a triple Axel, she also was unable to do a triple Lutz, Flip, or Loop! Thus an enormous difference in difficulty is grossly under-accounted-for in the scoring. The value of the Lutz is just one problem among many, and it is making me lose interest in women's skating.)

But it doesn't even begin to make sense to compare the value of a three jump combination with a solo jump (the clue being one is three jumps the other is one). They are two different things completely and cannot be compared. You can only do one three jump combination in a programme and it is likely to be a high scoring element because of the fact three jumps are involved. I would say most people advocate making combinations worth more, not less because of the fact that second (and yes third jumps) in combination are more difficult than jump done in isolation.

[Cherub721]

I don't understand how giving a bonus to the 2nd jump in the combo would incentivize 3z-3 whatever combos. To me, it would incentivize the easiest combinations that could finish with a 3t or 3l.

To be clear, I was saying that both jumps in a combination should get a factor of some sort, but the second jump's factor should be higher. For example, you could give a 10% bonus on the first jump's BV and a 15% bonus on the second jump's BV.

[Triple Butz]

IMO the real solution has nothing to do with the value of the lutz or flip or the deduction for the wrong edge or underrotation. The answer should be to factor the jumps in a combination by their relative value. The second jump gets factored higher than the second (because 3toe-3loop is more difficult than 3loop-3toe). It will become much more advantageous to do 3lutz-3toe or 3flip-3toe in the long program, and then we will start seeing them in the short as skaters become consistent.

THIS.