"'Is this new BMW-designed sled the ultimate sledding machine for Langdon and Holcomb?' Leigh Diffey asked before the pair cruised to victory. I don’t know, but I know that sled is the ultimate Olympic Games product placement.." -- Jen Chaney
So if the skater stops before the halfway point, the bonus time could still kick in toward the end of the restarted section.
And if the skater stops after the halfway point, any bonuses awarded for elements after the halfway point and before the interruption would still apply.
I think we agree here. Maybe I'm not expressing myself clearly enough.
Let's say we're talking about a 4-minute senior ladies freeskate. The bonus period starts at 2:00.
If the skater stops at 3 minutes in, then she gets the bonus for every jump she did between 2:01 and 3:00 before stopping, but no bonus for any jump in the last minute that was skated after the break.
If the skater stops at 1:00, gets a break, and then resumes and skates for 3 minutes, then she should get the bonus for jumps that take place more than 2 minutes after she resumes (what would have been the 3:00 point in the program if she hadn't stopped becomes the 2:00 point in the post-break section).
If she stops exactly 2 minutes into the program, then she would not get a bonus period either before or after the break.
That would probably work, as long as the rules are clearly defined.
That's a very fair solution.
DORIS, you highlight an important part of the rules and judging that is such a sham in my opinion.
IN ORDER FOR A MUSIC DEDUCTION TO APPEAR IN THE PROTOCOLS, A MINIMUM OF 6 OF THE 9 JUDGES MUST HAVE VOTED FOR THE DEDUCTION, OTHERWISE IT DOES NOT APPEAR ON THE PROTOCOLS AT ALL.
I think it should be indicated regardless of the number of judges voting for the violation. The level of attention, insight and knowledge of the RULES and whether they have been violated is so variable. Yet we have seen so many programs where it is clear that rules, especially in Ice Dance, are being violated without consequence. Even judges on a panel at the judges' round tables which conclude every competition, may not become aware that as many as 5 of the judges had voted for the violation, as it does not appear on the protocols, if the referee (who conducts the round tables) chooses to ignore the subject (at their discretion).
The ISU wisely does not air its ambiguous laundry. Unless there is something to explain, it doesn't volunteer information. It is not a sham, but it is not transparent enough to the public. That is unfortunate but somewhat prudent. If President Putin would stop weighing in on judging decisions, maybe the ISU would not fear having an open judging system so much! I would fear the wrath a Russian KGB-trained dictator. Speaking seriously, I think more transparency should be on the ISU's agenda. Anonymous judging should be gradually phased out.
Last edited by TheIronLady; 03-10-2013 at 10:39 AM.
My post was related to this:
"Originally Posted by TheIronLady
What if their dresses fall off? I think the music should be stopped and they should be allowed to get the garment back on."
Rubleva and Shefer were the first example I could remember. They didn't stop and the referee did nothing. As far as I know there was no penalty.