U.S. Men in 2018 - articles & latest news

[mag]

No. Jumps are defined by entrance, exit and rotation. A triple anything except for the axel by definition is 1080 degrees. More or less and the jump was not done properly; over or under rotating is an error.

Exactly my point.

ETA: to add to what @wickedwitch said above. Skaters regularly lose a level for less than a 1/4 turn short in a spin wih 16 or more rotations. They may lose “only” 0.3 or 0.4, but we are talking about 1/4 or even 1/8 of a turn out of what is equivalent to the number of rotations in 4 quad jumps yet there never seems to be uproar about that.

 

[Tavi]

I think it’s inappropriate for Johnny and Tara - and Michael Weiss, who tweeted essentially the same thing - to be calling out the tech panel for doing its job. It’s one thing to disagree with a call. It’s another thing to imply that the tech panel is biased and is pursuing some hidden agenda to bury Vincent and prevent him making the GPF, punish Tom Z, or whatever the theory is. Given here’s no evidence of foul play here, it seems like they’re just trying to influence the calling in Vincent's favor - if not at this competition, then the next one. Do we really want Tara and Johnny and Michael Weiss, who - despite their achievements as elite skaters, are not trained to make these calls - influencing future results? Isn’t that what we’re trying to get away from?

Personally, I enjoyed both of Vincent’s programs but from what I saw, he did underotate a lot of jumps.

 

[shady82]

So should a 3.25 lutz or a 3.5 lutz get more points than a 3 lutz? Maybe we should just have a sliding scale that gives X points for each degree of rotation?

<< jumps get <.
< jumps get negative GOE at the discretion of the judges.

 

[mag]

<< jumps get <.
< jumps get negative GOE at the discretion of the judges.

Thanks. I think I need to find that sarcasm emoji.

 

[misskarne]

Rotation should matter... but a quarter turn on the ice with your foot (on the most difficult elements that most skaters aren't even attempting) means you go from 2nd placement to 5th placement, contender to out of the final, just seems a bit of an over-correction.

That may seem harsh if it was just one "quarter turn on the ice with your foot". But it wasn't just one. It was seven in total across both programs. That's not harsh to drop a skater down for that.

The final margin was very tight and Vincent could have also finished higher if he didn't take 33 seconds to take his position for the SP, too. (Yes, I timed it. Leniently.) And that one's 100% on him. You can't conspiracy-theory your way out of that one.

 

[toddlj]

That may seem harsh if it was just one "quarter turn on the ice with your foot". But it wasn't just one. It was seven in total across both programs. That's not harsh to drop a skater down for that.

The final margin was very tight and Vincent could have also finished higher if he didn't take 33 seconds to take his position for the SP, too. (Yes, I timed it. Leniently.) And that one's 100% on him. You can't conspiracy-theory your way out of that one.

No conspiracy theorist here. I simply think the penalty for UR is too harsh. My opinion, which I am entitled to.
ETA: I'm suggesting a subtle shift in the penalty percentage.

 

[shady82]

No conspiracy theorist here. I simply think the penalty for UR is too harsh. My opinion, which I am entitled to.

The arguments supporting the UR penalty here are all rather poor. Saying "we cannot reward jumps fully that aren't properly executed" is not much of an argument and misses the point.

Why should a UR cost more than an overrotated jump?
Why should a UR cost more than a jump with a touch down?
Why should a UR cost more than a fully rotated jump with a fall?

These things happen regularly in scoring. Unless there's a decent answer to these questions, I continue to remain unconvinced.

 

[misskarne]

The arguments supporting the UR penalty here are all rather poor. Saying "we cannot reward jumps fully that aren't properly executed" is not much of an argument and misses the point.

Why should a UR cost more than an overrotated jump?
Why should a UR cost more than a jump with a touch down?
Why should a UR cost more than a fully rotated jump with a fall?

These things happen regularly in scoring. Unless there's a decent answer to these questions, I continue to remain unconvinced.

Because things like the occasional over-rotation, step outs, hands down, falls etc are mistakes. They could happen to any skater at any time. A slight loss of concentration, a camera flash, a slip on takeoff.

But under-rotation, particularly where it is chronic, is not a mistake, it's poor jump technique. It is a skater doing the jump incorrectly. And it needs to be punished harshly in order to disincentiveise it and stamp it out.

 

[aftershocks]

Eh, the tech panel and the judging panel all have conflicts of interest. The U.S. don't know how to politically protect any of their skaters in the first place. While clearly some of Vincent's jumps were URs, he was also overly harshly judged. There's no question of that. In the ladies program, we also see the overdone, overly harsh reviewing of Bradie's jumps while turning a blind eye to reviewing similar close landings by Satoko (who is a great artist and deserved to win, but whose jumps have generally always been forgiven). Satoko has improved, but still why aren't her jumps under review? The new system is really going to do a number on standings what with political manipulation and massaging for some skaters and not for others.

How are they calling jumps UR for Vincent and Bradie with only one camera position, and calling URs from the opposite end of the rink too? I think both Bradie and Vincent are being made examples of, while other skaters are not as scrutinized. Plus, the ISU in general with these new rules are asking skaters to be perfect, when the technical content expected of them is OTT difficult enough. But yet the ISU don't understand how important training figures is to improving basic skating skills. They over-emphasize and reward jumps, without understanding how to improve the way skaters are trained.

 

[mackiecat]

The TS fit the men’s event was Scott Davis, an American. Why would he be biased against an American skater

A lot of skaters got under rotations called. Wasn’t the only woman with no under call an American skater

 

[Tavi]

Since none of us saw what the TP saw, how is it possible for any of us to say that the judging of Vincent or any other skater was wrong or overly harsh?

Whether the rules are smart or whether the TP should have more than one view is another question. But as long as the same standards are being applied to everyone, it really shouldn’t matter that much.

 

[mag]

While clearly some of Vincent's jumps were URs, he was also overly harshly judged. There's no question of that. In the ladies program, we also see the overdone, overly harsh reviewing of Bradie's jumps while turning a blind eye to reviewing similar close landings by Satoko

Yes, there is a “question about that.” What do you think we have been discussing? Many of us could see the under rotations in real time. The fact that some couldn’t see them does not negate the fact that they were there, seen by many.

Bradie was not harshly reviewed. They showed the Lutz Loop combo in the slow mo’s at the end. It was clear again in real time that the combo should be reviewed. PJ Kwong, who is about as unbiased a commentator as you can get and who had Bradie picked to win SA even after the short, noted the under rotations. It is not surprising. Bradie missed that combo in the short. She probably was just a bit tentative or tight and the jump ended up short. It happens. As for Satoko, I have been a very harsh critic of her jumps but they looked good to me (not that it matters) but apparently the tech panel agreed. That doesn’t mean they weren’t reviewed and it doesn’t mean there won’t be problems next time.

 

[aftershocks]

ut as long as the same standards are being applied to everyone, it really shouldn’t matter that much.

Okay, status quo apologists. You've got middle of the road consensus and the ISU on your side. Obviously, Bradie and Vincent have to make it so that the judges stop reviewing their jumps. The difficulty is that when you get that reputation it's hard to shake, because whenever the judges review, they are going to find something.

It doesn't matter if the tech specialist on men's side is an American. Lots of Americans bend over backwards trying to be fair, and Vincent did have some URs. And Davis was not the only tech specialist on the panel. I think in general there is a prevalent attitude within the skating community that U.S. athletes somehow have advantages other athletes don't have, which is not always the case. More attention needs to be paid to making the sport better for all athletes.

In terms of politics, European-bloc judging was notorious down through the years. And clearly country-based politics and quid pro quo politics and conflicts of interest on judging panels are quite ingrained in the history of the sport, right down to today. There's a p.r. front about everything being fair, but the politics still goes on behind-the-scenes in different ways. I don't see any of that changing. How one rises in the sport is not just through talent, it's also through rep, buzz, political advantage, and luck. I'm sure many judges' intent is to be as fair as possible, but there are simply too many built-in factors allowing manipulation of scores, especially when competitions are tight.

The skaters realize they have to keep their heads-down and their noses to the grindstone and smile and say all the right things, so Bradie and Vincent will not be complaining. Overall, U.S. skaters did well at SA, with Hub/Don, Lorraine/Quinn, and Nathan as stand-outs, (and C/L toughing it out for a bronze medal) but generally SA was not the greatest competition, and some of the judging as usual was suspect. I guess as the first GP, it's generally the case that SA ends up with skaters still working out some kinks in their performances. Let's face it though, when you get a rep for being reviewed for URs, that makes no margin for error even that much harder, especially under this new scoring system.

Satoko is such a gorgeous skater overall, that the judges clearly in the past have turned a blind eye and not given her URs. That's a fact whether you agree or not. Bradie clearly had URs, but I think some of the calls were too close to call on Bradie. And there is definitely a problem with the use of only one camera. There is no excuse for that. I agree with Michael Weiss on that point.

 

[Tavi]

Okay, status quo apologists. You've got middle of the road consensus and the ISU on your side. Obviously, Bradie and Vincent have to make it so that the judges stop reviewing their jumps. The difficulty is that when you get that reputation it's hard to shake, because whenever the judges review, they are going to find something.

It doesn't matter if the tech specialist on men's side is an American. Lots of Americans bend over backwards trying to be fair, and Vincent did have some URs. And Davis was not the only tech specialist on the panel. I think in general there is a prevalent attitude within the skating community that U.S. athletes somehow have advantages other athletes don't have, which is not always the case. More attention needs to be paid to making the sport better for all athletes.

In terms of politics, European-bloc judging was notorious down through the years. And clearly country-based politics and quid pro quo politics and conflicts of interest on judging panels are quite ingrained in the history of the sport, right down to today. There's a p.r. front about everything being fair, but the politics still goes on behind-the-scenes in different ways. I don't see any of that changing. How one rises in the sport is not just through talent, it's also through rep, buzz, political advantage, and luck. I'm sure many judges' intent is to be as fair as possible, but there are simply too many built-in factors allowing manipulation of scores, especially when competitions are tight.

The skaters realize they have to keep their heads-down and their noses to the grindstone and smile and say all the right things, so Bradie and Vincent will not be complaining. Overall, U.S. skaters did well at SA, with Hub/Don, Lorraine/Quinn, and Nathan as stand-outs, (and C/L toughing it out for a bronze medal) but generally SA was not the greatest competition, and some of the judging as usual was suspect. I guess as the first GP, it's generally the case that SA ends up with skaters still working out some kinks in their performances.

Umm. No need for conspiracy theories. I look at it a little more simply:

- if you < your jumps, fix it.
- if you didn’t < your jumps but the TP wrongly thought you did, tweak the placement of your jumps in the program so that the TP can clearly see that they were fully rotated.

Ta da. The end.

 

[aftershocks]

No need for conspiracy theories.

Yep, the good 'ol resort to bringing up conspiracy theories. I never said anything about conspiracies. European-bloc judging was conducted openly. There was no need for any elaborate conspiracies. That whole cheating system is obviously no longer in play. But that doesn't mean politics and buzz, and how skaters are viewed at practices, and the country-based competitive system and conflicts of interest among judges, and PCS manipulation doesn't play a role in skater placements at competitions.

Also, the media ultimately plays a role in smoothing over results in order to protect the status quo system that's in place. It's a tough sport, and there will always be controversies surrounding scoring. It's only gong to get worse, not better as the season progresses, what with all the new rules, and particularly the GOE spread, not to mention the UR over-scrutiny based on one camera angle.

And I already said that Vincent and Bradie know they have to focus on trying to make it clear their jumps should not be under review. Easier said than done.

 

[mag]

Bradie and Vincent have to make it so that the judges stop reviewing their jumps

When exactly did Bradie get a reputation for under rotating? If anything she has the opposite. I know you will find this hard to believe, but it is just possible that the jumps looked questionable in real time so they got reviewed. Shocking, I know!

 

[aftershocks]

When exactly did Bradie get a reputation for under rotating? If anything she has the opposite. I know you will find this hard to believe, but it is just possible that the jumps looked questionable in real time so they got reviewed. Shocking, I know!

Obviously, Bradie now has the reputation. Some of her jumps were called UR at Worlds which kept her down in the standings to make room for other ladies. When Bradie burst through at Skate America last year, her jumps looked solid. Maybe some nerves set in later on. But I think Bradie was purposely harshly judged at Worlds, and so was Mirai. Once the judges start reviewing, you begin to get a reputation. And maybe you also become nervous about not URing, which might lead to URing. Who knows. What comes first, the chicken or the egg?

I don't think all the jumps called UR for Bradie or for Vincent at SA were all URs. Some were too close to call. And often, the angle is such that judges seem to err on the side that goes against skaters. Obviously, since she's been called for URs at every competition since Worlds, that I'm aware of, Bradie is not going to miraculously drop that reputation until or unless the tech panels stop feeling it's necessary to review her jumps.

 

[misskarne]

The difficulty is that when you get that reputation it's hard to shake, because whenever the judges review, they are going to find something.

Only if there's something there to find.

 

[Vagabond]

The difficulty is that when you get that reputation it's hard to shake, because whenever the judges review, they are going to find something.

The difficulty is that when your jump technique causes you to underrotate, you get the reputation for having poor jumping technique. Shake the technical deficiency, and you will shake the reputation soon enough.

 

[mag]

Obviously, Bradie now has the reputation.

You are unbelievable. Bradie just beat a two time world champion and Olympic silver medalist. If some powerful group really wanted to hold her down they could have propped up Med and no one would have been the wiser. If anything Bradie has a reputation as a solid jumper with nerves of steel who has taken full advantage of the off season to work extremely hard to improve her PCS.

 

[lurkz2]

Obviously, Bradie now has the reputation. Some of her jumps were called UR at Worlds which kept her down in the standings to make room for other ladies. When Bradie burst through at Skate America last year, her jumps looked solid. Maybe some nerves set in later on. But I think Bradie was purposely harshly judged at Worlds, and so was Mirai. Once the judges start reviewing, you begin to get a reputation. And maybe you also become nervous about not URing, which might lead to URing. Who knows. What comes first, the chicken or the egg?

I don't think all the jumps called UR for Bradie or for Vincent at SA were all URs. Some were too close to call. And often, the angle is such that judges seem to err on the side that goes against skaters. Obviously, since she's been called for URs at every competition since Worlds, that I'm aware of, Bradie is not going to miraculously drop that reputation until or unless the tech panels stop feeling it's necessary to review her jumps.

I don't think Bradie has developed a reputation for URs. Most commentators seem to note that her recent URs seem to be because she is still getting used to upgraded tech (she replaced her 3Lz-3T with a 3Lz-3Lo this season).

Not being an apologist but, right or wrong, the changes in the ISU Rules are usually in response to something that was prevalent in the previous quad. Last quad people were placing a lot of jumps they could rarely pull off successfully or chronically UR. This quad, they've decided to be more strict about that to discourage this practice and this was communicated to everyone. Skaters already knew (or should have known) that jumps UR by a quarter that would have been called clean last season would now be called UR.

 

[Marco]

I think Nathan is smart to pace himself. There is no need to try a bunch of things that he isn't ready for. At this stage he can rely on PCS and GOE on well executed triples, plus he still landed some quads, to win convincingly. He should perhaps add in another quad or two by GPF / Nationals and then slowly work towards peaking at Worlds. Unless he bombs a skate somewhere, he doesn't need to go to 4CCs. I am still warming up to the free skate but am already in love with the short on first viewing. More than anything, I am glad he is branching out stylistically and selling it.

I felt the ur call on Vincent Zhou's lutz in the short was 'uncalled for', but the ur calls in the free were quite obvious and deserved. He actually could have still won the bronze if not for the time deduction in the short. I remember skaters have up to a minute after their names being called to take starting position - has it been changed to 30 seconds?

 

[misskarne]

He actually could have still won the bronze if not for the time deduction in the short. I remember skaters have up to a minute after their names being called to take starting position - has it been changed to 30 seconds?

It's been 30 seconds for at least 4 years.

We're also ignoring the real controversy here - the USFS ordering Jimmy Ma to ditch the wonderful FS that he loved for that absolute trainwreck of a Rach FS.

 

[jlai]

To be fair, Jimmy did the Rach program quite well at US Figure Skating Classic and no one was dissing it then or all of last year. And Jimmy also said he loves Rach too.

That said, if Ma wants a new program, let him be.

 

[aftershocks]

the USFS ordering Jimmy Ma to ditch the wonderful FS that he loved for that absolute trainwreck of a Rach FS.

Yeah, I saw the Skate Talk Online video of Jimmy discussing how he was disappointed at being advised to drop his initial fp, choreographed by Joshua Farris too.

 

[aftershocks]

The difficulty is that when your jump technique causes you to underrotate, you get the reputation for having poor jumping technique. Shake the technical deficiency, and you will shake the reputation soon enough.

Eh it's not as much jump technique as it is nerves, as some posters in-the-know were discussing awhile back in a Mirai thread. Then it can become a bad habit that's hard to break, so URs are not as simple to fix as you are making it seem.

Only if there's something there to find.

With only one camera angle, the judges are clearly handicapped. In some cases, the 'something there' is often what they are assuming is there, especially when it's too close to call and they decide to call against the skater anyway.

 

[CoolGuy]

I felt the ur call on Vincent Zhou's lutz in the short was 'uncalled for', but the ur calls in the free were quite obvious and deserved.

It's hard to tell, especially because NBC's slow motion replay wasn't really slow motion; however, going frame by frame shows this:

https://i.imgur.com/rfyOOnq.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/jOibOHF.jpg

The TS made the right call.

 

[Foolhardy Ham Lint]

I think Nathan is smart to pace himself. There is no need to try a bunch of things that he isn't ready for. At this stage he can rely on PCS and GOE on well executed triples, plus he still landed some quads, to win convincingly. He should perhaps add in another quad or two by GPF / Nationals and then slowly work towards peaking at Worlds. Unless he bombs a skate somewhere, he doesn't need to go to 4CCs. I am still warming up to the free skate but am already in love with the short on first viewing. More than anything, I am glad he is branching out stylistically and selling it.

Agreed. Considering where he was only a few weeks ago at the Japan Open, this was a huge step up.

The program's jump layout seems to indicate that at some point, it may include five or six quadruple jumping passes along with the required triple axel. That he has earned perhaps the highest men's free skating score under the revised IJS so far this season, speaks volumes about his development as a skater, and how the judges are ready to view him.

 

[Jaana]

misskarne: I'm not surprised those two idiots got it wrong, but I'm more miffed about people who should know better, like his coaches and Jackie, joining the narrative that poor Vincent was robbed and the evil tech panel made things up.

After pondering about the matter I think that Zhou´s coaches had a good strategy of not seeing (or admitting) his UR´s. Better this way and continue working to get his jumps fully rotated. LOL, just remembering that famous Plushenko article about transitions...

I also believe that the technical panel has a much better and surer possibility to spot UR´s than Weir & Lipinki or the rest.

 

[clairecloutier]

Tom Zakrajsek wrote a detailed post about Vincent's jumps at Skate America. He calls for the ISU to have better video equipment: https://www.facebook.com/CoachTomZ/videos/323866178417034/