The quad twist | Page 3 | Golden Skate

The quad twist

GarthAqua

On the Ice
Joined
Feb 14, 2018
not quite... and as a matter of fact, the technical level this year has been growing in singles.... to the point that we had two ladies in seniors doing 3a and the first ever landed quad in seniors ladies...

we had a whole discussion about this a year ago.... pretty much, some of the folks think that the ISU has stopped pairs evolution... even the teams who had 4twist or 4throws are no longer doing them (the knierims, sui-han, james-cipres, tarasova-morozov)

Quad throws are dangerous and I have no problem with ISU not encouraging pairs to do that.

But they pairs who can do quad twists are mostly consistent and the can get level 2 o 3 all the time. So don't know why the quad twist also got lower BV.
 

CanadianSkaterGuy

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
Quad throws are dangerous and I have no problem with ISU not encouraging pairs to do that.

But they pairs who can do quad twists are mostly consistent and the can get level 2 o 3 all the time. So don't know why the quad twist also got lower BV.

But there was a time that doing throw triples was considered dangerous. Pairs skaters have also hurt themselves on lifts (Totmianina/Marinin; Cain/Leduc), and yet they still continue doing them.

I'm not for the ISU deliberately discouraging quads. At this point if they want to discourage quads outright, they might as well make them the same BV as their triple counterparts or 0.1 point more. Either go all the way in making the BV pitifully low or actually make them worth trying - but don't dangle a carrot of a point or 2 more, when an easier, well-executed triple can score the same as an averagely executed quad. No point in risking that. But hey, at this point why do Axel and Reverse lifts, when there are much safer options! Force the pairs to do SBS sit spins instead of camel spins where they can slash each other (see Dube/Davison).
 

anonymoose_au

Insert weird opinion here
Record Breaker
Joined
Feb 22, 2014
Country
Australia
It is sad about the Quad Twist disappearing. T/M and the Chinese pairs aside, Katia and Harley from Australia were training it too! It would have been magic to see a pair from little old Australia doing one of the hardest moves in pairs
Epic!
 

vitamintea

On the Ice
Joined
Feb 14, 2018
It is sad about the Quad Twist disappearing. T/M and the Chinese pairs aside, Katia and Harley from Australia were training it too! It would have been magic to see a pair from little old Australia doing one of the hardest moves in pairs
Epic!

Agreed! I think it's generally "easier" for skaters from lesser-known feds to prove themselves and make a splash through technically difficult programs than going for artistry. Not to say that doing quads is easier, but it's flashier and gets more attention than a beautifully skated, artistic program. It's like a fast lane into greater recognition from judges and fans alike.
 

4everchan

Record Breaker
Joined
Mar 7, 2015
Country
Martinique
Agreed! I think it's generally "easier" for skaters from lesser-known feds to prove themselves and make a splash through technically difficult programs than going for artistry. Not to say that doing quads is easier, but it's flashier and gets more attention than a beautifully skated, artistic program. It's like a fast lane into greater recognition from judges and fans alike.

that was duhamel and radford strategy... and it worked for them... it also worked for James and Cipres.... to a certain extent... now we are back to not daring but flawless skating... and until they change the rules again, quads will be part of history
 

cuiniel

Rinkside
Joined
Mar 17, 2019
I was watching CBC's That Figure Skating Show, and Dylan Moskovitch talked about how he missed quad twists and throws in pairs skating. With quads taking over the men's and ladies' fields, why are they disappearing from pairs?
 

ladyjane

Medalist
Joined
Jun 26, 2012
Country
Netherlands
Although there definitely is something to be said in favour of flawless skating (I do recall Aljona and Bruno having big tricks in their arsenal which sadly more often than not did not work, but won the Olympics with perhaps a less risky but beautifully and flawlessly skated programme that had a spectacular triple twist), I do think it's a pity we don't even see people trying them anymore. Before Season 2018/2019 you could however get more points with a quad twist level 3, than for the perfect triple twist level 4 with maximum GOE (which would be lower than is now possible). No longer, so why risk it. Better strategy is to aim for the highest level. A pity though.
 

NaVi

Medalist
Joined
Oct 30, 2014
Thought about starting a new thread but I'll just bump up this old thread(and the quad throw thread).

When it comes to the debate on pair quads I'm firmly on the side of discouraging them because they're more risky, the women is less in control of them yet the one likely to be injured, and they make the discipline that's already has recruitment issues even more elitist. It would also further restrict the body types that elite pairs would need. I'm also not convinced that they are needed to "progress" the sport to differentiate top couples as I think it would be better to just add another jump pass whether throw or side by side.

The BV for pair quads was lowered after the 2016 Olympics and even before then many people thought they were undervalued for the difficulty. I'm mostly supportive of that devaluing. But now we have no one even thinking about doing them now. The way Duhamel/Radford and Kavaguti/Smirnov did not feel too unsafe to me.

But what if a successfully executed pairs quad counted as a GOE cushion or "insurance" on another element? That is, a successfully executed pairs quad would neutralize the negative GOE on one another element. For instance, if a pair pulls off a positive GOE quad twist and then one of them falls in the side by side jumps then the negative GOE for that jump element could be neutralized to zero. The GOE cushion would not provide any benefit if they go clean in the rest of their elements but would keep the pair in the hunt if one of their other elements had a major mistake.

I think doing this might make a pair or two think about trying quads without making others feel like they really need to go for them.
 

CanadianSkaterGuy

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
Thought about starting a new thread but I'll just bump up this old thread(and the quad throw thread).

When it comes to the debate on pair quads I'm firmly on the side of discouraging them because they're more risky, the women is less in control of them yet the one likely to be injured, and they make the discipline that's already has recruitment issues even more elitist. It would also further restrict the body types that elite pairs would need. I'm also not convinced that they are needed to "progress" the sport to differentiate top couples as I think it would be better to just add another jump pass whether throw or side by side.

The BV for pair quads was lowered after the 2016 Olympics and even before then many people thought they were undervalued for the difficulty. I'm mostly supportive of that devaluing. But now we have no one even thinking about doing them now. The way Duhamel/Radford and Kavaguti/Smirnov did not feel too unsafe to me.

But what if a successfully executed pairs quad counted as a GOE cushion or "insurance" on another element? That is, a successfully executed pairs quad would neutralize the negative GOE on one another element. For instance, if a pair pulls off a positive GOE quad twist and then one of them falls in the side by side jumps then the negative GOE for that jump element could be neutralized to zero. The GOE cushion would not provide any benefit if they go clean in the rest of their elements but would keep the pair in the hunt if one of their other elements had a major mistake.

I think doing this might make a pair or two think about trying quads without making others feel like they really need to go for them.
I think elements should be independent of each other. Under 6.0 a fall on a high risk quad or 3A (ladies) could still mean a 5.8 or 5.9 as a “bonus”. But better now to have each one separate and increase the BV on the twist and throws.
 

NaVi

Medalist
Joined
Oct 30, 2014
I think elements should be independent of each other. Under 6.0 a fall on a high risk quad or 3A (ladies) could still mean a 5.8 or 5.9 as a “bonus”. But better now to have each one separate and increase the BV on the twist and throws.

Thanks for replying. I just don't think increasing the BV is going to be in the works for a long time. And in fact, if it's done it won't last long. Too many injuries and restrictions on body types in a discipline that has difficulties in recruitment.
 

gliese

Final Flight
Joined
Oct 31, 2020
Country
United-States
But what if a successfully executed pairs quad counted as a GOE cushion or "insurance" on another element? That is, a successfully executed pairs quad would neutralize the negative GOE on one another element. For instance, if a pair pulls off a positive GOE quad twist and then one of them falls in the side by side jumps then the negative GOE for that jump element could be neutralized to zero. The GOE cushion would not provide any benefit if they go clean in the rest of their elements but would keep the pair in the hunt if one of their other elements had a major mistake.
Why would we create a whole new judging system just for pairs?
 
Top