Rescoring of 2010 Olympics | Page 13 | Golden Skate

Rescoring of 2010 Olympics

CanadianSkaterGuy

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
He wasn't wrong. It was his ideal that he wouldn't compromise, no matter what. He said he was happy to have won a medal at all after coming back from such an awful injury (and I think his genuine joy and the happy tears he cried are proof that he actually meant it). He also stated that he doesn't think he would have been content had he won without attempting a quad. He was fine with the result and he made history anyway, just like the two OBMs after him did. :)

I’m glad he did medal - he deserved to be higher than Lambiel and not that close, even with the technical deficiencies. Winning of course is a different matter since Lysacek and Plushenko clearly outskated him. If we are considering figure skating as an Olympic *sport*, Takahashi really deserved no higher than 3rd - maaaybe 2nd because many of Plushenko’s jumps were off and not their usual standard of execution. If we are considering it an art/exhibition skate then by all means give him the gold.

I give him credit for going for broke with the quad - he knew he needed it to win. Unfortunately he badly executed it and got almost no credit -sure the system was flawed but everyone was playing under the same rules and if he wasn’t rotating his quad then it wasn’t worth the risk. One of the greatest skaters ever - but not the greatest in the 2010 Olympics.
 

Blades of Passion

Skating is Art, if you let it be
Record Breaker
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Country
France
If we are considering figure skating as an Olympic *sport*, Takahashi really deserved no higher than 3rd - maaaybe 2nd because many of Plushenko’s jumps were off and not their usual standard of execution. If we are considering it an art/exhibition skate then by all means give him the gold.

Figure skating is judged in part on the art displayed by the competitors; it's foolish to continually try and ignore that aspect. Takahashi wasn't far behind technically anyway; according to most judges of this scoring exercise he was technically superior to Lysacek in the SP (including yourself). Even if he's getting 0 points for his quad attempt in the LP, Lysacek only did a 0 GOE double axel in comparison. Lysacek's extra 2Axel and 2Lo in the LP isn't enough to make up for the PCS deficit and the SP deficit.

In fact, *your own scores* for GOE + PCS (every element besides the quad) are 5.6 points higher for Takahashi than Lysacek. Lysacek only has a 4.18 point base value advantage over Takahashi even with that quad attempt receiving 0 points (he gains 3.5 from the double axel in comparison, 1.5 from the 2Lo combo, loses 0.5 on footwork/spins between both programs, and 0.32 for less jump content in the 2nd half of the LP). Your own GOE and PCS put Takahashi as the winner in this scoring exercise, with the decided upon technical calls!

Interestingly, I was the only judge to give Takahashi a 0 GOE for his jump combo in the SP (which was not rotated better than his 3-3 in the LP) and his last spin in the SP. Also the only judge to not give him a +3 anywhere. In total you gave him 0.1 point less in GOE across both programs than I did, essentially identical, and 1.5 points more in PCS.

This panel as a whole, compared to the 2010 panel, had a 9.5 point higher differential between Takahashi and Lysacek on GOE/PCS. That's a huge difference and far exceeds the tech panel corrections (which, again, were reviewed and agreed upon). Even with no tech panel adjustment, 5 out of 9 judges on this panel still score Takahashi higher than Lysacek!

While watching this competition one of the things that stood out to be was how much smoother Chan was than almost anyone else, it was evident especially in sections of the short program. Having gone back and watched that it was clear to me the way some aspects of skating skills have evolved in the past 10 years.

I don't see Chan being smoother than Kozuka though, nor better in total skating skill here. Where, exactly, do you see this in the performances? Chan also had a clear stumble in the footwork in the SP (both of them had a minor slip in the LP footwork, also). Kozuka's edges and glide over the ice are outstanding; looking at what he's getting from the blade I don't see any less than what Chan showed. His ability to do deep curved edges with long lobes was especially apparent in the LP; I saw a bit more there from him than Chan. I'd also very much like to hear how Chan's performance quality and interpretation of Phantom of the Opera was better than Kozuka's soulful LP.

It's strange how certain people (not you) keep repeating stories about Chan doing figures when he was younger and training that aspect of his skating so much, when Kozuka also did a ton of figures and extensive skating skills training ever since was young, coached by experts who prioritized those aspects. There is a political slant here that needs to be addressed. Chan was actively pushed by Canada as a "champion", more than Kozuka was, and was himself more outspoken (also thanks to being able to speak fluent English). Then when Chan suddenly developed a relatively consistent quad, the reputation scoring just exploded and it was treated as if nobody else knew how to skate in comparison to him, and as if this aspect overruled everything else which is supposed to constitute artistry and performance, or other technical capabilities in skating.

--

Lmao this is hilarious given that Takahashi’s quad landed forward and was close to being downgraded.

It wasn't landed forward whatsoever, by any metric. He's more sideways than forward and, additionally, he starts the rotation on his quad earlier. His actual air rotation is more than a large number of quads which received no call at all. He's doing 3.3 rotations (and can be seen as at least 3.25 "creditable" rotations), and many others have been credited with the base of 3.25, or even much less, when tech panels don't properly look at pre-rotation and then decide to call a jump with 3 air rotations as a successful quad.

Lysacek has had a slew of quads that have been ratified including both programs at the 2007 GPF, 2007 4CC FS and 2008 4CC SP. Yes there was some pre-rotation but the landing is what is most important. He certainly landed with greater rotation than Takahashi’s 2010 quad. If Lysacek didn’t land his quads backwards then none of his quads would have ever been ratified

His 2007 4CC quad was definitely short (pre-rotated at least .6 of a turn and comes down .25 short, for a total of 3.15 rotations in the air at most) but the panel gave it to him. The landing is not inherently "the most important" either: if you pre-rotate 3/4 of a turn (1/4 more than should be allowed) and then landed perfectly "backwards", that is the exact same, in terms of counting rotation, as landing what appears to be "1/4 short" from a takeoff with only 1/2 turn pre-rotation. It makes no sense to judge the ending of something with no perspective at all for where it started. When you are drawing a circle or any line, the ending point can only exist in relation to where it started. That is a fact. Figure skating does not alter the laws of physics and mathematics.

Lysacek would usually land sideways on his quad, and always short of backwards. It's incorrect to say "if he didn't land backwards, his quads wouldn't have been ratified", because a perfectly backwards landing is not required for credit. When combined with the amount he pre-rotated (always at least 1/2 turn, usually more), Lysacek never did a quad in competition that was more than about 3.25 rotations in the air...usually less. Takahashi's quad rotation was truly not worse than a quad attempt that pre-rotates 1/2 turn and then comes down 1/4 short, which the rules would credit.

Takahashi's longstanding issue is his jumps don't have the speed nor the amplitude of the other skaters and this is reflected in his GOE; particularly on his toe jumps he lacks flow. It's why his 3F+3T< was underrotated

Takahashi had excellent amplitude and usually good speed on his jumps. Obviously he didn't execute every jump perfectly all the time. His 3F+3T was NOT more than 1/4 underrotated, and speed/amplitude would have nothing to do with calling such a thing; that shows a big misunderstanding of mechanics. The actual "issue" with Takahashi's toe jumps is that he pre-rotated less, making it so he rotated more in the air than other people, and thus more difficult to land; tech panels usually failed to recognize this (and had big issues in general with calling things properly).

And it makes no sense to diss Lysacek’s continuous inside edge change on his spin, as there’s nothing wrong with repeating a feature (a subtle one to ensure sufficient rotations at that) - from what I recall you extol Arakawa’s gold from 2006 but haven’t ever slammed her for doing a donut position in each one of her four spins. I suppose if it’s Lysacek though the tune changes.

It makes perfect sense, because choreography matters and positions matter for assigning GOE. It's not only his easier repeated edge change, but his easier and uninteresting repeated sit positions. A beautiful donut position is more worthy than what he showed (particularly because it went better with the music). Arakawa also showed other positions that are harder than anything Lysacek did to get his levels. I never said Arakawa had perfect choreography, and there's many other variables to consider than this one thing, no need to straw man the discussion. Also, it's hardly an outlier or unreasonable opinion that Arakawa's program was better than Lysacek's.
 

synesthesia

Final Flight
Joined
Mar 1, 2014
Country
Germany
This is all true! Especially his apparent real joy at his medal. I just always wonder what if someone had Been able to convince him to not risk a zero which is what happened to him. One jumping pass with a lot of effort ended with zero. It’s admirable in some ways that it wasn’t possible. Then at worlds he didn’t try quad toe again but quad flip! So it’s apparent that having lysacek carroll mindset strategy wasn’t ever happening

I give him credit for going for broke with the quad - he knew he needed it to win. Unfortunately he badly executed it and got almost no credit -sure the system was flawed but everyone was playing under the same rules and if he wasn’t rotating his quad then it wasn’t worth the risk.

True, Dai had a relatively unconventional mindset for a competitive athlete. Of course there were outside expectations on him that he tried to meet as well, but he certainly had his own ideals, especially artistic ones but also his insistence on attempting quads, even when he had a success-rate of 0% in 2009/10 (5 attempts in competition) and of about 48 % from 2010/11 to 2013/14 (46 attempts in competition), which came before considerations of how to maximise his scoring potential and which he "stubbornly" wouldn't let go of even if that often was to the detriment of his placement. I understand not everyone agreed with his "no risk, no reward" approach, but he made these decisions for himself. He knew the risk and accepted the consequences gracefully.



Winning of course is a different matter since Lysacek and Plushenko clearly outskated him. If we are considering figure skating as an Olympic *sport*, Takahashi really deserved no higher than 3rd - maaaybe 2nd because many of Plushenko’s jumps were off and not their usual standard of execution. If we are considering it an art/exhibition skate then by all means give him the gold.

I wonder why you addressed that part at me? I didn't argue against any of these points. Though I would contest that Plushy clearly outskated him. He did, however, outjump Dai. I did my own rescoring of this competition a few years ago (top five only) - not because I doubted the podium ranking myself but because I often came across the opinion that the result was controversial and wanted to see where the original top finishers would end up, if I tried to score them as objectively as possible (being fully aware that a smidge of bias would be unavoidable like it is for all of us ;)). I too had Evan coming out on top like the original and the panel here did. I had Plush in 2nd - albeit barely ahead of Dai - thanks to his higher jump BV and skating clean.

There are three competitions in regards to which I felt Dai wasn't assessed fairly in relation to other competitors in a significant enough way to influence his final placement - the 2010 Olympics aren't one of them.



One of the greatest skaters ever - but not the greatest in the 2010 Olympics.

Agreed. :agree:
 

CanadianSkaterGuy

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
Yeah to clarify I meant outjumped - and considerably so. Everyone has their own opinions, but Plushenko had harder jump content (and did it) and Lysacek performed almost all his elements as well as he could have. Takahashi gave up points pursuing the quad in the FS. And he didn’t perform his jumps or spins to the best of his ability in the FS giving up valuable points on GOE, base value with the URs, and spin levels. But his performances were quality Olympic-podium worthy skates and I’m glad that him going for the quad didn’t compromise his spot on the podium after he had set himself up well after the SP.
 

gmyers

Record Breaker
Joined
Mar 6, 2010
I thought the whole message of judging of skating from 2008 to 2010 was no man needed a quad to win! So I don’t agree Takahashi needed a quad to win. He didn’t feel he could be proud of himself without trying one. And that was the whole problem! Of course he could have Badly Ured a triple too. Many times skaters have switched “easier” jumps For harder ones and messed up the easier one. So just to make the point again I don’t agree Takahahsi needed a quad to win he wanted a quad to be in a winning performance. Just look at the SP doing a quad triple was entirely irrelevant to getting a 90. Gave Plushenko no advantage. Was completely meaningless to COP. Doing a quad triple was the only thing keeping Plushenko competitive with takahashi and Lysacek. If no quad triple Plushenko probably down wirh oda and weir!
 

CanadianSkaterGuy

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
I thought the whole message of judging of skating from 2008 to 2010 was no man needed a quad to win! So I don’t agree Takahashi needed a quad to win. He didn’t feel he could be proud of himself without trying one. And that was the whole problem! Of course he could have Badly Ured a triple too. Many times skaters have switched “easier” jumps For harder ones and messed up the easier one. So just to make the point again I don’t agree Takahahsi needed a quad to win he wanted a quad to be in a winning performance. Just look at the SP doing a quad triple was entirely irrelevant to getting a 90. Gave Plushenko no advantage. Was completely meaningless to COP. Doing a quad triple was the only thing keeping Plushenko competitive with takahashi and Lysacek. If no quad triple Plushenko probably down wirh oda and weir!

You are right that Plushenko doing a quad is the one thing that kept him competitive with Lysacek, Takahashi, Joubert, and Lambiel. But that is assuming those guys actually executed their content perfectly he was vulnerable. If Plushenko went clean then this advantage often put him ahead easily, because often those guys would falter AND have lesser difficulty. The only time he got beat by any of them is if they brought their A game against him (which only Lysacek did, and Joubert once) and if Plushenko did not (he would have won 2010 if he did his double loop and less wild jumps in his FS that compromised his GOE).

Takahashi’s jump elements were much compromised after his injury and they just weren’t the quality of the other guys - other than his 3A he didn’t get much flow or amplitude on his other jumps (especially the second jumps on his combos) and the GOE in many of his competitions post 2009 reflects this. The lack of a quad wasn’t his only issue. He was kinda “hanging on” technically speaking (in 2014 Olympics his TES was very bad, 13th in each segment or something like that) but his PCS always kept him competitive. Takahashi’s errors like URs/downgrades/edge calls along with relatively modest jumping ability and thus lower GOE (did he get many +3 on jumping passes other than his 3A and sometimes his quad? I don’t recall so) and lack of a consistent quad prevented his ability to break away from the pack unless he skated cleanly which IIRC he never did at a major competition after 2009. He did push himself artistically though which makes him a legend in skating and it’s not about the jumps. Same goes with Lambiel who even with jump errors and constantly killing his BV by going for 2As stayed in the game with good artistry and great spins - but the jump issues/deficiencies would always make him vulnerable against an in-form Plushenko.

If Takahashi had a consistent quad and actually went for it in the SP and Lambiel had a consistent 3A and went for it in the SP and LP, they would have been true contenders for gold. Normally even without a quad I would have put them as likely to beat Lysacek/Plushenko but only if everything else was clean and Plushenko erred because their artistry would put them ahead of a clean Lysacek if they did all the rest clean but they were far from that in the 2010 Olympics whereas Lysacek was near perfect and deservedly was placed ahead of them. Plushenko definitely deserves credit for strong technical skates in his 2006 gold and 2010 silver but he is a bit fortunate that 2006 he had no competition as the guys couldn’t do a quad (or 3A in Lambiel’s case) so it was an easy path to victory for a consistent competitor like him regardless of his program, and in 2010 he also had that advantage. It’s not his fault that the other guys played it safe for the Olympics though - that’s on them, and even the ones who did play it safe couldn’t go clean. If 2008 Takahashi showed up, he would certainly have Olympic gold.
 

GS Forum Staff

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 11, 2008
Hello Posters in the "Rescoring of the 2010 Olympics" thread.

Please comply with Goldenskate guidelines:
https://www.goldenskate.com/forum/showthread.php?18607

Your opinions as "judges" of the event are welcome, but please refrain from baiting and bickering.

Also, please stay on topic. If you are discussing a skater with a long career (such as Patrick Chan) please confine discussions to the performances at the 2010 Olympics.

Thank you.
 

gmyers

Record Breaker
Joined
Mar 6, 2010
You are right that Plushenko doing a quad is the one thing that kept him competitive with Lysacek, Takahashi, Joubert, and Lambiel. But that is assuming those guys actually executed their content perfectly he was vulnerable. If Plushenko went clean then this advantage often put him ahead easily, because often those guys would falter AND have lesser difficulty. The only time he got beat by any of them is if they brought their A game against him (which only Lysacek did, and Joubert once) and if Plushenko did not (he would have won 2010 if he did his double loop and less wild jumps in his FS that compromised his GOE).

Takahashi’s jump elements were much compromised after his injury and they just weren’t the quality of the other guys - other than his 3A he didn’t get much flow or amplitude on his other jumps (especially the second jumps on his combos) and the GOE in many of his competitions post 2009 reflects this. The lack of a quad wasn’t his only issue. He was kinda “hanging on” technically speaking (in 2014 Olympics his TES was very bad, 13th in each segment or something like that) but his PCS always kept him competitive. Takahashi’s errors like URs/downgrades/edge calls along with relatively modest jumping ability and thus lower GOE (did he get many +3 on jumping passes other than his 3A and sometimes his quad? I don’t recall so) and lack of a consistent quad prevented his ability to break away from the pack unless he skated cleanly which IIRC he never did at a major competition after 2009. He did push himself artistically though which makes him a legend in skating and it’s not about the jumps. Same goes with Lambiel who even with jump errors and constantly killing his BV by going for 2As stayed in the game with good artistry and great spins - but the jump issues/deficiencies would always make him vulnerable against an in-form Plushenko.

If Takahashi had a consistent quad and actually went for it in the SP and Lambiel had a consistent 3A and went for it in the SP and LP, they would have been true contenders for gold. Normally even without a quad I would have put them as likely to beat Lysacek/Plushenko but only if everything else was clean and Plushenko erred because their artistry would put them ahead of a clean Lysacek if they did all the rest clean but they were far from that in the 2010 Olympics whereas Lysacek was near perfect and deservedly was placed ahead of them. Plushenko definitely deserves credit for strong technical skates in his 2006 gold and 2010 silver but he is a bit fortunate that 2006 he had no competition as the guys couldn’t do a quad (or 3A in Lambiel’s case) so it was an easy path to victory for a consistent competitor like him regardless of his program, and in 2010 he also had that advantage. It’s not his fault that the other guys played it safe for the Olympics though - that’s on them, and even the ones who did play it safe couldn’t go clean. If 2008 Takahashi showed up, he would certainly have Olympic gold.

2008 Takashasi didn’t have to show up at all. He just had to train a program without quads and never try quads and Get quads out of his mind. Like oda coached by Morozov did. Morozov said to Oda- never do quads at all at any point in the season. Never do them. Lysacek didn’t need quads and Buttle didn’t need quads so why was great quad performer Oda totally without any quads in 2009 and 2010? Because Morozov said never do them. They aren’t rewarded. Takashasi needed to be coached by a man like Morozov who was able to make oda never do quads
 

4everchan

Record Breaker
Joined
Mar 7, 2015
Country
Martinique
2008 Takashasi didn’t have to show up at all. He just had to train a program without quads and never try quads and Get quads out of his mind. Like oda coached by Morozov did. Morozov said to Oda- never do quads at all at any point in the season. Never do them. Lysacek didn’t need quads and Buttle didn’t need quads so why was great quad performer Oda totally without any quads in 2009 and 2010? Because Morozov said never do them. They aren’t rewarded. Takashasi needed to be coached by a man like Morozov who was able to make oda never do quads

I don't necessarily disagree with that statement: but what did Oda win? It's not like he had any success in big events like worlds/olympics. Perhaps Oda did need his quads after all....
 

CanadianSkaterGuy

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
2008 Takashasi didn’t have to show up at all. He just had to train a program without quads and never try quads and Get quads out of his mind. Like oda coached by Morozov did. Morozov said to Oda- never do quads at all at any point in the season. Never do them. Lysacek didn’t need quads and Buttle didn’t need quads so why was great quad performer Oda totally without any quads in 2009 and 2010? Because Morozov said never do them. They aren’t rewarded. Takashasi needed to be coached by a man like Morozov who was able to make oda never do quads

Did he really? That's unfortunate. He only landed one quad in the 2008-2009 season but it was in the freeskate at Worlds so it's not like he wasn't capable. I think he really needed it (well, obviously he did) if he was going to make a play at the podium. Like Kozuka his skating is very clean and he has nice soft landings but his artistry and programs still weren't at the level needed to legitimately challenge for a medal. A shame about the 3L, because he was otherwise one of the cleanest of the bunch. And when he's on, he just lights up the ice. The Japan Open 2018 was less than 2 years ago and he laid this down - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_ev3Ku6JAM - so sad that he couldn't do this 8 years earlier (and toss a 4T in the SP), because he could have potentially medaled or even won in Vancouver.
 

Blades of Passion

Skating is Art, if you let it be
Record Breaker
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Country
France
I don't necessarily disagree with that statement: but what did Oda win? It's not like he had any success in big events like worlds/olympics. Perhaps Oda did need his quads after all....

Oda would have 2 Bronze medals at Worlds, were it not for the dumb application of the zayak rule at the time. A clean skate definitely would have put him on the Olympic podium as well, given the way things were scored. I do wish he had gone for the Quad, though, because he had a better one than several of the other guys.
 

4everchan

Record Breaker
Joined
Mar 7, 2015
Country
Martinique
Oda would have 2 Bronze medals at Worlds, were it not for the dumb application of the zayak rule at the time. A clean skate definitely would have put him on the Olympic podium as well, given the way things were scored. I do wish he had gone for the Quad, though, because he had a better one than several of the other guys.

as i said before, not interested in would haves and what ifs... i know he lost major points with the zayak rule... but that's still his fault... skaters are responsible to follow the rules, even if they are sometimes silly.
 

CanadianSkaterGuy

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
as i said before, not interested in would haves and what ifs... i know he lost major points with the zayak rule... but that's still his fault... skaters are responsible to follow the rules, even if they are sometimes silly.

Agreed. While the Zayak penalties were harsh, everyone was playing under the same rules. It is astounding though how much the rules negatively affected Oda in particular.

But that is part of being an athlete - knowing the rules and being able to think on your feet.

And the rules are the rules. Some might say a time violation is silly or an extended lift deduction or a spin invalidated because a position wasn’t held but the reality is, these are all things within a skater’s control. Seeing as how it’s part of their livelihood they should train and be prepared for every scenario and know what does and does not compromise their ability to get the highest score possible. Of course, mistakes happen but blaming a system that happens to have astringent but still completely followable parameters is just covering for the skater’s own inability to adhere to the rules. Chan was a couple seconds late to his starting position in the 2010 SP on home ice at the Olympics - should that be worth a -1 deduction? Well according to the rules it is, so that’s on him not on the time violation rule being rather tight in the first place.
 

Blades of Passion

Skating is Art, if you let it be
Record Breaker
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Country
France
The zayak rule was absolutely never intended to punish skaters the way it did during those years of CoP. There wasn't anyone in the entire world who ever said "that guy deserves 0 points for his beautiful 3Axel+3Toe, just because he did a 3Toe instead of only a 1Toe." It was simply a terrible bug in the computer programming that should have been fixed all the way back in 2004, or 2005 at the latest, but instead took over a decade more to correct, because of how terrible the ISU is at recognizing and fixing the problems right in front of their face. It's still not even fully corrected to this day.

The bottom line is Oda would have won 2 World medals, without changing anything at all about how anyone skated or how the judges scored it or the overall rules of the scoring system, were it not for a ridiculous quirk in a computer program that nobody saw as justified. It's incorrect to compare this to an unheld spin position or even doing a lift too long or not getting on the ice in time, because those are things that either show a lack of a skill or give a competitor a possibly unfair advantage. Those deductions are also far smaller an entire 3Axel being given nothing.

as i said before, not interested in would haves and what ifs...

Then why did you opine on Oda doing a quad or not, if you have 0 interest in talking about different things a competitor could have done?

Regardless if you are interested or not, other people are, and it's necessary to engage in that line of thinking when having a discussion about planning or strategy or the validity of judgements/laws or the impact of history. Oda would have won an Olympic medal without a quad if he skated like he did at TEB that season. It's difficult to say if training the quad more would have been a benefit, because it very well could have taken time/energy away from focusing on the quality of his overall skating. He did try to do the quad at Nationals that season, but fell on it and was hit with a < call.

Curiously, I think it would have been smartest for him to focus on the quad for just the SP, after his showing at TEB. He had a LP that was working well, and introducing a quad there could easily upset the balance. The SP takes less energy however, so doing a quad there is a smaller toll on the rest of the program, and he needed something to make himself stand out more in that phase of competition. Particularly with the hard-driving SP he was trying to do, the quad would have matched that energy better. There's also less risk of a zayak issue in the SP, because you can still safely do a 3Toe+3Toe combo if you happen triple out on the quad attempt (unless you also have a bad landing, a very unfortunate situation, and another instance of a rule that I think should be changed - being allowed to do multiple 3Toe in the SP, as long as one is the first part of a jump element and the other is the back end. The same should apply to 3Loop too).
 

CanadianSkaterGuy

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
Just because a skater does something doesn't mean it deserves credit if it falls outside the rules. That's why the rules are there.

If a skater these days wants to do 2 quad salchow and 2 quad toes, they will now only get credit for 3 of those. If a skater does 2 beautiful 3As but because they neglect to do one in a combo, one of them doesn't get full credit even though it's perfectly done, because the rules state one must be done in combination otherwise deduction will be incurred. If a skater decides to do a 4th spin, they can, but will get no points for that since only the first 3 get credit. Or say a pairs teams wants to do a 2nd death spiral/twist or a SBS spin or 2 of the same throw in their freeskate - there is nothing stopping them from doing it, but the rules don't allow those to get points because of the nature of the parameters of what will and won't get counted.

As 4everchan said, sometimes the rules are silly but they are rules. Skaters need a framework for which they all have to follow. If Oda got credit for his Zayaked elements it's unfair to other skaters who have to adhere to the rules. Of course, I also think Oda DESERVES a world medal, but that can be applied to various skaters who performed well, but ranked or scored lower because of a particular rule. Extended lifts for example I think are a dumb reason to get deducted but those are the rules and if skaters don't follow that, deductions get incurred.

Blaming the judging or the IJS rules, etc. is removing ownership from the mistakes skaters make. The rules might be silly in that years later he would have scored higher but you could say that about a number of rules. If Oda wanted to get on the podium, it's his fault that he didn't do his content as planned, or have a layout that is more accommodating to avoid Zayaks. At some point (in truth, the first instance) the skater needs to take responsibility - and Oda in particular had several chances to learn from his past Zayak mistakes. Everyone's playing under the same rules.
 

4everchan

Record Breaker
Joined
Mar 7, 2015
Country
Martinique
exactly... without a framework, it becomes impossible to judge... some skaters could just tag 3toes at the end of each jump...

the framework also develops the sport, (even the extended lift one ;) )

with the zayak rule, there is an incentive to develop euler combos, loop combos, etc. even the crazy lutz/flip combo dimitriev is doing is a way to have a 3-3 combo without spoiling a 3toe.

was the rule harsh then? yes. but it applied to everyone and it is the way to judge...

and if i agree (for once) with you that what ifs can be interesting for conversation, I get bored with them quickly simply because, yes... what if Oda hadn't zayak himself, .. but then what if Patrick Chan had skated the same way he did at TEB 2013, since you have mentioned it... he would be olympic champion and without a doubt... even if everyone else had skated clean... so we can go around in circles forever like that.... and that's why I prefer not going for what ifs...

to get back to 2010.. and what ifs... i wonder how jeff buttle felt when he saw he wouldn't have needed a quad to win it at home... we will never know ;)
 

Blades of Passion

Skating is Art, if you let it be
Record Breaker
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Country
France
Just because a skater does something doesn't mean it deserves credit if it falls outside the rules. That's why the rules are there. If a skater these days wants to do 2 quad salchow and 2 quad toes, they will now only get credit for 3 of those. If a skater does 2 beautiful 3As but because they neglect to do one in a combo, one of them doesn't get full credit even though it's perfectly done, because the rules state one must be done in combination otherwise deduction will be incurred.

Those are separate situations. The zayak rule exists to make sure people don't receive too much credit for overly repeated element types. The rule was never supposed to give someone 0 credit for doing a jump that was within the allowable amount. It was just coded like that in the computer program. Someone should never be getting a 0 for a 3Axel+3Toe, but then over 10 points if they had instead done a 3Axel+1Toe. That makes no sense whatsoever.

Kurting Browning didn't get 0 credit for his 3Flip+3Toe at 1991 Worlds just because that was his third 3Toe of the program. Yagudin didn't get 0 credit for his 3Axel at 2001 GPF just because he did an extra 3Toe. People with brains can look at a program and assign the correct credit for what was executed within the allowable rules; a properly coded computer program can also come to the correct conclusion.

without a framework, it becomes impossible to judge... some skaters could just tag 3toes at the end of each jump...

That wouldn't be impossible to judge at all, and it's allowed right now. Medvedeva did an extra 3Toe at 2017 Europeans for fun. It just becomes a choreographic choice at that point (in her case I found it to be a poor choice, because it lacked flow and purpose and good lift), something that people usually won't do, but if it does happen, then whatever.

if i agree (for once) with you that what ifs can be interesting for conversation, I get bored with them quickly simply because, yes... what if Oda hadn't zayak himself, .. but then what if Patrick Chan had skated the same way he did at TEB 2013...since you have mentioned it... he would be olympic champion and without a doubt... even if everyone else had skated clean...

Those are two different things though. Oda "zayaking" is irrelevant to the actual skating that happened. Nothing about the skating or judging or rules themselves becomes different, in the scenario of simply applying the zayak rule correctly.

As for the Chan in 2014 thing, that's highly debatable, although shouldn't be talked about here. Hanyu had a big base value advantage, and if he skated his absolute best, he would be getting very high GOE and PCS (he already did get high PCS for flawed performances).
 

CanadianSkaterGuy

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
Those are separate situations. The zayak rule exists to make sure people don't receive too much credit for overly repeated element types. The rule was never supposed to give someone 0 credit for doing a jump that was within the allowable amount. It was just coded like that in the computer program. Someone should never be getting a 0 for a 3Axel+3Toe, but then over 10 points if they had instead done a 3Axel+1Toe. That makes no sense whatsoever.

Kurting Browning didn't get 0 credit for his 3Flip+3Toe at 1991 Worlds just because that was his third 3Toe of the program. Yagudin didn't get 0 credit for his 3Axel at 2001 GPF just because he did an extra 3Toe. People with brains can look at a program and assign the correct credit for what was executed within the allowable rules; a properly coded computer program can also come to the correct conclusion.

Huh?! How can you make that comparison? This was under 6.0 where jumps didn't get points. If Browning or Yagudin did the same thing under IJS where Oda had his Zayaks they absolutely would not have been credited accordingly. (And how do you know the judges didn't take into account the extra 3T? They didn't get 6.0's for technical merit so perhaps the judges did take that into account?)

And the rules are still the same. If someone does 4T+3T, and 4S+3T, then absolutely doing a 3A+3T would get less credit than a 3A+1T/3A+2T because of the rules that are in place. Yes, it doesn't make sense as a general statement (3A+3T is obviously harder and "worth" more than a 3A+1T) but those are the rules. If skater A did a layout with three 4Ts (the third being invalidated) and skater B did two 4Ts and a 3Z, the former is obviously harder on paper, but the latter is worth 6 points more because it avoids a nullified element.

Again, I agree that the Zayak rule was silly in that it invalidated the entire element and not just the improperly repeated portion - but those were the rules at the time and skaters should be aware and account for that. That doesn't make someone "deserve" a medal more, no more than a skater "deserving" a medal because previous technical calls and base values would have changed under a different system/version of a system resulting in a different result after the fact. Such revisionist attitudes while fun to muse about are ultimately inconsequential, and it's important to remain cognizant of the rules/values in place at the time of the event. It would be like saying "Oh, well Kostner could have won Sochi if it were still under 6.0.", or "Goebel could have won silver or gold in 2002 if it were under IJS and he garnered better credit for his quads." or "Skater X wouldn't have won that medal if rotation rules were as astringent at the time as how they are now." I mean, sure - fantasize all you want. But it wasn't the case at the time, so the argument is moot.
 
Top