- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
If only figure skating scoring rules were that simple. It's not what the skater intends but what he or she actually does on the ice that makes the technical caller yell "Lutz" or "flip."
I still can't get around the case of the skater who does three-truns into a flip, but then loses concentration and rocks over onto the wrong edge. Does this get 6.0 points for a completed Lutz?
The rules governing under-rotations have been the source of constant debate and revision by the ISU, too. Not an easy question at all, although the current rules seem pretty straightforward and unobjectionable. (Not that this stops people from objecting to them. ) The one thing we cannot expect is that the scoring rules be consistent and commonsensical. That just doesn't seem possible. The main thing is that the skaters win who skate the best. Does the IJS do a pretty good job of this, or do we need more tweaking of the scoring conventions?
I still can't get around the case of the skater who does three-truns into a flip, but then loses concentration and rocks over onto the wrong edge. Does this get 6.0 points for a completed Lutz?
The rules governing under-rotations have been the source of constant debate and revision by the ISU, too. Not an easy question at all, although the current rules seem pretty straightforward and unobjectionable. (Not that this stops people from objecting to them. ) The one thing we cannot expect is that the scoring rules be consistent and commonsensical. That just doesn't seem possible. The main thing is that the skaters win who skate the best. Does the IJS do a pretty good job of this, or do we need more tweaking of the scoring conventions?
Last edited: