Calendar || Календарь

[cekoni]

Контести: два месяца назад я не знал, что делать

О планах на сезон, выборе музыки и подходе к постановкам, невидимых миру сложностях спортивной жизни и о том, каково быть женатым на собственном тренере – в интервью Самюэля Контести....

... more... http://www.championat.ru/other/_skating ... 72214.html

[cekoni]

Youtube channel, with very good HQ videos of Men's from 2010 Olympics

http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=OlympicVids2010#g/u

[cekoni]

http://www.flutzingaround.com/2010/11/a ... um=twitter
November 29

Adrian Schultheiss and Coach Evgeni Lutkov Separate

Swedish skater Adrian Schultheiss and long-time coach Evgeni Lutkov have gone their separate ways, Schultheiss tells me.

You may remember the scene from the short program at Skate America when Adrian walked around in the kiss and cry looking extremely confused without his coach or a team leader. Schultheiss says that it wasn't uncommon in the past for Lutkov to miss at least part of the off-ice warm-up, but he started to worry when Evgeni still hadn't shown up towards the end of the six-minute warm-up on the ice. He does recall in his earlier skating days that his coach would show up late to a practice session and then tell the skater that it was just a test to see if he would continue working without him. Confused about whether his coach was somewhere in the arena or just running late, Adrian made the decision to skate the short program. We later learned that Lutkov had blacked out in his hotel room and was found by security after Schultheiss told competition organizers of his absence directly after he skated. The coach woke up startled by the whole incident, and at the strong advice of Schultheiss, finally called 911 after an hour of insisting that he did not need to be examined. The doctors suggested that he be kept overnight for observation.

Lutkov was released the next day and was able to attend the free skate with Schultheiss, and he very kindly thanked the American doctors and others for their help while sitting in the kiss and cry area.

However, directly following the competition, things started to get shaky. Lutkov grew distant and told his pupil that he needed a rest from "big" figure skating for two weeks, which would be understandable given his health situation. There were no words exchanged between the two on an awkward plane ride back to Sweden, and to make matters worse, Schultheiss was informed by other officials from his skating club that Lutkov had actually gone to Finland to host a skating camp for some of the country's top skaters in the time that he was taking his "break". Schultheiss had two planned competitions coming up in a few weeks (the NRW Trophy in Germany and then his own National Championship), so obviously this was a slap in the face.

Schultheiss says that over the years, like with anyone you are around so much, there were plenty of disagreements and arguments between the two, and even with some of Lutkov's family. He knew that if he was going to continue to be happy with his skating, he needed to make a change. He now works with Maria Bergqvist and Johanna Dalstrand and says he feels very happy about the new set-up, but will unfortunately skip the NRW Trophy due to a groin injury and focus on making Nationals a success. His placements at the 2010 European and World Championships give two spots to Swedish men for this seasons competitions.

[cekoni]

http://www.flutzingaround.com/2010/11/p ... um=twitter
Tuesday, November 30

The 'Patrick Chan System': How Much is the New Scoring Method Really Helping?



We all should know the story by now. Following last season, there were plenty of figure skating fans who felt that risking difficult jumps (Quads for the men and Asada's triple Axel, for example) were too much of a risk, as skaters would often be down-graded for their efforts and they'd end up losing even more points than doing a simple triple toe or double Axel would earn them. So, what did the ISU do? They came up with a re-worked Code of Points (or IJS), one that increased the value of the more difficult jumps, and also decreased the negative grade of execution scores, so the penalty for taking risks wouldn't be as harsh. They also implemented an under-rotation penalty, one that docked some points from the base value of the jumps-- but not nearly the severeness of the full downgrade that they'd previously incur.

Everyone that was complaining before about skating taking steps backwards last year should now be happy, right? Not exactly. We have Patrick Chan falling all over the place in his Grand Prix events and still managing to score among the top skaters. We also have the "Mao Asada rule" (as many seemed to think the triple Axel changes were only to benefit her) not even playing a part yet this year as Asada has had extreme difficulties while changing her jumping technique.

Back to Chan. I thought it would be interesting to compare his scores from Skate Canada this season under the system used last year, to see if he really is getting plenty of help from the re-worked system.

First, the short program from Skate Canada. Remember, this year there is one less element in the program, as a second step sequence has been dropped. Another aspect to remember is that the GOE for the triples and quads have changed a bit. The scores have been factored to reflect the old system (for example, a +1 on a 3toe now earns 0.7 GOE, compared to 1.0 last season). Let's see how he scores.

The elements are not in table form (sorry), but they are listed by their code, their base value, their GOE, and then the total points earned for the element.

4T 9.80 -4.80 GOE = 5.00 (fall)
3A 8.20 -4.20 GOE = 4.00 (fall)
CCoSp4 3.50 +1.00 GOE = 4.50
3F+3T 9.50 +1.57 GOE = 11.07
FSSp4 3.00 +0.86 GOE = 3.86
CCSp3 2.60 +0.57 GOE = 3.17
SlSt2 2.30 -0.60 GOE = 1.70 (fall)

Total Element Score = 33.30 (compared to his actual score, 36.73)
Program Component Score = 39.47
Deductions = -3.00

Total Segment Score = 69.77 (compared to his actual score, 73.20)

Now, for the free skate. Two more changes in the system are reflected and factored here. The 1/2 loop in between two jumps is now scored as a single loop, and counted as part of a skaters three-jump combination. Last year, the 1/2 loop was not worth any credit, and the total jump sequence was started at 80% of its base value points. Second, the second footwork sequence in the free skate is now scored on a fixed start value (2.0). Last year, Chan received a level 4 for his second footwork sequence at Worlds (with the same program), so I have used the GOE scored there as a reference here.

4T 9.80 +2.00 GOE = 11.80
3A 8.20 -4.20 GOE = 4.00 (fall)
3Lz 6.00 +0.43 GOE = 6.43
SlSt3 3.30 +1.00 GOE = 4.30
FSSp4 3.00 +0.79 GOE = 3.79
3A+2T* 10.45 +0.29 GOE = 10.74
3Lz+2S+Seq* 6.42 +0.43 GOE = 6.85
CSSp3 2.60 +0.57 GOE = 3.17
3F* 6.05 +0.43 GOE = 6.48
3Lo+3T<* 6.93 -1.00 GOE = 5.93
2A 3.85 +1.00 GOE = 4.85
SlSt4 3.90 +1.80 GOE = 5.70
CCoSp4 3.50 +0.79 GOE = 4.29

Total Element Score = 78.33 (compared to his actual score, 83.18)
Program Component Score = 84.14
Deductions = -1.00

Total Segment Score = 161.47 (compared to his actual score, 166.32)

Total Competition Score = 231.24 (compared to his actual score, 239.52)

A difference of 8.28 points.

In all honesty, with all of the smaller scoring changes (the way the sequences are scored, etc.), I don't think that 8 points is really a huge number. Most people were probably thinking he would score about 15 or more points lower than he did, yes?

So, what do you think now? Was the old system better, or does the new system work just fine? Those of you that feel Chan was over-scored for what he did complete successfully at Skate Canada, what would you do to make the scoring more accurate for what we see?

And for those of you that thought skating was going "backwards", is the new method of scoring what you wanted to see?

Obviously, it would be nice to see what other skaters would score (Oda and Rippon at Skate Canada) under the old system for direct comparison-- that might come eventually as a part two to this analysis.

[cekoni]

http://www.flutzingaround.com/2010/11/p ... -much.html

The 'Patrick Chan System' Part Two: How Much Did the New Scoring Help Oda and Rippon?


My first post focused on Patrick Chan's programs at Skate Canada, as I scored them using the Code of Points from the 2009/2010 season. The end result was that he scored 8.28 points higher than he would have if the old system was still in place. I didn't think that seemed like too huge of a difference considering some of the more fine changes that were made, but then I scored Nobunari Oda and Adam Rippon's programs from the same competition to see if they also followed the trend..

If any of you want me to write out all of the exact numbers, let me know. However, I figure that most of you are just interested in the final totals so that is what I'm going to present. First, the silver medalist from Skate Canada, Nobu Oda.



Short Program

Total Element Score = 44.20 (compared to his actual score, 43.37)
Program Component Score = 38.00

Total Segment Score = 82.20 (compared to his actual score, 81.37)

So he LOST 0.83 with this new system. Continuing on..

Long Program

Total Element Score = 82.84 (compared to his actual score, 81.87)
Program Component Score = 74.28
Deductions = -1.00

Total Segment Score = 156.12 (compared to his actual score, 155.15)

Total Competition Score = 238.32 (compared to his actual score, 236.52)

So once again, he lost almost a point in the free skate with the new system, and he lost 1.80 points overall. Keep in mind that Patrick Chan was able to GAIN 8.28 points with the new system.



Here are Adam Rippon's scores.

Short Program

Total Element Score = 41.59 (compared to his actual score, 41.10)
Program Component Score = 36.43

Total Segment Score = 78.02 (compared to his actual score, 77.53)

See a trend here? Rippon also LOST 0.49 points under the new system.

Long Program

Total Element Score = 81.57 (compared to his actual score, 80.35)
Program Component Score = 75.16

Total Segment Score = 156.73 (compared to his actual score, 155.51)

Total Competition Score = 234.75 (compared to his actual score, 233.04)

Following a similar pattern to Oda, Rippon lost 1.71 points overall.

Remember that the second footwork sequences are all started on a 2.0 base value, but for purposes of this study, I've thrown in the level and GOE received at Worlds last season for Chan and Rippon, and the Grand Prix Final for Oda. If I would have kept that 2.0 and worked the GOE off of it, Oda and Rippon would have ended up with just about the same total scores in both systems.

So now the major question, where did Patrick Chan make up all of these points? This small study obviously suggests that errors are counted much less severely this year-- but are they now too small of a penalty?

For what it's worth, the final standings of Skate Canada scored under the 2009/2010 system would have looked like this:

1. Nobunari Oda 238.32 points
2. Adam Rippon 234.75 points
3. Patrick Chan 231.24 points

-----------------------------------

cekoni: but by "new" rules was:
1 Patrick CHAN 239.52
2 Nobunari ODA 236.52
3 Adam RIPPON 233.04

[Fish Family]

М-да... Система стала еще запутаннее и мутнее... в пользу этого узкоглазого самозванца(это про чана) и его свиты (риппон и ко)- теперь им их ТРЕШКИ (а порой и двушки с падениями)засчитывают как КВАДЫ

[cekoni]

... continuation...

http://www.flutzingaround.com/2010/12/m ... ystem.html
My Own Ideas for the Judging System



Oh, what do we have here? I played around with some numbers and came up with my own concept for the judging system.. well, at least the jumps.

Some concepts I have come up with are to remove the +3 and -3 from the options when marking the elements, and rather just have everything scored -2 up to +2. The column to the far right is the fall, or completely failed column, which essentially takes the place of the -3. However, I would remove the 1.00 deduction for falls on jumps (but keep the deduction for other falls in the program), and just use these set values for whenever a skater falls on a jump. Harsh? Yes. But a failed jump is exactly that.

The single Axel and doubles through the Lutz earn 33% of what the double Axel/triples through the Lutz are worth (I rounded on a few, but it didn't change the numbers that much), and the double Axel/triples through the Lutz are worth 40% of what the triple Axel/quads are worth. Most of this lines up with the current ISU base values for the jumps, anyways. I underlined the ones that have slightly changed in base value.

What would these changes mean? For starters, you'll notice that a 'excellent' double Axel, triple toe, and triple Salchow earn the same amount of points as a 'very poor' triple Axel, quad toe, and quad Salchow. This still would encourage some skaters to go for the difficult elements, yes? However, a fall on any of the most difficult jumps, and the skater would end up with less points for the element than the base value of the same jump with one less rotation (example: fall on quad toe earns 3.42 points, a base value triple toe is 4.10 points).

I haven't figured out if I want to also add an under-rotated column into this chart.. I have to play around with the numbers some more and see how everything turns out in a mock-competition.

One more aspect to think about is that many of these numbers are really random (6.63, 5.83, etc.). If a judge is going to try to cheat or figure out which components scores they must give Skater B to beat Skater A, their job might end up that much more difficult in trying to add up all of the numbers in their head. Not saying it happens all the time, but I'm also suggesting that it might happen every once in a while ;-)

In the case of jump combinations (example 3F+3T), a +1 for the element would result in the skater earning the +1 GOE for both jumps (5.83+4.51). That gives the skater more credit for the combination than just applying one single GOE to add to both jumps.

http://www.flutzingaround.com/2010/12/m ... anada.html
My Scoring System in Play: Skate Canada Mens Short Program

Yeah, I'm using the Skate Canada mens short as an example once again. I kept all of the program components and spin/footwork GOE's exactly as they were scored in Canada as I haven't really thought of any ideas on re-tooling those aspects of the system, but I did convert all of the jump element scores using the system I came up with in my previous post.

The results..

1. Nobunari Oda 80.02 Points (-1.35 points) Technical Score- 42.02
2. Kevin Reynolds 78.91 Points (-1.18 points) Technical Score- 44.85
3. Adam Rippon 76.75 Points (-0.78 points) Technical Score- 40.32
4. Alban Preaubert 69.05 Points (-0.66 points) Technical Score- 34.91
5. Patrick Chan 68.48 Points* (-4.72 points) Technical Score- 30.01
6. Javier Fernandez 65.61 Points (-1.13 points) Technical Score- 33.19
7. Artur Gachinski 63.55 Points (-3.02 points) Technical Score- 31.12

* Includes the 1-point deduction for the footwork fall as I haven't figured out how, if at all, I would adjust the scoring for spins and footwork.

What does my system tell me? Gachinski had an unsuccessful quad which ended up being his combo attempt, and Chan (you know by now) had two falls on jumps. Obviously my system hurts skaters that attempt the difficult jumps more severely than how the actual scoring works.

Everyone else lost right around a point, which has to do with the percentage being the factor for GOE on jumps rather than equal increments in the real system.

More ideas? Suggestions?

[clairdelalune]

Thanks for posting this, Cekoni. I´m afraid that Americans will start to put pressure on ISU to change the system again. This became really crazy!

[Дарина]

Перевела Тони Уиллера, он пересчитал результаты Skate Canada, пришёл к выводу, что изменения в системе оценивания после ОИ на руку Патрику, раньше он бы не победил с падениями, его бы обошли Ода и Риппон, которые откатались чище.

http://www.flutzingaround.com/2010/11/patrick-chan-system-how-much-is-new.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
Tuesday, November 30

The 'Patrick Chan System': How Much is the New Scoring Method Really Helping?



К настоящему моменту вся история должна быть нам известна. По итогам прошлого сезона многие поклонники фигурного катания считали, что рискованные сложные прыжки (четверные для мужчин и тройной аксель Асады, например) были слишком уж рискованными, поскольку фигуристов часто наказывали за их усилия, и они в конечном итоге могли потерять даже больше очков, чем принесло бы исполнение простого тройного прыжка или двойного акселя. Итак, что же сделал ISU? Они предложили переработанный кодекс баллов (или IJS), который увеличил стоимость более сложных прыжков, а также понизил штрафы так, чтобы наказание за риск было не настолько суровым. Наказания за недокруты в прыжках тоже предусмотрены, но они далеки от былой строгости.

Все, кто жаловался прежде на то, что фигурное катание делало шаги в обратном направлении в прошлом году, должны быть теперь счастливы, не правда ли? Не совсем так. У нас есть Патрик Чан, который постоянно падает в своих выступлениях на Гран-при и всё же держится среди лучших фигуристов. У нас также есть "правило Мао Асады" (так как многие, похоже, думали, что изменения в отношении тройного акселя были только в ее интересах), которое даже еще не играло роли в этом году, поскольку Асада испытывает огромные трудности, связанные с изменениями ее прыжковой техники.

Вернёмся к Чану. Я подумал, что будет интересно сравнить его оценки на Skate Canada в этом сезоне с системой, которая использовалась в прошлом году, чтобы увидеть, действительно ли он получает много помощи от переработанных правил.

Во-первых, короткая программа на Skate Canada. Помните, что в этом году в программе одним элементом меньше, убрали вторую дорожку шагов. Другой аспект, который необходимо помнить: GOE для тройных и четверных немного изменилось.

Оценки были пересчитаны с учетом старой системы (например, а +1 на 3t сейчас заслуживает 0,7, по сравнению с 1,0 в прошлом сезоне). Давайте посмотрим, что он получил бы.
Элементы не в форме таблицы (прошу прощения), но они перечислены по их коду, их базовой стоимости, их GOE, а затем даны общие баллы для элемента.
4T 9.80 -4.80 GOE = 5.00 (падение)
3A 8.20 -4.20 GOE = 4.00 (падение)
CCoSp4 3.50 +1.00 GOE = 4.50
3F+3T 9.50 +1.57 GOE = 11.07
FSSp4 3.00 +0.86 GOE = 3.86
CCSp3 2.60 +0.57 GOE = 3.17
SlSt2 2.30 -0.60 GOE = 1.70 (падение)
Total Element Score = 33.30 (его действительный результат 36.73)
Program Component Score = 39.47
Deductions = -3.00
Total Segment Score = 69.77 (его действительный результат 73.20)

Теперь произвольная программа. Еще два изменения в системе отражены и учтены здесь. 1 / 2 loop (ойлер) между двумя прыжками теперь считается как одинарный и как часть каскада из трёх прыжков. В прошлом году он ничего не стоил, и каскад получал 80% своей базовой стоимости. Во-вторых, вторая дорожка шагов в произвольной теперь имеет фиксированную начальную базовую стоимость (2,0). В прошлом году Чану поставили 4 уровень за вторую дорожку на чемпионате мира (с той же программой), поэтому я сослался на GOE, полученное там.

4T 9.80 +2.00 GOE = 11.80
3A 8.20 -4.20 GOE = 4.00 (падение)
3Lz 6.00 +0.43 GOE = 6.43
SlSt3 3.30 +1.00 GOE = 4.30
FSSp4 3.00 +0.79 GOE = 3.79
3A+2T* 10.45 +0.29 GOE = 10.74
3Lz+2S+Seq* 6.42 +0.43 GOE = 6.85
CSSp3 2.60 +0.57 GOE = 3.17
3F* 6.05 +0.43 GOE = 6.48
3Lo+3T<* 6.93 -1.00 GOE = 5.93
2A 3.85 +1.00 GOE = 4.85
SlSt4 3.90 +1.80 GOE = 5.70
CCoSp4 3.50 +0.79 GOE = 4.29
Total Element Score = 78.33 (его действительный результат 83.18)
Program Component Score = 84.14
Deductions = -1.00
Total Segment Score = 161.47 (его действительный результат 166.32)
Total Competition Score = 231.24 (его действительный результат 239.52)

Разница 8.28 баллов.

Честно говоря, при всех изменениях (в том, как оценивается дорожка и т.д.), я не думаю, что 8 очков на самом деле огромная разница. Большинство людей, вероятно, думают, что он бы получил на 15 или более пунктов ниже, чем на самом деле, да?
Итак, что же вы сейчас думаете? Была старая система лучше, или новая система работает просто прекрасно? Те из вас, которые чувствуют, что Чан был переоценен за то, что он выполнил успешно на Skate Canada, - что бы вы предложили, чтобы сделать оценивание более точным, чем то, что мы видим?
А те из вас, кто думал, что фигурное катание движется в "назад", является ли новая система тем, что вы хотели увидеть?
Очевидно, неплохо было бы посмотреть, как другие фигуристы были бы оценены (Ода и Риппон на Skate Canada) в рамках старой системы для прямого сравнения, - это мы увидим во второй части анализа.

[Дарина]

http://www.flutzingaround.com/2010/11/patrick-chan-system-part-two-how-much.html

The 'Patrick Chan System' Part Two: How Much Did the New Scoring Help Oda and Rippon?

Мой первый пост был сосредоточен на программах Патрика Чана на Skate Canada, я оценил их по системе, действовавшей в сезоне 2009/2010. Оказалось, что сейчас он получил на 8.28 выше, чем получил бы при старой системе. Не думаю, что это большая разница, учитывая некоторые принятые прекрасные изменения, но затем я пересчитал результаты Ода и Риппона, чтобы увидеть, следуют ли они тенденции.
Если кто-то хочет узнать все точные цифры, дайте мне знать. Но я думаю, что большинству интересен окончательный результат, именно его я представлю. Сначала серебряный призёр Нобунари Ода.



Короткая программа

Total Element Score = 44.20 (его действительный результат 43.37)
Program Component Score = 38.00

Total Segment Score = 82.20 (его действительный результат 81.37)

Итак он ПОТЕРЯЛ 0.83 по новой системе. Продолжаем…

Произвольная программа

Total Element Score = 82.84 (его действительный результат 81.87)
Program Component Score = 74.28
Deductions = -1.00

Total Segment Score = 156.12 (его действительный результат 155.15)

Total Competition Score = 238.32 (его действительный результат 236.52)

Итак ещё раз, он потерял почти балл в ПП по новой системе, а в целом 1.80. Не забываем, что Патрик Чан смог приобрести 8.28 по новой системе



Теперь Адам Риппон.

Короткая программа

Total Element Score = 41.59 (его действительный результат 41.10)
Program Component Score = 36.43
Total Segment Score = 78.02 (его действительный результат 77.53)

Видите здесь тенденцию? Риппон тоже ПОТЕРЯЛ 0.49 по новой системе.


Произвольная программа

Total Element Score = 81.57 (его действительный результат 80.35)
Program Component Score = 75.16

Total Segment Score = 156.73 (его действительный результат 155.51)

Total Competition Score = 234.75 (его действительный результат 233.04)

Подобно Oдa, Риппон в целом потерял 1.71.

Помните, что вторая дорожка шагов оценивается по базовой стоимости 2,0, но для данного исследования, я брал уровни и GOE полученные на чемпионате мира в прошлом сезоне Чаном и Риппоном, и в финале Гран-при Одой. Если бы я держался этих 2,0 баллов и рассчитывал GOE исходя из них, Ода и Риппон имели бы практически ту же самую суммарную оценку в обеих системах.

Итак, теперь главный вопрос, где же Патрик Чан набрал все эти баллы? Это небольшое исследование, очевидно, показывает, что в этом году ошибки оцениваются гораздо менее строго, - но не слишком ли мало наказание?

На всякий случай, окончательный результат Skate Canada по старой системе выглядел бы следующим образом:

1. Нобунари Ода 238.32
2. Адам Риппон 234.75
3. Патрик Чан 231.24