"We need quadruples ... that is the future of figure skating," Plushenko said. "Without the quadruple, [it's] not men's figure skating. Now it's dancing."The scoring system in figure skating has changed and is no longer the subjective 6 point scoring system where you had the mysterious "Russian judge" giving scores one couldn't understand, but is now a much more objective, particularly on the technical side, system where each element has a base score and the competitor is judged on how well they performed it. Further, jumps performed late in the program earn a 10% bonus to give credit for performing them when more difficult and to encourage skaters to not front load their routines making them somewhat boring. Add this all up and you have the technical score.
Now, a quad jump is indeed given a higher base score and so Plushenko's claim does have some merit, but it is only 1 of 13 elements that are scored, so since I love looking at data, I couldn't help diving in to the detailed scoring of their two routines to see how they stacked up.
In the table below, I've listed the programs for both skaters with the base value for their elements, their grade of execution, and running total along with the difference of their running totals through the programs. I've also put in bold those jumps that occurred in the second half of the programs and received a 10% bonus for the base value. Note, since both skaters had identical program components scores, analyzing the technical score is all that is needed to compare them.
| Lysacek | Base | GoE | Total | Plushenko | Base | GoE | Total | Lysacek Lead | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3Lz+3T | 10 | 1.4 | 11.4 | 4T+3T | 13.8 | 0.8 | 14.6 | -3.2 | ||
| 3A | 8.2 | 0.6 | 20.2 | 3A | 8.2 | -0.36 | 22.44 | -2.24 | ||
| 3S | 4.5 | 1 | 25.7 | 3A+2T | 9.5 | 1 | 32.94 | -7.24 | ||
| CiSt4 | 3.9 | 1.2 | 30.8 | 3Lo | 5 | 0.6 | 38.54 | -7.74 | ||
| FSSp4 | 3 | 0.8 | 34.6 | FSSp3 | 2.6 | 0.14 | 41.28 | -6.68 | ||
| 3A+2T | 10.45 | -0.56 | 44.49 | 3Lz | 6 | 0.6 | 47.88 | -3.39 | ||
| 3Lo | 5.5 | 1 | 50.99 | CSSp4 | 3 | 0.7 | 51.58 | -0.59 | ||
| 3F+2T+2Lo | 9.13 | -0.4 | 59.72 | CiSt3 | 3.3 | 0.8 | 55.68 | 4.04 | ||
| 3Lz | 6.6 | 1.4 | 67.72 | 3Lz+2T | 8.03 | 0 | 63.71 | 4.01 | ||
| 2A | 3.85 | 0.8 | 72.37 | 3S | 4.95 | 0.8 | 69.46 | 2.91 | ||
| FCSSp4 | 3 | 0.5 | 75.87 | 2A | 3.85 | 1 | 74.31 | 1.56 | ||
| SlSt3 | 3.3 | 0.9 | 80.07 | SlSt3 | 3.3 | 1 | 78.61 | 1.46 | ||
| CCoSp4 | 3.5 | 1 | 84.57 | CCoSp4 | 3.5 | 0.6 | 82.71 | 1.86 |
From this we can see that Plushenko did take an early lead with his quad/triple combination and extended it with his early triple axel combination and triple loop, but then the lead began to shrink and ultimately became a lead for Lysacek when he threw his triple/double/double combination. The way the lead varies is really due to the order of the elements as we aren't comparing apples to apples in the rows. To do that, I've reordered Plushenko's program to match the rows of similar elements of Lysacek's below and the Diff column is the difference for that row/element. The 10% bonus items still appear in bold.
| Lysacek | Base | GoE | Plushenko | Base | GoE | Diff | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3Lz+3T | 10 | 1.4 | 4T+3T | 13.8 | 0.8 | -3.2 | ||
| 3A | 8.2 | 0.6 | 3A | 8.2 | -0.36 | 0.96 | ||
| 3S | 4.5 | 1 | 3S | 4.95 | 0.8 | -0.25 | ||
| CiSt4 | 3.9 | 1.2 | CiSt3 | 3.3 | 0.8 | 1 | ||
| FSSp4 | 3 | 0.8 | FSSp3 | 2.6 | 0.14 | 1.06 | ||
| 3A+2T | 10.45 | -0.56 | 3A+2T | 9.5 | 1 | -0.61 | ||
| 3Lo | 5.5 | 1 | 3Lo | 5 | 0.6 | 0.9 | ||
| 3F+2T+2Lo | 9.13 | -0.4 | 3Lz+2T | 8.03 | 0 | 0.7 | ||
| 3Lz | 6.6 | 1.4 | 3Lz | 6 | 0.6 | 1.4 | ||
| 2A | 3.85 | 0.8 | 2A | 3.85 | 1 | -0.2 | ||
| FCSSp4 | 3 | 0.5 | CSSp4 | 3 | 0.7 | -0.2 | ||
| SlSt3 | 3.3 | 0.9 | SlSt3 | 3.3 | 1 | -0.1 | ||
| CCoSp4 | 3.5 | 1 | CCoSp4 | 3.5 | 0.6 | 0.4 |
Now we can more clearly see how they compare. Looking at just the jumps to start, as expected, Plushenko's quad does give him a big advantage, but Lysacek executed his triple axel better eating into nearly a 3rd of that advantage. Plushenko got a bit back with his triple axel combination being better executed (even though Lysacek got the 10% bonus here), but the 10% bonus and better execution got Lysacek nearly a point for his triple loop. They both did a third combination getting the 10% bonus but Lysacek threw in the extra double loop giving him a 0.7 advantage. But the big difference was Lysacek throwing his triple lutz late in the program got him a 0.6 advantage that he extended to 1.4 with his execution.
In the end, for the jumps, Lysacek had a base value of 58.23 (3.23 from the 10% bonus) and 5.24 for execution for a total of 63.47 to Plushenko's 59.33 base (but only 1.53 from the 10% bonus) and 4.44 for execution for a total of 63.77. Plushenko's big lead from the quad was nearly completely lost due to poorer execution (0.8 point diff) and not maximizing his 10% bonus (1.7 point diff). Also, due to doing the quad toe loop, Plushenko wasn't able to fit a triple flip in his program which is more difficult than the triple salchow and triple loop that he did perform.
Lysacek also performed more difficult footwork and spins having a base value of 16.7 with 4.4 for execution to Plushenko's 15.7 and 3.24 for a difference of 2.16. This results in, from a technical mark standpoint, Plushenko's 3.8 point base point advantage for his quad being lost and Lysacek actually beating him on the technical mark by 1.86.
Now, if Plushenko has simply paid more attention to putting elements where they get more bonus, say moving the triple axel (0.82 bonus) and triple lutz (0.6 bonus), the margin would have been narrowed to 0.44. That is less than the difference from his poorer execution meaning that ultimately his winning or losing was due to how he arranged his program and his execution, particularly his triple axel where he had -0.36 grade of execution.
So from the data, it does not appear Plushenko was robbed, rather his assertion that the winner needs to try a quad is only one part of the story.
But what do you think? Do you think Plushenko was robbed?
I am not a conniseur of ice skating and I feel it is very difficult to judge however, I think the whole ordeal between Plushenko and Lysachek only shows the gracefulness of Lysachek and the extreme pride of Plushenko. Get a life, Plushenko and move on to the next competition.
ReplyDeleteThere's a huge discrepancy between what Mr. Plushenko produced in both of his Olympic performances and how he was judged by a narrow group of people. NAMES MEAN LITTLE HERE. I’m NOT A FAN OF ANYONE. I JUST ADVOCATE FAIRNESS IN THIS SPORT. I HAVE SPENT 30 YEARS IN FIGURE SKATING. The whole argument is the score manipulation that allowed one to score higher on the merit of one level of one step sequence and one level of a spin in the men's event - not ice dance. Had Mr.Plushenko not landed his quad or botched some other of his elements, the argument would not have even started. The whole issue is there's one man in the entire competition skating a flawless and most difficult SP and getting low marks for the dubious transitions and thus not getting the lead he deserved in the SP.
ReplyDeleteEvgeny Plushenko cleanly landed 2 quadruple-triple toe loop combinations during the two days of competition, his step sequences were of high level, and his spins were fast enough. He presented the image of a macho trying to do a tango in his way and was great at it. If somebody did not catch the idea, it doesn't mean it was not artistic enough He had ONLY one minor problem - the exit of his triple Axel in the LP. JUST THAT! (And moreover, to say that Evgeny Plushenko's footwork is sloppy means that the person saying it has no idea what figure skating is about.) The judges, on the other hand, preferred to give higher GOE for simpler jumps executed by Lysacek. The difference that decided the gold medal was Level 3 for Plushenko's step sequence while Lysacek got level 4, and the same for one of the spins. CAN YOU BELIEVE THAT IN A MEN’s EVENT A ONE-LEVEL DIFFERENCE ON A SPIN AND A STEP SEQUENCE PUSHES THE COMPETITOR WHO CLEANLY LANDED TWO 4-3 DOWN TO THE SILVER MEDAL POSITION? IT’s A JOKE THAT IN MEN’s SKATING THE SIMPLEST MOVES DECIDE THE OLYMPIC GOLD.
I also want to add that it's very easy to manipulate levels on step sequences - transition from one edge to another, the composition of a step sequence, upper body movement, etc. So, the difference between level 3 and 4 is blurred and especially when a skater has no right to protest the results, this is where the judges have room for playing. On the other hand, jumps are much clearer to evaluate ( although the judges may not want to see if a jump was underrotated, like it happens with Lysacek. Evan was downgraded for more jumps in the LP – 3A, the flip and the loop and the negative grading was more significant.).But judges pulled Lysacek up where they could - programme component score in the SP and higher GOE on step sequences, WHICH IS VERY SUBJECTIVE and can be played around. That's what happened. If he had done the 4-3T like Evgeny, then it would be ok to judge the difference between them on step sequences. But when he has a problematic 3A, and no quad, let alone a quad-triple combo, it is so unfair to give Lysacek higher score on much less significant elements in men's skating. Lysacek technically is about 30% behind Evgeny's ability, at least. And to see their scores equal in the SP and Lysacek's higher in the LP is a GROSS INJUSTICE.
ABOUT TRANSITIONS : In the SP the judges gave Evgeny a lower Program Component score on the controversial "transitions" which he definitely had fewer because he was doing men's skating, and that means – LONGER ENTRY INTO A QUAD AS TECHNIQUE REQUIRED WITH CROSS CUTS AS WELL AS FOR A TRIPLE AXEL. You can't change jumping technique for those jumps. So if somebody says Evgeny needed more transitions they are covering up the fact that TRANSITIONS ARE NEEDED TO FILL IN THE SPACE WHERE JUMPS SHOULD BE FOR THOSE WHO CAN SHOW ATHLETICISM AND HOLD THEIR NERVE IN COMPETITION. Evgeny's programme had all the elements the modern system requires. Evgeny would have led by at least 3 points had the judges scored fairly in the SP and not lower the marks for the dubious at best transitions which cannot be many in the SP ( if you understand at least minimally in figure skating) PARTICULARY IF A SKATER GOES FOR A QUAD IN COMBINATION AND A TRIPLE AXEL AFTERWARDS. By deliberately putting low marks for Evgeny for these meaningless transitions in the SP the judges gave him a narrow lead.
ReplyDeleteCONCLUSION: The problem is the gold went to the man who has quite a few of his jumps underrotated particularly the triple Axel and has very average artistry on top of that. Still find it quite unbelievable in the negative light. It was the major disappointment of the Olympic figure skating competition.
ABOUT TRANSITIONS : In the SP the judges gave Evgeny a lower Program Component score on the controversial "transitions" which he definitely had fewer because he was doing men's skating, and that means – LONGER ENTRY INTO A QUAD AS TECHNIQUE REQUIRED WITH CROSS CUTS AS WELL AS FOR A TRIPLE AXEL. You can't change jumping technique for those jumps. So if somebody says Evgeny needed more transitions they are covering up the fact that TRANSITIONS ARE NEEDED TO FILL IN THE SPACE WHERE JUMPS SHOULD BE FOR THOSE WHO CAN SHOW ATHLETICISM AND HOLD THEIR NERVE IN COMPETITION. Evgeny's programme had all the elements the modern system requires. Evgeny would have led by at least 3 points had the judges scored fairly in the SP and not lower the marks for the dubious at best transitions which cannot be many in the SP ( if you understand at least minimally in figure skating) PARTICULARY IF A SKATER GOES FOR A QUAD IN COMBINATION AND A TRIPLE AXEL AFTERWARDS. By deliberately putting low marks for Evgeny for these meaningless transitions in the SP the judges gave him a narrow lead.
ReplyDeleteCONCLUSION: The problem is the gold went to the man who has quite a few of his jumps underrotated particularly the triple Axel and has very average artistry on top of that. Still find it quite unbelievable in the negative light. It was the major disappointment of the Olympic figure skating competition.
Great posts Danielle!!!
ReplyDelete