D and E Panel Analysis - WAG EF

[rue_des_plantes]

I realize you aren’t being 100% serious, but imagine BB without Mixed or Dance CV? 2001 - 2012 was bad enough, and while I’d prefer Mixed/Dance SB to go away, I think the formulas are almost finally back to where they need to be. Even so, we still see: orphan Aerial Cartwheel, Front Aerial, Side Somi, Turn, Leap, Dismount, with Acro and Jump Series.

Just because there are ridiculous, burdensome guidelines in place, we shouldn’t hack away at important parts of the sport. This same “logic” was used to remove subjective scoring / artistic evaluation. There ARE ways to logically reward artistry and connections without needing a protractor (lol!), etc.

1997 - 2005, you could be 1/4 short on twists / turns and still receive credit for the attemp; 1 year later (through present), you can’t be 9/10000 short or else you’ll A) lose DV (more if CR, etc. are involved), B) incur E Panel massacre. This is a major change in philosophy, and nonsensical.

1. Credit the skill that was ATTEMPTED, regardless of execution; or, at the very least, allow up to 1/4 before having it impact DV.
2. If a skill IS downgraded or changed, real-time communication is possible (done in figure skating) and would eliminate being penalized by both panels for 1 mistake.
3. Release the real-time calls within 24 hours (again, done in FS).

Yeah, I’m not endorsing it. What I’m open towards is the general sentiment that fewer things be left to D-panel micromanaging and controversy. There’s a reason the D-panel as it is structured now irritates the IOC, not just Watanabe.

Aerials are a perennial problem, especially side somis and free cartwheels in isolation. I’d either merge some or all aerials into the same box, or make 1-2 them C elements. Not sure yet.

 

[Doug1233]

I’d either merge some or all aerials into the same box, or make 1-2 them C elements.

I think it’s time. I’ve thought for a while that front aerial should be a C. Especially when they downgraded Sheep to C. I always thought a Sheep was harder to do correctly.

Although part of me thought the FIG downgraded the Sheep simply because they didn’t like the delays it caused to the D Panel. At least with a ring leap you only need to look at one foot.

 

[MaryClare]

I’m sure that the aerial cartwheel was a C in 2001-2005. I’m guessing the upgrade for the open ended code to better facilitate counting elements and encourage its usage as part of a series

 

[JJS_5056]

What I’m open towards is the general sentiment that fewer things be left to D-panel micromanaging and controversy

I agree. These rules were forced into play under the guise of fairness and described as “open-ended,” with the supposed aim of giving credit to content that exceeds an arbitrary limit (e.g., 10.0 SV). However, 15 years later, the WTC is as arbitrary as ever;

1. No attempt to quantify true value of skills. For V1 of this COP, fine, but by 2021, an Aerial and Rulfova should not both be worth .40 simply because of an outdated letter system, even if a simple .05 was added (i.e., D = 0.40 and 0.45 skills).
2. Adjusting DV every 4 years, when the relationship between VT entries, body positions in saltos, 1/2 twist additions, etc., can and should be quantifiable.
3. Capping “open-ended” ideology when it comes to UB pirouettes and transitions, BB/FX dance elements.

As with these and other decisions, hacking CV to minimize incompetence is totally out of line with the sport’s stated goals. There are so many obvious ways to improve the system before going to that extreme. Crediting attempted skills is easier, reduces compounding penalties, etc. In FS, athletes have to submit planned routines in advance. Why not require:

1. Athletes must submit planned content 24 hours prior to start.
2. All elements receive credit unless there is a substantial technical error (1/4 or more short of turn, 45 or more degree of knee/hip bend, etc.).
3. Downgraded elements receive lower DV, but the attempted skill is still ‘called,’ thus allowing a 2.5 to earn credit later if a 3/1 is downgraded earlier.
4. D Panel calls are communicated to E Panel in real-time; there’s NO reason why a Komova should worry she’ll lose -.10 D and -.30 E for a slightly piked Layout Jaeger simply because there is no communication.

Aerials are a perennial problem, especially side somis and free cartwheels in isolation. I’d either merge some or all aerials into the same box, or make 1-2 them C elements. Not sure yet.

Part of the solution is moving beyond the constraints of a letter system. Composition needs to be evaluated more holistically, as well, to discourage routines reliant on 1 skill type, but in the meantime, moving to a DV scale where Aerials can be worth 0.3 while an Onodi is worth 0.35, while both retain their “D” status for CV/SB purposes, would help alleviate the abuse of the easiest skills per letter.

Until basic (A, B) skills are worth 0 and count only toward meeting min skill reqs, CV, CR, etc., downgrading D+ elements is counterproductive. If a BHS / Split Jump earn .20 DV, you can’t have aerials earn 0.3. Even now, many D / E skills are extinct because the DV difference between B/C and D/E is so minimal. If C = 0.1, and D = 0.3 (Aerials) and 0.35 (Onodi), maybe we start seeing some change…

Since my ideal - a “Composition” component as part of an A Score - will never happen, I could live with a deduction (-.1, -.2, -.3) for “Overuse of element group(s) / skill type(s)” and grouping Aerial + Side Aerial, Side Somi + Front Tuck/Pike from 1 ft, etc.

I think it’s time. I’ve thought for a while that front aerial should be a C. Especially when they downgraded Sheep to C. I always thought a Sheep was harder to do correctly.

Although part of me thought the FIG downgraded the Sheep simply because they didn’t like the delays it caused to the D Panel. At least with a ring leap you only need to look at one foot.

The Sheep needs to go back to D regardless. The fact that there are D+B (.10) and D+D (.20) Mixed/Dance CV, when only the Straddle and Split Jump (B) and Ring Jump (D) are viable options for either is so frustrating.

I’m sure that the aerial cartwheel was a C in 2001-2005. I’m guessing the upgrade for the open ended code to better facilitate counting elements and encourage its usage as part of a series

Front Aerial was a C until 2001 and Side Aerial until 2006. Both are so out of place in a letter grouping with skills like the BHS 1/1, Rulfova, Omelianchik, etc., it’s sickening.

 

[Doug1233]

Please tell me they didn’t give this.

I had:

EHFBC(downgrade to split full)DC(no CV)B(downgrade to straddle half)D = 5.5

They gave 5.7. Unless my math is wrong, they credited both the gogean and this Popa attempt.

 

[MRR]

Yes, they gave both.

Mysteriously, Carey started from 6.2 in prelims but received a 6.3 in AA/EF. Do you think the hop 1/1 wasn’t credited?

 

[Doug1233]

Switch full? I’d need to see the video.

I hate how NBC packages these up into like 3 hour chunks and it’s impossible to locate individual routines without scrolling through the whole fucking thing.

 

[Doug1233]

they gave both

I could forgive the gogean but that Popa. That is diabolical given how hard they were hawking in everyone else.

 

[MRR]

I would normally say the switch full but it looks fine to me. Theoretically they could’ve credited a hop 1/2 and she still gets the dance series.

 

[YurchenkoLoop]

My thought is they may have recognized her switch 1/1 as a Johnson 1/2

 

[Doug1233]

Hmmm. I’m thinking the hop 1/1 too.

 

[Doug1233]

She drops the L a touch early

 

[Doug1233]

 

[Doug1233]

Should this get credit?

In real time I said yes to the double L but no to the double turn.

But FIG gave it.

 

[ArnoldRimmer]

In real time I’d expect most judges to give both there. Double L looks fine, for the double turn I couldn’t be sure she was short and therefore would credit.

That Popa credit for Jordan is hilarious. I’m not even mad.

 

[irichluck21]

the double turn should not receive credit. It was not complete, she turns with her right leg forward and her left leg back so to complete the turn her left should be in back of her right leg, instead it finishes in front of it.

However, in real time its probably hard to tell and likely to be credited.

Melnikova got several gifts in Tokyo.

 

[Doug1233]

I agree. You can’t turn on two feet. So surely the turn starts when her free leg comes off the floor. If you compare her hip/shoulder position at this moment, to when her free leg drops, it’s quite clearly short to me.

She cheats it by overturning the Double L; giving the impression that the whole turn sequence is complete. But surely you can only start counting the double turn (B) when she lifts the free leg?

 

[YurchenkoLoop]

Weight has shifted onto front leg for double pirouette en dehors

Front foot is placed on ground. It is slightly short, yes. In real time I did not see this and would not have held it against her.
However, in real time I did see how short Andrade’s Memmel was.

 

[dweiss324]

Arguing over badly performed dance skills for D-credibility is the thing that most bothers me about this sport.

 

[ArnoldRimmer]

Did Andrade get the Memmel credited?