The Grand Prix of Italy was held last week. I haven’t looked at all the protocols or all the competitions, but sometimes I suspect that even those who have to judge the competitions are not so much careful. It cannot be explained otherwise why the Technical Controller, the French Florence Vuylsteker, the Technical Specialist, the Italian Gilberto Viadana, and the Assistant Technical Specialist, the American Terry Kubicka, did not realize that the triple lutz performed by Yuma Kagiyama as second jump element of his free skate does not exactly have an outside edge.
Let’s take a good look at that triple lutz. Kagiyama arrives on an outside edge, then moves to an inside edge. That lutz should have received a wrong edge call, deduction from -2 to -4. To be generous with Kagiyama there should have been at least the unclear edge call, deduction from -1 to -2. And, with an incorrect take off, the starting mark couldn’t be higher than +3. At most, with a technical panel that did his job in a generous way, and with equally generous judges, the mark could be at most a +2. Even if the Technical Panel does not do what it is supposed to do, the judges can give a -1 for Unclear edge take off F/Lz (no sign). We are again back to that +2 which is the maximum possible mark for this jump. And this without considering the full blade take off and the prerotation.
I looked closely at only one other triple lutz, that of Mikhail Kolyada. Unfortunately there is no frontal view, but looking at the video it is evident that Kolyada maintains a very pronounced outside edge until the end. And, in addition to the outside edge, it is clear that he did the take off with the toe of the skate, not with the blade, and that he did not prerotate.
This is the first jump of the 3Lz+1Eu+3S combination, a great combination, which Kolyada completed effortlessly. Now, who explains to Kolyada that Kagiyama received higher marks than him?
If the sport is to be taken seriously, final scores must be awarded according to the rules. And, speaking of rules, for Touch down with one hand or free foot the deduction goes from -1 to -2, and certainly at least are missing bullets 2 and 3, good take-off and landing and effortless throughout. This is also true when the touch down is very small. Anyway, even without the touch, the deduction for Weak landing (bad pos./wrong edge/scratching etc) ranges from -1 to -3. This means that a jump with one of these problems cannot receive more than +2. Perhaps we should explain it to the Chinese judge Bing Han, who awarded Kagiyama’s quadruple toe loop, with a slight touch of his free foot on the ice, a +3.
The screenshots are dedicated only to the landing, they should be watched from left to right. In the first screenshot Kagiyama’s foot is still raised, in the second he is scratching on the ice, in two of the screesnshots you can also see the little cloud of ice raised by the blade.
How long will it take for the ISU to understand that better technologies, a simplification of the judges’ work and judges trained better are essential to avoid such nonsense?
