skatingforums
On the Ice => Sitting on the Boards Rink Side => Topic started by: nicklaszlo on December 08, 2017, 06:23:35 PM
-
What is the easiest way to perform a CoSpBV? This is a combination with only two positions.
The first thing I think of is forward sit -> forward upright, but I'm concerned this might be called as a spin in one position because "the concluding upright position at the end of the spin is not considered to be another position independent of the number of revolutions, as long as the skater is executing only the final wind-up without any enhancements."
-
That is correct. However, if you do a variation of position on the upright spin, it will then be considered as a separate position. Of course, if this is for a test, not a competition, you will probably be allowed to do a sit-upright as your combination with no change of foot, especially if you manage to get a good number of revolutions on the upright and do it as a scratch spin.
-
Last season I did sit to upright as a 2position basic spin. I did an open upright which I then pulled in for the windup. I was a little sceptical, but having two distinct (basic) positions in the upright meant that it wasn't seen as a wind up.
-
Last season I did sit to upright as a 2position basic spin. I did an open upright which I then pulled in for the windup. I was a little sceptical, but having two distinct (basic) positions in the upright meant that it wasn't seen as a wind up.
Under 6.0 judging or test judging, that is true. Under IJS, it would have been called as a sit spin.
-
Under 6.0 judging or test judging, that is true. Under IJS, it would have been called as a sit spin.
I only compete IJS and this was called as combination spin 2 position last season.
-
I only compete IJS and this was called as combination spin 2 position last season.
Oh, that's great to hear! Just be aware that different technical specialists may have different interpretations of what constitutes an "enhancement" of an upright position, since the term is not defined. I have learned the hard way that whenever something is not clearly defined, the results can vary widely. For example, I asked two technical specialists how they would call an attempted forward sit/back upright combination where the skater completed the forward sit, but then failed to successfully execute the change of foot into the back upright. One of them said he would call it as a sit spin but the other said she would give it zero credit since it was clearly an attempt at a CCoSpV that failed to meet the requirements. Each of them was surprised at the other's answer and neither one knew where to get clarification. These were both very experienced officials, too!
-
Oh, that's great to hear! Just be aware that different technical specialists may have different interpretations of what constitutes an "enhancement" of an upright position, since the term is not defined. I have learned the hard way that whenever something is not clearly defined, the results can vary widely. For example, I asked two technical specialists how they would call an attempted forward sit/back upright combination where the skater completed the forward sit, but then failed to successfully execute the change of foot into the back upright. One of them said he would call it as a sit spin but the other said she would give it zero credit since it was clearly an attempt at a CCoSpV that failed to meet the requirements. Each of them was surprised at the other's answer and neither one knew where to get clarification. These were both very experienced officials, too!
I find it strange for that example that one would call it as a sit spin. Over here I'm pretty sure all our tech specs are sufficiently harsh that that would call it as a CCoSpV zero credit.
I'm currently working on broken leg to back upright and am busy counting revolutions on both spins to make sure there's sufficient that there's no question in the TS brain about whether the back spin made minimum count.