On bias, and whatnot
Hi I’m that anon that just gave u feedback. Anyway, I was thinking that maybe when u make those posts, adding any personal assumptions could be something u do unconsciously, especially when talking abt skaters u aren’t a fan of. Like using a certain skater as the epitome of very bad technique, demanding that most (if not all) jumps should be << or < and mentioning the Olympic oath. I think it’ll be better if u just point these errors out without those side comments. –
– In a way, those comments make it look like that skater is deliberately cheating and not doing anything, not working hard enough, instead of the real flaw that is the ISU judging system. Don’t worry, I don’t see u as a hater, but comments placed alongside those posts imo make it seem like u just dislike that skater. And yeah as I said, it’ll be better if u can judge diff skaters on the same standards. Anyway, thanks for your kind response :) (sorry this got super long again)
–AND I get that biases are unavoidable and u are trying ur best to keep things simple, but I hope u don’t do so at the expense of ppl thinking wrong abt other skaters. Your blog helped me learn so much about the sport and I really appreciate the effort! Again, thank you and sorry for these long-ass asks
Hey there, thanks for the clarification. I’m glad I understand what you’re referring to now. Honestly for one moment I was scared you were talking about my tendency to be partial to Yuzuru and to keep using him as examples in my tech posts - now that is something I won’t be able to change anytime soon.
We’re talking about Shoma, yes? So I’d like to clarify: no, I do not think he’s the epitome of bad technique. As I mentioned the other day, he is by no means the only skater on the circuit having a pre-rotation issue. I did use his jump as an example of PR in this info post of mine (which I think is the only one time when I brought this topic up completely unasked for), but that was because I was using the top 6 men as examples throughout the post, and among that group, Shoma is the only one with that issue.
Now about this post, I did not write it with the purpose of demanding anything, The ask I received there was about why I appeared to treat Shoma’s jumps differently, so I was trying to explain that his jumping habits are quite visible and uniform across his toe loops, loops, flips, and Lutzes. I then went on to explain why, considering that fact, I’ve been opting to talk about his quad flip instead of the other jumps. True, I did say that based on my observation, I really ought to be demanding downgrade on everything except the Axel and maybe the Salchows. But that was by no means the main point of that post, and even if you take it to be the main point, I’d say it’s pretty factual: according to ISU rule, jumps pre-rotated by 180 degrees or more must be downgraded. You can argue with me about whether or not Shoma’s PR is visible enough in real time for the technical panel to make the call, but it remains a fact that, when you look at it closely, his PR is a thing that objectively exists.
By the way, technically his jumps should be called << for PR; I say nothing about the < call, which is used for under-rotation. In fact, I have said in no less than 3 separate occasions (here, here, and here) that Shoma doesn’t usually under-rotate his jumps. He might appear to, because of knee torque, but it’s usually not bad enough to merit a < call.
On my usage of the Olympic oath in a Shoma discussion, in that original post itself, I’ve heralded it by explicitly stating that it falls under the unsolicited part of my opinion. I have also tried to clarify my thinking further here, here, and here. I’d also like to point out that I’ve mentioned time and again that I never ever for one moment think that Shoma is not working hard enough. In fact, I probably mentioned it too much, because the last time I brought it up, I was given feedback that my comment came off as condescending - which is honestly completely not what I was aiming for.
That’s all I could think of to explain my point of view. I hope it helps clear things up.
I just want to say that I deeply appreciate every post you make, all the tech posts and gif posts and especially your posts sharing your personal opinions (they were the ones drawing my attention to your blog, and I love them!). I think the previous anon has no right to demand the things they said to you. If they want a pure technique info, just go google it. If they demand such a thing, they can either share their thoughts or simply unfollow.(I’m sorry,I feel really angry with that anon ask :(
Hey, I’m sorry to see that you’ve been getting asks accusing you of bias. As far as I can see these people only know how to vaguely call you biased and aren’t able to actually point out where you were supposedly inaccurate in your posts. If you were really wrong, it would be easy for them to just point it out. It’s so very transparent of these guys to pose as neutral and unbiased saints when all they want is for you to stop criticizing their faves’ flaws. I say keep up your good work. 👍
Guys, thank you so much. I’m very happy you are not annoyed by my not-always-unbiased opinions :) I know that I have a heck of a lot of those especially when it comes to Yuzuru. I mean, lordy, I have a confession to make that the other day when I put his hydroblade jump entry next to one of Janny’s for a gifset, I blatantly cut off the part where he fell on his butt right under the spotlight (whereas she lander her jump perfectly) :)) I’m eternally grateful that no Janny fan has come forth to call me out on my borderline fraudulent and manipulative activity.
For what it’s worth, even if it’s just about random stuff on the Internet, I do think that everyone should be held accountable for what they say and we should never encourage nor tolerate outright lies or defamation. I, however, do not have the full capacity to meditate on how every single line I write (and I do write a lot, unfortunately, please blame my natural wordy tendency) will be interpreted by every single person who will read it. If you have doubts about my intention/implication, do feel free to demand me to clarify it. I will do so, up to a certain limit, because I think that when I’ve explained myself thrice and you refuse to see the sense in it, we really should stop wasting each other’s time and agree to disagree.