PDA

View Full Version : New FSU Judging Game - 1994 Euro Ladies FS



Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5 6

Aussie Willy
01-09-2011, 05:04 AM
We had a few people think it would be interesting to do a judging game on this event. Very interesting mix of skaters - Butryskaya, Markova, Bonaly, Baiul plus a few others.

I am happy to do the ISUCalc part of it (have updated it on my laptop).

We need a TS and ATS. I am happy to act as a TC but only if no-one else wants the role as I would like to judge this one.

Is someone able to post the clips here?

We can have as many judges as those who want to participate. If I fill a panel I can just start another one. You are allowed to pick a country - first in best dressed. Marks will be entered in the order I receive them from the judges so again first in best dressed.

At the end of the event (we will have a deadline of a couple of weeks on this) the protocols will be posted for everyone to see. And then you can feel free to snark at your fellow judges (What the hell were you thinking :eek:!!!)

To help with the judging, a couple of ISU Communications to assist with the rules. Use Communications 1619 and 1611 from this link.

http://www.isu.org/vsite/vnavsite/page/directory/0,10853,4844-130127-131435-nav-list,00.html

One this link there is a Program Component Overview and also Explanations which may assist with the component side of things.

http://www.isu.org/vsite/vnavsite/page/directory/0,10853,4844-152055-169271-nav-list,00.html

Couple of other things to be aware of:

Mark elements in order as performed.

If you haven't done one of these games before, PCS are marked in increments of .25. Eg if you are marking in the 7.00s, then you could use 7.00, 7.25, 7.50, 7.75. Other marks won't be able to be entered in the program.

When it comes to steps and spins, judge quality, not quantity. If the steps are easy but very well done, reward the skater for it.

Unless the element has to be in the minuses of GOE according to the communication, if it has a slight deduction, then the element can still be in the +GOE. You do need to take into account all the aspects of the element, not just the deduction when applying the GOE.

Keep an open mind about choreography and music. You may not like the program or choice of music, but if the skater is using it and it is appropriate for the music, then reward the skater in their PCS.

Once you have watched the clips when posted, then you can send the marks through to me at kwillyau@internode.on.net. Last time someone had set up an Excel spreadsheet for this so if someone wanted to do that then that would be great.

Looking forward to playing.

Cheers

AW

Squibble
01-09-2011, 05:06 AM
FS? Don't you mean SP?

gkelly
01-09-2011, 05:24 AM
I'd rather judge, but if you can't find a TS I can try to do that instead.

seaner00
01-09-2011, 05:37 AM
delete this post

Aussie Willy
01-09-2011, 06:17 AM
FS? Don't you mean SP?
The suggestion had been the FS.

We could do parts 1 (SP) and 2 (FS). You don't need to have exactly the same panels on both so it would be possible to get a cumalative result.

What do people think?

Squibble
01-09-2011, 06:25 AM
AW, I see what happened. The thread started out discussing the SP, but someone suggested the FS. Then I posted links to some SP's.

It's your call, but I couldn't find a video for Ludmila Ivanova's FS.

Aussie Willy
01-09-2011, 07:20 AM
Maybe let's stick with the FS for the moment. We could revist the SP because I suppose with IJS you are judging what you see, not what placement you give. So whatever marks are given or calls are made, they should be judged independently.

Squibble
01-09-2011, 07:35 AM
Copied from the other thread....

Czako (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXClHIEjDnw)
Witt (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ainbHjq_ks)
Butyrskaya (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=POcVjSr9W9U)
Bonaly (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jnw1RsxVxeQ)
Markova (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mT57QERvqa0)
Szewczenko (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEx0PSawudQ)
Baiul (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJmcMo5uImA)

essence_of_soy
01-09-2011, 07:39 AM
'94 Europeans is one of my favourite competitions. I'll be interested to see how people judge this.

casken
01-09-2011, 08:25 AM
We need a TS and ATS.

Wouldn't it be simpler to just give the skaters the same base score for the spins and footwork and have everyone just give GOE for each element, like they currently do for spirals and the second men's footwork sequence?

briancoogaert
01-09-2011, 01:28 PM
Really weird to imagine that Oksana Baiul won the Olympics with a worse LP against Nancy Kerrigan who skated a better LP than Surya Bonaly at Euros ! But that's another debate : Politiks, politiks ! ;)

gkelly
01-09-2011, 01:59 PM
Wouldn't it be simpler to just give the skaters the same base score for the spins and footwork and have everyone just give GOE for each element, like they currently do for spirals and the second men's footwork sequence?

The spins and steps will probably all be level 1. If someone does happen to have the right kinds of difficulty in the right combination to count as level 2 or 3, do we want to reward that?

Or leave it up to judges to reflect difficulty in the GOEs, so that a difficult element that's not done especially well could earn +GOE in our version?

The other functions of the technical panel would be to determine jump rotation, determine which elements don't count at all, and identify falls that require fall deductions.

I guess the question is, are we trying to practice judging as accurately as possible under 2011 rules, knowing that the programs weren't designed to meet those rules, or are we trying to find as close as possible to a definitive answer of who "should" have won in 1994 rules if there had been a simple system of points for elements and five components at the time?

haribobo
01-09-2011, 03:32 PM
Maybe judging it in 6.0 would make more sense. If the programs weren't designed for CoP, seems funny to judge it that way. But I like the idea in general very much! :)

gkelly
01-09-2011, 04:08 PM
If we judge by 6.0, we'll all go in with preconceptions. I find it's impossible to 6.0-judge past events with a completely open mind when I already know the official results. Others are free to try.

Aussie Willy has offered to organize this, so we'll have to play by her rules.

If someone else wants to organize a game, they can set the rules.

If we want to adapt IJS rules to fit the rules the skaters were following at the time, I'd suggest the following modifications:

No maximum number of jump elements
Minimum one jump combo or jump sequence (no maximum at the time)
Zayak rule limits at the time: maximum of two triples may be repeated, at least one time must be in combination or sequence; the same triple can't be performed more than twice

No maximum number of spins
Spins need at least three revolutions to count as elements (or three on each foot to get credit for the change of foot)
No required kinds of spins
Spins with the same code can count more than once -- it's up to the judges to identify variety or repetition and reflect that under the Choreography score

Step sequences must be recognizably straight line, circular, or serpentine and fill the length or width of the rink or both, respectively
A second step sequence can be called if it's a different shape than the first and meets the requirements
Should they all be called as level 1 (unless they actually meet the requirements for level 2) or as ChSt?

A spiral sequence that meets the 2011 Choreo Spiral Sequence requirements can be called as an element; otherwise spirals like other field moves should be considered transitions

So what do you think, Aussie Willy? Can we adapt the IJS as we know it today to fit 1994 program construction rules? That will tell us more about how these programs compare with each other on their own terms. Trying to fit these programs into 2011 rules will distort the results by throwing out elements that were legal in 1994 but not in the much stricter 2011 well-balanced program requirements.

The PCS scoring should still be valid and interesting in either case.

In that sense it would be easier to use short programs because the rules were more similar. The only differences between 1994 and 2011 ladies SPs would be
*double jump out of steps was required and should earn +/- GOE according to quality, not automatic -3 as now when a triple is required
*spiral sequence is no longer a required element (and few of the sequences at the time would have counted even as level 1 by 2006-2010 rules), so just consider the spirals transitions

Susan M
01-09-2011, 07:10 PM
Step sequences must be recognizably straight line, circular, or serpentine and fill the length or width of the rink or both, respectively

It's going to be hard to characterize these 6.0 era skates under COP. I just watched both Baiul and Bonaly and could not find a full, recognizable step sequence in either. For starters, it is difficult to follow the pattern because the camera is zoomed close on the skater, losing perspective on where the skater is on the ice. (Obviously, you won't be asking me to serve as tech specialist here.:lol:) I think Bonaly twice does most of a circular sequence. This Baiul program has a lot of footwork, but COP would treat them as transitions because they are more near half pattern sequences. This program does sometimes have SL footwork into the 3 toe, but in this particular version, she just did basic stroking there.