PDA

View Full Version : Hersh article



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 18

Nomad
11-08-2011, 04:10 AM
yeah, the days of 6.0 were simple to understand when comparing one person/team to another. However, I was often left confused as to why someone won over another. In my eyes, they seemed pretty close and it just seemed that whoever was in favour at that time won. I couldn't understand how someone who fell still won over someone who didn't even earning a 6.0 for interpretation! There was seldom any explananation given, at least none that I found plausible. I remember plenty of discussions, especially in dance, about how one team was supposedly better than another. However, when I watched the FDs of the teams, I didn't see how you could compare one team to another. I mean, when one team seemed to be very theatrical, spent time posing for the judges or did some of their moves multiple times and they won over a team that moved and skated and danced, well I was left going ??? Some here tried to explain why that "dance" won but I was often still left wondering. This same type of thing happened in singles skating as well as pairs. Dare I think that if we had COP back in SLC that there would still be the arguing over the gold medal in pairs.

Yep, 6.0 may be easy to understand on how someone beat someone else but I was quite often left :confused: because I just didn't understand how the judged meted out those marks. Maybe it's because I'm a numbers kind of person but I like seeing how the skaters earned their marks. I will say there's room for improvement in COP but I much prefer - and understand - COP.

I never really understood 6.0 myself. All I got was that it was essentially a punitive system and if you made mistakes in the SP you were screwed. With CoP, the highest total score wins. My nieces (who only watch skating when the Olympics are on) get that. They did ask me why certain skaters they liked got lower scores than others (I can't remember who) but got it when I explained that some jumps are harder than others and get more points, and traveling spins get fewer points than centered ones, etc. They got the general idea. I think certain commentators would help make this clearer to adult casual fans by simply doing the same thing. If they MUST talk all through a program, tell the audience where the skaters are gaining/losing points and why. Don't blather on about what a hard worker Tammy Twizzle is or how Larry Lutz loves to cook and is getting a degree in architecture. And for God's sake, stop pissing and moaning about how arcane and byzantine "the new judging system" is. That helps nobody. /rant

lakewood
11-08-2011, 04:46 AM
Do you really think that "casual fans" who cannot tell the difference in the level skating skill etc... are stupid and idioitic?

I can tell you that someone like my husband would see no difference between Evan and Patrick and he is not stupid nor is he an idiot. He would think whoever did not fall should win. Lots of casual fans think that.

Those casual fans are not really fans. They do not enjoy skating. They may watch skating on TV when Olympics but not GP, 4cc and Worlds. No sport depends on casual fans. Do casual fans watch NFL and MLB regularly? You have to grow real fans.

Those people who watched skating on TV in US in late 90's and early 2000's were not casual fans of skating but casual fans of Kwan, Cohen, Kerrigan.. If USFS have another such glorious star, those casual fans will watch TV again regardless of scoring system. They will be happy when this star wins even with a fall.

brightphoton
11-08-2011, 04:52 AM
Don't blather on about what a hard worker Tammy Twizzle is or how Larry Lutz loves to cook and is getting a degree in architecture.
I don't know who the woman who does commentary during the US National championships is, but she always always always makes silly comments like that. "Oh that girl is so small, she can hardly see over the boards! Oh, do you know what her hobbies are? She likes to read and hang out with her friends." I don't know what is worse, that woman's pattering or Scott Hamilton's screeching.

The Eurosport guys are much more helpful, pointing out edge calls and underrotations live.



And for God's sake, stop pissing and moaning about how arcane and byzantine "the new judging system" is. That helps nobody. /rant

I hate it when gymnasts say that the new system is sooooo much harder for us non-gymnastics peasants and how much better the old 10 system was because it was soooo much easier. :rofl: :soapbox: We KNOW a score of 15 is not as good as 16, but better than 14. We're not stupid!

And no, we don't have a strange fascination or attachment to the number 10. We only watch gymnastics once every 4 years anyway.

Nomad
11-08-2011, 05:03 AM
I don't know who the woman who does commentary during the US National championships is, but she always always always makes silly comments like that. "Oh that girl is so small, she can hardly see over the boards! Oh, do you know what her hobbies are? She likes to read and hang out with her friends." I don't know what is worse, that woman's pattering or Scott Hamilton's screeching.

The Eurosport guys are much more helpful, pointing out edge calls and underrotations live.



I hate it when gymnasts say that the new system is sooooo much harder for us non-gymnastics peasants and how much better the old 10 system was because it was soooo much easier. :rofl: :soapbox: We KNOW a score of 15 is not as good as 16, but better than 14. We're not stupid!

And no, we don't have a strange fascination or attachment to the number 10. We only watch gymnastics once every 4 years anyway.

I don't remember if they did this for the Olympics or US Nationals, but I did see one televised competition where the commentator gave a breakdown of scores - "Over 200 points=very good; 175 - 200=good", and so on. That was a step in the right direction. It would give casual fans some sort of reference point. And it's no worse than 6.0, really, where judges gave skaters 5.4/5.5 because they represented "the wrong country" even though the skater/team representing "the right country" sucked on the day and got 5.8/5.9 anyway.

IceAlisa
11-08-2011, 05:08 AM
The Russian male commentator is good too. The woman, not so much, she is more of a color commentator, I guess.

RoseAugust
11-08-2011, 05:32 AM
I'm a little perplexed about the importance of casual fans when it comes to judging figure skating. Why should they have any influence? I'm a casual fan of basketball and believe me, the guys in my house who are true fans of basketball as a sport (not of the local team) would not me influencing the referees and the rule book! My opinion of how plays are called is not exactly valued, nor should it be.

Nomad
11-08-2011, 06:07 AM
nm

Nomad
11-08-2011, 06:08 AM
nm

berthesghost
11-08-2011, 01:51 PM
I'm a little perplexed about the importance of casual fans when it comes to judging figure skating. Why should they have any influence? I'm a casual fan of basketball and believe me, the guys in my house who are true fans of basketball as a sport (not of the local team) would not me influencing the referees and the rule book! My opinion of how plays are called is not exactly valued, nor should it be.:confused:
If people don't buy what you are selling, you go out of business. Basket ball is raking in the dough. Fs is on the brink of chapter 11.

So if you disagree that the judging system is the reason, why do you think fans are leaving fs in droves? Yeah the bubble burst, but we're not back to pre 1994 numbers, we're back to pre 1964 numbers. Yuna is like a rock star, as is chan, so there's only so long the "there are no more stars" excuse can lumber on.

nlyoung
11-08-2011, 02:05 PM
:confused:
If people don't buy what you are selling, you go out of business. Basket ball is raking in the dough. Fs is on the brink of chapter 11.

So if you disagree that the judging system is the reason, why do you think fans are leaving fs in droves? Yeah the bubble burst, but we're not back to pre 1994 numbers, we're back to pre 1964 numbers. Yuna is like a rock star, as is chan, so there's only so long the "there are no more stars" excuse can lumber on.

Changing the judging system back to the way it was won't bring back the fans. There is a completely logical explanation for why there aren't more fans of figure skating out there. This isn't a sport most can relate to, compared to sports like football and basketball that are played by many and seen by far more. Figure skating is an elite sport and as such has a very defined support group. And Chan may be a "rock star" in the FS community, but I can tell you that there are few average Canadians who would know who he is. On the other hand, most could identify Sydney Crosby...

museksk8r
11-08-2011, 02:06 PM
I wish there was a way that the ISU could blend the best of both systems (COP & 6.0) somehow. Why not a hybrid system called Code of 6.0 or something? Give the skaters more room in their programs to breathe and express the character and theme of the music and lighten up on all the technical requirements that are only means of whoring maximum points and level 4s. Still, I love to see faulty technique (under-rotations and wrong edge takeoffs on jumps) receiving the major losses in grades of execution that many times the 6.0 system failed to do. I guess one thing I can be thankful for is the code's recent rule changes on spiral sequences; I am so thankful that I no longer see anyone do the pee on the fire hydrant spiral. THAT move used to drive me crazy! Now we just have butt spins (A spins) galore! :drama:

gkelly
11-08-2011, 03:26 PM
:confused:
If people don't buy what you are selling, you go out of business. Basket ball is raking in the dough. Fs is on the brink of chapter 11.

Unlike the NBA, the ISU is not a business whose mission is to sell a product to consumers.

It's a membership organization whose primary mission is to serve its members by organizing and regulating international skating competition.

The members of the ISU are national governing bodies for skating sports. And the members of those national federations are skaters. Except for a few paid staff, most of the work of running the organizations is done by volunteers with expenses paid.

Instead of comparing the finances to a professional sport like pro basketball, compare instead to speedskating (also part of the ISU) or other traditionally amateur sports that don't attract much income from spectators. Compare the structure more to a nonprofit, primarily volunteer professional association than to a profit-oriented business.

Of course if the competitions attract audiences who are willing to pay for tickets, or TV viewers who are willing to look at ads and sponsors willing to buy those ads and TV networks willing to pay for broadcast rights, then everybody wins.

So figuring out ways to bring the audience in to understanding the sport on its own terms, and sometimes adjusting the sport in ways that add appeal to audiences more than they take away from the skaters' needs, is good business.

But compromising the mission of serving the athletes in favor of attracting audiences would defeat the purpose the organization exists for in the first place.

If outside income from the spectators and sponsors were to dry up completely because audiences have moved on to other interests, the ISU won't declare bankruptcy and disband itself. It would scale back its budget to activities that can be provided for its members funded by fees contributed by the members.

OliviaPug
11-08-2011, 05:50 PM
But compromising the mission of serving the athletes in favor of attracting audiences would defeat the purpose the organization exists for in the first place.

I acknowledge figure skating is NOT like basketball in terms of its product; however, I firmly believe attracting a solid audience to figure skating *does* serve the athletes as well as the organization.

O-

gkelly
11-08-2011, 06:27 PM
Oh, I agree. Many, probably most, skaters prefer to skate for an audience, and they all like the opportunity to earn money.

But they also spend a lot of time perfecting their edges, jump rotations, etc. So it wouldn't serve them to change rules to make those things less important than, say, smiling and remaining upright, just because most of the audience doesn't notice and doesn't care.

Vagabond
11-08-2011, 06:51 PM
I think "casual fans" are getting a lot less credit here for understanding what they see than they deserve.

This is Beatrix Schuba's Free Skate from 1972 Europeans: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTwv03_sufg. It's not terribly different from how she skated at the Olympics that year; she skated "clean" at both events. This is Janet Lynn's Free Skate from the 1972 Olympics: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vS581_gagjM (with the fall on flying sit spin at 1:48). I think that just about anyone can see that, notwithstanding the fall, Lynn was the better free skater, and so did the judges at the Olympics, who ranked her first and Schuba seventh.

Similarly, I think that just about anyone can see that Patrick Chan's actual skating is better than that of any of his rivals.

Leaving aside the minutiae of base values and grades of execution, most viewers can understand and accept that if Skater A does one element that is harder than anything Skater B does and Skater B has one more fall than Skater A, it doesn't necessarily follow that Skater A should beat Skater B. Yes, it takes a little bit of work to educate the viewer, but it's not all that difficult.