PDA

View Full Version : Judges' Favorites



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8

5Ali3
03-16-2012, 05:50 AM
Watch Patick Chan's short program at 4 CC's his quad - was it a fall? The definition is supposed to be if a hand is down but the skater could have stayed up without the hand it is not a fall. As far as I can see, hand or no hand it was a fall. Slow motion or regular speed. He was given -3 from the judges but no fall from the Tech Panel. There is always playing room from judges or tech panel - you just hope that sometime it goes in your favor.


-3 in GOE by the judges doesn't aways mean a fall on an element happened.

Julieann is correct that a -3GOE doesn't always mean that the skater "fell" on the element. In this case, beyond the errors on the landing of the 4T, there's another major problem: Chan performed the 4T as the "solo jump out of steps" and, um, there's no steps. In a short program, that 4T is clearly -3GOE for the combination of no steps and landing errors. (This was the first time that I've watched Chan this season. Does he typically do the combo on the 4T and do the 3Lz as the solo jump out of steps?)

I agree with Sylvia that the "fall" is not obvious on video, at least youtube video on my computer screen. If I'm spatially oriented correctly, I believe the "fall" would have been even more difficult to visualize from the camera angle used by the technical panel, which would have looked at Chan straight-on, not from the side, and I think the percentage of weight on his hands would have been much more obvious from the side than looking straight at him.

(For those who aren't familiar with the REVIEW procedures used by the technical panel, the technical panel can only review video from a single camera; at U.S. Nationals and internationals, this camera is mounted on the podium right by the tech panel. The idea is that the camera replicates the point-of-view of the tech panel, so if an edge change, fall, etc. wasn't visible from their angle, video isn't providing another opinion: it's simply allowing the tech panel to literally re-view what they saw the first time. The image captured by this camera is of lower quality than the TV cameras in the area, so that's a contributing factor, too. Finally, "falls" can only be reviewed in real time - no slow motion - and two of the three "calling" members of the technical panel (i.e., the Technical Specialist, Assistant Technical Specialist, and Technical Controller) must agree that it was a "fall;" Video, Data, Accountant, and Technical Accountant/Systems Specialist don't get to vote, frequently to the chagrin of Video. :lol: And no matter how much she wants to contribute, the lady announcing the skaters and playing the CDs doesn't get to vote either. :rolleyes: Oh wait, I think I'm mixing up Podunk Open and 4CCs... Well, the announcer at 4CCs also doesn't get a vote, but I suspect she didn't try. :) )

judgejudy27
03-16-2012, 05:55 AM
Judges Favorites:

- Patrick Chan
- Kim Yuna
- Carolina Kostner
- Jason Brown
- Adelina Sotnikova
- Julia Lipnitskaya
- Michelle Kwan

I dont agree at all on Sotnikova. I have never seen her overscored, in fact she is often scored harshly relative to some of the other young Russians.

gingercat
03-16-2012, 11:06 AM
As I have been taught, "a judge is supposed to judge what is in front of them on the day and not the reputation of a skater". A very difficult task, but it would wonderful to see this happen more often.

PashaFan
03-16-2012, 11:19 AM
As I have been taught, "a judge is supposed to judge what is in front of them on the day and not the reputation of a skater". A very difficult task, but it would wonderful to see this happen more often.

I've always thought that the judging system should NOT have been changed but the JUDGES.
They are too set in their ways.
Who knows what goes on in their heads sometimes.
Very little............................................ ...

allezfred
03-16-2012, 11:36 AM
I've always thought that the judging system should NOT have been changed but the JUDGES.
They are too set in their ways.
Who knows what goes on in their heads sometimes.
Very little............................................ ...

Are you for real? All the judges are too set in their ways and they all have diminished mental faculties? :rofl:

Seems like there is someone who has very little going on in their heads and it ain't the judges. :P

Frau Muller
03-16-2012, 01:22 PM
Wire-transfers from Piseev's Alfa-Bank account "don't hurt" to determine favorites. :sekret::sekret::sekret:

geod2
03-16-2012, 01:50 PM
I've always thought that the judging system should NOT have been changed but the JUDGES.
They are too set in their ways.
Who knows what goes on in their heads sometimes.
Very little............................................ ...


The protocols would be the place to answer that.
....as well as becoming a "student of CoP."
It's complicated, and sometimes frustrating....believe me, I know.

You are still wistfully pining for the days of 6.0 ....talk about set in your ways!

-

MrLucky
03-16-2012, 03:31 PM
I've always thought that the judging system should NOT have been changed but the JUDGES.
They are too set in their ways.
Who knows what goes on in their heads sometimes.
Very little............................................ ...

I agree and as a longtime fan also know some of these judges and officials would rather die than give up their little power fiefdoms.

But why only single out judges?

Cincuanta along with alot of the big ISU brass presided over SLC as well as the formerly scandalous discipline known as Ice Dancing.

Changing the system changed very little as long as so many of the same culprits remained in place.

This seems to be a no-brainer to me....yet others are silly enough to assume that changing the scoring system magically made all the known cheaters/manipulators honest players.

How odd! :(

PashaFan
03-16-2012, 04:28 PM
Are you for real? All the judges are too set in their ways and they all have diminished mental faculties? :rofl:

Seems like there is someone who has very little going on in their heads and it ain't the judges. :P

Did I say diminished mental faculties?. No. I meant very little in the way of being open to skaters who are not usually the judges favourites moving up.
Why insult me instead of asking me to explain what I wrote?.
IMO judges are very set in their ways. I never said I wanted the 6.0 system back did I?. I think NOW it works quite well but I still think the judges pre-judge a lot.

allezfred
03-16-2012, 04:45 PM
Did I say diminished mental faculties?. No. I meant very little in the way of being open to skaters who are not usually the judges favourites moving up.

You said:


Who knows what goes on in their heads sometimes.
Very little............................................ ...

So you're not saying the judges are stupid then?


Why insult me instead of asking me to explain what I wrote?.

Because when you write rubbish that tars every single skating judge in the world with the same brush you deserve to be called out on it. :P


IMO judges are very set in their ways. I never said I wanted the 6.0 system back did I?. I think NOW it works quite well but I still think the judges pre-judge a lot.

And if you every became a judge ( :yikes: at the thought), you'd be completely unbiased of course. :lol:

PashaFan
03-16-2012, 04:52 PM
You said:



So you're not saying the judges are stupid then?



Because when you write rubbish that tars every single skating judge in the world with the same brush you deserve to be called out on it. :P



And if you every became a judge ( :yikes: at the thought), you'd be completely unbiased of course. :lol:

Did I say the judges were STUPID?. Did I use that word?.
Did I say I want to become a judge?.
You need to grow up & stop making more of something than there is.

zaphyre14
03-16-2012, 04:59 PM
If the posters here can't agree on who the favorites are, why does anyone assume that the judges (who, contrary to apparently public belief, are human and individuals, not one giant amorphous Talkin Head) do?

allezfred
03-16-2012, 05:02 PM
Did I say the judges were STUPID?. Did I use that word?.

You said there was very little going on in their minds. I just like to summarise things up in one word when I can. :D


Did I say I want to become a judge?.

Well you seem to think you know a whole lot more about judging figure skating than they do so you really are missing your calling. :saint:


You need to grow up & stop making more of something than there is.

:biggrinbo

PashaFan
03-16-2012, 06:12 PM
You said there was very little going on in their minds. I just like to summarise things up in one word when I can. :D



Well you seem to think you know a whole lot more about judging figure skating than they do so you really are missing your calling. :saint:



:biggrinbo

True;)

MrLucky
03-17-2012, 02:51 PM
The skater achieves a base value (determined by the technical panel, not the judges) for being able to rotate a certain number of times in the air from a certain take off. That skill is "rewarded" in the base value, not the fall. The fall/butt slide itself is penalized (by the tech panel with a 1 point deduction and the judges with a 3 step reduction in GOE). I understand what you were trying to get at, and happen to agree that difficult jumps (particularly quads) with falls should probably not get as many points as they currently do, but the way you worded it, that "judges apparently love/reward butts sliding across the ice" is just false. The technical panel just assigns the base value based on what was attempted and to what degree it was completed, whether they "liked" it or not, and they don't have any say in how many points that is worth. Then the judges penalize the fall in the GOE. As far as I've seen, the technical panel and judges have been following these rules.

The degree to which falls should be reflected in the PCS is up for debate (as are what the point values of the elements should be depending on the GOE) but the judges would not reward falls in the PCS.

I can agree with most of this post since part of it is simply stating the "rules".

Here is a question: more than one skater - Jeremy comes to mind -has said adding a quad to your program automatically increases the PCS.

A skater landing a quad or even falling on a quad often gets a boost in their PCS.

I am curious why this happens as I can't find it in the rules. :confused:

I chalk it up to the culture of reputation scoring - which IMO never changed much when the new scoring system was introduced.

A butt slide might get penalized according the the tech rules but does it really matter if the PCS scores are boosted enough to carry a skater through an off night?

A real flaw is the difference of opinion we see at times from the tech panel and the judges. In the NFL if a referree signals a TD but then gets overruled by instant replay there are no points awarded.

What would be the point to having instant replay if it didn't determine the outcome of a play?

I see a lack of logic when the tech panel makes one call only to have it ignored by judges awarding +GOE on a jump that received a downgrade.

Not sport, just a free-for-all with frequently puzzling scores.

Is it acceptable for a skater to have a jump or combo jump downgraded by the tech panel yet to still receive +GOE from certain judges?

Did the skater manage to pull off a a really good but flawed jump? :blah:

If the micro management of the IJS is ever going to work and gain back the public some consistency and better logic will be required.