PDA

View Full Version : Judges' Favorites



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

MrLucky
03-19-2012, 01:31 PM
Again you are twisting or misunderstanding what I am saying. I am using the comparision of the NFL -- that's the American version of football and not to be confused with the the European version of football which we in Canada call soccer.

Once it is determined a play is a touchdown or not (whether or not video replay is used) you either get the full 6 points or you get none. You don't get partial points for being partially in the end zone. Either enough of you is in or you are not. Once a determination is made whether the play is good you get the points or not.

However, in figure skating you CAN get marks for what you did correctly before you made a mistake. THAT is where the difference lies -- or at least that is the point I was trying to make. One sport gives points only once it is determined that the "try was good" while another gives points for things done and subtracts for things done incorrectly.

Would you care to get off your high horse now? :lol:

I like my horses! :)

I can agree with what you said in this post and see football as a sport. I see figure skating under CoP as something more like ballroom dancing.
Sure it is a competition/contest but with so much credit being given for mistakes I think the sporting aspect is suspect.

I like ballroom dancing and figure skating but don't see them quite the same as other "sports" which typically don't reward failure. I also would agree with anyone who wants to claim skaters (along with dancers) are superb athletes.

Doesn't mean I am right - just the way I see it.

professordeb
03-19-2012, 02:13 PM
I like my horses! :)

I can agree with what you said in this post and see football as a sport. I see figure skating under CoP as something more like ballroom dancing.
Sure it is a competition/contest but with so much credit being given for mistakes I think the sporting aspect is suspect.

I like ballroom dancing and figure skating but don't see them quite the same as other "sports" which typically don't reward failure. I also would agree with anyone who wants to claim skaters (along with dancers) are superb athletes.

Doesn't mean I am right - just the way I see it.
Then I would guess you would not include other judged events as sports such as: diving, synchro swimming, moguls, gymnastics (both types) are what quickly come to mind. Pity, cause I enjoy those sports too.

modern_muslimah
03-19-2012, 02:27 PM
And if the jump just gets a < underrotation call.

Now that there are two separate calls, the << downgrade call requires negative GOE, so if a judge gives positive GOE then that judge made a mistake according to the rules.

I have a question about this. Do the judges know immediately after the program is over whether a jump is << or <? There isn't a lot of time between the end of a program and when the marks goes up for judges to enter marks and for the tech panel to review elements. Forgive me if this question has been answered before.

MrLucky
03-19-2012, 03:03 PM
I have a question about this. Do the judges know immediately after the program is over whether a jump is << or <? There isn't a lot of time between the end of a program and when the marks goes up for judges to enter marks and for the tech panel to review elements. Forgive me if this question has been answered before.

Actually I think it is a good question.

Part of my previous posts about this were based on the GPF from a few years ago.

I recall Yuna opened her SP with a 3L+3T and the 3T was given a UR by the tech caller.

If memory serves me right several judges gave Yuna +GOE for the combo jump.

I also recall how NBC opened their limited coverage of the event showing replays of Yuna's disputed combo jump.

Scott was all over the tech panel for what he saw as a very bad call.
Slow-mo replays that NBC shared with viewers made it clear Yuna's combo was good.

So what is the deal here? The tech panel did indeed dg Yuna's combo but I seem to recall several judges disagreed and actually awarded Yuna +GOE for the 3L+3T.

Maybe I am confused - but it seems ridiculous for a tech panel to dg a jump but still have judges award it +GOE.

To gkelly - not a matter if "judges broke the rules" but strictly a matter of a system that seems askew.

Any help appreciated.......

Mafke
03-19-2012, 03:20 PM
So what is the deal here? The tech panel did indeed dg Yuna's combo but I seem to recall several judges disagreed and actually awarded Yuna +GOE for the 3L+3T.
Maybe I am confused - but it seems ridiculous for a tech panel to dg a jump but still have judges award it +GOE.
To gkelly - not a matter if "judges broke the rules" but strictly a matter of a system that seems askew.
Any help appreciated.......


Here's some help: Downgrade-mania has been just about as bad for figure skating's popularity as figure-centric competitions in the early 70's (and I love figures and hate Bianchetti for her role in destroying the good practices they encouraged). It might even be worse since it's helped reverse decades of gains in the largest FS market....

Do I think underrotation should be punished? Of course! Do I think that CoP practitioners carried that principle beyond all rational justification?

Oh yeah.....

gkelly
03-19-2012, 03:26 PM
The rules about underrotations changed a couple years ago (distinguishing between < underrtoation and << downgrade), and the procedures for showing the judges what the calls are had been changed at least once during the period before that.

To the best of my knowledge, the way things work NOW is as follows:

During the program the tech panel calls the name of the jump and if any member of the tech panel has a question about the call s/he says "Review" and the data operator flags that element for review.

The judges only see the name of the jump element while the program is in process.

At the end of the program, the tech panel goes back and reviews all the elements were that were flagged. If they call underrotation or downgrade on any of the jumps, or wrong edge/unclear edge, the < or << or e symbol shows up on the judges' screens.

In many cases the judges would have seen the error themselves in real time and already taken the GOE reduction, so they don't need to make any changes after the symbols are added.

In other cases the judges did not notice the errors during the program but when they see the calls they change their GOEs to reflect the call.

For a << call the final GOE is required to be negative.

For < (and e, now that there's no more ! and the same symbol is used for both wrong edge and unclear edge), the final GOE is not required to be negative, it's just supposed to be lower than what the judge would have given that element without that mistake. If they already saw the error during the program and took it into account in awarding the GOE, they don't need to lower it any further after the program.

On rare occasions, a judge may have failed to see and reflect the error in real time and also might finalize their marks immediately after inputting their PCS, without checking the elements again to see whether any edge or rotation calls were added. In that case, it would not be surprising to end up with something like 0 GOE for an element like 2A+2T+2T<< -- incorrect according to the rules but appropriate for what the judge saw in real time.




Part of my previous posts about this were based on the GPF from a few years ago.

I recall Yuna opened her SP with a 3L+3T and the 3T was given a UR by the tech caller.

If memory serves me right several judges gave Yuna +GOE for the combo jump.

This would be going back to before the distinction between < and <<.

At that time, any jump that was underrotated by more than 90 degrees was called < and downgraded to the value of the next lower order of jump (e.g., triple to double). That was too harsh for jumps that were almost within the 90-degree tolerance and that were otherwise good with good flow on the landing.

I'd have to check back to what the rules were at the time about whether the GOE was required to be negative.

Under today's rules, that would have been a < call, not <<, the jump would get 70% base value, and positive GOE would be allowed if there were enough other good qualities in the element -- much more likely in a combination where the other jump could be great than in a solo jump.

ETA: For the record, we had been debating the downgrade rules for years before they changed them 2 years ago. I was arguing in favor of some kind of intermediate value for jumps short between 90 and 180 degrees, so I'm totally in favor of the new rules which are much better than the old, overly punitive ones.

For jumps that really are more than 180 degrees short, downgrading and requiring negative GOE is appropriate, but for jumps barely more than 90 degrees short with good flow, that look clean to the naked eye in real time, that penalty was too harsh.

MrLucky
03-19-2012, 03:34 PM
Here's some help: Downgrade-mania has been just about as bad for figure skating's popularity as figure-centric competitions in the early 70's (and I love figures and hate Bianchetti for her role in destroying the good practices they encouraged). It might even be worse since it's helped reverse decades of gains in the largest FS market....

Do I think underrotation should be punished? Of course! Do I think that CoP practitioners carried that principle beyond all rational justification?

Oh yeah.....

Thanks for your comments which I agree with.
Anybody who ever read comments from Janet Lynn would see she agrees with you as well.

But more specifically - my question is about whether a tech panel can dg a jump (or give it an edge call) and if the judges can ignore the tech call and still award +GOE for the jump. :eek:

If that is the case (and it seems to be) then it seems fans will always struggle accepting the validity of the IJS.

Hope I am wrong...... but please make it clear Yuna received no +GOE from the judges for her dg'ed combo at the GPF.

Let's also consider this - Yuna, a Korean skater was competing at the GPF in Japan.........were politics involved? Or as some like to claim the CoP has eliminated politics/cheating from skating.......:rolleyes:

ETA: I posted before I read gkelly's reply.

A thought - do the constant rule changes also drive away fans? Who can keep up with the never ending changes?
My comments were based on rules/events leading into the 2010 Olympics.

I think the points I made regarding Yuna and the GPF make it clear major problems remain with figure skating and the new scoring system hardly makes skating seem like a true sport.

geod2
03-19-2012, 07:18 PM
I have a question about this. Do the judges know immediately after the program is over whether a jump is << or <? There isn't a lot of time between the end of a program and when the marks goes up for judges to enter marks and for the tech panel to review elements. Forgive me if this question has been answered before.

On rare occasions, a judge may have failed to see and reflect the error in real time and also might finalize their marks immediately after inputting their PCS, without checking the elements again to see whether any edge or rotation calls were added. In that case, it would not be surprising to end up with something like 0 GOE for an element like 2A+2T+2T<< -- incorrect according to the rules but appropriate for what the judge saw in real time.


Even though this happens rarely, it seems like the procedure could be tightened up and improved by inserting a "verification" keystroke entry.
This entry would require each judge to certify that they have reviewed and taken into consideration the tech panel's final decisions on the elements,
and the system would only accept it after the tech panel has certified that their collective decisions are final.
That would prevent even the rare case of a judge forgetting or rushing ahead and finalizing a skater's score ahead of the tech panel.

Also, what uses of replay are permitted by the judges, if any??

gkelly, thank you for that explanation.

:)

Aussie Willy
03-19-2012, 09:30 PM
Also, what uses of replay are permitted by the judges, if any??


The judges only get to see the element in real time. They do not have access to slow mo replay.

The tech panel can slow an element down to frame by frame if they need.

5Ali3
03-20-2012, 03:24 AM
The judges only get to see the element in real time. They do not have access to slow mo replay.

The tech panel can slow an element down to frame by frame if they need.

Within the U.S., judges do not have access to replay at non-quals, Regionals, Sectionals, and Junior Nationals. Also, none of the U.S. systems, nor any of the ISU systems, have the ability to replay video frame-by-frame for the tech panel; the system can play 2x, real time, "slow," and "molasses slow." I am not familiar with any of the domestically-owned systems outside of the U.S. or their technological capacities. Actually, I'm not sure how many systems the ISU owns these days; their old main one was a useless, moody :drama: queen (bless her heart). There was some :argue: about which system to use in Vancouver; I can't remember the details, but it was something like: everyone refuses to the use ISU system, it would have been much cheaper to drive the main U.S system from Spokane to Vancouver than ship the main Canadian one from London to Vancouver, but Canada refused to consider using the the U.S. system at a Canadian-hosted Olympics. As I said, I can't remember the details - funny how it seemed like such a big deal at the time and now it seems so petty - but I'm pretty sure the system used in Vancouver was the Canadian one with a few spare parts from the U.S. system. I'm hoping the old ISU system has since been put on mothballs...

In other words, not every "system" [set of hardware parts] used to run IJS is identical, and yes, each one has its own personality quirks. The Southern Cali system has hypersensitive touchpads, the Detroit Metro Council system runs sluggish in the morning, and the headsets that are part of the ________ system are absolute rubbish: they don't work well and they cause helmet hair: that ticks off a few people with fluffy hairstyles, as you can imagine. :lol: