Discussion in 'The Trash Can' started by Maofan7, Feb 14, 2012.
I think that GOE is not being used as effectively as it should be. In this way, skaters may benefit from doing a simpler level of an element really well (think Angela N.'s layback spin with no change of edge or position) versus a hard level that looks awkward and slow (see many level 4 spins that contort). It's also confusing to see twizzles (example: D/W from skate america sd) get +GOE when there's a glaring unison problem. I think that if there is a mistake on an element, it should be negative goe. I don't care if the take off, air position, height, and difficult arm position if the person two-foot's the jump. It should get negative goe. and I think that's what is confounding people. I still think how Lambiel got lower spin scores than if I recall correctly Lysacek or Plushenko (I'm not completely sure about this, but I know it occured). Sure, Stephan's spins maybe didn't switch an edge or didn't contort himself to a bad position but he still spun better than anyone in the men's competition and this was evident to even ones with just basic knowledge of the elements.
I absolutely do appreciate that skaters, coaches and choreographers can get nearly instant feedback on their programs, but I would disagree that COP is all that transparent when the judges remain hidden and can give their marks anonymously.
And, in most cases, though not all, it seems judges still use PCS as placemarkers rather than as objectively as they could. I mean, look at Plushenko averaging 8.25 for transitions in his free skate at Europeans. What does that say about the knowledge of the judges? Yes, he should win the tech marks and perhaps the performance/execution marks, but for transitions as well? Really? C'mon! It's dubious things like that which make me feel like figure skating judging has not changed in the least since the days of 6.0.
You are only looking at what happens at major international events where the judges are put into random order. At most national and local competitions, the judges are identified. So for all those skaters who compete at those levels the judges are totally transparent. And there are a lot more skaters doing those events than those who compete in international events.
I think the problem is with the judges, not the system. What's mind boggling to me is why coaches are now teck controllers. That is bias in it's purest form. And should be illegal. They are judging skaters. Grand prix events should not allow coaches who have
Teams in the grand prix judge their rival skaters. This is a joke. Save the system out the
Thanks, Aussie Willy. That is good to know. I know at US Nationals and smaller events here the judges are also identified.
However, I still think it is a mistake for the governing body of the sport to hide the judges behind anonymous marks. The 2002 judging scandal was about collusion, and that is something that has not been dealt with, but indeed, completely ignored. The creation of a different judging system can only do so much if the basic problem remains. This is not to say I think all international judges are corrupt, but when one sees marks like the ones I posted above about Plushenko's transitions...
Knowing a few Technical Specialist, including those who have done international events, the last thing they are looking at when doing their job is the skater themselves. They are focussing so much on the elements and levels that who the is skater is irrelevant. It is actually the most unemotional and detached aspect of how skaters are evaluated and personality is taken right out of the equation. Sit on a technical panel doing data entry or video replay and you will see how it works. Plus there are 3 people sitting in that seat, not one.
As for it being coaches doing the TS role, there they are not allowed to be on panels where their own skaters are competing (even at a local level competitions). And many of them are not your top international coaches anyway so they would not be doing TS for events they have skaters competing in.
At the end of the day, the workforce is volunteer so I ask who do you propose to take on those roles if you don't think it should be coaches?
I'll second that!
^^ Also I'm pretty sure they can't call at any qualifying competitions in the same level as their skater??
Sissy Krick gave Tonya Harding a 6.0 at Skate America in 1991. Boy, would I love to ask her what it was like to see that performance LIVE.
I read somewhere and it was an article directly related to skating competition attendance and ratings (apart from a lack of coverage), that numbers were down because of the vast array of entertainment choices available now versus a decade ago.
Though CoP is a big improvement over the 6.0 system, for the average fan, it is still too complicated.
At least with 6.0, though it was a puzzle as to why skaters were given the marks they got, there was a mark for technical merit (what they did) artistic impression (how they did it), and a ceiling as well. Yes, the placements determined the winners ultimately, but it just looked neater.
With CoP, there is a technical element score, but 5 elements that make up the program component score. Especially when there is crossover between skating skills, transitions, performance, choreography and interpretation, why not just have one mark instead.
That is nice of her, definitely. My post came across like some sort of corruption allegation, didn't it? I meant just that is was a rather strange call to have S/P ahead of B/S in the SP.
I imagine tech callers are dedicated and try to be impartial at all times. That having been said - it does look bad, even if nobody's doing anything wrong, because it creates an appearance of possible impropriety, something skating doesn't need.
I didn't read it that way at all.
BTW I judged with Sissy today. She is a very natural and down to earth person. Even when I was having major problems with the computers she just went with the flow. Absolutely dedicated and passionate about skating.
But the problem in skating is that most judges, skaters and coaches know each other anyway. It is such a small community, even worldwide, that those perceptions are unavoidable.
I will disagree with you there.. I to know
Many tek controllers and while some are on the
Up and up, others become tek controllers to
Corrupt! I think Peter Kriek who should run for Isu head
Replacing the ass.... Who is there now. He really cares about
The skaters and hates this corruption . Thank god he I's there
And has to ok Tek panel. He try's to balance out the
Bullshit. But Alla is head of tek committee .
I am writing this quickly while at work...
But in the by laws judges can not be coaches
What kind of con job is that.. Isn't tek controllers
Wow, I didn't know that coaches are allowed to be technical controllers!
I am so tired of this continuous unfair judging that goes on and on. Just a couple of hours ago I read this interview with Pechalat/Bourzat and their opinions about what happened in the Euros: http://absoluteskating.com/index.php?cat=interviews&id=2012pechalatbourzat
The skaters feel as bad about the judging as does the audience. Who benefits from this system?
Absolutely. I have a hard time remembering skater's programs under COP because they all look so the same. I can clearly remember specific choreography and visual moments from pre-COP programs like Chen Lu's Rach, Klimova and Pomonorenko's A Man and a Woman, Michelle Kwan's Rach SP and several LPs, T/D's bolero and paso, etc.
The lack of uniqueness is even more apparently outside of the medal contenders. There are a lot of top 10 skaters who do generic programs with jumps with hippy hoppy double loops tacked on, wobbly spins, slow sloppy footwork, long footwork sections of swinging around on one foot which must wear the skater out. Whereas you used to get some truly interesting and entertaining programs outside of the perennial World medal contenders (like Kristina Czako, Stephanie Rosenthal in the US to name a couple).
However, I do want to point out that most of the skaters on the 2006 and 2010 Olympic podiums were skaters that are thought of as artistic/complete packages. Mao was trying to rely on the 3Axel, but she still is an artistic skater. Slute may have been a power skater but she had become a complete artistic skater. You can argue about Lysacek and Plush all you want, but that was not in the same vein of the athlete vs. the artist competitions like Elvis vs. Kurt/Ilia/Urmanov or Midori vs Kristi or Tonia vs. Kristi or Nancy.
The place I think it has really started hurting the most is pairs. Pairs now is full of truly ugly struggling arm wrestling lifts. It wasn't quite as bad during early COP. There are only a couple of pairs ladies with the line to make those lifts look decent and a couple of men who can keep up the speed during them.
I don't like the short dance, but dance is where I still see truly memorable choreography in COP, perhaps due to the skill level of the dancers.
I think everyone should drop a email to the
ISU to ask congress to change this immediately or
You will see in the next few years even more
Corruption then before. Tek specialist can make or
Break a teams scores! No coaches should be allowed to
A. being on the tech panel is not judging. I see no reason why coaches who don't have skaters in that event shouldn't be on a panel. There is zero evidence of any bias on the tech panels, and their job is very black and white, there is no opinion in it.
B. You only remember the specific choreography pre-COP because it was so rare
I don't think CoP is necessarily worse, but it is no improvement. There is still bias, it is just harder to see. Because of anonymity and because the marks are totals and not broken down (unless you know t look at protocols). The programs have lost something. It is sad that there are those who do not appreciate the athleticism needed to execute an artistic program. Why is doing a bunch of elements, often beyond your ability, considered more difficult than combining grace, musicality, and artistry with strong elements? People see CoP for exactly what it is, smoke and mirrors. The ISU created it to persuade the public that they were sound something about biased judging. They changed the math. But, they never addressed the real problem, a sport so steeped in opinion and bias, that no new system could fix it. SLC Olympics did a lot of damage to the sport. The sport thought it could just carry on, pretend to police itself, and keep the fans (AKA revenue). People are not that naive, they wanted to see real changes, like sanction unfair judging. The 6.0 system was not a prize winning system, but CoP is no better. It was never the system, it was the implementation of the system. And that has not changed one bit.
Being on the tek panel is not judging?? You must be joking. Then how do you account
For the marks the skaters receive ? If you think that is not judging you are not being
Real. Tek panel give levels they are judging levels from what their opinion I's.
Yes they have 3 that must agree and if one judges thinks they called a wrong level they
Call for a review. But if you have to cozy judges they can over rule the third call.
So yes this is most definatly judging and affecting the skaters marks. Geat Real!!!
Technical panel played a huge role in Euros short dance and also for example didn't call Chan's fall in 4CC.
I don't know no evidence of bias... Do you sit in round table disscussions of judges
When they are talking....the evidence is quite clear from the history of this sport .
To think it does not show up on tek panels is to be very naive.
Really don't think the system of judging is the main problem.
The relationships between coaches and judges are so incestuous it's sickening. Coaches and judges and skaters traveling together to international events, for example, with coaches continuously sucking up to the judges who will be judging their skaters.... Calling judges under the guise of asking advise about their skater, all the while just kissing up.....constantly trying to curry favor for their skater...
How can any one system even begin to fix this type of mess?
It can't. Add in that judges go to the official practices and then have meetings where they discuss those practices, and you have no way to fix it. Why are the judges allowed to go to the official practices? Why are the judges allowed to "make their deals" in the judges rooms at events?
Two hands down on a quad toe better always be worth more than a clean triple Flip!!! You are talking about a quad toe! It just goes back to an interview with Jeff Buttle I saw when he was asked "so what's a quad all about?" You can pull back on technical difficulty to plese the ignorant. If you want to ban quads that could be done but don't make it was before where an URed quad toe was worth 1 point and no one did them barely anymore and you then had complaints about technical regression! Four revolutions beats three! Always should be the case.
Were you responding to something other than the voices in your head?
Chan didn't fall in 4CC this year, he had hands down. Since it wasn't a fall, the deduction for it shows up in PCS as opposed to a deduction from his total. He didn't splat or zambonie the ice. If you want to see an actual FALL, check out Dai's quad attempt.
Patrick's short and he was clean in the free.
Dai's quad attempt
Maybe some people should read what was actually written by those who were there or who watched.
But his body weight was on his hands = fall! That's what the rules say!