Figure skating is dying, and judges can't prop it up

Discussion in 'Great Skate Debate' started by Sugar, Mar 18, 2013.

  1. MacMadame

    MacMadame Cat Lady-in-Training

    17,012
    3,511
    113
    At Lipinski's first Worlds, she had a horrible SP but did a great LP. But because 6.0 used factored placements, she was mathematically limited in how far she could move up. That doesn't happen under CoP. It would have been impossible for Gracie Gold to have come in second at Nationals this year after coming in 9th in the SP even having won the LP as she did under 6.0 without Ashley and a few others ahead of her totally bombing and I don't think that's fair at all.

    That's an aspect of the ordinal system that we haven't been discussing much here that I think needs to be critiqued. With ordinals. The spacing between 1st and 2nd and then 2nd and 3rd and so forth is exactly the same even if on the ice the skills between any two places have a big gap or a tiny gap. CoP, because it's all based on points and not factored placements, allows for a lot more movement and can reflect when a competition has 1st through 6th tightly placed or a big gap between the first two and 3rd on down (as two examples I've seen in competitions just recently).
     
  2. iloveemoticons

    iloveemoticons Well-Known Member

    1,219
    212
    63
    I don't think skating should be a jumping contest either, but because I think PCS is totally subjective, when PCS differences are too great, it is anything but fair. Judges don't always agree with one another on PCS. And after every competition, people always debate PCS. Just as much as they did under 6.0. :scream: If it were objective, most people should be able to agree on it. I gave the example of Sasha's skating skills at the Olympics. Another would be Brezina's relatively high PCS marks at Worlds with what I felt was an empty short program. That's not to say presentation wasn't subjective under 6.0, but I still think that overall, under 6.0, skaters who skated technically difficult programs still had a better shot at winning than they do now.

    If PCS were given 30% weight, I would be totally on board with CoP. 30% PCS is enough incentive for people to care about presentation but not so much that the differences are insurmountable. It has nothing to do with wanting younger skaters to overtake the older ones, it's about having an equal playing field with more objectivity. The top ladies currently have a 15-20 point advantage over the Gracie/Li/RussianBabies because of PCS. If somehow only one top skater competed against the up and comers in Sochi, that top skater could win the Olympic gold with just 3-4 triples even if the other girls did 7. I don't care how great their presentation is deemed to be by the powers that be, it's not a sport to me where certain skaters have a 3-4 jump advantage over others. And winning an Olympic gold with 3-4 triples would represent a regression of the sport to me.

    Thanks for that info. Fair enough. :)