Discussion in 'The Trash Can' started by Aussie Willy, Jan 9, 2011.
So am I (A)TS or the judge from Belarus?
You could do both if you wanted to. Otherwise which ever one you prefer.
I'd like to play!
What an interesting idea! But how do you want to judge spins, steps & spirals? Will you give all competitors level 1 for them? If so, won't it be jump contest?
No it won't, because we will give skaters GOE mark for their spins, steps and spirals and I don't see any obstacle in giving a skater level 2 for spin if he/she included some difficulty which is feature for higher level. Of course most of the spins will be level one but if someone did meet requirements for level 2 or 3 we should just give it to his spin/step sequence. And spirals are just choreographed ones so we only give them GOE mark. And there are some people on the forum who have enough knowledge to determine levels, I think we already have TS, don't we?
I dont neccessarily think Kerrigan's LP at the Olympics was better than Bonaly's at Europeans. Jump wise it definitely was not atleast.
Surya did 5 triples at 1994 Euros. Same as Nancy in Lillehammer.
If you think jump wise, Surya did 6 triples in Lillehammer ! Do you think her programs was better than her Euros' LP, jump wise at least ?
I'm not even about to judge this, but it was sooooo nice watching this sport from back when it looked like the one I once was in love with Every performance on here put a smile on my face
Maybe I'm the only one, but I think getting an element an element list would be really helpful. I wasn't sure on some of the elements if they were elements or not, particularly step sequences.
Bonaly had 5 clean triples in Lillehammer. The second triple of her triple flip-triple toe was badly cheated. And she was lutzless which in womens skating in the 90s is a huge no no. She had two huge errors, both bad misses on triple lutz attempts. Which is why she ended up off the podium altogether in Lillehammer.
At the Europeans she had a beautiful first triple lutz and a good attempt on a 2nd one as her only slight mistake (stepping out of it) and cheated none of her jumps, landing them all smoothly. Compared to Nancy in Lillehammer jumpwise she had a harder triple-triple, a slightly harder triple-double, and a good attempt of a 2nd triple lutz.
I'm sending Aussie Willy and Jenna my calls tonight.
I'm working on mine now!
I got gkelly's calls - thanks.
Sent my scores in. Everytime I do one of these I'm convinced the ISU need to re-work the PCS criteria somehow.
Performance/Execution and Interpretation seem redundant to me and I feel like it makes it difficult to accurately vary and judge PCS. And yes, I did read the specific explanations on the ISU website...
Performance/Execution is kind of a catch-all category, and some of it does tend to overlap with some aspects of Interpretation.
But most of it has nothing to do with the music, and Interpretation has everything to do with the music.
Similarly, Interpretation and Choreography tend to overlap specifically in the areas where Choreography relates to the music.
So maybe it would make sense to just put everything about music in one place -- Interpretation, or call it something else -- and then P/E and Choreography will consist of everything from their current definitions that's left over when the performance or program structure are considered apart from anything related to the music?
It sounds reasonable, I'm curious about results I wonder how ladies' FS from OG in Salt Lake City would be scored under CoP.
We already did ladies' short program from Salt Lake City so it would be nice to know the final result especially that it's very likely to be different than 6,0 one. Irina was first after SP in our game with huge score considering the fact that it was program without high-level spins, steps and spirals (over 63) and Kwan was 5th (with only 55 points). I would be really happy to do that FSU judging game.
I can't remember if I did the 2002 Olympics one. I know I did 88 Olympics Ladies SP.
If I did do it, the stuff would be on my other computer which is currently in storage.
Just curious - who was 2nd 3rd and 4th in that judging game? And how did Sarah hughes do??
oh, taso!! the performances put a smile on my face too! the sport i was once in love with ... you sound v. nostalgic, but i'm with you 100%.
i just re-watched surya bonaly's performance; it's such a beautiful programme! if i were her i would not have accepted the silver medal in 1994 as well (not because of the 1994 worlds competition per se, but because of 1993 and 1994 combined) ... but that's another thread. as a side note, it was so good to meet her in person in 2002 at the only skating show i ever went to. Surya and i had a nice little chat, and she seemed v. content and happy ... seemed to have moved on from the disappointments and injustices ...
I thought in previous games the elements were called and posted here so the judges could download the document, fill it with the grades and send it to AussyWilly.
Am I wrong? Where do the judges put the scores if not? And I just said I would like to participate, but I´m not sure if I have been confirmed as judge...
Sorry for so many doubts!
1st Irina - 63.46 33.23 30.23
2nd Sasha - 59.39 29.83 29.56
3rd Fumie - 57.38 28.43 28.95
4th Julie - 55.25 27.99 27.26
5th Michelle - 55.05 23.26 31.79
6th Sarah - 52.95 25.36 27.59
7th Maria - 49.08 20.67 28.41
Have you watch Yuka Sato's performance from Worlds that year?
Surya was not world champion material. Her basic skating skills were very poor and she had no refinement nor elegance in her moves. She is one of those skaters that would have done very poorly under IJS. She was lucky that she managed reasonable spins and jumps which held her up as even though they were okay quality, there was probably nothing to deduct from them. However looking back even that is questionable.
Bonaly's biggest case of wuzrobbed was probably 93. But even that isn't such a strong case in hindsight. She might have had all the required elements, but she had little quality.
IMO she lost 94 and 95 fairly because of both quality AND jump issues. In fact, I think she was lucky to have had silver in 95.
I actually thought 1994 was her most absurd case. She didnt even jump that well that day. A triple loop she had to put her hand down and step out of to keep from falling, and a badly cheated triple flip-triple toe where the triple toe w was atleast half a turn underrotated. I was stunned Bonaly even had higher technical merit marks than Sato for that performance. I thought Sato had cleaner jumps (even with the wobbly landing edge on the triple flip), much better spins, much better footwork, and of course much better basic skating. I would have scored them something like:
Bonaly- 5.7 technical, 5.6 presentation
Sato- 5.8 technical, 5.9 presentation
I was stunned it was even a 5-4 split.
I thought 1993 either Bonaly or Chen should have won. Would have been fine with either. Both outskated Baiul. I had Baiul 4th in the LP behind Kiellmann (though I knew no way the judges would have it like that). I thought even Sato's LP was comparable to Baiul's overall.
1995 I actually didnt think Chen was as the clear of a winner as some did, although I agreed with her win. I thought Bonaly, Chen, and Kwan were all close in the LP itself. Still in the SP Bonaly was lucky to not be 6th or 7th, her SP was quite mediocre.
Weird, 2002 Olympic Ladies competition is the perfect example of why I hate and love CoP at the same time !
I mean, I love that Michelle Kwan won the SP due to 6.0, and I hate that Sarah Hughes won the LP because of 6.0 !!!!
I always thought Kwan won the SP not due to 6.0 but since it was in the U.S. I am sure Irina would have won it anywhere else. Just like I am sure Irina won the final free program at the GP final that year not due to 6.0 but since there were 4 Euro bloc judges on the panel who had plans to block judge even if Irina bombed (how else to explain 4 1st and 3 3rds in the final program).
It's disappointing that while Surya improved in her packaging, style and musical interpretation over the years, she couldn't really get a firm grasp on better basic skating skills. It's one thing to be more artistic, the complete presentation mark accounts for demonstrating good skating skills (which I think her team misinterpreted badly).
I do note though that Surya's later programs actually had more transitions and field moves than some of the other competitors.
Her 1993 Worlds LP was not that bad, in term of choreo, but also in term of basics, IMO.
With all due respect Aussie Willy, that's a matter of opinion.
I can see why people would feel Surya did enough to beat Sato. Of course Yuka had better crossovers and basic skating, but where in the rules did it stipulate exactly what that was worth in terms of technical score? or Artistry?
Separate names with a comma.