View Poll Results: Should all Competitions use the new Judging System?

Voters
75. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    42 56.00%
  • No

    33 44.00%
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 59
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    126
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly View Post
    Good suggestion!

    I also think the lower base value for moderately cheated jumps is good for us low-level skaters doing single jumps. At least 0.1 final score is better than no value for a downgraded single!

    And I would suggest that if the minimum number of revolutions (on each foot) required on a spin is 3, that the spin should get called if there are at least 2 revs and let the judges give negative GOE.

    Also it would be good to have a different base value for spins with one feature vs. no features. Even to perform level 2 with two features is a challenge at bronze level (and probably higher than level 2 shouldn't be allowed), but one feature at a time is possible. E.g., backward entry, or the more flexible adults might attempt difficult positions.
    What about having the spins and step sequence be unleveled, ie GOE only
    Last edited by jenlyon60; 02-16-2012 at 09:43 PM. Reason: Typos

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Age
    52
    Posts
    10,237
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    10899
    Quote Originally Posted by jenlyon60 View Post
    What about having the spins and step sequence be unleveled, ie GOE only
    That would work, if the judges can reward higher difficulty (performed at least adequately) in their GOEs.

    I have the same concern about the choreo sequences at higher levels

  3. #23
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    2,525
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by jenlyon60 View Post
    What about having the spins and step sequence be unleveled, ie GOE only
    What does that mean?

  4. #24
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    10,392
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by FSWer View Post
    What does that mean?
    It is like the choreographic step sequence the senior skaters have. You can't earn a level doing features (i.e., Level 4, Level 3) all of them would be called "Level 1" and then the judges just assign GOE based on how good it was.

  5. #25
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    2,525
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    What's a GOE? Do you have a link showing it?

  6. #26
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    10,392
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    It is Grade of Execution. They range from -3 to +3. If you do an element really well you get +1, +2, or +3 GOE. If you don't do it well, you get -1, -2, or -3. If you just do it "average" you get 0.

  7. #27
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Kanada
    Age
    33
    Posts
    2,055
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Here's an example of a report card from an interpretive event held in Canada, where only PCS were awarded: http://www.skateabnwtnun.com/LinkCli...language=en-US

    Someone mentioned the issue of computers upthread..."going manual" (i.e., judging and calling is all done on paper, without computers), is not difficult or excessively time consuming if you have good data specialists on hand. I've been at numerous competitions where this has been done.

    6.0 needs to die in a fire. It makes me shudder to know that it still exists anywhere.

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    In the Land of Unrealistic Assumptions
    Posts
    4,511
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    1942
    All the suggestions for a modified IJS are lovely, but the fact remains that IJS is a costly system for clubs to use - costly in ice time (every skater takes an average of 45 to 60 seconds longer than the norm under 6.0), in officials (adding 3 tech panelists to the norm of 5 judges and a referee - and in long competitions, you can't expect the same people to judge every event all day so you need two panels at least) and in equipment (the mini system is expensive to rent and the paper system uses more than 10 times the paper per event that 6.0 uses and takes much longer for the accountants to set up).

    Since IJS costs the clubs more to use, they have to raise entry fees to cover their expenses. That puts a lot of competitions out of reach for a lot of the younger, newer competitors and could discourage a lot of parents from keeping their kids in the sport.
    "You just can't underestimate the power of positive underwear." 2013 Fruit of the Loom ad

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    2,893
    vCash
    400
    Rep Power
    5459
    Quote Originally Posted by Skittl1321 View Post
    IJS wouldn't work for basic skills skaters- they would pretty much just get points for an upright spin. Half jumps don't have point values, sit spins that are no parallel to the ice don't get points, their footwork sequences are not full ice so "don't count".

    The system would have to have major modification to work for the lowest levels.

    Here is an example of IJS used for low level skating. Look at the protocols for the Bronze ladies- many many elements have a value of 0. Now, think of skaters doing even lower level than Bronze (pre-bronze, basic skills freestyle, basic skills)- where would those skaters get points?
    http://www.deu-event.de/results/adult2010/index.html
    I agree that IJS would not work for lower levels especially those competitions that require a demonstration of elements that are not included in the SOV, however, I looked at the protocols you linked to, and the elements that received no points at all were all in violation of certain rules, which is not so much about the COP itself as much as skaters and or coaches not interpreting the rules correctly, which isn't limited to lower levels - just ask Oda how many times elements he's performed have scored 0!

  10. #30
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    10,392
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by antmanb View Post
    I agree that IJS would not work for lower levels especially those competitions that require a demonstration of elements that are not included in the SOV, however, I looked at the protocols you linked to, and the elements that received no points at all were all in violation of certain rules, which is not so much about the COP itself as much as skaters and or coaches not interpreting the rules correctly, which isn't limited to lower levels - just ask Oda how many times elements he's performed have scored 0!
    There was one woman who did too many loops, but a lot of the problems were sit spins that get no credit- a huge adult problem, I've seen entire competitions where no one's sit spin would count, and downgraded single jumps, getting them no credit. When you downgrade triples, they still count for something.

    At developmental levels, there has to be some leniency.

    Although someone described how to get a sit spin to "count" in combo, in IJS you can't do upright spins. For many bronze ladies- the spins they have are sit spin, scratch spin, and backspin. If their sit spin doesn't count, that's out. Then they can't do both a backspin and a scratch spin, so what is left? A single upright spin and then maybe a sit-upright (if the judges count the sit as an intermediate position)? In 6.0 they can do the three single spins. Not differentiating between a backspin and a scratch spin in 6.0 causes a giant problem for people who only have a few spins. In pre-bronze, a lot of ladies are still doing 2 foot spins, which get no points at all.

    The competition I linked to is relatively high level bronze skaters- no one who is just barely bronze is going to go to Germany to compete (unless they happen to be from Germany.)

    I know my program I'd be lucky to score a double digit. If I fell, I'd likely get a negative score.
    My loop would be downgraded for sure, so no value.
    I have a waltz jump-toe loop, the waltz jump has no value, that toe loop is generally cheated (sad...). I don't think I'd get any points here.
    My sit spin would not count, it is fast, and centered, but not low enough.
    My salchow would probably be downgraded, so no value.
    My backspin is on the right edge, but I often don't cross my foot, would it count if I'm "not in position"?
    My footwork is only half ice- is there provision for that? I might get a few points here.
    My toe loop is usually not cheated. It might get me a few points.
    My scratch spin is excellent, but I've already done an upright spin, no points here either.


    Without major revision, I don't see how this system works for low level skaters.

  11. #31
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    339
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Skittl1321 View Post
    My loop would be downgraded for sure, so no value.
    I have a waltz jump-toe loop, the waltz jump has no value, that toe loop is generally cheated (sad...). I don't think I'd get any points here.
    My sit spin would not count, it is fast, and centered, but not low enough.
    My salchow would probably be downgraded, so no value.
    My backspin is on the right edge, but I often don't cross my foot, would it count if I'm "not in position"?
    My footwork is only half ice- is there provision for that? I might get a few points here.
    My toe loop is usually not cheated. It might get me a few points.
    My scratch spin is excellent, but I've already done an upright spin, no points here either.
    Remember that there's a difference between underrotated jumps (<) and downgraded jumps (<<). Underrotated jumps DO get some value in IJS, just not the full base value of a fully rotated jumps. So, it would depend on how cheated your jumps are. If they are just underrotated (a cheat of less than 90 degrees, I think), you would get partial credit for all of them.

    I know that you're not in Canada, but just to give you an idea of how your program would score under Skate Canada's modified version of IJS, you WOULD get credit for your waltz jump and at least partial credit for all of your singles, as long as they're just "underrotated" but not actually "downgraded". (If they're underrotated by more than 90 degrees then, no, you wouldn't get any credit.)

    For your spins, no, you wouldn't get credit for your sit spin if it's not low enough. However, positions on upright spins (including backspins) are optional, so it doesn't matter if you cross your foot or not on your backspin. So, you would get full credit for your backspin, as long as you get enough revs. You're right that you can't get credit for both a forward upright spin and backspin, though - a lot of Skate Canada adult bronzes will do an upright spin and a change upright spin. If you have an upright spin and a backspin, then a change upright spin could be an option for you (if it's allowed under the USFS requirements), and that's worth more points than an individual spin anyway.

    Footwork just has to cover "at least half of the ice surface" for Skate Canada adult IJS, so you're fine there. (Level 1 footwork is actually REALLY easy to get credit for - all you have to do is cover enough ice and that's it - you get your points!)

    Also, remember that there is the PCS score as well, which definitely will always be above zero (even if it's very very low, which it is for many of us ), so it would be very hard to end up with a negative overall score unless you fall a LOT of times.

  12. #32
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Kanada
    Age
    33
    Posts
    2,055
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by zaphyre14 View Post
    All the suggestions for a modified IJS are lovely, but the fact remains that IJS is a costly system for clubs to use - costly in ice time (every skater takes an average of 45 to 60 seconds longer than the norm under 6.0), in officials (adding 3 tech panelists to the norm of 5 judges and a referee - and in long competitions, you can't expect the same people to judge every event all day so you need two panels at least) and in equipment (the mini system is expensive to rent and the paper system uses more than 10 times the paper per event that 6.0 uses and takes much longer for the accountants to set up).

    Since IJS costs the clubs more to use, they have to raise entry fees to cover their expenses. That puts a lot of competitions out of reach for a lot of the younger, newer competitors and could discourage a lot of parents from keeping their kids in the sport.
    All of these are addressable. A couple of years ago in Canada, the position of a "technical judge" was proposed, though I don't know if it ended up being put in place (it didn't for synchro). The idea was that for the most basic levels, one official could both assign difficulty levels and award GOE and PCS. That is absolutely do-able for things like Spin, Spiral, Jump competitions.

    I don't know what the restrictions are like in the US, but in Canada, the bare minimum you can run an event with is 3 judges (one can judge and ref) and a 2-person technical panel. There's no need to have 5 judges for a basic skills event.

    In Canada, under 6.0, data specialists still had to attend competitions and run their computers to post and calculate results. I agree more paper is used, but that's not a strong argument for keeping an archaic system that's detrimental to skater development, over one that actually allows skaters to improve and receive valuable feedback.

    Keeping 6.0 is not the answer. Adapting IJS to suit lower levels, and addressing any potential cost issues, is. The judges who even know what 6.0 is are going to run out at some point. People can't cling to that system forever. And it's not fair to the skaters.

  13. #33

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    1,142
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    3151
    They should be judged under ISJ in my opinion. It doesn't make sense to be judged under one system for a year or so, then change. Skaters will be better in the long run if they are already comfortable with all the ISJ involves.

  14. #34

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Age
    47
    Posts
    17,726
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    15381
    You can quite easily judge lower levels with components under IJS. We do it for artistic events. You could pick Skating Skills and Performance as the two.

    We have used a program called SkateScore which is great with 6.0 (based on an Excel macro) but it is no longer being developed for later versions of Excel. If you have Office 2007 or 2010 it just won't work.

    I do agree with the comment already made in this thread about the amount of time and effort used to set up an event, particularly with IJS. Having done the computer side of things many time it can be quite exhausting (and I just did a 3 day adult event). SkateScore does involve some time doing pre-event data entry but then you just have someone to enter everything manually during the event which takes a few minutes for each event. You don't need a whole bank of computers which can then have connection problems which just freak everyone out.
    When you are up to your arse in alligators it is difficult to remember you were only meant to be draining the swamp.

  15. #35

    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    In the Land of Unrealistic Assumptions
    Posts
    4,511
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    1942
    US Figure Skating uses the HAL2 program for 6.0 events. It's a great little program that produces all the documents needed for a competition from starting orders to announcers' sheets to judges marks and whorksheets as well as calculating the results. One person with a laptop can handle a basic skills competition (although it's always best to have two people and two laptops just in case).

    Even small IJS competitions require two accountants, at least two laptops and printers, (more if you have more than one ice surface) and a staff of people behind the scenes to generate all those lovely results. Frankly most clubs who host small low-level competitions have decided that IJS isn't worth the time and effort involved. Having the choice of system is beneficial to them and to the skaters.

    If you don't want to compete in 6.0 competitions, that's fine too. But requiring all competitions at all levels to be held under IJS is just not practical.
    "You just can't underestimate the power of positive underwear." 2013 Fruit of the Loom ad

  16. #36
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    7,134
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by zaphyre14 View Post
    US Figure Skating uses the HAL2 program for 6.0 events. It's a great little program that produces all the documents needed for a competition from starting orders to announcers' sheets to judges marks and whorksheets as well as calculating the results. One person with a laptop can handle a basic skills competition (although it's always best to have two people and two laptops just in case).

    Even small IJS competitions require two accountants, at least two laptops and printers, (more if you have more than one ice surface) and a staff of people behind the scenes to generate all those lovely results. Frankly most clubs who host small low-level competitions have decided that IJS isn't worth the time and effort involved. Having the choice of system is beneficial to them and to the skaters.

    If you don't want to compete in 6.0 competitions, that's fine too. But requiring all competitions at all levels to be held under IJS is just not practical.
    So basically, they're putting the club first and the skaters second? How is 6.0 beneficial to the skaters at all anymore? It's only a detriment. The IJS isn't "new" anymore. It's time to get with the program, IMO. Yes, it's costly and time consuming...but that's the way the sport is going! What do you want me to tell you?

    Having two completely different judging systems makes the sport so much more difficult for young skaters. For example, I knew a girl that won basically every competition under 6.0 on the Pre-Juvenile level. She landed four "double" jumps (all about 1/2 cheated) and she had decent speed and charisma. When she switched to Juvenile the following year, she placed dead last almost every time and ended up quitting due to frustration. Why? Because her jumps were finally being downgraded and her less than stellar spin positions were finally being accounted for. If this girl knew about these problems at a younger age, she could have avoided the frustration and shock that oftentimes occurs when skaters hit the Juvenile level. That's why IJS needs to be in place for at least Pre-Preliminary - Senior.

  17. #37
    Recovering from the Olys
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    28,279
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    16342
    ^^^ If you feel so strongly about it, wouldn't it be more beneficial to try and DO something about it rather than posting on a skating fan forum?

  18. #38
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    7,134
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Sylvia View Post
    ^^^ If you feel so strongly about it, wouldn't it be more beneficial to try and DO something about it rather than posting on a skating fan forum?
    Oh, I wish I could. But all I can do is voice my opinion! I don't have any power within US Figure Skating. I don't even have membership anymore.

    Believe me, if I had any power to revise the rules, I would!

  19. #39

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Age
    55
    Posts
    659
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Jenna View Post
    Having two completely different judging systems makes the sport so much more difficult for young skaters. For example, I knew a girl that won basically every competition under 6.0 on the Pre-Juvenile level. She landed four "double" jumps (all about 1/2 cheated) and she had decent speed and charisma. When she switched to Juvenile the following year, she placed dead last almost every time and ended up quitting due to frustration. Why? Because her jumps were finally being downgraded and her less than stellar spin positions were finally being accounted for. If this girl knew about these problems at a younger age, she could have avoided the frustration and shock that oftentimes occurs when skaters hit the Juvenile level. That's why IJS needs to be in place for at least Pre-Preliminary - Senior.
    Forgive me for going off on a bit of a tangent here, but judging systems aside, how does this skater's coach fit into the whole thing? Cheated jumps and bad spin positions are problems a coach should be addressing, no matter which system a skater is being judged under.

  20. #40
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    7,134
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Clarice View Post
    Forgive me for going off on a bit of a tangent here, but judging systems aside, how does this skater's coach fit into the whole thing? Cheated jumps and bad spin positions are problems a coach should be addressing, no matter which system a skater is being judged under.
    I'm sure the coach knew the jumps were cheated and the spins were poor, albeit fast. But, he also knew she could get away with it...when it came time for Juvenile though, it was too late. 6.0 does not really deduct for cheated jumps, at least not on the same scale as IJS. Hello, Sarah Hughes? The point is that with IJS, the girl never would have had such success on the lower levels. It would force her coach to crack down on her weaknesses...or accept a low placement. This happens a lot, at least in my area, when a girl dominates every level until Juvenile and then falls off the face of the earth.
    Last edited by Jenna; 02-21-2012 at 11:29 PM.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •