This discussion from the Europeans forum was interesting and although it's been discussed before after certain competitions with controversial results, I thought warranted its own thread. Since I like doing mathematical experiments to translate skating into specific numbers on the PCS, I came up with a system below.
Sorry that I went overboard with the quotes. I hope that doesn't violate a board rule but there were a lot of relevant posts.
Originally Posted by bekOriginally Posted by kosjenkaOriginally Posted by miffyOriginally Posted by CoriannaOriginally Posted by bekOriginally Posted by HedwigOriginally Posted by alchemy voidOriginally Posted by kosjenkaOriginally Posted by CoriannaOriginally Posted by bekOriginally Posted by topazOriginally Posted by alchemy voidOriginally Posted by Aussie WillyOriginally Posted by peibeckOriginally Posted by Cherub721Originally Posted by gkellyOriginally Posted by snoopyOriginally Posted by gkellyOriginally Posted by RFOSOriginally Posted by bekAs an experiment, I tried using a GOE/PCS conversion I came up with for my transitions system to come up with a "performance/execution of elements" mark.Originally Posted by RFOS
For my transition system, I originally had
"Outstanding" = 10.00 = +3
"Excellent" = 8.00 = +2
"Good" = 6.00 = +1
"Fair" = 4.00 = 0
"Poor" = 2.00 = -1 or -2
"Failed" = 0.00 = -3
However, for both purposes, I just added "Weak" to be 3.00 or -1 and changed "Poor" to 2.00 or -2.
One might argue that it should by symmetrical with the 0 GOE equaling a 5 for PCS but in practice I'd expect a skater with 5.00-level PCS to be able to get a mix of 0s and +1s. If everything was merely just completed to a 0 standard that to me is a little lower than 5 (Juveniles could certainly commonly do that), so 4 seemed appropriate to me. I think of below 2.00 for PCS as being painful, so -2 being not-quite-painful but still pretty seriously flawed sort of made sense to me too. A -3 error would be a blip where the performance would almost certainly be significantly marred and they probably wouldn't meet any P&E criteria while actually falling. (An exception where a -3 GOE wouldn't necessarily mar the program would be doing fewer revolutions than required on a jump in the SP. While the skater could still executed the lower jump well, the "ding" to the P&E marked could be due to the emotional disappointment incurred by the judge having to punch in a -3 and because it was a "failure" in a sense.)
At their best, V&T are capable of +2s or +3 on every element, which could correspond to around a 9 if there was an even mix.
I used that table to convert each of the unfactored average GOEs for each element into PCS with this formula:
X = GOE
Y = PCS equivalent
3 < X < -2, Y = 2*X + 6
-2 < X < 0, Y = X + 4
0 < X < 3, Y = 2*X + 4
I counted all elements equally. I suppose I would consider an element that received no value (and thus officially no GOE since they would just show up as dashes) due to a complete failure as a 0 also, whereas something that was asterisked due to being over the maximum could still be well-executed and I'd use the GOE I would've given it.
Using that method the "performance & execution of elements" score for V&T was about 6.571. This would include the performance & execution of the elements themselves and perhaps 1.5-2 seconds before and after each element, enough time to quickly recover from a fall. (I wonder what percentage of the average program this would actually work out to be). Using a similar rationale to my transition system, this could be averaged with a "performance & execution between the elements" score. This would be affected by falls between elements or falls on elements that the skater took longer than 1.5-2 seconds to recover from. For argument's sake, let's say this was a 9.00 for V&T. That would average to a P&E mark of 7.786, rounding to 7.75.
Because V&T had errors on 3 out of 12 elements (25%), and the "performance and execution of elements" is 50% in this experiment, essentially 12.5% of that mark was affected due to the errors (perhaps slightly more if they took time to get back into the program after one of the elements). This seems like a potential middle ground where it affects the mark more than, say, 3%, but certainly doesn't cut it in half or anything extremely drastic like that.
It does make sense that the *execution* of elements would be an important part of the performance & *execution* mark, not just such that "not clean" programs are given lower scores than "clean" programs, but because the qualities that would be needed to get +2 and +3s or that would be lacking if a skater got -2s and -3s would also in most cases somehow relate to the P&E component criteria, even if the P&E component description doesn't explicitly mention anything about the execution of technical elements. For example, a +2 or +3 jump would almost certainly have to have a really good air position and presentation of the landing (going into clarity of movement and projection and adding a degree of emotional excitement in the viewer), similar for a +2 or +3 spin, lift, step sequence, etc. Additionally, the elements take up quite a bit of time in the program and that time has a major impact on the overall impression conveyed to the viewer so that time should be reflected in the mark also.
I suppose that rationale could be applied to some degree to all components except for transitions (since that component quite specifically deals with only the connections BETWEEN elements), but I think the other components would be much less affected by the elements themselves. For example, when the skater is actually in the air for a jump they aren't going to be demonstrating anything in the criteria for skating skills so that time would have to be discounted. Falling on a jump (or other element, or between elements) would to at least an extent show a lack of sureness and should probably be reflected a little bit in the skating skills mark. I would argue that spins really wouldn't have much affect on the skating skills mark generally, but a footwork or choreographic sequence definitely is a place where a skater would demonstrate basic skating skills (and skills in all of the components except for transitions).