It seems to me that bridging the gap between 6.0 and the current system is simple - each judge awards two marks of 0.0-10.0 (now that figures are gone, 6.0 is an anachronism); in each set, throw out the high and the low, and add up the remaining 14 numbers.
One problem with the old system is, nobody even bothered to explain it. When there was a flip-flop, it was usually explained with a term like "in the crazy world of figure skating scoring." I actually shelled out for a USFSA rulebook back in 1992 just to find out how ordinals were calculated (nowadays, it would be a free download from ISU). It was as if casual fans were treated with a pat on the head and "Don't worry your pretty little heads about the scoring; just watch the skating and we'll look behind the curtain and tell you who's in what place." (Of course, it was impossible for the fans to figure it out on their own (except for pairs) before, what, 1983, when, rather than scoring each segment separately, a judge's ordinal for a skater would be based on the combined scores for that skater, so we would have to know the scores for every skater on every compulsory figure.)
Then again, I don't remember fans turning away in droves from women's gymnastics after FIG got rid of the "perfect 10" system...
It's just this. Every time an article like this appears saying that casual fans don't like the CoP, the Internet explodes with a thousand reasons why they should.
But they don't.
Seriously. They don't. There is no reason to kill the messengers, like Christine Brennan.
I don't think so. It's not the details that are different, it is the whole concept.Is there any way to do both at the same time?
By the way, do you agree that, in the World Championships just concluded, Kim Yu-na's 6.0 style program was far and away the star of the show and in fact, saved the event pretty much single-handedly?
Stuff like this is what leaves the casual fan all .
ETA - I watched a gymnastics event on tv recently. I am a very casual fan of the sport - in fact, I found the event because I was channel surfing. The announcers did an excellent job of explaining some of the faults and flaws, and the differences in technique and how they effected scoring. I was impressed and remember thinking at the time that US skating announcers should take a page from their book.
I'm surprised that you found them to be informative. NBC's broadcasts of gymnastics is considered to be absolutely horrific by gymnastics fans. In fact, they prefer figure skating commentary from what I've found.
Also, gymnastics fans have been very turned off by the way the code has changed their sport, and many prefer to watch NCAA. The artistry and attention to flow and lines and basics is certainly dying in that sport despite high difficulty. It may be more precise, but it's not as fun to watch. There's something to be said about presentation. Back then, the gymnasts just presented their skills that just impressed those in attendance (you'd hear gasps). Now, someone can do an insane skill but it's just not the same because the gymnasts are not taught how to present anything and they are simply too busy to.
I literally can't watch dance any longer. I mean, in 2002 I sat through every compulsory dance at Europeans in Lausanne - that was back when there were still 2 compulsories and it went on all day for like 7-8 hours. In Zagreb this year, I went sightseeing during the short dance and went to see the Zagreb Symphony during the free dance.
Using both to springboard.........how soon we forget. I'm going to use G&P, icedancers, as an example. We loved to hate them in NA. They fell, they were boring, they had an attitude, you name it they had something we hated.
But think if they skating now, how we'd view them under COP. They were fast, precise, excellent timing, and they lost points for x,y and z, but still won. Deservedly so.
I lament the fact that under the old 6.0 skaters like the above were vilified. There was no good reason for it except that we could not figure out what the judges were marking. Now we could. And I was never a G&P fan, altho I could recognize their skill. How nice it would be for *them* to get the recognition that they probably deserved in the skating fandom world. The old system certainly rewarded them, but the cost was high. Now under the new COP system, we might rail at the marks like we do now, but at least we do have a chance at understanding why someone wins. We might not like it, might not like their skating style, but now they do at least get some semblance of respect. Bring on COP, keep the old 6.0.
In the late 90s, before IJS was on the horizon, as a thought experiment I tried to analyze what would happen if 6.0-style scores were added up instead of using ordinals.
What I figured out was that if judges gave scores exactly the way they had been, including the tiebreakers, and then the high and low technical scores were dropped and the high and low presentation scores were dropped, in close contests it was possible to get a result that disagreed with the rankings of a unanimous panel! That to me was a deal-breaker for that kind of number crunching. In those cases it would be more accurate not to drop the high and low scores.
If we gave the judges ways to come up with meaningful technical scores and meaningful presentation scores each on a separate scale and not used to balance each other out, so that judges were not ranking skaters but scoring their technical content and scoring their presentation, then it might make sense to add up the scores.
Essentially that's what the TES and PCS do, in much finer detail.
So as a compromise maybe we could have a single score for technical elements, one for basic skating quality, and one for artistic impression, and add them up. Or break some of those down a little further, e.g., one score for jumps, another for spins, etc.
I definitely agree with you about the media's inability or unwillingness to explain ordinals either.
Maybe something like replacing the exhibition with a fans'-choice competition after the technical event would allow fans to engage with the results of an event featuring their favorite skaters who qualified through the technical. With real official medals to make it meaningful as a performance contests. Probably wouldn't be accepted by the IOC. And which fans are able to vote on the results (the location of the event, or which locations have access to live coverage) would significantly bias the results.
I was not able to watch the ladies' programs straight through and still haven't seen all of them, so I'm not in a position to answer that question.By the way, do you agree that, in the World Championships just concluded, Kim Yu-na's 6.0 style program was far and away the star of the show and in fact, saved the event pretty much single-handedly?
fluff piece investigative report after the pairs scandal -- not sure if it was on CBC or US TV -- in which many of the judges gave a few sentences about why they voted the way they did.
In one of her books, Brennan made a big deal about the brave Czech judge who refused to bow to pressure and award the Euro title to a Russian skater over Curry. I think it was in The Second Mark that he was quoted or paraphrased as having said that he didn't vote for the Russian skater for fear of going out of the corridor, because he couldn't believe the rest of the panel wouldn't have placed Curry first, and knew he was doomed when he saw the scores and found to his astonishment that four "Eastern-friendly" judges did. That was a rare, public time a judge that there were clear ramifications for a judge, but he was punished by his federation. (Flipping that, The Second Mark made Lavoie look heroic, when in PJ Kwong's book, Lavoie wrote the letter to te ISU and faced sanctions because the Swiss judge who heard Legounge say she had already promised her vote for B/S in Fall 2001 was about to come forward.)
I lost the post about not accepting new stars, but it's the same in dance and opera in my experience, an almost palpable resentment that someone new is on the scene. It's exascerbated in ballet because there's a hierarchy and lots of, "(wuzrobbed) I'm seeing the "B" (or "C") cast because she's a corps member or soloist, not at the top rank" when they're seeing the young Kistler or Obraztsova.
Last edited by kwanfan1818; 03-18-2013 at 07:05 PM.
"The team doesn't get automatic capacity because management is mad" -- Greg Smith, agile guy
One of my best memories growing up was watching skating on a Sunday afternoon on Wide World of Sports with Jim McKay and Dick Button. I remember watching dance and pairs on Saturday afternoon and the ladies skating live Saturday night and then the men skating live on Sunday. As a kid I didn't care about the scores, I just watched the beautiful skating - Jill, Tiffany, Elaine, Debbie, Todd, Christopher, Scott, Mark, Paul and Brian - such lasting memories - a whole generation will never experience this.
I am not as grumpy on this issue as I sound. I do not think that the IJS is a major reason for the decline of popularity of skating as a spectator sport in the U.S. I don't think the Salt Lake City controversy or the lack of a U.S. lady superstar is, either.
I do think that the IJS is a mild hindrance to marketing the sport.
That is why all the attention afterword focused on Hoffmann's vote, even though he was only one of five who voted for Baiul.
The same thing happened in the pairs event in Salt Lake City. It was well recognized going in that there were four B&S judges (Russia, China, Ukraine, and Poland) and four S&P judges (USA, Canada, Germany, and Japan). That put the spotlight on the French judge.
I'm curious how many folks who are baseball fans here don't ever look at the box scores?
Congratulations 2014 World Ice Dance Champions Anna Cappellini & Luca Lanotte!!!
(raises hand) Me. I only look if I missed the game and want a breakdown of what happened.
You should never write words with numbers. Unless you're seven. Or your name is Prince. - "Weird Al" Yankovic, "Word Crimes"