View Poll Results: Is PJ Kwong right?

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

    78 56.52%
  • No

    60 43.48%
  • Don't Know

    0 0%
Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 99
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    5,399
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    68873

    PJ Kwong: What is wrong is the failure of some to learn how the sport is scored

    Recent interview with PJ Kwong. In the interview, she states:-

    What is WRONG about the sport is the lack of willingness of some to inform themselves correctly about how the sport is scored. The misinformation is still rampant. The scoring system isn’t that complicated.
    So, is Kwong right? Is the fault with the current judging system or is it with those who don't understand it?
    Last edited by Maofan7; 05-05-2013 at 02:12 AM.

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Quadland
    Posts
    6,285
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    3358
    It all depends on what is not understood! If you don't understand PCS is judged 1 to 10 than nothing can be done! Or with TES that singling is worse than falling. Singling is one rotation not even worth a point! Doing 3 or 4 rotations means all those points on rotations minus -3 in GOE and then 1 off the total element score. Is that too complicated? I don't think so. A step sequence is made up of mitf! The more different MITF you do the higher the level!

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Victoria BC
    Age
    70
    Posts
    3,009
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    3722
    PJKwong is ALWAYS right!

  4. #4
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    1,520
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    I agree with Kwong. Brennan, Hersh, NBC folks seem averse to change. It should not still be referred to as "the new" system. It is 10 years old. There are problems with the components scores, but the system is well tested now and at least predictable. It is not difficult to sell it to general audiences with good presentation.
    Last edited by TheIronLady; 05-04-2013 at 11:57 PM.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Not after the same people as Theatregirl
    Posts
    21,924
    vCash
    350
    Rep Power
    36500
    I voted no, because the main problem with the scoring system (imho, of course ) is that components aren't scored correctly.

  6. #6
    YEAH!
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Worshipping Grebenkina...
    Posts
    13,802
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    11008
    Her comment is patronizing. Plenty of people understand the system but still disagree with many aspects of it. There are lots of thoughtful discussions about it right here on FSU, where she is a member. I agree to the extent that some media are OTT in their insistence that the judging system is an impossible code to crack and driving viewers away, but disagree that once everyone "understands" that there wouldn't be any problem.

    Also found it strange that she said a skater must be 100% healthy to win the Olympics, since there are plenty of counter-examples to that.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    NC, USA
    Posts
    16,691
    vCash
    450
    Rep Power
    7993
    Quote Originally Posted by PrincessLeppard View Post
    I voted no, because the main problem with the scoring system (imho, of course ) is that components aren't scored correctly.
    I'll second the "imho".

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Age
    48
    Posts
    17,937
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    33912
    Maybe the comment was being made in relation to a certain Ms Friedlander.
    When you are up to your arse in alligators it is difficult to remember you were only meant to be draining the swamp.

  9. #9
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    236
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Of course she says this to try and justify Chan's undeserved wins which she and a few rabid Chan fans/Canadian skating fans are the only ones to agree with. I remember her practically screaming and crying on air when the crowd booed Chan and his win at Worlds last year.

  10. #10
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    1,520
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Is there a video link to Kwong screaming and crying? That is hilarious if she really did that. Some Canadian commentators can be sniveling and biased, but Kwong has not been either when I have heard her. I recall her commentary being marked by promiscuous fairness. She seems to support everyone, and I have not heard her misrepresenting competitions in favor of Canadians.
    Last edited by TheIronLady; 05-05-2013 at 09:38 AM.

  11. #11

    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    29,578
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    42893
    Edmonton Journal blog article titled "Figure skating needs CPR": http://blogs.edmontonjournal.com/201...ing-needs-cpr/
    Excerpt:
    When viewers watch skating, they may not catch the edge calls and under-rotations. Not all viewers counts spin rotations, and know what a level four footwork sequence looks like. However, isn’t it irritating to see a low score and not understand why? Or a high score and feel like throwing skate guards at the 42” screen?
    ...
    Don’t we want to know why a skater isn’t on the podium without a calculator and scrap paper? This season, to the naked-eye, so many who skated appeared to have flawless performances, yet flopped in the points. And for many, it was because of the GOE, or grade of execution.

    Grade of execution – a value assigned to an element based how well it was completed – ranges from -3 to +3. This is combined to the base value. For example, the base value of a triple flip is 5.30, and if executed well, such as tight air position and nice landing it would receive a plus [+] value. If it wasn’t – such a weak landing or slight under-rotation, it would be minus [-]. This, of course, is open to the subjectively of the judges. The GOE on a good jump can range from +1 to +3 for the same skater. The reality of a judged sport.
    Last edited by Sylvia; 05-05-2013 at 01:36 AM. Reason: To add excerpt
    "Randy [Starkman (1960-April 16, 2012)] lived by the same motto as the rest of us. The Olympics isn’t every four years, it’s every single day. He just got it." --Canadian Olympic kayaker Adam van Koeverden

  12. #12

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    bowing down to Robert Lepage
    Posts
    3,415
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    5645
    People can agree with the way the sport is judged now or not. However, it is not a system that only favours Chan and Canadians.

    The elements of the system that allow Chan's controversial wins would also allow controversial wins for other skaters who gain a cushion because of where they are consistently judged superior.

    It is most blatant recently and particularly in this year's Worlds with Chan's victory - but had V and T skated more poorly than they did this year with more falls - they also still would have won easily judging by their margin of victory. I remember thinking that before they skated. I knew they would win even with mistakes - and I didn't have an issue with that- but I hoped they would skate in a way that there would be no controversy and luckily they did.

    It is the same reason people don't always agree with Kostner's wins with less difficult jump content and why she could place above a female equivalent of Denis Ten.

    I am not suggesting that any of these skaters DID skate with as many errors as Chan - but that if they had, the system the way it judges would allow for similarly controversial results.

    I happen to be one of the ones who sees why VT, Kostner and Chan should beat other skaters with more perfect programs. I am not saying you have to agree with me - I am just saying having seen them all skate live I have no problem with each of these skaters' mastery of the ice and all the time and energy it has taken them to get that way being something that gets rewarded when they skate the way the mastery of a jump is rewarded.

    Also - I don't find the suggestion that many people don't understand the system condescending because I have seen evidence of that repeatedly. That doesn't mean that people who understand the system and disagree with it don't also exist. I think both groups do.

    Unfortunately, there are many people who write about the sport or speak about it who DON'T understand it.

  13. #13
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,261
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by The Accordion View Post
    People can agree with the way the sport is judged now or not. However, it is not a system that only favours Chan and Canadians.

    The elements of the system that allow Chan's controversial wins would also allow controversial wins for other skaters who gain a cushion because of where they are consistently judged superior.

    It is most blatant recently and particularly in this year's Worlds with Chan's victory - but had V and T skated more poorly than they did this year with more falls - they also still would have won easily judging by their margin of victory. I remember thinking that before they skated. I knew they would win even with mistakes - and I didn't have an issue with that- but I hoped they would skate in a way that there would be no controversy and luckily they did.

    It is the same reason people don't always agree with Kostner's wins with less difficult jump content and why she could place above a female equivalent of Denis Ten.

    I am not suggesting that any of these skaters DID skate with as many errors as Chan - but that if they had, the system the way it judges would allow for similarly controversial results.

    I happen to be one of the ones who sees why VT, Kostner and Chan should beat other skaters with more perfect programs. I am not saying you have to agree with me - I am just saying having seen them all skate live I have no problem with each of these skaters' mastery of the ice and all the time and energy it has taken them to get that way being something that gets rewarded when they skate the way the mastery of a jump is rewarded.

    Also - I don't find the suggestion that many people don't understand the system condescending because I have seen evidence of that repeatedly. That doesn't mean that people who understand the system and disagree with it don't also exist. I think both groups do.

    Unfortunately, there are many people who write about the sport or speak about it who DON'T understand it.
    Well said.

  14. #14
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    395
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    I agree. Well said Accordian.

    Thanks to PJ's posting the score sheets a year or so ago, and thus leading me to various sections on the ISU sites, and some posts elsewhere, I'm now very comfortable with the scoring system-- much more so than I ever was with 6.0. But then, I never liked fractions all that much. Seeing the scores for each element is great.

  15. #15

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Partying with Oda
    Posts
    4,223
    vCash
    1799
    Rep Power
    33989
    Quote Originally Posted by Cherub721 View Post
    Her comment is patronizing. Plenty of people understand the system but still disagree with many aspects of it. There are lots of thoughtful discussions about it right here on FSU, where she is a member. I agree to the extent that some media are OTT in their insistence that the judging system is an impossible code to crack and driving viewers away, but disagree that once everyone "understands" that there wouldn't be any problem.

    Also found it strange that she said a skater must be 100% healthy to win the Olympics, since there are plenty of counter-examples to that.
    I agree with all of this.
    "I hit him with my shoes... if he had given me the medal like I told him to, I wouldn't have had to hit him!" -- 8-year-old Rhoda Penmark in "The Bad Seed"

  16. #16

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Oz
    Posts
    2,683
    vCash
    400
    Rep Power
    8867
    Quote Originally Posted by dorianhotel View Post
    Of course she says this to try and justify Chan's undeserved wins which she and a few rabid Chan fans/Canadian skating fans are the only ones to agree with. I remember her practically screaming and crying on air when the crowd booed Chan and his win at Worlds last year.
    I am not sure whether rabid is the right word for you to use against Chan's fans. I can pick your posts to show rabid applies more to yourself but then again, there are a lot of trash talk in trash can, and there are better things to do in life than indulge in negative nitpicking.

    I respect PJ Kwong though I may not agree with all her opinions. What I like about PJ is that she tries to point out the little details which a skater does which show the level of quality/difficulty. I have learnt so much listening to her at competitions, as a non figure skater. And I support her that COP is not difficult to understand if we look at the sheet of paper like in any basic maths. And for anyone who wants to write about figure skating, they should learn the rules. I am a casual fan and I don't bother. I just watch and enjoy the skaters's skills. But should I wonder why A scores more than B, I look at the protocols and find where the points are gained or lost.

    Interestingly, I wish COP was in place during Tara and Michelle's Olympic skates. IMO, it could have gone either way. I wish I know where Michelle lost to Tara just as in the recent 2010 Olympics where Plushenko lost to Lysacek.
    Prosperity makes friends, adversity tries them. – Publilius Syrus

  17. #17
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    233
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Didn't read the interview. It seems that she thinks people don't like some of the results because they don't understand the system?
    I thought IJS was more popular because it's basically a fool's system, easier to understand. Under IJS, each element is assigned a value, PCS is independent to TES, then simply add everything up, neglecting lots of more complicated situations. While 6.0 is much more complicated.
    Last edited by unicorn; 05-05-2013 at 04:58 AM.

  18. #18
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    222
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    I think this is the crux of the matter: the UNWILLINGNESS to understand and/or accept CoP, especially when one's favourites don't win. IJS has had a tremendous impact on the sport for developing skaters. It's not complicated. I know a whole bunch of 8 and 10 year olds who understand exactly what their skating report cards mean, and eagerly look for them at the end of the competition so they can see where they improved and what they still need to work on. And when they watch a video play-back with the report card in hand, the "wuz-robbed" complaining can often be silenced by a solid analysis of what actually happened and how it was scored. That's not to say there isn't work to do yet on how to decide PCS and GOE's, but the system at its core is sound, and is working well in so many ways. It's time for the media to get on board, and help explain it to the general audience instead of the constant whining about the "new" system. It's here. It's not new. Let's accept it, and work on tweaking it where needed.

    Here's the thing: I think there will always be a debate over whether or not jumps are more important, whether or not clean skates should be rewarded over difficulty, what constitutes difficulty, and so on. This happened under the old system as well, if I recall. And where someone sits in that continuum often depends on whether or not his/her favourite won the day. I don't think it is possible for everyone to agree on a "perfect" system, and what "perfect" means will likely continue to change with the winds. For some crazy reason, or multiple reasons, Patrick becomes the current whipping boy for the "haterz", although it should be pointed out that he is not the only one who has benefited from IJS. But I remember post Olympics how the forums were abuzz with the "haterz" who thought it was ridiculous that an Olympic champion could win without a quad. And so the system was tweaked to provide a higher point lead to those who complete quads. Now that Patrick has quads, and received the points he did largely because of his quad (along with a few other things), now the emphasis should be on "skating clean". Folks, we can't have it both ways! Either there will be greater reward and points for attempting and completing more difficult elements, or the skaters will not attempt them so they can guarantee a win. It's just logic.

    I do like that IJS rewards a more complete skater. It has made things more difficult for people like Plushenko, Joubert, and others who grew up in the old system and haven't adjusted terribly well to new expectations. But I sometimes wonder if Kurt would have had an Olympic medal if he had skated under IJS. He would mess up in the short, and then have too far to go in the free, even if he put in a stellar performance. I remember discussions about needing to have a great skate and a certain combination of others having to finish in a different order for him to have any hope of a podium finish. He really was (and is) a complete skater. In IJS, where its all about points, he may have been able to make up enought points to land on a podium, even if it wasn't gold.

  19. #19

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    859
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Uhhh... I think the problem is many people knows how the system is suppose to be scored, that is why people are upset?!

  20. #20

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Age
    48
    Posts
    17,937
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    33912
    Quote Originally Posted by NorthernDancers View Post
    I think this is the crux of the matter: the UNWILLINGNESS to understand and/or accept CoP, especially when one's favourites don't win. IJS has had a tremendous impact on the sport for developing skaters. It's not complicated. I know a whole bunch of 8 and 10 year olds who understand exactly what their skating report cards mean, and eagerly look for them at the end of the competition so they can see where they improved and what they still need to work on. And when they watch a video play-back with the report card in hand, the "wuz-robbed" complaining can often be silenced by a solid analysis of what actually happened and how it was scored. That's not to say there isn't work to do yet on how to decide PCS and GOE's, but the system at its core is sound, and is working well in so many ways. It's time for the media to get on board, and help explain it to the general audience instead of the constant whining about the "new" system. It's here. It's not new. Let's accept it, and work on tweaking it where needed.
    I totally agree. It is about learning about the system. One of the things I think is really important as a judge is not only to get out there as a judge, but then talk to skaters and explain what the protocols means. They always appreciate it. But then it helps them to go away and know what to work on.
    When you are up to your arse in alligators it is difficult to remember you were only meant to be draining the swamp.

Page 1 of 5 123 ... 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
  •