View Poll Results: What would it mean to score PCS correctly?

Voters
88. You may not vote on this poll
  • Some judges do it right, too many do it wrong

    38 43.18%
  • No one official does it right, but it can be done.

    9 10.23%
  • The rules need to be written better.

    23 26.14%
  • Can't be done right, so don't do it at all.

    2 2.27%
  • Can't be done right, so just use one number.

    3 3.41%
  • Right vs. wrong is meaningless -- but there is better vs. worse

    13 14.77%
Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 678
Results 141 to 151 of 151
  1. #141
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    1,435
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    I can think of two, related, reasons why some skaters might not go out of their way to use interesting music.
    1) They're just not interested in music. ...
    2) using complex music and executing complex choreography in time with the music is a challenge that distracts them from, what they're doing technically...
    Fair enough, but those skaters who chose not to bother effectively interpreting music should not still expect to get many points on the Interpretation of Music component. My beef is that they do. A skater with a big Skating Skills mark can get away with doing amazingly little music interpretation and still get a similarly good mark there. IMO each of these components needs to be scored on its own. Skaters who hide from any interpretive musical challenges should not be getting choreo and interpretation marks above about 5 or 6.

  2. #142

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Age
    53
    Posts
    10,472
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    21476
    Quote Originally Posted by Susan M View Post
    Skaters who hide from any interpretive musical challenges should not be getting choreo and interpretation marks above about 5 or 6.
    If they do next to nothing, yes, I agree, on interpretation.

    Or if they're interpreting every beat of music despite weaker skating skills, they should score much higher on IN than on SS.

    So what's needed is better education of the judges on how to identify where skaters are and are not meeting the criteria as written, and maybe rewritten criteria that are easier to identify. And explicit encouragement for judges to separate the IN mark from the more technical components. Perhaps change or loosen the way judges are evaluated to make it clear to them that they should not be worried about trying to stay in the same corridor on the IN mark as on the other marks.

    Aussie Willy has mentioned training that asked judges to assign the IN component score first instead of last. Maybe changing the order they're listed on the computer screen would encourage that.

    For choreography, as discussed a few pages ago, there are quite a number of criteria that are not directly related to the music, so the skater could still do well with some of those even if the moment-to-moment connection to the music is weak. So again, explicit encouragement to give very different CH and IN scores when the spatial and temporal layout of the program and the coherence of a concept behind it are much weaker or much stronger than the connection to the music.

  3. #143

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Partying with Oda
    Posts
    4,226
    vCash
    1799
    Rep Power
    34903
    Quote Originally Posted by Susan M View Post
    Fair enough, but those skaters who chose not to bother effectively interpreting music should not still expect to get many points on the Interpretation of Music component. My beef is that they do. A skater with a big Skating Skills mark can get away with doing amazingly little music interpretation and still get a similarly good mark there. IMO each of these components needs to be scored on its own. Skaters who hide from any interpretive musical challenges should not be getting choreo and interpretation marks above about 5 or 6.
    Exactly. This is one of the problems many of us have with PCS and the way it is scored.

    Regarding the part I bolded, it seems to me that a skater that hides from any interpretive musical challenges should certainly not get CH and IN marks above 5.00 (which is "average," from 0 to 10) and, in fact, probably lower, as they would definitely be below average in those areas.
    "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"

  4. #144

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Partying with Oda
    Posts
    4,226
    vCash
    1799
    Rep Power
    34903
    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly View Post
    At the top competitive levels, some skaters get to that level because they like to jump and skate fast, and it turns out that they're good at those skills. The music part is just a distraction from what they really like about figure skating.
    Fair enough, but the opposite could be true as well: some skaters may simply enjoy the interpretive part of skating, feeling that the big jumps "are just a distraction" to what they're doing artistically. So they do a beautiful program with low technical content.

    Are they given above average marks for technical skills?
    "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"

  5. #145

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Age
    53
    Posts
    10,472
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    21476
    Quote Originally Posted by skateboy View Post
    Fair enough, but the opposite could be true as well: some skaters may simply enjoy the interpretive part of skating, feeling that the big jumps "are just a distraction" to what they're doing artistically. So they do a beautiful program with low technical content.

    Are they given above average marks for technical skills?
    Well, define "above average" for technical skills.

    If the technical skating skills are high, they can score high in all components. If they're technically weak, or even only average, they won't do well in Skating Skills and will be limited in the difficulty and/or quality of their transitions.

    If they do easier triple jumps well, and level 3 and 4 steps and spins well, then they can earn technical element scores that above average for senior level, but they probably can't win medals, because those harder jumps are worth so much each.

    Medium jump content with good quality and components worked for Kostner a couple years ago.

    If they don't do triple jumps at all, they will not score well technically by senior standards. And internationally they can't stay at lower levels by the time they're over 19.
    That's where a separate form of competition -- for pros/older skaters past their jump prime, and/or for skaters who were always most talented or most interested in blade work and artistry -- would be useful.

  6. #146
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    1,435
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Well, define "above average" for technical skills.
    Let's not get pedantic. His point is obvious. Skaters who do not do difficult jumps don't get the points for them anyway, so why should jumpers who don't interpret music still get good scores on that Program Component?

  7. #147

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Partying with Oda
    Posts
    4,226
    vCash
    1799
    Rep Power
    34903
    Quote Originally Posted by Susan M View Post
    Let's not get pedantic. His point is obvious. Skaters who do not do difficult jumps don't get the points for them anyway, so why should jumpers who don't interpret music still get good scores on that Program Component?
    That is exactly my point, thank you.
    "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"

  8. #148
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    11,195
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Susan M View Post
    Let's not get pedantic. His point is obvious. Skaters who do not do difficult jumps don't get the points for them anyway, so why should jumpers who don't interpret music still get good scores on that Program Component?
    This IMO is the biggest flaw of COP. PCS is still somewhat based on TES and some judges still do reputational judging. I would much rather see Lepisto medal the way she did in 2010 then Leonova medal the way she did in 2012.

    Time to allow the 5 PCS to vary and allow individual judges to judge outside the corridor. Judges should have to explain why their scores are outside the corridor.

  9. #149
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    ciocioworld
    Posts
    578
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Susan M View Post
    Let's not get pedantic. His point is obvious. Skaters who do not do difficult jumps don't get the points for them anyway, so why should jumpers who don't interpret music still get good scores on that Program Component?
    Because it is easier to prove that someone didn´t land the jumps than he/she didn´t interpret the music at all.

  10. #150
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Does it matter?
    Posts
    1,175
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    For those interested, here is an interview Alexander Lakernik, Chair of the Singles and Pairs Skating Committee, delivered to a reporter at the 2013 Worlds where he briefly discusses the IJS. My favorite part is where Lakernik says that listening to the judges explain their marks reminds him of the movie Rashomon by Japanese director Akira Kurosawa where several people were recounting the same story and while each of them was telling the truth, their versions were quite different from each other. lol

    http://www.openkwongdore.com/2013/05...nd-steve-dong/

  11. #151

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Oz
    Posts
    2,683
    vCash
    400
    Rep Power
    8867
    Quote Originally Posted by VarBar View Post
    For those interested, here is an interview Alexander Lakernik, Chair of the Singles and Pairs Skating Committee, delivered to a reporter at the 2013 Worlds where he briefly discusses the IJS. My favorite part is where Lakernik says that listening to the judges explain their marks reminds him of the movie Rashomon by Japanese director Akira Kurosawa where several people were recounting the same story and while each of them was telling the truth, their versions were quite different from each other. lol

    http://www.openkwongdore.com/2013/05...nd-steve-dong/
    Thanks VarBar. I went to PJ's blog earlier but haven't got time to listen to all the podcasts.

    What was the name the Russian coach who developed a mathematical system in coaching? I couldn't catch his name. I want to read up on him. Lakernik's comments on IJS is interesting - that it is a system which is alive and will always find ways to improve itself. It is also interesting to read about the problems Russia is facing in getting former skaters to take up coaching. I think this problem may be existent not only in Russia but other countries too. Skaters now have many other choices post-competition other than coaching, and also not all skaters make good coaches. The conscious effort to rejuvenate in order to grow has to be a national effort, IMO.

    Interesting to hear Dong talked about general lack of figure skating interest in China. Hopefully, with the ascent of singles, Li and Yan, that may encourage more yougsters to take up fs in China.
    Prosperity makes friends, adversity tries them. – Publilius Syrus

Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 678

Posting Permissions

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