Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 94
  1. #41

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Age
    52
    Posts
    10,239
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    10899
    They did not tie.

    There were several layers of tiebreakers for various points along the procedure for calculating results.
    http://www.sk8stuff.com/traindocs/2_60_scoring_r1.pdf
    (let me know if you'd like a briefer summary)

    In this instance there was just one instance of the first tiebreaker in the very first step of calculating results -- within a single judge's rankings.
    It just happened to be judge #9 in the freeskate.
    But by the time you get to the second step calculating ordinals for the freeskate, there was no need for tiebreakers, let alone in later steps.
    http://winter-olympic-memories.com/h...igure_w_ex.htm

  2. #42

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Some place competitive and athletic, but ultimately more like an audition than anything else.
    Posts
    7,531
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    6730
    I think tiebreakers are for ties, so they were tied at least to one level, regardless if a tiebreaker ends a tie.

    ... Mmm ... I had not realized that Nancy got four 1st and five 2nd place ordinals while Oksana got five 1st, two 2nd, and two 3rd place ordinals. It was a lot closer than I thought.

    ETA Judge 9 was ... Jan Hoffmann ... I think Hertmirsh may be on to something.
    Last edited by bardtoob; 11-04-2013 at 06:32 PM.

  3. #43

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Age
    52
    Posts
    10,239
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    10899
    Quote Originally Posted by bardtoob View Post
    I think tiebreakers are for ties, so they were tied at least to one level,
    On ONE judge's card, only in the sense that he gave them both the same total. He did not give them the exact same marks, and he knew what the tiebreaker was, so by the time he entered his marks, he had broken the tie in his mind, if indeed there had been one.

    Then those numbers were converted to ordinals and the scores used to generate them were never considered again.

    I.e., the numbers in the "Technical Merit," "Artistic Impression," and "Total" rows were only placeholder tools for judges to keep track of their rankings, although they were displayed publicly.
    The only numbers that figured into the official calculations of the majorities were the ordinal numbers listed in the "Places" row.

    By the time the accounting algorithm got hold of the data, all that mattered was that this judge gave Oksana a 1 and Nancy a 2.
    Oksana had 1s from 5 of the judges, a clear though narrow majority, and that was that. No ties. No ordinal tiebreakers required.

    It was close, but not a tie.
    Last edited by gkelly; 11-04-2013 at 06:43 PM.

  4. #44

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Some place competitive and athletic, but ultimately more like an audition than anything else.
    Posts
    7,531
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    6730
    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly View Post
    On ONE judge's card, only in the sense that he gave them both the same total. He did not give them the exact same marks, and he knew what the tiebreaker was, so by the time he entered his marks, he had broken the tie in his mind, if indeed there had been one.
    Yes, I am certain Jan Hoffmann knew what he was doing.

  5. #45
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Miami, FL, USA
    Posts
    6,769
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Susan M View Post
    ...
    Maybe that's because you are trying to substitute your understanding of today's PCS for for the judging system that actually existed in 1994. The presentation mark was a lot more all encompassing than today's PCS (and in any event transitions and skating skills are judging technical content/difficulty/skills, not so much presentation). One of the things the presentation mark did was capture the totality of the performance, including "it factor". Baiul skated with the whole body and her whole heart, and even in the US, the general response of your average American viewer was that Baiul was the special skater that night. I think this response from the supervising judge pretty well summed it up:

    http://www.nytimes.com/1994/02/27/sp...-the-gold.html
    What did Oksana 'present' though in that program? What was 'special'? I never got what that program was about.

    FTR, Nancy also had a lot of spirit in her skate, coming back from the whack heard 'round the world. So, even by a 1994 standard, I don't see how OB should've or could've won.

  6. #46
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,194
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by olympic View Post
    What did Oksana 'present' though in that program? What was 'special'? I never got what that program was about.

    FTR, Nancy also had a lot of spirit in her skate, coming back from the whack heard 'round the world. So, even by a 1994 standard, I don't see how OB should've or could've won.
    I didn't get it either. She was just a kid performing to an odd mash of showtunes that included the classy standard "Tits and Ass." And before some know-it-all chimes in, yes I know the actual title is "Dance: Ten; Looks: Three" but Hamlisch always called it "Tits and Ass" so that's good enough for me.

  7. #47

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Age
    52
    Posts
    10,239
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    10899
    * My personal opinion is that Kerrigan's technical superiority was sufficiently larger than Baiul's artistic superiority and therefore I think Kerrigan deserved to win this one.

    * I can understand how judges might have gotten caught up in the moment enjoying Baiul's charisma/projection and musicality, and probably speed (I can attest that she was fast in the short program) and may have overlooked some of her technical flaws. There was no instant replay at the time, no close-up views of elements far from the judges' stand. IIRC Hoffmann went on record that he did not notice all the two-footed jumps in real time.

    * I do think that Baiul was exceptional in her ability to express music. I don't think anyone else in that event could have gotten as much detail and nuance out of that music as she did. (I think Chen was also exceptionally gifted musically, but less extroverted especially at that point in career.) In IJS terms, I think that particular program is a rare example of a performance that would deserve MUCH higher scores for Interpretation (9+) than for Choreography (maybe 5-something).
    That kind of gap would not be the norm, but this performance may have been sufficiently unbalanced to warrant it.

    *Baiul's showtune medley did not include "Dance Ten, Looks Three." The selection from A Chorus Line that it included was "One."
    Two years later, Irina Slutskaya skated a different showtune medley, in a blue dress of a similar style to Baiul's pink one, that did include "D10 L3." That must be what you're remembering. (Slutskaya didn't do nearly as good a job expressing the music or performing to the audience. But she did have better technical content in terms of steps, etc.)

  8. #48

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Some place competitive and athletic, but ultimately more like an audition than anything else.
    Posts
    7,531
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    6730
    Oh, you know that any one mark of 9 plus a bunch of 5s with the right judging panel could translate to 8.25 across the board.

  9. #49
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    11,069
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly View Post
    * My personal opinion is that Kerrigan's technical superiority was sufficiently larger than Baiul's artistic superiority and therefore I think Kerrigan deserved to win this one.
    I agree (for just the two of them, head to head).

    I am interested to know what the free skate requirements were at the time.

    What is the minimum revolution for a spin / position to count?

    Is a program expected to have 3 or 4 spins?

    Is there a change foot spin requirement?

    Is there a step sequence requirement?

    What is the definition of artistic impression at the time - did it include program structure (element spacing and layout, skating on 2 feet, too much time on centre ice and facing one side, no connecting elements, prolonged resting on 2 feet), or was it just about musicality and interpretation and speed?

  10. #50

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Age
    52
    Posts
    10,239
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    10899
    To the best of my knowledge, the only technical requirements for the freeskate ca. 1994 were the Zayak rule, and a minimum of one jump combination or sequence. (There may have also been a maximum of three, or that might have come a year or two later.)

    Minimum revolutions for spins in the freeskate also came a year or two later, which is also when the short program minimums were raised to what they are now. There may have been a general definition that at least 3 revolutions were required to meet the definition of a spin, but I think that was all for long programs at the time.

    The "well-balanced program" guidelines, which later became requirements, weren't introduced until about 1996 or so.

    Here are rules for what was considered in each of the two marks, as of 1997:
    http://www.frogsonice.com/skateweb/archive/marks.txt

    Scroll down for the freeskate rules:

    2. In marking the technical merit the following must be considered:
    a) difficulty of the performance (with no credit being given for
    portions thereof which are missed);
    b) variety;
    c) cleanness and sureness;
    d) speed.

    3. In marking the presentation the following must be considered:
    a) harmonious composition of the program as a whole and its conformity
    with the music chosen;
    b) variation of speed;
    c) utilization of the ice surface;
    d) easy movement and sureness in time to the music;
    e) carriage and style;
    f) originality;
    g) expression of the character of the music;
    h) unison (pairs).
    I think that in 1994 "speed" was in the Presentation mark for the short program, but that doesn't affect this discussion of the long program.

    I thought I had kept one old rulebook from about that time, but I can't find it. I can find another document that has the following excerpt from the 1996 USFSA rulebook, which may or may not be verbatim from ISU rules:

    Free skating consists of a well-balanced program of free skating elements such as jumps, spins, steps, and other linking movements executed with a minimum of two-footed skating in harmony with music of the skater's choice. All elements are to be linked together by connecting steps of a different nature and by other comparable free skating movements while fully utilizing the entire ice surface (forward and backward crossovers are not considered to be connecting steps). Special attention must be given to choreography, expression, interpretation of the music, and intricate footwork. The numbers of each element may be varied, but an excessive number of any element, or less than the minimum number required, as well as the lack of connecting steps and other comparable free skating movements between the various elements, must be penalized by the judges in the mark for technical merit since they are against the objective of a well-balanced program.
    Hope that helps.

    In general, the written rules before IJS were all a lot more vague and subject to individual judges' interpretation or weighting of priorities.

  11. #51
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,194
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Thanks for the correction, gkelly. For some reason, I remembered Pepto Bismol Pink Poodle prancing to "Tits and Ass" but it was Bombastic Blue Poodle who used the piece instead.

  12. #52
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    11,069
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Thanks gkelly. So basically what Baiul put out there was lacking, but not warranting deductions.

  13. #53

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Partying with Oda
    Posts
    4,132
    vCash
    699
    Rep Power
    17018
    Quote Originally Posted by olympic View Post
    What did Oksana 'present' though in that program? What was 'special'? I never got what that program was about.
    Well, it was a program completely honoring showtunes and Oksana presented it with with a ton of charisma.

    I never "got" Nancy's program (although I agree she deserved to win). What in her program was she attempting to present?
    "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"

  14. #54

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Infected with the joy of skating!!
    Posts
    10,391
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    7460
    Quote Originally Posted by skateboy View Post
    I never "got" Nancy's program (although I agree she deserved to win). What in her program was she attempting to present?
    Middle aged white people?
    Keeper of Nathalie Pechelat's bitchface.

  15. #55

    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Age
    33
    Posts
    4,787
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    3065
    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly View Post
    * I can understand how judges might have gotten caught up in the moment enjoying Baiul's charisma/projection and musicality, and probably speed (I can attest that she was fast in the short program) and may have overlooked some of her technical flaws. There was no instant replay at the time, no close-up views of elements far from the judges' stand. IIRC Hoffmann went on record that he did not notice all the two-footed jumps in real time.
    I think the bolded part is probably a critical point that many people tend to forget, including me. It's easy now to dissect Oksana's jumps, especially given our current era of slo-mo replays for jumps. But when I watched in real time, I didn't notice the two-foot on Oksana's triple toe and didn't even know about it until CBS brought it up during one of the fall pro competitions (Ice Wars IIRC). The two-foot on the triple flip was harder to miss or excuse, but the toe was a pretty light two-foot.

    That said, I have thought since that night that Nancy's technical abilities far outweighed Oksana's musical interpretive abilities, especially with the program Oksana skated that year. I do always find it ironic that Jan Hoffman put Oksana first because of her musicality and artistry, considering that was an area in Hoffman's skating that was always lacking, but I also think it's kind of cool that he appreciates that quality in other skaters (as opposed to some former skaters who seem to only appreciate their clones).

  16. #56

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Some place competitive and athletic, but ultimately more like an audition than anything else.
    Posts
    7,531
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    6730
    I think a lot of the fans that watched during non-Olympics years noticed the two-footed landings. Two-footed landings were almost the only tangible reason ever given to fans to justify low marks, particularly with triple jumps starting in the late 70s. I remember two-footed triples being treated almost like they did not exist because they were supposed to be as good as clean doubles to get the extra credit of a triple. And remembering that era, I don't think it is acceptable to let the judges off the hook because they were supposed to be qualified to do everything that technical callers and judges do today, and many judges, including the forementioned Jan Hoffman, were former competitors that knew what they were looking at.
    Last edited by bardtoob; 11-05-2013 at 08:38 PM.

  17. #57

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    12,878
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    16392
    bardtoob: entire post


  18. #58
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    3,402
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by bardtoob View Post
    I think a lot of the fans that watched during non-Olympics years noticed the two-footed landings. Two-footed landings were almost the only tangible reason ever given to fans to justify low marks, particularly with triple jumps starting in the late 70s. I remember two-footed triples being treated almost like they did not exist because they were supposed to be as good as clean doubles to get the extra credit of a triple. And remembering that era, I don't think it is acceptable to let the judges off the hook because they were supposed to be qualified to do everything that technical callers and judges do today, and many judges, including the forementioned Jan Hoffman, were former competitors that knew what they were looking at.
    This is very true - in the 70s, under-rotated standalone triples were pretty much considered failed elements as well (even if landed on one foot) by the judges. Essentially, the message in those days ways to not even put those elements in your program if you can't land them fully rotated on one foot.

  19. #59

    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Age
    33
    Posts
    4,787
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    3065
    Quote Originally Posted by bardtoob View Post
    And remembering that era, I don't think it is acceptable to let the judges off the hook because they were supposed to be qualified to do everything that technical callers and judges do today, and many judges, including the forementioned Jan Hoffman, were former competitors that knew what they were looking at.
    They might know what they are looking at, but depending on the angle and the severity of the two-foot, sometimes it is just not visible to the judges, especially in real time. Judges made mistakes back in those days, some a lot more bigger than missing a two-foot (for example, at 1992 Worlds, apparently 4 out of 9 judges missed that Kurt Browning did a double lutz instead of a triple lutz in his SP...it also frequently happened in pairs where judges would miss that one partner had one less rotation than the other on a jump).

    That said, I can't believe that I'm actually defending the judges who awarded the gold to Baiul.

  20. #60
    snarking for AZE
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    vera ellen's turtleneck museum
    Posts
    29,826
    vCash
    2068
    Rep Power
    21538
    Quote Originally Posted by Coco View Post
    Middle aged white people?
    LOL! and as a rapidly aging white person, i am offended ::
    I feel like I'm in a dream. But it can't be a dream because there are no boy dancers!

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 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
  •