GOE -5 to +5 How will skating change?

[Marymas]

That's only her avid fans' belief, amidst the whole WTF ZagMed-itis horse and pony show.

A lot of sound thinkers, active coaches and choreographers in the sport feel that Kaetlyn Osmond should have won OGM in ladies singles. The main drawback for Osmond in not winning gold is the Russian political clout juggernaut syndrome, and Osmond's relative inconsistencies due to nerves, thus her inability to slam dunk her Russian rivals head-to-head during the GP. Osmond has tended to be coddled by fans and judges generally, so if she had a more fierce competitive track record combined with her stellar skills, Eteri's gals may have been challenged in the minds of the judges. Realistically, Osmond is way better with speed, height, power and ice coverage on her jumps, and she's more mature and dynamic aesthetically. Osmond brung her A-game to the individual event at the Olympics and that was nice to see.

To be honest, Zag and Med are both talented skaters with great potential, but they have weaknesses that are overlooked, and neither should be receiving those ridiculously high PCS scores. Kostner, Miyahara, and Osmond are all superior aesthetically. Osmond is the best jumper overall. Re Zag vs Med, Zagitova is the better jumper and athlete, but both have technical weaknesses the judges apparently don't feel these two 'Russian juggernauts' need to work on.

Don't get me wrong, I fully agree with you that both should not receive the amount of PCS they're getting now. I too think Osmond should have won OGM but the momentum and "trend" was obviously on the Russian side. 1st and 2nd place were already "fixed" beforehand and I don't think Osmond would have gotten either of them unless two Russian made mistakes.

 

[Marymas]

Zagitova won on the technical side, Medvedeva on the PCS side, and when they added it all up it was a tie and Medvedeva won because the PCS is the tiebreaker. Yes, I think you could make an argument that Medvedeva's technical score was too high based on the GOE on her jumps, and the technical panel ignoring the flutz. On the other hand, there is an equally good argument that Zagitova was overscored in PCS because of the lack of finish in her movement - like seriously someone tell her to slowdown and hold an edge for a just 3 count at some point in the program. In the end it washes each other out, and the only person it would help is Kaetlyn Osmond.

Both of them should not be getting 75 PCS, PERIOD. I would probably give Med 1 more PCS than Zagitova but that's it. Med's muscled, labored jumps with horrendous jump techniques getting +2 to +3 is also shameful on the judges. And let's not even mention why and how Med is getting away with Flutz for the past 2 years. It's ridiculous.

 

[aftershocks]

Don't get me wrong, I fully agree with you that both should not receive the amount of PCS they're getting now. I too think Osmond should have won OGM but the momentum and "trend" was obviously on the Russian side. 1st and 2nd place were already "fixed" beforehand ...

Most of that is what I said already. You seem to be backing away quickly from your earlier claim. Perhaps you only meant between Zag & Med that Zag should have won, since you are now agreeing that Osmond is the real winner?

We knew from the beginning of the season the lay of the land, no? It was only a question about whether Med would prevail over Zag, or whether fans of both would slit their wrists in the interim. And also, who was going to be able to sneak in there for Olympic bronze. Of course, Osmond had her opportunities to convince the judges she was fierce and consistent enough as the Russians to be considered ISU-worthy of beating them, but Osmond blew all of those opportunities, ultimately settling upon repairing her nerves and trying to grab the only podium spot available.

... I don't think Osmond would have gotten either of them unless two Russian made mistakes.

The Russians woulda had to make a boatload of uncharacteristic mistakes for Osmond or other top contenders to come close to beating them. ZagMeds and their fans knew they alone were in the head-to-head battle for OGM. And the rest of the skating community were resigned to the inevitability, like

 

[Marymas]

Most of that is what I said already. You seem to be backing away quickly from your earlier claim. Perhaps you only meant between Zag & Med that Zag should have won, since you are now agreeing that Osmond is the real winner?

We knew from the beginning of the season the lay of the land, no? It was only a question about whether Med would prevail over Zag, or whether fans of both would slit their wrists in the interim. And also, who was going to be able to sneak in there for Olympic bronze. Of course, Osmond had her opportunities to convince the judges she was fierce and consistent enough as the Russians to be considered ISU-worthy of beating them, but Osmond blew all of those opportunities, ultimately settling upon repairing her nerves and trying to grab the only podium spot available.



The Russians woulda had to make a boatload of uncharacteristic mistakes for Osmond or other top contenders to come close to beating them. ZagMeds and their fans knew they alone were in the head-to-head battle for OGM. And the rest of the skating community were resigned to the inevitability, like

It was always Zag vs Med for me because there was just NO WAY that any other skater would have triumphed over those two jumping beans (not that Osmond was bad, but because Russians are the only ones getting high, UNDESERVED, PCS like wtf?). But between those two, I give Zag the upperhand for backloading and for having correct edges. I didn't even consider other skaters like Osmond to be the OGM contenders because of the reasons you and I agree on. In fact, I would have placed Osmond as OGM favorite had judging been "correct". It's ridiculous how Osmond gets ! but Med who have a deep inside edge on her Lutz gets +1.60 GOE. This is just disgusting. Her Toe Axel gets positive GOE as well which I have no idea HOW. These judges, if were given +5 GOE will go nuts on her combo. It is just another way to preserve 1st and 2nd for the Russians.

 

[MAXSwagg]

Zagitova won on the technical side, Medvedeva on the PCS side, and when they added it all up it was a tie and Medvedeva won because the PCS is the tiebreaker. Yes, I think you could make an argument that Medvedeva's technical score was too high based on the GOE on her jumps, and the technical panel ignoring the flutz. On the other hand, there is an equally good argument that Zagitova was overscored in PCS because of the lack of finish in her movement - like seriously someone tell her to slowdown and hold an edge for a just 3 count at some point in the program. In the end it washes each other out, and the only person it would help is Kaetlyn Osmond.

PCS is a joke in ladies. So, the least the technical panel can do is TRY to make correct and fair calls...

 

[aftershocks]

It was always Zag vs Med for me because there was just NO WAY that any other skater would have triumphed over those two jumping beans (not that Osmond was bad, but because Russians are the only ones getting high, UNDESERVED, PCS like wtf?). But between those two, I give Zag the upperhand for backloading and for having correct edges. I didn't even consider other skaters like Osmond to be the OGM contenders because of the reasons you and I agree on. In fact, I would have placed Osmond as OGM favorite had judging been "correct". It's ridiculous how Osmond gets ! but Med who have a deep inside edge on her Lutz gets +1.60 GOE. This is just disgusting. Her Toe Axel gets positive GOE as well which I have no idea HOW. These judges, if were given +5 GOE will go nuts on her combo. It is just another way to preserve 1st and 2nd for the Russians.

Good grief! Relax already. Maybe I need to break it to you: Zagitova has won the Olympic gold medal in ladies figure skating ALREADY!!! You should actually try to find some time to celebrate and enjoy her victory, before she gets overrun by Trusova et al in Eteri's Russian ladies point-gathering circus.

 

[Marymas]

Good grief! Relax already. Maybe I need to break it to you: Zagitova has won the Olympic gold medal in ladies figure skating ALREADY!!! You should actually try to find some time to celebrate and enjoy her victory, before she gets overrun by Trusova et al in Eteri's Russian ladies point-gathering circus.

Frankly speaking, I really dont care. But it’s tiring to hear whining from Med fans who ignores technical flaws that Med presents on ice but downplay Alina.

 

[aftershocks]

Frankly speaking, I really dont care. But it’s tiring to hear whining from Med fans who ignores technical flaws that Med presents on ice but downplay Alina.

You are all over the place with your ZagMed-itis comments. Please calm down.

 

[Marymas]

You are all over the place with your ZagMed-itis comments. Please calm down.

You seem to be bad at understanding words. I have no time for fools

 

[aftershocks]

You seem to be bad at understanding words. I have no time for fools

Ah, projecting much. Right back at ya!

Seriously, it might help if you reviewed all of your posts in this thread to recognize how you've been contradicting yourself all over the place, while still holding tightly to Zag over Med.

 

[Marymas]

Ah, projecting much. Right back at ya!

Seriously, it might help if you reviewed all of your posts in this thread to recognize how you've been contradicting yourself all over the place, while still holding tightly to Zag over Med.

I don’t see any contradictions. My point stands clear. Current judging system is obviously heavily biased towards russians because theyre the ones getting boosted PCS for no reason, causing other skaters to virtually have 0 chance to win OGM no matter how they performed. Alina’s PCS skyrocketed, which was enough to put her ahead of Med. Med fans are complaining because apparently Alina shouldnt get high PCS but are forgetting Med’s TES is far below Alina’s due to lack of backloading and horrendous jump techniques. IMO both dont deserve high PCS but I would give an upper hand to Alina for higher content with correct techniques.

I’m not favoring any skater or am fan of either of these skaters. I just want judges to score fairly and stop ignoring Med’s deep inside edge flutz

 

[aftershocks]

Well @Marymas, I think in addition to back-tracking, contradicting and circling the wagons, you've made most of your points more than once already, as well as repeating some of my points too that I originally made in response to your initial Zag-centric declaration.

Meanwhile, as a new poster, you seem to have an over-dramatic vendetta against Med fans for whatever reason. Smells of trollish behavior, but carry on...

 

[Marymas]

Well @Marymas, I think in addition to back-tracking, contradicting and circling the wagons, you've made most of your points more than once already, as well as repeating some of my points too that I originally made in response to your initial Zag-centric declaration.

Meanwhile, as a new poster, you seem to have an over-dramatic vendetta against Med fans for whatever reason. Smells of trollish behavior, but carry on...

I’m repeating them because you seemed unable to comprehend what I was posting, but that’s a matter only you can resolve. And i joined last january. Just didnt bother to post.

If you think calling out Med’s inferior technical skillls are “trolling” you really aren’t a figure skating fan

 

[aftershocks]

Ah, maybe @Marymas, very little of this back-and-forth is even worth attempting to comprehend. Hmmm, maybe overdone merry-go-round pissing matches in multiple threads can be chalked up to Olympics-withdrawal. Or not.

The big show is over, btw, for another four years. On to Worlds in Milan.

 

[Deleted member 221]

I agree with others along the theme of the rich -- established skaters who skate late in the start order -- will get richer, while the poor will get poorer.

I wonder whether jumps should have "levels," similar to twist lifts or spins. On one hand, it may bring about more fairness. On the other hand, it may bring about more contortionism for the sake of contortionism.

Features would be things like:
-- Unique arm variations (applied to the first jump on which the variation occurs, maximum of two per program)
-- Steps or linking elements immediately preceding the jump (maximum of two per program)
-- Steps or linking elements immediately following the jump (maximum of two per program)
-- Clear delay in rotation
-- Elevation (can this be quantified somehow? Or at least qualified so that an Osmond flip clearly gets it, and a Zagitova flip clearly does not?)
-- Acceleration of speed on jump landing

I also think it's time for some lines in the sand that prevent positive GOE if there is any visible error on the jump. In addition to edge changes, rotation issues, and falls, the tech panel should call out hands down, two-footed landings, and step outs. Too many judges conveniently ignore these things. If the tech panel calls an error of any kind, the + GOE boxes should be greyed out.

 

[Deleted member 40371]

-- Elevation (can this be quantified somehow? Or at least qualified so that an Osmond flip clearly gets it, and a Zagitova flip clearly does not?)
-- Acceleration of speed on jump landing

Change rules so that Osmond wins, okay

 

[misskarne]

I thought they were going to test the GOE changes at last year's Tallinn Trophy but it didn't happen. Are we just going to be jumping in cold turkey at the beginning of the season?

I thought I read somewhere that they'll be using it at Broadmoor Open.

 

[starrynight]

I thought I read somewhere that they'll be using it at Broadmoor Open.

Thanks!

http://broadmoorskatingclub.com/events/broadmoor/

It says:

Test Competition for the new IJS -5 to +5 scoring & The New Scale of Values along with the New FS Program Times for Juniors and Seniors

Looking forward with interest to this competition.

 

[Marco]

Change rules so that Osmond wins, okay

More like change rules so that better quality gets rewarded more.

 

[Polaris]

Give Hanyu all the +5 GOEs!

 

[Aussie Willy]

Nothing will change. People will still find something to complain about.

 

[Japanfan]

Is this a hypothetical question, or have GOEs actually been extended to -5 to +plus?

I do not have time to read through the whole thread and apologize if that question has been answered already.

 

[misskarne]

Is this a hypothetical question, or have GOEs actually been extended to -5 to +plus?

I do not have time to read through the whole thread and apologize if that question has been answered already.

It's actually happening.

 

[MacMadame]

Nothing will change. People will still find something to complain about.

Ain't that the truth!

 

[Birdseye]

Am I the only one who thinks that positive grades of execution is completely the wrong way to go about scoring an element? I really feel that Gymnastics has it right giving a base value and then deducting from there for errors. What i'd prefer to see is leveled jump elements which receive increasing base values based on the connecting and linking movements before after and during the element. Then they could limit the amount of times a feature was allowed to be used, like they already do with spins.

 

[Aussie Willy]

Am I the only one who thinks that positive grades of execution is completely the wrong way to go about scoring an element? I really feel that Gymnastics has it right giving a base value and then deducting from there for errors. What i'd prefer to see is leveled jump elements which receive increasing base values based on the connecting and linking movements before after and during the element. Then they could limit the amount of times a feature was allowed to be used, like they already do with spins.

Totally disagree. Skaters should be awarded for doing something above the basic requirements. And it is what helps differentiate between the skaters who are just average from those that are the top of the class. Remember this system is used through all levels of the sport.

We also need to reward skaters for the effort they put in rather than just deducting them for what they do wrong.

If you ever talk to a young skater when giving judging feedback and tell them you gave them a +1 for their axel, you should see their eyes light up. It is actually really positive reinforcement and gives them further incentive to work hard and strive for excellence.

 

[Coco]

Am I the only one who thinks that positive grades of execution is completely the wrong way to go about scoring an element? I really feel that Gymnastics has it right giving a base value and then deducting from there for errors. What i'd prefer to see is leveled jump elements which receive increasing base values based on the connecting and linking movements before after and during the element. Then they could limit the amount of times a feature was allowed to be used, like they already do with spins.

Ha! I got into this same disagreement with someone on another board.

My issue is that there is a difference between deduction free (Madison Kocian, for example) and deduction free + brilliant (Komova or Biles).

Figure skating doesn't go far enough to make sure that, all other things being equal, highest and faster will always score more. But they get a lot closer to that ideal than gymnastics, which has no mechanism, imo, to separate deduction free routines (or routines with equal deductions).

 

[Japanfan]

It's actually happening.

Okay. Not really seeing any benefit to it at the moment.

 

[gkelly]

On the negative side, I think there is value to subtracting more for a jump that was telegraphed and scrapy and small and landed on two feet before falling vs. a jump that was good right up through coming down on one foot before falling. Or a short program spin with only 4 revolutions and poor positions that traveled significantly vs. a short program spin with nice position and centering but still only 4 revolutions where 8 were required.

I.e., letting the GOE reductions accumulate beyond -3 for multiple errors on the same element makes sense (in a way that accumulating SP deductions from the whole program score for a single really bad element did not.)

For the positive +4 and +5 GOEs, I'm still not sure how they will work.

Will the new guidelines instruct judges to give one + for each positive bullet point, so that 5 bullet points would earn +5?

Or would they still expect each plus to need two bullet points, so the element would need to meet all 8 bullets listed to earn +4, and then either there would need to be additional bullet points available to earn +5 or else judges would have the option to count some bullets double if a quality is "excellent" and not just "good."

Or will there be completely new guidelines for a completely new method of awarding positive GOE?

And will +3 in the new range count about the same as +3 is worth currently, with +4 and +5 adding even more value to the element than is currently available?

Or will new +3 be the equivalent of current +2, and +5 the equivalent of current +3, with the even numbers representing intermediate point increases?

Until we know the answers to those questions, I have no opinion on what effects it's likely to have on how skaters plan and execute their elements, how they end up getting scored, and whether GOE will become more of a determining factor in final results.