@ skatingfan04
I agree with you that Mitch needs more expression (in terms of all that entails for the judges & the different elements). Scott Moir developed a very powerful, strong presence in his skating (perhaps too strong off-ice for some people! ) Andrew Poje is not quite as brash as Moir, but his looks, very tall height and glide give him some advantages. And Paul Poirier also has his own personality which can be quite musical and bubbly in some programs, but also gets praise for being more serious & darker in 'Hitchcock'.
We don't want skaters to copy someone else or try to change their own style and personality completely, but I think you may be on to something in terms of the way judges see these teams artistically or in terms of choreography and interpretation. I think Krylova will want to explore some different avenues for Mitch down the road, like she has with Andrew.
If the judges are following the ISU's rules, there is very little room for "the way judges see the teams", except to a limited degree with choreography, something which I clearly laid out in the post above that you just ignored. There isn't "did the team project in the way the judges like?" . It's "did the team project, in any of the ways that are acceptable per the criteria?" If you think P/I need to up their game at projecting a strong connection between the two of them, taking into consideration that extraverted or completely original projection is not a requirement for the highest possible PCS marks when judged fairly, then please, clearly explain why you think that is the case, and don't throw out vague stuff about needing to find what the judges are looking for. We already know what the judges are supposed to be looking for. You are entitled to find Mitch boring, but you are not entitled to conflate your opinion with the ISU rulebook.
Yes, judges are only human, and may perceive whether a team fulfills a criteria and to what degree differently, but they are not supposed to go "I dunno, man, if only he was tall, dark and handsome, then I could give him a better mark. If only this team were as campy as I'd like them to be. Or as exciting as per my personal definition of exciting. If only they made faces like this
http://youtu.be/gKkmNwZsEnA?t=4m40s " Do you think the judges are correct to judge in this manner, and if so, could you please tell me what parts of COP lead you to that conclusion? Where is a team's "unique style and personality" in the rules? The only legitimate question about P/I's expression, if you're going to bring the judges and scores into it, that is, rather than your own enjoyment regarding the team, is whether they project - either to the audience, or within their connection - strongly enough. I think they have an excellent, spellbinding connection, but THAT is the question where a legitimate debate can be had. If that's the debate you are trying to have, please be more specific about exactly what facet of criteria you find Mitch lacking in, keeping in mind that he doesn't have to show he can do it all. The same way G/P won't ever be required to do subtle romance. If you want to discuss how entertaining you find P/I as a team, that is your perogative, but then it might behoove you to take the judges out of it, when you keep insisting on ascribing them powers they don't on paper have. And all of that is aside from the fact, that even if P/I could be legitimately scored lower than G/P in expression, that amounts to almost nothing when stacked up against the rest of the PCS criteria at which they excel and G/P as a team don't.
And actually - even with choreography, it is NOT, or at least is not supposed to be, about what the judges enjoy. It is the use of space, the use of music, the use of innovative movement - all of which can be subjective to grade, but it's still not "Was I entertained? Did I love it? Is this something that artistically spoke to me?" That is not the criteria. I as a judge couldn't mark down G/P just because I don't enjoy watching them. I'd have to mark them down for what was lacking specifically per the criteria. Therefore this whole meme - which certainly exists outside of the P/I vs G/P discussion, I realize - of "what the judges are looking for" is pure BS. Sadly, that seems to be part of the reality right now with judging, but that doesn't make it legitimate. If you think I have my facts re: CoP wrong, or if you think the judging system should be different than it is, or if you think it's just fantastic that CoP as written is often not applied as such, then say so. But your view of how the judges should judge does not match what the ISU's own documents say, so please don't ignore the informed arguments that others make in defense of P/I, when it's you who are choosing to hang out in a P/I thread to discuss P/I. And BTW, being "musical" isn't an expression choice. It's a requirement for every single program in the way a skater moves with the music.
Anyone who wants to learn more about what CoP says, the documents are here:
http://www.isu.org/en/single-and-pair-skating-and-ice-dance/isu-judging-system/ice-dance
), so consider checking it out. I've never been, but I think I'll finally make the trip this year.
I called and checked. I believe the only ones that cost $ are the on ice seats, and I believe that's because they provide food/drinks.
) Andrew Poje is not quite as brash as Moir, but his looks, very tall height and glide give him some advantages. And Paul Poirier also has his own personality which can be quite musical and bubbly in some programs, but also gets praise for being more serious & darker in 'Hitchcock'.
