PCS question

Foolhardy Ham Lint

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,311
When a skater is awarded Program Components Scores less than 5.0 points, is that considered a failing grade?

I have seen some very accomplished junior champions get scores in this region. Mostly, because they don't have the most complex jumping passes.

That to me, is one of the biggest failings of IJS. That some skaters with big tricks, irrespective of their PCS, seem favoured by comparison.
 
Do you mean for testing?

Why would you think it to be a failing grade? What are they "failing"?
 
There is no halfway mark with PCS. Skaters in lower levels will be around 2s and 3s and can be considered quite good for that level. But you are comparing them with an international standard.

With testing in Australia, the GOEs are used to evaluate the test. We don't evaulate PCS but there is a consideration that you want to see a skater at a reasonable standard for that level.

Here is the component chart for the PCS - https://www.isu.org/inside-single-p...96-program-component-chart-id-sp-2018-19/file

As for it being the biggest failing of the system, that is more about the application of it rather than the system being a problem.
 
Last edited:
By failing, I mean that some competitors are effectively getting less than 5 out of a maximum of 10. To me, that seems like a failing grade.

I'll keep that in mind next time I look at my protocols and see all my PCS under 2. EDIT: oooh, I forgot I got a 3 for PE at a comp last year.

You still haven't really answered the question. Why do you think its a failing grade? 10 is like...Patrick Chan. Of course Juniors aren't going to be that standard. That doesn't mean they're failing.

EDIT 2: I just found a protocol for one of my earlier comps under IJS where one judge gave me 0.75 for CH. Ouch. Fair, but ouch.
 
Last edited:
I'll keep that in mind next time I look at my protocols and see all my PCS under 2. EDIT: oooh, I forgot I got a 3 for PE at a comp last year.

You still haven't really answered the question. Why do you think its a failing grade? 10 is like...Patrick Chan. Of course Juniors aren't going to be that standard. That doesn't mean they're failing.

EDIT 2: I just found a protocol for one of my earlier comps under IJS where one judge gave me 0.75 for CH. Ouch. Fair, but ouch.

I'm talking more at the elite international than the recreational level.

Under 6.0, it was very rare for even the last - placed skater in a junior world championship, to get less than 3.0 (out of a maximum 6.0) for artistic impression.

Is there some kind of guideline that details exactly how judges tabulate and arrive at the marks they give for PCS?
 
Under 6.0, it was very rare for even the last - placed skater in a junior world championship, to get less than 3.0 (out of a maximum 6.0) for artistic impression.

Is there some kind of guideline that details exactly how judges tabulate and arrive at the marks they give for PCS?

6.0 was also massively arbitrary. Not a good comparison.

https://www.isu.org/inside-single-p...igure-skating-rules/regulations-rules-fs/file - page 78 and 79 has what you're looking for.

Points given by the Judges correspond to the following degrees of the Program Components: less than 1 – extremely poor, 1 - very poor, 2 - poor, 3 - weak, 4 - fair, 5 - average, 6 - above average, 7 - good, 8 - very good, 9 - 10 - outstanding

So there you go - that "failing mark" you're talking about is actually "average".
 
I find it very useful to watch whole short program events from the first couple JGPs of each season, where most of the skaters are unknown to me and they're skating according to a random draw, and try to score the program components as well as I can based on the video.

I'm not being influenced much by reputation (I admit I do expect the Japanese and Russian skaters to do well and I usually have heard of the Americans and have some idea what to expect).

And then afterward I check the protocols to see how often I was in range with the panel and where I deviated. Especially for Skating Skills, if I was out of line I assume that something got lost between live and video.

I haven't done a statistical analysis of the JGP scores, but my impression is that the average of component scores tends to cluster around high 4s: lots of scores in the 4s, many in the 5s, and usually some outliers in the 6s and maybe 3s. At some events we see outstanding junior skaters earning 7s and even 8s, and occasionally there are skaters from small countries on the circuit who really aren't at a junior skill level earning scores in the 2s . . . or more rarely 1s and even 0s.


I think it's a good exercise for trying to see what constitutes average, above- or below-average, or especially good or weak junior skating. And to see where they are mostly not quite up to the standard of the elite seniors. Occasionally an exceptional skater will look like they could absolutely hold their own with senior GP skaters PCS-wise (or only in some areas), and those would be the exceptions that might inspire lots of 7s and maybe some 8s. But most junior skaters aren't at that level -- and if they're already over 16, that's exactly why they're competing in junior and not senior.
 
I find it very useful to watch whole short program events from the first couple JGPs of each season, where most of the skaters are unknown to me and they're skating according to a random draw, and try to score the program components as well as I can based on the video.

I'm not being influenced much by reputation (I admit I do expect the Japanese and Russian skaters to do well and I usually have heard of the Americans and have some idea what to expect).

And then afterward I check the protocols to see how often I was in range with the panel and where I deviated. Especially for Skating Skills, if I was out of line I assume that something got lost between live and video.

I haven't done a statistical analysis of the JGP scores, but my impression is that the average of component scores tends to cluster around high 4s: lots of scores in the 4s, many in the 5s, and usually some outliers in the 6s and maybe 3s. At some events we see outstanding junior skaters earning 7s and even 8s, and occasionally there are skaters from small countries on the circuit who really aren't at a junior skill level earning scores in the 2s . . . or more rarely 1s and even 0s.


I think it's a good exercise for trying to see what constitutes average, above- or below-average, or especially good or weak junior skating. And to see where they are mostly not quite up to the standard of the elite seniors. Occasionally an exceptional skater will look like they could absolutely hold their own with senior GP skaters PCS-wise (or only in some areas), and those would be the exceptions that might inspire lots of 7s and maybe some 8s. But most junior skaters aren't at that level -- and if they're already over 16, that's exactly why they're competing in junior and not senior.

Thank you for that. :-)
 
Or look at last year's JPG Final. All those girls gave fantastic performances with jump content that more than equaled what the seniors were doing. And they mostly earned PCS in the 7s, with some high 6s and a sprinkling of low 8s for the medalists.

I.e., the general consensus was that those performances were "good" and some verged on "very good."

So why weren't they earning 8s and 9s? There may have been a difference in absolute power/ice coverage -- hard to tell on video. I think the most obvious differences were probably in the various Performance criteria, especially Carriage & Clarity of movement. You could compare to the senior finalists and decide for yourself where you think the juniors equaled the seniors and where you think they had room for improvement.

And then consider how few other juniors can match what those junior ladies did even in terms of components, not even considering the jump content.

(Sometimes there are juniors who bring a high level of Performance or Interpretation but don't quite have the skating skills to match. In which case PE or IN scores a full point or more higher than SS might be appropriate more often than judges dare to spread the marks for a single performance. But those examples are probably even rarer than the all-around "good" juniors.)
 
Components are mostly a joke. Likewise, there are many senior skaters (including near or at the top) that occasionally give disastrous performances - what you would call poor or certainly below average - yet still get component scores that would tell you the performance was outstanding if you hadn’t seen it.

There really two sets of PCS. For seniors, a scale that ranges mostly from 6.00 to 10.00. For juniors, a scale that ranges 8 and under.
 
Likewise, there are many senior skaters (including near or at the top) that occasionally give disastrous performances - what you would call poor or certainly below average - yet still get component scores that would tell you the performance was outstanding if you hadn’t seen it.

Yeah, like Hanyu getting above 8s for that disaster skate at Cup of China 2014.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
Do Not Sell My Personal Information