Using the new +5/-5 GOEs

[gkelly]

The rules are very clear that a fall in a choreo sequence requires a -5 reduction of the GOE from whatever it would have been otherwise. That is not subject to interpretation.

What may be a gray area is whether a fall was in the sequence or whether it occurred right before the sequence began or right after it ended.

However, we don't even know for sure that that's what happened in that case. A look at the video would help; otherwise we're just guessing.

There are several other possible guesses to explain the discrepancy in scores. It may be that what the skater did was messy enough to be interpreted in more than one way, or it may be that one or more judges made a mistake in data input for reasons that may have more to do with the judge's knowledge and understanding or more with limitations in the data interface used at this competition.

No point in making a guess just so that you can rant about one reason that might not even be the correct reason.

 

[Aussie Willy]

It is actually no different to before. You are just working with a wider range of GOEs. But the positive bullet points for elements are actually simpler and more straightforward. Just don't think too hard about it.

 

[sleepingsleeping]

In that case, understanding of "choreo sequence" will be different for each judge.

 

[sleepingsleeping]

It is actually no different to before. You are just working with a wider range of GOEs. But the positive bullet points for elements are actually simpler and more straightforward. Just don't think too hard about it.

Please teach me how to calculate "-4"

3F+2T+2Lo<　　Fall

J1 -4
J2 -5
J3 -4
J4 -5
J5 -5
J6 -5

Fall -5
Under-rotated (sign < ) -2 to-3
Weak landing (bad pos./wrong edge/scratching etc) -1 to-3

https://www.isu.org/inside-single-p...s-for-marking-goe-2018-19-replacing-2168/file
In case of multiple errors the corresponding reductions are added

 

[kwanfan1818]

As a fan of Silvio Smalun, I loved the example data in the set-up manual.

 

[thvu]

Please teach me how to calculate "-4"

I wish there were a way to downvote posts.

 

[Marco]

Technical question: if a judge accidentally pressed +5 instead of 0 (for example), is there a way for him or her to rectify it on the spot or before the score was finalized?

 

[gkelly]

Technical question: if a judge accidentally pressed +5 instead of 0 (for example), is there a way for him or her to rectify it on the spot or before the score was finalized?

If they notice right away. By the time the next skaters is announced it's too late.

That's what dropping high and low is for.

 

[Aussie Willy]

Technical question: if a judge accidentally pressed +5 instead of 0 (for example), is there a way for him or her to rectify it on the spot or before the score was finalized?

Yes you can via Manual Data entry which is how you run IJS as a paperbased system.

 

[Sylvia]

(ETA - Apologies to Aussie Willy for "hijacking" this thread for this purpose.)

Re-posting @aftershocks comment and @GreatLakesGal's reply from the U.S. Men's thread to this relevant one:

Obviously the judges seem reluctant to take down Hanyu too much for his mistakes -- the sp turn out on a jump got positive GOE, which wouldn't have happened for anyone else

From Jackie Wong's Twitter: "A turnout, esp as small as Hanyu's turnout was, costs -1 to -2 on the overall GOE, so if a judge thinks the combo is a +5, they would give +3 or +4 for the combo w turnout ... that said, the flow out of the combo was not great, so the +1 or +2 most judges gave were right on"

From the GP Helsinki Men's SP protocol for Hanyu: 4T+3T 15.07 (base value) x (2nd half bonus) +1.36 (GOE) 1 1 1 2 4 2 1 2 0 16.43

 

[maatTheViking]

This is a really dumb question, but I am baffled by the new bonus system GOE. Or at least, how it was implemented at the Asian Open Trophy in Bangkok and the recent Crystal Challenge in Melbourne.

For example, when a skater is awarded a total average bonus from the judging panel of say -4 or +4, that it isn't reflected in the grade of execution as -4 or +4. But instead, it is something random like 1.9 or something like that.

Is it that +4 or -4 GOE is 40% of the base value, so the 1.9 points (presumably) is 40% of the base value of the element, in this case 4.75 i.e. 4.75 * 0.4 = 1.9.

I had the same question and this answers it. thank you.

this should mean that messing up a more difficult element should be has harsh as messing up and easy one?

 

[Aussie Willy]

(ETA - Apologies to Aussie Willy for "hijacking" this thread for this purpose.)

No problem Hijack away