So, those PCS modifiers...

[Eclair]

Realistically though, which top skater ignores spins and step levels to focus on quads? Jin? Who else? Hanyu, Chan, Fernandez, and Ten all regularly gets level 4's with great quality (one can argue spin quality for Fernandez, I guess).

Then again, who does a 4lz? 2 quads in the short, 4 quads in the long?

And it's not like he got PCS in the 80 - if Voronov can do a 39 in pcs in the short (2015 coc), Jin with 39pcs for a clean programm is not that far fetched.
Same goes for the lp: Voronov getting 77 pcs in coc 2015 vs. Jin getting 76 for his long is no shocker either.

The reason he places on the podium is not because his pcs are hugely inflated but because of his high tes.

 

[whatif]

Spins are part of the PCS in that they are inherently a part of the choreography and interpretation of a program.

Well, then so are all other TEs.

 

[AprilS]

Then again, who does a 4lz? 2 quads in the short, 4 quads in the long?

And it's not like he got PCS in the 80 - if Voronov can do a 39 in pcs in the short (2015 coc), Jin with 39pcs for a clean programm is not that far fetched.
Same goes for the lp: Voronov getting 77 pcs in coc 2015 vs. Jin getting 76 for his long is no shocker either.

The reason he's considered a 'top skater' is not because of his pcs but because of his tes.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here? I meant that if people cares about spins and steps, there are plenty of top skaters who have great spins and steps, and if someone is winning without like Jin (Jin's spins aren't even bad, though his lack of skating skills really show up in step sequences, IMO), who cares, it's just a different strategy. I for one like seeing different strategies and styles be rewarded.

 

[Eclair]

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here? I meant that if people cares about spins and steps, there are plenty of top skaters who have great spins and steps, and if someone is winning without like Jin (Jin's spins aren't even that bad, though his lack of skating skills really show up in step sequences, IMO), who cares, it's just a different strategy. I for one like seeing different strategies and styles be rewarded.

I'm sorry, I originally intended to answer to 4everchan to whom you replied, who complained about someone getting too high pcs.

 

[whatif]

the topic is about pcs modifier in an attempt to even out PCS scores "artistic impression" to TES "technical"... MY COMMENT : is that even in TES itself, there is a discrepancy in how the Base Value is assigned now that quads are getting more and more common... a great level 4 spin is closer to the triple jumps... ... but now, it is not even a factor with all these quads... they have also removed one step sequence in the LP... (which was the spiral sequence for ladies for instance) so my point is that, before reconsidering new options, like PCS modifiers, why not look at BV for TES, trying to promote all-around skaters, ones who have great spins, footwork and jumps... not only ones who can only jump. If my comment is off topic, I fail to see that.

Reading the latest interview by both Lakernik and Shekhovtseva, my impression was that is the question they are trying answer. How can you promote the survival of figure skating as sport because it depends greatly on its ability to constantly evolve while also recognising that artistic aspect of it is also important.

They used to have those "figures" part of the competition which I suppose did a little bit what we are discussing here. Too bad, they are gone. Same with compulsories.

 

[el henry]

Reading the latest interview by both Lakernik and Shekhovtseva, my impression was that is the question they are trying answer. How can you promote the survival of figure skating as sport because it depends greatly on its ability to constantly evolve while also recognising that artistic aspect of it is also important.

They used to have those "figures" part of the competition which I suppose did a little bit what we are discussing here. Too bad, they are gone. Same with compulsories.

This comment leads me to believe that you either not alive or not watching figure skating when compulsory figures were part of a program; (please forgive me if I am wrong) they were one and the same.

And if you were not watching figure skating in the 70s, or studying the results of figure skating during that time, than it is impossible to opine on "what has *always*" been most important in the sport as jumping higher.

Toller revolutionized figure skating. Not by skating higher, faster, stronger. He changed men's skating from crossover, jump, turn, spin in a certain defined way, jump, (and yes, compulsory figures) to far, far more. Also John Curry, although as a Toller uber, my opinion would be that Curry followed and benefited from Toller's innovation.

We can discuss and disagree about what is important today. But what happened 40-45 years ago eeking. Toller brought more fans to men's skating than higher, faster and stronger skaters.

Someone needs to stand up for history

 

[Rissa]

So how about taking one or two jumps out of the LP? The TES scoring potential will be lower, PCS will matter more, plus skaters will be less tired and able to focus on transitions/ int/steps more.

 

[whatif]

This comment leads me to believe that you either not alive or not watching figure skating when compulsory figures were part of a program; (please forgive me if I am wrong) they were one and the same.

And if you were not watching figure skating in the 70s, or studying the results of figure skating during that time, than it is impossible to opine on "what has *always*" been most important in the sport as jumping higher.

Toller revolutionized figure skating. Not by skating higher, faster, stronger. He changed men's skating from crossover, jump, turn, spin in a certain defined way, jump, (and yes, compulsory figures) to far, far more. Also John Curry, although as a Toller uber, my opinion would be that Curry followed and benefited from Toller's innovation.

We can discuss and disagree about what is important today. But what happened 40-45 years ago eeking. Toller brought more fans to men's skating than higher, faster and stronger skaters.

Someone needs to stand up for history

That's all I needed to see to care about your opinion. Bye.

 

[Blades of Passion]

Well, then so are all other TEs.

Yes, they are. Every movement a skater makes is part of the picture they are painting on the ice. So that includes jumps. The problem is, skaters don't treat jumps as artistic elements very much anymore. They are just there as a means of scoring points and are blocked off with certain entrances/exits for the sole purpose of doing the jump as its own thing instead of being a specific part of the whole program.

 

[4everchan]

mid 70s is too high IMHO for both these dudes

I'm sorry, I originally intended to answer to 4everchan to whom you replied, who complained about someone getting too high pcs.

 

[Alex D]

Well, then so are all other TEs.

Not as some high class skaters place them.

If you put as example, a quad at the beginning, then you destroy the whole concept of a well balanced program, with a climax in its progress.

Again, I bring Rika Hongo here. When she does her three jump combination, it is right on beat and perfectly placed in her choreography. This is a ten times more value in PC´s, as a triple Axel at the start. And no, this is not about Mao Asada, this is just a basic impression, how different jump elements are placed these days.

Truth is, if you put the Axel or quad very late, your legs are tired and since it is a hard to do element, skaters do not care about destroying the choreography, as the element will win them a competition and automatically qualify for high PC´s.

This is what I do not like. A strong TES is rightfully there, but why not punish the skater for it in PC´s, if the jump is not included in said program, but completely wasted as a choreographic detail early in the program...

Someone mentioned it, Figure skating is about a concept, about something that a skater has to put on the ice. We do have jumps, spins, steps, turns, holds in pairs and dance... all these elements need to be a part of the choreography, of the story and if this is not the case, then no matter how gorgeous said elements are, the skater must be punished for it!

It is not fair that skaters can get away with poor skating performances these days. Not fair to those, who actually take time to work on a choreography, time to develop an interpretation or strong entrys and exits for their elements. I am absolutely for rewarding skaters if they do hard elements that fall under TES; but I am against a free ticket to high PC´s, just because they performed the elements.

Again, this is not about a skater here, this is about the problem we have in this sport and why so many people waved goodbye to it. If things do not get better, it will make Figure Skating more and more unattractive. I was at Sochi and people asked why someone who falls a lot is Olympic champion and I am sorry, it is a question that has to be asked.

In my opinion, it is important for the survival of the sport, that we again see what we once had in the 80s and early 90s. Well constructed performances, performances that you still watch 30 years later, because it is figure skating, it is story telling while performing hard elements, that develop the story in a program.

Today, we have incredible talented skaters, I think Liza is wonderful, Rika is, I also think Hanyu and Chan have abilities, but it all goes down the drain, if we do not reward the right programs. Look at Mao, her SP is such a beast, I have hardly seen her better from a choreographic and story based perspective. Yet, she got pretty low PC´s for it - while her LP, which was a disaster at COC, was rewarded with huge PC´s.

I do not think that the judges do skaters any favors by scoring like that. It will drive good skaters, skaters who have qualities beyond TES, more and more into TES and I feel this is wrong. I want to see more MAO like in the SP, but less MAO like in the FS.

Again this is not about a skater, its about the system, so please put your pitchforks down guys

 

[Mathman]

I don't see BOP's proposal but your examples seem to be what I've been thinking, increasing the PCS factor. Let's say now the Men's PCS factor is 1.1 for SP and 2.2 for LP, i.e. an increase of 10% in value (Hanyu actually scored closer to 120% PCS value in NHK but let's suppose 10% over PCS is more of a norm by him and Jin.)

Your example will yield

Hanyu 110 + 90 =200 --> 110 + 99 = 209
Chan 100 + 95 = 195 --> 100 + 104.5 = 204.5

The difference goes from 5 to 4.5

Yes, we need a more extreme (and closer) example for anything interesting to happen.

Jin: 106 + 80 = 186 --> 106 + 88 = 194
Fernadez: 90 +95 = 185 --> 90 + 104.5 = 194.5

 

[Icey]

Figure Skating is SPORT, first and foremost! And in my very humble and personal opinion, TES should always be a priority. PCS, are good in differentiating class and avoid too big of flukes, but in general they should just take backseat. I like just the way it is.

So do I, and much of PCS is more subjective than objective.

 

[Violet Bliss]

Yes, we need a more extreme (and closer) example for anything interesting to happen.

Jin: 106 + 80 = 186 --> 106 + 88 = 194
Fernadez: 90 +95 = 185 --> 90 + 104.5 = 194.5

In this example, Jin's TES exceeds PS limit by 6% so increasing the value of PCS by 10% gives the advantage to Fernandez when the TSS are already very close and Fernandz has a very high PCS.

As I stated before, PCS are always given below the 100% limit so factoring by the percentage the TES exceeds the PCS limit will never equalize the two. PCS has to be factored by more than the TES value over the PCS limit for equalization of the importance of TES and PCS. E.g. Increasing the PCS value by 10% when someone's TES is close to or over 110 in a LP will never make any real difference.

Since it seems judges are willing to award maximum PCS of 95% and now 97.5%, the new PCS limit with the new factor should be at least 3-5 % higher than how much the highest TES exceeds 100% PCS, as in the example you gave. Increasing it by percentage corresponding to the percentage of highest TES over 100 in the LP or 50 in the SP will never equalize the importance of the two aspects of figure skating.

As well, as I said before, establishing a higher factor for PCS should not be based on a couple of exceptions but only when there is enough data to consider what is a fair factor, based on a collection of extremely high TES.

 

[Mathman]

Addition doesn't change either quantity! Multiplication does!

Not really. 10 + 10 = 20. Neither of the two 10's is changed.

10 x 10 = 100. Neither of the two 10s in changed. They are both still 10s.

9.0 average in PCS for a tech score of 100 would be 900 points. That same PCS of 9.0 for a tech score of 90 is 810 points. If we just added instead it would be 90 + 100 = 190 and 90+90 = 180. The differential between 900 and 810 (the first number is 11.1% bigger than the second) is larger than the differential between 190 and 180 (the first number is 5.6% bigger than the second).

This is actually the whole point. What multiplication does is give a higher final score to a program that is well balanced between TES and PCS, compared to one that is out of balance. (We can divide by 50 if we want to compare the finals scores.)

90+90 is the same as 100+80 and also the same as 80+100. All three skaters score 180 points. Who deserves to win?

But 90x90 is better than 80x100 or 100x80.

If we want to compare the two system, divide by 50. The first skater has a total of 162 and the other two have 160 for the segment.

(Isn't that pretty? :yes: )

 

[Mathman]

As I stated before, PCS are always given below the 100% limit so factoring by the percentage the TES exceeds the PCS limit will never equalize the two. PCS has to be factored by more than the TES value over the PCS limit for equalization of the importance of TES and PCS. E.g. Increasing the PCS value by 10% when someone's TES is close to or over 110 in a LP will never make any real difference.

It will not equalize the TES and PCS for that particular remarkable skater who can get 110 TES, nor should it. But I think the theory goes that for the super astonishing fictional skater who not only gets 110 in TES but also gets straight 10s in PCS, in this case the two should come out about the same in principle.

On the other side of the argument, though, what about the run-of the mill skaters who do not get the absolute top scores? In general, are TES scores running higher than PCS, and if so, is this OK or should an adjustment be made? Or should this just be addressed by the judges in handing out PCSs, without changing any rules?

 

[Blades of Passion]

This is actually the whole point. What multiplication does is give a higher final score to a program that is well balanced between TES and PCS, compared to one that is out of balance.

Someone being much better at TES or PCS being is immaterial, though. The whole point of the scoring system and the values which have been assigned is that TES and PCS are worth the exact amount of points that they are. Someone can be the best skater ever and not have high technical content. They deserve lower TES and huge PCS (assuming a great program and performance) in that case. Or for someone to be a jumping prodigy but not be musical at all. It's just how it goes. The performances have to be assessed for exactly what they brought to the ice.

 

[gkelly]

Someone being much better at TES or PCS being is immaterial, though. The whole point of the scoring system and the values which have been assigned is that TES and PCS are worth the exact amount of points that they are. Someone can be the best skater ever and not have high technical content. They deserve lower TES and PCS in that case.

Why would they deserve lower PCS just for not having high technical content (harder elements). If they're the best skater ever, I would expect the quality of the lower technical content to be good . . . which is only relevant to PCS insofar as it affects some of the P/E criteria anyway. If the skating is good, the transitions are good, the performance is good, the program is well constructed, the music is well interpreted, why should the PCS be lower just because the skater doesn't do the hardest jumps and spins?

 

[Blades of Passion]

Why would they deserve lower PCS just for not having high technical content (harder elements).

What are you talking about? I didn't say anything like that.

 

[4everchan]

Someone being much better at TES or PCS being is immaterial, though. The whole point of the scoring system and the values which have been assigned is that TES and PCS are worth the exact amount of points that they are. Someone can be the best skater ever and not have high technical content. They deserve lower TES and PCS in that case. Or for someone to be a jumping prodigy but not be musical at all. It's just how it goes. The performances have to be assessed for exactly what they brought to the ice.

What are you talking about? I didn't say anything like that.

maybe you needed an extra word or two in here ?