How do you penalize falls?

[doubleflutz]

First of all, the ISU knows full well who the judges are and what scores they gave. Just because you don't doesn't mean anything. The reason behind it is so fans/skaters can't say "Oh I see the Russian won because the Russian judge gave the skater +3 on their jumps."

No, wrong. The (official) reasoning for anonymous is not to hide the scores from the fans, but rather to shield the judges from the wrath of their federation, and take off the pressure for them to score in compliance with the wishes of someone like Didier. I think it's a sham, a complete facade, but it's the official rationale.

If your coach doesn't know that until he/she reads the protocols, you need to fire your coach.

Well, sure. They're still an amazing tool for educating parents and helping manage expectations, and in setting concrete goals and providing huge motivation for certain kinds of skaters. In serious competitions, no matter the level, only three people get to medal and only one gets to win. The vast majority of kids are going to go their entire career without winning a single one of their "real" competitions. Depending on their mindset, getting a +1 on a spin or jump they've worked really hard for can be so much more motivating and feel like much more of an accomplishment than "I want to be in the top ten of my qualifying round of regionals this year".

 

[mousepotato]

To answer the thread topic question, I'm not sure, the only thing I am 200% sure about is that I do not like falls whatsoever, doesn't matter whence it comes from nor how many times it happens (e.g. 1,2,3 et al). A Fall is a fall is a fall, and I really hate it, I'll even get up & leave sometimes when a fall happens, that's how much it affects my enjoyment of the skating.

My only saving grace as regards figure skating is that I cannot recall an Olympic Champion having ever won with a fall. Thank God, seriously. Except I think Kristi Yamaguchi did, but so did her nearest competitor Midori Ito, so in that case it all equals out. But the point is that the very highest pinnacle/honor awarded to a skater requires a skater to skate clean, as it should be. Yes, 2nd & 3rd place allow for falls, but NEVER 1st place (unless the top 2 both fall, which is really rare). I can live with that.

And really the truly great skaters throughout history do not fall, and that hasn't changed, nor do I expect it to. Winners come & go, but champions last forever (ala Henie, Grafstrom, Plushenko).

I hope your post was meant as a joke because it really made me laugh.

You get up and leave after a fall? Then you have missed some fantastic skating!

I doubt you have seen every Olympic champion in every discipline since skating has been an Olympic sport, I'm sure you can find at least one fall.

Truly great skaters don't fall? Then there haven't been any truly great skaters, because they have all fallen.

 

[gkelly]

Truly great skaters don't fall? Then there haven't been any truly great skaters, because they have all fallen.

Reminds me of a story I heard once -- can't remember where and I may have some of the details wrong.

When Torvill & Dean were training in Oberstdorf (before the 1984 Olympics when they were indisputably the best in the world at the time?), a tour group was passing through the rink. They happened to fall on some complicated move they were working on. The tourguide commented "That's what happens when beginners get above themselves."

Well, that's also what happens when the best in the world try pushing the limits.

 

[mousepotato]

No, wrong. The (official) reasoning for anonymous is not to hide the scores from the fans, but rather to shield the judges from the wrath of their federation, and take off the pressure for them to score in compliance with the wishes of someone like Didier. I think it's a sham, a complete facade, but it's the official rationale.

Really? I had no idea, would you mind pointing that out in the ofiifial ISU handbook?

 

[doubleflutz]

Really? I had no idea, would you mind pointing that out in the ofiifial ISU handbook?

First of all, the ISU knows full well who the judges are and what scores they gave. Just because you don't doesn't mean anything. The reason behind it is so fans/skaters can't say "Oh I see the Russian won because the Russian judge gave the skater +3 on their jumps."

 

[Olympia]

Reminds me of a story I heard once -- can't remember where and I may have some of the details wrong.

When Torvill & Dean were training in Oberstdorf (before the 1984 Olympics when they were indisputably the best in the world at the time?), a tour group was passing through the rink. They happened to fall on some complicated move they were working on. The tourguide commented "That's what happens when beginners get above themselves."

Well, that's also what happens when the best in the world try pushing the limits.

I remember that story. I think it might have been in the book about them that was published in the 1980s. It impressed me, too. There's a wonderful Robert Browning poem that contains the line, "Ah, but a man's reach must exceed his grasp, or what's a Heaven for?"

 

[Violet Bliss]

And really the truly great skaters throughout history do not fall, and that hasn't changed, nor do I expect it to. Winners come & go, but champions last forever (ala Henie, Grafstrom, Plushenko).

Seriously, I'll bet you whatever you want that no truly great skaters throughout history, or any champion at any level, ever get to be great or be champions without falling, indubitably more times than they can count.

 

[mskater93]

If your coach doesn't know that until he/she reads the protocols, you need to fire your coach.

You completely took blue's comments out of context. What blue was getting at is even competing under 6.0, your coach will (should) know whether your entrances/landings need or your turns need improvement. The protocol doesn't tell you WHY you received a -1, just that you did.

As for Blue's comments about judges giving feedback, I have had MANY judges willingly give me their $0.02 about a program, music, layout, element choices, etc both at 6.0 and IJS (I skate Adult Gold, so we get a few IJS opportunities both at local and Adult Nationals) competitions, even without seeking their opinion (as have both of my coaches). We try to absorb their opinions and look to work on those areas they point out as needing improvement. We typically already "knew" those areas needed improvement anyway, but we appreciate the feedback. It's also possible to have your coach invite judge(s) for critiques and they will be incredibly detailed in their feedback for this type of session.

 

[ivy]

A couple more general thoughts. The casual fan is not going understand the nuances of the sport. I watched for years casually without being able to tell if a skater did a salchow or a lutz. I probably knew the lutz was harder, without knowing why. I could always tell if a skater was fast and confident, with secure deep edges and had an elegant line, and was happy to trust technical experts to suss out the rest for me. Eventually I got more interested and informed, took skating lessons and the rest. I still stopped watching skating when it lost network coverage in the US. I was sad to do it, but I have no cable and the whole watching on the internet thing was too hard. My point - complicated rules for a complex sport isn't why skating is less popular then it could be, it's lack of media support (I know there is a chicken and egg thing here). Football has crazy complicated rules and is full of judging controversies but Americans sure do love it.

A certain number of falls is probably good for the sport - helps show everyone how hard it is.

 

[gkelly]

BTW, janetfan , here's a first-place freeskate with a fall. Does the fall negate everything else that was good about the performance?

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

No. Falls are a failure of a portion of the element. The take-off and rotations can still be successes.

For me, that's nonsense. A Fall on a jump shows bad technique on the entire jump. All the Jumps have definitions. How can an a major error be considered in part? Maybe the skater does not Fall during practice, but when he jumps in competition, it should be complete. It's not even an attempt.

BTW, is there anything written in the Rules about Attempts. I remember a few years back when American Ladies would Flutz and all her fans would say that she attempted a true take-off. My mind wuld boggle because she has never shown a true Lutz in 5 years of competing. That clearly said she never bothered to work on it. I asked a judge who used to post here whether or not after 5 tears she is still flutzing and the judge answered with the "Attempt" being the rule.

I can understand why judges do not want to lose anonimity in scoring.

 

[janetfan]

BTW, janetfan , here's a first-place freeskate with a fall. Does the fall negate everything else that was good about the performance?

No, but it should lower the tech score, and possibly the presentation score.

My point was that multiple falls do effect the flow of a program and should be noted not just in the tech but also in the pcs.

Or else get rid of the IN and P/E and save the CoP the trouble of ignoring them when their favorites are skating.

BTW, despite falling on the flying sitspin Janet did get a 6.0 for presentation. The judge later said it was such beauftiful skating and deserved a 6.0. :yes:

But I would have given a 5.9

 

[Mathman]

...here's a first-place freeskate with a fall. Does the fall negate everything else that was good about the performance?

Strangely enough, Trixie Schuba, the overall gold medalist, fell in the long program, too. (Not sure about Karen Magnussen.)

Here is the figures competition (Schuba and Lynn.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aTDLjhTUMbA

BTW, the commentators on some of these videos make the point that the way the scoring system was set up, the expert in figures would always win over the best free skater, and not just because of the relative weights given to each part of the competition.

Besidres that, figures were judged with wide variation between a truly great figure and a pretty good one. But a pretty good free skate garnered only a few less points than a great one.

 

[Mathman]

Really? I had no idea, would you mind pointing that out in the oficiial ISU handbook?

I doubt if the rationale is discussed in handbooks, but Doubleflutz is right about the origin of judges' anonymity.

In the 2002 Olympics the charge was that the French Federation colluded with the Russian Federation to deliver gold in pairs to Berezhnaya and Sikharudlidze in exchange for gold in dance to the French-Russian team of Anissina and Peizerat. To uphold their part of the deal, Didier Gailhaguet, predident of the French Federation, supposedly instructed judge Marie-Reine Le Gougne to vote for B&S even though she later admitted that she thought Sale and Pelletiere were better (later she recanted this confession).

Anyway, the International Olympic Committee called Cinquanta on the carpet and read the ISU the riot act. The result was, Gailhaguet and Le Gougne were suspended from participation in ISU activities for a period of time (they are both back in business now; no charges were brought against any co-conspirators from other federations.) AND -- the ISU rushed into place the "interim scoring system" (precursor to the CoP-based IJS)

The interim system was like 6.0 but the judges were anonymous and some of the judges' scores were dropped randommly. The reason why -- if judging had been anonymous then Gailhaguet could not have twisted Le Gougne's arm to go along with the deal with the Russians. In other words, Le Gougne could have double-crossed her boss, voted her conscience, and then lied about it, and Gailhaguet and Piseev would be none the wiser.

The question of the efficacy of this farce has been subject to constant ridicule ever since. Last year (January, 2010) the past president of the IOC blasted the ISU for running a crooked sport, citing anonymous judging as one of the factors that make cheating inevitable. Here is how it was explained in a follow-up article.

It may seem odd at first to expect that removing direct public scrutiny of individual judges by concealing their identities would curtail vote-trading. But the idea was that anonymity would make it hard to verify that corrupt judges have actually delivered the scores they've promised—no one can tie any individual judge to a score, and any of the nine could always claim that he was one of the two judges dropped from the scoring. It's hard to collude if you can't tell whether your partner in crime is keeping up his end of the bargain.

http://www.slate.com/id/2244277/

 

[mousepotato]

For me, that's nonsense. A Fall on a jump shows bad technique on the entire jump.

Really? Shen's quad looked great to me until 2 seconds after the landing when she fell. Maybe she hit a rut in the ice after she landed her perfect quad, so the entire jump shouldn't count? That's silly.

I don't ever remember reading if she ever said what she thought happened.

 

[blue dog]

In 1995, Elvis Stojko fell in his long program during the quad attempt. I cannot find the video--but I remember the first judge (a non-Canadian!) awarding him a 6.0 for technical merit.

 

[Mathman]

If a batter strikes out, He is out for the time being, but he still can some back and knock it out of the park. And even though he struck out, the team still wins. Can't a quarterback who throws an interception still score a touchdown to win the game?

I don't think this is really a sound argument. If a batter strikes out he gets no points for that at-bat. Yes, he will come up again and this time he might be successful. Just like a skater who falls on his quad. He should get zero points for that "at-bat," and then he can come back and hope for better luck on his triple Axel.

Same with the qusrterback. He gets zero points for the interception he just threw. But on the the next possession he might throw for a touchdown.

Zero points for the flubbed pass, six points for the successful one.

 

[mousepotato]

It may seem odd at first to expect that removing direct public scrutiny of individual judges by concealing their identities would curtail vote-trading. But the idea was that anonymity would make it hard to verify that corrupt judges have actually delivered the scores they've promised—no one can tie any individual judge to a score, and any of the nine could always claim that he was one of the two judges dropped from the scoring. It's hard to collude if you can't tell whether your partner in crime is keeping up his end of the bargain.

It's not up to the public to scrutinize the judges, it's up to the ISU and they know full well what judge gave what mark. It is also discussed in meetings after the competition.

Many people feel their skater didn't win because of a bad judging, and that is a wrong postition.

If two judges were dropped at random before the competition, one high and one low judge was dropped after the skate, and the rest were averaged...people would still complain because their favortite didn't win.

 

[mousepotato]

I don't think this is really a sound argument. If a batter strikes out he gets no points for that at-bat. Yes, he will come up again and this time he might be successful. Just like a skater who falls on his quad. He should get zero points for that "at-bat," and then he can come back and hope for better luck on his triple Axel.

Same with the qusrterback. He gets zero points for the interception he just threw. But on the the next possession he might throw for a touchdown.

Zero points for the flubbed pass, six points for the successful one.

But what is the batter being judged on? Just hitting a ball into the stands. A skater is judged on many components of the jump, not just the landing. If the batter was being judged on the form of the swing regardless of the hit, it would be a different ballgame...so to speak.

 

[Mathman]

It's not up to the public to scrutinize the judges, it's up to the ISU...

That's the problem. The foxes are guarding the henhouse.

The rationale that the ISU put out for public consumption was the baloney about not letting federations put pressure on their judges. As you point out, of course Federations can put pressure of thier judges, so what's with all the subterfuge?

The real reason is, the ISU does not want a repeat of the Salt Lake City judging scandal. From the point of view of the ISU, the scandalous thing was that the crooked judges got caught.

With anonymous judging it is less likely that dishonest judges will ever get caught.

Would the spotlight of public scrutiny help? I don't know. Seems like it might.

But what is the batter being judged on? Just hitting a ball into the stands. A skater is judged on many components of the jump, not just the landing. If the batter was being judged on the form of the swing regardless of the hit, it would be a different ballgame...so to speak.

I agree with this. Analogies to other sports are not very useful in discussions of figure skating.