New post-Europeans Sonia Bianchetti article

http://www.soniabianchetti.com/writings_whatsleft.html

Some interesting observations, though I don't agree with them all.

I can't say I yearn for the days of the old judging system quite as much as she does, in spite of the flaws of the new one. As she points out, the anonymous judging is not a step in the right direction. I also agree with her on the misuse of the PCS marks to hold up certain skaters based primarily on reputation and the seeming lack of ability of the judges to judge these categories properly and seperately.

I don't agree with her estimation that the new system is simply encouraging skaters to pack more and more difficult elements into their programs and the beauty of the sport is being lost.

Along with some of the great programs of the past, I also remember some very undeserving winners based on jumps alone - the practice of packing more and more jumps into the program, at the expense of everything else was largely taking over the mens event under 6.0. And while I don't find pairs inspiring at all right now, I think it has more to do with the current teams than it does with the judging system - though there are certainly tweaks that need to be made there. I remember that pairs was heading in (what I would consider) a very undesirable directions prior to the new judging system, with pairs increasingly putting three and four jumping passes into their routines simply because, as in singles, it was easy for the judges to reward them for them. A lot of them were done badly. Pairs spinning (and I'm not referring to side-by-side spinning here) hasn't been very pretty to watch from most of the pairs in decades. Very cookie cutter, by the numbers. Talk about lack of creativity.

And while I agree that some of the levels assigned in spins and footwork have led to some very aesthetically unpleasing results in all disciplines (all that footwork on one foot while the upper body twists and lurches around...ugh) I think what's more in need is a tweaking of the system to assign more points (or perhaps a better understanding by the judges of assigning GOE's, if Bianchetti's argument is to be considered) to well-done classic positions so it is worth a skater's while to do something well. As for her argument that all of the spiral sequences were looking the same, well, I can't say there was a great deal of variation under 6.0 either.

I also have to disagree with her that watching skating is less fun overall. I find it more fun, actually. Because while the judges COULD perhaps, have acknowledged great footwork and spinning and transitions etc, under 6.0, largely these elements were ignored in favour of counting jumps. Now skaters HAVE to have them, which, I think, is a good development. It has led to at least an acknowledgement that skating well is more than just jumping well.

And any system comes down to the judges. She complains about judging being reduced to recording results - well, they only have themselves to blame. Their lack of ability to use their discretion to come up with fair results is what led to the changes.

You make some good points, Rain. The question is always, "compared to what?" The faults that Mrs. Bianchetti finds in the New Judging System apply just as well to the old.

MM

I adore BianchetIti!! She speaks out about things others want not to believe or better yet, HIDE.

In Lyon, Plushenko executed two marvellous, breathtaking step sequences, very difficult, at great speed, perfectly in time with the music. Well, in the circular step sequence, only three judges out of 12 gave +3, three gave +2 and six just +1. The same applies to the straight-line step sequence: two judges gave +3, three gave +2 and seven +1. What are the judges expecting from a skater to give +3?

Click to expand...

The above example alone should make you want to read her whole essay.

Just look what the GOEs were from the 12 Experts. Now tell me that the judging is fair. Which judges of the above were the 3 eliminated and which were the 2 that were dropped to make the remaining 7 the authentic perfect scoring?

Creikie, I'm with Sonia all the way.

Joe

Mathman said:

The faults that Mrs. Bianchetti finds in the New Judging System apply just as well to the old.

MM

Click to expand...

ITA.

Well, Joe, counting Mrs. Bianchetti as the 13th judge, this means that there were four votes for +3, three votes for +2, and seven votes for +1. Is this shocking?

Was it shocking under the 6.0 system when one judge gave a skater a 5.4 and another judge gave the same skater a 5.7? Or if 6 judges gave Irina the first place ordinal and 3 judges gave it to Sasha? That is the nature of judging -- I like this, you like that.

MM

I agree Plushenko deserves +3 for alot of his footwork sequence, and even some of his jumps. Then maybe they could give him the -1s he deserves for most of his spins and still get him the huge scores they want from him without giving him scores in a mediocre area of his skating.

I also loved the part where she said Joubert getting better scores than Lambiel was something she could not see on the ice, except if you consider the bonus points for being French. Rich and true.

Also she gave outspoken opinions on specific areas of Slutskaya's PCS, Sokolova not getting her due on some of the elements GOE scores, among other things. I love how opinionated she is, even if some of her opinions I dont agree with, she is still a blast.

According to her the dance final was a farce. I saw highlights of the other events but not the dance. I wish I had seen the dance even more now.

I generally think competitive skating has improved a lot under COP. Before COP, singles skating was becoming completely dominated by jumps, with virtually no appreciation at all for other elements. And I personally feel ice dancing was becoming dominated by lifts and excessive posturing/posing, again at the expense of other elements.

Overall, COP has improved this situation. However, I absolutely agree with Bianchetti that judges are not sufficiently awarding grade-of-execution points under COP. And also, that the program component scores are still being used to rank skaters according to reputation. Slutskaya's PCS scores are ridiculous, as Bianchetti (thankfully) has the nerve to point out.

In skating, there should be a place, and an appreciation, for both 1) intricate, fast, technically difficult types of movements and for 2) large, sweeping, perhaps simplistic, but artistically satisfying and musically appropriate, types of movements.

Right now, COP rewards only a certain type of movement, and a certain type of choreography and expression. It needs to become more inclusive and to reward different types of movements.

One thing, for example, that I have noticed this year, and lamented, is the virtual disappearce of the layback spin. It seems like all the ladies are doing nothing but Biellman and catch-foot spins. I've seen relatively few classic, beautiful layback spins; they just don't seem to be featured as much as Biellmans, presumably because they don't get as many points. This is a shame, because a classic layback spin is a thing of beauty, when well done. COP should reward this type of spin (when well-executed) just as much as it does Biellmans.

Any judging system works best when it is continually reevaluated and tweaked to amend its own deficiencies. A judging system needs to be a always-evolving mechanism, not a list of rules set in stone. If COP evolves, I think it can work even better than the 6.0 system. The question is whether Cinquanta and the ISU have the will to make it, or allow it to, evolve.

The fact Plushenko, Lysacek, and Joubert get more points from spins than Lambiel and Buttle often do shows the COP does not reward you for what you are better at, thus not encouraging well-rounded skater as some would like to believe. The new COP is ridiculous, I wish it was chucked altogether. Every aspect of it is silly, the more I look at it.

During one of the GP Events, one of the commentators mentioned that Lambiel chose to keep some of his spins at a lower level because he felt to upgrade them would take away from the beauty of the overall program.

Reading Bianchetti diss the COP is like reading Speedy praise it.

MM - I'm not defending the 6.0 system except that it did bring more beautiful skating then what we see today. This is what Bianchetti said, and I agree.

In the musical The Boyfriend, the song Sur La Plage - everyone looks the same. This is what she meant. I agree. But to make the CoP work fairly it has to be reworked so that the skaters stop imitating each other (among many other things).

the elements in figure skating are very limited, the skater should do something with them instead of looking at the scores and then oh, I have to imitate that.

Joe

tarotx said:

Reading Bianchetti diss the COP is like reading Speedy praise it.

Click to expand...

To a degree I totally agree with this. Sonia has many bones to pick with Speedy and the ISU, so it's hard to read what she writes and consider her an objective source. Some of her valid points, to me, get a bit lost in her obvious "issues" with the ISU.

There are a number of examples in this article that make me go "huh?" Here is one of them. She points out Plushenko's doubling of a jump, and mistakes on his 4/3 combo as an example of COP being detrimental to clean programs. Didn't we see these kinds of things under 6.0? These are jump mistakes that I believe happen regardless of the system.

She presents a short list of skaters including the likes of Witt, Boitano, Orser, Cohen, Kwan, etc. as examples of "will we ever see skaters like these again?" Her short list spans several different skating eras, and point to the very few skaters who to varying degrees made marks on the sport. Some of those skaters are still skating today under COP and IMO, and to me are just as special to watch today under COP as they were under 6.0. And the competitions have never been filled with lots and lots of these really special skaters at one competition. I have no doubt that Kwan, if she is fully recovered by the Oly's, can deliver memorable programs in the classic Kwan tradition too.

I agree with her point about "sameness" in spin positions. I hope that as the system evolves, the system is tweaked (or the skaters get more creative). But I do not think that "every program looks the same." Under 6.0, there would be a few skaters that stood out, and I think that is still true today. Johnny's Swan SP comes to mind as one example.

I was also scratching my head in the section where she criticizes COP for forcing skaters to have to count. ????? If holding position longer or doing more revolutions is more difficult, then why shouldn't that be rewarded, and why is this bit of planning and counting "too much" for a competitive athlete?

All in all, I like the new system much better than 6.0. I'm sure it can (and hopefully will) be improved.

Oh well...

DG

I agree with much of what she wrote. My biggest concern is that the programs ARE all beginning to look alike-- many of us have been saying this for some time. It is the spins that suffer the most-- the constant changing of position and the ugly contortions are destroying one of my favorite elements of the sport.

At least Bianchetti is speaking out. Maybe someone will listen. I just hope the system will be tweaked-- perhaps a limit on the number of catch-foot (Beillmann) positions used overall and a limit on the number of changes of position in the spins.

I realize we have discussed this ad nauseum, but I gave up trying to count the number of Beillmann positions Irina used in her LP at Euros. Between repeating some moves (after losing the grip on her blade during a spiral sequence) and what was planned, there were at least 7.

Without question, the highlight of Euros was D&V's free dance. Exquisite!

Maybe it isn't as simple as "the old system was better".

I'm not so much a fan of the new system as I am an opponent of the old one.

First, skating will always be a subjectively judged sport, like gymnastics, diving, and ballroom dancing. There's no way to get around that. To me, anything that makes it less susceptible to a judge's personal likes and dislikes is a plus, since it gives the skater more of an idea of what they need to do to succeed.

Second, the COP system is in its infancy - most skaters today grew up learning the 6.0 system, and thus retreat to the familiar, to what is already out there, what they've seen - the catch-foot, for example. The system will hopefully evolve - restricting the number of catch-foot positions that can be used would be a good start - and so will skaters, inventing new moves. Hopefully the scoring system will allow for this - I seem to recall a lift that wasn't scored because it was a waist lift rather than a hip lift. I'm aware that the Powers that Be in figure skating aren't known for quick reactions and innovation, and that's not necessarily a bad thing - some 10 year old is right now learning skating based on the COP, and it would be crazy to dramatically change the system every 4 years. But perhaps some inherent flexibility is necessary - the ability to evaluate a waist-lift for its difficulty and score it when it is introduced, rather than just ignoring it (that's probably a poor example, but I can't think of any others).

Third, the old system was pretty ridiculous. Scores didn't matter, ordinals did, and figuring out who would win was bizarrely complicated. I remember reading in one book the contortions judges would have to go through - and one judge who said she had to place a skater either 5th or 11th (I'm paraphrasing) because those were the only scores she had left. That's no way to run an airline, either. It didn't matter if you were a mile ahead after the SP, or just squeaked by, they were counted the same. This makes sense?

Fourth, were programs so varied under the 6.0 system? A few skaters had some unusual tricks - change-of-edge spirals, catch-foot spins - but mostly the programs were interchangeable, especially when you got past the podium contenders. That's why the change-of-edge spiral was so spectacular - it was different. Everyone else was doing pretty much the same old arabesque position on different edges.

Fifth, there are some real problems with the COP, but the top two can be corrected fairly easily. Anonymous judging is probably the most blatant, and removing it would solve a host of concerns - judges need to account for their scores. Randomly discarding scores is also pretty silly - why not discard the high and low, as is done in diving? Neither of these changes would affect the intrinsic structure and purpose of the COP, but would eliminate some of the pitfalls.

Sixth - have the results been that different? Does anyone think Irina and Evgeny would not be the favorites if the 6.0 system were still being used? Michelle's problems as last year's worlds were a product of a lousy qualifying round, and her lack of competitive experience under the new system. I was crushed to see her off the podium, but it was mostly her own doing, and a 6.0 system that would have put her first or second would have been flawed, imho.

Seventh - from the article "We are no longer seeing the skaters' passion, the skaters' joy during their performances; we are only seeing skaters suffering and struggling to get to the end of overly demanding programs." Well, if it was easy, anyone could do it. Seems to me I've heard that it's better to do an easier element well than a sloppy harder element - which is why Kimmie Meisner dropped her triple axel and some men aren't doing the quad. To me, the core conflict is exactly over this point - a quad used to beat everything (unless it was Elvis Stoiko), but now a great program, a la Jeffrey Buttle or Johnny Weir, has a shot. That's variety.

Ok, I'll shut up now. I've been lurking here for years, I think it's time to go back to that practice.

sloopie said:

Maybe it isn't as simple as "the old system was better".

I'm not so much a fan of the new system as I am an opponent of the old one.

First, skating will always be a subjectively judged sport, like gymnastics, diving, and ballroom dancing. There's no way to get around that. To me, anything that makes it less susceptible to a judge's personal likes and dislikes is a plus, since it gives the skater more of an idea of what they need to do to succeed.

Second, the COP system is in its infancy - most skaters today grew up learning the 6.0 system, and thus retreat to the familiar, to what is already out there, what they've seen - the catch-foot, for example. The system will hopefully evolve - restricting the number of catch-foot positions that can be used would be a good start - and so will skaters, inventing new moves. Hopefully the scoring system will allow for this - I seem to recall a lift that wasn't scored because it was a waist lift rather than a hip lift. I'm aware that the Powers that Be in figure skating aren't known for quick reactions and innovation, and that's not necessarily a bad thing - some 10 year old is right now learning skating based on the COP, and it would be crazy to dramatically change the system every 4 years. But perhaps some inherent flexibility is necessary - the ability to evaluate a waist-lift for its difficulty and score it when it is introduced, rather than just ignoring it (that's probably a poor example, but I can't think of any others).

Third, the old system was pretty ridiculous. Scores didn't matter, ordinals did, and figuring out who would win was bizarrely complicated. I remember reading in one book the contortions judges would have to go through - and one judge who said she had to place a skater either 5th or 11th (I'm paraphrasing) because those were the only scores she had left. That's no way to run an airline, either. It didn't matter if you were a mile ahead after the SP, or just squeaked by, they were counted the same. This makes sense?

Fourth, were programs so varied under the 6.0 system? A few skaters had some unusual tricks - change-of-edge spirals, catch-foot spins - but mostly the programs were interchangeable, especially when you got past the podium contenders. That's why the change-of-edge spiral was so spectacular - it was different. Everyone else was doing pretty much the same old arabesque position on different edges.

Fifth, there are some real problems with the COP, but the top two can be corrected fairly easily. Anonymous judging is probably the most blatant, and removing it would solve a host of concerns - judges need to account for their scores. Randomly discarding scores is also pretty silly - why not discard the high and low, as is done in diving? Neither of these changes would affect the intrinsic structure and purpose of the COP, but would eliminate some of the pitfalls.

Sixth - have the results been that different? Does anyone think Irina and Evgeny would not be the favorites if the 6.0 system were still being used? Michelle's problems as last year's worlds were a product of a lousy qualifying round, and her lack of competitive experience under the new system. I was crushed to see her off the podium, but it was mostly her own doing, and a 6.0 system that would have put her first or second would have been flawed, imho.

Seventh - from the article "We are no longer seeing the skaters' passion, the skaters' joy during their performances; we are only seeing skaters suffering and struggling to get to the end of overly demanding programs." Well, if it was easy, anyone could do it. Seems to me I've heard that it's better to do an easier element well than a sloppy harder element - which is why Kimmie Meisner dropped her triple axel and some men aren't doing the quad. To me, the core conflict is exactly over this point - a quad used to beat everything (unless it was Elvis Stoiko), but now a great program, a la Jeffrey Buttle or Johnny Weir, has a shot. That's variety.

Ok, I'll shut up now. I've been lurking here for years, I think it's time to go back to that practice.

Click to expand...

I love the way you expressed your opinon. Please don't hide!!

DG

Great post Sloopie!!!!!

I love the tech part of CoP because I can figure out what stuff is worth and evaluate a program based on that (it is all about ME after all, LOL), and I wish they PCS side was scored by a separate panel of judges...but I've said all this before. I like your observations a lot, and couldn't agree more.

Super analysis, Sloopie.

Here is another point of view. If the CoP really succeeds in making figure skating "more like a real sport," (bobsledding, for instance), maybe that will open the door to a resurgence of interest in professional skating.

MM

i fully agree with her. how can at least 1/2 the judges dare to put a level 1 for plushenko's step sequences is beyond me. and the overuse of biellmans and repetition of some ugly looking spirals... how sokolova got no +GEOs on her jumps... etc. it's NOT the judging system. of course we all knew that all along. we can implement till we're blue in the face... but unless there's serious accountibility, there remains the same problems.

is it true that the french judge involved in the scandal was hailed pretty much a hero of sorts for heralding in the new system of judging by her crooked actions?? uh, something reeks about that... how can she even be invited to any event or judged again is what i'm asking? how can others take this sport with any credibility anymore?

rain said:

I also have to disagree with her that watching skating is less fun overall. I find it more fun, actually. Because while the judges COULD perhaps, have acknowledged great footwork and spinning and transitions etc, under 6.0, largely these elements were ignored in favour of counting jumps. Now skaters HAVE to have them, which, I think, is a good development. It has led to at least an acknowledgement that skating well is more than just jumping well.
.

Click to expand...

Well, only if judges applying GOE correctly. It is really painful to look most of these skaters put the difficult footwork beyond their ability, only to triped/stumbed through it. Typical examples are Evan at US Nationals and Lambiels at European...why can't they using GOE more percisely to reward those lower level but executed smooth and smealessly, and deduct higher level with sloppy execution, so that a level 2 fw with excelent execution could beat a sloppy level 3 fw?

waxel said:

I agree with much of what she wrote. My biggest concern is that the programs ARE all beginning to look alike-- many of us have been saying this for some time. It is the spins that suffer the most-- the constant changing of position and the ugly contortions are destroying one of my favorite elements of the sport.

At least Bianchetti is speaking out. Maybe someone will listen. I just hope the system will be tweaked-- perhaps a limit on the number of catch-foot (Beillmann) positions used overall and a limit on the number of changes of position in the spins.

I realize we have discussed this ad nauseum, but I gave up trying to count the number of Beillmann positions Irina used in her LP at Euros. Between repeating some moves (after losing the grip on her blade during a spiral sequence) and what was planned, there were at least 7.

Without question, the highlight of Euros was D&V's free dance. Exquisite!

Click to expand...

Absolutely Waxel - I don't think we can put aside Bianchetti's views. the rush to get more points, have created more contortionisms in figure skating where once was there were beautiful positions, and a skater without the beautiful moves had to work on them - not contort them.

Your description of Irina's repetitive Bielman positions is correct and the actual dancing on ice (instead of trying to imitate Pairs) of D&V was the breath of fresh air to figure skating. I hope dancers take note how beautiful Skate Dance is when couples are actually dancing.

Joe