What would you do to Improve the scoring sys?

Gotta give my opp.
One set of judges to judge technical,
and one set to judge Artistic (not of the figure skating backgownd, "dancers" or "interpretive thespians" )
- as well as having them be anonymous.
Might also be nice to have a limit on how many times you perform a "element."
What cha thinkin'?
:scratch:

I like the idea of two panels, and, a limit on the number of positions (i.e., catch foot), but I couldn't tell from your remark "- as well as having them be anonymous", if you like anonymous judging or not. IMO, anonymous judging is the first thing that has to go.

I would also like to have all regions represented, to guard against too much influence from cultural differences. I don't know how many regions this would result in, however.

Limit the levels of elements to level 3, no level 4s, allow skaters only 1 level 3 and 1 level 2 per program, and increase the value given to GOE scores. Tell judges that even if they give a 0 for GOE to a far below average element, an average element should get 0 for GOE as well, only well done elements should get +1 or more on GOE, and tell the judges to be more willing to give +3 on GOE scores.

Also have the PCS components be more vague so the judges actually have to justify why they are given them rather than toss them out like candy to their pets like Cohen, Lysacek, the Ukranian dance team, who DO NOT deserve their scores in this area.

Also give extra points for triple-triples being done.

IMO, the only way to increase variety in spins is to have a MILLION more "features". I saw somebody post that they think a spin should go two levels up if you hold a position for eighteen revolutions. That's a great idea!
Right now, everybody wants a level 4 spin (which requires 4-5 features?) and there are only 5-6 possible features for each spin. That means that we see skaters doing only the same features- the easiest ones that count.

More differentiation in PCS scores- judges tend to equalize the sections, producing a score that is approximately fair when totaled, but not at all accurate taken score by score.

And DEATH to anonymous judging!

Start by giving heavy penalty for falls. If a skater falls on a jump, that skater should receive absolutely NO CREDIT whatsoever whether it's rotated fully or not. If a skater has 2-3 falls in a program, penalty should be high enough that this skater cannot look at the podium.

Limit the use of Biellman, catchfoot or othet spin variations. (Shizuka did back camel-donut how many times in her LP?)

Give penalty for wobbly COE in spins and spirals.

Biellman IS NOT considered as a variation of layback. I'm sick of seeing head to skate "laybacks".

Basic skating gets more consideration in PCS. PCS being rewarded for skating, not because a skater's reputation.

Severe penalty for flutz and lip: incorrect jump techniques.

Bonus rewarded or encourage all types of jumps being performed in LP.

rjulie510 said:

Start by giving heavy penalty for falls. If a skater falls on a jump, that skater should receive absolutely NO CREDIT whatsoever whether it's rotated fully or not. If a skater has 2-3 falls in a program, penalty should be high enough that this skater cannot look at the podium.

Click to expand...

People will then start complaining that no one's pushing the envelope on jumps unless they can land it 95+% of the time - no one as a 100% success rate on all jumps. If someone can land a jump 85% of the time in practice, I wouldn't mind having them try it in competition.

Also, jumps are comprised of the entry, position in the air and the landing. If a skater falls, I do think that there should automatically be a -3 GOE since it's usually caused by either the entry or position in the air and that the deduction should be more than 1 point. I also think a hand down should be -2 minimum GOE and a wonky landing should be minimum -1 GOE for the same reasons.

Anonymous judging should be eliminated.

Limit on catch foot spins to 1
Limit on catch foot in spirals to 1 - why are we rewarding biology over skill?

Liking where this is going. Constructive is always helpful to "someone"

I had to clarify on the anonymous judging remark, but I am wondering why everyone feels it should stay or go. The "all regions represented" really does seem a little out of the question because of size / number, and what about when that regions skater does or doesn't make it?

But here again I really want to know "why" about the anonymous judging. ?

seanibu said:

I had to clarify on the anonymous judging remark, but I am wondering why everyone feels it should stay or go. The "all regions represented" really does seem a little out of the question because of size / number, and what about when that regions skater does or doesn't make it?

But here again I really want to know "why" about the anonymous judging. ?

Click to expand...

The idea of having all "regions" represented is to protect against legitimate cultural differences (such as rewarding skaters who use classical music more than those who use more modern music, or vice versa). Different tastes do develop in different sections of the world, and, when enough judges have the same bias, it looks like the improper "block judging".

I don't like anonymous judging because there is no way to hold judges accountable for what they do. The skaters can get nailed (both by judges and by the press) if they screw up; if the tech specialist screws up, he or she can get nailed (at least by the press); but the judges are protected. That isn't fair.

More importantly, the worst thing for figure skating is when the public figures that it is fixed, and there is nothing to be done about it. The ISU needs to recognize that it has little, if any, credibility as far as disciplining corrupt judges is concerned -- so telling the world that "we'll take care of judges who cheat" isn't going to re-assure poeple that the results of an event are fair.

Definitely separate panels of judges for TES and PCS.

Jump combinations should:
a. Get more points for being in combination, instead of the total of two jumps.
b. Have different base levels or bonus percentages based on relative difficulty. I.e., 2T/3T gets more points than 3T/2T.

More base points for steps into a counted jump, based on difficulty level of steps. Example:
3T, base=4
3TSt1, base = 4.x
3TSt2, base = 4.2x
3TSt3, base = 4.3x

If a 3T from difficult steps is harder than a 3S with a standard entry, then it should get more base points.

Zayak rule:
a. Should not apply to second or third jump in a combo, only to the first jump or solo jump, (ex: 3T/3T and solo 3T should be allowed.)
b. The same combination shouldn't be allowed to be repeated (2-3F/3T's are illegal, but 3F/3T, 3F/3Lo is okay).

Jump sequences should get the total number of points of the two jumps, not a 20% deduction. They are harder than doing two separate jumps.

Extra credit for diversity, based on the total number of positions in spins and spirals. The mighty computer can track this and assign bonuses. Extra credit for doing an element in the LP that was more than half different than the one in the SP. For example, doing a COE arabesque to fire hydrant to forward spiral in the SP, and a COE Biellmann to back Biellmann to fire hydrant would get more points than doing the first spiral in both programs. Same for spins.

Each "caller" would have a different specialty area. For singles it could be split into Jumps, Spins, and Spirals/Footwork. For Pairs, it could be split into Jumps/Throws, Lifts/Twists/Death Spirals, and Spirals/Spins/Footwork For Dance, it could breakdown into Lifts, Spins, and Footwork/Twizzles. Either they each take one of three roles, depending on the element (ex: TC for jumps, TS1 for spins, TS2 for spirals/footwork) or each one calls each element (types into computer), and they convene if there isn't a unanimous call (or if the TC and TS1 for that element aren't in agreement.)

Take away the policy that calls a judge whose scores are different from other colleagues on the panel "out of line" and start comparing the scores to the written guidelines. The ISU can have three members of the committee that created the system to mark along the guidelines. If they notice that the guidelines and training are not specific enough, they can fix them. If the judges refuse to get it, they should be sanctioned.

Otherwise, there is nothing but incentive to pre-mark and keep the PCS within .5 of each other. There are a number of skaters at Worlds whose marks so far have been within a point or two of their Olympics skates, particularly in PCS. Performances change from competition to competition, but there is incentive to mark based on history, to stay "in line."

ISU certification of the judges. Either they can mark within the written guidelines, or they can't. If the Federations continue to own the judges, they can nominate whomever they want, but those judges have to pass stringent guidelines to be assigned to major events, which is what they all want.

I have heard that next year there WILL be a rule in place regarding Beillmanns--only one per spiral sequence and one per combination spin, or something. I forget where I heard it and I have no idea how true it is... God, I hope it's true!

I'd have well centered spins with variations and speed count as much or more than change of edge spins/combos. Lambiel is a perfect example of someone who gets robbed for spins in the CoP arrangement.

A well center spin that is fast and consistent is just as difficult to do as one that spins slowly and then changes to another edge, imho.

Also, I'd add bonuses to program that has more variations of jumps than those that leave out jumps. For Example a ladies program that has a two flips and two lutzes (one in combo, one not) should not be rewarded higher that a program that has the loop and salchow, even though the former jumps are allegedly more difficult. In concert with this, the more variety of moves in the field that are performed the more I'd add value to the program. I love when splits, falling leafs, wallys and slide spirals, etc. are part of the program.

I agree with the poster that suggested that lips and flipzes(I won't call them 'flutzes' because they are in no way akin to lutzes). I'd also add penalty/bonuses to jumps according to whether they are telegraphed or not. For example, Irina's lutz would receive high grade of execution while Elena L would be downgraded because of the tremendous amount of ice she covers while doing nothing as she "prepares" for the jump the jump.

I think judges should ABSOLUTELY be identified so that there is responsibility when judges marks are completely out of line with the others on the panel. I also believe that judges should be paid and not affiliated with any skating federation. It might not hurt to send them to the same place so that they are valuing the same elements in the same way according to blue ribbon panel of experts.

Lanie said:

I have heard that next year there WILL be a rule in place regarding Beillmanns--only one per spiral sequence and one per combination spin, or something. I forget where I heard it and I have no idea how true it is... God, I hope it's true!

Click to expand...

That should be a good thing. Thanks, Irina!

Wouldn't the pressure of "getting nailed for screwing up" have negative aspects to the judges, "clear head" DVL ADVCT
There's an American football player that said the refs should get fined for bad calls - is that the same thing?

I'm sure I'm repeating some of what others have said, so forgive if I repeat yours:

1. PCS scores should be judged by experts in that each area. I agree with whoever said they are simply being lumped into a "Presentation" score.

2. Maximum of 1 change in position in a layback spin.

3. Skaters wear a speedometer to measure speed on spins. Points given accordingly.

4. Bonus points for men who do 6 different types of triples. Bonus for women who do 5 different triples, and even more bonus for all 6 triples.

5. Like others have said, 1 beilman/catchfoot spin per program and 1 bielman/catchfoot spiral per program.

6. Keep qualifying rounds, but points don't carry over.

7. I love hockeyfan's idea of crediting footwork into jumps.

8. Falls should receive minus 4, instead of minus 1.

9. More points for quads (bigger difference between quad and triple).

I'd like to see a rule limiting the number of consecutive jumping passes, no more than two in the SP and 3 in the LP.

And a limit on number of level four or three spins.

Something I'd like to see personally is a requirement for a jumping pass with no more than two revolutions to encourage unusual entries and less commonly performed jumps (like inside axels, tuck axels etc) I realize that has no chance though.

I think that after the QRs the 30 skaters with best scores should be able to participate in short programme. Now so much depends on in which QR one is skating. Also in my opinion the short programme groups should be according to the scores, and not placements in QR. It looks so funny to have in final group a skater from 8th place instead of a skater that placed scorewise 6th.

A fallen jump even with full rotations should not be credited so high.

A skater should have PCS scores according to what she/he executes in that particular competition and not use those scores to held a skater up. PCS scores should not be considered or used as some level for a skater.

1. Having the 2 different panel of judges( Elements Scores and Component Scores has to be given by different judges).

2.Change the definition of the "level" in single and pairs spins to get more attractiv, faster, more entertaining spins with less ugly positions with slow rotation because of the too many edge and position changing.

3. definitely the same thing about Bielmann and cathcfoot in spirals, dance lifts and spins (maximum 1 per section. We can call it "Slutskaya rule" like the Zayak rule).

About the secret judging. I hate it, but I'm FOR it. It made the judging more fair.
Before that, the judges had no choice just give the good points and placings to their own skaters, because other wise their own Federation should kill them, and should never send them to any other competition!!!!

It is a shame, but that is the rality of this sport.

Give the chance to professional, bravehearted judges to survive. They have no other chance than the secret judging!!!! As long as the National Federations has the right to listing and delegating the judges from that country.
Even if the ISU will delegate the judges, who will put them into the pool, they should be choose from??? Their own Federation. They have to serve their federation. No choice for them. In this secret system- at least- they can show their real opinion about anybody's skating. For those judges, who are still has the national bias, it is just doesn't matter secret or not secret judging system.
For honest judges it DOES matter (unfortunately).

Please, be realistic, don't dream !!!!

Like always, I forgot something important!!

Please, don't give any points for any jumps which ends up with a fall.
I don't want to see skaters making splash fest all over the places to get points for jumps they never made succesfully even in a training.

The minus 1 is not even needed, if they can't get the point.
A fully rotated, but not landed jump is NOT a jump, like a jump is not a jump without rotation. It is as simple as that.

bigdeal said:

About the secret judging. I hate it, but I'm FOR it. It made the judging more fair.
Before that, the judges had no choice just give the good points and placings to their own skaters, because other wise their own Federation should kill them, and should never send them to any other competition!!!!

Click to expand...

I totally agree with you on this point!:agree:

bigdeal said:

About the secret judging. I hate it, but I'm FOR it. It made the judging more fair.
Before that, the judges had no choice just give the good points and placings to their own skaters, because other wise their own Federation should kill them, and should never send them to any other competition!!!!

It is a shame, but that is the rality of this sport.

Give the chance to professional, bravehearted judges to survive. They have no other chance than the secret judging!!!! (...)
In this secret system- at least- they can show their real opinion about anybody's skating. For those judges, who are still has the national bias, it is just doesn't matter secret or not secret judging system.
For honest judges it DOES matter (unfortunately).

Please, be realistic, don't dream !!!!

Click to expand...

I totally agree too.
I agree also with what you say about the falls.