Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 41

Thread: new scoring system

  1. #1
    On the Ice
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    28

    new scoring system

    in my opinion, i think that the new system is totally overated. the purpose of the judging system is to promote skaters to be more artistic and more 'supreme' in figure skating, but i differ. b4 the new system, people were more artistic anyways and skating actually LOOKED good. but now, the skaters are too busy with the points that they just totally forgot about the essence of the sport. it is the combination of athletisism and artistry that DEFINES the sports. b4, skating was just more enjoyable to watch and all the best based their talents on consitency and deliberation. now, all the top skaters are thinking far too much and all the 'other things' are so 'important' that they totally lost the visual aspects of it. there are no interpretation, no expression (even if there are, it's all mechanical and not from the heart), no passion and no total focus. actually more points are rewarded to someone who did a level four spin/ footwork/ field move versus someone who did a level two spin/footwork/ field move but awsome positions. the change edge or torso thing on the three discipline mentioned b4 is also overated. just cuz u change somthing on the move doesn't necessary mean that it will be more difficult or innovative. ive seen a tv competition where all top five skaters were just doing the same thing but in different order, innovative? i dont think so. tha annonymous thing in the system is also overated. how do you know that it's annonymous? all the 'tv' skaters are pretty well known in the world. also, ive heard that jeff butle once said that in some events the judges could tap on their shoes to notify the downgrading or the upgrading. the tv had always said that the new scoring system was based on the judging contravercy in 2002 but so far it's just like a contravercy over a contravercy? i dunno, what do you guys think?

    what do you think bout the new scoring system?

  2. #2
    Custom Title Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    27,954
    I agree with those concerns. I think the worst feature of the CoP -- how it has played out in practice -- is in the lack of independence in the program component scores. Not only do they seem simply to track the tech scores, but also there is no variation within the five components.

    If you do a quad, that's an automatic 8.0 in choreography and interpretation (except for Chenchung Li).

  3. #3
    Custom Title Joesitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    20,185
    Quote Originally Posted by Mathman View Post
    I agree with those concerns. I think the worst feature of the CoP -- how it has played out in practice -- is in the lack of independence in the program component scores. Not only do they seem simply to track the tech scores, but also there is no variation within the five components.

    If you do a quad, that's an automatic 8.0 in choreography and interpretation (except for Chenchung Li).
    Absolutely correct. And it is the consensus for members of GS that there be installed a separate group of judges for the PCS scores. I would add to that the PCS judges not be involved in figure skating and be paid.

    Joe

  4. #4
    Yeah! Lets get this party started. enlight78's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,024
    And since the PCs judges are getting paid. We might as well have the same judges for every event. There should be no more random or secret judging. That way a judge that is obviously not doing his or her job well may be caught and fired by the ISU.

  5. #5
    Custom Title Joesitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    20,185
    Quote Originally Posted by enlight78 View Post
    And since the PCs judges are getting paid. We might as well have the same judges for every event. There should be no more random or secret judging. That way a judge that is obviously not doing his or her job well may be caught and fired by the ISU.
    Right on! We should know who they are and hopefully know their credentials.

  6. #6
    MY TVC 1 5 SeaniBu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Watching the Wheels
    Posts
    4,984
    I see the point of no anonymous judging (I like a face to yell at and disagree with), but I don't think it makes a difference to fair. I still strongly believe it is more "fair" to have them be anonymous.

    They can still be questioned, and everything is up for review - the "sys" still knows who is who, it is just you and I that don't know. Also how can you prove to a pay-off-er that the pay-off-ee did what they said they were going to?

    It sounds like the incentive to bribe has been lessened. Yet I know from a conversation here and my "Vinni" example, I may be off. But I still haven't heard anything that makes me believe it doesn't help a little - not a total fix, but I still say a little bit of a deterrent, at least more than before.

    BTW, that PCS judges getting payed is hypothetical isn't it?

  7. #7
    Custom Title Joesitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    20,185
    Quote Originally Posted by SeaniBu View Post
    I see the point of no anonymous judging (I like a face to yell at and disagree with), but I don't think it makes a difference to fair. I still strongly believe it is more "fair" to have them be anonymous.

    They can still be questioned, and everything is up for review - the "sys" still knows who is who, it is just you and I that don't know. Also how can you prove to a pay-off-er that the pay-off-ee did what they said they were going to?

    It sounds like the incentive to bribe has been lessened. Yet I know from a conversation here and my "Vinni" example, I may be off. But I still haven't heard anything that makes me believe it doesn't help a little - not a total fix, but I still say a little bit of a deterrent, at least more than before.

    BTW, that PCS judges getting payed is hypothetical isn't it?
    The bribe only happens when there is a question about two skaters or teams vying for gold. Mischin didn't have to bribe for Evgeni. It was obvious and rightly so before anyone skated. However, if there was another male skater in contention for the gold that year, well.........

    I don't know why you brought up the bribe business when posters were talking more about incompetence and being influenced by the Tech. Nothing to do with shady judging.

    Yes, there is room to cheat. It is a subjective sport with a scoring panel that doesn't agree a hundred percent. No bribes until there is a tight competition. There is no incentive except maybe for the Koreans and Japanese in Ladies.

    What anonymous judging has brought us is that we don't know who the judges are. Therefore any cheating is more difficult to become public. (Anyone know of any questions and reviews?) That's what Speedy wanted and you bought it.

    Joe

  8. #8
    and... World Peace! Tonichelle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Kenai, AK
    Posts
    18,654
    Sean obviously hasn't been paying attention to skating long enough to realize that in order to trust the system those in control must be trustworthy (the wink is more for the friendly ribbing, not for the statement itself)... with me growing up watching and reading scandal after scandal and countless others in the same way in order to trust the 'secret judging' we have to know that it's not being predetermined by Speedy and Co.

    the ISU allows judges who have been caught cheating and suspended to not only come back but come back before their suspension is up... they know these people cannot be trusted and yet they time and again choose them over someone more trustworthy and just as --if not more so-- qualified...

  9. #9
    MY TVC 1 5 SeaniBu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Watching the Wheels
    Posts
    4,984
    Quote Originally Posted by Joesitz View Post
    I don't know why you brought up the bribe business when posters were talking more about incompetence and being influenced by the Tech. Nothing to do with shady judging.
    Because I couldn't see any other reason to have anonymous judging. What was the reason if it wasn't to "curb" bribing and pressure from fans and skaters??? And it was anonymous judging not being liked was what I was responding to. That is why.

    So if anonymous judging is to help curb scandals and bribes, AND will not get "crap" from their country for not scoring them higher... what is it for?? And other then you and I not knowing who is giving what, so what? The Judges can give a fairer score based on what they want rather then what they think that countries judge "should" have given.
    Quote Originally Posted by Joesitz View Post
    What anonymous judging has brought us is that we don't know who the judges are. Therefore any cheating is more difficult to become public.
    I believe that is a good thing. Diff in opinion.

    Thanks for the wink Toni, it would have hurt my feelings not to have seen that - some are getting as vicious as I once was. I am aware it has been going on for ever and often heard of them myself even in the FS closet, but the thing is - it doesn't hurt anything to have it anonymous IMO. You had to deal with individual integrity before, yes I am aware of that, but now you have eliminated the "pressure of" having a countries name under your score so "pressure" is no longer an issue - ONLY the same personal integrity that was in question before and will always be. This to me is a forest through the trees issue. Not seeing the forest and focusing only on the trees.
    Last edited by SeaniBu; 12-12-2006 at 07:23 PM.

  10. #10
    Custom Title Joesitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    20,185
    Seanibu - I hope I haven't been too hard on you.

    I think most fans understand the anonymous judging. Cinquanta was getting hell from the Olympic Committee for the scandal in 2006. Figure Skating has the largest Nielsen rating in the US and that scandal looked like the demise of FS for the US media. Horrors. He had to do something. He quickly instituted the CoP which has its merits and demerits. No problem. But he quickly decided that the names of the judges would be anonymous. This was not to prevent bribery or cheating. It was to prevent any wrong doing from going public. That is the reason you do not see much bribery or cheating going on. However, does it go on? We dont know. Cinquanta can not afford another public scandal. That is the sole reason for anonymous judging.

    Open judging is favored by the skaters, btw and most fans.

    Joe
    Last edited by Joesitz; 12-12-2006 at 07:44 PM.

  11. #11
    Custom Title Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    27,954
    The "pressure" that anonymous judging was supposedly intended to alleviate was pressure put on the individual judges to toe the line drawn by their national federations. It was in direct response to the Salt Lake City scandal in which the President of the French Federation, Didier Gailhaguet, leaned on the French judge, Marie Reine LeGougne to place Berezhnaya and Sikharulidze ahead of Sale and Pelletiere, in exchange for a gold medal in dance for Anasinna and Peiserat. (She did, B&S won by a vote of 5 to 4, LeGougne was later confronted and tearfully confessed, and the rest...is secret judging.)

    If anonymous judging had been in effect at Salt lake City there woiuld have been no scandal. No one could have pinned anything on LeGougne, Gailhauget or anyone else. Business as usual.

    That's why Cinquanta rushed the interim system into effect so quickly. I do not believe that anonymous judging will stop national federations from conspiring nor judges from knowing which side their bread is buttered on. We may not know whether a judge succumbed to pressure and voted the "right way," but the "interested parties" certainly will. (Pissev calls up Speedy and asks, "say, what scores did my Ukranian judge give to the Russian pair?")

    What secret judging does do is make it harder to catch people when they cheat.

    But even that is not the worst. I personally think that outright fixing of contests is rare. Where secret judging really harms the sport is that it creates a perception in the public mind (that miniscule part of the public that bothers to think about figure skating from one decade to the next), that this is a crooked sport.

  12. #12
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    604
    Quote Originally Posted by Joesitz View Post
    Absolutely correct. And it is the consensus for members of GS that there be installed a separate group of judges for the PCS scores. I would add to that the PCS judges not be involved in figure skating and be paid.

    Joe
    I am told that the judges who have tried the split panel approach find just judging the GoEs boring to the point they would not want to judge a competition if that was all they did.

    I have seen a few US competitions that used split panels, and the judging of the PCs was no better on a split panel than a standard panel. Splitting the panels is not going to solve the main problem with the marking of the PCs others have described in this thread. Judging the PCs will only improve through better education of the judges.

    Not exactly sure what is meant by using judges not involved in skating, since as soon as they start judging they are, by definition, involved in skating. Judging Skating Skills requires considerable knowledge of skating technique, Same for Transitions. Performance and Execution requires knowledge of errors and strengths in skating technique as well. Choreography and Interpretation could both probably be judged well by someone with a non-skating background in dance and music.

    Paying the judges is simply not economically viable for this sport. Not with all the TV money, and even less so when the TV money goes away. You have no idea what the economic impact the volunteer base has on skating. Skating would cease to exist if the officials were paid even minimum wage for all their work. Plus, paying someone to do a job doesn't guarantee they are any good of it. There are a lot of people in this world collecting a pay check who are not very good at their jobs,

  13. #13
    MY TVC 1 5 SeaniBu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Watching the Wheels
    Posts
    4,984
    Quote Originally Posted by Mathman View Post
    What secret judging does do is make it harder to catch people when they cheat.
    I hate to open myself up for more target practice, but - how? It is just a thought and I don't mean to sound like I am just causing waves, I am not. Please read in full for I know I have made an acceptable argument, but often have a hard time putting it in words for some here to understand. Sorry "up front."

    So on how it makes it easier to cheat... I am in disagreement - and will humbly accept a point if I see it. - NO sarcasm intended at all. Just respectfully inquisitive.
    The public did not catch the conspirators?
    The skaters did not either?
    They rose a "stink," but they still can, just not toward a particular judge. Just the score. Defamation of character is still slander whether it is the right thing to do or not. It might have something to do with slander laws. ????
    It was the "committee," who is still able to see who is judging and can still hold them accountable. AND they don't have to release any information on who, just what, and they still get held accountable just not by the public or the skaters. That "side steps" slander laws. And slander is very sticky - the law does not seem right sometimes I agree.

    The only thing I think that validates NOT having it be anonymous is if one were to assume that nothing would have been done if not for the public / skaters uproar. And on that same note, the public can still have contest with the scores that are placed, as well as the skaters. The only thing that has changed as far as I can see is you wouldn't know who you are contesting, just the score - which the "committee" will know exactly who it is. So they will still be as likely to get busted without the public having another reason to question FS or "destroy" someone for a mistake - however serious it maybe.

    Public and skaters Can STILL uproar about score, just not individual Judge - which might also fall in the category of prejudice. Where as if we are screaming about the score unassociated with the judge, it is that much more likely a valid "gripe" rather than just saying "the Russians scored us low, its unfair." Now it is "the score here was low and that is unfair. Much more likely to believe someone who has a gripe without the possibility of prejudice. It is immediate validation that the score is the problem, not the judge themselves. The separation of blaming a person immediately validates a qualm by saying the action is in question, NOT the person.

    It seems like I am in left field all by my lonesome, but have not had any reason to come in because there is still just one out. I don't want to make anyone mad, I am very open to learning. But I still feel like the decision was a good one for the whole of FS. The judges are still going to be held accountable, just that the public is not nearly as involved - that alone is a good thing IMO.

  14. #14
    Yeah! Lets get this party started. enlight78's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,024
    Quote Originally Posted by gsrossano View Post
    I am told that the judges who have tried the split panel approach find just judging the GoEs boring to the point they would not want to judge a competition if that was all they did.,
    It is boring just judging GoEs. I thought the most interesting part would be watching the skating no matter which part they are judging. This make know sense to me. Grading GoE's should require great attention to details.If just judging GoEs is boring; judging the PCs can't be that more interesting

    Quote Originally Posted by gsrossano View Post
    I have seen a few US competitions that used split panels, and the judging of the PCs was no better on a split panel than a standard panel. Splitting the panels is not going to solve the main problem with the marking of the PCs others have described in this thread. Judging the PCs will only improve through better education of the judges.,
    I agree about the judges need to be better educated or trained.But if one is also judging GOE's the PCs are obviosly not given his or her full attention. Splitting the panel is fair to the skater. Judges should have no excuse for everypart or detail of a skater program getting accounted for.

    Quote Originally Posted by gsrossano View Post
    Not exactly sure what is meant by using judges not involved in skating, since as soon as they start judging they are, by definition, involved in skating. Judging Skating Skills requires considerable knowledge of skating technique, Same for Transitions. Performance and Execution requires knowledge of errors and strengths in skating technique as well. Choreography and Interpretation could both probably be judged well by someone with a non-skating background in dance and music..,
    I believe that the goal is to have judges that have no prior afiliation(I can't spell) with figure skating before becoming judges for CoP. That way they have no preconceptions or biases that will interfere with "training" that will make them (I guess) superior judges.

    Quote Originally Posted by gsrossano View Post
    Paying the judges is simply not economically viable for this sport. Not with all the TV money, and even less so when the TV money goes away. You have no idea what the economic impact the volunteer base has on skating. Skating would cease to exist if the officials were paid even minimum wage for all their work. Plus, paying someone to do a job doesn't guarantee they are any good of it. There are a lot of people in this world collecting a pay check who are not very good at their jobs,
    You are right about this. It just that personally, when I'm paid to do a job; I feel obligated to do my best. When I volunteer for anything, I may give 70% if I am feeling good that day.

  15. #15
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    604
    Quote Originally Posted by enlight78 View Post
    It is boring just judging GoEs. I thought the most interesting part would be watching the skating no matter which part they are judging. This make know sense to me. Grading GoE's should require great attention to details.If just judging GoEs is boring; judging the PCs can't be that more interesting.
    Actually, the mental challenge of judging well is a very important motivator for many people. There is little mental challenge in judging the GoEs (not to mean that it's easy, though). You see the element you give the score. You invest about one second, if that, in coming up with a score. Then your concentration MUST be on to other things. Agonizing over the GoEs is not a good way to judge. First impressions are most likely to be correct the vast majority of the time.

    PCs are immensely challenging to judge. (Don't you wish vBulletin had a spell checker! I do.). One ISU judge (who is a rabid supporter of the system) told me he finds it much more mentally exhausting than the old system.

    Quote Originally Posted by enlight78 View Post
    I agree about the judges need to be better educated or trained.But if one is also judging GOE's the PCs are obviosly not given his or her full attention. Splitting the panel is fair to the skater. Judges should have no excuse for everypart or detail of a skater program getting accounted for.
    I agree, some (many?) judges have it backwards. They focus on the GoEs during a performance. The best approach is to focus on the PCs and just spend a moment assigning the GoEs after each element. That is the way they are starting to train the judges. It's all a matter of practice. If the PCs look fishy sometimes, it is not because they are distracted by the GoEs. It's because either they don't properly understand the PC criteria, or are just ignoring them cause it's easier to use the PCs to place the skaters.

    Also, split panels mean you need to double the number of judges involved and then that brings in the cost issue. The cost of officials would become unsustainable.

    Quote Originally Posted by enlight78 View Post
    I believe that the goal is to have judges that have no prior afiliation(I can't spell) with figure skating before becoming judges for CoP. That way they have no preconceptions or biases that will interfere with "training" that will make them (I guess) superior judges.
    Except these new bodies will be trained by the people already there, using the methods already in place, to the standards already accepted. They will fall into line with the desired expectations or will not get appointements. If you want better judges you need better training approaches and better accountability approaches.

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •